Okay, good morning everybody welcome to a meeting of the Metrolink board of directors
They had a really scrounge at the bottom to pull me in here to chair the meeting until our chairman Doug
Chapey gets here, so we're going to try to finish the meeting before he arrives. That's that's the goal here
So we're gonna call the meeting to order to start with the safety briefing Frank. You're gonna provide that
Good morning director Roper
Board members so as a reminder, this is your safety briefing in the event of a fire alarm activation
We're all going to collectively go down stairs out front in front of the Metro customer service
And we will wait for the all clear to go back to the building or wait for further directions
If you meant we have an earthquake
We're all going to drop and cover wait for the shaking to stop do an assessment of whether or not we'll evacuate
And take further direction from that point
If a situation comes up requiring first aid and or CPR
I'm going to be your first aid provider and I'm going to ask Ms. Michelle Pena to contact
Metro Security and the authorities to provide services.
The event of an active attacker, I'm a trusty friend over there with Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department.
It's going to spring into action, but we always say run, hide, fight in those situations.
And that concludes your safety briefing this morning.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
We're going to go to the Pledge of Allegiance.
I'm going to ask our Sky President, Art Brown, to lead us, please.
All right, thank you very much.
Do a roll call, please.
Director Wapner.
I'm here.
Director Dutray.
Director Marquez.
Vice Chair Chaffee.
Director Nguyen.
Director Murphy.
Here.
Second Vice Chair Burksen.
Director Spiegel.
Director Middleton.
Present.
Director Vargas.
Director Trembly.
Here.
Director Chavez.
Here.
Director Barger.
Here.
Director Cacorrian.
Director Najarian, director Solis, director Hughes-Leslie,
director O'Connor, director Allen,
director Presiado, chair McCallin.
We do have a quorum present.
Thank you very much.
brings us to the public comment portion of the meeting.
Are there any members of the public
like to address the board with any written comments?
We did receive a written comment from Brian Yanady
on behalf of rail pack
and his support of some Orange County projects,
so that email will be forwarded to the board
after the meeting.
And that's it?
That's it, thank you very much.
Brings us to the consent calendars,
it's items number 11A to 11S.
Is there any discussions or questions
on the consent calendar?
If not, can we get a motion, please?
Move approval, Murphy.
Motion by Murphy, second by?
Carter.
Carter.
Any opposition or abstentions on that?
None the consent calendar is approved brings us to item number 7a
Adoption of our budget and budget forecasts and Christine's going to present that
For public hearing okay as required by applicable laws and agreements this hearing is called in order to receive public comment on the fiscal year
23 24 budget members of the public have been notified of the public hearing in accordance with all applicable requirements
As of today the proposed budget has been approved individually by all five member agencies
Now, I'm going to turn it over to Christine Wilson
to present the presentation.
Thank you Chairman Wapner and members of the board.
Excuse me.
I'm here presenting the proposed FY24 budget.
Staff recommends that the committee recommend to the board
that the proposed FY24 budget be adopted
and that the four-year forecast be approved.
Next slide, please.
This slide is a proud reminder that MetroLink has served
the people of Southern California for 30 years, over 6 counties with 547 route miles and 66
stations. And of course, MetroLink would not exist without its member agencies. Please
know how well aware we are of our debt to you. You are the fuel without which we would
not run. Be assured that fuel not only includes funding but concern, encouragement, advice,
collaboration. We are grateful for all of them. The budget actually was made
possible by collaboration with our member agencies, their CFOs and staff, and
CEOs. We sincerely thank you for all your help. Next slide please. Assumptions used
in producing the FY 24 budget include the following. For service level, service
at the current level, full co-chair, pending rail-to-rail agreement with
Losan. Arrow service as a separate budget. For revenue, revenue and ridership is based
on the most recent conservative Sperry Capital KPMG forecast. There will be no fare increases.
There will be new fare promotions. As to expenses, contractor increases only as mandated by agreements,
No new FTE headcount and a 5% merit pool, no COLA.
As to reporting, that will be monthly, formal year-end budget review, and Aero Service monthly
budget review.
Next slide.
In a continuing effort to create efficiencies and grow ridership, several studies are in
progress with the results due in spring 2020-2023 to achieve the following.
Optimized crew and train equipment usages intended to optimize service of current station
pairs and identify potential for new stations.
And to create models to review peak versus off-peak and reverse peak service to allow
evaluation of performance to inform ongoing services.
a study in collaboration with Losan to optimize distribution of trains across travel hours,
a study of potential riders, including noncommuters, finally fuel efficiency study funded by a
TERSP grant. Next slide, please.
This slide displays the significant difference between the forecast used for the FY23 budget
as compared to that which we'll be using for the FY24 budget.
Notice we are making every effort to avoid a budgetary shortfall
on revenue in FY24.
Next slide, please.
Details of the proposed FY24 operating budget are,
operating revenue is 52.8 million, which is a decrease
of 13.7 million from FY23, a reflection of our more current
for our more conservative forecast.
Total operating expenses are $303.4 million,
an increase of $7.1 million or 2.4%.
Member agency support is $250.7 million,
which is an increase of $20.9 million or 9.1%.
Next slide, please.
This slide depicts the amount of support requested
from each member agency for the FY 24 operating budget.
Next slide please.
Here we're displaying the top drivers
of our operating expense.
The largest are maintenance away,
train operations, and equipment maintenance.
Next slide.
Now we come to the capital program.
Next slide please.
The request for the state of good repair is 129.8 million,
an increase of 35.4 million or 37%.
The request for new capital is 20.3 million,
an increase of 8.2 million or 67.4%.
I want to point out that these do not include
any amount of our backlog,
which is currently estimated
to be approximately 750 million.
Next slide, please.
This displays the amounts requested from each member agency
for state of good repair and new capital respectively.
Next slide, please.
We, I want to point out that we have decided
that we are deferring the request for working capital.
As we got into the details of what it was going to take
to be absolutely sure that that money was controlled
in a responsible way, we felt that we needed more time
to come up with a procedure that would be completely transparent
and that we would be able to present to the member agencies.
Next slide, please.
Next slide.
Next slide.
Now, this is the budget summary.
Next slide.
This shows both operating and capital support
by member agency.
Next slide.
Now, this shows, and as I said,
we're deferring the working capital request.
So if you look at the subtotal, there shows by member agency the operating support
and the total capital support and how much it is for each member agency.
And it also shows a comparison to what it was last year.
This packet that you've received also includes detailed comparative operating statements
by member, by line, and historical amounts.
You have also received details of the projects proposed
in the FY24 capital program, including cash flow.
That concludes my report.
May I answer any questions?
Thank you.
I'm proud of questions from the board.
Are there any members of the public who want
to address the board on the budget?
Any written comments on the budget?
Mr. Chair, and I do have one comment to follow
up on Ms. Wilson, if I could.
I believe yesterday the last
of the five member agencies approved budgets
that are consistent with the adoption of our budget.
So all five agencies have adopted those budgets
that are consistent with this.
So Mr. Mueller, thank you.
Thank you.
Going back, any written comments?
We've not received any written public comment on this item.
Then I'll close the public hearing.
I will go to questions and comments
by board members.
Karen?
I'm right.
I'm on the right side.
Bob, go to the left for change.
Go ahead, Karen.
I will defer to the honorable woman from Riverside.
Go ahead.
She's from Riverside County.
And yes, thank you.
All of our agencies have approved this budget.
But I think we have to really be serious about looking
beyond this budget because it wasn't with ease
that the budgets were passed, at least our county.
A lot of concern that next year we may not
be able to supplement as much.
And I'm sure my colleagues from other counties
are going to have some of the same problem.
In the meantime, with the ridership down
and all the other issues that are going on,
I think this next few months, next year,
we need to take a deep dive and really look at things
in a very serious deep dive on how we can make improvements,
where we're going, because we can't wait
until next year budget time and suddenly everybody's saying,
no, because what if?
What if our agencies weren't going to?
What does that make for MetroLink?
I think that's what you really have to look.
And when you look at the on-time performance,
and that's not getting better,
and we have to work towards making our passengers,
because ridership is what's holding us back.
And other things, but if the passengers aren't feeling
confident, comfortable, safe,
feel that they're getting to work on time, school on time,
that's part of the challenge of getting our ridership up.
So I think we need to be very careful
as we pass this, since all of our agencies have,
but to say now's the time to be very serious,
take a deep dive, look at all these issues
so that we really can get better.
I know we'd say we're going doing stuff,
but next year it's not gonna be
as easy to pass this budget.
If I could, Mr. Chair, real quickly,
just to hit on a couple of points.
As Ms. Wilson went through the presentation,
we did identify three areas of study
that we're literally in the middle of right now
in anticipation of how we might execute in the fall
and certainly give us our opportunity to do that
in anticipation of the next fiscal year budget.
The second item is that as we develop this budget,
we've actually provided to all the member agencies
the anticipation of the budget
for the next four years beyond that.
So we are trying to get ahead of this
so that member agencies know what that is.
But your point is well taken.
We've said this, we can't keep doing business
the same old way, and we know that.
And so we have our work cut out for us in that regard,
but it's not like we've not looked at that,
and I hope that by, certainly by fall,
and in fact, at our board meeting in July,
you will receive a presentation from Hennig Eichler
regarding the passenger study,
the future passenger study,
trying to identify those next markets.
So we're on it, but you know, we have to show what we can do to deliver.
Thank you.
First of all, thank you, Christine Arnold and Darrell.
I know this has been, you know, challenging to navigate and put together this budget.
And I also want to acknowledge our Metro staff who I know have collaborated with you for LA County.
I agree with Director Spiegel as it relates to PrEP.
I think that if you know that you've got possibly a cliff,
you want to prepare on how we're going to address that.
But something you just said, and I'm just curious
about this working capital that you're deferring,
is that something we have, it's been in our budget
in years past?
No, no.
So explain to me what exactly the working capital,
can you kind of explain to me that?
And then what controls are not in place
or that you see need to be put into place?
Okay, the current situation is that the funds for operating, the cash, because cash is fungible,
right, they have been, the funds for operating and capital have always been co-mingled.
That's always been the way it's been at Metrolink.
What happens with the capital, except, with the exception of Metro,
Almost all the money we get to support the work that we do
for capital projects is provided by grants.
And those are only paid on a reimbursement basis, right?
That means MetroLink, you know, doesn't have funding from,
you know, tax measures or we only have our funding
that you give us quarterly to fund the operating expenses
that are current quarterly, we don't have any money really
to support these outlays of funds to do the capital projects.
So what happens is now for a while things were behind
as far as paying things but we really have gotten better
and better about paying things on time,
making sure we know what's going on
because we feel a great responsibility to know where we're
at as far as how much money we owe and whether or not we're in line with budget.
And so what's happened is that Squeeze is becoming more and more in the cash because
we don't have the float anymore to support being able to pre-fund all that capital activity.
You know, it's huge.
Yeah.
No, I understand.
Thank you for that.
I will say to add to follow up on what you said, Director Spiegel, and I know that we
had a presentation, I think we did, I get confused, about looking at how we're going
to structure our lines based on the change in how people are coming to work, school,
etc.
I think that the sooner we look at that in terms of, because I even know downtown, I
was with a group last night, they were talking about how they come in twice a week now and
And then they telework the other three days.
And I don't think that's the exception, I think that's becoming the rule.
And I think it would be important for us to maybe survey some of the big, if we haven't already, we may have firms
in different areas where we have high ridership and find out what their employees needs are so
that we can maybe readjust how we are providing service, just a suggestion.
And we may have already done it.
Thank you for comments, I apologize for being late, I am an example while we should ride
the rails as they're trying the freeways.
Are there any further comments or questions from the board members?
And moved, is there a second?
Moved and seconded.
Any further comments?
May I have a, do roll call this time or not?
Okay.
Any objections?
The motion carries unanimously.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're now on our agenda 7b item and this will be presented by Elizabeth Lunn, Assistant Director of Design.
Thank you.
Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members of the Board. I'm also here joined by Justin Fernelly,
Chief of Program Delivery and Bichoy Pesteros, Senior Contract and Compliance Administrator.
Next slide.
I'll begin with a timeline of the recent events.
On April 18, 2023, OCTA was notified by the city of San Clemente of Earth Movement.
There was evidence of cracking and separation at the back terrace of the Casa Romantica
property.
On April 27, an abrupt slope failure occurred, and passenger rail services were suspended.
The city mobilized and performed grading work to stabilize the slope, and thereafter, on
May 27th, Metrolink was able to resume passenger rail services upon grading work completion.
On June 5th, a second major slope failure occurred.
This was worse than the first failure, and again, passenger rail services were suspended.
The authority moved swiftly to come up with a solution that would safely allow passage
of trains, and on June 14th, the authority's CEO authorized an emergency procurement for
temporary barrier wall. Quickly in record time on June 22nd we awarded a
design build contract and issued the notice to proceed. The project is
estimated to be complete between mid to late July but that is subject to change.
We will have a more better understanding of the project completion in the next
few days as we work out details on site access and preparation requirements in
in this very constrained work site.
There's also unknowns that may be encountered
due to drilling as well as the nature
of design build projects.
But we are continuing to seek opportunities
to expedite the schedule moving quickly
on this emergency work,
keeping in mind the safety of the public
and the railroad workers.
Next slide.
In terms of the vicinity of the landslide
on the bottom left corner,
Milepost 204.6 is the landslide
that we're discussing today.
This is at the Casa Romantica site
next to the San Clemente Pier.
The previous landslide that we came
to the board in January to present,
that's two miles south of this current location
at Milepost 206.8.
On the top left is a photo of the landslide vicinity
that was taken shortly after the first landslide
on May 3rd, where you can see some displacement
where there's bare soil.
And then on June 5th, the second landslide,
there's the footprint of the landslide.
Next slide.
This is another comparison of the first landslide
and second landslide.
The cracking and sliding of the Casa Romantica Terrace
above the railroad tracks.
That back wall has displaced up to 40 feet.
And then on the bottom right corner, additional movement.
Next slide.
And this is another vantage point of the landslide,
looking into it, May 3rd and June 5th.
So you can see how much of that has displaced
and it actually had debris also falling
onto the tracks at the bottom.
Next slide.
The landslide footprint is about in half acre.
It's located within the city's right-of-way
and the debris which we've outlined
has fallen within the railroad right-of-way.
That's highlighted in the yellow shading.
The barrier wall that we're proposing
is shown in the yellow line.
That has yet to be designed,
but we are estimating that the dimensions
will be approximately 250 to 300 feet long
and about 12 to 15 feet above the ground.
This wall is a temporary structure
until the city completes their long-term solution
for stabilizing the slope,
which is projected for completion in a year.
Next slide.
In terms of the procurement process, in the event
of an emergency, the CEO is authorized
to initiate procurements and enter into contracts
to perform emergency work.
Board ratification would follow as soon as practical.
So on June 14th, the CEO authorized
an emergency procurement.
The authority released a request for proposal
to Conde Johnson and Flat Iron, a panel made up
of Metrolink, OCTA, and our geotechnical experts
evaluated the proposals, and selected
Condon-Johnson and Associates, Inc.,
who are well experienced in working with active landslides
and can accomplish the scope of work for the best value.
The engineer's estimate for the temporary wall construction
was $2.5 million.
Condon-Johnson's construction amount was $1.7 million.
Flatiron West was $4 million.
Next slide.
In regards to funding, last Friday, June 16th,
the state declared a transportation emergency
for the landslide location.
This was followed by a CTC emergency allocation
of three million on June 20th.
OCTA has also committed to funding the costs
not covered by the state's funding,
and staff are working with OCTA
to execute a funding agreement.
Next slide.
With that said, it is recommended that the board
ratify construction contract number C31-5523
with Condon-Johnson and Associates
in an amount of approximately 1.7 million
with a 35% contingency to cover unknown risk
that may arise in an expedited
emergency design build project,
resulting in a total not to exceed amount
of approximately 2.3 million
for the design and construction
of the temporary barrier wall.
That concludes my report.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
Any questions from board members?
Do we have any public comments?
Oh, I'm sorry, yes, lady with the light.
Director Spiegel, please go ahead.
And I'm glad to see the shared responsibility.
I'm just curious on that.
You call it something else, but is that a home
that's right above where that area happened?
That's a romantica?
It's a historic building that is owned by the city.
I think it's a garden and cultural center.
Is that now still open or are they having to shut that down
because of it?
They had to shut it down.
I think there are limited areas that are being utilized.
But I don't know how this all works geologically,
but are they having to do some?
What's the city?
Yes.
It's the whole plan now.
They do have a long-term solution
to stabilize that slope.
The city is leading that effort.
It may require something similar to what we've done
at Cypress Shores, where there was a tie-back system
to hold back the slope.
It makes it a little easier with it's not a private individual. So if the cities
Okay, thank you
There's our call it's used by the public for gatherings including weddings and that sort of thing that is now
Not able to be done
There no further question. I'm sorry. Go ahead engineers estimates 2.4 million dollars
The contract bid this amount is 1.6. So there's $800,000 difference
I'm assuming staff has fully analyzed the the contract and
Justify the cost and we won't have any
Change orders or any unusual change orders?
We'll probably have changed orders
Because of $800,000 gap there, right? Yes, we did analyze it thoroughly
There are also some functions that will be supported by Herzog with which is our maintenance contractor. So that also
Contributes to why their cost is slightly lower
But overall they've got you know, I guess secured beams and whatnot and the cost analysis seems accurate
Thank you for that comment I
See no further comments. May I have a motion to ratify the action of the
executive chief you guys officers
untracked
Very second wooden seconded any objection
Motion carries unanimously. Thank you
Now our next action item is a renewal of our insurance program
Delighted by Bill Garrett our senior council with risk marriage went mr. Chair is as mr. Garrett approaches the podium
I want to share with the board that this is bill has been our risk manager
for 12 years now round numbers
And today is the last time he will be presenting to you his discussion on providing insurance
to the authority.
Bill is retiring from Metrolink by I think his last day is technically today or it's
next Friday.
Is it today?
It's today.
So, you know, if you're going to beat up on Bill, today is the day to do it.
And, joking aside, you know, in my time here I've had a chance to work closely with Bill.
Talk a lot about insurance.
Ensuring a passenger railroad in the United States is no easy task.
And we operate in a very, very different environment.
And Bill has educated me on what it takes to make all this happen and build the tower
that we have to build to protect ourselves.
So I just want to say thanks to Bill for your time here
at Metrolink and appreciate again the education you've given me
and also the friendship.
And with that, Mr. Chair, I will turn it over to Mr. Garrett
to present the item.
Thank you, Bill.
Thank you, Darren.
And thank you.
I want to wish everyone a good morning, obviously.
vice chair and all the directors and it's been my absolute pleasure to serve the agency
as risk manager for these many years.
So jumping straight into it, next slide please.
So the authority requires insurance to mitigate its operating and other risks
and of course board approval is necessary to renew the insurance policies that we carry
on a fiscal year basis so they extend from July to next slide.
The first component of the significant component of the authorities insurance program is the
operating liability program or the tower as we refer to it and this covers our potential
liability to third parties in the event of some sort of catastrophic event.
We have once again been able to construct a liability tower to an aggregate level of
coverage of $347.5 million, which is in round numbers $25 million in excess of the federal
passenger liability cap.
This is comparable to the levels of insurance that we've been carrying for the last couple
of years when the federal liability cap was raised.
The liability tower renewal was not without its challenges this year.
continue to face insurance industry-wide pressures regarding recent loss history, both the number
and the magnitude of those losses, wildfire, named storms, a number of different factors
kind of come into play as well as the increasing costs of litigation and jury
verdicts that outpace inflation in most corners of the states. So this is just again some of the factors that have kind of
Beared upon the the the insurance market and put pressure on our renewal. Next
slide. Notwithstanding the foregoing, we have been able to renew the liability
tower at a premium level that is effectively flat from last year. That is
largely as the result of the reduced passenger loads on the trains, which
obviously reduces the potential exposure in the event of some sort of
the past catastrophic event involving train operations.
We've also renewed our terrorism liability coverage
at a pretty modest increase of 5%.
The EPL also was a small decrease this year,
which is really noteworthy given the fact that we are
in California and frankly is a testament to our
particularly inspirational loss history over the last several years.
This was a very challenging placement in the first years that I arrived on at the agency,
but because of the reduced loss history, the premiums have really taken that into account
and outlined relative to market trends generally.
also renewed the pollution legal liability with a small increase. So our
total for liability coverage is $9,096,296. Again, no
substantial increase. That experience, next slide, is to be contrasted with the
property program coverage. Unfortunately, the renewal of the property program has
proven very challenging this year. It is a result of kind of a combination of
factors. First, obviously, is the same insurance industry pressures that I
discussed previously, but also the more recent loss history that the authority
has, primarily due to the Cypress Shores Earth Movement claims which continue to
to be outstanding, and the imminent settlement
of the property portion of the Oxnard incident from 2015.
So those are unfortunately both kind of front of mind
and combined with the pressures in the industry generally.
It's been very difficult to extract premiums,
or excuse me, extract quotations from carriers.
We've been working for literally months trying to do so,
And to this date, we still do not have binding commitments
for major portions of the property.
That's why I currently seek a not to exceed allocation
to finalize the property tower,
so $6.7 million not to exceed number,
which in consultation with our brokers,
they indicate that they have a very high degree
they have a high degree of confidence that will be able to complete the tower within
that budgetary allocation.
The other portions of the property coverage have renewed relatively uneventfully, the
terrorism standalone property program, 80,549 up 14% year over year, and the boiler and
machinery coverage, a premium of $8,260, which I believe is just a very modest increase relative to last year.
So total for the property program, including the Not to Exceed allocation of $6.7 million, would be $6.860,809.
Next slide.
And there are a few ancillary coverages.
The Fleet Automotive Program was quoted at 384.804,
approximately 10% overexpiring,
continuing with Liberty Mutual.
And the Workers Comp quoted at 513.749,
basically flat year over year.
Both of those quotations are based on current fleet
or employee base numbers,
and they're adjusted after the year-end
based on an audit of actual.
And we also have the public officials' E&O coverage,
a premium of 61.014, crime coverage,
a premium of 9,583, and security and privacy,
a premium of 36.830.
That is up somewhat significantly on a percentage basis,
but is frankly reflective of trend in the industry
and loss history particularly as it relates
to ransomware attacks and those sorts of things
as well as theft of personally identifiable information.
So the 20% frankly is much less
than most insurers have experienced.
So the total of our miscellaneous insurance coverage
is another $1 million, $5,900.
So my recommendation, as kind of discussed,
is to renew the liability-related coverages
for $9,096,296,
authorize the CEO to renew the property coverages
at a total not-to-exceed cost of $6.860,809,
and then the balance of the miscellaneous coverages
at prices indicated above.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
Any questions from board members?
Yes, Director Spiegel.
Yep, just a quick question.
Back after the chance worse incident,
I know that our federal liability was increased.
How long, is that gonna be permanent?
And what they're saying we need to have coverage for?
So, my understanding is that the federal liability,
the statute that implemented the federal liability cap actually had an explicit indexing based
on CPI, so it adjusts, I believe it's every five years, but it could be three.
I couldn't swear to it, I could get that to you.
But in the statute, it specifically says that it increases on a periodic basis and the FRA does that computation and publishes it.
So the investment that we did in some of those like positive train control and some of the other things we've done does not help.
It's going to continue to have this increasing federal limit.
So it does not help with reducing the liability cap, it does help with respect
to moderating insurance premiums because certainly the carriers take into account the reduced
likelihood of train on train collisions.
But as Oxnard demonstrates, PTC doesn't prevent everything,
I wrote some pretty substantial checks.
A question on the security and privacy.
That also includes our cybersecurity.
What's the limits on that policy?
So I will confess I am not a expert
on some of the minutia on that.
It is a complicated policy.
My understanding is that it covers a fixed notification
of a fixed number of persons who might be impacted
by a data breach.
I believe that number is a million impacted parties.
There are also first party damages coverage.
So if Metrolink were to be struck
by some sort of malware or something like that.
I believe our first party coverage is a million dollars.
So it's not a huge amount of cover,
but it's also not, as I understand it,
a huge risk for us because we don't have
a deep repository of personally identifiable information.
We don't store credit card information,
So we're really talking about names and addresses,
we're talking about social security numbers for employees.
It's kind of more peripheral to our risk profile.
I agree on that, but we're also seeing an uptick
in the number of ransomware attacks
that are trying to target operations
and to close down operations.
And this gives me some pause as to whether or not
We have adequate coverage there.
Thank you, Dr. Spiegel.
With your departing our agency,
when all this gets done,
I'm sure you have your second in command
that's gonna take care of making sure it all happens.
Do you?
Bill is also the second,
he's the first in command and the second in command.
So you will be taking care of this?
Yes, ma'am, along with our general counsel, yes.
And you and both Mr. Del Rio and you will know,
I am real fanatic on this insurance now,
to make sure that every policy has been renewed
and check it off that list
that you just put the recommendations.
Those of you who don't know, we went for quite a while
without catching that we didn't have
our public officials insurance for a while.
And I just wanna make sure we check off the list
to make sure each policy has been in fact renewed
and we have it in hand.
So I'm just putting it out there that we need a checklist to make sure that it's all been completed and
We are supported by our brokers marsh who do do a good job of making sure that those boxes
You know in accordance with with past practice
Mr. Kettle any further comments. I know mr. Chair
Looking for lights or hands. I see none may have a motion, please
All that they asked the questions I'll let them first and second
Nope, I was gonna move it in which they're seconded and she beat me to it all right
any objection any abstention
Seeing and hearing no motion carries unanimously. Thank you for your service. It's been
Appreciated a lot and this is complicated stuff
Now we have a item regarding station and connectivity enhancement so receive and file Adam
But I don't present it by David Wang, our planning manager.
Good morning, Chairman and member of the board.
I'll be presenting the station connectivity enhancement plan.
Next slide, please.
So this project is Metrolinx Network Integration Study,
funded by the Caltrans 2018 TI CP plan grant.
The study, we're looking at the connectivity,
that barrier to our customer from getting
to and from our stations and the developer strategy
to address this issue.
Mama Donalds and the IBA Group
are the lead consultants for this project.
Next slide, please.
So we have conducted customer surveys
and the market analysis in the area around the stations.
The studies divide into three major sections.
First, the station's condition assessment.
We identified the need and it was completed
for all 63 corn or metrolink stations,
excluding the arrow station because they're already new.
Second, station typologies.
We identify the characteristics of the stations.
Is the station an origin station, such as San Francisco,
where a lot more residential area,
or destination type, such as Tustin or Irvine,
where a lot of major business is,
and people go there for work.
And this analysis will provide a framework
for improvement and recommendations
and the projects, pilot projects type.
Third, the connectivity toolkit address the need
of specific treatment.
So the toolkit is designed for use by a station owner
and it's included as a standalone detailed description
to the main report.
There's a variety of a project that could be implemented
as a part of the toolkit framework,
from safety improvement to way findings,
multimodal integrations,
mobilities, and climate applications.
With the toolkit developed, we're looking at selecting the pilot project station to demonstrate the functions of the toolkit and how it can help improve the station access.
A Go dancing developer lets the station showcase their unique characteristics and how the toolkit can help improve their connectivity.
There are three elements in the selection of the stations.
The first key element is geographic distribution.
This includes at least one station in each county to address AV county's unique challenge
and make sure pilot projects are implemented throughout our network.
Second, the following element is the equities.
All select stations are close to the disadvantaged communities, as these communities are typically
more transit-reliant and will experience a greater impact from transportation projects.
Third, the station typologies.
The consultant assess each station looking for surrounding communities and the land use,
travel patterns to and around the stations, area to the station access, and the multi-model
connectivities.
We initially selected about 14 stations that can demonstrate the toolkit implementations.
We consult with our member agencies planning teams for their input as they have an in-depth
knowledge of the challenge each station seat is facing. We let know down the list
to seven stations. Less incursation based on specific characteristics. For
examples we consider station with a high concentration of all the adults or youth
as these two age group are typically more transit-reliance and benefit from
the 2K implementations. We also consider station with a high climate
and vulnerabilities such as extreme heat,
that can use a better shape for our rider
while they're waiting for our train.
Next slide, please.
So here are some examples of the toolkit.
We have way-finding improvement with the motor language
that can help provide clear direction for our riders,
climate change adaptations
that provide a better shape for our riders,
or the first and last mile improvement
that provide better crosswalk layout for our stations.
Next slide please.
So here are the seven candidate stations
for the pilot projects.
Just keep in mind that this pilot project's goal
is to demonstrate a toolkit
to help improve the connectivities.
The stations show here are candidate.
They are by no means more important
so we'll have more issues than other stations.
We designed a toolkit to use in any station in our network.
We have shared our draft report of the toolkit
with the seven stations in the last
and to support their efforts in transit improvement.
The recommendation is based on our findings,
and the individual city know the area better than we do,
and the city can definitely modify our recommendations
and or select other toolkits for the future projects.
Quick examples of the projects,
downtown Burbank Station is a nice station
with the busy commercials and residential area
and the transfer type of stations.
We feel like a Burbank Station
a strong candidate for bicycle-focused pilot projects because the area has a bicycle amenity
incorporated, and the city of Burbank in 2035, a complete street plant, identified additional
improvement that could be implemented in the future. We propose adding up bike repair stations,
bike lockers, bike storage, e-bike charging stations, and wayfinding signs on the bike
The bicycle improvements pilots will focus on leverage the existing and the planned infrastructures
and maximize the metronome support and the benefit from the related items.
Next slide please.
So our pilot project concept will develop for all seven stations and they include descriptions
of existing conditions, barriers, and the need.
Conceptual site plans and descriptions that support the development of the concept at
each station.
preliminary scope of work, high level costs and the schedule estimate, and identifying
key partners that could be involved in the implementations.
These are designed as examples that other station owners can use to identify and address
station connectivity needs.
Next slide, please.
So in conclusion, Metrolink will continue to team up with our partner agencies, station
owners, local jurisdictions, riders and the communities that we serve to pursuing the
the funding to improve the regional rail service and our usefulness to the residents and the
visitors throughout the regions.
The pilot project included in this report presents the intent to show how improvement
can begin at each station and can be further refined in cooperation with the station owners
for improvement.
Let's conclude my report.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
Any questions from board members?
Yes.
Director Spiegel.
Okay, smile. Yes, I'm asking another question
You keep mentioning station owners. I know that Riverside County we own all of our stations. I don't know who owns what stations
but
when you're talking about some of the funding opportunities are we going to look at any of those grants as
The entire organization or is each
When you said owner, that means RCTC would have to do our own grants and implement all
these suggested in the framework, or is it going to be across the seven projects or seven
pilot projects and then take it into the entire network or how are we looking at doing that?
So these toolkits intend to address individual stations their own unique need.
and as you know, the maintenance on the stations
will be ideal for us to team up with station owners
so we can pursue the funding of course.
The more agency team up to get it,
the better chance we have.
And especially, I know that some of the first
and last mile connectivity studies
that I attended with the different cities,
they do have idea how they want to improve
the connection to the stations.
This study will help get quite a bit of work for them already,
so they can allocate their resources
on additional improvement.
And of course, two agencies can help to get us,
give us a bit of art on getting the money.
All right, thank you.
Yes, please, go ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And I think connectivity between modes of travel and, of course,
the elephant in the room that we've never really addresses
interoperability affairs. The technology is there. I don't quite understand why we
have them come together. Darren, do the transit operators meet on a regular
basis? Various counties handle things differently. I know the LA County Metro
group meets regularly with the multiple municipal transit operators in Los
Angeles, and I would only just remind the board that with a Metrolink ticket you
can ride any transit service, virtually any transit service in the region, so
using our ticket you can do that. But that's been the extent of connectivity
as it relates to direct access to the transit agencies. I think it's time that
the boards that we serve on come together and direct staff to really
come back with some options. I think if everybody travels and you see this
occurs everywhere you go that you can go from one mode to another without a
problem whether it's a smart card whatever it may be. And I'm not sure who
who leads it, maybe SCAG leads it since they cover
the whole region, I don't really care who,
but I think that we need to step up
and make sure that we move in that direction
because we're just really far behind the time.
And like I said, the technology's there,
so perhaps that can come back to a future agenda items.
We can have a more thorough discussion
and maybe you start discussing it with your colleagues
and some of the members you see so well.
Thank you.
Bring that back to them, yes.
Thank you Director Wapner.
Director Perciado?
Yes, thank you, Chair.
thank you very much for the presentation.
If I could maybe make a suggestion on the toolkits,
I would also take an opportunity to look at storm water capture opportunities.
I know that there's a lot of funding for that.
I saw your bull bouts. One thing that we're pushing at our local city in Pomona
is when they create a bull bout that they have a storm water capture feature on them,
and primarily it's because it's less expensive than putting in a whole water
that will lead to the ocean anyways.
Not to mention that like, Director Allen and I,
yesterday we were at Foothill Transit,
and at the bus stops, they've got these honeycomb
type shade structures that will actually lead
to underground water storage and be able to use that again.
And I know that there's different measures of funding.
I measured W, Prop C, and different things.
I think it would be a great enhancement,
especially to the locations as well.
whether director comments or questions.
Yes, please go ahead, Director O'Connor.
Right, and to build on that,
looking towards the agency's sustainability plan.
You know, what are the aspects and elements
of the sustainability plan that can be built
into these station enhancements
so that we have the best, most sustainable stations.
And one other thing I wanted to mention,
I'm a fairly experienced user of transit,
but I have the most problem with wayfinding
at MetroLink stations.
So, I think we really need to ramp that up, especially like, well, okay,
which track is the train on, you know, and if it's a split station, that's a little bit like,
okay, it's 50-50 if I can't find the information.
So, I think, you know, that might be something we can do a little bit more immediately.
Again, new customers, if they're befuddled, and as I said, I've been befuddled,
and I'm pretty sophisticated transit user.
I can see where some people would be a little, you know,
less likely to want to return.
Director O'Connor, so just real quickly, just wait till you see our presentation regarding our
future riders study that we have underway that we presented next month, because those are some
of the things we hear from people that have not ridden the train is a, how do we use it,
how do we, the whole notion of way finding.
And just as a very quick history from my own personal experience,
I've shared with this board I was part of the creation
of the downtown Rialto Metrolinx Station in the early 90s.
And at the time when we were building those stations,
the funding agency was then Sandbag, now SBCTA.
And they said, we will pay for four directional signs
for you to get to your station.
That was it.
And so we had those kind of, so in a lot of cases,
there were limitations, not because of the local jurisdiction
or because of Metrolink, it was because, again,
working with our partners, we had limits on how much.
And I always say, well, signage is cheap.
We should be able to do more of it.
And anyway, that'll be something that we talk about
as we try to identify those new riders.
But you're spot on on that comment.
Thank you for Director comments.
That's an important item.
We would like it for the report.
Thank you for your presentation.
Chair, if I may, we did receive a written public comment
on this item.
I'm sorry?
we received a written public comment.
We do have one.
Please go ahead.
OK.
This is from Marvin E. Norman.
He said, overall, it is good to see
that Metrolinx recognizing the importance of improving
connectivity to stations and seeking
to make investments in that realm.
One small point to emphasize is that the 10 to 15 minute
half mile walk shed of a station really leans heavily
on the time side of that over the distance.
Thus, when people are able to make trips to and from
Station which have minimal impediments such as traffic signals and long distances between crosswalks
They might conceivably be willing to travel even beyond half a mile in contrast having to wait for a two minute
Cycle to run its course every block or two really limits the distance
Particularly since people perceive waiting time to pass more slowly than it actually does on a related note
It is good to see that a bike shed radius is recognized as being up to three miles
And although this specific project appears to be focused on a half-mile radius and there undoubtedly is no shortage of need in that area
investments into the bike network improvements which lead to stations from within that larger catchment area also should be considered in
Particular the point about at least identifying and preserving rights of way as development occurs
Bicycles are an ideal complement to Metrolink across much of the service region and the right
to help make stations part of the focal point of a given bike network including integrating station underpasses to be usable as
Connections between the bike network such as is common in the Netherlands sincerely Marvin E. Norman
Thank you for that
All right. This is
Not an action item. We now go to our June legislative update
presented by Alex Davis
our senior manager of government relations
Thank You chair and directors next slide, please
Metrolink conducted a public meeting on Wednesday, June 21st to discuss our low-income fair discount program
We have received 19 comments so far on the discount program and comments can be submitted through mid-july
There's also a survey available online to comment on the fair reduction program
And all comments received will be made available to the board to receive and consider at its July 28th public hearing
In Sacramento, the legislature considered and approved its two-party budget agreement
last week between the Senate and the Assembly.
The $311.7 billion budget is the next step towards a three-party negotiation between
the Senate, Assembly, and the Governor on how to address an estimated $31.5 billion
budget gap.
Of note and important to public transit, the legislature has restored the full $4 billion
transit and intercity rail capital program funding, which will be made available by formula
with 100% available for transit operating assistance. In addition, the legislature also
created a new 1.1 billion zero emission transit vehicle formula program for multimodal investments,
which include rail. This program will also be available 100% at local discretion for
transit operations. The legislature also restored 200 million for the active transportation
program and included the administration's proposal to delay 350 million for grade separation
projects from 2023-24 to 2025-26.
The Governor has also released 10 infrastructure policy proposals for the legislature to consider
during the budget trailer bill process.
I would like to highlight a few of those important in relating to transportation.
The first is the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA Administrative Records
review which allows a public agency to prepare and record limits to extensions of the statutory
timelines to compile records. Second, CEQA judicial streamlining which limits CEQA litigation
for covered projects to no more than 270 days. Third is National Environmental Protection
Act or NEPA delegation authority which removes the existing 2025 sunset for the California
state transportation agency NEPA delegation that covered rail
transportation and multimodal projects. And fourth, job order contracting and
authorizing Caltrans to use JOC for broad range of projects. We expect that
the legislature will make progress over the weekend in releasing budget junior
the budget junior bill as well as related trailer bills. The information
that will be released this weekend will likely include the accountability
metrics for how local operators can access new TIRCP funding for transit operations.
We expect to see an agreement as well on the Governor's infrastructure package,
which the administration continues to seek action on before the summer recess.
We will keep the Board apprised as final action is considered in the following week.
The Senate and the Assembly Budget Committees are already scheduled to meet on Monday.
Additionally, I'd like to note that we are aware of a lawsuit being filed by the Association
of American Railroads and the American Shortline and Regional Railroad Association
against the California Air Resources Board, or CARB, proposed in use locomotive regulation.
We will continue to gather information from the filing and keep the board apprised.
Next slide, please.
In Washington, D.C., we are continuing to follow and monitor the Federal Rail Safety Bill,
As noted in the report, the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee marked
up their version of the bill on May 10th.
The House has still not set a date for consideration of their bill.
The National Transportation Safety Board, or NTSB, is meeting this week in Ohio to discuss
the derailment.
We are coordinating through the Commuter Rail Coalition to ensure that commuter rail operations
are not negatively impacted or subject to unfunded mandates.
Since the report was prepared, Congress and the administration did reach an agreement
on how to address the federal debt limit.
The agreement includes a two-year suspension of the debt limit and limits non-defense discretionary
spending for FY24 and limits discretionary spending to 1% growth in 2025.
would be kept flat at $637 billion,
defense at $886 billion, or a 3.5% increase.
This action tees up consideration for Congress
of the 12 FY24 appropriations bills.
Of note, the House is pushing for lower FY24 funding
below the debt limit agreement.
The House-approved transportation housing
and urban development, or T-HED bill,
included $65.2 billion or 25% less than the $87.3 billion approved in FY23, the Senate
yesterday approved its sub-allocations, including $88 billion for the Transportation Housing
and Urban Development Bill.
Both chambers will now work towards an agreement before the fiscal year ends on September 30th.
If these 12 appropriation bills are not passed by January, there will be an across the board
1% reduction across all of the appropriations bills. Staff will continue to monitor and
advocate for the board approved priorities through the appropriations process. And I'd
like to close with just noting that CEO Darren Kettle did join Mobility 21 this week for
their delegation trip with the Mobility 21 board and advisory board. We appreciate Darren's
leadership and voice in D.C. with our regional partners as they met with members of Congress
and key transportation officials.
And that concludes my update.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Director Spiegel.
I had not heard about that Air Resources Board suit.
Can you explain just briefly on that?
The suit is being brought by the Association
of American Braille Roads, or AAR,
and the American Shortline and Regional Rail Association.
As part of the suit, both agencies have filed
to preliminary enjoying implementation
and enforcement of the rule
while the district court considers the case.
So we're continuing to gather more information.
The notice of the suit was just released this week.
And once we have more information,
we'll be able to price the board of any potential impacts.
You don't know what the impetus of the suit was?
If I can, I'll go ahead and take it, Alex.
It all boils down to the fact that the freight railroads
don't like what ARB has done with the in-use local
motive rule requiring the change to the adoption of zero emission. So while we
worked very hard to be good partners with the state and try to come up with
alternatives in a commitment long term to try to get there, we also have that
ability to use the alternative compliance plan which allows us more
time. The freight railroads have just said this is not doable. There's a
variety of reasons. One is interstate commerce and how locomotives are used
throughout the country so that's that's it in a nutshell but it really is the
fact that they don't that they the the turnover those locomotives is just not
realistic from their perspective it to meet the CARB requirements any other
comments or questions I don't work any public comments we've not received any
public comment on this item thank you received file item we now go on to what
we all are waiting for, the chief executive offers report.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First off, before we go to the next slide,
just a really hearty congratulations to our partners,
our member agency LA Metro for the opening
of the regional connector last week.
Number of board members were there, I was there,
and I used it to go from the office at Seventh and Fig
to over here to Union Station that afternoon.
So it really is a game changer.
I'm looking forward to seeing how it works
throughout Southern California.
But congratulations to Metro on that
just small $1.6 billion project.
So congrats to Metro on that.
Next slide.
Some other news to share.
This gentleman in the pictures,
our Deputy Chief Operating Officer Luis Carascharo.
we were fortunate to receive a rail safety certificate
of merit award for the program that Luis really championed,
which is the Shake Alert program that joined with PTC
in the event of a, depending on the size of the earthquake,
has various factors about how it communicates
with our locomotives and our engineers
in the event of an earthquake that can actually get
to the point where it stops the locomotive.
So it was a first of its kind technology.
And it's one of those things where we'd all talk
about the PTC and the cost that it takes
to implement that system.
We are finding value added in PTC and this is one of those.
So wanna make sure that the board was aware
of that certificate award.
Next slide.
Also on the positive note with our friends
in the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority,
the California Transportation Foundation,
awarded the Rail Transit Project of the Year award
to the Aero Service for last year.
So I was able to join SBCTA staff at the podium
where the CTF awarded that project, that special award.
So congratulations to certainly SBCTA
for getting the project all the way up to the point
where and then where we picked up to complete the project
and to run the service.
So a good, another positive story.
Next slide.
I don't know how many people are going to be familiar with the honorable Bill Davis.
He was a member of this board for a number of years.
He was Ventura County's representative, former mayor of the city of Seamy Valley.
Bill passed away a couple of weeks ago, and I would ask Mr. Chair that when we do adjourn
today that we adjourn in Bill's memory.
That concludes my report, Mr. Chair.
comments or questions of Mr. CEO. Seeing none, announce our board members
opportunity. Do we have any comments of board members? Yes, please go ahead.
Director O'Connor. Well, you know, and I was going to give a brief report. As you know, I
was gone the month of May. My wife and I completed our journey of visiting all
30 major league baseball stadiums in 30 days, and yes, your Wrigley Field, because
of its history, was one of the favorites. Actually, Dodger Stadium was
way up there as well. I can tell you the worst stadiums in the world are Okun Coliseum, absolutely
without a doubt. And then, didn't really like Houston, Houston had their dome up, it was
very dark and depressing in there. Favorite stadiums, I think Arlington, Tampa Bay, Toronto,
oh that was really, Darren, that we're on our trip, we're in the middle of the trip
and say, oh my gosh, we are going to Toronto, we don't have our passports. I mean, who
do you think about passports and a baseball tour? So fortunately we got those overnight
or two as we can do. So we did make all of them very stressful, especially the weather.
instance was we're in Philadelphia, you're supposed to go to New York to watch the Mets,
80% chance of showers, we had a book, a flight that day to San Diego, then come back to New
York the next morning to catch the game. So it was like that, you know, the rain delays
everywhere we went, but we got all through, and we watched games, the whole games, complete
games in each stadium. We had to watch from the first pitch to the last pitch. And we're
very fortunate, Channel 11, if you haven't seen it, did a segment on my wife and I on
in our trip. So if you didn't catch it, it's online on Fox 11 News. But I appreciate my
colleagues' patience with me being gone the whole month. You probably enjoyed me being
gone the whole month. Yeah, I was gone. Hey, you were gone too, so you wouldn't know, okay?
And I have home movies available if you're ever interested in watching them. Thanks.
Dr. Perciato? Yes, I want to say thank you to the staff for the presentations, as well
as you know I just I just love our rail system and I had an opportunity to see
a family on board and I know that we're doing a lot of summer sales I also would
I think maybe encourage that maybe we get personal testimonies from people
because they would be our biggest advocates especially when we have to go
up against the regular TV news that shows rail as not being you know maybe
we offer them a ticket for the day for speaking up on it and I think those
families, those writers are our biggest advocates and for one thing I really
always enjoy you doing at these meetings is encouraging people to visit locations
and the one that I'm gonna give a shout out is I hear that West Covina just
opened up their laugh factory. Oh, that's Covina. Oh, I'm getting in trouble. I'm getting
trouble. Covina. Sorry, Covina. The city of Covina has a new laugh factory. See
There's a laugh right there.
That was a joke.
Thank you all very much.
Thank you.
Director Allen, anything you'd care to say?
No, on a serious note,
we are still getting a lot of ped strikes,
and that's something we have to continue working on,
addressing ways to prevent suicide,
and so just overall, just continue looking at technology
and science to help us reduce it,
because it affects the employees here
that are involved in those incidents,
our riders, and the reputation.
So we can continue taking a look at the technology
that's involved, and it is Colbina, not it's Colbina.
Director Allen, you're absolutely right.
We have seen an uptick.
It's hard on all of us, you know,
And Director Spiegel spoke to on-time performance.
And where we are just absolutely, that
completely ruins a day of OTP on a line
where we have a fatality.
So we are looking at some opportunities with technology.
There is growing technology out there,
along with using AI, camera work, those types of things.
it's something that Frank Castellan,
our Chief of Safety Security and Compliance,
is laser focused on.
It's been interesting as I've,
we were at the APTA rail conference last week
and I was asking my peers and
we definitely have higher than the average
and I think it's a,
some of it's a byproduct of our very open system.
A lot of our sister agencies have systems
that are completely fenced,
which helps keep people off the right away.
It is something that matters to us and we gotta,
but this has been, there have been members
on this board that have been around for a long time
and it's something that has been a constant source
of frustration and sadness
and everything else that goes along with it.
But thanks, yeah, appreciate you raising it
and we're looking at all options
and maybe as technology's improving,
we'll have a better feel for it.
But thank you, yeah.
thank you for those remarks
any other director
uh... seen on i will separate conclude by again uh...
thank you bill garrett for a service
and every getting us insured for the whole coming year before leaving
and wish you a happy retirement
and also joining the meeting in former board member bill davis
thank all of you for attending and i will try to ride the rail next time