POLICY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

Friday, October 24, 2014 – 2:30 p.m.

Menlo Park City Council Chambers

701 Laurel St.

Menlo Park, CA 94025

AGENDA

1. Call to Order

2. Roll Call

3. Chairperson Comments

4. Public Comment (For items not on the agenda)

5. Consent Calendar

a. Minutes of April 25, 2014 Meeting

6. Report of the Citizens Advisory Panel

7. Information Items

a. DRC Project Committee Structures

b. Dumbarton Express Bus Service Update

i. DB & DB1 Bus Service Performance

ii. Dumbarton Bus Replacement

iii. Dumbarton Express Bus Service Expansion Study

8. Action Item

a. DRC Project Committee Objectives and Structures

9. Correspondence

10. Requests from Members

11. Next Meeting

12. Adjourn

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

1 of 7

Meeting: Date:

DRC Policy Advisory Committee April 25, 2014

Location: Time: City of Union City Council Chamber Meeting Start: 1:32 pm 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road Union City, CA 94587 Meeting Adjourn: 3:07 pm

Notes Prepared By: Issue Date: Shirley Rosales October 17, 2014

Attendance:

Attendees (sign-in sheet attached)

Policy Committee Members

Carol Dutra-Vernaci, ACTC (Chair) –Union

City

Alan Nagy, ACTC- City of Newark

Raj Salwan, ACTC-City of Fremont

Barbara Pierce, SMCTA- Redwood City

Kirsten Keith, SMCTA- Menlo Park- Late

1:50 PM

Tom Blalock, CCJPA

Project Staff

April Chan, Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

Hilda Lafebre, Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board

Shirley Rosales, Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers

Board

Others Please refer to the attached sign-in sheet.

Item No. Discussion

1. Call to Order

Mayor Carol Dutra-Vernaci, PAC Chair, called the meeting to order at 1:32 pm.

2. Roll Call

Insufficient members were in attendance to achieve quorum.

3. Chairperson’s Comments

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci stated that due to MTC’s recent actions she was considering perhaps changingthe title of the committee

4. Public Comment

No public comments.

5. Consent Calendar

Minutes of the October 25, 2013 meeting could not be approved as there was no quorum.

6. Report of the Citizen Advisory Panel (CAP)

Tim Pitsker (Freemont CAP representative) stated that there were no items voted on by the CAP.Some CAP members have expressed deep concern about the proposed transfer of $20 million to the

Agenda Item 5a.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

2 of 7

Caltrain Electrification Project. These CAP members indicated their desire to keep the funding for the Dumbarton Rail corridor.

7. Information Items

A. MTC Recommendation on the Dumbarton Rail RM2 fund balance

April Chan (JPB) provided an update on the status of the DRC project (Attachment 1). She reported that MTC staff included a provision in the recommendation for the East Bay, forgiving the original loan made from RM2 line item for Dumbarton to the Bart to Warm Springs Project in the amount of $91 Million; originally a repayment was scheduled back to the Dumbarton Project in 2019.

Ms. Chan also relayed comments from the Cities of Menlo Park and Palo Alto and from a member of the CAP that were sent to MTC:

City of Menlo Park City Council indicated they were fine with the recommendation to transfer$34.7 million in RM2 funds to Dumbarton Bus Fleet replacement Project ($14.7 million) andthe Caltrain Electrification Project ($20 million); however they oppose the loan forgiveness of$91 Million for the Bart to Warm Springs Project.

City of Palo Alto submitted similar comments, except that they support forgiving only $20Million of the $91 Million loan for Bart to Warm Springs Project and pay back the remaining$71 Million loan balance since in the West; Caltrain Electrification Project would be receiving$20 Million in funding.

A few days ago, we forwarded an email to the PAC from a member of the CAP and formerChair of SMCTA, Malcom Dudley, opposing MTC’s recommendations (Attachment 2).

i. Discussion

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci added an email comment dated April 23, 2014, from the Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund to the MTC in opposition to reprogramming the RM2 funds.

Alan Nagy expressed concern as to how the electrification of Caltrain would advance the East-West corridor.

April Chan mentioned that the money was specifically programmed to the Dumbarton Rail, the reason they are holding the public hearing is because the money is being moved from this corridor to some other project. That is why MTC had to have a public hearing before they could take such an action. One of the things that is planned in the EIR is that the Dumbarton Rail corridor will feed into the Caltrain line. All three of the rail alternatives feed the rail into the Redwood City area.

Alan Nagy replied indicating that there thousands of commuters every day that don’t need Caltrain, rather a fast and reliable way to get to work. Facebook is creating a grid-lock on the West Bay in Menlo Park. Facebook is adding 5 or 6,000 employees who will mostly live on the East side. Taking money away from the West corridor, then, is not an option. The money that was voted on by the people for improvements in that corridor is now being taken away. I don’t know how MTC in good conscious can do that. This is the problem when you put initiatives out for people to vote on and then something else happens. The need isn’t here right now for the Dumbarton Corridor, but it will be. The goal is to increase ridership with the funding for new buses, but need the infrastructure (i.e. Park & Ride lots). The Park & Ride lot in Fremont is filled by 7:30/7:45 AM. He requested an answer as to potential plans for additional lots or for increasing the size of these Park & Ride lot.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

3 of 7

April Chan responded that the total amount proposed is $14.7 million. She mentioned that MTC was advised on the need for slightly less than $10 million, therefore, there is about $4.7 million for capital improvements. Improvements of traffic along local streets and mayor arterials feeding into the bridge are being contemplated. This is an area, Ms. Chan feels can be discussed with MTC and use some of this funding for short-term capital improvements.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci mentioned her conversations with the Mayor of Menlo Park regarding housing affordability in the East Bay versus the West Bay, in particular the Dumbarton area which impacts the traffic on the Dumbarton Corridor. She also mentioned that it would be more productive to put more funding into the buses as a short-term solution than transferring Dumbarton Rail funds to the Caltrain Electrification.

Kirsten Keith indicated that the City of Menlo Park is not in favor of forgiving the $91 Million loan as it was not a gift. It is important that that money be used in the way it was meant to be used originally. Menlo Park would like to see a train station near all the larger employers in the Dumbarton Corridor area. It’s understood that currently there are other projects working on congestion relief in other areas that need funding to further or complete the project, but it should not be to the detriment of Menlo Park, for which the money was voted on. The representative of Menlo Park requested JPB’s project staff to make sure the Dumbarton Rail Project continue to move forward, with the understanding of the funding challenge as there are hundreds of millions of dollars needed. She considered it will not be insurmountable if all stakeholders work together.

Tom Blalock mentioned that MTC manages all these funding sources to benefit the Bay Area. When the Bart was building the San Francisco airport extension in the West side, there was a shortage of money and MTC borrowed from the East Bay extension to Warm Springs Project to fund the West Bay project, which was very successful and is now paying back, instead of letting the money sit in the bank deteriorating. Right now MTC is working on providing funding for Caltrain because the Dumbarton Rail Project is so far out from being able to be built. We need so much money in order to build the Dumbarton Rail Corridor; we are going to have to rely on MTC to get there. We don’t build any faith with MTC by saying we don’t want them to do something that they are going to do anyway.

Raj Salwan indicated that transportation is a regional issue. He expressed support to MTC’s recommendation because he considered supportive of the region.

Barbara Pierce mentioned that the City of Redwood City support the MTC recommendation. All transportation pieces need to work as well as they can. The money needed for the Dumbarton Rail is not there now, which is a significant hurdle. The position of Redwood City is that when a project cannot use the funds, it’s better to use them to improve the transportation throughout the area. We do need to go back to MTC to remember us in the future when building support to build the Dumbarton Rail as it is a critical piece in the East- West connection as well as continue to work together to make sure the Dumbarton project is not derailed.

Jim Bigelow (City of Redwood City) mentioned that he has been part of the Dumbarton project for the last 25 years and is not going to give up today. He stated we need to go back to a restart mode to get project moving. The $14.7 million is good funding for the new buses and expanding services up to Redwood City. In the regional plan, the Dumbarton Rail will be electrified, so money will come to that later. Caltrain Electrification is going through its final stages of approval. We need to get political will reestablished for Dumbarton and large companies participating. The CAP and PAC need to keep regular meetings going with full quorum and present on what cities are doing to envision rail. He believes the project can return to a productive path and perhaps we can phase the project due to the cost. It would be valuable to have the cities on the corridor present their vision or plans in preparation of the rail. Mr. Bigelow also recommended an oversight body over AC Transit for the use of the project funds being used to expand the bus

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

4 of 7

service in the Dumbarton corridor to ensure they meet the needs of the communities in the corridor.

Barry Ferrier (City of Union City) mentioned that MTC is the regional body, but they appear not to be paying attention to the problem affecting millions of commuters in this corridor, which is only expected to increase. The real issue is the people trying to get to and from work. High tech companies keep expanding in the area and the developments going on in west bay and east bay, reverse commutes; people are frustrated at the increased traffic congestion. If the Dumbarton Rail Project was to be shut-down, it is also at a high cost; there is still commitment to the Coast Guard to either remove or replace bridge. The problem is not going to go away. It would be ideal to have everyone involved with this project, such as the PAC members, attend the MTC meetings in order to represent the interests of the residents of this corridor.

Kirsten Keith inquired as to a way to use some of the $14.7 million on improving bicycle routes leading to and from Dumbarton Bridge. The buses only have capacity to carry 2-3 bicycles. She requested to look into this issue further and try to find a solution.

April Chan responded that all of the $14.7 million is allocated to replace the existing buses. Based on estimates, there will be a little left-over to expand the fleet. She also mentioned that she is working with MTC staff to decide if funding can be used on other capital improvements. There are also a number of other bike/pedestrian programs that could potentially provide funding.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci noted that there are not enough members for a quorum to take any kind of action and agrees that looking at short-term solutions and bicycle/pedestrian access is important.

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) noted that the existing bus configuration is for 2 bike racks. There are current proposals to have 3-position bicycle racks. The California Highway Patrol has been concerned that it is too long, or blocks view of headlights.

Kirsten Keith asked about ways to reduce bus sizes in order to accommodate more bikes, or to have short buses with trailers.

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) mentioned that reducing bus length reduces capacity, which won’t be appropriate given the current ridership.

Kirsten Keith did not agree with the statement. She indicated that by providing additional bicycle racks, ridership would increase. She requested to look into any studies on this issue.

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) mentioned that Caltrain provides bus trailer with a van for Bay Bridge crossing. Another option is to look at bike lockers.

Kirsten Keith requested that these options be explored.

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) indicated that this can be done through a survey. However, no timeline was provided.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci suggested placing bike carriers on the back of the bus.

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) mentioned that there is potential for sight disconnect between operator and rider retrieving bike at the back of a bus when making multiple stops along the route.

Tom Blalock commented that in instances where there is no quorum, the PAC could develop something to take to MTC and then take action when the PAC does have a quorum.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

5 of 7

Barbara Pierce suggested a bike study to identify potential solutions. Though bike/ped improvements are important, Ms. Pierce did not feel it was appropriate for MTC to spend some of the $14.7 million on improving bike access. She suggested that if C/CAG does the study in the San Mateo County area it would be more appropriate. The goal should be utilize the funds to continue to improve the corridor to prepare it for the rail service and look for alternative funding to take care of other needs.

Raj Salwan suggested that it would be better if the money is spent on direct improvements rather than studies, such as the parking areas.

Alan Nagy reiterated his support of the original recommendations from the PAC and CAP, and did not agree with MTC totally ignoring those recommendations. Redirecting money from the Dumbarton Rail Corridor takes away from the ability to improve or provide other modes of transportation service to the residents of this area. Additionally, he understands that there is $135 million of toll fee funds that are being diverted and he believes that people should be made aware.

B. DBROC Performance Update

Howard Der from AC Transit provided an update on the Dumbarton Express Service (Attachment 3). He reported that, in general, ridership has been going up in correspondence to increased service funded by RM2 funding.

i. Questions and Answers

Barbara Pierce asked – are buses riding at capacity now?

Howard Der responded – some buses are at capacity now, especially at the peak of the peak trips to be expected.

Barbara Pierce asked – if you added more buses, would you anticipate a jump in ridership in general, or only at the peak?

Howard Der responded – it all depends on operations funding. If able to add funding, one potential avenue would be to add more service and increase frequency. This could attract more riders. For current fiscal year, ridership is up about 7% without any change in service.

Barbara Pierce replied – it would be helpful for future rail project as well as congestion. If you felt that adding an additional stop and frequency in service would make a significant increase in ridership, then that would be something we would support and encourage MTC to look into. In terms of fare box, why do you think we aren’t reaching the fare box on one particular route? Not enough people?

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) responded – ridership has been increasing gradually and we have three years to get to 30%.

Kirsten Keith asked – when is the 30% recovery deadline?

Howard Der responded – that we will begin the 3rd

year of that timeline this coming July. We haveuntil July 30

, 2015 for that specific route.

Kirsten Keith asked – how is that 30% decided?

Howard Der responded – decided by MTC and not sure how they reach that figure. The national fare box recovery standard is 20%.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

6 of 7

Kirsten Keith asked – are you in discussion now about whether the 30% should continue after 2015?

Robert. Del Rosario (AC Transit) responded – we haven’t had that discussion yet. At this moment there are no red flags. We should do some target marketing, but we are trending in the right direction.

Kirsten Keith asked – can you confirm what amenities are on the buses?

Robert Del Rosario (AC Transit) responded – these are suburban-configured buses, so they have mid- to high-back seating. Most of them have reclining seating, individual reading lights, Wi-Fi, AC, two bike racks in front, Clipper compatible.

Kirsten Keith asked – it would be great if our area could work on having just one type of pass for multiple transportation modes.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci noted – she has heard people commenting that they enjoy the buses across the bridge and the Wi-Fi and only use BART as back-up.

Jim Bigelow commented – some of the buses coming over during peak hour are standing room only, so it is important that with the study we look at how many buses are needed and learn from what currently has happened. Newark has $17 million for Dumbarton Rail that hasn’t been touched and may be reassigned by their Transportation Commission. We have suggested that transit center be included in Newark, where they have a new development plan and have gone through EIR process, and Menlo Park at Willow Road. For our San Mateo County people, the latest quarterly Transportation Authority report shows an accrual in the renewed Measure A for Dumbarton Rail for $6.7 million. Perhaps the Newark City Council can move quickly and do a formal action so they can get a transit center started for these buses and be able to provide additional parking spaces.

Barry Ferrier – we need to thank Jim Bigelow for starting the idea to start the RM2 $5 million fund set aside for Dumbarton Rail operations going elsewhere because we didn’t have a rail to operate. Diane Shaw, an employee of SamTrans, reported at the CAP meeting that she used to take the Dumbarton Express bus, but has now been riding the ACE train from Freemont connecting down to Santa Clara and connecting to the Caltrain northbound to San Carlos and she is making it faster than the Dumbarton Express bus service. Perhaps if we had a couple of trains running for Dumbarton Rail we could run them on the ACE network connecting with Caltrain on an interim basis. There needs to be oversight of AC Transit and the Dumbarton Express service. There is no one from the peninsula corridor representing at the meetings; although the PAC oversees the rail project, we are utilizing the bus service to increase ridership to transition to the rail project eventually. Also, why don’t we make the Dumbarton bus an all-day bus at it serves many business parks with varying work schedules?

Kirsten Keith – expressed interest in looking into Ferrier’s suggestion to run couple of Dumbarton Rail on the ACE network connecting with Caltrain on an interim basis. It was added this would involve coordinating with Union Pacific to allow crossing their tracks which would involve a multi-million project to improve capacity on their tracks. However, she indicated, that might still be a less expensive alternative than the cost of building the Dumbarton Rail Project as planned

Tim Pitsker commented – in regards to improvement of Capital Corridor and ACE, he lives near the subdivision line to be purchased for the Dumbarton Rail, near the Shinn connection and has observed the Union Pacific Railroad rebuild that line, replacing ties and spikes. Perhaps there is something in the works for making a stop by Capital Corridor at the Union City BART station or they will be moving a lot of freight. We should look into it as it would affect the future of the Dumbarton Rail Project.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes

7 of 7

8. Correspondence

Hilda Lafebre (JPB) informed that no written correspondence had been received beyond theinformation provided at the beginning of the meeting.

9. Requests from Members

Barbara Pierce requested that quarterly meetings continue that will look at transit centers that havebeen planned and look at what needs to be done strategically to build up ridership and complete theDumbarton Rail. As well be strategic about getting mayor companies involved.

Kirsten Keith requested to achieve a quorum at the next meeting as it is difficult to take any actionsthat will improve the Dumbarton Corridor. She also looked forward to a bike study.

Raj Salwan requested that the PAC continues to meet when we have a quorum. Perhaps send aletter out to the appointed members who are not attending the meetings.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci – suggested sending a letter to the members that are not showing up, andrequesting that they reach out to their alternates in the event they cannot attend the meetings.

Hilda Lafebre indicated that MTC and VTA have not made appointments which will make the quorumand that it needs resolution. Mayor Dutra-Vernaci asked if is possible to reduce the number ofmembers to make it possible to reach quorum.

Hilda Lafebre responded that it is up to the PAC to make that decision.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci requested this to be added to the agenda for the next meeting. However, we willneed a quorum at the next meeting to approve the action.

Tim Pitsker commented that VTA may not even be interested since they eliminated all funding for theDumbarton Rail Project a couple of years ago since it is not a part of their 10-year plan. They havenot attended meetings in years.

Jim Bigelow – VTA delayed the Dumbarton Rail funding because they are focusing on their BARTextension for 10 years. It doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be here.

Kirsten Keith – Can we at least agree that a letter can be sent to confirm participation?

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci - absolutely.

10. Next Meeting Purpose and Date

Next meeting on Friday July 25th at 1:30pm in San Carlos

11. Adjourn

Meeting adjourned 3:07 p.m.

Memorandum

Date: April 17, 2014

To: Policy Advisory Committee Members

From: April Chan-PCJPB

Re: MTC Recommendation on the Dumbarton Rail RM2 Fund Balance

We previously informed the Dumbarton Policy Advisory Committee that while all elements of

the Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report

(EIS/EIR) for the Dumbarton Corridor Rail Project were completed, the funding plan for the

project is deficient. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has indicated that if reasonable

funding sources cannot be included in the Administrative Draft EIS/EIR to fully fund the

project, it is unlikely the FTA would issue a Record of Decision for the project. As a result, the

project is now placed on hold until a funding plan can be secured.

We further reported that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) had inquired on

the status of the Dumbarton Corridor Rail project and that $34.7 million in Regional Measure 2

(RM2) capital funds for the project remain unallocated. In response to the MTC inquiry, we

informed MTC that the Dumbarton Corridor Rail project would be placed on hold, and that the

project partners worked to develop a list of potential projects that can utilize the RM2 funds to

provide benefits to the Dumbarton Corridor and that can be implemented in the near-term. The

list of potential projects was transmitted to the MTC in November 2013.

At its February 12, 2014 Commission meeting, MTC staff recommended the following for

Dumbarton:

Provide no further funding for Dumbarton Rail;

Transfer $34.7 million in RM2 funds to two (2) projects:

o Dumbarton Bus Fleet replacement: $14.7 million; and

o Caltrain Electrification: $20 million

At its March 5, 2014 Commission meeting, MTC scheduled a public hearing for its April 9, 2014

meeting to receive public comments regarding the re-direction of Dumbarton RM2 funds to the

Electrification project, among other actions it needs to take regarding other projects for the MTC

RM2 program. MTC is slated to take action on its final recommendations of the RM2 program

at its May 28, 2014 Commission meeting.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes, Attachment 1

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes, Attachment 2

Page 1 of 2

From: malcolm.dudley@wellsfargoadvisors.com [mailto:malcolm.dudley@wellsfargoadvisors.com]

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:36 PM To: Lafebre, Hilda

Subject: FW: Don't lose Dumbarton Rail to BART!

Hilda: As we discussed, please distribute copies of this letter to members of the San Mateo County

Transportation Authority, The Dumbarton Policy Advisory Committee and the Dumbarton Citizens

Advisory Committee. Thank you.

Malcolm H. Dudley Wells Fargo Advisors Senior Vice President -InvestmentsCA Insurance License # 0A456831950 University Avenue Suite #300, E. Palo Alto, CA 94303Ph: (650) 330-3856 Fax: (650) 322-7381 TF: (800) 423-1736Malcolm.Dudley@WellsFargoAdvisors.com

From: Dudley, Malcolm

Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:25 PM

To: Rosy Leyva (rleyva@mtc.ca.gov) Cc: Dudley, Malcolm (mhdudley@pacbell.net)

Subject: Don't lose Dumbarton Rail to BART!

Rosy: Please distribute to all of the Commissioners.

Dear MTC Commissioners:

My participation in the Dumbarton Corridor issues goes back to the early 1970s during the planning stage for the new Dumbarton Highway Bridge. West Bay citizens and cities were deeply concerned with the potential negative traffic impacts from the proposed new Dumbarton Highway Bridge. The initial plan included only a single West Bay approach road, the Willow Road approach in Menlo Park. Citizens from Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Atherton formed a citizens organization to work with Caltrans in an effort to disperse West Bay approach road traffic, to deal with drainage problems in East Palo Alto and to include rail transit over the proposed new Dumbarton Highway Bridge. The citizens group had also entered into a lawsuit in an effort to bring about mitigations. As a result of the citizens efforts two additional West Bay approach roads were added to the design. The citizens group was not successful in having rail service added to the new highway bridge. The focus then shifted to working for establishing passenger rail service using the existing Dumbarton Rail Bridge.

In 1986, while I was mayor of Atherton, I was appointed to serve on the San Mateo County Expenditure Plan Committee to help in the development of a ½ cent sales tax measure to fund transportation projects within San Mateo County. That committee proposed a measure that limited Caltrain investment to $20 million dollars over a fifteen year period. That was a critical time for the future of Caltrain as the state subsidy was to end in another two years, leaving insufficient funds to continue Caltrain operation on the Peninsula. I was the sole negative vote on that proposal. Frank Pagliaro, then mayor of Burlingame, and I were successful in getting a majority of San Mateo County cities to vote against that Measure “A” proposal. We then reorganized the Expenditure Plan Committee and made Caltrain the top priority, with 50% of all Measure “A” funds going to Caltrain, which produced about $500 million over the next twenty years. With the successful passage of Measure “A” we formed the San Mateo County Transportation Authority to administer the funds raised from this sales tax. I served

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes, Attachment 2

Page 2 of 2

on this board from the beginning, including several years as chairman. Within the first two years we had enough funds to be able to acquire the Right of Way from San Francisco to San Jose.

The Dumbarton Rail Bridge was one of the important elements of Measure “A” This was one of the projects that had been broadly supported by the voters. The promise of having rail service across the Bay gave hope for relief from a growing congestion problem in the mid-peninsula.

There has been a long history of cooperation between governmental bodies in working to bring about this voter approved plan for the Dumbarton Rail Bridge. Elected representatives from rail corridor cities and the three counties, with help from members of the state legislature including Assemblyman Ted Lempert and Assemblywoman Delaine Eastin all worked to carry out this commitment to build the Dumbarton Rail Bridge. In addition to the counties’ transportation tax revenues voters approved Regional Measure 2 in 2004.

The loan of $91million of Dumbarton funds to finance the BART Warm Springs Extension, was never intended to be a gift. It is important for voters to be able to trust that tax payer funds will be spent as promised. There is no reasonable basis to forgive this $91 million loan. Taxpayers must be able to trust the promises that are made when they are asked to approve bond or tax measures.

Currently there is a balance of $49.2 million in Measure A funds for the Dumbarton Rail Project and the remaining Regional Measure 2 funds. These funds need to be retained for the eventual Dumbarton Rail Bridge project. It would be wrong to forgive the BART loan without going back for voter approval. It was in the spirit of cooperation that Dumbarton Rail funds were loaned to BART, but this loan was made with the expectation that this loan would be repaid.

Finally, there might be one other alternative that helps BART and preserves Dumbarton. What about swapping Dumbarton Rail for Dumbarton BART? Forgive the loan if BART agrees to plan for a BART line coming across the bridge, linking up with BART in San Jose, and eventually linking with BART at SFO? If BART ran up the middle of 101 on elevated tracks, it could also provide a link to the San Jose airport! Then we would truly have the Bay Area linked with a continuous transit system.

Malcolm Dudley, Former Chair, SMCTA

Malcolm H. Dudley Wells Fargo Advisors Senior Vice President -InvestmentsCA Insurance License # 0A456831950 University Avenue Suite #300, E. Palo Alto, CA 94303Ph: (650) 330-3856 Fax: (650) 322-7381 TF: (800) 423-1736Malcolm.Dudley@WellsFargoAdvisors.com

Alameda Contra Costa Transit District

1600 Franklin Street Oakland, California 94612

MEMORANDUM

Date: March 31, 2014

To: Dumbarton Rail Project Development Team

From: Howard Der, Dumbarton Express Contract Service Administrator

Re: Dumbarton Express Operations Update

The following memorandum provides a current status and overview of the Dumbarton Express bus operation.

BACKGROUND:

Effective December 2011, the Dumbarton Express began operating as a contracted service. Under this arrangement, AC Transit fulfills the administrative and governance functions and MV Transportation fulfills the operations and maintenance functions. The term of the contract between AC Transit and MV Transportation is five (5) years.

The Dumbarton Bridge Regional Operations Consortium (DBROC) provides operational oversight. DBROC membership consists of staff from AC Transit, BART, SamTrans, Union City Transit, and VTA.

The Dumbarton Express is funded through RM-2 operating funds originally allocated to Dumbarton Rail operations. MTC allocated slightly over $2.4 million for the Dumbarton Express for FY 2013-2014.

The Dumbarton Express fleet consists of 16 Gillig Phantom high floor transit buses. The buses have a suburban commuter layout with high-back seating and WiFi connectivity.

The Dumbarton Express consists of two routes. Route DB operates all day from 5:22 AM to 8:51 PM between Union City BART and the Stanford Oval with 30-minute peak frequency and 45-minute off-peak frequency. Route DB1 operates during the peak period from 5:26 AM to 9:45 AM in the morning and 1:35 PM to 8:43 PM in the afternoon between Union City BART and the Palo Alto Industrial Park area with 20-minute peak frequency. Figure 1a below depicts the Dumbarton Express route structure in the East Bay and Figure 1b below depicts the Dumbarton Express route structure in the Peninsula.

Dumbarton Rail Corridor Policy Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes, Attachment 3

Figure 1a Dumbarton Express Route Structure-East Bay

Figure 1b Dumbarton Express Route Structure-Peninsula

SIGNIFICANT ACCOMPLISHMENTS & PERFORMANCE:

The total Dumbarton Express ridership for CY 2013 was 318,938 compared to 270,915 for CY 2012 translating to an annual increase of almost 18%. The current combined average daily ridership is almost 1,300 with ridership split almost evenly between Route DB and DB1.

Figure 2 below depicts the monthly ridership since December 2011 when MV Transportation began operation of the Dumbarton Express:

Figure 2

18,768

19,842

19,807

21,760

20,489

21,114

20,467

24,013

26,483 22,299

28,646

23,407

22,588

24,771

23,254

26,966

27,360

28,808

26,892

28,520

30,552 26,629

29,702

23,995

21,489

26,788

24,083

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

22,000

24,000

26,000

28,000

30,000

32,000

34,000

Decem

ber 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

Septem

ber 2012

October 2012

Novem

ber 2012

Decem

ber 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

Septem

ber 2013

October 2013

Novem

ber 2013

Decem

ber 2013

January 2014

February 2014

Dumbarton Express Monthly RidershipDecember 2011-February 2014

Monthly ridership was hovering at around 20,000 before July 2012, when additional trips were added and span of service was increased. Since then, ridership has been consistently over 24,000 per month, except for the holiday months (November and December) and September 2012 for unknown reasons.

AC Transit purchased automatic passenger counters (APCs) for installation on four buses in the Dumbarton Express fleet. Data collected from the APCs will provide a better understanding of passenger activity and facilitate the ability to make service adjustments based on quantitative information.

To date, the Dumbarton Express is operating on budget. As set by MTC, the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB should be 20% or better and the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB1 should be 30% or better. For the 2nd Quarter of FY 2013-2014 ending

December 31, 2013, the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB was 28.2% and the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB1 was 26.2%.

FUTURE ACTIVITY:

To enhance fleet uniformity and reduce average fleet age, SamTrans is in the process of transferring 4 retired buses to the Dumbarton Express operation. This will allow MV to terminate the lease of the 4 ex-LA DOT buses to help operate the service.

With the concurrence of the Dumbarton Rail Citizens Advisory Panel (CAP) and the Dumbarton Rail Policy Advisory Committee (PAC), SamTrans, as the Dumbarton Rail Project Development Team lead agency, has petitioned MTC to permit Dumbarton Rail RM-2 capital funds to be used to:

1. Purchase new vehicles for the Dumbarton Express fleet2. Develop a study to plan the expansion of DB Express service3. Install transit priority improvements along the DB Express corridor

MTC is expected to approve the funding for the capital allocation in May 2014. At a minimum, the new vehicles will have the same level of amenities as the existing Dumbarton Express fleet.

The AC Transit Board of Directors approved a change to its fare structure in December 2013, which under the Dumbarton Express interagency operations agreement applies to the Dumbarton Express as well. Key features to new fare structure include discounted local fares for Clipper users, the elimination of transfers and a shift to a pay-per-ride system, and implementation of a day pass. AC Transit staff is currently assessing how these aspects of the new fare structure among others will affect and interface with the Dumbarton Express fare structure, especially with interagency transfer agreements. AC Transit staff will present findings and recommendations once the assessment is complete.

Memorandum

Date: October 24, 2014

To: Policy Advisory Committee Members

From: April Chan-PCJPB

Re: DRC Project Committees Composition

In 2004, the Dumbarton Rail Corridor (DRC) project funding partners agreed to form a Policy

Advisory Committee (PAC) to provide oversight and policy advice during the development

and implementation of the project.

The PAC is comprised of a total of 13 members with the committee membership as follows:

3 members appointed by the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA)

3 members appointed by the Valley Transportation Authority

3 members appointed by the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC)

3 members appointed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission

1 member appointed by the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority

Members appointed by ACTC represent cities of Newark, Fremont and Union City, while

members appointed by SMCTA represent cites of Redwood City, East Palo Alto and Menlo

Park.

In addition to PAC, a Project Development Team (PDT) structure, comprised of staff

representing the above agencies and cities along the Dumbarton, convene prior to each PAC

meeting to discuss items to better inform their respective members of the PAC.

A Citizen Advisory Panel (CAP), consisting of interested citizens representing cities along the

Dumbarton Rail Corridor, was also constituted to provide advice to the PAC on policy issues.

Since the Dumbarton Corridor Rail Project has now been placed on hold due to the need to

secure a funding plan that can advance the project further, MTC has approved the transfer of

Regional Measure 2 funds from the DRC project to two projects:

Dumbarton Bus Fleet replacement: $14.8 million

Caltrain Electrification: $20 million

Agenda Item 7a.

Policy Advisory Committee Members October 24, 2014 Page 2 of 2

The PAC should consider the committee composition resulting from the following:

MTC withdrew the appointment of members to the PAC due to the shift in RM2 funding

from Dumbarton Rail to Electrification and funding for Dumbarton Bus Fleet

Replacement

The purpose of PAC, which was formed to inform and advise on the rail project, has

shifted to review and monitor bus service improvement effort along the Dumbarton

corridor area (DB & DB1).

At the October 24, 2014 PAC meeting, PAC members should discuss the following, in light of

the above developments:

Purpose of the PAC

Appropriate composition of the PAC

Appropriate supporting committees to advise PAC

Alameda Contra Costa Transit District

1600 Franklin Street Oakland, California 94612

MEMORANDUM

Date: September 30, 2014

To: Dumbarton Rail Project Committees (PDT, CAP & PAC)

From: Howard Der, Dumbarton Express Contract Service Administrator

Re: Dumbarton Express Operations Update

The following memorandum provides a current status and overview of the Dumbarton Express bus operation for the 2nd Quarter of Calendar Year 2014, as well as an update on bus fleet enhancement activities and the service expansion study brought forward during the April 2014 Dumbarton Rail Committee meetings.

OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE

The total Dumbarton Express ridership for the 2nd Quarter of CY 2014 (April-June 2014) was 81,010 compared to 83,060 for the corresponding period in CY 2013, translating to a decrease of approximately 2.5%. The current combined average daily ridership is approximately 1,300 with ridership split fairly evenly between Route DB and DB1. Table 1 below compares ridership activity between the individual months of 2nd Quarter CY 2013 and 2nd Quarter CY 2014.

For the entire Fiscal Year 2013/2014 ending June 30, 2014, the Dumbarton Express ridership was 319,642. In comparison, the ridership for Fiscal Year 2012/2013 ending June 30, 2013 was 305,487. Between the two periods, the Dumbarton Express saw an increase in ridership of 4.6%. Previously, ridership for Fiscal Year 2011/2012 was 259,587, resulting in a ridership increase of over 23% for the two year period between FY 2011/2012 and FY 2013/2014.

To date, the Dumbarton Express is operating on budget. As set by MTC, the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB should be 20% or better and the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB1 should be 30% or better. For the 2nd Quarter of CY 2014 ending June 30, 2014, the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB was 24.1% and the farebox recovery ratio for Route DB1 was 22.8%. These ratios have remained relatively unchanged since the expansion of service in July 2012. Both routes have three years to achieve the farebox recovery. Per MTC, the farebox recovery needs to be met by FY 2014/2015; funding for both DB lines would be provided for FY 2015/2016 but could be discontinued as early as FY 2016/2017. AC Transit with the DBROC and the Dumbarton Rail stakeholders will need to develop strategies to meet the MTC requirements for RM-2 funding.

Agenda Item 7b.

Table 1 Dumbarton Express Ridership

2nd Quarter CY 2013 vs. 2nd Quarter CY 2014

April May June

2nd

Quarter

Total

Total Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 27,641 26,560 26,809 81,010

Line DB Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 13,864 13,848 14,113 41,825

Line DB1 Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 13,777 12,712 12,696 39,185

Ave daily ridership, CY 2014 1,256 1,265 1,277 1,307

Total Monthly Ridership, CY 2013 27,360 28,808 26,892 83,060

Line DB Monthly Ridership, CY 2013 14,530 15,140 13,773 43,443

Line DB1 Monthly Ridership, CY 2013 12,830 13,668 13,119 39,617

Ave daily ridership, CY 2013 1,244 1,309 1,345 1,340

Pct Change Total Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 vs CY 2013 1.0% -7.8% -0.3% -2.5%

Pct Change Line DB Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 vs CY 2013 -4.6% -8.5% 2.5% -3.7%

Pct Change Line DB1 Monthly Ridership, CY 2014 vs CY 2013 7.4% -7.0% -3.2% -1.1%

Pct Change Ave daily ridership, CY 2014 vs CY 2013 1.0% -3.4% -5.1% -2.5%

BUS FLEET

To enhance fleet uniformity and reduce average fleet age, SamTrans transferred 4 retired buses to the Dumbarton Express operation in May 2014. The buses were placed into service as outfitting was completed, such as installation of WiFi equipment and Nextbus equipment. This vehicle transfer improves the overall reliability of the service by making more vehicles available to operate the service considering the age and reliability of the Dumbarton Express fleet.

With the concurrence of the Dumbarton Rail Citizens Advisory Panel (CAP) and the Dumbarton Rail Policy Advisory Committee (PAC), San Mateo County Transportation Authority, informed MTC that the Dumbarton Rail Project would be placed on hold until the project partners can secure a funding plan that can advance the project further. In addition, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority requested that part of the Dumbarton Rail RM-2 capital funds be used for the purchase of new vehicles for the Dumbarton Express fleet.

MTC approved funding for the capital allocation of $14.8 million on May 28, 2014. This amount is estimated to yield up to 24 vehicles. The vehicles will be purchased from Gillig as part of AC Transit’s allocation of buses through the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (County Connection) bus procurement consortium. At a minimum, the new vehicles will have the same level of amenities as the existing Dumbarton Express fleet.

On July 9, 2014, AC Transit Board of Directors authorized an initial procurement of 16 buses to replace the oldest vehicles in the Dumbarton Express fleet using the redirected Dumbarton Rail RM-2 capital funds. Because of a backlog in orders, anticipated delivery will be December 2015 at the earliest.

SERVICE EXPANSION STUDY

During the May 2014 meetings, the Dumbarton Rail project stakeholders expressed interest in expanding the current Dumbarton Express service using the balance of unallocated RM-2 operating monies that fund the current service. The last published bus operations study was incorporated as part of the Dumbarton Rail Alternatives Analysis in 2010. Since then, enough factors and assumptions have changed to warrant a new study. These factors include increased employment as recovery from the economic downturn continues, shifts in traffic patterns and traffic congestion, and the expansion in employer-provided shuttle services.

The intention is to have the Dumbarton Express service expansion study funded through a Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant. AC Transit’s Grants Department reviewed the grant’s call for projects and concluded that a Dumbarton Express Service Expansion study met its conditions, especially considering the Dumbarton Express operates on Caltrans right-of-way. The amount being requested is $180,000 with the grant application is due October 31, 2014. Grant award announcements are anticipated in March 2015 and funds will be available for use by July 2015. The scope of work for the study is being developed and refined by the Dumbarton Bridge Regional Operating Consortium (DBROC); a draft scope of work is included as Attachment B.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

The Dumbarton Rail PAC requested a report on bicycle usage on the Dumbarton Express at its April 2014 meeting. AC Transit staff implemented an on-line survey to assess this information. Preliminary survey results suggest that about half the respondents have been turned away at least once due to the bike rack on the bus being full; in general, those turned away waited for the next bus. However, most respondents have identified a three-position bike rack as the solution to remedy this situation.

A fare change was implemented on July 1, 2014 for AC Transit. Under the Dumbarton Express interagency operations agreement, the fare changes also apply to the Dumbarton Express. Key features to new fare structure include discounted local fares for Clipper users, the elimination of transfers, and a shift to a pay-per-ride system. There were no significant changes to Transbay fares; as the vast majority of Dumbarton Express riders are Transbay passengers, they were unaffected by the fare change.

ATTACHMENT A BACKGROUND

Effective December 2011, the Dumbarton Express began operating as a contracted service. Under this arrangement, AC Transit fulfills the administrative and governance functions and MV Transportation fulfills the operations and maintenance functions. The term of the contract between AC Transit and MV Transportation is five (5) years.

The Dumbarton Bridge Regional Operations Consortium (DBROC) provides operational oversight. DBROC membership consists of staff from AC Transit, BART, SamTrans, Union City Transit, and VTA.

The Dumbarton Express is funded through RM-2 operating funds originally allocated to Dumbarton Rail operations. MTC allocated slightly over $2.4 million for the Dumbarton Express for FY 2014-2015.

The Dumbarton Express fleet consists of 20 Gillig Phantom high floor transit buses. The buses have a suburban commuter layout with high-back seating and WiFi connectivity.

The Dumbarton Express consists of two routes. Route DB operates all day from 5:22 AM to 8:51 PM between Union City BART and the Stanford Oval with 30-minute peak frequency and 45-minute off-peak frequency. Route DB1 operates during the peak period from 5:26 AM to 9:45 AM in the morning and 1:35 PM to 8:43 PM in the afternoon between Union City BART and the Palo Alto Industrial Park area with 20-minute peak frequency. Figure A.1 below depicts the Dumbarton Express route structure in the East Bay and Figure A.2 below depicts the Dumbarton Express route structure in the Peninsula.

Figure A.1 Dumbarton Express Route Structure-East Bay

Figure A.2 Dumbarton Express Route Structure-Peninsula

ATTACHMENT B DRAFT DUMBARTON EXPRESS SERVICE EXPANSION STUDY SCOPE OF WORK

INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

The Dumbarton Express (DBX) is a regional public transit service connecting areas of Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties via the Dumbarton Bridge. The service commenced in 1984 as an AC Transit operation, and has since been operated by either AC Transit or by private operators under contract. Currently, MV Transportation operates the Dumbarton Express under the administration and governance of AC Transit.

In addition, the Dumbarton Bridge Regional Operations Consortium (DBROC) provides operational oversight. DBROC membership includes AC Transit, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), BART, SamTrans, and Union City Transit.

Previously, the Dumbarton Express service was funded proportionately by members of DBROC, with AC Transit funding any operating fund shortfall. The Dumbarton Rail Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and staff investigated transferring its RM-2 operating funds (approximately $5 million annually) to an interim bus service that would build ridership and compliment the transition to rail service.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) approved transfer of Dumbarton Rail RM-2 operating funds to DBX operations and allocated $2.2 million in RM-2 funds to operate the DBX beginning in Fiscal Year 2012/2013. The RM-2 funding removed need for DBROC members to fund DBX operations, although DBROC retains operational oversight.

Originally, the intention was for the Dumbarton Rail PAC to petition MTC to reassign RM-2 funds when rail operations began. However, the Dumbarton Rail project has been put on hold due to funding shortfalls and MTC requested an update from Dumbarton Rail stakeholders as to the capital funds that were already committed to the corridor.

With the concurrence of the Dumbarton Rail Citizens Advisory Panel (CAP) and the Dumbarton Rail Policy Advisory Committee (PAC), the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB), as the Dumbarton Rail Project Development Team lead agency, petitioned MTC to permit Dumbarton Rail RM-2 capital funds to be used to purchase new vehicles for the Dumbarton Express fleet.

MTC approved the funding for the capital allocation of approximately $14.8 million in May 2014. This amount is estimated to yield up to 24 vehicles. The vehicles will be purchased from Gillig as part of AC Transit’s allocation of buses through the Central Contra Costa Transit Authority (County Connection) bus procurement consortium. At a minimum, the new vehicles will have the same level of amenities as the existing Dumbarton Express fleet.

As noted earlier, the amount of RM-2 funds available for Dumbarton Rail operations is approximately $5 million annually. About half that amount is used to fund the

Dumbarton Express bus service and the Dumbarton Rail stakeholders have expressed interest in expanding the current DBX service using the unallocated annual amount. The last published bus operations study was incorporated as part of the Dumbarton Rail Alternatives Analysis in 2010. Since then, enough factors have changed that warrant a new study of expanded bus service in the Dumbarton corridor.

A major consideration is the farebox recovery ratio goal for any new service funded through RM-2. MTC’s benchmark is that any RM-2-funded service must have a 20% farebox recovery ratio for service that operates all day, and a 30% farebox recovery ratio for service that operates only during the peak commute period.

In the past few years, many large employers have begun operation of employee shuttles directly to their campuses. Such employment sites are poor candidates for expanded Dumbarton Express service, as their “closed door” service is seen as much more desirable and attractive for those employees.

TASK LIST

Work tasks for the expansion study consist of the following:

I. Data collection and existing conditions.

a. Description of existing conditions and study area.

b. Home-based journey-to-work information within the study area.

c. Employment site locations and characteristics.

i. Immediately north of the Dumbarton corridor.

ii. Immediately south of the Dumbarton corridor.

d. East Bay “collector” locations.

i. Park & ride facilities.

ii. Transit stations.

iii. Other locations with available space.

II. Public outreach and needs assessment.

a. Contact employment sites to ascertain interest in service and potential for

partnerships.

b. Conduct evaluation of what current riders and non-riders need.

III. Analysis.

a. Transit systems and operations analysis.

i. Additional opportunities for existing service.

ii. Consider findings and recommendations of Dumbarton Rail

Alternatives Analysis.

iii. Assess operational feasibility of serving new locations.

iv. Develop routing.

v. Define operational parameters.

1. Number of trips.

2. Frequency.

3. Span.

vi. Forecast operating metrics.

1. Ridership.

2. Productivity.

3. Farebox recovery.

vii. Assess operational needs.

1. Equipment.

2. Costing and financial constraints.

b. Transit infrastructure planning.

i. Park & ride facilities.

ii. Transit stations.

iii. Transit priority improvements.

IV. Recommendations.

a. Service recommendations.

i. Cost/benefit analysis.

ii. Feasibility analysis.

b. Capital recommendations.

i. Cost/benefit analysis.

ii. Feasibility analysis.

DELIVERABLES

Task I: Report including summary of existing conditions, analysis of journey-to-work information as it applies to the study area, identification and description of potential employment sites with the potential to be served by expanded service, and identification and description of facilities available to accommodate passengers on the expanded service.

Task II: Report summarizing public outreach efforts, including employment sites contacted and level of interest and needs of current riders and non-riders.

Task III: Report identifying expanded service alternatives, including routing, operating parameters, destinations served, and resources needed.

Task IV: Report with service and capital recommendations, including discussion and analysis of costs/benefits and overall feasibility for each recommendation; also discussion of alternatives considered but not recommended.

Estimated Budget

As the service administrator, AC Transit will apply for a Caltrans Sustainable Communities grant to fund the service expansion study. Specifically, the grant calls in part for “transportation planning projects that identify and address mobility deficiencies in the multimodal transportation system, encourage stakeholder collaboration, involve active public engagement.” In addition, transit agencies are identified as being eligible primary recipients.

The Sustainable Communities grant calls for an 11.47% local match that AC Transit staff believes can be fulfilled with staff time. Potentially however, the DBROC member agencies could be called on to contribute to the local match.