May 27, 2026 • 38 mins
The Sacramento Transportation Authority convened on May 14, 2026, adopted consent items, and introduced the balanced FY 2026–27 draft budget highlighting a 3.6% sales tax revenue increase, a reduced capital program, and sharply lower CalPERS liability.
Board discussion covered budget resolution flexibilities, strategic planning goals, and upcoming studies on economic development, pavement, and bridges. A public hearing on staff vacancies reported a 25% vacancy rate with reliance on consultants and lean staffing practices.
The board authorized STA participation in SACOG’s 2026 federal funding programs to pursue funding for the Harvest Corridor Improvement Partnership and the Stockton Boulevard Safety and Transit Enhancement Project. The Executive Director reported on SACOG grant trainings, SB1 and VMT mitigation concerns, and a new countywide safety action plan grant.
Multiple board members expressed support for the projects, and items passed unanimously. The meeting concluded with brief subcommittee updates and adjournment.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to go ahead and call to order the Sacramento Transportation
(00:07):
Authority for May 14th, 2026. Will you please call the roll?
Yes. Directors Boulahan? I'm here.
Desmond? Here.
Dickinson? Here.
Guerra? Here.
Hume? Here.
Kennedy? Here.
Maple? Here.
Nelson? Here.
Pullapati? Here.
Rodriguez? Here.
Serna? Here.
(00:28):
Singh-Allen? Here.
Spies? Present.
Talamantes? Here.
Vang? I'm here.
Dickinson? Yeah, just arrived.
And Chair Rangel? I didn't say present.
Here. Oh, and Singh-Allen is also present.
Perfect. And you do have a quorum.
If you'll please stand with me for a moment.
(00:49):
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for
which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
(01:16):
If you'll please read the announcements.
This meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority is live and recorded with closed
captioning. It is cablecast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel
on the Comcast and DirecTV U-verse cable systems. It is also livestreamed at
metro14live.saccounty.gov. Today's meeting replays Sunday, May 17th at 2 p.m. on Metro
(01:39):
Cable Channel 14. Once posted, the recording of this meeting can be viewed on demand at
youtube.com forward slash Metro Cable 14. To make an in-person public comment, please complete a
speaker request form and hand it to the clerk. The chairperson will call your name when it's
your turn to make a comment. You may send written comments by email to boardclerk at
(02:00):
saccounty.gov. Your comment will be routed to the board and filed in the record.
Thank you. That takes us to comment items. Do we have any comments from the public on
items this evening? We do not have any comments. All right, so that takes us to the consent items.
Anyone want to pull anything this afternoon?
(02:23):
Motion and a second. Are we electronically voting today? Yes, we are. All right, please vote.
We seem to be having some technical difficulties. I'm going to close out the vote and I'm going to
(02:46):
restart it. Can I change my mind? Maybe it's not an option.
Metro Cable, can we get some assistance?
Let's just call, let's just call the call the roll. We're good. Okay,
(03:09):
let's go ahead and do it. Okay, Directors Boolihan? Aye. Desmond? Aye. Dickinson? Aye.
Guerra? Here. Aye. Hume? Aye. Kennedy? Aye. Nelson? Aye. Cerna? Aye. Sing-Allen? Aye.
(03:38):
Spees? Aye. Talamantes? Aye. And Chair Raythel? Aye. And the motion passes unanimously.
That takes us to separate items. Will you please call the next item?
Item number seven is introduce draft STA budget for fiscal year 2026-27.
(03:58):
All right, good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, and Board of Directors. I'm Dustin Purinton
and I will be presenting the budget, the draft budget for fiscal year 2026-27.
So to start off, why are we here? Why are we adopting a budget? We are legally required to
(04:20):
adopt a budget. This budget is balanced. We have the ITOC committee, which operates on this,
call it separate from the board. They have reviewed this draft budget and they provided
comments and we've already made or incorporated those comments into the draft budget. We will be
(04:40):
bringing this back in June to adopt the final budget with any comments that we get today.
And there was one open item, the appropriations limit in there, that has since been updated.
They published it after I put this onto the website. So we have a complete budget now.
(05:01):
Moving on, what is unique to the authority in this budget? We are a special district sales tax,
not to be confused with Bradley Burns, the jurisdiction taxes. We have a funding constrained
capital improvement program, which means we do not budget beyond our projections and our actual
funding. We have a very large formulaic allocation of revenue, which all the jurisdictions receive
(05:24):
portions of that, and that's about 80 percent of the total budget, the total sales tax budget that
is. And we have a countywide transportation impact fee, which is specific for capital
improvement program, and it is jurisdictionally bound. So if it's collected in the city of
Sacramento, it is returned to the city of Sacramento, or at least the jurisdictional
(05:47):
bounds of the city. And it is bound by a nexus study, which was approved earlier a couple of
years back now. And we do have pretty strong stability in this budget. We have strong population
growth, we'll call it modern population growth, and strong per capita spending. So the population
has rising wages in the county of Sacramento. So that brings us to the budget highlights. We
(06:13):
were projecting an increase of 3.6 percent in our sales tax revenue assumptions, and that carries
through the entire budget. We also are projecting a 26.8 percent capital improvement program
decrease, and that is mostly caused by the prior year having significant budgeted capital
(06:35):
improvement projects that were unique to last year. They were just much higher than they
normally are. So now we're coming back into a more normal budget cycle, and I would expect
these numbers to continue into next year. And I also wanted to highlight our CalPERS unfunded
accrued liability is under 5 percent of our total administrative fund appropriations, which I
(06:58):
consider that pretty low. To continue that thought, this is a chart showing where our CalPERS UAL
is and how much we paid towards it. So we started off at about 1.5 million in 2022 and 23, and now
we are close to about $200,000 in this budget cycle, which is a significant reduction. And I
(07:21):
can say that that is almost 100 percent caused by the board approving additional contributions into
this liability. So and that's going to help us for years to come. We also we don't pay interest on
on the outstanding balance, and they don't require us to pay quite as much every year.
So moving on, we I wanted to highlight some budgetary resolution differences this year that
(07:45):
were not included last year. This budget resolution is going to authorize the the
impact fee to be adjusted to reflect actual earnings. The impact fee is really difficult
to project because we cannot accurately predict when Kaiser is going to pay their large impact
fees or a development out out in the county is going to pay impact fees. So this gives us a
(08:10):
little bit of flexibility to budget towards what we're actually taking in. And this also authorizes
a capital improvement program rollover year-to-year. So project balances that existed in prior years,
well the most recent prior year, will be rolled forward into the next year. This gives jurisdictions
(08:30):
some more spending ability without having to come back to the board to ask for more money.
In a lot of cases, I'd like to highlight that Caltrans with Highway 50 did this as part of a
board item this year. So they brought forward prior year money into the current year. And the
last item here is the capital improvement appropriation flexibility bullet here. So we
(08:55):
are looking for some additional flexibility in using sales taxes versus impact fees on specific
projects. This allows us to be more efficient and effective with the use of money because our
impact fees are quite a bit more restricted than our sales taxes. We have a nexus study,
we have eligibility requirements, and we have return to source stipulations in impact fees.
(09:19):
This will allow us to flexibly use the best source of funding in project spending,
but ultimately allowing us to use the most restricted funding first.
And I'm going to pass off the presentation to Kevin to continue with our strategic planning goals.
(09:44):
Wonderful. Yeah, we wanted to highlight these strategic planning goals. They're kind of
help us guide our work and work in our budget and work over the year. So there's three strategic
planning goals. First one is build public trust. We do that through our financial planning and
forecasting to ensure that we're not spending more revenues than we anticipate. We try to
be good stewards of our debt and our debt and credit. We also try to make sure we have
(10:09):
accountability and transportation, sorry, transportation accountability in place as
relates to our accounting, what we put on our website, what we put on our actually in our
board agenda reporting on how these funds are used so the public really understands that.
And then we have ongoing public outreach and education on, you know, where the funds from
Measure A are being utilized, which is also on our website as well. We do that through our social
(10:33):
media channels. Oh, I better click this thing. Okay. Another thing we do is we want to develop
great relationships. You know, SDA is not, is a funding agency. We are not an implementing agency.
We do not do project delivery. We not do those things, right? And so what we want to ensure is
that our project partners who actually deliver the projects funded usually in part by Measure A,
(10:54):
we're working well with them. So we take a concerted effort to meet with every like example,
we meet with every agency at least annually to check in on how they're doing on their measure
funds. Are they spending down their balances? Are there new priorities? Have priorities shifted,
as an example? We have a professional advisory group that we engage, especially before like
major board items to sort of weigh in on their thoughts, which is made up from planners and
(11:16):
engineers from the various agencies that receive Measure A. And then we, we do a little more than
that. Like in this year, we did some training specifically related to the SACOG funding round
to ensure that the agencies are well prepared for that upcoming grant opportunity and they're able
to leverage Measure A funds. Then the third one is aligning transportation priorities with the
(11:38):
funding, right? So I think that has to do with our local Measure A dollars are a small component of
the overall cost of a lot of these projects. It takes a lot of additional funding to, to actually
advance these projects. So we want to ensure that there's, there's, there's when needed grant level
leverage strategies and other types of efforts that sort of align the variable, the various
(11:58):
transportation funding with the parties that each agency wants to implement. So we do a lot of work
in this particular area to try to advance projects through grants. And we'll talk about that more
under item number nine. So this slide here was my attempt to sort of like roll all that into one
beautiful slide, talking about all the activities we anticipate doing over the next year, broken out
(12:21):
into the first half and the second half of the fiscal year. I'm going to highlight, these are,
these are organized by those three priorities, build public trust, develop great relationships,
and align transportation priorities with funding. A couple of ones I want to highlight, the first
being in the orange box on the top left, economic development study. We would like to do an economic
development study to analyze the economic development impacts of Measure A over the last
(12:44):
almost more than 15 years. We think that this is really good information for the public to have,
right? We're spending about $180 million a year investing in our transportation system.
What are the benefits that we're getting, getting from that? What are the jobs,
as well as what other opportunities come out of that? And then another one I want to highlight is
(13:05):
in the bottom box in gray, on the right here is pavement and bridge needs. This is an area where
a lot of the public is concerned about our major infrastructure and the condition of that major
infrastructure. In 2024, we did an analysis of our pavement needs only, looking at really,
looking, I think really looking at what are the, what are the overall needs for our pavement
(13:27):
conditions and at a jurisdictional level, how much our current funding goes and what
additional funding we need to address pavement. But bridges are another high, high interest area
that we want to cover. So we are going to cover both pavement and bridge needs in this updated
study. So you'll see, you should see that in the beginning of 2027. And so with that,
(13:48):
hand back over to Dustin. All right. I just wanted to highlight that this is our eighth
consecutive year of receiving the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award. This award really
helps us align our budget and what we're communicating with best practices with other
much larger governments to try to basically communicate the best way that we can with the
(14:10):
public. So moving on, the recommendation here is just to introduce this draft budget. We are going
to leave it open for comment until the final draft budget is brought back to you in June.
So with that, I'm open for any questions. Thank you, Dustin. Any questions?
All right. Any public comment? No public comment. Oh. Member Dickinson. Thank you. I just have a
(14:37):
request. Thanks for the presentation, but in the material posted for the agenda, it requires going
to another website to actually look at the budget. Yes. So when you come back, when you present,
can you include the budget with the item so people just including board members don't have to go
(14:58):
through that step? We can do that. Yes. The only reason we've done this is just the length of it
because I believe it's 130 pages this year. It just keeps getting bigger, but we will do that.
And if you want, I mean, there are certain elements of it that are certainly more
relevant than others in ways. Your line items, your categorical spending, those kinds of things,
(15:24):
I'm sure you have charts for those or tables for those. So you may be able to slice down that 130.
Of course, you might ask yourself why you have 130, but that's a secondary question.
Yes. I have made an effort to reduce it as many pages as possible. We could bring back just a
letter of transmittal, which includes a really good summary of everything, just the budget in
(15:47):
general. And that's probably about 30 pages. Does that include tables, the tabular form of
the budget so people can see your line items of how you're spending or proposing to spend?
It does include the consolidated table. So that includes all of our funds in one table.
(16:09):
Yeah. I mean, I'm not looking at, so I'm not quite sure, but I'd say this generally, that I think
when people want to look at a budget, they want to look at where your money is coming from,
what are the sources of your money, and how are you going to expend it on a line item basis.
And so that's what I think people would be most interested in personally.
(16:31):
Okay. Yes. We'll include the whole budget just so we don't miss anything. But I will,
we'll think about that.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Chair.
Okay. Any other comments or questions? All right. And no public comment?
No public comment.
(16:52):
Perfect. Please call the next item.
Item number eight is annual public hearing on staff vacancies pursuant to AB-2561.
All right. This is my item again. All right. So this is in regards to Assembly Bill-2561.
(17:14):
It is a public hearing for staff vacancies. Just to update the public on any vacancies,
any recruitment, and our retention efforts as an authority. So our vacancy rate as of today
is 25%. We have four full-time positions authorized with one vacancy. We don't currently
have any job openings, and this is as a result of the board's direction to hire consultants
(17:38):
to handle the work as opposed to hiring a new staff. This is also really in alignment
with STA's operating structure. We operate in a very lean fashion, and we do delay recruitment
as long as possible to align with budget and workflows. So our hiring policies are periodically
(18:00):
reviewed, and we don't see any barriers to hiring. There is no fiscal impact with this item,
and the conclusion here, this hearing is just open for public input.
Thank you, Destin. Seeing no request to speak, we're going to go ahead and open the public
comment or open the public hearing. Do we have any comments?
(18:22):
No comment. All right. With that, we're going to go ahead and close the public hearing,
and please call the next item. Item number nine is adopt a resolution authorizing
participation in SACOG's 2026 federal funding programs and authorized related actions.
Okay. Good afternoon, board, chair, and vice chair here to present on item number nine,
(18:53):
which is adopt a resolution authorizing our participation in the SACOG 2026 federal funding
program. So at SDA, we like to leverage our measure a dollars, our local dollars to get
additional funding. We do that through the SACOG funding round, the federal funding round,
other future grants, and hopefully those funds will all go to the actual project delivery.
(19:15):
SDA kind of is the countywide has takes a countywide coordination role. We work with the
various agencies, the counties, cities, regional agencies, trans providers to sort of help align
those transportation priorities with funding, grants being one of them. Now, there's a bit
of a challenge here with the SACOG federal funding round. It limits the number of applications that
(19:35):
each agency can submit to three applications per program. And it's a little more challenging with
multi-jurisdictional projects. So the agencies are faced with, do we submit a local agency priority
or do we submit a project, a shared project that has some benefit to our agency? And that kind of
puts agencies in a little bit of a challenging spot. But don't worry, there's a solution here.
(19:59):
So we talked to SACOG, SACOG is comfortable with SDA submitting multi-jurisdictional applications
so they would not account against the implementing agencies application limit. So this approach
essentially preserve the local agencies slots so they can use all their slots. It supports, you
know, these more regional projects, right? Transportation doesn't end at the city border,
(20:23):
right? And so it allows these more larger projects to move forward. And those projects are actually
very competitive. The more regional projects have regional benefits, they do well, they do
a little bit better at the federal and state level for funding. And so this package of projects is
intended to balance out both urban and rural context. And we'll talk about those two projects
(20:44):
here. So the first is the Harvest Corridor Improvement Partnership, which is more about
agritourism, agricultural routes, and addressing things that Mr. Hume is very passionate about,
I'm sure. And then we have the Stockton Boulevard Safety and Transit Enhancement Project,
which is a project we heard about at our last board meeting.
So Harvest Corridor Improvement Partnership. So the lead agency for this would be Sacramento
(21:07):
County. We would be actually covering the areas of South Sacramento County and Apple Hill.
The partners for this would be Sacramento County, El Dorado County, and the cities of
Gallup, Eielton, and Elk Grove. The overall purpose here that we're pursuing funds for
is for environmental clearance. Do you need some water? No. Okay. Essentially getting
(21:32):
environmental clearance for this. The funding request we're looking for is somewhere in the
$3 to $4 million range. This one is still kind of a work in progress. There is a federal program
called the Rural Program, which the average reward is about $30 million. So $30 million
in construction dollars for kind of rural roads would actually move the needle quite a bit in
South Sacramento County. And given that all these various cities kind of use those routes, we think
(21:57):
this is a really good project. Second project is the Stockton Boulevard Safety and Transit
Enhancement Project. It is the lead agency would be the City of Sacramento. They are partnering
with Sacramento County and the City of Sacramento, as well as SacRT, are all partnering together.
We are looking at funding the initial final design phase, 65% design, which will put us in
(22:18):
a really good position to apply for grants in the future, because we'll have a really good
understanding of the right-of-way costs, construction costs, utility relocation costs, environmental
mitigation. There are a variety of federal and state grant programs that are available for this
particular project. Not all parts of the project align with all the same grants, but we think
(22:39):
taking the entire package to a 65% design puts us in a really good position. Funding requests,
the consultant for City of Sacramento is still working on the total dollar amount. We estimate
somewhere in the $5 to $10 million range, but that is really an estimate. But we think this is a
really good project and has a lot of options for getting funding in the future. And so with that,
(23:01):
we're just asking for a resolution authorizing SCA to submit the application for these two
projects. I will note that our role is really limited to submitting the application only. We
are not the implementing agency. We might be doing some coordination, but that's pretty much it. And
with that, open to any questions. Thank you so much. Director Hume.
(23:22):
Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, support both of these efforts. Stockton Boulevard is ripe for
investment into transportation and really revitalization of that corridor. But I just
want to thank you, Mr. Busey. You did say that I called me out by name that I'd be passionate
about the Harvest Corridors Improvement Partnership. And, you know, it was something I
(23:43):
think of just like a flip comment that I made during a meeting one day. And you said, do you
really want me to look into this? And I said, well, sure, let's look into it. And it's now,
I think, grown into this fully realized strategy to try and recognize the importance of roadways
that would not otherwise compete well and yet not making it punitive to the agencies that would
(24:04):
have to prioritize, well, do I spend our money over here or do I spend it over there? We're kind
of taking it out of their area of responsibility. So appreciate that. And I'd be happy to move the
resolution. Director Guerra.
Thank you very much. Yeah, I agree. I think both of these are important projects. Obviously,
(24:26):
we want to make sure that as our agritourism economy grows, that when folks are driving out
there, that it's a safe areas to drive, let alone folks who live there and have to use heavy
equipment for the agricultural purposes. And very excited about the Stockton Boulevard, you know,
safety and transit enhancement project. And this is one of those where we have multi agencies
(24:48):
looking at not only just the transportation part of it, but also the housing component of it and
also the business revitalization component of it. The only one thing, again, I want to
also think about and ask as we move forward and as STs in these conversations, and I brought this up
to the city and RT as well, is that there's new technology coming in. What is a bus rapid transit
(25:13):
system? How does an alternative to, say, light rail look like? And, you know, I saw Atlanta's
efforts most recently, and I think it's important for us to make sure that we're looking at what is
the next 30 to 40 years look like, and not just the past technology that we've seen. I think
there's great examples of that. But excited again to look at how we continue to improve and
(25:36):
revitalize Stockton Boulevard, which in my opinion, I think at some point it'll go not just
from Sacramento, the city, but through the county and to Elk Grove in the future. So thank you very
much and glad to second the motion. Thank you. Director Maple. Thank you, Chair. Everything that
my colleagues just said. So not much else to add. Just really want to appreciate, especially on the
(25:57):
Stockton Boulevard piece, how important that is to the communities that Eric and I represent and
Patrick Kennedy and Phil Cerna. It's truly a partnership, but it's why I think one of the
highest growth opportunity areas in the city and the county and beyond. We have Aggie Square in
there. We've got over a thousand planned units. There's so much investment and opportunity along
(26:21):
the corridor that I think Stockton Boulevard is going to be a very different place in
five and ten years. And so I think projects like this will only help that grow.
So I'm very excited to support this today. Thanks. All right. We have a motion and a second.
We might have electronic voting. There we go.
(26:45):
The motion passes unanimously with those members present.
That takes us to our executive director's report. Director Beese.
Yeah, wonderful. Just kind of highlight a few things we're working on that may not actually
come to the light of the full SDA board as far as an item. SACOG regional funding round training.
(27:06):
So we did two training sessions. They're about 30 to 40 minutes long on essentially, you know,
what is the strategy for applying for these SACOG funding rounds and how to put together
a competitive application. This is $203 million total available across six counties. And it is
awarded on a competitive basis. And so we want to ensure that our agencies are leveraging our
(27:28):
local dollars or our Measure A dollars. So we put the training on our, we did this training,
we recorded it. It's on our website. And we actually did a couple of actual
kind of check some worksheets essentially to sort of help each agency out.
So we're hopeful that we'll move forward. We'll be very successful in that funding round.
(27:50):
We had about 30 staff at each of those trainings. And it was a little different.
The first was more about strategy. So it was for one audience. And the other one was more about
preparing the grant application, which is kind of more for another audience. So it was good.
Um, one thing I want to flag is we are, we've been having some conversations with SACOG on SB1087.
(28:11):
It's a bill to modernize SB375. One of the challenges with that bill is that it,
it essentially, essentially there's a challenge as it relates to SB1 funding in the future.
It would likely, likely going to be limited to only projects that can reduce greenhouse gas
emissions through the Solutions for Congested Corridor and, and the TCEP program, which is,
(28:37):
TCEP is Trade Corridor Enhancement Program. And there's, there's some challenges with that
in the fact that, you know, the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program as an example was really
about freight and good movements. And so to try to limit our region's ability to apply for those
types of projects, to only projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions would be, we would
(28:58):
probably not have a lot of projects to, to, to try to get those SB1 dollars. We have Solutions
for Congested Corridor is a little different because there are a lot of transit and rail
related projects that are eligible for that. So I think that is a, that one's a little less
restrictive. Um, I will note that, um, with that one in particular, I think that the challenge
(29:18):
there though does become, are we going to have projects that we want to advance given our
current concern regarding a transit fiscal cliff, right? Are we going to be in a situation where
we're going to be, we're going, we don't have competitive projects to expand transit because
we don't have the funding to actually operate our current transit system. And so I think we've,
SACOG and I've had some really good conversations about it. I think what we're, what I've asked
(29:40):
them to do and they're looking into now is to make sure that our current 2025 blueprint
will continue for at least the next three cycles of the SB1 program. So we will not have that
limitation and we continue to apply for funding for all project types for the next three funding
rounds. So I think that's been a good conversation. I'm hoping to see some, something come out of
that. Uh, second item would be the, uh, there is a statewide VMT mitigation bank under AB130.
(30:05):
Um, they had developed some, um, uh, some guidelines on how that program, program would work.
The costs for that program are about 17 cents per VMT, which is really, really low to the point
where it would make a regional, uh, VMT mitigation bank pretty much infeasible. Um, and there's still
concerns about, uh, specifically that return to source component, right? Are we going to put money
(30:31):
into a statewide bank? Will it come back to us? So both STA and SACOG wrote letters to, um, LCI,
which is the office of land use and climate on those guidelines. Um, I think those are great
letters. I've attached the letter to this, to this actual, um, staff report so you can all see it,
but really focusing on that return to source element to, to ensure that those dollars that
(30:52):
are generated through VMT mitigation in your agency stay within your agency.
Uh, and then finally, I do want to highlight a couple of things, um, SB1 regional project
prioritization. So SACOG is prioritizing what projects come, what projects are prioritized
at the region when we apply for SB1. Um, STA is looking at applying, um, for that program under,
(31:13):
for the U.S. 50 comprehensive multimodal corridor plan, under the solutions for congested corridor.
And we're also looking at advancing a project, uh, on the I-5 corridor related to managed lanes.
Um, we've had a lot of good conversation with our partners. Um, they're all very excited about
those, those, the project, those projects, specifically U.S. 50. We've got a lot of,
like, multimodal transit projects on the 50 corridor. Um, we think we're in a good position
(31:37):
to get, to hopefully get those funded through this program. And then finally, since most of us,
a lot of us went to cap to cap last, um, recently, uh, it was really interesting.
We, I was at cap to cap and we had been working with, um, DOT on our safe streets and roads for
all grants, trying to get that grant assigned. And they signed it on the Monday when I was in
Washington, uh, right when I was in actually a meeting with them and I thanked them. But,
(32:00):
uh, so we're excited about that county wide safety action plan. Um, they, we got a million
dollar grant to do that. We can now, we can start developing the RFP and issue it was about
a $1.25 million effort. And it would basically provide, uh, what is our, what is our plan to
address safety, uh, at a county level? Uh, we'll have chapters for each agency. Some agencies are
doing their own plans. We'll just incorporate your work, but it makes us eligible for other
(32:23):
grant programs. Once that plan is done, it makes us eligible for the highway safety improvement
program. It makes us eligible for safe streets and roads for all actual implementation grants.
So I'm pretty excited that we're able to move that forward. And with that, I'm open to any
questions. Thank you, director. Thank you, chair. Um, great report. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Uh, with respect to the, um, the statewide VMT bank, you know, we had a spirited discussion
(32:50):
on this board and obviously returned to source in some fashion remains a serious concern. So
I appreciate you and, and say cog, um, uh, you know, certainly waving that banner.
But the other thing is we had a discussion on this at the lunar committee at say cog last week,
and there's some speculation that the 17 cents per unit, um, VMT figure is artificially low
(33:15):
and that it has basically no effective purchasing power, uh, depending on which region, uh, it's
into, uh, which it's deployed and that maybe they perhaps looked at expediency over accuracy
when trying to sort of look at how to put this, uh, piece together. And so I would just,
uh, encourage, and I don't know if it takes formal direction from this board,
(33:37):
but I would encourage you to kind of stay aware and stay vigilant and continue, uh, demanding,
uh, you know, a reasonable program to put together, whether that's, you know,
something that we can compete with locally or not. Thank you, director tickets.
Thanks. Um, uh, something you said made me think, uh, there, uh, is considerable controversy,
(34:00):
uh, about, uh, carbs potential for, um, affecting the distribution of greenhouse,
the greenhouse gas emissions fund. And, uh, in particular, uh, the, uh, transit agencies
around the state. And I think, uh, increasingly the cities and counties have become, um,
(34:24):
nothing short of alarmed because the way the carb has, uh, at least, uh, floated a draft,
it would zero out money for the affordable housing, sustainable communities program for
tursip and, and for the trade quarters. And when you mentioned the trade quarters,
that's what triggered us, the trade corridors program. Um, so I was just curious whether, uh,
(34:50):
either you have picked that, that up or whether the state association has,
has picked, picked that up as an, as an issue. Yeah, that sounds like it's squarely in the
SACOG world to me and the Cal, you know, the California, uh, council of governments. I mean,
I'm not as aware of that as, as, uh, those agencies. I'm pretty sure they're actively
(35:13):
working on that specifically because there is some discretionary funds and it's unclear exactly
where those funds are going. Um, um, so I could, I could work with them and check in to see where
they're at. I think they're fairly effective. It's certainly relevant to SACOG, no question
about it. Um, but it also becomes relevant to, to this authority, uh, in terms of funding that,
(35:34):
that could be available, could be a part of a match for funds that are available under measure
A, for example, affordable housing, sustainable communities program. So I, I, I encourage you to,
to take a look at it. Yeah, I'll just say, I think the, you know, affordable housing,
(35:55):
sustainable community strategies or that program itself, I mean, typically we'll fund both
accommodation of housing transit and bike and ped, right? And so I think I'm aware of like five
different applications that SACRT is working on under that program. Um, and then we, we also view
Stockton Boulevard as a very strong future project. Um, and I think, uh, I think Dos Rios
(36:17):
actually was one of the, one of the projects that was awarded. Dos Rios, I think, yes.
So you make a great point. As, as is the, the, the bridge housing project at Arden and Del Paso
Boulevard, which has transportation improvements associated with it as well. But I, my only,
my only point is that I think it had, may have implications for the authority too. So it might
(36:40):
be something you want to delve into a little bit. Thanks. Thank you. Any other questions or comments
on this item? All right. That takes us to our authority and subcommittees, uh, Director
Talamantes, any update on CARTA? All right. Um, CARTA is extending a job offer to the new
(37:03):
executive director of that, and it will be on the board agenda for next week. And so I was not part
of the interviews, but I heard it was very competitive and we selected a great candidate.
And so excited to see what that looks like. And then I-5 will eventually make its way
onto the managed lanes and then eventually we'll have voting power and, um, we will hit that road
(37:26):
and get a lot of comments from the residents of Sacramento region. I'm sure. All right. So next
step, we have our new transportation funding subcommittee, Director Guerra. Uh, nothing from
the committee itself, but the, the, uh, uh, information available from the safe streets
campaign that's out there independently of this agency, uh, is out there collecting signatures.
(37:46):
They have a deadline coming up in about in a month and, um, we'll know more information about
that and in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, SDA's role in the region subcommittee,
Director Hume. We have not met nothing to report. Hopefully we'll have a meeting maybe towards the
end of summer. All right. Any other comments from the board today? Seeing none, we're adjourned at
(38:07):
2 11. Have a great day, everyone.
Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to go ahead and call to order the Sacramento Transportation
(00:07):
Authority for May 14th, 2026. Will you please call the roll?
Yes. Directors Boulahan? I'm here.
Desmond? Here.
Dickinson? Here.
Guerra? Here.
Hume? Here.
Kennedy? Here.
Maple? Here.
Nelson? Here.
Pullapati? Here.
Rodriguez? Here.
Serna? Here.
(00:28):
Singh-Allen? Here.
Spies? Present.
Talamantes? Here.
Vang? I'm here.
Dickinson? Yeah, just arrived.
And Chair Rangel? I didn't say present.
Here. Oh, and Singh-Allen is also present.
Perfect. And you do have a quorum.
If you'll please stand with me for a moment.
(00:49):
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for
which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
(01:16):
If you'll please read the announcements.
This meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority is live and recorded with closed
captioning. It is cablecast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel
on the Comcast and DirecTV U-verse cable systems. It is also livestreamed at
metro14live.saccounty.gov. Today's meeting replays Sunday, May 17th at 2 p.m. on Metro
(01:39):
Cable Channel 14. Once posted, the recording of this meeting can be viewed on demand at
youtube.com forward slash Metro Cable 14. To make an in-person public comment, please complete a
speaker request form and hand it to the clerk. The chairperson will call your name when it's
your turn to make a comment. You may send written comments by email to boardclerk at
(02:00):
saccounty.gov. Your comment will be routed to the board and filed in the record.
Thank you. That takes us to comment items. Do we have any comments from the public on
items this evening? We do not have any comments. All right, so that takes us to the consent items.
Anyone want to pull anything this afternoon?
(02:23):
Motion and a second. Are we electronically voting today? Yes, we are. All right, please vote.
We seem to be having some technical difficulties. I'm going to close out the vote and I'm going to
(02:46):
restart it. Can I change my mind? Maybe it's not an option.
Metro Cable, can we get some assistance?
Let's just call, let's just call the call the roll. We're good. Okay,
(03:09):
let's go ahead and do it. Okay, Directors Boolihan? Aye. Desmond? Aye. Dickinson? Aye.
Guerra? Here. Aye. Hume? Aye. Kennedy? Aye. Nelson? Aye. Cerna? Aye. Sing-Allen? Aye.
(03:38):
Spees? Aye. Talamantes? Aye. And Chair Raythel? Aye. And the motion passes unanimously.
That takes us to separate items. Will you please call the next item?
Item number seven is introduce draft STA budget for fiscal year 2026-27.
(03:58):
All right, good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair, and Board of Directors. I'm Dustin Purinton
and I will be presenting the budget, the draft budget for fiscal year 2026-27.
So to start off, why are we here? Why are we adopting a budget? We are legally required to
(04:20):
adopt a budget. This budget is balanced. We have the ITOC committee, which operates on this,
call it separate from the board. They have reviewed this draft budget and they provided
comments and we've already made or incorporated those comments into the draft budget. We will be
(04:40):
bringing this back in June to adopt the final budget with any comments that we get today.
And there was one open item, the appropriations limit in there, that has since been updated.
They published it after I put this onto the website. So we have a complete budget now.
(05:01):
Moving on, what is unique to the authority in this budget? We are a special district sales tax,
not to be confused with Bradley Burns, the jurisdiction taxes. We have a funding constrained
capital improvement program, which means we do not budget beyond our projections and our actual
funding. We have a very large formulaic allocation of revenue, which all the jurisdictions receive
(05:24):
portions of that, and that's about 80 percent of the total budget, the total sales tax budget that
is. And we have a countywide transportation impact fee, which is specific for capital
improvement program, and it is jurisdictionally bound. So if it's collected in the city of
Sacramento, it is returned to the city of Sacramento, or at least the jurisdictional
(05:47):
bounds of the city. And it is bound by a nexus study, which was approved earlier a couple of
years back now. And we do have pretty strong stability in this budget. We have strong population
growth, we'll call it modern population growth, and strong per capita spending. So the population
has rising wages in the county of Sacramento. So that brings us to the budget highlights. We
(06:13):
were projecting an increase of 3.6 percent in our sales tax revenue assumptions, and that carries
through the entire budget. We also are projecting a 26.8 percent capital improvement program
decrease, and that is mostly caused by the prior year having significant budgeted capital
(06:35):
improvement projects that were unique to last year. They were just much higher than they
normally are. So now we're coming back into a more normal budget cycle, and I would expect
these numbers to continue into next year. And I also wanted to highlight our CalPERS unfunded
accrued liability is under 5 percent of our total administrative fund appropriations, which I
(06:58):
consider that pretty low. To continue that thought, this is a chart showing where our CalPERS UAL
is and how much we paid towards it. So we started off at about 1.5 million in 2022 and 23, and now
we are close to about $200,000 in this budget cycle, which is a significant reduction. And I
(07:21):
can say that that is almost 100 percent caused by the board approving additional contributions into
this liability. So and that's going to help us for years to come. We also we don't pay interest on
on the outstanding balance, and they don't require us to pay quite as much every year.
So moving on, we I wanted to highlight some budgetary resolution differences this year that
(07:45):
were not included last year. This budget resolution is going to authorize the the
impact fee to be adjusted to reflect actual earnings. The impact fee is really difficult
to project because we cannot accurately predict when Kaiser is going to pay their large impact
fees or a development out out in the county is going to pay impact fees. So this gives us a
(08:10):
little bit of flexibility to budget towards what we're actually taking in. And this also authorizes
a capital improvement program rollover year-to-year. So project balances that existed in prior years,
well the most recent prior year, will be rolled forward into the next year. This gives jurisdictions
(08:30):
some more spending ability without having to come back to the board to ask for more money.
In a lot of cases, I'd like to highlight that Caltrans with Highway 50 did this as part of a
board item this year. So they brought forward prior year money into the current year. And the
last item here is the capital improvement appropriation flexibility bullet here. So we
(08:55):
are looking for some additional flexibility in using sales taxes versus impact fees on specific
projects. This allows us to be more efficient and effective with the use of money because our
impact fees are quite a bit more restricted than our sales taxes. We have a nexus study,
we have eligibility requirements, and we have return to source stipulations in impact fees.
(09:19):
This will allow us to flexibly use the best source of funding in project spending,
but ultimately allowing us to use the most restricted funding first.
And I'm going to pass off the presentation to Kevin to continue with our strategic planning goals.
(09:44):
Wonderful. Yeah, we wanted to highlight these strategic planning goals. They're kind of
help us guide our work and work in our budget and work over the year. So there's three strategic
planning goals. First one is build public trust. We do that through our financial planning and
forecasting to ensure that we're not spending more revenues than we anticipate. We try to
be good stewards of our debt and our debt and credit. We also try to make sure we have
(10:09):
accountability and transportation, sorry, transportation accountability in place as
relates to our accounting, what we put on our website, what we put on our actually in our
board agenda reporting on how these funds are used so the public really understands that.
And then we have ongoing public outreach and education on, you know, where the funds from
Measure A are being utilized, which is also on our website as well. We do that through our social
(10:33):
media channels. Oh, I better click this thing. Okay. Another thing we do is we want to develop
great relationships. You know, SDA is not, is a funding agency. We are not an implementing agency.
We do not do project delivery. We not do those things, right? And so what we want to ensure is
that our project partners who actually deliver the projects funded usually in part by Measure A,
(10:54):
we're working well with them. So we take a concerted effort to meet with every like example,
we meet with every agency at least annually to check in on how they're doing on their measure
funds. Are they spending down their balances? Are there new priorities? Have priorities shifted,
as an example? We have a professional advisory group that we engage, especially before like
major board items to sort of weigh in on their thoughts, which is made up from planners and
(11:16):
engineers from the various agencies that receive Measure A. And then we, we do a little more than
that. Like in this year, we did some training specifically related to the SACOG funding round
to ensure that the agencies are well prepared for that upcoming grant opportunity and they're able
to leverage Measure A funds. Then the third one is aligning transportation priorities with the
(11:38):
funding, right? So I think that has to do with our local Measure A dollars are a small component of
the overall cost of a lot of these projects. It takes a lot of additional funding to, to actually
advance these projects. So we want to ensure that there's, there's, there's when needed grant level
leverage strategies and other types of efforts that sort of align the variable, the various
(11:58):
transportation funding with the parties that each agency wants to implement. So we do a lot of work
in this particular area to try to advance projects through grants. And we'll talk about that more
under item number nine. So this slide here was my attempt to sort of like roll all that into one
beautiful slide, talking about all the activities we anticipate doing over the next year, broken out
(12:21):
into the first half and the second half of the fiscal year. I'm going to highlight, these are,
these are organized by those three priorities, build public trust, develop great relationships,
and align transportation priorities with funding. A couple of ones I want to highlight, the first
being in the orange box on the top left, economic development study. We would like to do an economic
development study to analyze the economic development impacts of Measure A over the last
(12:44):
almost more than 15 years. We think that this is really good information for the public to have,
right? We're spending about $180 million a year investing in our transportation system.
What are the benefits that we're getting, getting from that? What are the jobs,
as well as what other opportunities come out of that? And then another one I want to highlight is
(13:05):
in the bottom box in gray, on the right here is pavement and bridge needs. This is an area where
a lot of the public is concerned about our major infrastructure and the condition of that major
infrastructure. In 2024, we did an analysis of our pavement needs only, looking at really,
looking, I think really looking at what are the, what are the overall needs for our pavement
(13:27):
conditions and at a jurisdictional level, how much our current funding goes and what
additional funding we need to address pavement. But bridges are another high, high interest area
that we want to cover. So we are going to cover both pavement and bridge needs in this updated
study. So you'll see, you should see that in the beginning of 2027. And so with that,
(13:48):
hand back over to Dustin. All right. I just wanted to highlight that this is our eighth
consecutive year of receiving the GFOA Distinguished Budget Award. This award really
helps us align our budget and what we're communicating with best practices with other
much larger governments to try to basically communicate the best way that we can with the
(14:10):
public. So moving on, the recommendation here is just to introduce this draft budget. We are going
to leave it open for comment until the final draft budget is brought back to you in June.
So with that, I'm open for any questions. Thank you, Dustin. Any questions?
All right. Any public comment? No public comment. Oh. Member Dickinson. Thank you. I just have a
(14:37):
request. Thanks for the presentation, but in the material posted for the agenda, it requires going
to another website to actually look at the budget. Yes. So when you come back, when you present,
can you include the budget with the item so people just including board members don't have to go
(14:58):
through that step? We can do that. Yes. The only reason we've done this is just the length of it
because I believe it's 130 pages this year. It just keeps getting bigger, but we will do that.
And if you want, I mean, there are certain elements of it that are certainly more
relevant than others in ways. Your line items, your categorical spending, those kinds of things,
(15:24):
I'm sure you have charts for those or tables for those. So you may be able to slice down that 130.
Of course, you might ask yourself why you have 130, but that's a secondary question.
Yes. I have made an effort to reduce it as many pages as possible. We could bring back just a
letter of transmittal, which includes a really good summary of everything, just the budget in
(15:47):
general. And that's probably about 30 pages. Does that include tables, the tabular form of
the budget so people can see your line items of how you're spending or proposing to spend?
It does include the consolidated table. So that includes all of our funds in one table.
(16:09):
Yeah. I mean, I'm not looking at, so I'm not quite sure, but I'd say this generally, that I think
when people want to look at a budget, they want to look at where your money is coming from,
what are the sources of your money, and how are you going to expend it on a line item basis.
And so that's what I think people would be most interested in personally.
(16:31):
Okay. Yes. We'll include the whole budget just so we don't miss anything. But I will,
we'll think about that.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Chair.
Okay. Any other comments or questions? All right. And no public comment?
No public comment.
(16:52):
Perfect. Please call the next item.
Item number eight is annual public hearing on staff vacancies pursuant to AB-2561.
All right. This is my item again. All right. So this is in regards to Assembly Bill-2561.
(17:14):
It is a public hearing for staff vacancies. Just to update the public on any vacancies,
any recruitment, and our retention efforts as an authority. So our vacancy rate as of today
is 25%. We have four full-time positions authorized with one vacancy. We don't currently
have any job openings, and this is as a result of the board's direction to hire consultants
(17:38):
to handle the work as opposed to hiring a new staff. This is also really in alignment
with STA's operating structure. We operate in a very lean fashion, and we do delay recruitment
as long as possible to align with budget and workflows. So our hiring policies are periodically
(18:00):
reviewed, and we don't see any barriers to hiring. There is no fiscal impact with this item,
and the conclusion here, this hearing is just open for public input.
Thank you, Destin. Seeing no request to speak, we're going to go ahead and open the public
comment or open the public hearing. Do we have any comments?
(18:22):
No comment. All right. With that, we're going to go ahead and close the public hearing,
and please call the next item. Item number nine is adopt a resolution authorizing
participation in SACOG's 2026 federal funding programs and authorized related actions.
Okay. Good afternoon, board, chair, and vice chair here to present on item number nine,
(18:53):
which is adopt a resolution authorizing our participation in the SACOG 2026 federal funding
program. So at SDA, we like to leverage our measure a dollars, our local dollars to get
additional funding. We do that through the SACOG funding round, the federal funding round,
other future grants, and hopefully those funds will all go to the actual project delivery.
(19:15):
SDA kind of is the countywide has takes a countywide coordination role. We work with the
various agencies, the counties, cities, regional agencies, trans providers to sort of help align
those transportation priorities with funding, grants being one of them. Now, there's a bit
of a challenge here with the SACOG federal funding round. It limits the number of applications that
(19:35):
each agency can submit to three applications per program. And it's a little more challenging with
multi-jurisdictional projects. So the agencies are faced with, do we submit a local agency priority
or do we submit a project, a shared project that has some benefit to our agency? And that kind of
puts agencies in a little bit of a challenging spot. But don't worry, there's a solution here.
(19:59):
So we talked to SACOG, SACOG is comfortable with SDA submitting multi-jurisdictional applications
so they would not account against the implementing agencies application limit. So this approach
essentially preserve the local agencies slots so they can use all their slots. It supports, you
know, these more regional projects, right? Transportation doesn't end at the city border,
(20:23):
right? And so it allows these more larger projects to move forward. And those projects are actually
very competitive. The more regional projects have regional benefits, they do well, they do
a little bit better at the federal and state level for funding. And so this package of projects is
intended to balance out both urban and rural context. And we'll talk about those two projects
(20:44):
here. So the first is the Harvest Corridor Improvement Partnership, which is more about
agritourism, agricultural routes, and addressing things that Mr. Hume is very passionate about,
I'm sure. And then we have the Stockton Boulevard Safety and Transit Enhancement Project,
which is a project we heard about at our last board meeting.
So Harvest Corridor Improvement Partnership. So the lead agency for this would be Sacramento
(21:07):
County. We would be actually covering the areas of South Sacramento County and Apple Hill.
The partners for this would be Sacramento County, El Dorado County, and the cities of
Gallup, Eielton, and Elk Grove. The overall purpose here that we're pursuing funds for
is for environmental clearance. Do you need some water? No. Okay. Essentially getting
(21:32):
environmental clearance for this. The funding request we're looking for is somewhere in the
$3 to $4 million range. This one is still kind of a work in progress. There is a federal program
called the Rural Program, which the average reward is about $30 million. So $30 million
in construction dollars for kind of rural roads would actually move the needle quite a bit in
South Sacramento County. And given that all these various cities kind of use those routes, we think
(21:57):
this is a really good project. Second project is the Stockton Boulevard Safety and Transit
Enhancement Project. It is the lead agency would be the City of Sacramento. They are partnering
with Sacramento County and the City of Sacramento, as well as SacRT, are all partnering together.
We are looking at funding the initial final design phase, 65% design, which will put us in
(22:18):
a really good position to apply for grants in the future, because we'll have a really good
understanding of the right-of-way costs, construction costs, utility relocation costs, environmental
mitigation. There are a variety of federal and state grant programs that are available for this
particular project. Not all parts of the project align with all the same grants, but we think
(22:39):
taking the entire package to a 65% design puts us in a really good position. Funding requests,
the consultant for City of Sacramento is still working on the total dollar amount. We estimate
somewhere in the $5 to $10 million range, but that is really an estimate. But we think this is a
really good project and has a lot of options for getting funding in the future. And so with that,
(23:01):
we're just asking for a resolution authorizing SCA to submit the application for these two
projects. I will note that our role is really limited to submitting the application only. We
are not the implementing agency. We might be doing some coordination, but that's pretty much it. And
with that, open to any questions. Thank you so much. Director Hume.
(23:22):
Thank you, Mr. Chair. First of all, support both of these efforts. Stockton Boulevard is ripe for
investment into transportation and really revitalization of that corridor. But I just
want to thank you, Mr. Busey. You did say that I called me out by name that I'd be passionate
about the Harvest Corridors Improvement Partnership. And, you know, it was something I
(23:43):
think of just like a flip comment that I made during a meeting one day. And you said, do you
really want me to look into this? And I said, well, sure, let's look into it. And it's now,
I think, grown into this fully realized strategy to try and recognize the importance of roadways
that would not otherwise compete well and yet not making it punitive to the agencies that would
(24:04):
have to prioritize, well, do I spend our money over here or do I spend it over there? We're kind
of taking it out of their area of responsibility. So appreciate that. And I'd be happy to move the
resolution. Director Guerra.
Thank you very much. Yeah, I agree. I think both of these are important projects. Obviously,
(24:26):
we want to make sure that as our agritourism economy grows, that when folks are driving out
there, that it's a safe areas to drive, let alone folks who live there and have to use heavy
equipment for the agricultural purposes. And very excited about the Stockton Boulevard, you know,
safety and transit enhancement project. And this is one of those where we have multi agencies
(24:48):
looking at not only just the transportation part of it, but also the housing component of it and
also the business revitalization component of it. The only one thing, again, I want to
also think about and ask as we move forward and as STs in these conversations, and I brought this up
to the city and RT as well, is that there's new technology coming in. What is a bus rapid transit
(25:13):
system? How does an alternative to, say, light rail look like? And, you know, I saw Atlanta's
efforts most recently, and I think it's important for us to make sure that we're looking at what is
the next 30 to 40 years look like, and not just the past technology that we've seen. I think
there's great examples of that. But excited again to look at how we continue to improve and
(25:36):
revitalize Stockton Boulevard, which in my opinion, I think at some point it'll go not just
from Sacramento, the city, but through the county and to Elk Grove in the future. So thank you very
much and glad to second the motion. Thank you. Director Maple. Thank you, Chair. Everything that
my colleagues just said. So not much else to add. Just really want to appreciate, especially on the
(25:57):
Stockton Boulevard piece, how important that is to the communities that Eric and I represent and
Patrick Kennedy and Phil Cerna. It's truly a partnership, but it's why I think one of the
highest growth opportunity areas in the city and the county and beyond. We have Aggie Square in
there. We've got over a thousand planned units. There's so much investment and opportunity along
(26:21):
the corridor that I think Stockton Boulevard is going to be a very different place in
five and ten years. And so I think projects like this will only help that grow.
So I'm very excited to support this today. Thanks. All right. We have a motion and a second.
We might have electronic voting. There we go.
(26:45):
The motion passes unanimously with those members present.
That takes us to our executive director's report. Director Beese.
Yeah, wonderful. Just kind of highlight a few things we're working on that may not actually
come to the light of the full SDA board as far as an item. SACOG regional funding round training.
(27:06):
So we did two training sessions. They're about 30 to 40 minutes long on essentially, you know,
what is the strategy for applying for these SACOG funding rounds and how to put together
a competitive application. This is $203 million total available across six counties. And it is
awarded on a competitive basis. And so we want to ensure that our agencies are leveraging our
(27:28):
local dollars or our Measure A dollars. So we put the training on our, we did this training,
we recorded it. It's on our website. And we actually did a couple of actual
kind of check some worksheets essentially to sort of help each agency out.
So we're hopeful that we'll move forward. We'll be very successful in that funding round.
(27:50):
We had about 30 staff at each of those trainings. And it was a little different.
The first was more about strategy. So it was for one audience. And the other one was more about
preparing the grant application, which is kind of more for another audience. So it was good.
Um, one thing I want to flag is we are, we've been having some conversations with SACOG on SB1087.
(28:11):
It's a bill to modernize SB375. One of the challenges with that bill is that it,
it essentially, essentially there's a challenge as it relates to SB1 funding in the future.
It would likely, likely going to be limited to only projects that can reduce greenhouse gas
emissions through the Solutions for Congested Corridor and, and the TCEP program, which is,
(28:37):
TCEP is Trade Corridor Enhancement Program. And there's, there's some challenges with that
in the fact that, you know, the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program as an example was really
about freight and good movements. And so to try to limit our region's ability to apply for those
types of projects, to only projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions would be, we would
(28:58):
probably not have a lot of projects to, to, to try to get those SB1 dollars. We have Solutions
for Congested Corridor is a little different because there are a lot of transit and rail
related projects that are eligible for that. So I think that is a, that one's a little less
restrictive. Um, I will note that, um, with that one in particular, I think that the challenge
(29:18):
there though does become, are we going to have projects that we want to advance given our
current concern regarding a transit fiscal cliff, right? Are we going to be in a situation where
we're going to be, we're going, we don't have competitive projects to expand transit because
we don't have the funding to actually operate our current transit system. And so I think we've,
SACOG and I've had some really good conversations about it. I think what we're, what I've asked
(29:40):
them to do and they're looking into now is to make sure that our current 2025 blueprint
will continue for at least the next three cycles of the SB1 program. So we will not have that
limitation and we continue to apply for funding for all project types for the next three funding
rounds. So I think that's been a good conversation. I'm hoping to see some, something come out of
that. Uh, second item would be the, uh, there is a statewide VMT mitigation bank under AB130.
(30:05):
Um, they had developed some, um, uh, some guidelines on how that program, program would work.
The costs for that program are about 17 cents per VMT, which is really, really low to the point
where it would make a regional, uh, VMT mitigation bank pretty much infeasible. Um, and there's still
concerns about, uh, specifically that return to source component, right? Are we going to put money
(30:31):
into a statewide bank? Will it come back to us? So both STA and SACOG wrote letters to, um, LCI,
which is the office of land use and climate on those guidelines. Um, I think those are great
letters. I've attached the letter to this, to this actual, um, staff report so you can all see it,
but really focusing on that return to source element to, to ensure that those dollars that
(30:52):
are generated through VMT mitigation in your agency stay within your agency.
Uh, and then finally, I do want to highlight a couple of things, um, SB1 regional project
prioritization. So SACOG is prioritizing what projects come, what projects are prioritized
at the region when we apply for SB1. Um, STA is looking at applying, um, for that program under,
(31:13):
for the U.S. 50 comprehensive multimodal corridor plan, under the solutions for congested corridor.
And we're also looking at advancing a project, uh, on the I-5 corridor related to managed lanes.
Um, we've had a lot of good conversation with our partners. Um, they're all very excited about
those, those, the project, those projects, specifically U.S. 50. We've got a lot of,
like, multimodal transit projects on the 50 corridor. Um, we think we're in a good position
(31:37):
to get, to hopefully get those funded through this program. And then finally, since most of us,
a lot of us went to cap to cap last, um, recently, uh, it was really interesting.
We, I was at cap to cap and we had been working with, um, DOT on our safe streets and roads for
all grants, trying to get that grant assigned. And they signed it on the Monday when I was in
Washington, uh, right when I was in actually a meeting with them and I thanked them. But,
(32:00):
uh, so we're excited about that county wide safety action plan. Um, they, we got a million
dollar grant to do that. We can now, we can start developing the RFP and issue it was about
a $1.25 million effort. And it would basically provide, uh, what is our, what is our plan to
address safety, uh, at a county level? Uh, we'll have chapters for each agency. Some agencies are
doing their own plans. We'll just incorporate your work, but it makes us eligible for other
(32:23):
grant programs. Once that plan is done, it makes us eligible for the highway safety improvement
program. It makes us eligible for safe streets and roads for all actual implementation grants.
So I'm pretty excited that we're able to move that forward. And with that, I'm open to any
questions. Thank you, director. Thank you, chair. Um, great report. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Uh, with respect to the, um, the statewide VMT bank, you know, we had a spirited discussion
(32:50):
on this board and obviously returned to source in some fashion remains a serious concern. So
I appreciate you and, and say cog, um, uh, you know, certainly waving that banner.
But the other thing is we had a discussion on this at the lunar committee at say cog last week,
and there's some speculation that the 17 cents per unit, um, VMT figure is artificially low
(33:15):
and that it has basically no effective purchasing power, uh, depending on which region, uh, it's
into, uh, which it's deployed and that maybe they perhaps looked at expediency over accuracy
when trying to sort of look at how to put this, uh, piece together. And so I would just,
uh, encourage, and I don't know if it takes formal direction from this board,
(33:37):
but I would encourage you to kind of stay aware and stay vigilant and continue, uh, demanding,
uh, you know, a reasonable program to put together, whether that's, you know,
something that we can compete with locally or not. Thank you, director tickets.
Thanks. Um, uh, something you said made me think, uh, there, uh, is considerable controversy,
(34:00):
uh, about, uh, carbs potential for, um, affecting the distribution of greenhouse,
the greenhouse gas emissions fund. And, uh, in particular, uh, the, uh, transit agencies
around the state. And I think, uh, increasingly the cities and counties have become, um,
(34:24):
nothing short of alarmed because the way the carb has, uh, at least, uh, floated a draft,
it would zero out money for the affordable housing, sustainable communities program for
tursip and, and for the trade quarters. And when you mentioned the trade quarters,
that's what triggered us, the trade corridors program. Um, so I was just curious whether, uh,
(34:50):
either you have picked that, that up or whether the state association has,
has picked, picked that up as an, as an issue. Yeah, that sounds like it's squarely in the
SACOG world to me and the Cal, you know, the California, uh, council of governments. I mean,
I'm not as aware of that as, as, uh, those agencies. I'm pretty sure they're actively
(35:13):
working on that specifically because there is some discretionary funds and it's unclear exactly
where those funds are going. Um, um, so I could, I could work with them and check in to see where
they're at. I think they're fairly effective. It's certainly relevant to SACOG, no question
about it. Um, but it also becomes relevant to, to this authority, uh, in terms of funding that,
(35:34):
that could be available, could be a part of a match for funds that are available under measure
A, for example, affordable housing, sustainable communities program. So I, I, I encourage you to,
to take a look at it. Yeah, I'll just say, I think the, you know, affordable housing,
(35:55):
sustainable community strategies or that program itself, I mean, typically we'll fund both
accommodation of housing transit and bike and ped, right? And so I think I'm aware of like five
different applications that SACRT is working on under that program. Um, and then we, we also view
Stockton Boulevard as a very strong future project. Um, and I think, uh, I think Dos Rios
(36:17):
actually was one of the, one of the projects that was awarded. Dos Rios, I think, yes.
So you make a great point. As, as is the, the, the bridge housing project at Arden and Del Paso
Boulevard, which has transportation improvements associated with it as well. But I, my only,
my only point is that I think it had, may have implications for the authority too. So it might
(36:40):
be something you want to delve into a little bit. Thanks. Thank you. Any other questions or comments
on this item? All right. That takes us to our authority and subcommittees, uh, Director
Talamantes, any update on CARTA? All right. Um, CARTA is extending a job offer to the new
(37:03):
executive director of that, and it will be on the board agenda for next week. And so I was not part
of the interviews, but I heard it was very competitive and we selected a great candidate.
And so excited to see what that looks like. And then I-5 will eventually make its way
onto the managed lanes and then eventually we'll have voting power and, um, we will hit that road
(37:26):
and get a lot of comments from the residents of Sacramento region. I'm sure. All right. So next
step, we have our new transportation funding subcommittee, Director Guerra. Uh, nothing from
the committee itself, but the, the, uh, uh, information available from the safe streets
campaign that's out there independently of this agency, uh, is out there collecting signatures.
(37:46):
They have a deadline coming up in about in a month and, um, we'll know more information about
that and in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, SDA's role in the region subcommittee,
Director Hume. We have not met nothing to report. Hopefully we'll have a meeting maybe towards the
end of summer. All right. Any other comments from the board today? Seeing none, we're adjourned at
(38:07):
2 11. Have a great day, everyone.
Popular Podcasts
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.