Hang on, I'm trying to get the, you got it?
Any document the CTC creates
can be translated into any language you need.
Simply email us at ctc at catc.ca.gov
and we'll have them return to you as quickly as possible.
American Sign Language Translation
is being provided on the webinar for this meeting.
You should see the translators on your screen.
Spanish Language Translation is also being provided.
You should be able to access this
through the interpretation tab at the bottom of your screen.
Please use the Q&A tab if you have questions about this.
Five closed captioning is also available.
Please select the show captions tab
at the bottom of your screen.
There are a number of language options
available there to choose from.
If you're on the agenda to make your presentation,
please do your best to be succinct.
Please remember to speak at a steady pace
to allow our translating services adequate time
for accurate translations.
If you're presenting remotely,
we hope that you will turn on your camera
during your presentation if you have one.
for our members of the public.
We welcome comments from the public
as a part of each item at this meeting.
For those attending in person,
please submit a speaker slip to the clerk
at the front of the room, that's me.
But let us know you want to comment on an item.
Speaker slips are available at the back of the room,
just outside the room where the agendas were.
For those attending via Zoom,
you should see the webinar control panel,
likely located at the bottom of your screen.
There you will find the raise hand and Q&A tabs.
We encourage you to use the raise hand feature
as early into the item as you can
to give the system time to acknowledge you.
Commission staff will let you know
when it's your turn to make a comment.
Alternately, you may use the Q&A tab
to submit your comment in writing.
Please be sure to include the agenda item number
you are commenting on
and commission staff will read the comment on your behalf.
As a reminder, each registered attendee
is provided a unique link and phone number
to access the webinar.
These should not be shared with other participants
as this can create confusion for staff
when calling on you to make comments.
Please do your best to be concise.
Please make sure that your comments add new information.
To agree with the comments of a previous speaker,
simply make that statement.
Please remember to speak at a steady pace
to allow our translating services adequate time
for accurate translations.
Since we often have many speakers,
we ask that you make your point in two minutes or less.
If for some reason we have many speakers on any single topic,
we reserve the right to limit comments
to one minute as needed.
Thank you for joining us today.
We know your time is valuable
and we appreciate you sharing some of it with us.
Thank you so much, Douglas.
Next, we will go to the Welcome to the Region.
It's my pleasure to bring up Aaron Haik and Kerry Schindler.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, commissioners.
Executive Director Taylor, Undersecretary Hacker,
Director El Tawansi, Californians.
Welcome to Riverside.
Welcome to Riverside County in inland Southern California,
home to 4.7 million Californians
and the ancestral lands of the Cahuilla,
Lusseño, and Tongva, including 12 federally recognized
tribes, our essential partners in the work that we do.
By choosing to come to the Inland Empire every year,
the CTC chooses to see a region on the rise.
You're choosing to see a people who are humble but proud,
who are building families, businesses,
and opportunity for themselves on fertile ground.
You're choosing to see people who are seeking
such opportunity, yet must contend
some of the longest, most grueling commutes in the state and in the nation. But let me be clear,
people want to live here. Since 2002, this region has grown its population by 67%. Within the next
25 years, 500,000 people will move to the Inland Empire. I'm sorry, that's just Riverside County.
Let me correct myself. 500,000 people to Riverside County alone in the next 25 years.
We're supplying the housing that Southern California needs, though clearly it is not
enough. We need more. And the infrastructure needed to support that housing isn't here yet,
and without game-changing action, won't arrive until it may be too late, if ever.
But we're undeterred. Many who live here are new, drawn by affordability, freedom to work remotely,
and proximity to open space and a lifestyle of their choosing. Others, like myself and your
outstanding new commissioner who has just joined you, we are so thrilled to have heard Dr. Paulette
Brown Pines. Any like she and I have and Miss Schindler who you'll meet in a
moment have lived here our whole lives and have seen this region go from dairy
farms and citrus groves to hills and warehouses dotting our hills and
communities growing that were not there before. On behalf of all of us whether
we've been here a short time or a long time thank you for seeing us. It's an
honor to host you. The mission of the Riverside County Transportation
Commission is to improve mobility for the residents of this county, the people of this
county, and we do that through delivering and funding and planning projects, whether
that's the 7191 Interchange that we just opened this year with the funding from the TSEP program
or from the Mid-County Parkway, which will be awarded a construction contract on this
very dais next Wednesday from the Congested Corridors Program, a safety project that will
save lives and improve mobility through the middle part of this county.
Whether that's through CV-Link, the transformative 40-mile active transportation corridor, one
of the largest active transportation projects in the state that just opened within the last
30 days in the Coachella Valley and I hope you have an opportunity to visit sometime
soon.
Or whether that's through the innovation that we're doing on Interstate 15 with the Smart
Freeway project where we will be connecting Caltrans ramp meters to technology on the
freeway to try to reduce congestion and improve safety without adding any pavement to the
But we can't do all this work alone. While we unapologetically stake out a
leadership position on many transportation issues in our region and
state, our success is only possible with the actions of partnership between us,
with you, the state, the Transportation Commission, Caltrans, Calista, tribal
governments, our 28 cities, the county, our federal partners, and yes our
neighbors to the north. And it is my honor now to introduce to you my good
partner and friend, Ms. Carrie Schindler, the Executive Director of the San Bernardino
County Transportation Authority.
Thank you, Erin.
Good afternoon, commissioners.
It's great to see some of you again.
We got to spend the morning together and see others of you here and our partners at the
dais as well.
We can accomplish what we accomplish in this region or this state without this partnership
and we value it heavily.
We are glad you are here.
We're glad you took time to come and visit with us this morning.
I hope that those of you that joined us for the Zero Emission Multiple Unit Tour and the
Aero Corridor Tour and had a chance to hear about our visions for that, enjoyed it.
It is no small feat that we have the first in North America, FRA Federal Railroad Administration
regulated Zero Emission Multiple Unit.
I shared the intent there was to focus on the vehicle so we can get zero emission technology
deployed in a more cost effective way and quicker to our region. We take air
quality very seriously here. San Bernardino County is big and proud and
we certainly appreciate our partnership with Riverside County. We are the largest
county in the contiguous United States at over 20,000 square miles. We have
everything from urban cores to the rural list of rural areas you could imagine.
over 80% of our land is vacant and we have mountains, some of the steepest
mountains in the country to the lowest deserts in the country. We have a lot to
cover and we take a lot of pride in that and we work very hard to represent
those communities well and authentically to who they are. I want to just touch on
a couple things that people might not know. We have six ski resorts, we have a
National Park, a national monument, and recently USA Today voted Big Bear Lake
the best lake in the country. So we have a lot going on here but we also have to
balance that. We have the fastest growing airport in the country which is huge to
have. We took local control of that about 12 years ago now. A huge economic
generator for our county. Very important adds a mobility, right? It allows people
to get around, move around quicker, and we have certain defining characteristics that we share
with Riverside County beyond the magnificent things that we have. Part of our economy is
goods movement. We have the majority of goods movement moving through our two counties
from the ports, you know, just west of us through our communities out to points beyond and certainly
throughout the nation. And so we're hard to deliver things like the ZEMU and we know it's
important we also have to figure out how do we keep balancing moving people
allowing them to have reliability knowing that we have a lot of goods
moving through our country and so with that you know consideration of air
quality congestion infrastructure needs is not lost on our board of directors
and they have to make tough decisions and we work hard to be good stewards of
public dollars worth with your magnificent staff to get key projects
delivered and make the tough decisions that we can innovate
and develop in a sustainable way as we see this wave of
population moving here and we know that the housing needs are
great. So sometimes that means moving boldly like at the ZEMU
and other times it means taking a step back and pausing and
really thinking about is this the right project and decision
for this time? And our board takes those decisions very
very seriously and they deliver it very heavily with that.
So I just want to make sure you know that about us.
We look ahead to where we can be and we really see our partnership as a way to get there.
Thoughtful determination of how we balance the needs to continue to grow our transit
systems and that element balanced with what we know the land use decisions are that are
that are being made here and the desire to be here,
transportation's at the heart of all of it.
And so we thank you for your support
and we thank you for when we call
and we say we have this need or we have this issue
that's come up, we really appreciate that you hear us.
I think you truly hear us and you truly support
our communities and our efforts.
So welcome, we hope you enjoy your stay here.
We're here if you need anything.
Thank you, have a great meeting.
Thank you so much.
Any public comment on this item?
we do not receive any request to comment on the item thank you thank you any
questions comments from the dies on this one Leanne eager thank you I just
wanted to say that the tour this morning was absolutely amazing huge hydrogen fan
so getting on that train and taking the hydrogen bus to get on the hydrogen
train fulfilled all kinds of wonderful dreams that I have so keep up the good
work and thank you so much for all the work that both of you do.
All right, thank you, Commissioner. Anyone else? Yes, Commissioner Brown-Heinz.
Can you hear me on this one, okay? Now, I'm just so proud to be from the Inland Empire
and to have such a strong group of transportation professionals. I'll say as soon as the announcement
was made, they had me in their office before the holiday getting me prepared for this meeting,
So I really appreciate that and then the tour today was just amazing and I'm here from this
region but I hadn't really had a chance to see that the zero emission train and I hadn't
had a chance to see the transportation center that's there and in the city that I grew up
in.
So I really appreciate the opportunity to do that and I appreciate the opportunity to
serve on this commission as well and thankful that my first meeting is here in my home city.
Well, yes, indeed. Anyone else like to make a comment or question? Hearing none, we're
going to move on to the next items. Taps 3-5, Doug Remedios.
Thank you, Chair. Tap 3 is the approval of the minutes from the October 16, 17, CTC meeting.
Tap 4 is the commissioners' meeting for compensation. Tap 5 is the committee members' compensation.
Staff recommends your approval of all three items.
Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Hearing none, is there a vote on the dice?
Thank you, Commissioner Bradshaw, seconded by Commissioner Tiffany. All those in favor?
Aye.
Opposed? Abstentions? Abstention, Ms. Brown-Hines. Motion is approved. Next up, we're going to
Item six, Executive Director Taylor.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone.
It's a blessing to be here today.
And it's nice to see your friendly faces
after spending the past few months
recovering from ankle surgery.
I'd like to thank my staff here and team at the commission
for all their hard work keeping us moving.
Breaking multiple bones in your ankle is an experience
I don't recommend anyone do.
But I am very grateful and proud to have a team that stepped up
and kept the commission running seamlessly during my absence.
I literally called Paul on a Thursday
and said I was having surgery on Friday.
And he stepped in, and he stepped up,
and he kept the commission moving without a hitch.
And so I just want to take a moment to really thank
him for that.
It's not an easy task to step in,
but it shows the seamless work that Paul and I do together.
As we begin our, so thank you, Paul.
I didn't say thank you.
Thank you, Paul.
As we begin our meeting today,
I'd also like to thank Aaron Haake and Kiri Schindler
for welcoming us to the region,
as well as for organizing the tour for commissioners
and staff earlier today,
and my apologies for not being able to participate
in the tour, and especially for the ice
and the stool for my ankle underneath my chair.
I really appreciate that.
That was very thoughtful.
We're pleased to continue our partnership
with Riverside County Transportation Commission
and the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
to deliver transportation improvements
that benefit the Inland Empire region
and all of Southern California.
I'd also like to recognize a new face on the dais.
Last month, the governor appointed Paulette Brown-Hines
to the commission.
Commissioner Brown-Hines has deep roots in the region,
as you've already heard,
and we are very excited to have her join us.
So welcome to the commissioner.
Commissioners, we've had a busy autumn
since our last meeting in October.
Last month, the commission held its second joint meeting
of the year with the California Air Resources Board
and the Department of Housing
and Community Development in Sacramento.
At the joint meeting, our agencies heard updates
from our state and regional partners
on the potential impacts to transportation projects
from the federal government's illegal rescission
of California's waivers under the Clean Air Act.
I can report that last week, the United States EPA
informed ARB that it approved proposed modifications
key modeling tools that Californians regions use to demonstrate they are meeting federal
air quality standards. While this approval is a vital step towards unfreezing critical
transportation projects, much work remains to make up for the impacts of losing these
important regulatory tools and to continue California's progress towards cleaner air
and healthier communities. Also in November, commissioners and staff attended the 2025
on the future conference. This conference was an opportunity to discuss shared challenges
with California's self-help counties and how we can continue to partner into the future.
I want to recognize Commission staff members Justin Behrens, Rory Waters and Matthew Yozgott
for each participating in different panels at the conference and sharing their insights
and expertise with our partners. It really speaks to the magnitude and the greatness
of our team here at the Commission. I'm pleased to announce that last month the Commission
received the Partner of the Year award from the Solano Transportation Authority.
I'd like to thank the authority and all our commission staff for their hard work that
makes that partnership possible.
I was pleased to accept the award alongside another awardee, Assemblymember Lori Wilson,
who is recognized for her leadership on transportation issues as legislator of the year.
At the end of October, commissioners and staff also attended another successful active transportation
Program Symposium hosted with Caltrans at UC Davis. The Symposium brings together stakeholders
and subject matter experts to discuss important issues around active transportation such as
climate and resiliency, how to engage youth and older adults, active transportation on
rural main streets, and how to expand accessible pedestrian facilities. The Symposium also
provided an opportunity to discuss best practices around impactful non infrastructure programs
like education and encouragement campaigns. We'll have an update on these types of projects
at an upcoming commission meeting. More than 500 people attended the symposium in person
and virtually. I want to take this opportunity to thank Caltrans and UC Davis staff for organizing
the event, along with Commissioned Staff Anya Ollenbacher, Ilika Chiangisi, and Jaden Gales.
I'd also like to thank Chair Grisby, Vice Chair Falcone, Commissioner Eager, and Commissioner
Lugo for their attendance and support, as well as all of the speakers, moderators, and
attendees.
We look forward to seeing you all at the 2027 Active Transportation Program Symposium.
I'd also like to thank everyone who participated in our hearings on the draft 2026 inter-regional
transportation improvement program, or ITIP.
After our hearings in Northern and Southern California, staff will be working with Caltrans
to bring the final ITIP to the Commission for approval in March of next year.
Staff also kicked off development of the guidelines for the next cycle of Senate Bill 1 competitive
programs.
We appreciate the participation of our partner agencies and stakeholders in our workshops,
Which we anticipate taking place over the coming months with a call for projects late
next year.
We will hear more about Senate Bill 1 guidelines development process later on the agenda.
As we move into today's agenda, I'd like to note that yesterday was the last executive
meeting of the Interagency Equity Advisory Committee of 2025.
In addition to thanking the committee for their insight and engagement over the past
year, I'd also like to thank Martha Armeth Kelly and Ana Gonzalez, the Chair's Committee
and Vice Chair for their service over the past year
and their contributions toward
advancing transportation equity.
As it is the Commission's last meeting of the year,
this week we will be presenting the Commission's 2025
annual report to the legislature for your approval.
The annual report summarizes the Commission's accomplishments
over the past year, including allocating over $13.7 billion
to projects across the state
and awarding an additional $2 billion in new funding.
This massive total is something we can all be proud of as we continue to invest in projects
that ease congestion, enhance goods movement, reduce air pollution,
improve system resiliency, expand the state's zero emission freight fueling infrastructure,
and make streets more accessible and safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.
I'd like to thank Vince Ma and Ben Williams for their work
in pulling together this year's annual report.
We look forward to continuing the commission's work
improving California's transportation system
in the new year.
All these considerable investments represent progress
towards meeting our shared transportation goals.
We must also continue our work to ensure stable funding
for transportation improvements in the future.
As part of our meeting agenda, we will hear from Caltrans
on the status of our planned improvements
in the current state highway operation
and protection program and the outlook
for the next program of projects expected
to be submitted for Commission approval early next year.
As we will hear from Caltrans,
cost increases on anticipated emergency damage
and declining fuel tax revenues continue to put pressure
on our transportation resources
and our ability to maintain the commitments
made to the voters through Senate Bill 1.
Establishing a sustainable transportation funding mechanism
must be a priority as we move into the next year and beyond.
I'd like to thank Assemblymember Wilson
for continuing her series of town hall meetings
on this topic and where our staff has been able to communicate the magnitude of our needs
in communities around the state. Also on our agenda, we will hear from Commission staff
on the findings of our Vehicle Safety Study Task Force who have been exploring the connection
between vehicle size and weight and safety outcomes for vulnerable road users like pedestrians
and cyclists. As we move into the next stage of developing the Commission's report on this
topic. I'd like to thank our task force members and the research team at the
University of California for their work supporting this effort. I'd also like to
thank Kayla McDonald for leading this project and pouring many hours of hard
work into the study. Commissioners I have a few staffing updates today. It's my
pleasure to announce that Christine Gordon has returned to the Commission as
our new Deputy Director for Administration and Financial Management.
Christine was previously Program Manager for the local partnership program here at the Commission before moving to the State Water Resources Control Board.
We are very excited to have Christine bring her decades of experience to the Commission in her new role.
I'd also like to thank Doug Remedios for serving as Interim Deputy Director.
Doug took on a lot of extra responsibilities to keep the Commission's business humming along, and we are grateful for his hard work.
On another note, a sadder note, this is the last commission meeting for AMEDGONOM.
AMED has accepted a new project management position with Caltrans after several years with the commission's engineering team.
It is of benefit to both the commission and Caltrans when our staff have these opportunities to build experience at both agencies
And take the lessons learned with them into their future endeavors, although we don't like it
We're sad to see a meds departure, but we are grateful for his contributions to the Commission and we are excited for your next chapter of med
Commissioners this concludes my report and as a reminder our next regular Commission meeting will be in Roseville on January 29th and 30th. Thank you
thank you director Taylor and welcome back and in fact if folks would indulge
me please give a round of applause to our executive director welcome your back
is there any public comment on this item we never see your request to comment on
the item thank you many questions or comments from the dice Vice Chair
Falcon thank you mr. chair I just wanted to also welcome back to Nisha you were
very much missed, but as you said very eloquently that we were in great hands
with Chief Deputy Paul Golodzewski. He was kind of our, you know, really stable
stable presence while you were gone. And so, you know, you've you selected well in
terms of who who would kind of carry the ball while you were gone, but we were so
we're so glad that you are back. And also wanted to really uplift the ATP
staff on a wonderful symposium. It was a great experience, well attended, great
sessions and speakers. It was my first time being at the symposium and
and really seeing the interest and enthusiasm
of those who attended and those who spoke.
And I look forward to future ATP symposiums to come.
It's really valuable.
And just loved being at the UC Davis campus
and really seeing the thriving bike culture there.
And then also just to thank the governor
selecting such a really neat new Commissioner and it's how apropos
that you come on board Commissioner Brown-Hines in your home area. We are
looking forward to working with you. I'm already liking your vibe. There's
now three eco-friendly sized Commissioners and so you know you'll be
standing next to me and Commissioner Eager in photos. So really looking
forward to hearing you know your your priorities and your perspective unique
perspective representing such an important region to our state that is
growing and dynamic in in in our mobility investments and so and thank you to
to Erin and to Carrie for a wonderful welcome to the region.
And that is it, thank you.
All right, hearing any other questions or comments
on the last item, we can move to item number seven,
commissioner and ex officio reports.
Anyone like to go first?
I see our commissioner Lugo.
Thank you, chair.
Okay, just making sure this button
turns on this microphone.
It's great to be here.
I love this tradition of coming out to Riverside in December
for the commission meetings.
And I wanted to just, as others have mentioned,
spotlight what a fantastic job the ATP staff did,
along with staff at the Active Transportation Resource Center
at UC Davis Institute of Transportation Studies
with the ATP symposium in October.
It was for me, such a treat to be there.
There are very few spaces where my transportation researcher,
bicycle advocate, and commissioner personas can come together,
and that was one of the places.
It felt great to be there.
It also really highlighted for me something that I work
on in my professional work, but that I don't see us focusing
on enough at the commission,
which is the issue of behavior change.
So we can, and we are,
I see the projects that Caltrans districts
and regional agencies are bringing to the commission
are absolutely shifting in the direction
of supporting multimodal transportation,
supporting cleaner fuel usage, things like that.
But the thing is, if we don't support the people
of California feeling comfortable and familiar
with the kinds of infrastructure that we're building,
we're not going to see the impacts
that those infrastructure systems are intended to have.
And so I've asked staff to in the next year,
hopefully bring more in front of the commission
around what are called non-infrastructure projects,
which are usually how we refer to projects
that encourage people to try biking and walking
or engage with their transportation infrastructure systems
different ways because this is just such a crucial piece of the of the story and piece of the puzzle
and we're not going to get the return on investment in the infrastructure system we're creating
if we don't also scaffold the human infrastructure and support people in making that transition
to greener systems. And so getting to be in the space at the ATP symposium and recognizing
the need to really uplift non-infrastructure work was great. And then in November, unfortunately,
I got a reminder of another aspect of why this behavior change piece is so important
when I learned about the death of a 13-year-old boy in Dana Point, which is really close to
my hometown of San Juan Capistrano, a young man named Luis Adrian Morales Pacheco, who
was walking to school with his brother
early on a Tuesday morning.
And a driver in a truck jumped a curb
and hit Luis on the safety island where he was standing.
So and Luis, unfortunately, the driver didn't stop.
It was a hit and run.
And Luis was taken to the hospital
and died of his injuries.
The driver was caught later that day.
And it turned out that he had had two prior DUI convictions
in 2021, he was still on probation from that.
One of those convictions included a hit and run
but he was driving lawfully at this time.
So, you know, this was a case where this child
was walking in a safe environment.
This was an infrastructure system that had been upgraded
with the safety of vulnerable users in mind
but an uncooperative driver chose to interact
with the system in a way that was deadly.
So I just really want to highlight how important investing in behavior change and culture change is for our state if we truly want to create opportunities for Californians to travel safely and in in ways that that get them where they're going.
Here here. Thank you, Commissioner Lugo. Anyone else like to do a commission report. I see Commissioner Lee and eager.
Just really quickly, being able to go to the ATP symposium and see the wonderful work
that our staff did to put it together. I know it was a lot of work and I know
this year there were way more people than the year before and I'm hoping next year we're
going to double that. I see the look on your face like, oh shoot, she said that.
But it was wonderful and the speakers were great. I also want to commend the speakers
at the focus of the future we had some staff that were speakers there and we were able to attend
that conference and hear the wonderful work that we know you all do and we got some good feedback
from some people that were there about CTC staff and how you really build this state up and bring
us forward so I just wanted to say an extra commendation to all of you that did the hard
work for those two events. Thank you Commissioner. Anyone else like to do a
Commission report? I see Commissioner Bradshaw. Thank you chair. So I don't
forget. Hey boss welcome back. The team did amazing. I want to do it on the front
of the meeting this this time. Second to none in the state. The staff working for
the Transportation Commission. So thanks again. They did you proud. It is all
proud but glad you're back. As you described some of your, which I won't get
in your personal details, but describe some of the things that needed to happen
to get you back up and running so to speak. You probably made some engineers
and stuff you know a little scared because we think that kind of technology
and bring it to some of the bridge work we got going on. I'm not trying to put
any pressure on anybody but anyway well done and glad to have you back. I want to
I personally welcome our new commissioner, Brown-Hines.
Great, you know, it's not really about resume and all that,
but what was really cool, my phone blew up
from a lot of folks that have been good mentors to me
in transportation about, one, they got an eye on me.
Make sure I welcome you proper, but two,
it's great to have you here, anything we can do.
Last thing I say, I was kind of a first time ever,
was able to visit Paris, and talking about connectivity,
talking about safety, talking about how things shift.
And once I got used to what the lighting systems were
around the bike lanes and the pedestrian lanes,
plus my wife understands.
I blind on the left side, so she kind of saved me
a number of times for probably stepping
in the way of a bicycle.
But it was quite, but after three or four days there,
Commissioner Lugo, Sister Lugo, talking about
how we need to, and I don't want to speak for you,
but my perspective, the education of multimodal
and how we look at how these systems integrate.
And we do have to have the human element
and the advancement there.
And to see it, I'm not saying that nowhere's perfect,
but three or four days in Paris,
I saw this kind of alignment,
no pun intended, of vehicles, right?
Autos, pedestrian, and bicycles, you know?
And it was really impressive,
not to mention the transient connectivity
is something for us to strive for.
I would say.
Great to be at Riverside.
Love it down here.
Thank you for the welcome.
But I probably mumbled the folks annoyance up here,
maybe possibly if I did, apologies.
But I must have mumbled out housing, housing, housing,
three or four times over here.
It's again, broken record.
But as we do everything we can in transportation,
the housing, particularly for the working class
of our state, we have to find a way
to tie infrastructure into housing production
to bring affordability.
I'm based up in the Northern California area,
but you'll see a very similar thing
when you run from the Bay Area, the Northern Bay Area,
out to Patterson, Tracy, the North Valley,
or if you run across the reservoir, right,
going from the South Valley over into Santa Clara.
And we need more capacity.
I'm just gonna say how I see it.
We need more capacity there and it will help drive affordable housing for workers.
So I just wanted to throw that out there and this commission has been anything we can do
and I'm really honored to serve here and the support with that.
If we don't fix that, on seeing nods from our leadership in Riverside because we've
had conversations over the years on this, we're just, we're not even keeping up.
I'll just put it to you that way.
So I just wanted to raise that issue again, and Paris is great, and I'm happy to be home.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Any other commissioners that would like to make a vice chair focal.
Thank you again, Mr. Chair.
I wanted to report that attended ribbon cutting the state route 116 121 in Sonoma County,
I wanted to make sure that I acknowledge because it was such an important seems like a very,
important project for the communities in Sonoma and Napa, was well attended and congratulations
to Director Nguyen and his staff and I know that CTC has been involved with this really
important roundabout project that is going to be or is already positively impactful for
the communities there. And, you know, congratulating the Sonoma County
Transportation Climate Authorities, that is their newly branded agency name, and so
wanted to share that report with you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Vice
Chair. Any other commissioners like to make a statement, comment? Okay, so I will
close it out then, make a couple comments. One, want to also give praise and thanks
to Paul Gee for your time when Tanisha was out.
Yeah, it would've been great.
Definitely a great leader to work with.
I appreciate you and Tanisha Pickwell.
And I also want to also echo what some members
have said here today that coming to Riverside
in December is a great tradition.
This region is oftentimes overlooked
and I think it's important to keep Riverside
and the larger Inland Empire, including San Bernardino,
at the center of our hearts.
Want to also congratulate and thank our new commissioner
from this great region, Brown Hines.
Thank you for joining us.
Another great appointment by our governor.
And I want to welcome you.
And finally, I want to also thank staff
for the great ATP symposium conference
that we had very well attended, some great meaty topics.
and also want to thank you for covering our support
for rural main streets,
something that you all know that I care a lot about,
and I'm so appreciative that you had a session on that.
And also want to thank Lee Ann Eager for being the moderator
for that session.
Really great comments and just sharing of ideas there
that was really powerful.
So any questions or comments?
Any public comment on this item, I should say?
We do not receive any requests to comment on the item.
Thank you so much.
All right.
It's my pleasure now to go to item eight,
CalSTA undersecretary James Hacker.
Good afternoon.
All right, I used the button, right?
Right, good afternoon, everybody.
It's great to be here with you all.
Thank you for having me.
I'm James Hacker, undersecretary CalSTA,
stepping in today for Secretary Omashakan,
who can't join but sends his regards.
I wanna echo earlier comments and say,
one, thank you for having us,
Director Haik and Director Schindler.
Welcome back, Director Taylor,
and welcome to the commission, Commissioner Brown-Hines.
We're very excited to have you.
Looking forward to working with you.
So I'm here to provide the CALSTA update
and I'll attempt to be as quick as I can.
As usual, sort of providing our report
under the framework of the core four.
So first, supposedly I have slides.
If not, I can just talk.
There we go.
All right.
So first, under climate action,
to talk first about recovery from recent storms and damage the state highway system.
Just here at the state we're seeing increasing impacts of climate change and increasing weather
related damage at an accelerating rate over the last couple of years. I'd like to give a shout out
to Caltrans and to all the hard work they've done over the last year to recover from recent storms,
particularly as that damage relates to the continuing recovery from the January fires down
in Los Angeles. Currently there are 15 emergency projects underway recovering from the Palisades
fire and the subsequent rainstorms as well as the Eaton fire and the December 2024 Franklin fire.
These projects estimated to cost roughly 115 million dollars so not an insignificant chunk of
change and that work includes replacing damaged guardrails, repairing and reinstalling traffic
signals, repairing damaged or constructing new retaining walls, and installing temporary k-rail
and other protective systems to make sure we're protecting private homes and businesses
during construction and during the potential future storms.
This recovery work is ongoing.
It's been going on since, you know, late 2024 and it's only going to continue from here.
Traffic on major highways officially reopened early in the summer of 2025, although active
work zones remain on PCH and State Route 27 into Panka Canyon.
Importantly, Caltrans is working with Southern California Edison to work on undergrounding
all of their utilities along both PCH and State Route 27 slash Topanga Boulevard work
that is expected to be completed in March of next year while Caltrans is also working with the City
of Malibu and the rebuilding of state drainage systems and seawalls to make sure that we can
continue to protect and preserve Pacific Coast Highway right there where it abuts the sea.
Caltrans is also embedding within with staff at the City of Malibu's Rebuilding Center
to make sure that they're available to help answer questions and help homeowners navigate the
permitting process as they seek to rebuild from January's fires. The magnitude of these disasters
can't be undersold and so which means the magnitude of the work to recover cannot be overstated.
So once again we're grateful to Caltrans for all their dedication and essential work around the
clock on this issue. Pretty soon my second item here sort of zooming out from the sort of LA Fire
and Storm recovery specific question to sort of the larger fiscal impact to the state.
Just flagging it later on in this agenda, CTC will be looking to allocate funding or additional funding from the 2024 State Highway Operation and Protection Program, or SHOP,
and reviewing the draft 2026 SHOP. Both of those will be heavily impacted, as Director Taylor already sort of previewed, will be heavily impacted by recent disaster spending.
It's worth noting that the state of California has spent more than a billion dollars recovering from disasters each year for three years running now.
10 years ago, our annual total was roughly $460 million,
so we've more than doubled that over the last 10 years.
That billion dollars a year is more than half
of what we typically set aside for disaster recovery
when we do our fiscal planning,
which means that we then, like, we can't not do that work,
so we have to pay for that
by shifting money out of other things,
which means that the more money we're spending
on disaster recovery, the less money we have available
for additional projects, either maintenance,
you know, capital reconstruction or expansion.
Most of this damage is storm-related.
By far the primary cause is extreme rainfall or snowfall
resulting in local flooding slides or washouts.
There's a couple of good examples.
You know, the region's sliding big sur
and the continued issues around last chance grade
in Humboldt County.
They've seen significant concentrations of damage
which means we've spent significant amounts of money
in those hotspots, but it really is a statewide problem.
We're working to sort of plan for this
and address this going forward.
The shop has committed $250 million
federal protect funds for the adaptation of the state highway system and help supplement
our climate adaptation efforts in addition to that emergency spending already talked about as
well as some of our major damage work around repairs. Well this has helped to boost our climate
adaptation work future rounds of protect funds are uncertain and so this is likely going to be a
thing that we're going to find additional ways to solve on our own here. Caltrans has increased
their funding for adaptation work in recent years and state funding for adaptation work but many of
the resulting projects are still in the early phases of development and won't be completed
for several years if not longer. Caltrans is also looking to increase the disaster reservation
in future shop programs which will help mitigate some of these sort of unexpected shocks to the
system and the program of projects but again that starts to come out of future new projects and
future new or future maintenance rehabilitation work so it's all a balancing act. But while we
look to sort of right size these reservations and look to move some of these large scale sort of
future adaptation projects forward. It's imperative that Caltrans and the CTC and the state as a whole
continue to work together to identify ways to reduce the risk of catastrophic damage to the
state highway system and the state transportation system in the coming years. This will be a priority
for us at CALSTA over the next year plus and we look forward to working with Caltrans, the CTC,
and our local and regional partners to move this work forward. Last note on climate action
and Sustainable Communities Task Force.
Sudden topic change.
The SCTF has been moving ahead
since it was announced earlier this year.
Our last meeting or our second meeting, I guess,
was October 29th in Davis.
The next meeting will be December 16th in Sacramento,
and we are working towards producing a final report
to the legislature for ways to improve our plan
and implementation of the Sustainable Community Strategies
system or program one year from now.
If we'll go to the next slide,
Moving on to safety, some news from OTS,
the Office of Traffic Safety.
They recently awarded more than 140 million
in federal funding for traffic safety grants
to 495 projects to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety
and provide critical education enforcement programs
that serve the traffic safety needs of all Californians.
This is a second consecutive record year of funding for us.
We had a roughly $140 million last year,
exceeding our total two and three years ago
which was roughly 130 million dollars.
So we're very excited to see the increased funding
and we're looking forward to the benefits
that those projects will bring to the state highway system
and to the state as a whole.
This work is made, the importance of this work
was highlighted by OTS's participation
in the World Day of Remembrance,
which is a day of remembrance
for those who were lost to traffic accidents.
OTS participated in events in San Francisco and in LA.
And in LA they marked the day by setting out
711 empty chairs, one for each person
who was killed in a traffic accident
in the city in the preceding year.
So this is truly crucial work that will help save lives.
Continuing that theme,
the state priority safety corridors,
they were announced earlier this fall by the secretary
and by Cal State with our local partners.
Cal State continues to support the two corridors
down in Los Angeles County that we announced earlier
this year, working with LADOT and local advocates,
schools and church groups to attend those community meetings
and advance work along those corridors.
And we're looking forward to announcing
a third priority safety corridor
in the hopefully fairly near future.
Related to that, the Secretary's policy on road safety,
that was signed by the Secretary,
by Council Secretary Omashakan as well as the Secretary
of the California Health and Human Services Agency
back with the launch of the first two safety corridors.
At the last CTC meeting,
Deputy Secretary Christine Casey announced that
and gave a bit of a preview on what was in that policy.
And so we're moving ahead on identifying
the implementation steps we need to take
to get that policy moving.
Importantly, we're looking to reconvene
and expand the Zero Fatalities Task Force,
and so expect invitations to come out from that,
or for that from us later this month.
And lastly, tomorrow is the final graduation
from the CHP Academy for the year.
Cadet Training Class 325 is, like I said, the final class.
It's roughly 140 students moving from cadet to officer,
at which point they will take their place
in the California Highway Patrol
and work to improve safety all across California.
to go to the next slide for equity.
Just a couple of highlights here.
And again, just want to echo the good work,
echo the comments,
highlighting the good work that the EAC did yesterday.
Held again here in Riverside,
topics included the vision mission
and foundational principles
for transportation equity visuals.
Representatives from CalSTA, including Jessica Chan,
Stephanie Doherty from Office of Transportation Safety,
and Paul Chung from Caltrans,
as well as Alison Jo from CalSTA,
our system with the meeting and delivered presentations
around Caltrans's people and community first action plan,
as well as the larger state agencies role
in securing safety and transportation statewide.
Building off that last month,
CalSTA kicked off the work
for the agency-wide equity action plan,
starting with an internal survey.
This aims to recognize the important groundwork laid
for promoting equitable transportation efforts
across CalSTA, both the agency and the departments
and commissions that sit under us,
will also pinpoint an opportunity
to advance transportation equity
across all of our programs in the coming years.
This plan is included and was name checked
in the Governor's Executive Order N1622,
which directed the state to adopt
additional equity plans and strategies.
And it was also highlighted by Secretary Omashakan
in several of his directives to develop strategic plans
that take actionable and achievable steps
towards embedding equity in our work.
Lastly, a quick note on DBEs.
We're working with other state DOTs,
the Attorney General's Office and FHWA
to coordinate our policy responses
to the recent federal DBE IFR or interim final rule,
which again, for those who aren't tracking,
made some fairly significant changes
to the way that we do our DBE contracting work,
both in terms of awarding as well as tracking and reporting.
So we're working to reevaluate that program
and update our policies and procedures
around things like goal setting, monitoring, and compliance.
with new race neutral requirements of the DBE program.
The goal of us doing that is to reevaluate
our existing DBE program according to the new IFR
and guidance and to ensure that we're compliant
with those rules while still meeting state priorities
and state goals.
So we're trying not to necessarily change course,
just to make sure that we can still get
where we're trying to get under the new set of rules.
Caltrans is working to develop additional small business
strategies to reinforce our efforts,
to promote and encourage small business participation
in Caltrans projects and to underline our commitment
that effort. We go to the next slide. Just a couple of quick notes on workforce creation and
private capital. So first just highlighting a couple of outcomes as we've rolled out the
Port and Freight Infrastructure Program or PFIP. Across all of the awarded projects,
we're creating estimated 26,000 construction jobs and 5,600 permanent jobs, including
in infrastructure expansion in places like clean technology, warehousing, intermodal
logistics, and site development. Projects like the Pier B On-Doc Rail Support Facility
at the Port of Long Beach and the Merced County Inland Port are not only supporting local
economies but are also going to stimulate workforce development in fields such as construction,
engineering, as well as clean tech manufacturing. Additionally, as of 2025, PFIT projects have
reported over $717 million in leverage non-state funding,
including federal, local, and private contributions,
highlighting the ability of these state programs
to leverage private dollars and further expand our impact.
For example, Port of Oakland's terminal modernization program
secured match funding for zero-emission yard equipment
and fueling stations,
so further extending the impact of the state investment,
demonstrating strong public-private partnership here
and continued in growing private sector interest in the space.
That's very exciting.
continue that work. We'll go to the next slide for innovation. Just a couple note on autonomous
vehicles. First, as you all know, DMV is the permanent entity for autonomous, or the, I guess,
the operations permitting entity for autonomous vehicles in the state. PUC has a role in permitting
commercial application, but DMV permits the vehicles themselves. On November 21st, DMV approved an
expansion of Waymo's permit, both to expand the technologies they can use for a purpose-built
all-electric vehicle manufactured by Zika, which I think is what you're seeing in the picture there,
as well as to expand their geographic operating area to include much of the broader Bay Area,
Sacramento, San Diego, Orange County, and the larger Los Angeles region.
The company highlighted that they don't plan on starting those operations until May of 2026,
and they plan on consulting with local authorities, as well as local law enforcement
and regional planning agencies before they begin that service.
sort of riffing on that. The state's been in the process of updating its regulations
for the autonomous vehicle program. And I believe yesterday, in response to the more than 80 public
comments we received from the first round of regs, we released an updated set of or revised version
of those regulations, which are currently in a 15-day public comment period. These proposed regs
make a couple of changes, including revising data reporting requirements, allowing for enhanced
enforcement and reporting by law enforcement and opens a pathway to
operational autonomous vehicles above 10,000 pounds,
which previously were not allowed under existing regs. Importantly,
these changes, especially above the 10,000 pound limit,
would allow for the transportation of passengers by what we're calling medium
duty autonomous vehicles, those between 10,000 and 14,000 pounds,
to provide passenger service in partnership with public agencies,
providing new avenues and a potential new use case for autonomous vehicle
technology as well as hopefully additional tools for local transit agencies to provide service.
Again, that's out for a 15-day public comment period right now. DMV will review those public
comments, receive the current round before moving forward and finalizing those rules
for implementation sometime in early 2026. Statutorily, we have to have that process
finished by April, so we really are in the home stretch here of getting this done.
Lastly, on zero emission vehicles, Caltrans continues to make progress and implementation
to the Federal National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program or NEBI in partnership
with the California Energy Commission. FHWA recently approved our what we're calling a
bulk obligation request so we just got approval for 67 million dollars in additional funds from
the feds which I think secures all the funding we have been promised or at least that is currently
available and Caltrans is is working Caltrans and CEC are working together to obligate the remaining
the remainder of the roughly 384 million dollars total that we were allocated by the feds.
so it's a very important milestone for us. The first NEVY funded stations in California went live
at a shopping center in San Ysidro in late November and so we're looking to further accelerate that
work and bring more of those stations online in the coming months. So go to the next slide.
I don't have a bullet on this one but just a couple of verbal comments from me
just noting that later in the agenda the commission as I think has already been previewed will be
sort of beginning the guideline process for SB1 competitive programs including the local
partnership program, solutions for congested corridors and the trade corridor enhancement
program. CalSTA is very much looking forward to the development and eventual implementation of
these guidelines and consistent with our core four priorities. CalSTA will be looking for the
eventual guidelines to do some of the following. So first continue to meet the statutory goals and
requirements of SB1. We've got to make sure we're taking those boxes. We also want to make sure that
we continue to align competitive programs with the updated CAPTI or climate action plan for
transportation infrastructure 2.0 where we can. I want to continue efforts to further and prioritize
SB1 investments that meaningfully yield equitable outcomes particularly in historically disadvantaged
communities. Further refine and advance our efforts to reduce the environmental impact
of our transportation system and the emissions associated with that system while continuing to
invest in some of our core priorities such as congestion management and goods movement.
And lastly further support our efforts to accelerate the adoption of zero emission
vehicles particularly in the medium and heavy duty space. So we look forward to that process.
We're looking forward to engaging with all of our stakeholders with the CTC and with others
in this process and we're looking forward to getting that across the line and getting those
those projects put down that call for projects next year. So with that that concludes my remarks.
Thank you once again for having me. I'm happy to take questions. Thank you Undersecretary.
Any public comment on this item? We didn't receive any requests to comment on the item.
all right. Thank you. Any questions, comments from the dais? I see Vice Chair Falkland.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Undersecretary for your
year update. A couple things that kind of stuck in my mind is the work that
you're directing with EAC on disadvantaged business enterprises, something that I've been
particularly interested in you know given the tone and feel right now of the
administration and ensuring that there's equitable access to opportunities for
these businesses to participate in building our infrastructure in the state
so it's something I've been personally interested in in hearing how how we
we continue to invite businesses large and small to be part of building of our state.
The second, I just wanted to uplift the work that the administration and Caltrans has been
doing on the border, one of the most impacted areas of air quality, because of idling trucks.
And so I'm glad to hear about the continuing work that the administration and that we're
all doing in trying to ensure opportunities for charging for medium and heavy duty freight
vehicles.
vehicle. So just wanted it to call out a couple of those items that you mentioned. Thank you.
I would like to respond. Yeah, I'm happy to respond to those. And thank you, Commissioner.
On the DBE question, you know, I just want to sort of, I think our comments echoed each
other to some degree, you know, the federal government put out a new updated rule for
the DBE program that I think to put it lightly was disruptive to the program. So we're trying
to find our way towards is we're trying to navigate our way towards compliance with the
letter of that rule that still allows us to meet our goals in the ways that we've been
trying to meet them over the last couple of years, right? We're not walking away from
our commitments, but we are trying to make sure that we can meet them in a way that doesn't
set off any tripwires. You know, that's a complicated and difficult process to work
through, but we are working through it. And I do know that Caltrans has been, you know,
know who's on the DBE list and the folks that they work with in that space. And so they have
been communicating with the folks who are directly impacted by this to make sure that everybody
sort of knows where we are in the process, where we're trying to get to, and as we start to get
towards sort of a solution here, sort of what that's going to look like and how to make sure
that folks aren't left out in the cold as we get there. And then just a quick note on sort of the
zero emission vehicle point and sort of the focus on medium heavy duty vehicles in particular.
just earlier this year the governor put out an executive order
directing agencies and departments to identify ways
to continue to support the transition to zero emission vehicles in light of the
federal pullback you know the the the tax credits you know the
the coming changes in air quality standard or
vehicle efficiency standards and one of the tools that was identified was
were programs for these kinds of things right to finding ways to to boost
Charging fueling infrastructure particularly for medium and heavy duty vehicles, which is space that is less developed in the light duty space particularly in in
Congested industry heavy and like you said sort of typically disadvantaged areas, right?
There's a lot of industry a lot of truck traffic that runs through some of these areas
And so the more we can sort of drive that that adoption and drive those investments the more we can help those communities
Thank you. Under secretary. Any other questions or comments from the decks?
If not, thank you under secretary for the report
Next we will turn to item 9, Caltrans Director Dina Altawansi.
Good afternoon Chair Grisby, Vice Chair Falcone, Commissioners, and welcome back Director Taylor.
I also want to welcome Commissioner Brownhays on the Commission. Welcome and look forward to working with you.
My name is Dina Altawansi and I serve as the Caltrans Director. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the-
Dina, I'm sorry, can you get a little closer to your microphone?
to provide the updates for the department today. Can I get the slide that please? Thank you.
Next slide. So I'd like to begin with some of the leadership changes. Next slide.
I'm pleased to announce that just over a week ago Dave Moore began serving as the acting
chief deputy director following the conclusion of Ryan Dormity's acting assignment. Dave has 32
years of experience with the department. For nearly a decade now he's been serving as district
to director and he's overseeing transportation improvements projects spanning seven counties
and portion of two others. He's responsible for maintaining and operating more than 1700 miles of
lanes. Prior to his appointment as district to director he served as a deputy district director
for planning and local assistance. Throughout his career he's gained a lot of broad experience
and several project delivery functions including design, construction, project management and
transportation planning. Dave holds a BS degree in civil engineering from UC Davis and a masters
certificate in project management from George Washington University. Dave is a mountain Maydu
from the Palomas County area and a non-voting tribal member of the Moretown Rancheria. He's
actively involved in community and cultural initiatives, serving as president of the Shasta
County Arts Council and participating in the Native Roots Network, a local indigenous-based
collaborative. I also want to take a moment to recognize a number of retirees from our executive
board. Starting with Janice Benetton, who's the deputy director for maintenance and operations.
She's just retired. She has served in the department for 32 years. Also, Valissa Clemens,
who is our chief of staff, the director's office,
who has been serving with the department,
well, the state for 35 years and Caltrans for 12 years.
And later today, you're gonna be hearing from Mike Johnson.
This is his last commission meeting,
and I wanna thank Mike for his service as well.
Mike is our state asset management engineer.
He's been serving with the department for 37 years.
And Dara Wheeler, whom you've heard from
in recent commission meetings,
who's the acting chief data and artificial intelligence officer,
34 years with the department.
So as you can see, so many years of experience are walking out.
I want to congratulate them all for their years of service
to all the people of California and wish them
the best of luck in their next endeavor.
So please give them a round of applause.
Thank you.
Next slide, please.
I want to also highlight some of the events focused
on our goal for employee excellence.
Next slide.
On October 22, Caltrans hosted the special statewide town hall meeting broadcasted live from district 10 in Stockton. The theme was our people, our strength, our future.
The event served as a platform to highlight the exceptional work being carried across the state by our employees and its alignment with the department's strategic goals of safety, equity, climate action, prosperity and employee excellence.
This town hall meeting also provided a valuable opportunity for our employees to engage directly with our executive leadership team through a live Q&A session, reinforcing our commitment to transparency, collaboration and inclusive dialogue across all levels of the organization.
Next slide. In November, Caltrans also participated in the ASH2 annual meeting held in Salt Lake City, joining peer agencies from across the nation.
Caltrans representatives actively engaged in a range of technical and policy focus forms including the council on highways and streets road use and use their charge board of directors meeting active transportation council council on multimodal transportation and transportation policy form.
These sessions provided a valuable opportunity to contribute to national dialogue on infrastructure planning funding mechanism and multimodal integration.
In addition to participating in council meetings,
Kaltran's staff engaged in a series of knowledge sessions
as well.
These were focused on emerging technologies
such as application of artificial intelligence
and transportation.
During the general session, Kaltran's
also contributed to a panel discussion
offering strategic insights on the department's planning
efforts for major international events,
namely the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games
and also the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
The conference also served as a platform
to highlight California's leadership
in transportation innovation and policy development,
reinforcing the state's commitment to forward thinking,
equitable and sustainable mobility solution.
Next slide.
Also, I'm excited to share that Caltrans Division
of Maintenance was recognized at the Governor's Wildfire
and Landscape Resilience Task Force Regional Meeting
in Southern California.
The Secretary of California Natural Resources Agency Secretary Waitcroft
applauded Caltrans Division of Maintenance investment since 2020 to scale up field crews,
professional support services, and contracts with specialty contracts to perform vegetation
management along 80 routes that function as primary emergency evacuation routes.
This reduces the probability of wildfire ignition by humans caused within 500 feet of the road.
Furthermore, in Riverside, Caltrans, alongside with our federal and state partners, signed a Southern California Ignition Reduction Program Charter.
The public-private partnership was created to reduce human-caused wildfire ignitions, particularly along roads where nearly two-thirds of Southern California's wildfires begin.
The charter is intended to reduce ignitions, lower costs, and limit wildfire impact across the region. Next slide.
Moving from looking back to looking ahead and what's coming, I want to share some of the general updates on key initiatives and activities. Next slide.
As many of you are aware, we have been involved in several strategic collaborative efforts, one of which is the Caltrans effort to support the governor's new state action for facilitation on encampment or safe task force.
Caltrans identified corridors in each of 10 priority cities,
naming the San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, San Diego,
Sacramento, Los Angeles, Fresno, Bakersfield, Anaheim,
and Long Beach to coordinate encampment operations
and deterrence action through the Governor's Office
of Emergency Services.
Since the safe task force inception, sites were covered
in Los Angeles and San Francisco.
just since last our October meeting, we've also covered additional sites in San Diego, Anaheim,
Fresno, and this week, just yesterday, we had covered the site in Long Beach as well.
Dorian Campus has taken place within the 30 days window cleanup action, which is achieving one of
the task force benchmark goals, demonstrating the effectiveness of having wraparound services provided
by sister agencies in health and human services and in law, law enforcement. Additionally,
the resource fairs hosted by some of the cities and the counties prior to encampment cleanup
action has been incredibly helpful in providing services to individuals that need it and finding
shelters. As we move into the winter months, Caltrans remain committed to partner on coordinating
on this coordinated approach at the governor's safe task force not only to responsibly protect
safety on the state highway system right away but also the dignity and belonging of everyone
in our state. Next slide please. Moving to policy updates, after successful public engagement
earlier this year, Caltrans is proud to release the second edition technical documents for SP743
implementation. Caltrans has published updated second editions of the transportation analysis
framework or TAF and the transplantation analysis under CEQA-TAC as well as Q&A documents responding
to public comments on the draft second editions. The updated resources reflect the latest policy
direction guidance and stakeholders input for the analysis of capacity increasing projects on the
state highway system and also clarify the unconsolidated guidance informed by subject
matter experts research and practitioners experiences for more than three years of SP 743
implementation on the state highway system. Incorporating this information does not change
how projects are currently analyzed. Instead, we are consolidating the implementation guidance
into formal documentation. As Keltranz continues to implement SP 743, we anticipate further
opportunities to refine further analysis framework through interim guidance updates via our Hot
Topics and Bulletin on the Caltrans SP743 website. Next slide. Okay, shifting our focus
to federal level, earlier this year, Caltrans and CalSTA launched a reauthorization working group
with statewide partners to shape California's federal transportation advocacy through broad
stakeholders input. As you all know we formed aid groups, subgroups that were formed around key
priorities such as safety and maintenance. Since then, ten meetings have been held with over 1000
participants. These discussions are informing policy proposals for the next surface transportation
bill which will be reflected in the forthcoming California Federal Surface Transportation
consensus principle document. CALSTA and Caltrans are also engaging in national reauthorization
efforts, including congressional outreach and participation in initiatives led by national
organizations such as ASHTO, APTA, AMPO and others. California's focus for the next bill includes
funding reforms to stabilize the highway trust fund and support multi-year programs prioritizing
safety including a goal of zero traffic death by 2035, advancing innovation through flexible
funding for new technologies, supporting economic growth and workforce development.
California will also urge congress to streamline federal programs, allow flexibility and funding
transfer, and reduce grant complexities. We are also advocating for robust safety programs
and infrastructure readiness for emerging technologies. Perhaps most critically we're
also emphasizing the need for a skilled workforce pipeline to build the transportation system of
tomorrow and to invest of what really makes our state so unique, our people. Next slide please.
Finally I would like to provide a preview of the draft 2026 shop and highlight a presentation on
the select state highway system project outcomes report that will be provided later in today's
meeting. First the draft 2026 shop. This draft shop includes 600 projects across covering the
period of 2026 through 2030 valued at about 17 billion dollars. The shop is our fixed first
program for existing assets improving safety providing pedestrian bicycle modes and more.
The draft would be open for public commenting beginning next week through January 16th.
Lastly, I want to close with a preview of the select state highway system project outcome report. Next slide.
It should be noted that this report represents the second department's submission in compliance with requirements for SB 695.
This reports provide a summary of project outcomes that were completed for the year fiscal year 2324.
These outcomes include, but are not limited to, lane additions, enhancements to bicycle
and pedestrian infrastructure, jurisdictional relinquishments, residential and commercial
relocation, and other project elements. It's important to keep in mind when reading this
report that this reflects projects that were planned years ago, reflecting the transportation
policies and planning framework at the time that we started developing these projects.
We'll take any questions.
There will be comprehensive
discussion and today's meeting
agenda on this topic, so we'll
take we will dive into the
reports, finding implications
for future planning and policy
alignments. Next slide. And with
that, I conclude my updates.
Happy to take any questions.
Thank you, Director. Is there
any public comment on this item?
Um, yes, Commissioner Mann.
Um, thank you so much.
Thank you so much for that overview of the work that's, that's going on.
And before I ask my question, I just wanted to add to everyone else thanking Paul for
all of his incredible work.
It's been so fantastic working with you.
Well, we have more work together, so this isn't like wrapping it up.
Yeah, but it's been really wonderful getting to know you and working with you.
So thank you. And Tanisha, yes, you have an incredible team. They've all been
wonderful. We're so happy to have you back, but please know that your team just
did an absolutely fantastic job and we're incredibly well cared for. And then
also I do want to welcome Commissioner Brown-Hines to the Commission. It is
fantastic that we're in Riverside for your first meeting. It was lovely
spending time with you today on the tour earlier and getting to know you and your anchoring in this
area. So I look forward to working with you and learning more from you along the way. So welcome.
So my question is, and I really appreciate that report in terms of what Caltrans is doing,
for the safe task force. As you were sharing that, I was trying to get a better sense of how
that safe task force interacts with the airspace lease program. Is there interaction? Do they
inform one another? Is there overlap in terms of that work? But that was what I was curious about.
But thank you so much. Yeah, thank you very much, Commissioner Mann, for the question.
The short answer is no, there are two separate efforts. The safe task force is really focusing
on a number of priority cities doing what Caltrans normally does which is, you know,
trying to do encampment clearance, some deterrence, but the difference with this
safe task force also is that we've got a much bigger group of collaborative partners that are
joining us in this effort. So they are focusing on providing the services and providing social
services and shelter beds and the likes to folks that are experiencing homelessness to help,
you know, bridge them to the next chapter. The airspace leases is a different topic
that we are grappling with. It has a lot to do with some of our current leases that,
you know, are expiring or that we are in the process of renewing. So it's totally different
effort. It's not overlapping. Thank you for that. So are you finding that for the
airspace lease program, you don't have encampments there that then would require the safe task force.
Because that's really what I'm curious about.
No, there are encampments on some of our airspace leases
and that is something that we are working to address.
We're not necessarily addressing it
through the safe task force,
we're addressing it in general
just as part of our maintenance practices
for the department.
Thank you, Commissioner, great questions.
I had a follow up to Commissioner Mann's question.
I live in an area heavily impacted, as you know,
and just sort of curious,
once the area has been cleared,
what kind of efforts can be taken
to make sure it stays cleared.
I know there probably are staffing issues
to make sure you can take care of all these sites
and kind of tying it back to our last meeting we had
and the use of technology to help surveil those sites,
just wondering what your thoughts are around that.
Thank you.
Yeah, thank you for the question, Chair Grisby.
So a couple of things that we're doing
in terms of preventing re-encampment.
One is providing some deterrence measures.
Sometimes it's hardscaping of certain locations
that make it difficult for folks to come back to areas
that are not safe for them to be in.
In addition to that, we were also working
with a number of cities
on delegated maintenance agreements.
So that is an effort that has taken off
on several cities across the state.
The delegated maintenance agreements allow the local
to come into our right of way
and do some of the maintenance work on a more regular basis.
And as these encampments are formed,
they're allowed to address them immediately.
So this is some of the efforts
that the department is doing in this space.
The other thing that we're also doing
is we're working with CHP on more regular enforcement.
So part of the task force is CHP patrolling these locations
on more regular basis and kind of helping us
prevent the repopulation of those spots as well.
Thank you so much.
I really appreciate that.
Any other questions or comments from the dais?
Hearing none, thank you so much for your report.
Much appreciated.
Next, we're going to go to item 10, which is withdrawn.
Moving on to item 11, regional agencies moderator,
Louis Thal.
Closer next time.
Southall in the back.
Afternoon Chair, Grisby, Vice Chair Falcone,
Executive Director Taylor, Director El Tawansi,
Undersecretary Hacker and Commissioners.
My name is Louis Zhao.
I am from OCTA.
I'm the RTK moderator for this year.
The RTPA has met yesterday
and we were graciously hosted by RCTC.
And we met quite a, we met about a couple of things,
but before that, I do want to welcome Director Taylor back,
Executive Director Taylor back, sorry.
Chief Director, Chief Executive Director, Golozewski,
did a great job while you're out, as you've heard already.
We also want to welcome Commissioner Dr. Brown-Hines.
The Regents look forward to working with you,
and there's no better place to start
than here in your home county riverside.
So I'm gonna apologize in advance.
We had a very procedural meeting yesterday.
A lot of things that happened in the background,
where the magic happens,
but it's important for everybody to know
that the Regents are working together
along with the state agencies.
So the first thing you very heard was a DB issue
that continues to be a significant topic
amongst the regional agencies,
especially those that are going through the procurements right now.
Under Secretary Hacker mentioned it, there's a lot of transparency, a lot of guidance that's
being provided to us from those agencies.
There's still some questions about how we're going to deliver some of these projects when
that switch flips back on and whether or not it's going to impact our existing procurements.
We do appreciate Caltrans and Calstone, the continued transparency in giving us guidance
as we work through this process.
credit. It's a very obscure kind of programming thing that we work on, but
it's also very important. We use it to maximize federal share of funds for our
projects. On the transit side, it's an important issue for us because we use it
to maximize our federal transit administration funds and helps us operate
our bus service. Those funds are at a critically low amount, and we are
working with Caltrans to make sure that we could continue to get to move
and get and secure those funds for the near future. The Federal Year
earmark repurposing, this is also a very procedural issue,
but it's something I really want to highlight
because it is a great success story.
We received an update on the federal earmark
repurposing efforts and Caltrans working closely
with the regional agencies
successfully repurposed 51 earmarks.
That's three times the amount that we had last year.
Of that, 20 of these earmarks initially lacked
obligation authority, so there's no money for them.
But somehow Caltrans and FHW worked their magic,
and now we have money for them.
So we were able to secure additional obligation authority
and we, the regions really want to sincerely thank Caltrans,
DLAM and Bob Bacher for their work,
for being creative for the dedication
and their speed in getting these funds advanced
and making sure our projects move forward.
Lastly, the vehicle emissions waiver.
You've already heard about this earlier,
but we'd like to thank all the state agencies
for the efforts and making sure that we continue
to get federal funds and move forward with our projects.
We know that it was a big effort to get that pulled together,
but it's an important challenge
that we're able to overcome as a state.
In closing, it's the end of 2025
and the Regents would like to thank the Commission
for what was, could be lightly said
as a very challenging year,
but we did have our great successes
and we look forward to working with you again in 2026.
With that, there concludes my remarks,
I'm happy to answer any questions.
Hey, thanks so much.
Is there any public comment on this item?
We do not receive any requested comment on this item.
All right, thank you.
any questions or comments from the dice?
Hearing none, thank you for your presentation.
Much appreciated.
Next up is item 12, rural counties task force chair.
Welcome to Aaron Hoyt.
Good afternoon, Chair Grisby, commissioners,
Undersecretary Hacker, the director Val Tawansi,
and great to see you again, Director Taylor.
And I also want to welcome Commissioner Brown-Hines
to this wonderful CTC commission.
The staff is great,
and there's a lot of great conversations we have
about transportation here.
So my name is Aaron Hoyt,
the deputy executive director
for the Nevada County Transportation Commission
and also chair for the rural counties task force
representing the 26 regional rural agencies,
transportation planning agencies, I should say,
as well as local transportation commissions.
The RCTF met last with CTC and Caltrans staff
on November 21st to hear a number of updates.
During that meeting, we heard a presentation
from Tim Hart and Nuit Nasar from Caltrans,
so I wanna say thank you to them.
The presentation was on the statewide managed lanes,
planning and technical guidance,
and while many of our rural agencies and members
are really focused on highway safety,
highway evacuation from wildfires,
and other things of that nature,
there are several rural county task force members
who are looking into managed lanes projects.
So I think the presentation was timely and welcomed,
and those agencies will continue to engage with Caltrans
during the development of those guidelines.
I also wanted to thank Sabrina Bradbury from CalCog.
She presented to us on an effort that they are embarking on
to create educational training videos for elected officials.
So in the breadth of things that we do at the RTPA and NPOs,
there's a number of topics and areas that we wade into,
and I think this will be very helpful and educational
for kind of our current board and elected members,
well as those in the future. I also want to just share that we collectively
discussed some challenges rural counties have and maybe it's the same thing in
more urban parts of the state with heavy trucks traveling between the state
highways on local roads and the really the questions how do we maintain those.
While there were no solutions that were identified for that specific scenario we
did talk about it and District 2 staff helped or offered to help engage on that
topic in that county of question so something that we're working on at that
level and as always CTC and Caltrans staff presented updates on a number of
topics such as an ongoing SB1 and ATP program guidelines workshops, the STIP,
all things transit funding and the federal and state budget outlooks. So in
closing our CTF is appreciative of our Caltrans and CTC partners and all you do
and engaging with us. Thank you. Hey, thank you for the report. Any public comment on this item?
We didn't receive any requests to comment on this item. Thank you. Any questions or comments from
the dice? I do have one for you. For years, I've been really interested in managed lanes and some
of the equity implications and would love to hear more about how managed lanes may interact with
rural communities. So if you have any thoughts now or if you want to email me, I'd love to hear more
more about that. Yeah, I don't have any thoughts now to share
about those specific locations. But I'd be glad to report back
in the future as those projects develop just as a conversation
piece. But I will say that those two RTPAs that are looking into
and pursuing managed lanes are within the MPO boundaries. So
there are kind of on the outskirts of our, you know, urban
counterparts, and there's probably a more comprehensive
system that's being planned there, although they are still
rural county task force members.
So, um, it's kind of a blend there on the, the outskirts of the urban areas that
they're pursuing this to create a complete system.
That sounds great.
Thank you so much.
Nice to have you.
Um, item 13 has been withdrawn.
So we're going to move to item 14 Sequoia.
Good afternoon.
Hi, good afternoon.
Thank you very much.
Commissioners tab 14 features our standing equity initiatives update.
I will start with a quick update on what we've been doing
with our interagency collaborations,
and then I will pass it over to you Chair Grisby
to share reflections, and then back to EAC Chair,
Martha Armies Kelly for final remarks.
Unfortunately, Naomi Iwasaki is unable to join us
this afternoon for the EAC member spotlight,
but we will feature her in 2026.
So December marks the end of a very active
and productive year, as we've heard throughout this meeting,
with the Equity Advisory Committee.
Yesterday, on Wednesday, December 3,
the committee held its final executive meeting of the year.
And I want to personally thank all of you
who were able to join us, or who have been able to join us
throughout the year, and celebrate our outgoing chair
and vice chair, and also our members
whose terms are ending.
At yesterday's meeting, members and staff
showcased the final version of the committee's vision, mission,
and foundational principles for transportation equity
and provided an overview of advisory accomplishments
that the committee has achieved this year.
Caltrans staff presented on the People and Community First
Action Plan.
And CalSTA staff co-presented with Caltrans and the Office
of Traffic Safety on efforts to improve safety
outcomes in the state.
It's a very interesting and informative meeting.
And thanks to our presenters for bringing that.
This month, outside of meetings, the EAC Leads team
is also focused on recruitment and member selection
for the three seats of the members who are terming out.
We will brief commissioners soon with our recommendations
for new or continuing membership.
And the final business meeting of the year
will be held virtually on December 16th,
where the committee will review legislative updates
as they had requested from CalSTL legislative staff.
And just a quick overview of 2025 opportunities,
because you also have a sheet next to you
that highlights this.
So I wanted to draw attention to
the SB1 Funding Program Guidelines
Community Engagement Narrative Review
that members helped support.
Members provided updates and feedback
on the active transportation program guidelines.
Members supported by providing feedback
on recommendations from the Vehicle Weight Safety
Task Force.
They also provided feedback on the comprehensive multimodal
corridor plan guidelines, which were integrated.
And they provided feedback on a proposal for the AB 744
Transportation Data Tools recommendations.
And finally, the State Transportation Improvement
Guidelines updates and review.
So the reflection piece that you have next to you
captures the energy, dedication, and progress
that we've made together this year.
And we're deeply grateful for the commitment of the EAC
members, interagency executives, and commissioners,
your support has been instrumental in advancing equity
across our state's transportation landscapes.
Thank you.
By uplifting EAC member voices, our insights, and leadership,
together we are shaping policy and really
building a culture of shared responsibility and inclusion.
So thank you very much for that.
Now I'll pass it to you, Chair Grisby,
for reflections and remarks to outgoing chair,
Martha Armies-Kelly and outgoing vice chair,
Ana Gonzalez.
Thank you, Sequoria.
And before I start, I want to thank you
for your leadership in this space.
It's very clear that your contributions.
I'd like to also take a moment to now recognize
the service and contributions of our outgoing chair,
Martha Armies-Kelly and vice chair, Gonzalez.
Chair Martha R. Most Kelly and Vice Chair Anna Gonzalez,
thank you for your hard work and dedication
to supporting and guiding the committee through 2025.
The commission holds its collaboration
with the Equity Advisory Committee in the highest regard,
not only for the formal guidance you provide,
but for the powerful combination of lived experience,
technical knowledge, and community-rooted insight
that helps shape how we do transportation funding
in our state.
Your contributions influence our staff's work
as well as inform commission discussions
and decisions throughout the year.
We count on this committee to help ensure
that our policies and programs are informed
by real world experience and responsive
to the needs of Californians who have historically been left
out of transportation investments.
We're sincerely grateful for your dedication,
whether it's setting thoughtful agendas,
reviewing complex policies, weighing trade-offs,
or offering candid, grounded feedback.
We're excited to continue to build upon
this important work together in 2026.
Thank you, Chair and Vice Chair,
for your commitment and dedication to the committee,
to your communities and to the people
of the state of California.
And now, on behalf of the California Transportation
Commission, I would like to present both of you
with certificates of appreciation.
Oh, thank you, Lily.
Thank you, Lily.
Lily, come with us.
Thank you so much.
I'm going to take pictures.
Thank you very much.
All right, thank you.
I wonder where my vote.
I've been to the comments.
Let's get the vice chair as well.
We'll be right here.
Thank you so much.
All right, thank you so much, Chair Grisby.
We very much appreciate the recognition.
Although we don't do this work for recognition,
we do it to represent our communities
and make the state's transportation system better.
Again, thank you, Chair, commissioners,
agency partners, and community members.
As we close out 2025, I want to express my profound gratitude
for the opportunity to serve as your vice chair this year.
It has been an honor to work alongside all of you,
leaders who are deeply committed
to building a more equitable California.
The last two weeks, however, for me have been very heavy.
16 apartment units burned down at an apartment complex
in my city of Rialto.
Our organization stepped into house, people,
and provide meals every day and make sure
that they have a joyful holiday season.
But it opened our eyes to see the, sorry, the challenges
that we face in emergency preparedness
and climate action.
To the staff that keeps this work moving every day,
thank you for your diligence, your patience,
and your commitment to community.
And most especially, I want to thank our chair,
our Miss Kelly.
Martha, your leadership, your strength,
and your steady guidance has shaped this committee
in ways that will last beyond.
So I don't want to cry.
I have learned so much from you,
and I know we still have so much more work ahead of us.
As Latinas, some of us migrants from Mexico
and community leaders, we all thank you.
As we reflect on 2025,
I want to say with the truth of what we've heard
from our communities across California,
and particularly the ones from the Inland Empire, my home.
A region that has become central to the economics
and success of the state and corporations,
yet continues to face some of the deepest inequities
in California.
One of the clearest challenges we face
is the lack of public transportation and mobility
options.
Public transit is the in the island empire
and other rural areas remains underfunded,
unreliable, with limited routes that
have transit dependent that leave transit dependent residents
stranded.
We lack first and last mile connections.
We lack zero emission mobility options,
and we lack the kind of service frequency
that connects people to jobs, schools, health care,
and civic life.
When mobility is limited, opportunity is limited.
That is a structural inequity we must address.
In 2025, we must accelerate the alignment
among state agencies.
We need coordinated statewide response
with CalEPA, CARB, CalSTA, CalTrans, HCD,
and others working together, not in isolation.
We need sustained equity-centered investments,
infrastructure upgrades, zero-emission freight corridors,
real solutions for CalTrans right-of-way homelessness,
expanded public transit, multilingual engagement,
affordable housing near our job centers,
and strong environmental justice protections
in warehouse and land use planning.
Addressing these long-standing disparities
is not just an equity mandate.
It is investment in the health, safety, and prosperity
of an entire state and the nation.
So as we close this year, I urge this committee
to continue prioritizing the Inland Empire,
all the rural communities across California
with urgent equity regional systems
that bring progress and health.
Let us move forward with conviction,
with coordination, and with courage.
Thank you again for the trust you placed in me this year,
and thank you for your dedication to equity.
I am hopeful for what we'll all build together in 2026.
Thank you.
Are you gonna speak as well?
Yes.
Wow, I am thrilled to be here.
I want to thank you all for a wonderful year.
It has been a profound privilege to serve
as chair of the Interagency Equity Advisory Committee.
Over the past three years, although it was only one year
as chair, we have had our challenges,
asked difficult questions, and have grown together in ways
that I believe will leave a lasting impact
on this commission and the communities that we serve.
We've had growth through challenge.
When we began, many of us were unsure of our role
in our decision making.
Are we decision makers?
Are we advisors?
What we discovered was that our work required deep reflection.
How do institutions that serve communities work together?
How does transportation connect or fail
to connect people to opportunity?
Are we engaging with authenticity or simply
extracting input?
These questions shaped our journey.
We moved from extractive practices
to collaborative ones, from uncertainty to clarity,
and from ideas to action.
This has created a living legacy.
One of my greatest privileges has
been coordinating and providing leadership
for the creation of our vision and mission statement.
Alongside Carrie Namine, Akimi Hernandez,
our staff, and every member of the EAC, we built something.
Something that is not just a document,
but also a living testament.
It is a guide for embedding equity
into every transportation project, every policy,
and every decision.
This is the gift that I leave you with.
And I'm very proud of it, because it
was all from the heart and the experiences of many of those
that have experienced those disparities first-hand.
A reminder is that equity must be practiced,
not only promised.
Environmental justice and health cannot exist
without equity, one in one, hand in hand.
Transportation decisions affect health,
access, and opportunity.
They shape whether the communities thrive
or if they struggle.
We must recognize that health is found in inequities in air,
water, and land and stewardship directly impacted
by public health, transportation.
Communities are also burdened with pollution,
unsafe infrastructure and lack of access,
and they suffer disproportionately.
Access, equity means ensuring participation for all.
regardless of the physical ability or linguistic background or infrastructure limitations.
Interpreters at accessible meetings at all times and recognition of community and knowledge are not extras,
they are essentials. I am proud to say that we have been doing good work in that area, we still need to be better.
Justice, we must be honorable in how we honor other nations,
agricultural communities and coastal communities
whose survival depends on sustainable and resilient systems.
This leads me to safety and climate.
I ask the commission to prioritize safety and climate
as your guiding principle when issuing RFPs,
not only awarding lucrative budgets,
but reward proposals that show considerations
for mitigation of climate incidents,
such as fires, floods, and earthquakes.
We can no longer pretend that this does not exist.
We have to create funding streams
so that we take this consideration as an action,
not as a consideration, but an action.
We saw this attending the town hall meetings
and seeing Pacific people that live Pacifically
in their communities, taken out of their communities,
and wondering if they were going to survive
because of decisions that we made
that we didn't make all too soon.
We need funding for those communities.
Just recently, I was in South Salido,
and I saw what the King Tides do
to the communities that they serve.
I had no idea.
I had no idea how these people have been surviving.
And every time their houses are damaged,
Every time the infrastructure is created,
where we have to have environmental health folks come
in and folks out there from Caltrans put their lives
on their line, literally in the water.
I mean, in the water where a tide could take them
out to make sure that people have access.
We need to do better.
We need to do better.
I was there in Planata when the floods came.
And yes, some of it was internal, the communities.
But we need to make access available
for funding to remediate these needs.
And if I leave you with anything,
I'm just proud of being here to be able to be that voice,
to be able to be that sounding board.
And I'll take the punches,
and I'll take every bit of looks,
even questions and answers, and I say it in a loving way,
because I said this yesterday.
In a family, there's always that one person that's crazy
and yells and says whatever, but she has good intentions.
And I say this, I say this because I feel that
even if I sound like I'm a clanging bell,
I'd rather be that clanging bell that you hear
and makes change and makes impact,
because some of my community members can't be here.
And I thank you for the ability to be here
and be able to be that voice for those that aren't here.
And I thank you for the work that you do.
I thank you for the opportunities that you've created,
the time that you shared with me,
the time that you've opened your doors to me,
the gifts that you brought me, the cookies,
the other times that I won't mention.
But I love you all for what you've done,
for the impact that you created in my life,
and for the impact that you created in my community.
Because you put me in a place
where my own community wouldn't give me,
and that made a difference in my life.
Because I've been able to give back
to a community that didn't know who I was.
So I thank you.
Thank you, Chair Armist-Kelley and Vice Chair Gonzalez
for those beautiful words.
That concludes our item commissioners.
Thank you all for a wonderful year.
Are there any questions or comments?
There we go.
Had to press that several times.
Thank you so much, Sequoria.
Thank you to our leaders of the EAC.
Let's go to public comment first.
Is there any public comment on this item?
I don't see any requested comment on the item at this time.
Thank you, let's turn to the dais.
I know that Commissioner Tiffany would like to make a comment.
Yeah, thank you, Chair Grisby.
I just want to thank you and congratulate you both
for a phenomenal year.
Every time I go to one of your meetings like yesterday,
I'm just amazed by the strong voices
that your committee has.
It's such a variety of different voices,
but you all come together to really make a difference.
You also elicit a lot of comments from the public
that sometimes we don't hear on days like today.
And yesterday was an indication of that hearing the comments
about how people are impacted in areas
like around Rialto and others.
And anyway, it makes a huge impact,
I think on our commission.
And anyway, I wanted to thank you for your service
and for just a phenomenal job to both of you.
So thank you very much.
Thank you commissioner.
Any other commissioners?
Yes, commissioner Leigh Ann Eager.
Thank you.
And you know, I'll try not to cry.
Chair Amherst Kelly and vice chair Gonzalez.
I know it's been a challenging few years,
but what the two of you have done
to bring this committee together
has been nothing less than remarkable.
And I know it's your passion
and it's your commitment to give back
to not just the people in your area,
but to the entire state of California.
And it shows every time you have a meeting,
every time you speak, every time you show up to an event,
you know, we had some ups and downs,
but what you two have done with your entire committee,
we saw that yesterday, we saw the civility,
We saw the family that you brought to us.
We, I think I have said this numerous times
when we looked at the need for the EAC
and what was expected.
I had to be honest for a few years there,
we were like, is this really gonna work?
You know, what is the role?
And how can we all work together?
You have proven that our initial thoughts were correct.
that this was a group that is essential
in the state of California.
So I can't thank you too enough
for all of the work that you did this last year.
And I know we'll continue to do good work.
So thank you both so much.
I appreciate you.
Thank you, commissioner.
Vice chair Foucault.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yeah, I just wanted to really uplift the chair's comments
encapsulating, you know, our sentiments as a commission and how we feel about the EAC
and commissioners, Tiffany and Eager, you know, we have sat through these EAC meetings
with you when we have the opportunity to sit and to participate.
I just want to say that both of you and your colleagues at the EAC really have helped put
a human face to the work that we do.
You're not a nice to have as a group.
You are absolutely a must have and so integral to the work that we collectively do.
you are not cover for business as usual, okay, and looking at the year in review report that
has been illustrated not only on this page, but, you know, the thorough reports that you
provided yesterday is so validating in our continued support and uplifting of your work.
And I also want to acknowledge the tremendous work of CTC staff and Caltrans and CalSTA
supporting all of you, you know, you have turned perspectives and community
experience into an actual structure in what we do and that is not something
that we need to take you that we ought to take lightly it is it is part of us
now and so echo all of my colleagues comments and just to say thank you
really deeply for what you have done for the work that we do and more
importantly for the state in the communities that you represent so thank
you. Thank You Vice Chair and I will turn to Director Taylor. Thank you I just
wanted to take a minute first just thank you ladies you've been with us since the
beginning and you believed in the vision you've helped us create the vision and
more importantly you've given us grace and mercy right we're humans just like
you all are we don't get everything right all the time sometimes we get we
knock it out of the park sometimes we don't but being able to not be in that
echo chamber being able to have those honest dialogues to invite you in to
invite us into your world as well and it really means the difference with how we
step forward right when we talk about equity and we talk about how we embed
equity we're trying to embed equity not just in a single person but
throughout our agencies throughout every single person within our agency to make
sure that as I leave this dais as you ladies leave the EEC as our teams turn
over that our legacy stays because it is built within the agencies we are
serving and you all have created that for us and I just want to say thank you
your legacy will live far beyond all of us and I want to thank you for that and
giving us your time your grace and your mercy so thank you. Thank You Director
Taylor and thank you for your commitment to equity and the EAC as well. Any other
yes Commissioner Bradshaw and by the way just for commissioners to know I was
told earlier the request to speak button works and I'll put you in the queue.
I don't know if I trust okay sorry maybe that's a hidden scar I won't go there
thank you brother chair I appreciate it chair almost Kelly and vice chair
Gonzalez thank you for your service one of the things that not by intention just
volume of life I've not been able to be as engaged in the committee and meetings
and actions and seminars and conferences and everything else you all put so much
work in but I did want to share that as I became a new commissioner and not long
after that I met you Martha and we started having some conversations you
know before and after the commission meetings and I watched this grow you know
become stronger and mission driven and I just wanted you to hear from this
commissioner that it's inspiring and to call it just try to call it as I see it
you know it's I'm honored to be a commissioner but this is all about all
of us you know and leave none out and to see your drive and commitment to pull up
to support to challenge but to grow and be an inspiration. Gratitude that I have
for that and it inspires things in other parts of my life, you know. Just great
job. Thank you so much. You've taken us to a place that others will build off it
and I also want to thank Sequoia for keeping it going and keeping us in tune
and what's going on and you know I'm getting a bit a bit emotional about it
But I'm tying back to a conference that I recently went to that was about, as we face
– I hope no one in the audience takes offense – but I would say, as we face some forces
out there that would like to push us back and divide us, and there's already so much
to do, right, that it's most important that we come together and to listen and recognize
and honor, and even when we have disagreement, to engage in a way that we all can get stronger
about it, that it's very serious, to put it lightly, what's going on, but to be able
to say in our states and hopefully other states, we will not tolerate any actions to divide
us and to leave us out, and for those that have always been left out or pushed back,
to redouble our efforts to pull up.
And that conference rallying cries about 500 working men
and women in the carpenters union just to call it out.
And the whole theme was rise, restore and inspire.
And you did that for me today, but most importantly
through your actions over the last year.
Great job, appreciate it.
Thank you commissioner, commissioner man.
Thank you.
I also just wanted to thank you all
for all of your incredible work.
Building is difficult and you've done it.
And so you've created a structure
in which we can continue to build one.
I'm gonna plus one everyone else's comments
so I won't repeat them.
But what I will say is that
when I think so much about this work,
I think about what makes investments more effective.
And I really think about the equity work,
about what is going to make it more effective,
because really this has to serve all Californians,
and that is the sharp focus that you have all given
to the work and that the entire EAC has given to the work.
So I really wanna thank you for that,
because as we think about all these different pieces
and how we're serving the entire state,
you've kept that so close to your heart,
and you've made sure that we've heard
from so many people of different backgrounds
who have taken us through a day in their life.
And what does it mean to interact?
I remember one presentation where we heard from someone
who was visually impaired and what they're experiencing,
which is a completely different experience
than my experience today.
That may be different from my experience 20 years from now
or five days from now, who knows?
So I really appreciate that sharp focus.
So thank you for bringing that
and thank you for creating a solid foundation.
and I know that we haven't seen the last of the two of you.
You'll still be around.
And I'm looking forward to what that work looks like ahead.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Seeing no other hands raised,
I guess we're gonna move on to the next item,
but before we do, just one on one skin praise
the work that you've done.
Wow.
And could we just say Jay Bradshaw for governor, just saying.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
So we're going to move on to
the next question.
Does that involve a background
check of any type?
And how far back do you go?
Indeed.
And just want to also like.
Just want to also just say that
there's many ways to approach
upward mobility.
And I appreciate your focus on
people and planet and the
Fitz. Good afternoon, commissioners. Tab 15 is the update on state and federal legislative matters. Staff is recommending that the Commission adopt the draft 2025 annual report, which is attached with the book item and also direct staff to transmit the report to the legislature.
The report highlights the Commission's key accomplishments over the past year, including
allocating $13.7 billion to projects across the state and creating over 150,000 jobs.
The report also includes recommendations for the legislature's consideration.
These mirror the Commission's recommendations from the 2025 State and Local Transportation
System Needs Assessment, which was submitted to the legislature in May of this year.
We would like to thank everyone on commission staff for their contributions to this report
and a special thank you to Ben Williams for his assistance with preparing the draft, which
we are presenting today.
I also have a quick, brief legislative update.
The Senate and assembly are in recess until January.
Shortly after they return, the governor must submit his proposed 2026 27 state budget by
January 10.
And with that, Commissioner, that concludes my report.
Thank you, Vince.
Is there any public comment on this item?
Did not receive any requested comment on this item.
Thank you.
Is there a comment question or motion from the desk?
So moved by Commissioner Lee and Eager,
seconded by Vice Chair Falcone.
All those in favor?
Opposed?
Sorry, I wrote abstentions.
Motion is approved.
All right, we're gonna take a break now.
Two minutes.
Yeah, let's do a 10 minute break.
We'll see all back shortly.
Thank you.
In allocation capacity.
And in his presentation, Keith will also describe
the proposed allocation.
Can I have order, please?
In his presentation, Keith will also describe
the proposed allocation plan for the remaining capacity
in the state highway operation and protection program
for fiscal year 2025-26.
And upon presentation of the allocation plan,
staff will recommend your approval.
Keith.
All right, thank you, Justin.
Chair, commissioners, good afternoon, happy Thursday.
As mentioned, Keith Duncan, Caltrans budgets
and I'll be providing the presentation tab 16,
the budget and allocation capacity update.
Let's see, next slide.
We'll do one more please, right on, thank you.
As standard commission activities through October,
as noted on the screen,
as well as in your agenda materials through October,
the commission has allocated $3.8 billion
onto 338 projects across all programs within your purview.
that represents about 33% allocated for the year.
That leaves about $7.6 billion still to go.
So that's our goal for the rest of the year.
Next slide, please.
Here, as I think Vice Chair Valcone asked back in October,
I think Commissioner Tiffany as well,
questions about what is the ideal allocation rate?
I mean, how much should we be allocating every year?
The goal, ideally, 100% across all programs.
That means we're investing every available tax dollar
meet priority needs within each of the respective programs. We also know that there's nuances
when it comes to project delivery. Projects get delayed. We have abundance of time extensions
that show up on your agenda. Projects get pushed out, so we don't always hit that mark.
We've been seeing about 70 to 80% allocated across all programs combined in each of the
last few fiscal years. The percentages you see, it's typically an early indicator of
potential problems, not problems but potential problems.
As we'll touch on in a few moments,
the shot being at 71% allocated,
there's a potential issue there.
We also see programs like the aeronautics program at 85%.
That program, the commission allocates a lump sum amount
to the department and the department sub allocates
those funds to respective airports for their grant program.
So there's no issue there.
But each program has its different nuances,
different levers and switches that we monitor
when it comes to the fiscal condition.
And then we bring it to you if there's any concerns
that we need to address.
Next slide, please.
Next, we wanted to provide a quick update
regarding departmental activities
when it comes to the G12.
The G12, as you know, is the delegated authority
by the commission to the department
to make adjustments to project allocations
within certain thresholds.
Through October, the department has processed
project allocation adjustments on 78 projects,
which resulted in a net savings of $170 million.
Specifically for the shop,
because we'll touch on the shop in a moment,
the shop we made adjustments to 77 projects
that resulted in a net savings of $172 million.
That $172 million is returned to the shop
so we can find additional shop needs.
Next slide, please.
All right, now the meat and potatoes.
The reason why this is an action item.
As mentioned by Executive Director Taylor,
under Secretary Hacker,
The shop has been facing some fiscal issues.
We've seen an abundance of emergencies
over the last few years.
Over a billion dollars a year over the last three years.
We've seen drastic cost increases for projects.
A lot of these fiscal issues have created
what we found that we need to be able to address
when it comes to the shop available capacity
for the current fiscal year.
As our chief financial officer, Steven Keck,
at the October meeting acknowledged and mentioned,
we see an issue, we're gonna come back to you
at the next meeting to provide you
what the department wants to do.
So here we go.
Simply put, when it comes to the 2024 shop
for the current fiscal year of 25-26,
the base allocation capacity, funding levels,
they are in line with the fund estimate
that it was adopted by the commission.
So funding is relatively unchanged.
So we're facing no funding issues,
at least at this point in this year.
But the problem is we've allocated over 70%,
71% onto projects through October,
which only leaves about $1.3 billion
for the rest of the year.
We have anticipated bid savings.
We've already seen $170 million so far.
We do continue, we hope to see a little bit more,
but we do know that the current year
project allocation needs will greatly exceed
the total available capacity.
So that's why we're here today,
requesting your approval on an action item.
Next slide, please.
The department is recommending your approval
on a 2024 Caltrans shop allocation plan
to ensure that our allocation of program projects
for the rest of this fiscal year
remain within the current fiscal constraints
that are identified in the fund estimate.
When it comes to the allocation plan,
we know that there's three categories we must allocate.
The first category, emergencies.
As we've, whenever emergency happens,
Caltrans has always done a wonderful job
getting there and reopening the facility.
We know that we need to dedicate funds
to be able to continue that effort.
When an emergency happens, we need to be able to fund that.
The next category, reactive safety.
Safety is a top priority for the department
as well as the commission across transportation.
So we know we need to continue to fund
those reactive safety projects
within the delegated authority
by the commission to the department
as well as relinquishments,
which is either relinquishments approved
by the legislature or by the commission.
Next slide please.
All right.
As remaining capacity permits,
we have four priorities that we are going to be looking
at each project on a case by case basis.
These aren't in priority order.
They're just, these are the four priorities
that the department is going to be focusing for this plan.
We're going to be planning to look at projects
that are required to meet mandates.
If they're required to meet state or federal mandates,
we need to deliver them.
That's what we need to be able to move forward for,
if we're gonna be able to deliver them this year.
Projects of significant statewide interest.
If those projects are gonna be available
or deliver this year, we need to make sure
that the funds are made available to allocate them.
Targeted asset management performance activities.
This is the SB1 performance targets identified in statute
as well as adopted by the commission.
Specifically, as Mike Johnson,
our statewide asset manager has provided payment in culvert,
we're in pretty good shape in regards to that.
But we wanna make sure we have focused effort on bridge
and traffic management system efforts.
And then lastly, facility security projects.
So using these priority, these lists of priorities,
we plan to look at each project on case by case basis,
And those are the projects that are gonna come forward
for your approval for allocation for the rest of this year.
Next slide, please.
Caltrans does expect to keep our allocation requests
within budget, and it is important to note,
even with this allocation plan,
we still plan to allocate $5 billion for projects.
70% of that has already been allocated,
so we've already allocated $3 billion of that.
But for the year, we still intend to allocate $5 billion,
so that is still the sizable investment
in the state highway system.
Caltrans may adjust this plan
if additional funding becomes available,
whether it's part of the G-12 or the bid savings,
if potentially federal funds may come available
or any additional state funds.
And then we as a department will provide regular updates
to you at all subsequent meetings
when it comes to the status of this allocation plan
and how things are looking.
Next slide please.
All right, and with that kind of change over,
looking ahead to the month of January,
at the January commission meeting,
we know that the governor will release this Jan 10 budget
for the proposed budget for the 26-27 fiscal year.
So we'll provide any pertinent updates
when it comes to transportation related items.
We also plan to present the draft 2027
active transportation program fund estimate
for the next cycle.
And then it's not bulleted here,
but we will plan to provide an update
regarding the shop allocation plan
for the current fiscal year.
Next slide please.
All right, and as I always say,
and given the condition with the shop,
we always wanna thank commission staff,
our Caltrans financial programming
and our Caltrans budgets team.
It will always take a village
when it comes to managing the finances
as well as managing the program.
So I appreciate everyone's dedication and effort for that.
And I'm available for any questions you may have.
Thank you so much.
Let's go to public comment first.
Is there any public comment on this item?
Not seeing any requests from the public
to comment on this item.
All right, not seeing any buttons lit up yet.
Commissioner Tiffany, do you wanna go?
All right, thank you.
So first of all, Keith, where is that photo?
What's it, that is us 50.
That's what I'm looking at.
It's a rebuild, it's a drone shot.
It's a US 50, I believe right on the Tahoe side.
Okay, that's what I thought.
Thank you.
It's terrifying.
I believe commissioner Gordino did ask
that I stopped using cliff pictures.
So I apologize in advance.
Okay, I'll work on some other, okay.
So when I drive over that, can I be confident
that that bridge will be safe?
have confidence in our Caltrans effort.
Okay, good.
But I want to dig a little bit more into this,
the shop of funding issue.
First of all, how do you define,
I certainly understand emergencies,
but how do you define reactive safety projects?
What falls into that category?
I don't have those specific items,
but there is an indexing that we use in specific criteria
when it comes to performance or evaluating the safety,
but I can get those details for you.
I'm sorry, I don't have those relative.
And I wanted to, you address this as funding is available,
you spoke about dealing with asset management,
performance measures, which we track closely
and Caltrans has been doing, you know,
a great job of reaching those targets.
How do you see this $3 billion that's being moved
into future years?
Has Caltrans had an opportunity yet to really dig
into how those performance measures are gonna be impacted
since you won't have the funding to address them
as was originally planned?
This is on-
Where are we on that?
Sorry, I interrupted you.
This is when I can quickly say that Mike Johnson
is our next presenter.
This is part of it. Yeah, I
need to talk about the 2026
shop like it's a deferred him,
but that is that's part of the
intent here. The intent is for
this allocation plan is to be
for this fiscal year. The 2026
shop that the draft shop that
Mike would be presenting. It's
intended to kind of do a
rebalancing for those projects
that won't get delivered this
year will be built into the 26
shop so we can continue to put
the projects in place program
them to be able to meet those
Even with this allocation plan,
we do plan to prioritize performance in that regards there,
but we do know that the 26th shop will also have that focus
so we can continue to meet those goals.
Okay.
Can I ask a quick follow up question, Bob?
Yes.
So Keith, one of the things that's in your allocation plan
you've talked about it are those performance targets
in the TAMP and all of those things that we talk about
all the time at the commission.
That is one of the ways that you are continuing to make sure
that you're moving towards continuing to meet those targets.
But in addition to that,
You guys are on track to meet those targets now, right?
And I think that's an important thing to say
is that with the investments that are before us,
they are on track to meet the targets
and they've prioritized those two,
specifically in the allocation plan
because those are the ones where we need to continue
to make concerted efforts to stay on track.
Bonafrains, thank you.
And thank you, Keith,
and I will follow up when Mike gets up here.
Thank you.
Okay, great.
Not seeing any other questions for the guys.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
For your presentation.
Oh, for.
Next step, we're going to go.
Oh, I beg your pardon.
Beg my pardon.
Is there a motion to pass this?
So moved by commissioner Tiffany, is there a second?
I'll second, but I would say I agree
that that bridge is probably safe,
but we're going to have commissioner Tiffany go first.
Ha ha ha.
Damn.
Seconded by commissioner.
I like that.
I like it.
It's not too bad.
Made the motion. I thought you'd want to.
Sorry.
I see a second from Gordino, but a commissioner of Rachel.
There's no more cliff.
On the motion, which I support, but I just like.
Like, you know,
Feel good. That was built by union carpenters and laborers.
Don't worry about it.
All right. All those in favor.
All right.
Opposed.
Stensions.
to item 17, Tim.
Commissioners, tab 17 is an information item.
As mentioned, there'll be a bit of a continuation
from the item just presented by Keith
and Caltrans is here to give a presentation
on how the impacts for the shop allocation,
sorry, the shop allocation challenges
are gonna impact the 2026 shop.
Mike Johnson, Caltrans State Asset Management Engineer
is here to give a presentation on the draft 2026 shop
and revisions to the 2025
State Highway System Management Plan.
I'll turn it over to Mike.
Good afternoon, commissioners, Chair Risby.
I don't think I've had as big a buildup ever
to a presentation as that.
So, I'll thank Keith later for that one,
but Mike Johnson with Caltrans State Asset Management
Engineer and I will be first presenting today
on the 2026 shop draft,
which will be going out and will be made publicly available Monday morning for public comment
through mid-January.
And so we're going to run through what's in that shop and try to answer some of the questions
that just came up related to the allocation crunch and how does that all fit in.
So with that, we could queue up the presentation.
Let's go to the next slide, please.
Okay so I want to just send new commissioners so I like to start and get it level set everybody.
Our products and asset management that we have been implementing and cultivating over the last
10 years begin with the California transportation asset management plan that this commission adopts
by state law and then we produce a much more detailed document called the state highway system
management plan. That is essentially a performance-based analysis that is done
at our district level for over 30 different performance objectives that
we're simultaneously trying to achieve in the shop. From that, ultimately, we
transfer into some targets at the district level. Those go back to our
districts and our districts put projects together specifically tailored to meet
we need to work with people to
meet these 33 different
performance objectives.
We do that over a 10-year period of time.
So at any given time, anybody, any of you,
any of the public can go into projectbook.dotc.gov
to our dashboard and see every project
that we're planning to do for the next 10 years.
So if people want to know, you know, want transparency,
where is our tax dollars going?
And we update it every quarter,
because actions come before this commission,
project costs change, schedules change.
So it's constantly moving, but it is updated
and it is transparent and it's out there
for anyone to look at.
And it's all GIS enabled and anybody can download it
into a spreadsheet if they wanna do
whatever they wanna do with the shop.
So that is a big transparency enhancement.
But the first four years of that
is what we bring before this commission as the shop.
That's what you program.
So we still have six more years beyond what's programmed.
But when we come before you,
we come every other year for the shop
and we typically bring two new years into you.
So we do this, it's very specific.
We're tailoring projects to get specific performance outcomes
across all these different things we're trying to do,
and then annually come before you in June
and present the performance benchmark report,
which is really a report card,
how are we doing towards meeting all of those things?
Next slide, please.
So the timeline is something that confuses folks
a lot of times.
So I like to put this and look at multiple years
and sort of where we are right now in the 25, 26 fiscal year
We are in the second year of the 2024 shop
We have planning that has been going on for the last two plus years to develop new projects to go
Before you in the 2026 shop all of that work the planning and pre programming is from
The 2023 state highway system management plan or prior
Okay
At the same time, the department is working on planning 2028 shop projects already.
So, you know, there's always a continuum where we're looking at things we've done and looking
at things that are coming.
It's all reflected in that project book dashboard.
Next slide.
Okay.
So this year was a little bit challenging in the time that I've been state asset management
engineer for the last 10 and a half years.
You know, this is the fifth shop that I've done in that capacity, and this is the first
one where I would say the funding is more constrained than before, because right after
I took my position, we had SB1 pass and we were expanding.
Then we had IIJA come in and we were expanding again, and now things are tightening up a
little bit.
But the beauty of asset management is it cuts both ways.
It allows you to establish priorities when things are expanding and when they're reducing.
So in the case of the 2026 shop, as Keith mentioned, we are not going to be able to
allocate all the projects that we had thought were going to be, that they will be delivered.
We thought they would be funded, but that's not going to be the case.
And so those projects and the funding of those projects are going to spill into next fiscal
year into the 2026 shop. So the effect of that is that projects that will likely be
delivered in late spring to early summer, normally we would come in for an allocation
and say in June, instead we may be coming to you for an allocation in August. Okay,
so we cross that fiscal year boundary. It's the same projects, it's the same work, but
the money is going to come out of this year versus next year. Well, that's the difference
between 2024 shop and 2026 shop, but in effect we're pushing work into the shop that a couple
years ago we didn't anticipate being there and that in turn is going to push things through
the shop, the four year period, and some are going to be delayed outside of the shop and
all of that does have some impact on performance which gets back to the action item you just
took, which is we need to be very deliberate about the projects that we're putting forward
for allocation if allocation is going to be limited. We want to make sure we're getting
the projects we absolutely need to get. Next slide. So having said all of that, it's not
maybe the typical process at which we get to the shop, but regardless, we are here.
And by shop guidelines, we have to publish and we will be publishing a draft for the
public comment. We're still talking about almost 600 projects. We're still
talking about 17 billion dollars worth of construction. So this is a real bus
shop. It is a little unconventional how it all came about but regardless it is a
full portfolio of projects over a four-year period. You can see you know in
the table here a little bit on in terms of the different objectives nine billion
dollars for pavements over that time period. You know, 2.8 billion for bridges. So you
see the commitment to fix it first, but I also remind the commission that within that
$9 billion of pavement, that's not all going to just asphalt and concrete. That's going
to, by competitive improvements and drainage improvements and TMS improvements, all being
done in these larger pavement projects. In fact, as we were looking at how we were going
to sort of take this allocation and move it into the shop,
we were looking at the bike and ped impact.
And one of the things in our analysis
is that about 75% of all of the new bike and ped inventory
that we're adding to the system is coming
through pavement projects.
And that's great because we're getting large economies
of scale by doing work that way.
Next slide.
When we look at the work that we're doing, I always present this distribution and we
still see that the majority of our projects are between about $5 million and $40 million
in cost, but one thing that is unique is the 19 projects over $100 million.
We have been doing larger projects as a department and for various reasons, the cost of this
work is going up. And, you know, so you see that reflected in some of these breakdowns
of the projects. And so some of these bigger projects are a little trickier to make sure
we're managing them in time appropriately. Next slide. So what are we getting for all
of this? So I mentioned $9 billion of pavement, you know, over 5,500 lane miles of pavement
will be rehabilitated or fixed in that time period.
4.7 million square feet of bridges will be fixed.
So it was brought up earlier about the performance piece.
And bridge is one of those areas that I come before you
every June.
And we talk about bridges because it takes so long
to get those bridge projects through the process.
So we don't want to lose the momentum on that.
4.7 million square feet of bridges
are going to get fixed in this shop. 700 TMS elements, that's another area where we are
working very hard to get to the targets that were established by 2027. And we have a bunch
of work that we have to do between now and 2027 to get there. So focus on that. And in
our drainage system elements, we continue to do work. But across these four core things,
about 75% of the funding it's in this 2026 shop. Next slide.
Simultaneous to all of that, and I say my job is always about balancing, you know, we're
balancing 33 different balls at once. But we are also trying to simultaneously expand
zero emission options through our bike and pad and to the extent we can facilitate transit
movement on the state highway system. So you can, you know, collectively over several hundred
miles of bike lanes are being added and broken down by classes, not even counting class three,
which is probably several hundred miles on its own. You know, you can see we're doing
work on transit stops that are on the state highway system, primarily to provide safe
Harbor for people that are using transit so bowl balance so buses can get out and not block traffic
You know crosswalks and in complete streets to get to and from these transit stops
So, you know, we still have our commitment to this as well
And and that that is the biggest challenge of the job at least of my job is to
Make sure that we're we're we're sort of doing all of this at the same time. Next slide. Um,
I showed this graph typically it's you know it's a trend graph of our shop
projects and how many of those shop projects have biker pedestrian elements
in them we're at 44 percent we were at 44 percent two years ago and you know
this is probably you know close to terminal velocity in terms of the shop
and people you know I was often get a question well why not more well a lot of
these projects are on the interstate,
whereby Comped aren't permitted, so we can't have it there.
There's projects that are underground,
by Comped work underground.
So we are looking, and every single project
by our own policy is reviewed for the inclusion
of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
But for this shop, we're sitting about 44%.
That's the same as we were for the 2024 shop.
Next slide.
It's a little bit about the schedule by shop guidelines.
We're supposed to have the draft shop out on December 7th.
That's a Sunday.
So we will be putting it out Monday morning on the 8th.
We will be providing an online dashboard, which
is on the same projectbook.dot.ca website.
And in that dashboard, it will be
limited to the four years of the shop.
It's all mapped.
It's all GIS-enabled.
You can keyword search.
You can look for any particular kind of activity
on the projects, and you can download it all to a spreadsheet.
On that same dashboard page, there
will be a link to all of the programming
details for the project that ultimately will
come before this commission for adoption, probably in March,
as well as an online comment form.
So all of this is being done electronically.
It's all GIS-enabled.
It's all through the 1projectbook.dot.ca.gov dashboard.
The public will have until January 15th to submit comments.
We will take all those comments.
We will incorporate them as appropriate in the draft
that we will give you on January 31st of 2026.
Then we'll receive commission comments,
wrap it all up in a final document
that will come before you in March for adoption.
Between January and March, there will be two public hearings
that the commission will organize typically in February,
and we'll have another opportunity for comments.
So we're trying to get out there very transparently
with the project lists, all map, downloadable, searchable,
and provide as many opportunities for the public
to make comments on the proposal as we can.
So with that, I think that was my last slide.
Doug, you can double check me on that.
Oh, no, sorry, I'm gonna continue the story here
because as we push current year projects into the shop,
we're taking work that would have normally been in the shop
and we're essentially pushing it back into the 10-year plan,
the state highway system management plan.
And so none of the projects in all of this are going away.
They are simply being delayed so that we can afford them.
And I was trying to think of the best analogy
because people ask, well, how did this happen?
I hear that a lot.
And Keith touched on it a little bit that we,
and multiple people have, that we've
had three years in a row with over a billion dollars
of damage to the system.
And that is considerably higher than we had been planning for.
So in the 2025 state highway system management plan, we actually increased what we call our
reservation, the set aside, if you will, for damage, up to 800 million.
At the same time, we initiated a program review of major damage to see if there are opportunities
to sort of tighten that up a bit internally.
those two things are coming together but it does have an impact on the state
highway system management plan. We are having to also make revisions to that
and we will be you know we will be publishing a revised version of the
state highway system management plan to reflect the rebalancing as well as the
commission adopted fund estimates from August because the August fund estimates
reduced shop funding by about six hundred million dollars a year. So we need to reflect
that as well in this upcoming planning cycle. So that kind of gives you the whole ten year
spectrum of time and how, you know, all of this works. And, you know, the other thing
I can say is that we have seen, you know, we will start projects. And the analogy that
I said was that it's like going to the grocery store and, you know, you have a budget and
you fill up your cart, but between you filling your cart
and you getting to the register to check out,
the prices all went up.
And that's exactly what's happening to us.
And you are seeing that in the form
of supplemental funds requests and greater than 120 awards.
That is the cost of the same work,
but the cost of that work is going higher.
And that's really that coupled with the damage
of the two factors that are causing us
to have to do a little bit of a delay
and the allocation of our projects.
Okay, I think that was the last one, so thank you.
I'm happy.
Summary, I think I've covered all of this.
You know, we're still on track.
The performance came up.
We looked at it very closely.
How much performance was this gonna cost us?
There is a timing component to all of that
and when the performance is realized.
You know, we are confident
that as the commission just adopted the allocation priorities that we will
meet all of the SB1 performance requirements. They'll say that we will
meet them so come 2027 we will be able to say you know we you know took the
the funding we made a promise to the people of California and in 2027 I will
not be here but someone will be able to stay up stand up hopefully the director
the time and say we kept our promise and we met the performance that we said we were going to achieve.
Okay, I'm sure I'm done now. Thank you. Thank you so much. And before you go to online comment,
let's pause and take a second to thank you for your service to the state. Thank you. We appreciate
your vast knowledge. Thanks so much. So let's move on to online and comment. We do have a virtual
attend you with their hand raised. Let's call on Janie Ward-Waller. Hello, good afternoon,
chair and commissioners, and I also want to echo thank you to Michael Johnson and just appreciate
his long service to Caltrans and to the state and all the great work that he's done. We've worked
together a long time and we don't always agree, but just really appreciate you, Michael, and all
the work that you've done. On behalf of Climate Plan and our partners who are really focused
on active transportation, we want to appreciate all the work that's being done on incorporating
bike and ped facilities into the shop. I agree that there's, you know, definitely been a lot
of progress made. We hope to see continued progress. Certainly, you know, more of those
protected kind of bike facilities. We think those are more of the appropriate facilities on the State
Highway System given just how much VMT and vehicle travel and just the safety risks of being on those
higher speed facilities. So we encourage Caltrans to continue to look for opportunities to do more
protected bike facilities instead of just those class two striped bike lanes. But given all the
work around SB 960 and my Cal Bike and our other partners. We really just encourage Caltrans to
continue to push that work forward. And also just wanted to note the comment that Michael
Johnson made at the end of the presentation about how much storm damage is increasing and impacting
the shop. You know, obviously climate change is a major contributor to the increasing severity of
of storms, so it just seems very important to us to continue
to push for those alternative modes of transportation
to give people options to not drive and reduce emissions
and further impacts on the system going forward.
So thank you very much for your time.
Up next, I'd like to call on Jared Sanchez.
Hi all, thank you.
Jared Sanchez, policy director at CalBike.
Don't have a lot to say other than thank you
for putting this forward.
I look forward to reviewing the shop projects,
checking out the dashboard.
I have a question or request on that dashboard
from previous years.
It's pretty limited about what info or details
it describes for the projects.
I would love to know if the PIDS,
the Project Ignition Nation documents,
specifically the Complete Streets Decision Documents,
whether those can be published or attached in some way
to the workbook, or if Caltrans is in some ways
to be making those publicly available to really dive in deeper to some of those bi-compet
improvements that were listed, and yeah, really excited to learn more. So thank you for presenting
and look forward to more. That concludes all requests to comment on this item at this time.
All right, thank you so much. So we're going to turn to the dais now, and
any commissioners wishing to speak please use the request to speak button,
Yeah.
I see.
Yeah.
Okay.
That is.
Yes.
Commissioner Brown.
Hi.
Just a quick question.
I really appreciate.
The conversation around transparency and accessibility of the information.
And I look forward to looking at the project book.
Online.
I was curious about when you're talking about public comments and,
and.
How is the public informed about the opportunity to participate?
That's a great question. Well, here's one form for you right here. But when we make
the dashboard available, we will send out notifications to every MPO, every regional
transportation planning agency. And then I sent out a notification to about 35 different
advocacy groups that we've just been cultivating over the years that come to our workshops
and other things including you know Jared's group and Climate Plan and others and um you know so we
try to blanket it that way to the degree we can um and then the commission holds two public hearings
as well which you will also advertise sort of independent of Caltrans um so those are you know
those are the primary means that people become aware of the opportunity to comment on the projects.
Thanks.
Thanks. Any other commissioners?
Commissioner Tiffany.
Thank you, Mike, for your presentation.
Very thorough. I appreciate it.
Just a follow-up question on the asset management plan now,
will we be seeing a, you know, that chart that shows what percentage,
where we stand and how the impact has impact?
I mean, the the shifting of dollars, how that's been impacted on that chart, is that coming up soon?
I don't know how that's done and how you factor in this. I'm just I'm just curious.
So every June we present what we call the benchmark. It's like a it's a report card,
if you will, of how we're doing. And when we do that report, we're looking at the most recent
condition of all these assets and we're looking at the the work that is slated to be done
over a certain period of time typically 2027 is the one I was most interested in.
So we look at what we call the pipeline of work and then we look at the ongoing deterioration
that's expected of the system in that same time frame and what we present to you is sort of the
net of all of that. So, if we are getting more work done, then deterioration is happening,
then we're making progress, right? But that is really after the fact. When we do the state
highway system management plan, we are literally asking the question, how much of this do we
have to do to meet the performance target at a minimum? And so, you know, that is how
we cultivate that plan across all those different objectives is really specifically designed
to hit the numbers. And so, you know, we can look out, you know, there are some variability
in it. You know, we look at project delivery, but our project delivery has been fairly good.
So, you know, our confidence level is high there. And we aim, you know, we're not going
right to meet the number. We're aiming a little bit high so that we have a little bit of cushion
If something happens.
So you'll see it again in June, the latest one.
But I could tell you from looking at the impact of the allocations and all of that, it certainly
is moving things around.
But in many cases, it's only delaying a project from June to August.
And in some cases, even projects that meet ready to list or are ready to advertise them
don't get allocated to August anyway.
So in some cases, there may be no impact.
In other cases, the impact could be greater.
And so we looked across all of that
with a performance lens before we developed this shop
so that we would know if there was something
that was going to be a problem,
there was an opportunity to go back to our districts
and say, look, we really need this in here
because this project is critical
to meet our performance objectives.
Yeah, and just thank you for that.
And just a comment, you said that there's been three years
in a row of, you know, much greater expected emergencies.
Unfortunately, you know, the concern I think we all have
is it's the sign of the times,
and we're gonna continue to see that going forward.
Reflect the fact later, I think in the agenda,
we are bumping up the emergency funds that are allocated.
But as we go forward, it's gonna be something
I think we're gonna be dealing with further.
And of course, as projects get pushed out,
because of that, those price, the costs go up
as you pointed out.
So it's a challenge and, you know,
it's not the only challenge we have in terms of funding.
We have other funding challenges, but that's the big one.
So anyway, thank you for your comments.
I'm not, I'm just smiling because, you know, we're playing defense, fixing damage, and
we need to start playing offense, but we have to pay for the defense and the offense simultaneously.
And that puts a lot of pressure on funding that really, you know, wasn't envisioned
to provide the resources necessary for climate adaptation.
All right, Commissioner Brown-Hines, do you have a follow-up?
I'm sure that you're, okay, great.
Anyone else?
If not, thank you so much.
Oh, Vice Chair Falco.
First of all, Mike, thank you for all the years
of work and service to the state
and presenting to us throughout the years
and really educating us and updating us
with full transparency, appreciate your work with us.
Second of all, just acknowledging,
as you're recalibrating, you know, priorities.
You know, the work that the districts have to do
in order to, you know, to meet the priority guidelines
and moving around projects, that's not easy.
So just wanted to uplift their work in meeting,
you know, where we're at right now
as it relates to our capacity.
question I have and I think Commissioner Tiffany you know kind of asked it
already but you know as we catch up with with the asset management particularly
those areas that are you know that you we've been behind bridges and TMS and
just listening to you know where the impact of shop funds have gone to in the
the last three years because of catastrophic damage.
As we move to fulfill some of these TEMP priorities,
do we feel, well I hate to ask it this way,
but are we fortifying our system for climate-related damage?
And I know that we can never really stay ahead,
but you kind of alluded that we wanna play
a little bit of offense.
Can you kind of talk a little bit more about that?
Yeah, I think maybe the best way to explain that
is to talk about a particular project,
is that you can really understand it easiest.
I've been with the department for almost 35 years,
and almost the first day I came into the office,
we were dealing with last chance grade.
So we have been dealing with portions of 101
sliding into the Pacific Ocean for almost 35 years.
And now, so we've been playing defense.
We go out, we put walls in, we hold it back,
and we keep the highway open.
We have to play defense because it's a critical route
to those communities up there.
Now we're starting to play offense with a tunnel.
That is getting us out of playing defense and into offense.
But it's going to come at a very steep price.
It's in excess of a billion, maybe several billion.
And so I think that's the challenge,
is we realize we want to play offense,
but playing offense is very expensive.
And so how do you balance that, and that's been the challenge.
So we can do hardening, and we do hardening
in a systematic way, building system resiliency in ways
that are probably not obvious to this commission,
but when we replace culverts,
we're replacing culverts with more water capacity
than they had previously so we don't get local flooding.
And so there are these systemic improvements
that are being made that are more localized,
but then we have these big challenges.
You know, what's gonna happen with Highway 1
in the Big Sur area or the Sonoma Coast?
You know, these are challenges that at some point
are gonna have to be addressed
it in a comprehensive way,
otherwise you're just gonna play defense
like we've been doing a last chance grade.
And I think with 35 years of perspective,
we wanna get there, but we would need,
in my opinion, whole new revenue streams
to be able to do that.
Like it said.
So, thank you, Mike, first.
Congratulations on retirement.
That's a big milestone and well deserved.
But just to build on what Mike, the last point that Mike just said is that we've had this
conversation many times before as we've tried to identify different challenges that the
transportation system faces, right?
This is a similar conversation that we had before we passed SB1 and asking the question
of what should we invest our transportation revenue on?
And at what level should that revenue be?
And so all of the things that you're hearing from Mike, all of the things that you're going
to hear across the commission over the next several years are going to inform that conversation.
We heard in my talking points that I talked about Assemblymember Wilson is out having
town halls to talk about some of these challenges and some of the needs that came up in our
needs assessment.
The things that Mike is talking about, they are included in our needs assessment.
And they are included in that billions of billions of dollars number that the transportation
system will need over the next 10 years to be able to continue to meet the
needs of Californians. Now just like SB1, I'm gonna predict that we're probably
not going to get to a sustainable revenue source that meets all of those
needs. That's a really really big number. And so the question is going to be how
do we align not just the state's revenue but the state's revenue with the federal
government's revenue with regional agencies revenue with cities and
counties revenue to be able to meet all of these needs to be able to find those
cost savings and those efficiencies that are going to be required to keep moving us forward.
Any other questions or comments from the dice? Hearing none, thank you so much for your service.
Next up we are going to item 19, Lael. Thank you Chair Grisby. Commissioners, top 19 is an
informational item. As part of our innovation in transportation series, we are pleased to
to highlight a presentation titled,
Transportation and Urban Wildfire Evacuation,
lessons from the 2025 Los Angeles wildfires.
Dr. Houdin, postdoctoral scholar
with the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies,
will present initial findings from UCLA survey
on evacuation travel during the January 2025 wildfires
in the Palisades and Eaton fire areas.
With that, I'll turn it to Dr. Dinh for his presentation.
Good afternoon, commissioners.
Waiting for the slides to show up here.
So my name is Hao Dinh.
Thanks for the introduction.
I will be presenting our study, a survey
we conducted of evacuees from the Palisades and Eastern
Fires.
Yeah.
OK.
Thank you.
So like I said, presenting initial findings from our survey of the evacuees from these
two fires.
This is a team led by Professor Evelyn Bloomberg, who's director of the UCLA Law Center for
Regional Policy Studies.
I'll be presenting on behalf of our team.
Okay, so next slide please.
Yeah, so I will open with a short discussion
of the context of our research
and then I'll present our initial findings,
just some highlights and then share our next steps
for our coming research, subsequent research.
All right, next slide please.
Next, please.
Okay, so there have been multiple surveys going on
about these wildfires in January 20, 2025
in the Los Angeles area.
But our focus in the survey is on the evacuation travel
during the wildfires.
And next piece.
And that's a unique contribution
in terms of genetic knowledge
because the Palaces and Eaton fires are relatively rare cases
of large urban confliction fires
that there hasn't been much studies
about this kind of fires before.
And then next please, another unique thing
about our research is we're collecting a random sample.
So that's going to better represent the characteristics,
the attitudes, the different tribal behaviors
of all evacuees.
Previous research is only,
It's mostly relied on convenience sampling.
Next, please.
And please, next.
Our topics covered in the survey include the evacuation
travel of evacuees.
And next, please.
If you can click through the next four items, I think.
Yeah, here.
Please go back one.
And then the evacuation experience of these evacuees
and then where they went as their first destination
and their future plans in terms of housing.
And we collect some social demographic information
to help us with subsequent modeling.
Okay, and the results I present today
will mostly be centered on the first three items.
Next, please.
And next.
Our first high level finding here
is that most people evacuated in household vehicles.
You can see here over 90% of evacuees from both areas
evacuated either driving or riding in household vehicles.
And then a small share also rode with friends or neighbors.
And virtually none used public transportation in this case.
And that's going to have implications
on what kind of pressure you put on the transportation
infrastructure during emergencies like this.
And this problem will reappear in the next few slides.
Next, please.
And among those who used the household vehicles
to evacuate, many households took more than one vehicle.
You can see almost half from both areas
actually took two or more vehicles.
That's additional burden on the transportation infrastructure.
Next, please.
And we also found that more respondents from the Palisades
area evacuated or traveled for a longer period of time.
You can see from this chart, there's pretty stark contrast
here, that actually more than about half of the evacuees
from Palisades fire, it took them more than one hour
to reach their destination and you can see from the next slide that congestion was reported
as a major obstacle for over 60% of respondents from the Ohio State area and you can see it's
less of a problem for evacuees from the eastern fire.
So that speaks to the kind of road network in place,
in a place like Palisades where you have long cul-de-sacs
funneling traffic into a few major arterial highways.
And that's going to generate, create congestion
in key bottlenecks.
And then, of course, road closures and objects
on the road further compounded this pressure.
And next, please.
And this is the last high level of finding our share.
Most evacuees went to their families or friends' home.
This is their first stop, their first destination.
And then a small share, about 20% or so,
went to hotel or motel.
All right, next case and next.
So, we plan to write off our initial results.
There's more than this coming.
And a couple of policy briefs that will be published,
next please, published through the UCLA's
Lowy Center for Regional Policy Studies.
You can follow up through this link.
I also have a QR code in the next slide
that will outline our key findings.
In addition to these findings,
We have findings on whether they have evacuation plan
in place before and what their future plans are
in terms of housing and our discussions
for policy implications.
And then for subsequent analysis,
we're currently at a stage of formulating research plans
for more statistical modeling and analyzing questions
The next question is for example, travel behavior, so how do household characteristics interact
with the fire evacuation communications with the built environment of the fire areas to
determine evacuation time, speed, distance, travel, and the mode they took.
Next, please.
Another key question is the relationship between trauma experience from previous fire exposures
and the urgency of the situation itself and household decision making during evacuations.
Another major area is next please. Can you go back one more? Back. For one more. Sorry.
One more, yes. The overall experience focusing on vulnerable travelers like the elderly people,
people with disabilities, how their constraints may have affected their evacuation outcome.
So like I said, we're only assembling initial findings now and I'm sharing some of them today
And we're formulating plans for next steps now. We're interested in what you as the commissioners are interested in. Maybe we can use our data data and serve it to address some of your concerns. Thank you.
And thank you for the presentation. Let's go to public comment first. Is there any public comment on this item.
Would you never see any request to comment on this item. Thank you.
Now we'll turn to my colleagues. Any comment or questions from the dais.
Chair Lee any warmer chair Lee any good. Thank you so much. Great information. I know there's
a lot of communities around the state that are dealing with these issues right now that,
you know, have one lane in one laid out. And are you working with any of those other communities
around the state to look at, you know, what what have you found happened and, and what can they do
do in the future. I know many of us went to Laguna Beach recently and we toured the road
out because if PCH closed down, that's the only way in and out and things falling in
the road there, they would be trapped. So I didn't know if any of those other communities
have gotten any outreach from you or the group.
No, yeah, thanks for the question.
No, we have not reached out to these other communities,
but there have been past studies about the past fires
like the Paratus fire that highlighted a similar issue
of this limited access through the growth network
and the cost congestion and led to difficulty for evacuees.
So it's a pretty common problem observed
a lot of fires. That really is where we think that some intervention is needed to better
manage vehicular traffic coming out of the fire areas. I want to go back to one of our
findings that majority of people used a car and many of them took more than one car and
and thus further congesting the road system.
So maybe there are better ways to leverage other modes
of transportation to try to reduce the amount
of vehicles coming out of the fire area
during this emergency situation.
Commissioner Min.
Thank you so much.
This is really helpful and I appreciate all the work
that you've done to put into this.
You know, you ask the question at the end
in terms of like what information would be helpful,
and there's quite a lot, I mean it kind of, you know,
building off, you know, the earlier question,
which I really appreciated your question,
about what's happening in these other communities,
like what have we learned?
Because one thing that really comes up for me a lot
in terms of this particular experience,
because we're about to get to that one-year anniversary,
is that this is now, we should now have plans in place,
because now it's expected, right?
It's no longer unprecedented, it's happened,
and now we need to plan for it in the future.
And when I think about the evacuation,
Yes, there are the people who evacuated and where they went
and what their plans were.
But there are also those where, and if you spoke a little bit
about transit agencies, we had some transit agencies come in
because they did help with the evacuation.
It wasn't part of an evacuation plan, it didn't seem,
but they saw a need and they were there.
And so when I think about sensitive receptors,
that was to a nursing home.
What are the plans for them?
If we ever have a situation where it's close to a hospital,
like what's that evacuation plan?
Or if it's in the middle of the day and it's a school.
But knowing as a full community,
like what these evacuation plans are.
And then the other place I would think
in terms of even some additional surveying
are for individuals in Hollywood.
So that evening, we had the evacuations
that happened for Eaton fire, for Palisades fire,
but there was also a fire that was happening in Hollywood.
Fortunately, that one was stopped,
but that is an incredibly congested urban area.
And when I spoke to my friends who were thinking
that they would need to evacuate,
they honestly didn't know how they were gonna get out,
because it is a very congested area
and the roadways were, there was no communication
about like where they would go
or what signaling or shifting would happen.
So when I just, I do,
I feel like I'm adding so much additional work.
But I really do think that this is like
kind of looking back at what we've seen
because there is great information
that's come out of Paradise
and so many of our other communities.
It's looking at what happened a year ago,
even in some of those communities
where we didn't end up having the same level of crisis
like Hollywood, because those people still
needed to evacuate or still thought
that they needed to evacuate.
And then looking towards the future of what
is our collective plan?
Because it really is a matter of everyone
having an understanding of what we do the same way
that we do with earthquake drills.
People generally have a sense of what we're supposed to do.
if there is another fire that's like this
or something similar, some other type of climate catastrophe,
what do we do?
And that's not your job to figure out for all of us.
But since you asked, I do think that getting some more
of that information of what happens in these situations
and taking lessons learned to be able to give some sense
and thoughts of what could be some best practices moving
forward would have a lot of value to it. But I really thank you for the work that you're doing
and the stories that you're listening to and the surveys that you're conducting. Thank you.
Thank you. I just want to add that I didn't mention just now during my presentation that
we did find that the vast majority of our respondents didn't have any plans,
didn't have any evacuation plans in place before this happened. I think the number was about 60%
of the Palisades evacuees and then three-quarters of the eastern respondents they didn't have any
plans in place. So now that we know that these are I mean we have been we have known that these
areas are fire-prone, they're prone to disasters like this and preparing for
this kind of disaster requires, of course, governments to implement plans
and other measures but maybe there are some responsibilities for
communities and individual households to prepare for themselves for such events
as well. All right. Thank you. Commissioner Tiffany. Thank you chair. Have you have you
visited paradise by chance? I know I would I would encourage if you have the opportunity
I would encourage you do so we we some of us here got a tour of paradise recently when
we were visiting during a town hall and I mean they've done an amazing job of rebuilding
I mean, it's really impressive, but we were shown,
it's very struck by the plans that they now have in place.
Now they were, as I was mentioning to some people,
they're fortunate in that PG&E was found fully liable,
so they received millions of dollars
to help rebuild their community.
but also they were able to, and they put a lot of money
into identifying evacuation areas.
So every part of the community in Paradise now
has an evacuation area.
They know, and there's been a lot of communication.
So they know where to go if a fire were to start again.
And they also have a warning system,
very sophisticated warning system.
when we hear about what happened in L.A.
and what you're describing, people are just,
number one, a lot of people didn't even know.
And so the communication wasn't there.
But then also, once they were leaving,
they just knew to get out.
But they didn't know where to evacuate, what's the,
so it seems like that's a huge part of it,
is to try to, within all of our communities that are at risk,
set of evacuation plans which unfortunately requires a lot of money
which a lot of communities don't have but that's a challenge.
I'm also, I'm just curious, so anyway I'd like when you get a chance maybe comment
on the evacuation and that's got to be part of it but you showed a slide there that said
that was nearly half of the people I believe left with more than one car.
And I don't know if you took, you asked this question,
but I'm curious, are people leaving with more
than one car because they need to?
Because they, you know, they have a large family,
or they're, you know, or is it because they wanna take
their cars and not have them burn up?
And if that's the case, and I don't know how you do this,
but if you have people, you know, families are leaving
two or three cars versus just one,
If they only need one to evacuate,
it would tremendously reduce the congestion.
So anyway, it just occurred to me
that somehow if that could be addressed,
that could make a big difference.
Yes, I think that makes a lot of sense.
And the way we asked the question was just how many,
if anyone said they took a car,
we asked them how many cars they took as a household.
But we do plan to follow up with some of these respondents
than we can then further investigate the reasons why
they took more than one car.
I think that speaks to one of my point earlier
that we need to figure out a way to better manage
vehicular traffic coming out of the evacuation zones.
One side of it is to encourage people to take fewer cars.
But also, we can leverage other services like transit agencies
to help bring people out in,
more people out in fewer vehicles.
And then to your point about evacuation plans,
I think yeah, what you mentioned about the plans in place
for Paradise was very, it's very good because like I said,
there are things that household needs to prepare for
and communities as a whole needs to prepare for
Because we also find that social networks play a role in here.
Some people get notifications from their friends,
from their neighbors, from their family members.
And then they get rights from them
to get out of the evacuation zone.
And I think on top of managing traffic, part of the job
of the government is also to help communities
to put together plans to prepare for future risks.
You know, I believe that all communities have
or every county, cities, they have emergency services
that have evacuation plans in the case
of earthquakes and fires.
but I suspect that probably a very high majority
of those communities have no idea
what those evacuation plans are
because they're not communicated to anyone.
So anyway, it's a huge challenge,
but I really appreciate the work you're doing
and hopefully we can learn lessons from these past tragedies
to do a better job next time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Oh, one more thing.
I am aware that there are studies examining,
evaluating community preparation plans
in disaster emergencies like this
conducted by my colleagues at UCLA.
So I don't want to speak for them,
but they did find some plans outdated,
some plans not very well aligned with current needs.
So you have plans in place, but you
may have to put in more effort to update the plans, too.
All right.
One of the questions I have kind of evolves around equity.
We know that the state cares a lot about that.
And I know you didn't get into the demographic information,
but there are a couple of cues for me that piqued my interest.
One was that the Eden Fire residents
were more likely to use 3-plus cars to get out.
So it makes me wonder if there is multi-generational families
there or other ways to cut costs.
Maybe there's something to delve into there.
And also, when it comes to where they went after they evacuated,
they're more likely to go to other, which I notice
includes shelters.
So I'm curious about how your knowledge on that
might guide our efforts going forward?
Yeah, I think that's, thank you for that.
That's a very good comment.
I think we are going to delve deeper
into the differences between these two areas,
these two communities.
Like you said, the income differences is one.
And then we also collected information
on how the age of respondents
and how many members in our households
may have disabilities or other conditions
that may cause problems during this kind of evacuation.
So we will compare between the two areas
and see how those kind of differences
affect the evacuation outcomes.
That's our next steps.
And we will report back on our findings in the future.
Great, thank you so much.
Looking forward to that.
Not seeing any other questions from the dais.
Thank you so much for your presentation
and all the knowledge you imparted us.
Thank you.
So apparently I was really eager to get to this item
because I skipped number 18.
So let's go back to Tim.
Thank you.
Mike Johnson thought just because he's retiring
gets to sneak out early, but that is not the case.
Tab 18 is an information item
in accordance with changes to streets and highway code
enacted by Senate Bill 695.
Caltrans is required to prepare an annual report
summarizing select project level outcomes
from projects constructed on the state highway system.
Mike Johnson is here again to provide a presentation
on the select state highway system outcomes report
that will be reporting on projects that were completed
between July 23 and June of 24.
I'll turn it over to Mike.
Well, hello again.
I thought you were just giving me a break,
so that was kind of nice.
I do have a presentation, but as to mention,
This is our second report that we call this
select state highway system project outcomes,
i.e. the Senate Bill 695 report.
Last year was our first reporting, next slide please.
In the way that the law is structured in 2025,
we had to do a five-year look back.
So we had to build a five-year history of completed projects.
It was a big lift.
And we had, there's a number of very specific things
that the law calls for us to report on.
Some of them are on the screen,
but things like how many lanes were added to the system?
How big was the system in any given year?
What did we do in terms of adding
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure?
Where did we relinquish state highway systems?
How many homes and businesses were relocated
as a result of transportation projects?
So there's in total about 11 different things
that we have to report on.
And then for the 2026 report, and I say it's 2026,
it is by law supposed to be public by January 1st,
which is why I'm here before you today.
And it also requires that we make a presentation
to this commission.
And so we're kind of checking a couple of boxes
or hoping we can get this report out early this year.
But in 2026, we had additional things that were layered into
and in addition to what we had to do before,
but this was only for one year at a time.
So this is now we're on kind of our annual cycle
where every year we're gonna do this report
and we're gonna report on these 11 different things.
Plus we have to, in the 2026 report for the first time,
quantify the number of bicycle and pedestrian connections
that were made to local systems.
So from the state highway system to local systems,
as well as quantifying any projects
that were in this window of time
that required VMT reporting,
emission reporting under CEQA,
and emission mitigation or VMT mitigation.
Next slide.
So with respect to the VMT and emission mitigation,
the short story is there were no projects that met the criteria for reporting in this report.
And there are really two things that limit that. The first is a timeline. So in order for a project
to be reported in this report, the environmental document would have had to begin after September
15, 2020, and it would have to be completed by today, or actually by 2023-24. No project met
that criteria. In addition, if a lane is added and it's less than one mile in
length and it doesn't trigger the CEQA requirements, it also wouldn't be
reported. So those are really the two primary exclusions. Bottom line is
there's no VMT reporting in this because we didn't have any eligible projects. Next
slide. I mentioned that this project or this report was the first one that
required us to report on bicycle and pedestrian connections and in order to
do that, we had to actually define what a connection was. And so within this report,
there's a series of diagrams. This is one of them and I just want to give a shout out.
All of these diagrams that are in this report were done by a student that worked for us
from Cal State Chico over the summer. Hannah Pieri, if she's watching, Hannah, she graduates
in about a year, we're hoping to hire her, but she worked with a lot of different groups.
We are about to have an opening.
What's that?
We are about to have an opening.
So we have all these diagrams.
This is a simple one, but basically what we ultimately arrived at is that we wanted to
separate the modes because it's possible to have a bike connection, but not a pedestrian
connection or vice versa or both. And it's also possible to have a connection in the
case of a four way intersection like this at every quadrant of that intersection. So
in a typical intersection like the one shown on the screen there can be up to eight different
connections that are possible. There's four corners and two modes so you can get up to
eight. This is a simple diagram where we have access control, interchanges and other things.
it becomes much more complicated to define
what exactly a connection is.
Point is within the report, there are many diagrams
that lay out exactly how we are counting these connections
so that they can be consistently done from year to year.
Next slide.
So for the 23-24 fiscal year, we looked at a total of
about 1,500 projects that had completed in that time window.
We screen them using a number of different techniques
that were all audited last year,
and we feel they're pretty complete and robust.
From that 1,500 projects, we identified 211 projects
that could potentially have one of the things
we're looking for.
And those 211 projects were distributed out
to all 12 of our districts,
and I just wanna acknowledge this is a big lift
for our districts.
They have to then go in to all these projects,
review plans, review completion reports,
review photographs and other things
to ascertain some of this information that's in the report.
And it's quite a labor intensive exercise
for them to do this.
Of those 211 that we thought could potentially
have something that we need to report on,
after that review,
89 projects were determined to actually have something that needs to be reported
and so
You know, there are some stats. I'm not going to read them all all there because I'm going to go into some detail on some others
here in a minute, but
You know we had of the 89 projects 56 of them had had constructed some pedestrian facility
Right. So then the question is did it make a connection to a local bike or ped network or not?
and that's not something that we have in our databases it's not something we've
ever tracked and so it becomes a very manual exercise to try to figure that
out. Next slide. I want to talk a little bit about the timing because this comes
up. There's two things the Commission really needs to understand about this
report. First of all we are reporting any project that we're aware of that
touched the state highway system that does not limit it to just it is not
limited to just Caltrans projects. It is anybody that we are aware of that touch
the state highway system gets included in this report. So while we're we are
making the report the projects that are in this composition are not all Caltrans
projects. So that's an important thing. The other thing that's really important
is that and what this graph is showing if you just kind of focus on the darker
blue that is showing when these projects were initiated and then there's a win win did the
planning work complete on these and they actually start going into the design and ultimately
the construction process and and you can see from this graph that when we look at key dates
like the passes the passage or an enactment of SB 743 not the passage but when it was
actually implemented in 2020. Director Policy 37 which is Caltrans Complete Streets Policy
as well as Kaptai in 2021, the majority of the projects that we're reporting on here
were initiated long before these key policy changes. So what we're looking at is projects
projects that were created under a completely potentially different policy objective through
modern day policy lens, and that is something that is kind of inconvenient, because in the
early 2000s, and I was here then, it was all about congestion reduction. We had congestion
reduction programs all over the state, and that was really one of our key policy focuses
at the time, so we're seeing projects now that are born in the early 2020 or 2000s
and they're completing 20 years later, and now they're being included in this report.
So it's really important to understand we're looking at a lot of predominantly legacy projects.
If you look at post-2021, there's about eight projects that would be affected by current
policy that are being reported. Next slide. One of the things we have to
report are the number of lane miles that were added to this system in this
year and you know I was listening earlier to the representatives of the
region talk about how much the Inland Empire is growing and that is reflected
here. You see the it's the largest area of lane mile growth in the state is the
the Inland Empire, in part because it's, you know,
there's a lot of industry moving to the Inland Empire,
and it's also where the affordable housing is.
And so the combination of those two things
is really driving the need for more capacity
in the transportation system.
We also saw here a pretty decent number of lanes
being added in the Sacramento area.
This was primarily interstate five south of Sacramento and highway 70 north of Sacramento.
Next slide.
We provide in the report tables that look like this that break down all of the lanes
that were added by the type of lane and who paid for them.
This is quite a challenge to be able to do this.
And you'll notice that there's a column there that says multifunded because a lot of the
Projects that are adding lanes to the system have funding coming from two three four different sources
You know, there's some other things that you know
I guess we can highlight here if you look at this shop in particular, you know sort of
The corner of the world that I work in the most, you know, we did add lane miles
But for truck climbing purposes primarily
And and left and right turn pocket extensions
So if we have traffic queuing up that's trying to turn,
we can make a longer pocket, effectively add to the lane.
But that's the bulk of what we do.
And one of the things you hear a lot
is when we're adding these acceleration, or ox lanes,
all over the state.
And the numbers clearly show that the shop is not
doing this.
And so I bring this up because it
is one of those things that I hear a lot,
but it's not really grounded in data.
So that's kind of what we've got this table in there.
We had a table similarly.
The growth rate overall for the state of California was 0.4%.
That is the nationwide average.
Last year when we reported it was at 0.2%.
That was about half of the nationwide average.
So we're not growing the system any faster than anybody else
in the country on average.
Next slide.
We have to quantify the new bike, bikeway miles that were added to the system and here
the lion's share of them or the big concentration was in the Los Angeles area with, you know,
some additional miles in the San Francisco Bay Area as well.
Next slide.
We are required to report on homes and businesses relocated and this is, you know, where I want
to just remind the Commission that we are reporting on projects that are not
always Caltrans projects and that is true in this category especially. So
there were eight projects that were completed in that time window that had a
home or business relocated the vast majority of all of them were right here
in Riverside County on the 91 freeway from Orange County all the way to the
2015 and 241 so large project his origins go back to
2015 or sorry
202005
So the project is 20 years old
Completed in that time window. So again, it's a legacy project
You know you you sort of heard the need for it because of the growth that we have
But here we are we're reporting on it because it completed in 2324 next slide
And there's some other results in there, and I'm not going to go through all of them
But we did relinquish which is transfer ownership to a city or county 23 miles of the state highway system
There are times when that is a very good decision for both the state and for the local community
and so
You know we do that from time to time all of those come before this Commission for approval before relinquishments occur as well as
the legislature
We did convert 43 miles, or lane miles of general purpose highway to managed lanes.
So you see more of that, and in fact, even in that lane addition table, there was a pretty
substantial growth in HOV and express toll lanes that were added.
So of that total, some of those are in fact managed lanes as well.
We had 25 connections made between the state highway system and local bike and ped networks,
if you will.
So that's one of the first reporting that we had.
And again, as I mentioned, there were no projects that met the criteria for VMT reporting.
Next slide.
So with that, you know, we are just finishing up the report.
like I said it's supposed to be by law posted prior to January 1st we will we
will be meeting that confident of that and once we post the report we will be
you know notifying those that are most interested in this report that it's out
there and available when we post it we also post all of the underlying data
that supports this report as well with that I'm happy to answer any questions
Thank you. Great Thanks so much.
Let's move to public comment.
Is there any public comment on
this item? Yes, we do have one
virtual attendee with her hand
raised at this time like to call
on Hannah Crager. Hi,
commissioners. My name is Hana
Krieger representing the Green
Lighting Institute and on behalf
of the families displaced by
highway expansion projects who
can't be here today. I want to
underscore the scale of this
expansions in just this one-year period. Combined with the previous five years
before that, we're now approaching 900 homes and businesses demolished in only
six years. And that's just a snapshot. The LA Times found that in the past 30 years,
California highways have displaced more than 10,000 families. Yet we still don't
know how many more homes are at risk from future projects currently in the
pipeline, and how many more families will be forced out of their homes.
On Greenland's Homes Before Highways website, we've mapped the SB 695 demolitions across
legislative districts. We've been walking legislators through it recently. Across the
political spectrum, they're stunned. They don't realize how many projects are deepening the housing
crisis in their districts, or that there are still more projects being planned that would
displace people, not just legacy projects. Many recognize the concept of induced demand,
that widening highways only makes traffic worse. Meanwhile, the state spends roughly $20 billion
a year on transportation. Yet the results show traffic is rising, road safety is declining,
and our road quality ranks 47th in the nation, costing drivers up to $1,000 a year in repairs.
Californians deserve better outcomes, which means spending our dollars differently.
And that's why I want to acknowledge this commission's leadership. Last year, you all made
a precedent-setting shift to move 94 million dollars within TSEP from highway expansions
into electric truck charging. That decision shows what's possible when investments reflect
California's values. And so that is progress, but now we need to build on it. Families across
the state are watching these decisions, lawmakers are watching, and we urge you to continue leading
with the same courage you showed last year by putting people, not pavement, first. Thanks for
your time and please check out the mapping tool on our Homes Before Highways website.
up next we have Jeannie Ward-Waller. Hello again commissioners Jeannie Ward-Waller on behalf of
the climate plan network. I want to just echo the comments from Hannah and just really you know
urge you especially in the context of your the previous item discussing the shop and all of the
impacts all the needs that we have on our transportation system. It is really alarming
to continue to see the rate that we are adding lanes to the state highway system which really
just as adding additional risk, additional liabilities to ultimately have to maintain
with shop dollars. So really just feels like, you know, we need to be thinking about those
policies. SB 743, it passed in 2013. So even though it didn't get officially implemented,
there was a lot of warning that that was coming for many years. And the complete original Complete
Street's policy by Caltrans was actually in 2008. So it's taken many years for these things to really
be taken seriously and I really encourage the commission to push harder for Caltrans to take
those policies seriously and really implement them and make these shifts more urgently in the
context of the climate and housing and equity crises that we're facing. And oh, I also just
wanted to comment on the action in CAPDI. CAPDI made a recommendation for Caltrans to develop a
policy to avoid future displacement of housing for highway widening, and we'd really love to see
progress on that. It's my understanding that there's not been significant progress made. So
Again, you know, this data really shows the urgency of actions like that.
And Caltrans really moving those things forward with more urgency.
So thank you.
Not seeing any other requests to comment on the item.
All right.
Thank you so much.
Now we'll move to the dais to see if there's any questions or comments.
I don't see any lights lit up yet.
So let's go to commercial activity.
Mike, just a quick question.
And you showed a slide that showed that there were, I think, 40 plus miles that went from
general purpose to, I guess, commuter lanes.
How does that change be made?
Is it all local and, you know, does it have to be approved at a certain level?
I'm just not familiar.
I was curious and, you know, how that happens.
Yeah, within the course of our projects or our partner projects, I want to just go back
to the previous comment.
When we talk about homes and business relocations and things, just to be crystal clear, these
are non-shop funded projects largely and they're not even Caltrans projects.
So let's not conflate those two things.
The homes and business relocations were not Caltrans nor shop projects for the majority
of them. To answer your question, if we have a general purpose lane, we can convert that
lane to an HOV lane or to a hot lane or an express lane, and that does happen based on
traffic operations modeling and things that make sense, and we have done that.
So it's a decision made by Caltrans. Each district makes that decision. Is it in conjunction
with the local or regional agencies as well? Yes, in many cases it may be
proposed by the local MPO. Right, okay, thank you. Vice Chair Folkle. Thank you.
Thank you for your presentation again Michael. I don't expect you to quantify
this but you mentioned that this report is looking at projects that
precede some policies that were adopted. So kind of looking at let's say possible
future reports you know how you think it will reflect you know CAPTI, SB 743, new
policies as it relates to multimodal and complete street policies just you know
from your expert lens you know how what could we or what should we anticipate
participate for future reports?
That's a great question, when is it going to reflect current policy?
And we did look at that, and in fact in the report it says that by 2030 we would expect
half the projects that are being reported on to be subject of new policy versus old
policy and it will take a little bit longer for the rest of those legacy projects to sort
of work their way through.
And that kind of goes back to the shop and just even transportation projects in general.
I mean, our average shop project takes 10 years to get done.
And so when you make a policy change, you're really not going to see it in a report like
this for 10 years for a typical project.
Hi.
Can I just clarify a question with Mike?
So Mike, just a clarifying question, just to make sure we put a fine point on this.
What you're saying is that the completion of the project will happen in 2030.
You are not saying that you are not currently working on incorporating those things, and
I want to make that distinction because it's really important to say that you all are working
on incorporating those policies, and they take time to actually be incorporated and
then completed through projects, correct?
Yes, that was very well articulated.
As shown, some of the projects we're reporting on were started more than 20 years ago.
the projects we're working on now are we're working on in accordance with
current policy those will start you know to build to greater and greater
percentage we saw eight out of eighty nine so approximately I think it's seven
point something percent were projects that would have been subject to current
policy in this report that percentage should grow as we go through time vice
Vice chair, were you done with your, all right.
Yes, let's go to Commissioner Brown-Heis.
Thank you, thank you for this.
I was wondering in the report,
I was looking at the slide where it said lane miles added
to the state highway system and it had the Inland Empire
and I think Sacramento area with the most,
the highest concentration of added lanes.
And it said most were funded by multifunded
or non-shop projects.
And then the next slide has kind of a type and funding program, but it's not listed geographically.
And I'm wondering, is the underlying data in the report, can you see things geographically
as well in terms of like I said, when we publish the report, we will also publish all the underlying
data.
And every project has a location.
So that would be like like a GIS kind of mapping of the data.
Honestly, I had never actually thought of doing that
but it's kind of planting a seed.
Can we bring up the slide that Commissioner Brown-Hines
is referring to the addition of Lane Miles by Regent?
I think it's the previous slide.
This one has the map.
Yeah.
Do you really looking at the intersection of this
and the map, I think is what you're asking about.
Yeah, an overlay just would be, I think,
an interesting way to see the data as well.
Can we go?
Thank you.
See you.
All right.
So I noticed the San Francisco gate article from 2024.
I seem to recall a big debate about 10 years ago
about whether or not economic growth had
strong indefatigable connection to highway expansion or not what does the
literature literature show on that given that we're making that assertion on this
page I'm sorry can you I'm not sure I understood the question does does Lane
ex expansion and there's been a debate for a number of years about whether or
not economic growth has to lead to additional lane miles and this has been
debate that has been going on for a while. Some folks say that it is necessary, some
folks say that that's a policy decision. So I'm asking you, based on the assertion that
we have on this chart here, what do you know to be the literature on the topic?
I'm not familiar with the literature, so I would want to comment on that. You know, I
think the Inland Empire is certainly a growing area. You heard that in the Welcome to the
the region, I think they were expecting their population to double in a short
period of time, you know. So if you're going to have that kind of population
growth, the people are going to have to get to jobs and to other places. Does
that equal highway expansion? Not necessarily. I mean, there are many
modes of transportation and I think that, you know, becomes more of a global
planning question. In this case, we're coming after the fact just reporting on what happened,
not really in a position to change it. It's already done. But I think your point is, yes,
could you make the language other modes? Absolutely.
Yeah, I call it out just to simply ask for more neutral language on it. And there is
case studies that can point to other regions,
Northern Virginia in particular,
that had high growth last 20 years.
They did add lane miles, they did so unapologetically,
but they also added a lot of metro service.
So I think it's a combination of policy objectives
that a region may have, and it's up to the region
to figure out what mix they want.
But I have an issue with saying that is directly correlated
that it has to happen a certain way.
Because that's a policy decision that regions need to make
about the mix for their particular type of growth
they want to have.
Commissioner Ratshaw.
Thanks, brother chair.
So I've kind of had a standing,
I guess it's an informal offer that I would happily host.
I know NorCal a little better than SoCal,
but it mirrors here to invite folks
and I don't mean to put you on the spot,
so don't feel obligated that I'm dragging
in a political thing, but I'll try to get to a point
I think is relevant.
But folks in the day job I represent,
a large majority of them due to the cost of housing,
and I think even one of the callers brought up equity,
which certainly it's rooted in that.
To join us and I'll rent vans on our own dime
from my organization and go out there
or three in the morning at the intersection of I5 and 580,
which 580 becomes I5.
And I'd like to hear in real life, real time,
how we bring relief as workers across the board who
can't afford to provide child care if they happen to be
in a home where there's two parents,
it ends up a cost situation where it's not viable.
One, you can't get child care at 3 in the morning.
And two, by the time you work, if someone takes a second job,
you're probably at a net loss.
So you lose, often, not in every case, a breadwinner.
The point I'm trying to make here
is that when you are a worker, I know construction workers well,
that you have to spend, right,
maybe you're working eight or nine hours on the job,
but you have to spend another two and a half,
three, often four hours on that highway.
And I know there's a version of it here,
punching into LA Metro area.
So I'd like to know how we bring relief
without expansion of capacity of highway.
I'm all into it, right?
Hey man, if we had a rail system that was developed
that ran 24-7 starting 75 or 100 years ago,
we'd be way ahead of it.
I'm all in as commissioners, all in on that.
However, it gets talked about a lot,
it probably is losing some of its punch
to say housing crisis, even equity crisis, all that stuff.
There's another situation, they're all related in my view,
it's just my opinion, going on.
which is escalating I can speak to the construction industry.
Here's a horrible debate to have for statistics.
We're not quite sure based on data,
whether we're one or two on suicide rates in our industry.
We know with comfort we can say,
I mean a little bit of a smart aleck there,
that we are number one in addiction,
depression and drug abuse.
So, this carpenter, and proud to serve as a commissioner,
finds that all this is related.
That pressure cooker can only go on so long.
I'm all about steps, progress, and forward movement.
I wouldn't speak for another commissioner.
I don't think anyone up here, though,
in my experience with these commissions,
that anyone is anti that.
But on the same note, no one's taken up that challenge,
right, and I'll make it again,
And you let me know after the fact.
And we'll get some organizers.
And some of those workers will pay them for the day
so they can join us on that little trip.
And it'll blow your mind what it looks
like across the Patterson Pass and into the Altamon.
And it is insane.
Now, I remember being back about 20 years ago
when it was bad, right?
And it would kickstart about 4.45, 5 in the morning.
It's not sustainable.
So again, just wanted to put it out there because it's, you know, the economics of it
is creating a social problems, put it lightly across the board.
So if you have a thought on that, man, brother, go ahead and throw it in.
Being that this is my last meeting in the condition, I think I'm going to take the fifth
on that.
That is a big problem, throw land use in there, throw lots of other things.
I don't think we're going to solve that one this afternoon.
No.
So, yeah, I have a follow up.
So, complete agreement with Commissioner Brescia, and he and I have talked about this many times.
I've done research on late shift workers, know that public transportation cannot meet
their needs.
been educated by my brother Bradshaw about his workers and the lack of availability of access for them via public transportation. That's reality.
But we do know that it's a policy choice about the mix.
And that's what I raised here. And like I said the policy example I use, which was Northern Virginia, they did in fact at Lane Miles and they did so unapologetically because they also did massive metro investment.
Director Taylor at the risk of jumping into a conversation. I probably shouldn't but I will
You know, I really appreciate the conversation today because the reality is what we've talked about across this dais is
It's an it's not one solution for everything right? It is we need multiple modes
multiple opportunities and
We have to deal with housing affordability
All of those things really matter and one of the things I can talk about in terms of our regional agencies from when I worked
at a regional agency and I'll use San Joaquin Cog where I work because you talked about the ultimate
Pass and really trying to find those solutions and that balances that's part of what happens in the regional transportation planning process
Where there is a hard conversation about we have this much available revenue
What do we do with it to your question and comments about policy decisions?
and those are very very hard policy decisions because you have to look at
the age you have to look at the housing fit you have to look at the economic
employment opportunities you have to look at how everything fits together and
if you're in San Joaquin County you also have to look at what's happening across
the corridor in the Bay Area right because the housing imbalance is so
great that you cannot ignore it and so when I was at San Joaquin Cog and I think
they still do this I don't want to speak for them but I'm pretty sure they do
they coordinate across the corridor,
regions coordinate across their boundaries, right?
Because transportation doesn't stop at the county line,
it doesn't stop at the MPO region line.
And so when we talk about how do we move our workforce,
how do we move people, right?
Some of the conversations I would have
when I was at San Joaquin County are,
I can live in the Bay Area and pay a million dollars
for a house, or I can live in San Joaquin County
and pay half that and have twice the house
And be able to go on vacation with my family.
And that's a choice that people do make.
Because it's an important choice, right?
Those intangible life discussions,
those life needs being able to afford childcare,
being able to eat, being able to have a yard
if you choose to have a yard, right?
Those are intangible personal decisions
that people have the right to make, right?
Because people are still chasing the American dream.
And that's important to be able to achieve
whatever version of the American dream
you want to achieve, right?
That's really, really important.
But how we meet the transportation needs,
because we don't have enough money to do everything,
you do have to make trade-offs.
You have to ask those value statements
to really address the questions
that we're talking about across this dais right now.
All right, thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Tiffany.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jay.
Brother Bradshaw, for bringing,
You're always very eloquent, and I appreciate the comments
that, Tanisha, you made as well.
Yeah, I think that, again, we, a lot of us talk about,
you know, one size fits all.
And, Mike, you were talking about, you know, years ago,
it was all about congestion and level of service.
And now, of course, we shifted to VMT, but, you know,
Just to reiterate what was just said is that in some areas,
congestion is the problem.
And certainly, VMT is a very important, particularly
in urban areas where there's transit.
And you can use that as an alternative.
But in areas like what Commissioner Bradshaw
talking about or in my community where people are commuting up to Silicon
Valley congestion is is the issue and I would love if I mean I'm all for a rail
system that goes that runs but you know we are years and years away from that
and we don't have the money for it so in my mind you've got to have a balance
and there has to be it can't be this narrow approach that some people would
have and not not every area has can be looked at the same in the in my
community people are so pissed off by the congestion that there is an
overwhelming anti-growth attitude in our community the point where no houses are
going to be built, to the point where they don't even want to see any commercial development,
which is ridiculous, because that's what would bring local jobs to keep people off the roads.
So if you push it too far, it can backfire on you.
And anyway, I just wanted to weigh in, and any time you want to jump in here with this
conversation tonight. I'm just thinking, thank you so much, wait on this report. I mean,
and I think the report, you know, the conversation that the report is generating is a very positive
thing. And so, you know, maybe in years forward, you can build on that. I do just want to close
out if I could just thank the commission for many years and the staff, Tim, John, others shop,
you know it's asset management um you know going back 10 years i remember standing before this
commission i think commissioner gordino might be the only one that's still here but you know it
started off and it's like where are we going no one knew you know exactly and you know to look
at where we are now we you know we're definitely one of the premier states in the country if not
the world. And, you know, it's it's really been a collaborative partnership between Caltrans,
you know, all of our districts, our headquarters groups, all of our local partners, as well as the
commission to make it work. So I just want to thank all of you and, you know, Tim, John,
you know, they're they're our day to day partners in the shop. And so just want to acknowledge that.
and once again thanks for your service to the state love it love it uh great policy conversation
and we are on to item 20 south hearing for proposed 2025 comprehensive multimodal corridor
plan guidelines rigid thank you chair grizzby commissioners tab 20 is an information item to
hold the south hearing for the commission's comprehensive multimodal corridor plan
guidelines. And after this item, the next item will be to consider staff's
recommendation for guidelines adoption. So as a refresher, all projects
nominated for the Commission's Solutions for Congested Corridors Program are
required by the California Streets and Highways Code to be included in a
multimodal corridor plan. The Commission adopted the initial corridor plan
guidelines in 2018 and this serves as the first update to those guidelines.
Staff circulated a draft of the corridor plan guidelines for a 30-day
public comment period back in July of this year. We received feedback from
Caltrans, several regional agencies and members of the Interagency Equity Advisory Committee.
We greatly appreciate the feedback that we received and have incorporated comments throughout
the guidelines to reflect it.
The Commission held the North Hearing at the October Commission meeting in Merced in which
we did not receive any public comment at the hearing.
Attachment A of the staff report details
the key changes that were made between the 2018 version
and the proposed 2025 version.
The 2025 guidelines update is intended
to produce a more streamlined document
that provides resources for applicant agencies.
And while the guidelines do not reflect
significant policy changes. I did want to highlight some of the key changes that we
did make in the guidelines. First, staff has added a new appendix with links to planning
resources, including Caltrans statewide planning documents and corridor planning guidance.
We have expanded considerations for climate resiliency and adaptation safety and emergency
management and encouraging equitable outcomes. And we have highlighted the importance of
multimodal transportation, including interregional rail transit and marine transportation infrastructure
in corridor planning. That concludes my remarks, and I would be happy to take any questions
or comments. Thank you, Bridget. Let's move to public comment. Any public comment? We've
So we've not received any requests from the public to comment on the item.
Thank you. Any comments from the desk.
Hearing none. I'll turn it back over to you.
All right, we are on to tab 21. This is an action item staff recommends that commission adopt the proposed 2025 comprehensive multimodal quarter plan guidelines, as reflected as attachment be in the staff report.
Since the October commission meeting staff has made minor formatting and language changes to the guidelines.
And I would like to acknowledge Destiny Preston from my team for her work and contributions in the guidelines update.
With that, I thank you for your attention and staff recommends your approval of tab 21.
Thank you. And just in case the record needs I'll make sure I say that the hearing was closed on item 20.
and uh is there a let's go to public comment or item 21 actually any public comment we've
not received any request a comment on this item thank you uh any discussion or a motion from the
dice a move approved uh so moved by commissioner eager did i hear a second seconded by commissioner
tiffany all those in favor opposed abstentions motion is approved now we're going to item 22
road charge research study and pilot updates. Frances. Good afternoon slash evening commissioners.
Tab 22 is an informational item. Caltrans road charge program manager Lauren Projota will be
providing an update of the findings from the 2023 California Road Charge Public Private Roads
Project. The 2023 Public Private Roads Project tested the viability of current GPS technology
to differentiate when driving on a public versus private road. This project
also focused upon the perspectives of two distinct populations of the state,
rural and tribal communities. Caltrans partnered with the California
Transportation Corridor agencies to test the functionality of a tolling agency
serving as a third-party commercial account manager in a road charge system.
Lauren will also be providing an update on the Senate Bill 339 Road User
charge a road user charge pilot program. With that I will now turn it over to
Lauren. Thank you. Well good evening. I'm so pleased to be with you here today to
give you an update on the state's research into road use charges.
As Frances said my name is Lauren Pahoda and I head up the state's research effort
as we explore potential replacements for our critical gas tax funding. The state
has done four pilots, what I'm gonna primarily talk to you about today is the
third project that we did that really focused on some of our key communities
that we wanted to draw more information out of, specifically rural communities
and tribal communities. In our first pilot back in 2017 we had difficulty
recruiting from these groups and so part of the recommendations was let's do a
deeper dive to make sure that we understand what the impacts are and what
priorities are from these communities and really make sure that they're at the table.
If you want to go to the next slide.
So that was kind of the main idea behind this pilot.
We've done a lot of research on impacts to rural areas.
But that's different from engagement, right, and really having a discussion about what
this looks like.
So that was one of the key goals of this project.
We also specifically looked at some technology in terms of how to report miles.
In a full road charge program, we expect that there would be many, many different options
on how you would do this.
But in this specific pilot, we really focused in on a very high-tech option with GPS technology
just to understand how that might work, especially in more rural areas, and how that might play
out in a tax collection system.
And then finally, we had the opportunity to partner with one of the state's tolling agencies,
to explore a little bit of the potential crossover between the kind of
back office operations of road charge and tolling and see how that might work.
Next slide please. So we did a lot of efforts to kind of come at
understanding where people's priorities were from as many angles as we could
think of. So we did some surveys, we did focus groups, we met with tribal
tournaments leadership, we had one-on-one interviews with members of the Cal
Trans Native American Advisory Committee. We met with different organizations that are
often frequent in these communities such as Farm Bureau and Cattlemen's Association. Map
here is of all the places that I went over the state to present to Board of Supervisors
and Local Transportation Commission. You have to really try to be present and invite people
into this idea and how they think it might work in their day. Next slide please. So the
results from the pilot as we looked at how to,
could we differentiate between public and private roads
using this GPS technology,
how that played out and how people were using the system
when they're on taxable roads
and when they're on private roads.
And I think one of the things that surprised us,
particularly in the rural cohort of our participants
is actually how few miles
were actually driven on private roads.
Our theory had been, you know, in rural areas,
you probably, if you're on a ranch,
driving on your own personal property rather than the public road. And we wanted to see
how this broke out. And it was actually a lot less than we expected. And this is really
important as we engage this community in a discussion about what their priorities were.
Next slide, please. So the rural areas of the state tend to really value privacy. They
tend to have a priority for paying less than taxes. And when you engage in this kind of
specific reporting that has a lot of data,
has location sharing, those kind of things interact.
And so we wanted to understand what their priorities were
because when you have a more precise
mileage reporting option that includes location sharing,
that means your taxes will likely go down
because you aren't charged
for when you're on private property, right?
So what was the priority there?
And I think what our finding was with the pilot
because those miles on private roads
were so much lower than we thought,
it really wasn't enough for people
to value the tax savings.
And so the privacy priorities really won out in that battle.
So that was an important piece of feedback
that we got from this where rural priorities
might lie in this kind of consideration.
We also really heard from them
that they have a preference that,
okay, we get the funding problem.
We really want to see that solved
because there's a real concern about the state of roads
and rural areas and the funding for it.
But if you have to do it, can you just do it for EVs
and keep the gas tax in place for all the rest of us?
This is an important point to understand
because what our research shows is that on average,
because they tend to drive less fuel efficient vehicles,
rural drivers right now under the gas tax system
are paying more to use the road than their urban counterparts.
So the idea of a road charge would kind of
bring that into balance.
But if you just do it for EVs,
while the EV end comes up, the higher end doesn't come down.
So there's less of an equity benefit.
But again, that was their express priority.
So that was good feedback that we heard from that community.
And the other interesting thing we found from them,
those who participated in the pilot,
by the end of the pilot, were very supportive.
This is really, I think, important and illustrated because these are the communities that are
most distressful of a new idea like road charge and really don't want to engage with it, but
when they do and they live with it, oh, they're fine, you know?
And we've seen this pattern across multiple pilots now through many states.
And so I think what we see in this is should this come to pass, which is still a big question,
you know, nothing has been decided.
But we think once people experience the acceptance over time, we would see that progression.
Next slide please.
So, in terms of tribal community preferences, they really do not like the idea.
And that's really down to a couple key things that affect their community.
First and foremost, of course, is that they are sovereign nations.
And they do not like the idea of the state of California taxing their members.
So that's kind of the key issue, number one.
Other issues that came up during the conversation though,
with this issue of tribally owned gas stations.
There's about 40 odd tribally owned gas stations
in the state, not all tribes have them,
but they are a key revenue source
for those tribes that do have them.
And they do not collect the state gas tax.
So they have about a 60 cent per gallon market advantage
that they feel drive people to them, to their business.
And then of course that's a key revenue stream
for their communities.
So they are one of the few groups that I talked to
that don't like the idea of the gas tax being repealed.
Most people don't believe it would be,
but the tribes actually don't want it to be.
Because again, that is such a critical source for them
of revenue and to meeting their community's needs.
So that was a really important point to bring forward.
Thirdly, just as the federal government
is also exploring this idea of road use charging
and is potentially doing a pilot at the federal level,
this is gonna be a really important point
and point of conversation at the federal level
because most tribal funding for roads
comes from the feds, not from the state.
And that's a really consistent point of concern
the level of funding that they have, how that works with their tribes and
nations interacting with the federal government. So it's really going to be a
very key point of conversation at the federal level as well. Next slide please.
In terms of GPS, it worked very well. We were fortunate especially to leverage
Caltrans-based maps, which are pretty accurate. You need to make sure that
those underlying maps are accurate, otherwise it's not going to work as well.
And, you know, you have to have an ongoing process to keep updating those maps to make
sure that you're charging accurately.
And it just happens every day.
We actually had one of our participants call in and say, look, you charged me wrong for
this one road.
It's a private road, and you charged me, and I shouldn't have been charged.
We dug into it, and we found out, no, it was a public road.
It's just one of the neighbors put a sign up saying it was a private road because they
didn't want anyone driving by their house.
So, you know you're gonna run into issues like that, but as we go through the administrative cost of
Something like location sharing. There's a really large cost around the data processing the storaging things like that
That really ups the admin cost and given
The low levels of interest from the participants the low level of potential mileage
It does raise the question of is a technology at least at this point in time
That the does use GPS is it really worth the cost does it bring?
Benefit to the state does it bring benefit to the taxpayer? That's it was definitely a question coming out of this
Next slide, please
And then finally working with the tolling agency our partners at TCA
With a great experience and we found that we could they could just roll the road use charging into their monthly tolling bill
To some of their existing customers
they worked really well and it was kind of a win-win-win in that overlap that we
hope to keep exploring and how to bring down those administrative costs and
make it very easy for the user. Next slide please. So what's next? You may
recall in 2021 the legislature passed SB 339 which required us to do a fourth
pilot in which we collected actual revenue instead of just simulated
billing and also explored two different potential road use charge rates.
We are in the process of drafting that report right now and we will be presenting it to
the Road Charge Technical Advisory Committee next July as required by the legislation and
then bringing it to the Commission next October is the plan for that pilot report.
Next slide please.
Then I just wanted to give you a brief update on some of the things that are hopping around
the country, one of the most exciting developments just happened a month or so
ago and with the Oregon legislature passed a mandatory road discharge for
EVs. So they have finally made the jump from a voluntary program to doing it so
that's an exciting development in our neighbor to the north. Vermont is also
looking pretty close to jumping to a program. New Zealand has just introduced
legislation to move all of their vehicles to a road use charge program.
They've had one in place for commercial vehicles since the 70s, but now they're
planning to roll everyone into that. And Hawaii launched their road charge
program this July, and that's really the first mandatory program for all vehicles.
They'll be transforming all vehicles from the gas tax to a road charge by 2033.
so we're watching what they're doing closely. Finally in California I think
it's been mentioned a couple of times that Chair Wilson has been having a
number of town halls around the state. I know some of you have been to some and
also some informational hearings in the legislature kind of talking about the
issue starting to educate members so we're seeing that discussion unfolding.
So that is where we are. Next slide please. I have the link here to the full
report if you'd like to read it. So all of our research again is online at
faroadcharge.com if anyone wants ever wants to do a deep dive. It is there for
your enjoyment. So with that happy to take any questions. Thank you so much
for the great presentation. Let's go to public comment first. Yes we do have one
attendee with her hand raised at this time. I'd like to call on Sofia Ravikova. Yes, good
evening commissioners Sofia Ravikova with the Coalition for Clean Air. First of all
wanted to express a brief welcome to Commissioner Brown-Hines for joining the Commission, but mostly
wanted to just express our support in this exploration of implementing an EV first phased-in
road user charge approach, as was shown to be supported also by the rural and tribal communities
who participate in the Caltrans Outreach Study. And starting with a phased-in approach would allow
the state to kind of test the road charge system on EV vehicles, and this reason is why a lot of
other states have adopted such a system with Utah establishing a voluntary road charge program,
Oregon recently approving a mandatory program, and Hawaii even planning to expand their program
to fully to all vehicles in 2023, but planning to has recently started it now. And additionally,
as the vehicle fleet gradually transitions from gas and electric, the road charge will gradually
overtake and eventually will replace the gas tax creating a smooth transition.
While an EV-only approach makes sense from a political and practical perspective,
we want to still ensure that California continues to incentivize the transition to
electric vehicles throughout this process. One way to do so is just to ensure that zero-emission
vehicles are paying less in mileage fees than similar vehicles would be paying under gas taxes.
Additionally, also getting rid of the current arbitrary annual registration fee would provide
further financial incentives to switch to zero emission despite the advent of a road charge fee.
Additionally, since these fees would be collected from electric vehicles, we would like to see them
also spent in a way that's in alignment with the values of those vehicle owners. There was a
survey that found that among folks purchasing electric vehicles, 72% stated they did so in
in support of the environment, and as such those fees should go towards programs aligned
with cap die principles.
Thank you so much.
That concludes all requests to comment on this item.
Thank you so much.
Now it turns the dais to see if any of the colleagues here would like to make a comment
or have a question.
Commissioner Tiffany.
I seem to be very active here this afternoon.
So, you know, I was looking at this, a brief history of California's road charge exploration.
And this has been going on since, what, well over 10 years now.
2013-ish.
Right.
And so there's one study after another study after another study.
I know this is a real political challenge.
Mike wasn't willing to weigh in, maybe you were willing to weigh in.
But there are, you know, we are seeing states, like you said, jump, make the decision.
We already know that there's areas, whether it be New Zealand or certainly a lot of countries
in Europe, are doing in some form or another.
I'm just curious, do you see a lot at the end of the tunnel?
I know that's a hard question to answer.
Instead of just us kicking this can down the road
for another five or 10 years, something,
I mean, the direction of the money
is going the wrong direction.
We see the great need.
It just seems to me something needs to be done.
Well, I think the positive part of the answer
to that question is the state have done a lot
the work to build up to hopefully a successful implementation if the
legislature decides this is the path they want to go. It is not the only path,
there are many things that they can consider and you know they're the ones
who are elected and above my pay grade. So you know what we have endeavored to
do as they've directed us to look at specific things in certain highlights and
also to do other research to help them weigh the potential trade-offs. There
there is no magic wand, right?
There's not gonna be an easy decision.
So I think where we have been successful
is doing the research to answer the questions
that they need to consider.
What is the impact to super commuters?
What is the impact to rural drivers?
In our next report, part of what they directed us to do
was to look at different rate structures,
the different people float, whether it's an EV discount,
whether it's a low income, pretty much every stakeholder
group that I come to has a reason
why they should get a discount, right?
So understanding the pros and cons of each of those,
none of them are bad, none of them are good,
you have to weigh those off.
So I think we are at a place
where we've put together a good body
of things to think about for the legislature.
When they take that up is a question.
And obviously you guys also have,
I think an important role in that,
in your annual report to the legislature
and where your priorities are
and of course your own personal conversations.
But we've seen a lot going on in the shop
and all those things that discussion will need
to take place at some point.
But unfortunately I do not have the magic eight ball answer.
All right, so thank you so much for your presentation.
I don't see any other mics lit up.
We really enjoyed the presentation, the conversation.
So thank you very much.
So we're going to move on to item 23.
Alika.
Alika, we cannot hear you.
No, we cannot hear you now.
We can see her trying to talk.
Is she on?
She is.
I can see her face on here.
Okay, do you want me to do it?
All right.
Commissioners, tab 23 is an action item
presenting the adoption of the amendment
to the Aeronautics Capital Improvement Plan
ranking priority matrix for the acquisition
and development program, or the A&E.
The A&E is a two-year program providing state grants
to airports for planning, construction,
and land acquisition.
Each A&E project program is ranked based
on the scope of work utilizing the priority matrix.
The existing matrix includes three ranking categories,
safety, capacity, and security.
To provide a brief overview of the amendment
to the A&D ranking priority matrix
is a division of aeronautics chief, Tarek Taubshuri,
and I will provide the staff recommendation
at the end of his presentation.
Well, good afternoon commissioners.
The Caltrans division of aeronautics provides grants
to support publicly owned general aviation airports
through three grant programs.
As mentioned, the A&D program is a discretionary program
that supports capital improvement, maintenance, planning and acquisition projects.
The current A&D project selection process is outdated.
It does not adequately address the condition of airport infrastructure and aviation system
needs, nor does it proactively align with the state's transportation priorities.
The Project Prioritization Update provides a comprehensive weighted scoring system that
takes into account airport safety needs, state, local and regional priorities, and
includes a process to account for potential scoring bias.
The new update improves transparency, stakeholder engagement, and planning and forecasting activities.
After the presentation at the October 16th Commission meeting, the division provided
the proposed update to our airport customers.
We did not receive any substantive comments and no changes have been made to the proposed
update.
I would like to thank division staff for their hard work to develop and test this update
and to commission staff who worked patiently and collaboratively with us throughout this
process.
Thank you for your attention.
I'm happy to take any questions you may have.
All right.
Allaria, are you complete?
I was just seeing if there was any questions before I give the recommendation.
you can give the recommendation. Okay. Commissioner staff recommends approval of the amendment to the
aeronautics capital improvement plan ranking priority matrix for the A&D development program.
Ready. Thank you. Any public comment on this item? Would you not receive any request to comment on
this item? All right. I do not see any mics up. Is there a motion for this item? So moved by
Commissioner Eger is there a second seconded by Commissioner Tiffany all
those in favor opposed abstentions motion is approved
information calendar Justin thank you commissioners tabs 24 through 38 are
information items that have been reviewed and found to have no issues
raised by the Commission staff therefore individual items will not be presented
unless specifically requested by a commissioner please make note of the
change list for top 37 if there are no questions that will conclude the
presentation of the information calendar thanks so much any public comment on
this item there's no requested comment on any of these listed items great thank
you so much don't see any mics lit is there a motion for this section oh okay
now we're going to consent calendar Justin
commissioners tabs 39 through 69 are action items on the consent calendar
please make note of the change list for tab 47 staff recommends your approval of
tabs 39 through 69 thanks so much any public comment we never see any request
to comment on any of these items thanks so much no mics will it up is there a
motion motion to approve so moved by Commissioner Brad Shaw is there a second
seconded by Commissioner Eager. All those in favor. Opposed? Abstentions? Motion is
approved. Thank you for your patience today we are adjourned.