>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A QUORUM. [00:00:03] >> ALL RIGHT, TAKES THE PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYONE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC, WE SHOULD BE HEARD. AT THIS TIME, IT'LL BE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT DURING THE REGULAR MEETING AS WELL, BUT ANYBODY AT THIS POINT LIKE TO ADDRESS THE MCAG BOARD? SEEING NONE, TAKES US TO ITEM 3, [3. Tipping Fee Study Workshop] WHICH IS OUR TIPPING FEE STUDY WORKSHOP. MR. MOORE. >> AGAIN, WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE TIP FEE STUDY. LAST MONTH WE HELD OUR TWO-HOUR WORKSHOP WHERE WE PRESENTED THE FINDINGS OF THE TIP FEE ANALYSIS AND TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT NUMBERS, DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO IMPLEMENTING THE TIP FEE. WE TOOK THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED FROM THAT SESSION AND HAVE COME BACK IN YOUR PACKAGE. YOU HAVE SOME TABLES. WE TOOK THE FEE INCREASES OUT THE FULL 10 YEARS, AS WAS ASKED. WE ALSO LOOKED AT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE NORMALIZE THE RATES WHERE ALL THE JURISDICTIONS, WE'RE PAYING THE SAME RATE. [NOISE] THAT INCREASE WAS ALSO SPREAD OUT OVER THAT 10-YEAR PERIOD. THEN WE ALSO TOOK THOSE SAME TABLES AND THEN RESET THEM AGAIN, ASSUMING THE TIP FEE INCREASE DID NOT GET IMPLEMENTED UNTIL JULY 1ST, 2024. YOU BASICALLY HAVE TWO SETS OF CHARTS. JUST GO AHEAD AND JUMP INTO THOSE. >> JAMES, WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, I GAVE HIM THESE WHITE FOLDERS WITH ALL THE MATERIALS. JUST TO ORIENT YOU TO IT, ON THE LEFT SIDE OF YOUR PACKET IS JUST THE STAFF REPORT THAT'S IN YOUR REGULAR AGENDA. JUST IF THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE YOU WANTED TO DEFERENCE. ALSO ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE BACK DOCUMENT IS THE POWERPOINT FROM THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. THEN AS JAMES MENTIONED, THERE ARE TWO BASIC OPTIONS AND THEY'RE THE TWO SMALLER PACKETS ON THE RIGHT. ONE SAYS, GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO AND THE OTHER SAYS NORMALIZED GATE RATE. THOSE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT. SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO WALK THROUGH, AND THERE IS A DUPLICATION. THERE WAS ALSO A COPY OF THE POWERPOINT THAT WAS LOOSE ON YOUR DESK. THAT IS WHAT I BELIEVE THAT WILL BE USED TODAY. LOTS OF INFORMATION. SORRY. THANKS, JAMES. >> YEAH, JUST TO [NOISE] JUMP BACK REAL QUICK, THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE RESERVE FUND BALANCE PROJECTION WITHOUT THE TIP FEE INCREASE. AS YOU CAN SEE SOMEWHERE THERE IN ABOUT THE '27, '28 YEAR PERIOD, THAT GREEN LINE DROPS DOWN BELOW THE YELLOW AND ORANGE, WHICH ARE OUR PROJECTED FUND RESERVE MINIMUMS. WHEN WE JUMP OVER, QUICK NOTE, ONE OF THE ITEMS WE HEARD AT THE WORKSHOP LAST MONTH WAS SOME INPUT THAT INITIALLY WE WERE LOOKING AT RAISING ALL OF THE GATE FEE ITEMS, INCLUDING SOME OF THE ANCILLARY TYPE FEES WE HAVE FOR INERT MATERIALS AND APPLIANCES AND THINGS. WENT BACK AND WE TOOK THAT INCREASE OUT. WE ONLY APPLIED THE INCREASE TO THE MSW RATE. THAT TOOK US TO THAT 6.05% INSTEAD OF PREVIOUS 5.2 YOU SAW ON THE CHARTS LAST MONTH. AGAIN, WE'VE TAKEN THE RATE OUT ALL THE WAY THROUGH 2032, '33. [NOISE] YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE CHART THERE THE GREEN LINE, OUR RESERVE FUND BALANCE DOES DROP A LITTLE BIT BELOW THE YELLOW LINE ABOUT EIGHT YEARS FROM NOW, BUT THEN IT STABILIZES AND COMES BACK UP ABOVE THERE. WE STAY ABOVE THE ORANGE OUR MINIMUM RESERVE FOR CLOSURE POST CLOSURE THROUGHOUT THE 10-YEAR PERIOD. THE NEXT SLIDE, AND GET TO GO BACK AND LEARN CALCULUS AGAIN, RIGHT? >> YEAH. >> [LAUGHTER] THIS WAS A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT TO INTERPOLATE THE RATES BASED ON THE CURRENT GEOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCE IN THE RATES AT EACH AGENCY. PHILIPS TEAM DID A GREAT JOB ON PULLING THESE NUMBERS TOGETHER. WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS TYPICALLY THAT MEANS WE'VE GOT ANYWHERE FROM A 5.5% RATE INCREASE TO ABOUT 8% FOR THE AGENCIES THAT ARE PAYING THE LOWEST COST RIGHT NOW. AGAIN, THAT'S TAKEN OUT THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2032, '33, WHERE EVERYBODY ENDS UP AT 68, 50 A TON. THAT'S A STEP-BY-STEP INTO THAT PROCESS. THEN AGAIN, IF WE DELAY THE INCREASE UNTIL NEXT YEAR, WE GO FROM 6.05-7.2 SO THAT WE END UP AT THE SAME PLACE IN 2033. BASICALLY, WE'VE DELAYED THAT ACTION A YEAR. THE RATE HAS TO INCREASE A LITTLE BIT IN ORDER FOR US TO END UP AT THE SAME POINT. [00:05:04] YOU SEE AGAIN, UNDER THIS SCENARIO, WE DO HAVE A SLIGHTLY LONGER DIP IN THE RESERVE FUND BALANCE BEFORE IT COMES BACK UP, BUT WE DO END UP BACK IN POSITIVE TERRITORY BY 2033. AGAIN, IF WE NORMALIZE THOSE RATES ACROSS THE AGENCIES, NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT ANYWHERE FROM ABOUT A 6.5% TO ABOUT A 9.5% INCREASE BEGINNING NEXT YEAR, AND THEN ENDING UP JUST OVER $71 A TON BY 2033. OUR INTENT TODAY WAS TO JUST LET YOU LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS. WE HAVE AN ACTION ITEM ON THE REGULAR AGENDA A LITTLE LATER THIS AFTERNOON WHERE WE WILL ASK THE BOARD FOR DIRECTION AS TO WHICH ONE OF THESE OPTIONS, EITHER MAINTAINING THE GEOGRAPHIC SEPARATION OR NORMALIZING AND WHAT IMPLEMENTATION DATE YOU'D LIKE TO SEE. AT THIS POINT, WE'LL OPEN TO QUESTIONS. THE IDEA HERE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENT NUMBERS YOU'RE SAYING. >> CLARIFY TWO THINGS. [NOISE] ONE, I DID WANT TO MENTION FOR ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTS AS A HARD COPY THAT I JUST WALKED THROUGH THEIR WHITE FOLDERS UP HERE NEXT TO THE AGENDAS THAT YOU CAN TAKE. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, JAMES IS RIGHT, THERE IS A REQUESTED ACTION AT THE END OF THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR THIS, ASKING FOR YOUR DIRECTION ON WHICH TO PURSUE THAT ACTION THEN WILL BE FORMALIZED AND WILL BE ON YOUR AGENDA FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE FEE INCREASE, THE SCHEDULE, AND THE START DATE IN APRIL. >> JAMES, THAT'S THE BULK YOUR PRESENTATION? >> YES. >> QUESTIONS? ANYBODY? DIRECTORY SILVER. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WHEN YOU WERE COMING UP WITH THESE NUMBERS AND DOING ALL YOUR CALCULUS ON THESE, DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION? WHAT I'M LEANING TOWARD IS NORMALIZING THE RATES OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME. I DON'T THINK I'LL GET MUCH PUSHBACK FROM MY COLLEAGUES THAT I THINK WE THINK THE FAIR THING TO DO IS EVENTUALLY, I WASN'T HERE WHEN THOSE RATES GOT. I WOULD INVITE DIRECTOR NELSON TO COME AND SIT UP HERE. HE'S A PART OF THIS CONVERSATION. >> I THINK THAT'S THE LAST WE RAISED WHEN HE WAS HERE. >> YEAH. >> I THINK YOU'RE ASKING HIM TO EXPLAIN? >> NO. WELL, HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN. >> THE ONLY ONE. >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND. MY LOGIC TELLS ME THAT MAYBE IT WAS JUST THEY WERE LOOKING AT IT LIKE HERE'S WHAT A RATE TO GET GARBAGE TO THE DUMP IS AND IF YOU LIVE FURTHER AWAY, YOU'RE GOING TO PAY MORE IN TRUCKING. IT IS, WHAT IT IS, I THINK THE FAIR THING TO DO IS IS THAT EVERYBODY PAYS THE SAME RATE. I LIKE PHASING IT IT OVER TIME SO THAT NOT ONE JURISDICTION IS JUST GETTING HAMMERED WITH A REALLY BIG INCREASE. BUT WHEN YOU WERE COMING UP WITH THESE NUMBERS, WHEN YOU WERE NORMALIZING THESE RATES, DID YOU TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE VOLUME? IS THAT PART OF THE CALCULUS OR THAT YOU FIGURED BECAUSE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT A JURISDICTION LIKE DOS PALOS AND AUGUSTINE, THEY'RE GOING UP AT A HIGHER RATE, I GET THAT, TO GET THERE. BUT TONNAGE WISE, IF YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE BIT OR UP A LITTLE BIT IN THE CITY OF LOS MADISON, MERCED, WHEN YOU'RE FIGURING THAT FUND BALANCE AND THE REVENUES GENERATED, I DON'T CARE IF IT'S A 1% INCREASE IN LAS VEGAS OR MERCED, DOLLARS-WISE AT THE END IS GOING TO END UP AS A LOT MORE THAN IF YOU DID A 5% RATE INCREASE FOR DOS PALOS AUGUSTINE,SO WAS THAT FIGURED INTO IT OR IS IT JUST STRICTLY LOOKED AT THE STARTING MONEY AND HOW OVER THE COURSE OF X AMOUNT OF YEARS DO WE GET TO WHERE IT EQUALS THE SAME? >> IT WAS THE LATTER. WE LOOKED AT HOW DO WE GET EVERYONE TO THE SAME RATE AND PLUG THE FUND BALANCE GAP THAT WE HAD. WE DIDN'T GIVE DISCOUNTS FOR VOLUME. >> I GUESS THEN FOR ME IT'S REALLY THE GRAPHS ARE A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF WHAT THE REVENUE IS GOING TO BE. >> WELL, I GUESS WE TOOK THE TOTAL VOLUME THAT IS GOING INTO THE LANDFILL. WE DID PLAY WITH SCENARIOS WHERE IF WE RAISED THOSE PALLETS THAT WOULD NOT HAVE THE IMPACT ON THE FUND BALANCE THAT RAISING MORE SAID WOULD HAVE, SO WE JUST WEIGHTED AVERAGES TO COME UP WITH HOW MUCH MONEY WE NEEDED ACROSS ALL THE JURISDICTIONS. >> THEN THOSE REVENUE NUMBERS ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF JUST TOTAL TONNAGES NOT NECESSARILY, X AMOUNT OF TONS CAME FROM MERCED, X AMOUNT OF TONS CAME FROM LOS BANOS? >> EXACTLY. WE DIDN'T GO PER JURISDICTION. FOR THESE CHARTS, WE DO HAVE PER JURISDICTION BY EVERY MATERIAL TYPE BY YEAR WITH ALL GROWTH FACTORS AND RECESSIONS AND ALL OF THAT PLAN IN THE BACKGROUND. >> I JUST WANTED TO JUMP OUT THERE AND SAY, I THINK THAT GETTING THE RATES TO WHERE THERE'S PARODY OVER A PERIOD OF TIME IS PROBABLY AN EASIER FOR EVERYBODY TO SWALLOW. [00:10:02] THAT'S AT LEAST MY OPINION. THEN I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR 24, 25. THE REASON BEHIND THAT IS I KNOW SOME OF THE SMALLER JURISDICTIONS HAVE JUST WENT THROUGH RATE INCREASES AND SO TO HAVE TO STACK BACK TO BACKWARD ONES UP ON THEM ISN'T ALWAYS FUN. THEN TWO, WHEN YOU LOOK AT TIMELINE WISE, WE'RE AT A MARCH MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO HOPEFULLY GIVE DIRECTION TO PUT SOMETHING ON AN APRIL MEETING. IT GETS PASSED IN APRIL. THAT DOESN'T GIVE YOU VERY MUCH TIME TO BE ABLE TO DO IT TO 18. I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO ASK ANY JURISDICTION. I DON'T CARE WHETHER IT WOULD BE THE COUNTY, WHETHER IT WILL BE THAT ONE OF THE LARGER CITIES, THE SMALLER CITIES, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING TYPICALLY THAT ANYBODY DOES IN-HOUSE ON THEIR OWN. THAT REQUIRES HIRING CONSULTANTS. THERE'S ALL STUFF THAT HAS TO BE DONE WITH THAT AND SO I THINK IT'S AN UNREALISTIC APPROACH TO ASK PEOPLE TO TRY TO. IF THEY NEED TO DO IT TO A 218, I THINK IN THE COUNTY SAY, OUR CONTRACTS ARE WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT WE DO TO 18. THEY'RE BUILT IN CPI INCREASES ON THEM. BUT FOR THE JURISDICTIONS THAT HAVE TO DO IT, I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IT'S FAIR TO ASK THEM TO HAVE TO TURN THAT AROUND IN SUCH A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME. I THINK WE'RE SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR FAILURE IF WE DO THAT. AGAIN, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE DO THE PHASE IN APPROACH TOUR, AT THE END OF 20 FISCAL YEAR 32, 33, WE ALL END UP AT THE SAME RATE, BUT WITH THAT STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR 24, 25, AND THAT GIVES EVERYBODY PLENTY OF TIME TO PREPARE FOR WHAT'S COMING. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> WITH DIRECTION HOW MUCH DO WE WANT TO TRY TO TRAIN TO STAY STRAIGHT? HOW MUCH IS IT INTENDED TO BE DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW DURING THE WORKSHOP OR SHOULD WE WAIT TILL LATER ON OR THE DISCUSSION ITEM WHICH IS ITEM 16 ON THE AGENDA? >> FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP, IT'S JUST TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION. WE'RE NOT DOING THE WORKSHOP WANTING TO ARRIVE AT ANY CONCLUSION, BUT THE HOPE IS THAT THIS TIME IS SPENT HAVING THE DISCUSSION REQUIRED THAT THERE WOULD STILL BE PUBLIC COMMENT AND OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCUSSION AT THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEM. BUT THAT ESSENTIALLY THE KINKS HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT AND THAT THE BOARD IS FEELING LIKE THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME LEVEL OF CONSENSUS, SO NO ACTION HERE. >> CAN I HAVE ONE FOLLOW-UP COMMENT? >> YEAH. >> SORRY FOR THAT, MR. CHAIR. THAT WASN'T MY DIRECTION. I WAS JUST LETTING EVERYBODY KNOW WHERE I WAS LEADING TOWARDS [LAUGHTER] TO GET A DIRECTION LATER. >> GOOD. DIRECTOR LLANEZ. >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE RATES AS FAR AS LIKE LET'S SAY FROM A PRIVATE HAULER. SOMEBODY SHOWS UP AT THE DUMP WITH A TRAILER FULL OF GARBAGE, ARE WE ASKING WHERE THEY LIVE? HOW DOES THAT RATE GET FACTORED IN? IS EVERYBODY JUST SAYING THEY'RE FROM DOS PALOS? HOW DOES THAT WORK OUT? >> IF YOU HAVE A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL COMES IN THAT WAY, THEY'RE GOING TO PAY OUR STANDARD GATE RATE, WHICH WILL ALSO INCREASE BY THESE PERCENTAGES UNDER WHATEVER IMPLEMENTATION WE FOLLOW. >> AGAIN, I WAS JUST CURIOUS. SOMEBODY IS DOING A JOB IN A CERTAIN JURISDICTION AND HOW THAT GETS FACTORED IN, SO OKAY. THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTION? >> [BACKGROUND]. [LAUGHTER]. >> DIRECTOR NAGY. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST A QUESTION FOLLOWING UP ON DIRECTOR SILVEIRA'S. I LIKE THAT IDEA, BUT HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT THE NUMBERS? WOULD THOSE NUMBERS BE SPREAD OUT OVER? >> WE WOULD END. [OVERLAPPING] >> BECAUSE LIKE GUSTINE, I THINK IT WAS 8.1% THE FIRST TWO YEARS. DOES THAT MEAN IT WOULD BE 16% THE FIRST YEAR INCREASE OR WOULD YOU REWORK ALL THE NUMBERS GOING OUT TO 32? >> IF WE WERE TO START JULY 1ST, 2024, GUSTINE WOULD BE LOOKING AT AN 8.10% INCREASE THERMALIZE, PUSHING IT BACK A YEAR PUTS YOU AT 9.5%. THAT INCREASE RATES STAYS CONSISTENT THROUGH THE 10-YEAR PERIOD. AGAIN, WE'VE TALKED, [NOISE] NOW WE HAVE THIS MODEL BUILT. WE'LL BE ABLE TO UPDATE IT ANNUALLY EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS. IF WE GO THROUGH A RECESSION, SOME OTHER ECONOMIC IMPACT HITS WE'LL BE ABLE TO UPDATE THESE NUMBERS, COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND SAY, IT'S THINGS HAVE BEEN WORSE THAN WE EXPECTED OR THEY'VE BEEN BETTER THAN WE EXPECTED. WE CAN MAKE A DETERMINATION THEN WHETHER SOME ANNUAL RATES MIGHT BE DEFERRED OR WE MAY HAVE TO ADJUST A LITTLE BIT THE OTHER DIRECTION. >> MICHAEL OR MARISSA, CAN WE PUT THE SLIDE UP THAT HAS STARTING IN 24, 25, THE NEXT? >> THAT'S IT. >> THAT'S IT. [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. THAT'S HIS 23, 24. [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT IT'S WRONG. [00:15:01] >> THAT'S THE DATE IS INCORRECT ON THE SLIDE. >> YEAH. THE FIRST COLUMN FOR 23, 24 IS ZERO. [OVERLAPPING]. >> ON YOUR PRINTOUT, IT IS THE SECOND PAGE. IF YOU'RE WANTING TO SEE THOSE NUMBERS UP CLOSE BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE HARD FOR ME TO READ. SORRY BECAUSE I'M THE ONE I'M LOOKING AT IT WAS CORRECT, SO MY MISTAKE. >> [BACKGROUND]. >> DIRECTOR PEDROZO, YOU HAD THAT THOUGHTFUL LOOK ON YOUR FACE. [LAUGHTER]. >> WE'VE GOT FANCY BUTTONS HERE. >> MR. CHAIRMAN. >> THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING] >> I DON T THINK THAT ANY OF US IT'S LOST. ANY INCREASE IS ALWAYS A CHALLENGE FOR OUR BOSSES. BUT I'VE ALSO WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THE RATES ARE PRETTY LOW. THEY HAVEN'T BEEN RAISED FOR A LONG TIME. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT AN EIGHT OR A SEVEN OR A 10%, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT THAT BOTTOM SLIDE THAT SHOWS YOU WHAT THE RATE WOULD GO IF WE STARTED IN 24, 25. FOR EXAMPLE, THE CITY OF ATWATER, YOU WOULD GO 3,748 TO 4,025 AND THAT REPRESENTS A 7.38% INCREASE. FOR THE CITY OF LOS BANOS YOU WOULD GO FROM 4,021 TO 4,284. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT IN TOTAL DOLLARS AMOUNT, IT'S A LITTLE AND EVERY YEAR IT GETS A LITTLE BIT BIGGER. I'M AN AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT A LONGER-TERM ON IMPORTATION, IT'S THAT DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD WITH IMPORTATION. YOU BRING IT IN AND YOU'RE BRINGING IN ALL THIS ADDITIONAL REVENUE, BUT YOU'RE SELLING AIRSPACE FOR A CHEAPER RATE THAN WHAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE IT AT. I THINK BY US INCREASING RATES, IT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO HAVE THOSE HONEST CONVERSATIONS. DO WE WANT TO STOP BRINGING IN IMPORT STUFF AND ONLY KEEPING WHAT SPACE WE HAVE FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND WITHOUT A RATE INCREASE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S POSSIBLE. JUST ANOTHER LITTLE BIT OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> THANK YOU. >> GET TO BE QUESTIONS. OBVIOUSLY, WE WILL DO WE START IN 23-24 OR 24-25 AND THEN THE GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO OR THE NORMALIZATION SEEMS TO BE THE TWO BIG DECISION POINTS. FOUR POSSIBLE OPTIONS FROM WHAT YOU PRESENTED. ANYBODY ELSE? I THINK WE ALL AFTER THAT STEADY SESSION A FEW WEEKS AGO THAT ONE NIGHT PLUS. I THINK EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE TOPICS [BACKGROUND]. >> GOOD. >> DIRECTOR PAREIRA. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO THE RATE INCREASES AND I GUESS REALLY, ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO THE RESERVE FUND BALANCE, DOES NOT INCLUDE IMPORTATION OR DOES INCLUDE. >> IT INCLUDES THE CURRENT IMPORTATION, BUT IT STOPS AT THE END OF THE BOARD-APPROVED TIMEFRAME WHICH IS 2027? >> '27, ROUGHLY. CONCURRENT WITH THE BOND REPAYMENT. >> BASICALLY, WE'RE DARN NEAR DOUBLING OUR RATES IN 10 YEARS. ALTHOUGH IT'S NICE FOR THE CITIES, THAT COUNTY GETS TO PICK UP THE TRASH THAT GETS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME THEY'RE GOING OUT IN THE COUNTRY AND DUMPING IT. IF WE'RE GOING TO DOUBLE THE RATES, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOME MITIGATION TO THE TRASH DUMPED ON THE SIDE OF THE ROADS. THEN PICKING THESE RATES AND GOING OUT WILL BE NINE YEARS, I GUESS IF WE DON'T START TILL NEXT YEAR. BEFORE WE'VE REALLY DECIDED WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IMPORTS IT'S ALSO, I THINK A LITTLE INACCURATE, I GUESS IS THE WAY TO SAY IT. IF WE RAISE THE RATES FOR IMPORTS AND IT CUTS IN HALF THE AMOUNT OF TRASH WE'RE GETTING, HOWEVER, THEY'RE PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE FOR THE AIRSPACE, THEN WE'D PROBABLY BE ABLE TO LEAVE THE RATE'S A LITTLE LOWER FOR OUR OWN CITIZENS OUR CONSTITUENTS. I JUST THINK WE'RE TAKING THIS ALL LIKE WE KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS OR WE HAVE ALL THE VARIABLES AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE REALLY DO. BUT SITTING HERE TRYING TO PROCESS THIS [00:20:01] AND I GET THE THOUGHT OF EVERYBODY PAYS THE SAME WHEN YOU GET TO THE LANDFILL BUT REALLY, THAT'S NOT THE RATE. THE CUSTOMERS PAY THE RATE WHICH IS THE COST AT THE LANDFILL PLUS FREIGHT. I TRIED TO DO THE MATH AND WHOEVER DID THESE RATES BACK IN THE DAY DIDN'T JUST DO IT BY DISTANCE. THERE HAD TO BE SOME OTHER CONSIDERATION IN THE RATES. IF I'M FROM DOS PALOS THAN SO LET'S PUT A LANDFILL OUT IN DOS PALOS, LET'S ADD ONE MORE AND SO MY FREIGHT IS THE SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE'S FREIGHT, SO TO GO TO MAKE UNDER TIPPING FEE EVEN DOESN'T MAKE IT EVEN FOR THE CONSTITUENTS. IF BACK WHEN THE COUNTY WAS THE LANDFILL, THE WASTE MANAGEMENT, EVERYBODY PAID THE SAME. THE TIPPING FEES MAY HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT BUT YOUR FREIGHT OFFSET IT. YOU DIDN'T PAY MORE FOR FREIGHT IF YOU'RE IN DOS PALOS AUGUSTINE THAN IF YOU WERE ON BELLEVUE ROAD HERE IN MERCED. HAVE WE LOOKED AT ALL THIS? DOES ANY OF THIS MAKING SENSE TO ANYBODY ELSE THAT'S ON THE BOARD. ANYWAY, SO I'LL LEAVE IT THERE AND HOPEFULLY THAT HAS SPURRED SOME MORE DISCUSSION. >> THAT'S DISCUSSION SPURRED BY? >> I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM AND I'M GOING TO LOOK AT NAVE AND JAMES AND PHILIP, BUT I BELIEVE THE EXISTING RATE STRUCTURE PREDATES THE TRANSITION FROM THE COUNTY TO US. I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE STRUGGLE OF US NOT HAVING THE DOCUMENTATION. I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT AND I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT THERE HAD TO HAVE BEEN A FORMULA OR SOMETHING THAT WENT INTO THAT WE JUST HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO. I INHERITED THE UNDERSTANDING AND I THINK MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES HAVE THAT THERE WAS A GEOGRAPHIC CONSIDERATION FROM THE HAULING COSTS BUT I AGREE WITH YOU THERE HAD TO HAVE BEEN SOMETHING ELSE AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE OTHER VARIABLES WERE. >> IF I MIGHT, MR. CHAIR, BUT JUST, IF THIS HAPPENS, IT COULD TURN OUT THAT THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF MERCED SAID WILL HAVE THE CHEAPEST RATES IN THE COUNTY. IF YOU TAKE THEIR TIPPING FEE PLUS THEIR FREIGHT. ANYWAYS THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS. >> GREAT. DIRECTOR ESPINOSA. >> WELL, [NOISE] I AGREE WITH THE DIRECTOR PAREIRA . MOST OF THE THINGS, AND I AGREE. I THINK WE SHOULD STAY WITH GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO. SMALLER CITIES TEND TO HAVE LOWER INCOME COMMUNITIES, NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT, BUT STILL MOST OF THE UNINCORPORATED ARE FAR AWAY FROM THE LANDFILLS MOST OF THE COMMUNITIES. IT'S NOT THE SAME AND IT'S BETTER TO GO AHEAD AND IMPLEMENT IT IN 23, 24 THAN WAITING FOR 24, 25 WHEN YOU GET INCREASED IT TO EIGHT OR NINE PERCENT. I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT IT'S JUST GOING TO HIT PEOPLE HARDER. ALREADY INFLATION IS VERY HIGH AS WELL, IMPLEMENTED IN 66 PERCENT ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYBODY. IN THE END, LIKE I SAID, IT'S ALLOWED ANYWAY, FIVE TO SIX PERCENT. IT'S A LOT INQUIRIES AND MOST OF THE COMMUNITIES WILL BE PAYING OVER 100 PERCENT. I UNDERSTAND THE BIGGER CITIES WILL BE PAYING A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT STILL, I THINK THAT THERE'S MORE SERVICES IN THE BIGGER CITIES AND LESS SERVICES IN SMALLER COMMUNITIES SO I THINK WE SHOULD STAY WITH A GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO. THANK YOU. >> THANKS, SIR. IN YOUR THOUGHTS, COMMENTS? GO AHEAD DIRECTOR NAGY. >> I WENT BACK-AND-FORTH ON THIS MYSELF, BUT ONE THING THAT NOBODY HAS POINTED OUT IS THAT YOU'RE THINKING, WELL IT'S AN EIGHT PERCENT INCREASE OR NINE PERCENT INCREASE OR WHATEVER IT IS, BUT THAT'S PER TON, THAT'S NOT PER CUSTOMER. WHEN THIS GOES BACK TO JOHN Q. PUBLIC, HE'S NOT GOING TO SEE AN EIGHT OR NINE PERCENT INCREASE IN HIS BILL BECAUSE HE'S NOT THROWING AWAY A TON OF GARBAGE. HE'S THROWN AWAY 40 OR 50 POUNDS OF THIS AND 100 POUNDS OF THAT AND SO FORTH. >> THAT'S CORRECT. DISPOSAL IS ONLY ONE PORTION OF THE RATE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE LABOR IN THERE. THEY HAVE EQUAL MOLES PROCESSING AND QUITE A FEW OTHER. I MIGHT SEE MAYBE A THIRD OF THE EIGHT PERCENT. >> THEN AS FAR AS THE TRANSPORTATION, I GET IT BUT IF YOU'VE GOT MERCED THAT'S A BIG METROPOLIS. [00:25:06] THEY'VE GOT HOW MANY MORE TRUCKS MAKING THAT TRIP EVERY SINGLE DAY COMPARED TO A SMALLER CITY. THAT MEAN REALLY IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 50 TRUCKS GOING OUT THERE TO EVERY 10 OR FIVE OF A SMALLER CITY. I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY THAT YOU CAN QUANTIFY WHAT THE FREIGHT IS DIFFERENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR FORMULA WAS BACK IN THE DAY, BUT I THINK I LEAN MORE TOWARDS DIRECTOR SILVEIRA, THAT WE NORMALIZE IT. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT YOU GUYS ARE THE PROFESSIONALS AND YOU GUYS ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE ALL THE NUMBERS AND YOU'VE BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME AND IT'S GOT TO BE A VIABLE AGENCY. >> THE REALITY COMES DOWN TO AT THE END OF THE DAY, AS YOU SAID, THE COST OF THAT CUBIC YARDS OF AIRSPACE IS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE WASTE IS COMING FROM SO THAT DOES LEAN INTO IT. I THINK YOU GUYS LOOKED A LITTLE BIT AT CURRENT HALL RATES. AGAIN, SINCE EACH JURISDICTION IS GOING OUT FOR A COMPETITIVE BID FOR HAULING, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE AND TAKE, BUT THE INDIVIDUAL HAULERS ARE HAVING TO FINE-TUNE THAT PENCILING IN THERE. AGAIN, WE TRIED TO GO BACK AND COMPARE FREIGHT RATE FROM JURISDICTION TO JURISDICTION IT'S NOT A STRAIGHT LINE AT ALL. >> TO WHAT EXTENT ARE THE BIGGER JURISDICTIONS ARE THE CLOSER ESSENTIAL AND NOW IT'S IN THE CITY EMMA SAID, THE CLOSER JURISDICTIONS AND THE BIGGER JURISTIC BEING THE BIGGEST JURISDICTIONS AND SAY AS WELL, SUBSIDIZE IS PROBABLY ISN'T THE RIGHT WORD, BUT BY PROVIDING AN ECONOMY OF SCALE, ALLOW THOSE SMALLER JURISDICTIONS OR THE FARTHER JURISDICTIONS TO HAVE A BETTER RATE, HAVE A BETTER SERVICE JUST BY EVERYBODY JOINING TOGETHER AND THEN PIGGYBACKING ON A BIG CUSTOMER LIKE THAT. I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE UP, I'M JUST ASKING IS THAT A? >> I COULDN'T SAY NUMBERS, BUT IT'S A SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT IF DOS PALOS WAS RUNNING A LANDFILL BY THEMSELVES, THEY'D HAVE TO PAY THE SCALE ATTENDANT AND ALL THE OPERATORS AND THEY'D BE USING MAYBE 10% OF THEIR CAPACITY. YOU'RE JUST NOT GOING TO GET THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE OR THE EFFICIENCY THAT YOU WOULD HAVE FOR HAVING A LARGER JURISDICTION ANCHOR TENANTS LIKE LOS BANOS IN THE CITY OF MERCED. >> IS IT IMPOSSIBLE TO PUT A ROUGH BALLPARK BEST YOU CAN, WHAT BENEFIT WOULD? >> THAT'D BE IRRESPONSIBLE FOR ME TO TRY TO CALCULATE THAT HERE. >> IT'S ALMOST ST. PATRICK'S DAY. [LAUGHTER] >> OKAY. NO, THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. YOUR QUESTIONS THOUGHTS? ALL RIGHT. >> ONE MORE QUESTION. I KNOW THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY, BUT SO YOU LOOK AT A SET OF NUMBERS ON A SHEET OF PAPER THAT GOES OUT 10 YEARS, 9,10 YEARS. LATER ON IN THE MEETING IS THAT WHAT WE'RE AGREEING TO SET THAT TO COME BACK AS THE NEW RATE INCREASE THAT IF WE WERE TO VOTE YES ON IT, WE WOULD BE INCREASING EACH JURISDICTION BY X OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. IS THAT WHAT WE WILL BE VOTING ON IN THE APRIL MEETING? >> I BELIEVE THE INTENT WOULD BE THAT THAT WOULD BE THE MAXIMUM RATE FOR PURPOSE OF YOUR 218 PROCESSES. AGAIN, AS WE SAID NOW THAT WE HAVE THE MODEL AND WE CAN UPDATE IT ANNUALLY, WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE WE'RE AT AND WE CAN COME BACK IN EACH YEAR AND SAY, OKAY, THE ECONOMY WAS BETTER [NOISE] WE DIDN'T SEE A DROP IN TONNAGES, OUR RESERVE LINE IS HERE. MAYBE IN 2028, 2029. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT NINE-AND-A-HALF PERCENT INCREASE OR THAT 7% INCREASE. MAYBE WE COME BACK, SAY, WE CAN GET AWAY WITH 3% AND WE'LL MAINTAIN OUR RESERVE. THAT'LL BE AN ACTION ITEM THAT THE BOARD WILL TAKE EACH YEAR. >> EACH YEAR? >> BUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE 218, WE'VE GOT TO SET A MAXIMUM RATE. >> PERFECT. >> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK THAT ALSO ADDRESSES DIRECTOR PEREZ CONCERN AROUND NOT REALLY KNOWING WHAT THE IMPACT OF THE INCREASED RATE FOR IMPORTATION IS GOING TO HAVE. BUT THAT'S THE TRIGGER WHERE IF WE'RE WATCHING THIS, THIS SETS THE STAGE THAT WITH BOARD ACTION NEXT MONTH. THIS IS THE COURSE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING, BUT WE'RE GOING TO BE MONITORING IT ANNUALLY AND HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BOARD AND LOOKING AT HOW DOES THE INCREASED RATE IMPACT IMPORTATION, HOW DOES THE ECONOMY IMPACT IMPORTATION AND ALL OF THE OTHER FACTORS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. THIS IS LIKE SETTING THE STAGE OF SAYING, [00:30:03] HOLDING ALL OTHER THINGS EQUAL. THIS IS OUR PATH OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS THAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSING PERIODICALLY, BUT ALSO GIVING US THE FLEXIBILITY WITH THIS BOARD'S DIRECTION TO ADJUST AS OUR ENVIRONMENT CHANGES ON THE BETTER SIDE OF IT. MEANING IF WE DON'T NEED AN 8%, WE CAN GO WITH A 6% I MEAN, THAT WOULD ALL BE DONE HERE AT THIS BODY, BUT ABSENT OF THAT DIRECTION, FOR THE 218 PROCESS THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD BE PLANNING FOR. >> DID YOU GUYS DO ANY ANALYSIS, REASONING, DISCUSSION OF THE CURRENT RATES WITH THE GEOGRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES IN ESSENTIALLY HOW RATIONAL THOSE ARE. >> WE DID GO BACK AND TRY TO RECONSTRUCT WERE IN TRANSPORTATION MODELS. WHAT WE'VE FOUND IS THAT THERE ARE SOME OTHER FACTORS THAT MUST HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AT THE TIME IT'S NOT SOLELY BASED ON OUR TYPE OF MODELING IT WOULD NOT BE SOLELY TRANSPORTATION BY MEASURING THE DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER OF THE CITY TO THE LANDFILL, MULTIPLYING BY THE HOURLY RATES AND THE TONS. THERE'S ALSO A LOT OF OTHER FACTORS BUILT INTO THE SERVICE RATES IT'S GOING TO BE THE PROFIT MARGIN OF THE HAULERS AND THERE'S GOING TO BE WHAT TYPE OF SYSTEM THEY'RE USING AND THEY'RE TAKING THAT TO THEIR MIRTH AND THEN THEY'RE TAKING THE RESIDUE FROM A PROCESSING AND BRING THAT TO THE LANDFILLS. THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT OPERATIONAL CONCERNS. IT'S NOT JUST THE TAKING THE TRASH TO THE LANDFILL THAT'S BUILT INTO YOUR SERVICE RATES. >> HOW DID YOUR NUMBERS LOOK? HOW DID YOUR NUMBERS DIFFER FROM THE CURRENT ONES? DO YOU REMEMBER? >> I'D HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK, BUT THEY WERE FAIRLY SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT. >> DO YOU RECALL HOW SO TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION, NOT HOLDING ANYTHING? >> PROBABLY 10 OR 15% IN SOME INSTANCES THERE'S SOME VARIABILITY IN THERE. ALSO, AT THE TIME THAT THE RATES WERE CONSTRUCTED, THERE WAS DEFINITELY DIFFERENT HAULING ARRANGEMENTS. ATWATER GOES OUT TO BID RIGHT NOW, LIVINGSTON'S OUT TO BID. >> OKAY. >> WHAT'S MINUS WENT THROUGH A COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT AND SINCE THEN. >> DO THEY TEND TO BE CLOSER TOGETHER OR FURTHER APART OR JUST A MIX AND ALL OVER THE PLACE. >> THERE IS A MIX. THERE WAS NO REAL RATIONALIZATION THAT WE CAN COME TO FOR HOW THEY GOT TO IT. >> GOT IT. INTERSTING, ANYBODY ELSE? NO MORE. >> ANYTHING ELSE YOU GUYS LIKE TO ADD IT'S 2:35 RIGHT NOW. WE GOT ABOUT 25 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WE CAN TURN OVER TO SCOTTY 25 MORE MINUTES TO SPEAK. [LAUGHTER] YOUR OPPORTUNITY. OKAY. GENTLEMEN THANK YOU AND I GUESS WE'LL ADDRESS THIS AGAIN HOPEFULLY WITH SOME DIRECTION LATER ON IN THE MEETING. THANK YOU BOTH. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL THREE O'CLOCK. AT THREE O'CLOCK WE'LL CALL THE MARCH 16TH, [4. Call to order] 2023 IN MERCED COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO ORDER AND BEGIN WITH ROLL-CALL. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, DIRECTOR ESPINOSA? >> PRESENT. >> DIRECTOR HOGUE? >> HERE. >> DIRECTOR LLANEZ? >> HERE. >> DIRECTOR MCDANIEL? >> PRESENT. >> DIRECTOR MORAN? >> PRESENT. >> DIRECTOR NAGY? >> HERE. >> DIRECTOR NELSON? >> HERE. >> DIRECTOR PAREIRA? >> HERE. >> DIRECTOR SILVEIRA? >> PRESENT. >> DIRECTOR PEDROZO? >> HERE. >> CHAIR SERRATTO? >> HERE. >> WE HAVE A QUORUM. >> THANK YOU. NOW TO THE INVOCATION, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO'D LIKE TO LEAD THE INVOCATION? SEEING NONE WE HAVE A DIRECTOR PAREIRA WHO IS READY. LLOYD, IF YOU CAN LEAD US IN THE INVOCATION BEFORE A MEETING AND ALSO IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. [NOISE] [BACKGROUND] >> [LAUGHTER] THERE IT IS. >> THANK YOU. HEAVENLY FATHER, WE ASK YOU INTO THIS CHAMBER. WE ASK FOR YOUR GUIDANCE, WE ASK FOR YOUR WISDOM, AND WE ASK THAT YOU WOULD CONTINUE TO BLESS US HERE IN MERCED COUNTY. LORD, I PRAY THAT YOU WOULD GIVE WISDOM AND INSIGHT TO EACH OF THE DIRECTORS THAT THEY MIGHT MAKE GOOD DECISIONS THAT BENEFIT THE CITIZENS OF MERCED COUNTY. LORD, AND WE PRAY FOR OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE NORTH, WHO HAVE HAD A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF FLOODING, AND FOR SOME REASON YOU CHOSE TO SPARE US THIS PAST WEEKEND AND WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THAT, BUT WE ASK THAT YOU KEEP PEOPLE SAFE AND THAT YOUR WILL BE DONE IN JESUS NAME, AMEN. >> LET'S BEGIN WITH THE PLEDGE. >> >>> THANK YOU, LLOYD. >> SURE. >> TAKES US TO ITEM 5, [5. Approval of agenda] WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. >> MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD ASK THAT WE MOVE ITEM 16 TO ITEM 10. [00:35:09] >> OKAY. TEN AND 11 SHOULD BE REALLY QUICK. WHAT IF WE MOVE IT TO JUST BETWEEN 11 AND 12? >> THAT'S FINE BY ME. WITH THAT, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA WITH THE STATED CHANGES. >> I'LL SECOND THAT BECAUSE I'LL BE LEAVING AT 4:30. >> IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A NUMBER OF FOLKS, DIRECTOR PEDROZO, ESPINOSA, SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE AT 4:30. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE TO LEAVE EARLY? DIRECTOR PAREIRA AS WELL? >> NOT AT 4:30, BUT EARLY. >> WE'LL TALK FAST. [LAUGHTER] MOTION, WAS THERE A SECOND? >> I SECOND. >> OKAY. ANY OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. TAKES US TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO BE HEARD ON ANY ITEM THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, NOW'S YOUR TIME. ALSO, WE HAVE A SPANISH INTERPRETER AVAILABLE AS WELL. SO IF ANYBODY NEEDS THE ASSISTANCE OF THE SPANISH LANGUAGE INTERPRETER, WHO'S RIGHT THERE, WE HAVE THAT SERVICE AVAILABLE AS WELL. [7. Guest Speaker: Congressman John Duarte] TAKES US TO ITEM 7. WELCOME OUR CONGRESS MEMBER, JOHN DUARTE. CONGRESSMAN DUARTE, WE THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. NOW, YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO ADDRESS THIS BODY. WELCOME, SIR. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU TO THE ENTIRE GROUP, COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS. IT'S AN HONOR TO BE YOUR CONGRESSMAN. I WANT TO BE VERY ENGAGED WITH EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING WHATEVER WE CAN DO TO MAKE THIS PART OF OUR VALLEY A BETTER PLACE. I HAVE BEEN ENGAGED WITH A NUMBER OF YOU ALREADY AND I'M VERY THANKFUL FOR THAT. I LIKE THE PHONE CALLS. I LIKE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS WE CAN DO FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SIDE OF THINGS TO HELP THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AND I'M THERE FOR YOU. GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND. I'M A FARMER AND A BUSINESSMAN FROM THE MODESTO AREA. FIRST TIME IN OFFICE, SO BE GENTLE. [LAUGHTER] NO, SERIOUSLY, DON'T. JUST HIT ME IN THE HEAD. LET'S JUST GET THIS NEOPHYTE STAGE OVER SO I CAN DO AS MUCH AS I CAN FOR YOU. I WANT TO BE VERY OPEN TO YOUR INPUT. I'M ON A FEW COMMITTEES BECAUSE THERE'S A NARROW MAJORITY IN OUR PARTY, THERE'S A LOT OF COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS FOR EVERYONE IN THE PARTY BECAUSE, OF COURSE, THE PARTY IN THE MAJORITY WANTS TO HAVE THE MAJORITY ON EVERY COMMITTEE. I'M ON GREAT COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. I'M ON AGRICULTURE, I'M ON TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, AND I'M ON NATURAL RESOURCES. AS WE START LOOKING AT SOME OF THE FLOOD CONTROL, THE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, THE WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT, IT COMES OVER THAT WHOLE BAILIWICK OF COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS I'VE GOTTEN IN MY SUB-COMMITTEES. IF IT SAYS WATER ON IT, I'M ON THAT SUBCOMMITTEE. I'M ON THE RAILS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SUBCOMMITTEE, I'M ON THE HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT SUBCOMMITTEE IN TNI, I'M ON THE WATERWAYS SUBCOMMITTEE IN TNI. SO THREE COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS THERE. I'M ON RISK MANAGEMENT, CREDIT AND COMMODITIES ON AG, SO I'LL BE ABLE TO TALK A LOT ABOUT CROP INSURANCE TO THE LOCAL FARMERS, A LOT ABOUT THE FARM CREDIT SYSTEM. THEN I'M ALSO ON THE CONSERVATION BIOTECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE, SO I'LL BE ABLE TO DO AS MUCH AS I CAN DO FOR THE LOCAL UNIVERSITIES AND MAKING SURE THEY'RE PLAYING A ROLE IN OUR AG RESEARCH EFFORTS THROUGH FEDERAL RESOURCES. HAPPY WITH MY COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. THERE'S MORE BIGGER, THERE'S MORE POWERFUL COMMITTEES, BUT THERE ARE NONE THAT ARE MORE RELEVANT SPECIFICALLY TO THIS DISTRICT, AND SO I'LL BE HOPING TO ENGAGE THROUGH THAT. ONE OF MY FIRST LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S LEGISLATIVE OR JUST WORKING WITH THE AGENCIES, AND THIS ISN'T JUST SOMETHING BECAUSE OF RECENT EVENTS. WE HAVE TO DREDGE OUR DRAINAGE SYSTEM. IT NEEDS DREDGING, IT NEEDS REGULAR DREDGING. IT NEEDS STANDING PERMITS TO KEEP IT DREDGED. OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO PREVENT THE FLOODING, BUT IT HAS SOME HABITAT VALUE, IT HAS SOME RESTORATION VALUE TOO. I'M HOPING WE CAN GET SOME OF THE AGENCIES ONBOARD AND SOME OF THE NGOS ON BOARD WITH US. WE CAN DO BETTER FOR THE FISH AND HABITAT VALUE BY DREDGING AND BY GETTING HIGHER SAFE RIVER FLOWS. WE CAN ALSO USE THAT TO HOLD MORE WATER IN OUR RESERVOIRS. FLOOD CONTROL IS ALWAYS A FUNCTION OF HOW BAD MIGHT IT GET AND WHAT DO WE DO ONCE IT GETS THAT BAD. IF WE HAVE MORE FLOOD CONTROL SPILL CAPACITY, WE HAVE LESS HEADSPACE NEEDED IN THE DAMS FOR FLOOD CONTROL CONTINGENCIES. SO DREDGING THE RIVER CHANNELS AND THE CREEK CHANNELS NOT ONLY PROTECTS YOUR COMMUNITIES IN THE VALLEY HERE A LOT BETTER, IT LETS US STORE MORE WATER IN THE RESERVOIR EVERY YEAR. BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH IT'S A ONE IN 50 YEAR FLOOD, WE NEVER KNOW WHAT YEAR THAT FLOOD IS GOING TO COME. IT'S A BIG PRIORITY. I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF COMMON SENSE. WE WILL BE HAVING FIELD HEARINGS DOWN AT THE [INAUDIBLE] AG CENTER ON APRIL 11TH. I'M LOOKING TO WORKING WITH [00:40:01] CONGRESSMAN VALADAO'S OFFICE TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHO'S GOING TO BE OUR WITNESS SET ON THAT AND WHAT OUR KEY STRATEGY WITH THAT HEARING IS, BUT THAT COVERS ONE DIRECTION. I REALLY WANT TO TAKE IT. COMMUNITY FUNDING PROJECTS ARE COMING THROUGH. YOU GUYS HAVE SUBMITTED SOME. I'M VERY HAPPY TO HELP WITH THOSE. I AM HERE TO DELIVER FOR THE VALLEY. I'M HERE TO DELIVER FOR THE DISTRICT. I HAVE NO PHILOSOPHICAL IMPINGEMENT AGAINST GETTING RIVERSIDE COUNTY AND ITS CITIES WHAT IS NEEDED TO KEEP THESE COMMUNITIES WORKING RIGHT. WE'RE ON THE HEELS OF COVID, WE'RE ON THE HEELS OF DROUGHT, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ON THE HEELS OF FLOODING HERE VERY SHORTLY. THIS COMMUNITY NEEDS RESOURCE, IT NEEDS REBUILDING, IT NEEDS HELP FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND I'LL WORK ANYWAY I CAN TO GET THAT HERE FOR YOU. EXCITED THAT THERE'LL BE QUITE A CONTINGENT OF YOU COMING OUT IN MAY. I'LL BE LOOKING FORWARD TO HELP HOST YOU THERE. AS YOUR CONGRESSMAN, THE ONLY COUNTY I'VE GOT ALL OF, IS MERCED. IF MERCED COUNTY IS COMING IN, I'M THE GUY. I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO THAT. IF THERE'S A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS RATHER THAN GO ON BLINDLY HERE. >> QUESTIONS FOR CONGRESSMAN DUARTE? >> I HAVE A COMMENT, NOT A QUESTION. >> GO AHEAD. >> I JUST APPRECIATE YOU COMING HERE. YOUR ACCESSIBILITY HAS BEEN UNBELIEVABLE. THAT'S VERY APPRECIATED, ESPECIALLY IN OUR TIME OF NEED AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR GETTING ON THE RIGHT COMMITTEES. [LAUGHTER] EVERY ONE OF THOSE ARE EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED FOR THIS COUNTY SO MUCH APPRECIATED AND APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK. >> THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> DIRECTOR ESPINOSA. >> CONGRESSMAN, I WANT TO APPRECIATE FOR YOU COMING TO MY DISTRICT BACK IN JANUARY AND ALSO, SAM HAS ALWAYS BEEN GRATEFUL. WHATEVER HE NEEDS, HE TELLS ME CALL ME ANYTIME. HE'S ALWAYS ACCESSIBLE. WE CAN COMMUNICATE BACK AND FORTH ANYTIME. I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU DO FOR US AND ALL THE STUFF YOU DELIVER TO PLAN ON. THANK YOU. >> MY PLEASURE. I SHOULD INTRODUCE SAM. SAM, MY DISTRICT DIRECTOR HERE. HE'S HERE AND WE'RE STILL MOVING OUR FIELD REPS AROUND. CHRIS JOHN SANTOS IS GOING TO BE YOUR FIELD REP STARTING APRIL 1ST. HE WORKED ON MY CAMPAIGN SUM, AND HE'S JUST A TON OF ENERGY. I THINK YOU'LL REALLY ENJOY HIM. WE'RE VERY PROUD TO HAVE HIM ON THE TEAM, BUT WE'RE HERE TO SERVE MERCED. >> HE'S NOT RELATED TO YOUR COLLEAGUE OUT OF NEW YORK, IS HE? [LAUGHTER]. >> NO. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] >> THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN FOR BEING HERE. AGAIN, SAM, THANK YOU FOR JUST MAKING HIMSELF AVAILABLE. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT GOING ON AND YOU NEED HELP WITH THAT AND I THINK SAM IS A GREAT GUY FOR THAT. SAM, THANK YOU. THEN I KNOW THAT IT WAS ALREADY MENTIONED TO YOU, BUT I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD AS SAYING AS A MEMBER OF THE ARTS BOARD, WE DID SUBMIT A PROJECT TO YOU AND THAT'S FOR SIX BUSES AND WE'RE PERFECTLY FINE. WE'D LOVE TO GET ALL SIX, BUT IT'S SCALABLE. THESE BUSES ARE ABOUT 950,000 A PIECE. ANY HELP THAT WE CAN GET ON THAT IT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. NOW I'LL SHARE WITH YOU, AS YOU BECOME MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE ARTS, IT REALLY WAS A LOCAL SOLUTION TO A FEDERAL PROBLEM. IT'S A FIVE COUNTY JPA THAT IS PROVIDING TRANSPORTATION INTO YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK AND TRYING TO HELP THEM WITH ONE OF THEIR BIGGEST CHALLENGES, WHICH IS GETTING VEHICLES OUT OF THE PARK. ANY HELP THAT WE CAN GET THERE WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, SIR. >> HAPPY TO DO IT. I'LL GO TO BAT ON THAT. I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE LOCAL SOLUTION TO A FEDERAL PROBLEM IS VERY CLEAR AND VERY LOGICAL TO ME. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? DIRECTOR PEDROZO. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. THEN ALSO THANK YOU TO SAM AND YOUR STAFF. I WAS ABLE TO HELP WITH SOME FOOD DRIVE STUFF THAT YOUR OFFICE HAD PUT TOGETHER. THROUGH THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, I WAS VERY HAPPY TO DO THAT. THEN WITH YOU GUYS PARTICIPATION IN REGARDS TO THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND THAT TYPE OF STUFF, SAM WAS ON THE CALLS ALL THE TIME REALLY PROVIDING THE PERSPECTIVE AND DIDN'T SAY MUCH BECAUSE I THINK THAT IF WE NEEDED HIM TO, I THINK HE WAS LISTENING A LOT AND GIVING YOU THE INFORMATION AS HE SAW FIT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SAM. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THEN THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. I THINK THE CREEKS ARE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT REALLY DOING ENOUGH TO CLEAN THEM OUT. I THINK IT'S ADDING TO THE PROBLEM THAT WE JUST FACED. I WOULD MUCH RATHER TAKE THAT PROACTIVE APPROACH THAN REACTIVES SO THAT WE'RE NOT IN THIS POSITION AGAIN. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. THEN ALSO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I APPRECIATE IT. >> DIRECTOR PAREIRA. >> THANKS FOR BEING HERE AND REALLY GETTING UP TO SPEED QUICK. HEARING YOU TALK, IT'S JUST AMAZING. I WOULD BE JUST TOTALLY OVERWHELMED. [00:45:01] YOU'RE THE MAN FOR THE JOB. JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. WHAT'S BEEN THE BIGGEST LEARNING CURVE FOR YOU, OR WHAT HAVE YOU ENJOYED LEARNING ABOUT THE MOST OR JUST LITTLE INSIGHT TO YOUR WORLD IN DC. >> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. HOW MUCH YOU REALLY HAVE TO TEAR INTO STUFF. I'M LOOKING AT THE BUDGET NUMBERS COMING OUT. I'M LOOKING AT THE SILICON VALLEY BANK FORECLOSURE AND I WAS A FINANCE UNDERGRAD AND MBA. I CAN TAKE SPECIAL INTEREST IN SOME OF THESE BUSINESS MATTERS. THERE IS A LOT BEHIND THE NARRATIVE ON EVERY ONE OF THESE THINGS. WHEN YOU DIG DEEPER, LIKE THE SILICON VALLEY BANK, I AM STILL NOT CONVINCED THEY DIDN'T HAVE ADEQUATE BANK CAPITAL TO SEE THROUGH A LIQUIDITY CRISIS. WHAT WE DID WAS HURT THE DOLLAR AND INFLATED BITCOIN IN OUR ACTIONS. THE CRYPTOCURRENCIES WENT UP IN VALUE AS WE FORECLOSED ON A BANK WHICH I THINK HAD ABOVE THE REGULATORY MINIMUM CAPITAL, EVEN AFTER ALL THE LONG-TERM SECURITIES WERE SOLD OFF AND LOSSES TAKEN. THERE WERE SUBSTANTIAL LOSSES TAKEN AND THERE WERE SUBSTANTIAL MISTAKES. BUT THAT'S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF BASICALLY, THERE'S ALWAYS MORE TO LEARN. THAT'S WHY I WILL PICK UP MY PHONE AND I WILL HEAR FROM YOU GUYS BECAUSE I KNOW EVEN BACK THERE IN THE BIG FANCY BUILDING, THE CAPITOL BUILDING, THERE'S A LOT THAT IS JUST PURE NARRATIVE AND NOT REALLY SORTED OUT. THE BUDGET CRUNCH, I THINK THERE'S SOME SENSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO THAT ARE BEING GLOSSED OVER BY BOTH PARTIES. >> THANKS. >> WELL, THANK YOU-ALL. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE. YOU KNOW HOW TO GET A HOLD OF US. >> ONE MORE THING. >> YES, SIR. I'M SORRY. >> NELSON, HE NEEDS HIS CHANCE WITH YOU. >> WELL, I DON'T NEED MY CHANCE, BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENT ABOUT HELPING MERCED COUNTY AS A MAYOR OF ATWATER AND AS EVERYBODY ELSE UP HERE PROBABLY HAS THE SAME SENTIMENT, CALIFORNIA IS A DONOR STATE AND WE NEVER SEEM TO GET BACK THE HELP WE NEED HERE IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY. MY JOB AS THE MAYOR IS TO GET BACK TO ATWATER AS MUCH STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS AS WE POSSIBLY CAN TO HELP OUR COMMUNITIES AFTER WE'VE DONATED SO MUCH TO THE REST OF THIS NATION. I THINK EVERYBODY UP HERE WOULD PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT. >> IN THE APPROPRIATIONS, I WILL FIGHT ANYWHERE I CAN TO GET INSTEAD OF STATE BLOCK GRANTS. I DON'T THINK WHEN THINGS GO TO CALIFORNIA THAT THE RURAL COUNTIES THAT I REPRESENT REALLY GET THEIR SHARE. ANYTIME YOU HAVE IDEAS AS TO HOW TO GET STATE BLOCK GRANTS TURNED INTO COUNTY GRANTS MORE LIKE WE DID WITH COVID RELIEF, WHERE THE CITIES AND COUNTIES GET IT DIRECTLY, I'M ALWAYS FOR THAT. I DON'T TRUST THAT SACRAMENTO'S GOING TO GIVE US THE FAIR SHAKE WE DESERVE. >> ANYBODY ELSE? >> IF I COULD JUST VERY QUICKLY. THANK YOU AGAIN, I HAVE TO SAY WHEN WE MADE THE REQUEST, I THINK WE DID IT AND WE WERE JUST REALLY PLEASED WHEN WE HEARD THAT YOU WERE WILLING TO COME AND MEET WITH US. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A CONGRESSMAN VISIT US AT A BOARD MEETING, AT LEAST IN THE EIGHT YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE. THANK YOU FOR DOING THAT. ALSO, I WANT TO JUST REITERATE VERY RESPECTFULLY, I THINK I AGREE WITH WHAT YOUR COMMENT IS. SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE'RE HAVING, THERE'S SO MUCH FUNDING OUT THERE, AND THERE'S A REAL STRUGGLE ABOUT BRINGING THAT FEDERAL FUNDING DOWN INTO OUR COMMUNITIES IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY. THERE'S A WHOLE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WE CAN HAVE ABOUT THAT. BUT SOMETIMES WHEN THOSE FUNDS GO TO THE STATE THEN THEY ARE FETTERED THROUGH THE STATE LENS AND STATE PRIORITIES. IT ISN'T ALWAYS THE EASIEST TO DRAW THEM DOWN INTO SOME OF OUR NEEDS HERE, PARTICULARLY ON THE TRANSPORTATION SIDE WHERE WE HAVE THINGS LIKE NEEDING TO FINISH WIDENING 99 AND OTHERS. WE DO ALTHOUGH, I WANT TO SAY, HAVE AN EXCELLENT RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR DISTRICT 10 OUT OF CALTRANS. THEY'RE EXCELLENT PARTNERS OF OURS, BUT I THINK YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. YOU'LL HEAR MORE FROM US ON THAT IN MAY FOR SURE. >> LET'S HAVE A SIT DOWN. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I'M HERE TO MEET WITH YOUR CALTRANS FOLKS. FIND OUT WHERE THE MONEY IS, FIND OUT WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE AND WHAT WE CAN DO. >> EXCELLENT. >> HERE TO DO. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. [OVERLAPPING] >> THANK YOU. >> THANKS AGAIN. EXCITED FOR A LOT OF GOOD WORK AHEAD. TAKES US TO ITEM 8, THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT. [OVERLAPPING] [8. Citizens Advisory Committee Report] >> MADDIE IS HERE. >> MADDIE BROWN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> NO FUNDING TO OFFER AS A STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE, BUT I CAN GIVE YOU A REPORT. ALL ACTION ITEMS THAT WERE PRESENTED LAST FRIDAY, MARCH 3RD. WE PASSED AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND THERE WERE A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT GENERATED COMMENT, THE FIRST OF WHICH IS THE POTENTIAL CONTRACT WITH STANTEC FOR THE ZERO EMISSION BUSES. ONE OF THE COMMITTEE'S CONCERNS THERE WAS THE CONDENSED TIMELINE. BUT THROUGH DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, WE CAME TO UNDERSTAND THAT CERTAIN TASKS CAN BE PRIORITIZED TO MEET THE CARBS DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING OUR PLAN. [00:50:06] THEN WE HAD DISCUSSION ON THE REGIONAL HOUSING UPDATES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR '23/24 BUDGET. WE WERE ABLE TO SEE THAT AT A LINE ITEM LEVEL. THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT PROPOSED CUTS, BUT AS YOU-ALL KNOW, HARD TO GET BLOOD FROM A TURNIP. THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THERE WAS NOT A REPORT FROM THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. PAUL ANNOUNCED THAT HE WILL BE LEAVING THE CAC ROLE AFTER ABOUT SIX YEARS, I BELIEVE, OF SERVICE. WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR PAUL WARD PARTICIPATING AND HE RECEIVED FORMAL RECOGNITION IN THE MEETING. WE WISH HIM WELL. >> THANK YOU, MADDIE. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS, ANY COMMENTS? ANYBODY? TAKES US TO NINE, [9. Caltrans report] THE CALTRANS REPORT AND DO WE HAVE EITHER MARLIN OR DENNIS OR SOMEBODY ELSE AVAILABLE? >> WE DO HAVE MARLIN ONLINE. MARLIN, WE HAVE PROMOTED YOU TO PANELIST, BUT YOU DO HAVE TO ACCEPT IT ON YOUR END. HERE IT COMES. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, MARLIN. >> HERE, THIS IS EMILY HADEN AND DEPUTY FOR PLANNING, LOCAL ASSISTANTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL. HOPE YOU CAN HEAR ME. GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD MEMBERS, MR. CHAIR, MADAM DIRECTOR. APPRECIATE THE TIME. I'LL JUST GIVE A COUPLE OF UPDATES. I HAVE A FEW UPDATES FROM THE UPTRENDS SIDE OF THINGS LATELY. I'LL START OFF WITH STATE OF EMERGENCY THAT HAS BEEN NOTED FROM THE STATE GOVERNMENT. OUR GOVERNOR HAS ISSUED A STATE OF EMERGENCY AND ALSO OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS ISSUED A STATE OF EMERGENCY AS WELL FOR CALIFORNIA. THIS IS, OF COURSE, IN RESPONSE TO THE LATEST STORMS THIS MONTH, LAST MONTH AND EVEN INTO LATE JANUARY. IT'S DEFINITELY THE FIRST THING ON OUR MIND FOR CALTRANS RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK RIGHT NOW AND THE WEATHER, BUT WE KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF IMPACTS THIS WEEK AND LAST WEEK, AND WE DO EXPECT ANOTHER SYSTEM COMING IN VERY SHORTLY. THIS IS SOMETHING OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM IS VERY MUCH IN PROGRESS AND RESPONDING TO MANY AREAS WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT ARE INUNDATED RIGHT NOW. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF WORK WITH THAT. PLEASE DO BEAR WITH US. OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM IS STRETCHED PRETTY THIN RIGHT NOW, BUT WE ARE VERY COGNIZANT OF THE CLOSURES RIGHT NOW IN MERCED COUNTY IN PARTICULAR, STATE ROUTE 59 SOUTH OF MERCED. WE'RE VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THAT ON THE DISTRICT SIDE OR DOING WHATEVER WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE NOT ONLY A SHORT-TERM SOLUTION, BUT ALSO A LONG-TERM SOLUTION TO THE FLOODING ISSUE. IT'S VERY MUCH ON OUR DIRECTOR'S MIND, DENNIS AGAR, AND HE WANTED TO CONVEY THAT CONCERN ON OUR END TO THE BOARD TODAY. IT'S VERY MUCH SOMETHING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BOARD IS AWARE OF THAT. TO THAT POINT AS WELL, WE DO HAVE A PROJECT AT MARIPOSA CREEK BRIDGE THAT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH. WE'RE TRYING TO ADD SCOPE TO THAT PROJECT AND IN PARTICULAR, OUR CULVERTS. WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD COLOR FACILITIES AS PART OF THAT PROJECT, BUT WE DO UNDERSTAND RIGHT NOW THE BRIDGE IS THE MAIN FOCUS OF THAT PROJECT. WE'RE WORKING ON THAT ASPECT IN THE SHORT-TERM. BUT IN THE LONG TERM WE ARE DEVELOPING AN ADAPTATION STRATEGY PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET HOPEFULLY HEADQUARTERS BLESSING ON. THAT'S SOMETHING I'VE ASKED MY TEAM TO WORK ON AND SUBMIT THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I'M LOOKING FOR SOME POSITIVE NEWS ON THAT, BUT I DID WANT TO LET THE BOARD KNOW THAT THAT IS A MAJOR CONCERN FOR US AND WE ARE CONTINUING TO ADDRESS THAT AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. WE DO APPRECIATE THE PARTNERSHIP WITH MCAG IN THE COUNTY AS WELL AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER AND PARTNER ON HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER BEST TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS ESPECIALLY WITH THE CLIMATE STRESSOR THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US RIGHT NOW AND THAT'S FLOODING. APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTS AND CONCERN AND WE'LL CONTINUE OUR COORDINATION. I DO WANT TO MENTION SOME OTHER POSITIVE THINGS THOUGH AS WELL. [00:55:03] WE RECEIVE WORD AT THE HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, THEY WANT SOME FUNDING OUR FORMER SAID, AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY THAT'S A STATE PROGRAM. SORRY. THERE'S $225 MILLION STATEWIDE THAT HAS AWARDED MERCED COUNTY OR I SHOULD SAY MCAG, [LAUGHTER] WE RECEIVED $1.4 MILLION ROUGHLY JUST FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SOUTH OF STATE ROUTE 140. I'M VERY HAPPY THAT FUNDING HAS BEEN ALLOTTED TO THAT PROJECTS, AND I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEE THAT MOVE FORWARD AS WELL. IT'S A GREAT THING AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY ABOUT THAT. MOVING FORWARD. THE THINGS I WANT TO MENTION, WE HAVE OUR COUPLE OF GUIDELINES OUT AND PLANS OUT. ONE OF THEM BEING THE CALIFORNIA STATE RAIL PLAN, IS NOW OUT AS A FINAL DRAFT OUT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW. OBVIOUSLY, IT CONTAINS A LOT OF THE RAIL PLANS THAT WE HAVE. PLAN FOR IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS. THE PLAN ACTUALLY GOES ABOUT 40 YEARS OUT. IT'S A LONG-RANGE PLANNING DOCUMENT. I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE. IT IS ON OUR STATE WEBSITE. BUT IF YOU NEED A LINK, I'M HAPPY TO SHARE THAT WITH THE BOARD ACCORDINGLY. IN ADDITION, WE DO HAVE OUR RECONNECTING COMMUNITIES HIGHWAY TO BOULEVARD GUIDELINES THAT ARE ALSO OUT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW. THIS IS A 60 DAY REVIEW AND I BELIEVE THE FINAL DATE IS MAY 15TH, I WANT TO SAY FOR THAT DOCUMENTS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THOSE AS WELL REGARDING THE RECONNECTING COMMUNITIES, BUT THAT'S ALSO AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. AGAIN, I WANT TO MENTION THAT'S A STATE PROGRAM THAT HAS ROLLED OUT OF THE FEDERAL RECONNECTED COMMUNITIES PROGRAM AS WELL. JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT. ALSO I WANT TO GIVE A LAST BUG FOR OUR CLEAN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DAY CELEBRATION. TOMORROW WE'RE STARTING OUR CLEAN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DAYS FROM MARCH 17TH TO MARCH 27TH. WE'LL HAVE A RANGE OF EVENTS. OUR BIG EVENT IS AGAIN ON MARCH 25TH. THAT'S A SATURDAY AT SAN JOAQUIN DELTA COLLEGE. BUT WE DO HAVE A WEBSITE FOR THAT CLEANCALIFORNIA.CA.GOV. I'M HAPPY TO SHARE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITH THE BOARD ON THAT AS WELL. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S JUST TO MAKE SURE AND ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO KEEP OUR HIGHWAYS CLEAN AND KEEP CALIFORNIA CLEAN. THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. BE PRIDEFUL IN OUR STATE AND OUR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES. WE ARE USING SOCIAL MEDIA HASHTAGS TO PROMOTE THAT AS WELL HASHTAG CLEAN CALIFORNIA OR CLEAN CA. MOVING ON, I DO ALSO WANT TO MENTION WE DO HAVE OUR MAP APP THAT WE ARE PROMOTING FOR REAL-TIME TRAFFIC INFORMATION. OBVIOUSLY, IT HAS ALL OF OUR CLOSURES ON THERE. MANY OF OUR MOUNTAIN PASSES ARE STILL CLOSED AT THIS MOMENT. IF YOU LIKE REAL-TIME TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, PLEASE DO CHECK OUT THE APP, IT IS ALSO ON OUR WEBSITE, QUICKMAP.DOT.CA.GOV AS WELL. THE LAST THING I WANT TO MENTION IS THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ACTIONS THAT CAME OUT I BELIEVE IT WAS LAST MONTH'S MEETING. I DIDN'T KNOW. SUPERVISOR PRAYER. YOU'VE MENTIONED STATE ROUTE 140 AT V STREET, I BELIEVE. I THINK THAT'S ONE THAT YOU MENTIONED. WE DID REACH OUT TO THE CITY REGARDING THAT PROJECT. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED RESPONSE YET, BUT WE WERE LOOKING TO COORDINATE WITH THEM TO DISCUSS THAT AND HOW WE CAN MAKE THAT INTERSECTION BETTER BECAUSE WE HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT THAT ISSUE AS WELL. THE OTHER ONE JUST LEFT MY BRAND. BUT I WILL CONCLUDE MY UPDATES RIGHT THERE. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS. ACTUALLY, BEFORE I REMEMBERED NOW, THE SIGNAGE FOR THE GRANT, THAT WAS THE OTHER ONE THAT I WANTED TO MENTION. THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR PAJAROZZO FOR CONCURRING, BUT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED FINAL CONCURRENCE FROM THE COUNTY STILL WAITING ON THAT. THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE LAST STEP THERE. HOPEFULLY WE RECEIVED SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE COUNTY ON THAT. THAT CONCLUDES [LAUGHTER] MY UPDATES. [01:00:02] HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS. I APPRECIATE THE TIME, MR. CHAIR. >> THANK YOU, MARLIN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR UPDATE. ANY QUESTIONS? DIRECTOR SILVEIRA. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. MARLIN, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP HIGHWAY 59, MARIPOSA CREEK BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO BRING IT UP. BUT I GUESS THE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION IS YOU AND DIRECTOR AGAR ARE TRYING TO PUSH THIS PROCESS ALONG FASTER IF THERE IS SUCH A THING IN CALTRANS, LIKE WHAT CAN I DO TO HELP? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT MAYBE I SHOULD BE REACHING OUT TO? I WAS ACTUALLY ON A CALL WITH ONE OF THE CTC MEMBERS IS ON A BOARD THAT I'M ON AND I HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT BRINGING IT UP THERE. I DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING OTHER THAN POTHOLES. IT'S THE BIGGEST THING THAT I GET CALLED ABOUT BY MY CONSTITUENTS THAT ARE COMING TO MERCED, THAT NEED TO COME TO MERCED. I GET PHONE CALLS PRETTY MUCH ON A DAILY BASIS ASKING ME, IS 59 OPEN, IS SANDY MUSH OPEN BECAUSE THAT'S THE DESIGNATED? WELL, IT'S NOT A DESIGNATED ROUTE BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE. I WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IF CALTRANS WOULD DESIGNATE A DETOUR ROUTE SO THEN WE COULD HOPEFULLY HOLD YOU GUYS A LITTLE BIT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DAMAGE THAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR LOCAL ROADS SINCE THEY'RE HAVING TO GET OFF OF YOUR HIGHWAY AND ONTO OUR LOCAL ROADS. THAT WAS WHAT I WAS TOLD THAT CALTRANS USED TO DESIGNATE A DETOUR ROUTE, AND NOW THEY JUST CLOSE IT AND DON'T DESIGNATE A DETOUR ROUTE AND SO THEN THERE'S NO RESPONSIBILITY THERE FOR ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF THAT IS TRUE AND HOW MUCH OF THAT IS HEARSAY, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK INTO, IF YOU COULD. AGAIN, WHAT CAN I DO? I KNOW THAT MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT 1 WOULD BE ADVOCATING RIGHT BESIDE ME ON ANYTHING THAT WE COULD DO TO TRY TO HELP SPEED THAT PROCESS ALONG. THEN THE LAST THING THAT I'LL SHARE WITH YOU IS I KNOW THAT YOUR CREWS ARE SUPER SWAPPED WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON, BUT HIGHWAY 152 THROUGH THE CITY OF LOS BANOS IS PROBABLY IN THE WORST SHAPE THAT I CAN EVER REMEMBER IT BEING IN. IT IS DETERIORATING QUICKLY. I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON YOUR RADAR FOR SOME OF THE MAINTENANCE CREWS TO TAKE A LOOK AT. THANK YOU, MARLIN. >> YEAH. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR SILVEIRA, TO YOUR POINTS AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE OFFER FOR SUPPORT IN ANY WAY THAT YOU CAN PROVIDE AND WE'LL DEFINITELY MAKE SURE TO INCLUDE YOU IF WE NEED ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO SUBMIT OUR PROPOSAL FOR THE PROJECT, AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THAT EXPEDITED APPROVAL. WE'RE GOING TO WORK INTERNALLY AND TRY AND GET THAT MOVING FORWARD, AS WELL AS THE LONG-RANGE ADAPTATION PLANNING PROPOSAL. THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF THE FEDERAL PROTECT PROGRAM. I'LL SAY IF WE DON'T RECEIVE POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM HEADQUARTERS THEN, THEN MAYBE WE CAN ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN THAT REGARD. BUT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE STEPS IN HOUSE TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO AND GET APPROVAL. IF WE DON'T, THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY AND THEN WE CAN HAVE AN ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION. I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT. TO YOUR QUESTION REGARDING THE DETOUR SIGNS, I REMEMBER, I THINK LAST BOARD MEETING THERE WAS A COMMENT REGARDING THE DETOURS AND I DID REACH OUT TO OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM AND THEY EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THERE WAS DETOUR SIGNAGE POSTED AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS AROUND THE COUNTY ESPECIALLY AROUND 59 AND 152. >> THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION MARLIN. >> THAT'S CONCERNING TO ME YOU'RE NOT SEEING THOSE DETOUR SO I'LL HAVE TO FOLLOW IT BACK WITH OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM AND SEE WHERE, IN FACT, THAT THEY POSTED THAT AND IF THEY NEED TO INCREASE THE POSTING OF THOSE DETOURS. >> MARLIN, I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S A QUESTION OF THERE IS DETOUR SIGNS OUT THERE, IT'S JUST THAT CALTRANS DOESN'T HAVE A DESIGNATED DETOUR ROUTE. IT'S BASICALLY CLOSED OFF AT SANDY MUSH IN HIGHWAY 59. YOU CAN GO LEFT OR YOU CAN GO RIGHT. IF YOU GO LEFT OR YOU GO RIGHT, YOU CAN FIND A WAY AROUND IT. BUT WITHOUT THAT DESIGNATED DETOUR ROUTE DESIGNATION, I'M GOING TO CALL IT, WE GET PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING DOWN ROADS THAT THEY'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH, PEOPLE GETTING STUCK AND NOT TO MENTION, YOU'RE TAKING HIGHWAY TRAFFIC AND PUSHING IT ONTO LOCAL COUNTY ROADS THAT WERE NEVER DESIGNED TO HANDLE THAT TRAFFIC AND OH BY THE WAY, AT THE WORST TIME THAT YOU WANT THAT TRAFFIC WHEN WE'VE HAD THE ABUNDANCE OF RAIN. >> I UNDERSTOOD DIRECTOR. I DEFINITELY WILL REACH OUT TO OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM TO SEE IF THEY CAN DESIGNATE A PARTICULAR ROUTE THAT MAKES SENSE WITH THE COUNTY. I THINK THAT'S A VALID SUGGESTION AND I'M GOING TO POSE THAT TO OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM AND SEE WHAT COMES OUT OF THAT. [01:05:02] I'LL DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH THE BOARD ON THAT REQUEST. THEN ON STATE ROUTE 152, I THINK THERE WAS A PREVIOUS ACTION ITEM FOR SOME POTHOLES IN THE ROAD THERE. I DID ALSO ASK OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM TO ADDRESS THAT AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THEY HAD. BUT IF THIS IS AN ADDITION OR IF IT'S IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION THEN PREVIOUS OR I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE PARTICULAR LOCATIONS OF THE POTHOLES ON 152. YOU CAN REACH OUT TO ME ON THE SIDE IF YOU'D LIKE, BUT I'D LIKE SOME DETAILS ON THAT BECAUSE I'D LIKE OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM TO ADDRESS THAT AS WELL. >> IT'S PRETTY MUCH MARLIN, START AT ONE IN THE TOWN AT THE CITY LIMITS AND GO THROUGH THE OTHER END OF TOWN EITHER DIRECTION. THE ROAD IS REALLY STARTING TO DETERIORATE. IT ISN'T ONE BIG POTHOLE, IT'S JUST THERE'S A BUNCH OF SETTLING WHERE THEY'VE COME IN AND DID THE DIG OUTS AND REPLACED TIRES WITH OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. IT'S ALL SETTLING WITH ALL THIS MOISTURE AND IT'S JUST REALLY ROUGH AND I JUST HAVE NEVER SEEN IT THAT BAD BEFORE. THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. I WILL ONLY HAVE OUR MAINTENANCE TEAM ADDRESS THAT. >> DIRECTOR ESPINOSA. >> WELL, THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. WELL, MARLIN, THANK YOU FOR UPDATING US ON THE NAMED ROUTE AND THE BRIDGE AND AS WELL AS DIRECTORY SILVEIRA IN THE WORLD HERE WHERE ONE-TWO PUNCH HERE. PEOPLE ARE FRUSTRATED BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ALMOST A MONTH, IT'S BEEN CLOSED. LET'S SAY WHETHER IT'S HILLY OR RAIL ROAD IT IS, HAS A BETTER ROUTE DETOUR. I HAD TO TAKE A DETOUR MYSELF AND WENT AROUND HILLY AND GOT SOME BIG POTHOLES AND NOW THANKFULLY, I WAS ABLE TO CALL DANA AND PULL THE WORKS IN AND TO ADDRESS THOSE BECAUSE THEY CAME UP PRETTY FAST. SANDY MUSH THROUGH HILLY OR RAIL ROAD IS PROBABLY A GOOD POSSIBILITY. ALSO, NORTH BY 99 ON THE INOC SEND ME AN EMAIL REGARDING THE PLANADA SIGN OFF THE FREEWAY. I COULDN'T FIND IT SO I DON'T KNOW. I SAW IT, I COULDN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS, BUT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN SOUTH OF MISSION BOULEVARD GOING NORTHBOUND. SOMEBODY BROKE IT AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S AT. BUT I KNOW IF YOU DID THE RESEARCH IN YOUR DEPARTMENT, I KNOW THAT IT TOOK US THREE YEARS TO PUT IT UP AND MR. JOHN CHAVEZ FROM PLANADA ADVOCATING FOR IT AS WELL. HOPEFULLY, IF YOU DO THE RESEARCH, YOU PROBABLY KNOW EXACTLY WHERE TO GO IN YOUR DEPARTMENT THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SUPERVISOR. THAT'S IT'S HELPFUL DETAIL. WE'LL DEFINITELY TAKE A LOOK BACK AT THAT. >> [BACKGROUND]. >> YEAH, MARLIN, THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. JUST TO ECHO WHAT DIRECTOR SILVEIRA IS TALKING ABOUT. THERE WERE SOME REALLY BAD POTHOLES IN LOS BANOS AT 152 AND 165 AND CALTRANS NEED TO ADDRESS THOSE SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. I THINK THAT MIGHT BE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IS SPECIFICALLY THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF TOWN, THE NUMBERED STREETS, SIX-SEVENTHS STREET, ALL THE WAY THROUGH WEST. IT IS REALLY BAD. THEN THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE, AND AGAIN, I'M JUST FROM MY OWN CURIOSITY, HOW MUCH DOES CALTRANS PLAY A ROLE WITH AS FAR AS THE WAY WE AS CITIZENS TRACK TRAFFIC ON OUR PHONES? I'LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE. I WAS COMING OVER SUDDEN, I KNEW NOT STATE 59, I GOT ON MY PHONE, I CLICKED APPLE MAPS AND I SAID, HEY, TAKE TURN 11 TO SANDY MUSH TO 59. I'M LIKE, NOPE, THAT AIN'T HAPPEN. HOW MUCH DOES CALTRANS AT ALL DOES YOUR APP ACTUALLY CONVEY THAT OR ANYTHING ON THAT? >> GREAT QUESTION. I ALWAYS SAY THAT WAYS PULLS THE DATA FOR QUICK MAP. THAT'S FOR SURE. GOOGLE MAPS DOES THE SAME, BUT APPLE MAPS IN PARTICULAR, I'M NOT QUITE SURE. ACTUALLY, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER FOR YOU, BUT I KNOW FOR SURE WAYS IN GOOGLE MAPS, THEY GET THEIR DETAILS OR REAL-TIME TRAFFIC FROM QUICK MAP. IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, I WOULD RECOMMEND WAYS OR GOOGLE MAPS IF YOU'RE NOT USING QUICK MAP. APPLE MAPS, I'M NOT QUITE SURE, BUT I WILL GET A RESPONSE BACK ON THAT. LET ME LOOK INTO THAT AND I'LL FOLLOW UP. >> YEAH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> RICHARD MARON. >> THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. AS I DRIVE EVERY DAY THROUGH 99 THROUGH MERCED AND ATWATER ACTUALLY YESTERDAY AGAIN, I SAW ONE OF THOSE BIG RIGS HIT ONE OF THE MANY BRIDGES ON 99 AND I'M JUST WONDERING, ONCE THEY'RE DONE WITH THE PROCESS OF EXPANDING THE FREEWAY, IS THERE FURTHER WORK EXPECTED TO BE DONE AT THE BRIDGES TO SEE ABOUT THE DAMAGE OR IF IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THAT IN THE FUTURE? ARE THERE ANY PLANS ON THAT OR ANY UPDATES, INFORMATION? >> ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY WONDERING ABOUT IN ATWATER? >> MERCED. >> OH, SORRY, MERCED. IN TERMS OF THE PROJECT THAT WE HAVE GOING ON, [01:10:04] ONCE IT'S COMPLETED, IT'S COMPLETED. BUT WHAT WE DO IS, WE DO ROUTINELY DO CHECK THE BRIDGES ON OUR STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM FOR STRUCTURAL FEASIBILITY, IF IT IS ACTUALLY SAFE TO DRIVE ON, SAFE TO TRAVERSE. WE DO THAT ON A PERIODIC NATURE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN, BUT WE DO IT PERIODICALLY, AND IF THERE'S A CERTAIN BRIDGE THAT IS OF CONCERN BASED ON SOME IMPACT TO IT, WE CAN EXPEDITE OUR STRUCTURAL REVIEW OF THE BRIDGE SO I CAN MENTION THIS TO OUR TEAM AND THEY CAN GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK. BUT I WOULD, IF POSSIBLE, LIKE SOME DETAILS ON THE PARTICULAR BRIDGE THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. WE'D BE HAPPY TO GO OUT AND TAKE A LOOK AS SOON AS WE CAN. >> I THINK THEY ALL HAVE BEEN IMPACTED ALL ALONG THAT MERCED STRETCH. THERE'S NOT ONE SPECIFIC AND THEN THERE'S NO WAY FOR ANYBODY TO STOP BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM, BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU JUST DRIVE THROUGH AND YOU JUST LOOK AT THE BRIDGES, EVERYONE HAS BEEN HIT. THEN I KNOW FOR SURE THERE'S ONE, AND I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE, BUT THE REAR AXLE OF A BIG TRUCK WAS JUST PULLED FROM THE TRUNK AND THAT'S HOW HARD IT HIT THE BRIDGE. I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE IF YOU DRIVE THROUGH IT, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE IT. >> IF IT'S WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA, AND THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK, I WILL ASK OUR PROJECT TEAM TO LOOK AT IT, THOSE BRIDGES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND SEE JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE STRUCTURALLY SAFE. SAFETY IS OUR MOST IMPORTANT CONCERN, SO WE'LL DEFINITELY EXPEDITE OUR REVIEW OF THE BRIDGES WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA RIGHT NOW. I APPRECIATE THAT. >> [FOREIGN] >> MARLON, JUST TO ADD ON THE PUBLIC'S TRAFFIC SAFETY, WHEN I GO WITH MY REGULAR HONDA CAR, GOING NORTHBOUND ON THE NUMBER 2 LANE OR THE INSIDE LANE, IT'S VERY DANGEROUS, ESPECIALLY AT NIGHT. IT'S HARD TO SEE THOSE BRIDGES, THOSE CORNERS. THE CURVES ARE VERY TIGHT AND THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC LIGHTS, THAT'S WHAT CAUSES ALL THE ACCIDENTS, BECAUSE THERE'S NO HIGHER BARRIERS IN THE BARRICADES TO PREVENT THAT. THE ONCOMING TRAFFIC LIGHTS ARE REALLY GLARING AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT DANGEROUS. I'VE ADDRESSED IT TO THE CHP AS WELL IN THE PAST, BUT THAT'S GOING TO CREATE MORE ACCIDENTS AS CAR TRACTORS DOESN'T ELEVATE THOSE. AT LEAST IN OTHER PROJECTS IN THE PAST, I'VE SEEN BOARDS ON TOP CEMENT BARRIERS, BUT NOT HERE. IT'S JUST GOING TO CAUSE MORE AND MORE ACCIDENTS, UNFORTUNATELY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR. I SHARE YOUR CONCERN AND YOUR DISCOMFORT IN DRIVING THROUGH THAT AREA. IT'S NOT THE EASIEST THING. IT REALLY ISN'T. BUT I APPRECIATE THE SUGGESTION AND I DO AGREE WITH YOU. WE HAVE PUT THOSE UP IN DIFFERENT AREAS ACROSS THE STATE. I DON'T KNOW IF OUR PROJECT TEAM HAS CONSIDERED THAT, BUT I WILL PROPOSE THAT TO THEM BASED ON YOUR REQUEST, SO THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING THAT. >> ANYONE ELSE? >> MY LAST COMMENT, MARLON. I'M GLAD TO SEE YOU'RE BACK IN YOUR NICE, FANCY OFFICE. >> [LAUGHTER] WELL, I COULDN'T BE THERE IN PERSON TODAY, BUT I FIGURED THIS WOULD BE SECOND BEST, SO THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR. >> THANKS AS ALWAYS, MARLON. WE APPRECIATE YOU, AND OBVIOUSLY, WE ALL SYMPATHIZE, WE UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES, ESPECIALLY OF ROAD MAINTENANCE DURING THE PAST FEW MONTHS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND THANK YOU FOR THE WORK OF YOUR AGENCY. WE'LL SEE YOU NEXT MONTH. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> TAKES US TO ITEM 10, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS, [10. Information items] ANY INFORMATIONAL ITEMS THAT ANYONE ON THE BOARD WISH TO HAVE PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION OR FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES? SEEING NONE, NO ACTION NECESSARY THERE, IT TAKES US TO ITEM 11, WHICH IS CONSENT. [11. Consent calendar] ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ANY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO HAVE PULLED FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION OR DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION WITH RESPECT TO THE CONSENT AGENDA? [01:15:02] >> CHAIR, SILVEIRA, MOTION TO APPROVE. >> MOTION FROM DIRECTOR SILVEIRA. SECOND? SECOND FROM DIRECTOR LLANEZ. IS ANYONE OPPOSED? ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. TAKES US NOW TO ITEM 16, [16. Action item] WHICH HAS BEEN MOVED UP, 16 IS THE LANDFILL TIPPING FEE RATE INCREASE DISCUSSION, AND JAMES, WE TURN IT BACK OVER TO YOU, SIR. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, AGAIN. >> AFTERNOON. >> WE HAD OUR DISCUSSION ORDER DURING THE WORKSHOP, [NOISE] AND IN THE STAFF REPORT, THAT YOU HAVE AS PART OF YOUR REGULAR AGENDA ITEM. WE ARE ASKING FOR SOME DIRECTION ON REALLY TWO FACTORS. ONE, WHETHER WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO IN THE TIPPING FEE OR GO TO A NORMALIZED RATE WHICH WOULD EVENTUALLY TAKE EACH JURISDICTION TO THE SAME RATE. ONCE THAT DECISION IS PUT FORWARD TO US, THEN THE SECOND HALF OF THAT IS WHETHER THAT RATE INCREASE WILL BE EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST OF THIS YEAR OR JULY 1ST OF NEXT YEAR. BASED ON THE GUIDANCE YOU GIVE US TODAY, [NOISE] WE WILL COME BACK NEXT MONTH WITH AN ACTUAL ACTION ITEM TO IMPLEMENT THOSE DECISIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR JAMES? IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO BE HEARD ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL TAKE INPUT. I'LL TAKE THE QUESTIONS AND THEN BEGIN THE DISCUSSION. ANY QUESTIONS? DIRECTOR SILVEIRA. >> YEAH, JAMES, THANK YOU. JAMES INFORMED ME EARLIER THAT HE WAS IN WASHINGTON DC AT 5:00 AM THIS MORNING. HE'S BEEN ON A PLANE FROM SACRAMENTO BACK TO MERCED AND THEN GETS TO DRIVE HOME DIRECT IN THE NIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOUR LOYALTY TO THE COURSE HERE. JUST AS A REFRESHER FOR EVERYONE AND MYSELF INCLUDED, THESE RATE INCREASES, IF WE'VE SET FORTH DIRECTION TODAY, IT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO US IN APRIL. THERE'S NOTHING THAT PRECLUDES US FROM LOOKING AT THESE RATES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S AN ITEM THAT'S COMING UP LATER IN THE AGENDA WHERE BECAUSE OF THE MISFORTUNE OF THE OAK FIRE, OUR LANDFILLS RECEIVED THREE MILLION DOLLARS IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT WE WEREN'T ANTICIPATING BECAUSE A LOT OF THAT DEBRIS CAME DOWN TO OUR LANDFILL. WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH THESE FLOODS. THERE'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DEBRIS REMOVAL THAT IS GOING TO END UP IN OUR LANDFILLS THAT WE WEREN'T ANTICIPATING. BY GIVING DIRECTION TO PASS SOMETHING NEXT MONTH, WOULDN'T THOSE REVENUES THAT POTENTIALLY COME OR DON'T COME, WE HAVE AN OPTION TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT THESE. THESE ARE JUST UP TO INCREASE AMOUNTS, CORRECT? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY. >> YES, I MENTIONED AT THE WORKSHOP LAST MONTH, WE REALLY BE RATHER SURPRISING THAT IT HAD BEEN 12 YEARS SINCE THE LAST RATE INCREASE AND THROUGH WHATEVER FACTORS WE'RE GOING ON THE REVENUE STREAM LOOKED OKAY, THE RESERVES LOOKED GOOD. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, YOUR BOARD DID ASK THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS TIP FEE STUDY. AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH IT, WE SEE NOW THE VALUE OF THE TOOL. WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AS WE GO YEAR-TO-YEAR AND WE'LL CERTAINLY PROBABLY HAVE THIS DISCUSSION EVERY YEAR RATHER. I PROMISE YOU IT WILL NOT BE 12 YEARS BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THIS AGAIN. >> PERFECT. THEN I GUESS THE COMMENT THAT I WANT TO MAKE IS, AS WE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT IN THE WORKSHOP I DID IS, WE GET TO THE POINT AND I BELIEVE IT'S 27, 28, THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD HAS AGREED TO AS FAR AS IMPORTING TRASH INTO OUR LANDFILLS, AND THAT IS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF BOND PAYMENTS. I WANT US TO BE IN THE POSITION TO WHERE WE GET TO MAKE A CHOICE WITH IMPORTATION. WE DO IT BECAUSE WE WANT TO DO IT AND NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO IT. FOR ME I THINK THAT NOBODY LIKES TO PASS INCREASES ON. BUT I THINK THAT PUTTING OURSELVES IN A POSITION THEN WE GET TO MAKE A DECISION. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? DOING IT BECAUSE WE WANT TO, NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO. THAT MEANS THAT CURRENTLY WE BRING IN IMPORTS AT A DISCOUNTED RATE. THEY'RE PAYING A LOWER FEE TO BRING THOSE IMPORTS IN BECAUSE WE NEED TO HAVE THAT BASELINE OF REVENUE TO BE ABLE TO PAY OUR BONDS BACK. WHEN WE GET INTO A POSITION THAT WE DON'T NEED THAT IMPORT TRASH, THEN WE CAN PUT THE RATE OUT THERE THAT SAYS, YOU'RE NOT PAYING CHEAPER THAN WHAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE PAYING, MAYBE YOU'RE EVEN PAYING A PREMIUM. IF SOMEBODY NEEDS A SERVICE BAD ENOUGH, THEY'RE GOING TO PAY IT AND IF THEY DON'T, THEN THEY'RE NOT. BUT EITHER WAY, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE IN A BETTER POSITION, THE RESIDENTS OF MERCED COUNTY AREN'T SUBSIDIZING ANOTHER COUNTY'S LANDFILL NEEDS. [01:20:05] THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT I TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION INTO COMING UP WITH THIS DECISION. AGAIN, I WASN'T HERE WHEN THE DECISIONS WERE MADE TO CHANGE THE RATES BASED UPON GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS. I THINK THAT THE FAIREST WAY IS THAT WE ALL END UP AT THE SAME RATE. I WILL AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE DIRECTION IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING BECAUSE IT WAS JUST A WORKSHOP, I'M IN FAVOR OF THE ROUTE THAT WE GO THAT OVER THE COURSE OF NINE YEARS, EVERYBODY'S RATES COME TO BE THE SAME RATES, BUT STARTING IN FISCAL YEAR '24, '25 INSTEAD OF '23, '24. A LOT OF YOU WERE HERE, BUT SOME OF YOU WEREN'T IN. THE REASON MY THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND THAT IS THAT WE AGREE TO GIVE DIRECTION TODAY IT GOES ON AN APRIL AGENDA, A MEETING IN APRIL, KNOWING WITH 218 PROCESSES THAT I DON'T THINK ANY ONE JURISDICTION HAS THE CAPABILITY OF DOING THOSE SOLELY ON THEIR OWN. THERE'S CONSULTANTS THAT HAVE TO BE INVOLVED TO DO THAT. I THINK THAT PUTS PEOPLE AT A DISADVANTAGE TO TRY TO GET RATES, 218 PROCESS DONE, JULY 1ST WILL BE HERE BEFORE WE KNOW IT. FOR THOSE REASONS, I AM AT THIS POINT, THE STARTING IN '24, '25 WITH THE RATE INCREASES AND HAVING THOSE RATES ALL COME TO END UP AT THE SAME RATE BY 2032, '33 IS THE MODEL THAT I WOULD PREFER. I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT MY COLLEAGUES HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU. >> ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, THOUGHTS? >> I HAVE ONE. >> GOOD. >> OKAY. HI. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> DOS PALOS IS GOING THROUGH A 218 PROCESS ALREADY FOR OUR WATER RATES. I AGREE WITH DIRECTOR SILVEIRA AND MAYBE WE CAN START THIS NEXT YEAR, WE CANNOT HAVE TWO OF THOSE GOING ON AT THE SAME TIME. WE'RE ALREADY GOING TO INCREASE OUR WATER RATES BY DOUBLE AND IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG HIT FOR EVERYONE. WE ALREADY HAD AN INCREASE IN OUR GARBAGE RATES. IT WILL DRASTICALLY AFFECT OUR COMMUNITY IF WE RAISE RATES AGAIN THIS YEAR PLUS IT WOULD CONFUSE EVERYONE. I'M JUST SAYING, BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S MY THOUGHT. >> WHO'S NEXT? DIRECTOR PAREIRA? >> I GUESS THIS IS PROBABLY A STACY QUESTION. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO GATHER THE DELIVERY RATES FOR OUR APRIL MEETING? >> THE HAULING RATES THAT EACH JURISDICTION IS CURRENTLY PAYING? >> OR WILL PAY BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL CHANGING RIGHT NOW, EITHER WAY. >> IT WOULD BE INCUMBENT UPON THE JURISDICTIONS TO RELEASE IT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD HAVE IT FOR ATWATER OR LIVINGSTON BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T GONE OUT YET. I'VE KYLE AND PHILIP IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE, AND JAMES, I'VE NOT READ A HAULING CONTRACTS. IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IF THE JURISDICTIONS WERE TO PROVIDE THEIR HAULING AGREEMENTS TO US THAT INFORMATION WOULD BE AVAILABLE OR HOW WOULD THAT WORK? >> YEAH. THERE ARE SOME OF THE RATES I'VE LOOKED, THERE ARE SOME RATES THAT I CAN'T FIND ONLINE, OTHER RATES I WOULD HAVE TO CONTACT THE CITIES OR THE JURISDICTIONS DIRECTLY AND ASK THEM WHAT THEIR RATES ARE. SOME ARE TIED INTO THEIR UTILITY BILLS AND SO THEY'D HAVE TO LET ME KNOW WHAT THOSE RATES ARE FOR SOLID WASTE SPECIFICALLY. WE CAN GET THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU. NOW, THERE'S A SOLID WASTE RATE, THERE'S A RECYCLING RATE, THERE'S A GREEN WASTE RATE. THE RATE THAT THEY'RE PAYING AT THE LANDFILL IS SPREAD ACROSS THOSE DIFFERENT COSTS. WE CAN LET YOU KNOW WHAT EACH ONE IS INDIVIDUALLY, BUT THOSE CONTRACTS ARE NEGOTIATED BY THE JURISDICTIONS AND HOW OUR RATES AFFECTS THE RATE THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE PAYING, ISN'T A DIRECT LINE BECAUSE EACH HAULER HAS A DIFFERENT SETUP OF HOW THOSE RATES ARE, HOW THEY DISPERSE THOSE RATES. SOME HAVE DIFFERENT RATES THAT THEY'RE PAYING THEIR STAFF, THEIR FUEL, THEIR PROCESSING MAY BE DIFFERENT IF THEY'RE TAKING IT TO US OR IN CASE OF CHILTON IT'S TAKEN TO THEIR FACILITY. THERE'S JUST DIFFERENT WAYS FOR THEM TO DECIDE HOW THAT IMPACTS THEIR COST TO THEIR RESIDENTS. [01:25:02] SOME OF IT IS BASED OFF THEIR PROFIT DECISIONS. SOME MAYBE WILLING TO TAKE A HIGHER OR LOWER PROFIT AND SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT ARE NEGOTIATED WITH THE JURISDICTIONS AND HOW THAT AFFECTS THE HAULER. >> TO GET TO THE HEART OF THE QUESTION IS WE WOULD GO INTO YOUR CITY MANAGERS AND TO YOUR COUNTY CEO AND SAY, WE'RE TRYING TO IDENTIFY THE RATE YOU PAY FOR THE HAULING OF YOUR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE. WE'LL BRING THAT INFORMATION RECOGNIZING IT'S NOT GOING TO BE APPLES-TO-APPLES, BUT IT'LL GIVE SOME IDEA OF WHAT THEIR PAYING; IS THAT FAIR? >> OPENING OF THAT LIST. ARE YOU LOOKING JUST FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COSTS OR YOU ARE ALSO LOOKING FOR THE COST OF THE COMMERCIALS PAY? BECAUSE THERE ARE MULTIPLE, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE COMMERCIAL BIN, HOW THAT COULD BE AFFECTED. AGAIN, THE HAULER MAY PUT THAT FEE INTO THE RESIDENTIAL OR THEY MAY RECOUP IT THROUGH THE COMMERCIAL COST OF THEIR HAULING. THAT CAN AFFECT IT AS WELL. LET ME KNOW WHICH RATES YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AND WE CAN PUT IT TOGETHER A LIST FOR YOU. >> YEAH. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE CONSTITUENTS PAYING FAR DIFFERENT RATES TO HAVE THEIR TRASH HAULED TO THE LAND. IT'S EASY TO SIT HERE AND SAY, 50 BUCKS A TON FOR EVERYBODY IS FAIR. BUT IS IT REALLY? IF THE JURISDICTIONS DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE IT, I'M GOOD. I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE AN AVENUE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A WAY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CONSTITUENTS ARE PAYING. >> I CAN GET THAT. >> IT'S NOT YOUR LOAD TO BEAR, IT'S THE JURISDICTIONS. I'M JUST ASKING IF WE COULD ASK THAT. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. YOU'RE PARTICULAR CONCERNED ABOUT THE HAULING COST, RIGHT? >> YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT MAY NOT BE APPLES TO APPLES AS WE LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS. IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY CLEAR WHERE THAT COST IS BEING, I DON'T WANT TO SAY HIDDEN, BUT IT IS BUILT INTO OTHER VARIABLES. >> YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THE RESIDENTIAL OR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL RATES, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE? >> I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO MAKE TOO MUCH WORK? [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING] CAN I GET A SENSE FOR WHAT IT'S LIKE, THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY TRYING TO. >> OKAY. I'LL PUT TOGETHER A LIST FOR APRIL. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. DIRECTOR ESPINOSA? >> WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE A MOTION AGAIN FOR WHETHER IT'S GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO AND WHETHER IT'S 23, 24, OR 24, 25. BUT I'D RATHER GO WITH THE STATUS QUO. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST GOING TO BE HARDER AND A LOT OF PEOPLE, IT'S BETTER TO IMPLEMENT IT. I KNOW THAT THE HAULERS WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY, THEY DON'T WANT TO WAIT OVER A YEAR TO SEE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DECIDE. IT RATHER BE IMPLEMENTED INTO THEIR CONTRACTS WITH THE DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES. I'M GOING TO GO WITH THAT. THANK YOU. >> DIRECTOR LLANEZ. >> WE HEARD EARLIER IN THE TIP FEE WORKSHOP AS FAR AS THE GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO IS, WE DON'T KNOW HOW WE GOT THERE. I THINK THAT'S THE OVERWHELMING SENSE IS THAT HOWEVER WE GOT THERE, IT'S THERE. BUT WHEN WE HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO OUR CONSTITUENTS AND ANYBODY IS THEY'RE GOING TO ASK, WELL, HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THAT NUMBER AND WE DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER. I THINK THE END GAME IS TO NORMALIZE EVERYTHING AND HOWEVER THAT LOOKS THAT'S THE PATH MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE TO ME IT'S MUCH EASIER TO EXPLAIN PEOPLE, WELL, WHAT IS MY BILL AND HOW DID YOU ARRIVE AT THAT BILL? TO ME, IT'S EASIER TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE THAT RATHER THAN I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO IN THAT SAME DIRECTION. I'M LEADING AGAIN TOWARD THE NORMALIZING AND AGAIN, SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN ADJUSTED FOR 12 YEARS AND THEN NOW WE TURN INTO A QUICK RUSH TO DO THE 218 PROCESS IN A 90-DAY OR 100-DAY SPAN. I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR SO THAT'S JUST MY TAKE ON IT. >> MORE THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? I'M NOT SURE IF IT QUITE MAKE SENSE TO TWO-STEP IT OR DIVIDE IT, BUT YOU HAVE ONE, DO WE START WITH A RATE INCREASES JULY 1 OF '23 OR JULY 1 OF '24 FOR THE UPCOMING '23, '24 FISCAL YEAR, THE '24, '25 FISCAL YEAR. THAT'S ONE QUESTION. THEN OBVIOUSLY A GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO OR THE NORMALIZATION IS THE OTHER ISSUE. SEEM TO ME TO BE TO SOMEWHAT SEPARATE ISSUES, BUT ANYWAY, I'VE JUST TAKEN THEM ONE BY ONE THE DATE OF THE RATE INCREASE, DOES ANYBODY HAVE IN ADDITION TO WHAT'S BEEN SAID ALREADY ANY STRONG FEELINGS OR ANOTHER THOUGHTS ABOUT THE DATE OF THE RATE INCREASE. DIRECTOR JOSEPH. >> I THINK I AGREE WITH WHAT'S BEEN SAID ALREADY IN REGARDS TO THE '24, '25. [01:30:03] BUT I ALSO LIKE PAUL'S ARGUMENT IN THE SENSE THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT GEOGRAPHIC THING CAME FROM. I'M LEANING TOWARDS NORMALIZING THE RATES AT '24, '25. I THINK THAT JUST MAKES MORE SENSE RIGHT NOW. >> NORMALIZING IN '24 WOULD BE IT. >> YEAH. >> MR. CHAIR, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THEM AS SEPARATE MOTIONS. IS IT GIVING DIRECTION, THE MOTION? >> WE COULD TAKE THEM SEPARATE, WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S THE RIGHT COURSE OR NOT. WE COULD TAKE THEM SEPARATE OR WE COULD TAKE THEM TOGETHER. >> ESSENTIALLY, THE REQUEST IS TO GIVE US DIRECTION ON WHAT THE ACTION WILL BE NEXT MONTH. IF IT TURNS OUT THAT IT'S NORMALIZING STARTING JULY 1 OF 2024 THEN THE ACTION ITEM NEXT MONTH WE'LL SAY THAT WE'RE ASKING TO APPROVE THIS RATE INCREASE TO START AT THIS TIME AND THIS IS WHAT THE RATES ARE GOING TO BE SO BASICALLY TELLING US WHAT THE ACTION ITEM WILL BE NEXT MONTH. >> I GUESS THEN MY NEXT QUESTION, YOU'RE GOING TO JUST TAKE THE PULSE SO YOU'RE GOING TO READ THE PULSE OF THE BOARD ON THAT OR WOULD YOU LIKE IT IN AN ACTION? BECAUSE I'D BE WILLING TO. [OVERLAPPING] >> READ THE A MOTION. >> THEN I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE GET THE FIRST QUESTION ANSWERED AT LEAST IN MY OPINION, THAT WE SHOULD START IN FISCAL YEAR '24, '25, AND THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> JUST AS A REQUEST TO DO THEM BOTH? YOU SAID NORMALIZE. OBVIOUSLY, YOU'VE EXPRESSED CLEAR SUPPORT FOR NORMALIZING AT THIS POINT. TAKING BOTH TOGETHER OR? >> I GUESS IN THE INTEREST OF LETTING EVERYBODY HAVE THEIR OPINION AND IF I'M JUST READING COMMENTS, I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME FOLKS THAT MIGHT BE OKAY WITH STARTING IN '24, '25 MIGHT NOT BE OKAY WITH NORMALIZING AND SO AGAIN I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY GET CONSENSUS AROUND STARTING IN '24, '25, AND LET'S GET THAT OFF THE TABLE AND THEN WE COULD HAVE THE NEXT DISCUSSION. AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> SECOND FROM DIRECTOR PEDROZO. ROLL CALL VOTE MARY-MICHAL. >> THIS IS FOR STARTING WITH THE RATE INCREASES FISCAL YEAR '24, '25 SO STARTING JULY 1 OF '24. >> THE MOTION WAS BY DIRECTOR SILVEIRA AND SECONDED BY PEDROZO, IS THAT CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> YOU DIRECTOR ESPINOSA? >> NO. >> DIRECTOR HOGUE? >> WHETHER YOU START IN 23' 24' OR 24' '25? >> THIS IS FOR 24' '25. >> THE MOTION IS TO BEGIN THE RATE INCREASE IN FISCAL YEAR. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M VOTING YES. >> THIS IS FOR THE LATER START. >> YES. LATER START. >> DIRECTOR LLANEZ? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR MCDANIEL? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR MORAN. >> YES. >> DIRECTOR NAGY? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR NELSON? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR PAREIRA? >> AYE. >> DIRECTOR SILVEIRA? >> AYE. >> DIRECTOR PEDROZO? >> YES. >> CHAIR SERRATTO? >> YES. >> MOTION CARRIES. >> TAKES US TO THE OTHER ISSUE WHICH IS GEOGRAPHIC STATUS QUO VERSUS NORMALIZATION. THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION OBVIOUS ALREADY ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO NORMALIZE THE RATES. >> MOTION FROM DIRECTOR PEDROZO TO NORMALIZE THE RATES. IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND. >> SECOND FROM DIRECTOR LLANEZ AND MARY-MICHAL. IF I COULD PAUSE FOR A SECOND. MARY-MICHAL. >> THANK YOU. DIRECTOR ESPINOSA? >> NO. >> DIRECTOR HOGUE? >> I'M A YES. >> DIRECTOR LLANEZ? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR MCDANIEL? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR MORAN? >> ABSTAIN. >> DIRECTOR NAGY? >> YES. >> DIRECTOR NELSON? >> NO. DIRECTOR PAREIRA? >> NO. >> DIRECTOR SILVEIRA. >> AYE. >> DIRECTOR PEDROZO? >> YES. >> CHAIR SERRATTO? >> YES. >> MOTION CARRIES. [01:35:01] >> THREE IN ONE. SEVEN AYES, THREE NO AND ONE ABSTAIN. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY FOR AN EFFICIENT DISCUSSION THERE. I APPRECIATE THE TIME. JAMES, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK IN THIS. >> THANK YOU. >> MRS. WELL KYLA, EVERYBODY THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK, AND THEY FORGET TO SOOTH. APPRECIATE LOOK FORWARD TO A BRIGHT FUTURE FOR THE LANDFILL. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND WE'LL HAVE THAT ACTION ITEM NEXT MONTH. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> WE SHOULD LEAVE NOW AND GO HOME AND GET SOME REST. >> YES. [LAUGHTER] >> WHAT KIND OF YOU FLY THE CONCORDE OR SOMETHING FROM DC THIS MORNING TOGETHER? >> [BACKGROUND]. >> F-15. >> 2-DFW. >> TAKES US BACK TO ITEM OR ACTUALLY ITEM 12, [12. Action item] WHICH ARE MCAG ACTION ITEMS. THEY MAY SEE YOU'RE ALREADY READY TO GO OR REAP 2.0 DRAFT SCORING CRITERIA. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND GOOD AFTERNOON DIRECTORS. THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM REGARDING OUR DRAFT SCORING CRITERIA FOR TWO NEW GRANT PROGRAMS. THE MCAG IS PROPOSING UTILIZING OUR REGIONAL EARLY ACTION PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM OF 2021 OR A 2.0 FUNDING. I HAVE SEVERAL SLIDES THAT I'M GOING TO SHARE AND ALL THE INFORMATION IN THE SLIDES IS PULLED FROM THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 244 OR 246. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT REAP TO POINT OUT QUITE A BIT OVER THE LAST SIX MONTHS, BUT JUST AS A LITTLE BIT OF A REFRESHER, REAPED 2.0 IS A STATE PROGRAM ALLOCATING FUNDING TO THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS WITH THREE MAIN PROGRAM OBJECTIVES LISTED ON THE SLIDES. IT'S TO ACCELERATE, INFILL DEVELOPMENT AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER FAIR HOUSING AND TO REDUCE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED. NEXT SLIDE. MCAG SUBMITTED OUR GRANT APPLICATION TO THE STATE IN DECEMBER FOR OUR FORMULA ALLOCATION OF ABOUT 3.6 MILLION, BASED ON THE PROGRAM FRAMEWORK THAT THE GOVERNING BOARD APPROVED IN DECEMBER. THAT FRAMEWORK INCLUDED TO GRANT PROGRAMS OUTLINED ON THIS SLIDE. THE FIRST IS A LARGER REGIONAL COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM AIMED AT FUNDING PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION. THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 2.7 MILLION. THEN THE SMALLER LOCAL SUBALLOCATION GRANT PROGRAM, WHICH FUNDING PAUSE ABOUT $900,000. THAT WOULD MAINLY JUST BE FOR PLANNING FUNDING SUBALLOCATED TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THE STATES CURRENTLY REVIEWING OUR GRANT APPLICATION. WHILE THE DEADLINE FOR THE GRANT APPLICATION WAS DECEMBER 31ST, THERE'S A SEPARATE DEADLINE FOR THE STATE TO APPROVE ANY SUBALLOCATION CRITERIA OR SCORING CRITERIA THAT WE'RE PROPOSING WITH THESE THESE GRANT PROGRAMS. NEXT SLIDE. IN JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE DRAFT SCORING CRITERIA THAT WE'RE PROPOSING. THIS IS IN LINE WITH ESSENTIALLY THE ONLY SET OF SCORING CRITERIA THAT THE STATE HAS APPROVED AS OF RIGHT NOW. THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED BY THE SANTA BARBARA COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS, OR SBCAG, SEVERAL OTHER MPO'S ARE UTILIZING THE SAME SET OF CRITERIA FOR THEIR REGIONAL PROGRAMS AS CLOSELY ALIGNED WITH THE STATE'S GUIDELINES. WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT THE STATE WOULD APPROVE OUR SCORING CRITERIA LATER THIS MONTH, AND THEN WE WOULD GO ON TO DEVELOP THE REST OF THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND THEN HOPEFULLY ISSUE A CALL FOR APPLICATIONS LATER THIS SUMMER. ON THE SLIDE HERE IS JUST A SUMMARY OF THE CRITERIA WITH THE PROPOSED WEIGHTS. THIS IS FOR THE COMPETITIVE, THE LARGER POT OF FUNDING. THE CRITERIA IS HEAVILY WEIGHTED, 75% TOWARDS MEETING THE STATES THREE OBJECTIVES AND THEN A MAXIMUM OF 20 POINTS FOR SOME OTHER PRIMARY FACTORS WHICH ARE ALL DEFINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON THOSE. THEN FIVE POINTS FOR THE SCOPE OF WORK AND BUDGET, JUST ESSENTIALLY TO ENSURE THAT APPLICATIONS ARE THOROUGH AND THAT PROJECTS BEING PROPOSED TO BE DELIVERABLE. THEN FOR THE LOCAL SUB ALLOCATION GRANT PROGRAM. SORRY. COME AGAIN. >> GO BACK TO THE LAST SLIDE. CAN WE CHANGE IT? CAN WE CHANGE THOSE NUMBERS? >> THE GOVERNING BOARD DOES HAVE DISCRETION TO DO THAT? YES. >> I WOULD SAY THAT WE CHANGE WHAT WE DO, REDUCING VMT AT 23 AND AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING AND GET 25. >> WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET BUT WE WILL GET, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TO ADJUST THE SCORING BUT. >> WELL, I'M JUST PUTTING THAT OUT THERE SO YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT IT THAT I DON'T WANT TO SEE DMT HIGHER THAN THAT. I'D RATHER SEE AT THE BOTTOM. >> THEN FOR THE LOCAL OF ALLOCATION GRANT PROGRAM WHICH ALLOCATES FUNDING BY FORMULA TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, WOULD USE THE SAME SET OF CRITERIA, BUT THIS IS ESSENTIALLY OVER THE COUNTER FUNDING FOR JURISDICTIONS. WE WOULD EVALUATE THOSE APPLICATIONS JUST ON A PASS FAIL BASIS. THOSE THOSE PROJECTS OR THOSE PLANNING FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM, [01:40:02] WE ANTICIPATE BEING THINGS LIKE REZONING TO ADDRESS YOUR ARENA FROM YOUR HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE, INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING TO SUPPORT INFILL HOUSING, THAT SORT OF THING. AS PART OF OUR SCORING CRITERIA, WE ALSO INCLUDED A PROPOSED SET OF ALLOCATION FORMULA FOR THAT PLANNING FUNDING THAT $900,000 POT. SO AFTER DISCUSSIONS WITH LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AND THROUGH OUR REPORT GROUP, WE CAME UP WITH A BASE ALLOCATION OF $100,000 PER JURISDICTION AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL PORTION OF THAT FUNDING BASED ON YOUR SHARE OF THE SIX CYCLE ARENA. THIS IS JUST A TENTATIVE TIMELINE AND IT'S TENTATIVE BECAUSE THE STATE STILL HAS NOT APPROVED OUR APPLICATION. DEPENDING ON WHEN IT IS APPROVED AND WE'RE ABLE TO RECEIVE THOSE FUNDS THAN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO ISSUE THE CALL FOR APPLICATIONS AND THE APPLICATIONS WILL BE DUE LATE SUMMER OR IN THE FALL. HOPEFULLY, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AWARD AND EXECUTE AGREEMENTS LATE THIS YEAR. THEN THE BIG DEADLINE IS JUNE 30TH, 2026. ALL FUNDS HAVE TO BE EXPANDED. THAT'S A TIGHT TIMELINE FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, BUT THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE LEGISLATION. JUST IN CLOSING, THIS IS A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE SCORING CRITERIA. SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR TAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS ON ALTERING THE CRITERIA OR THE WAITING. BUT THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM. MCAG IN TRB, RECOMMEND THE GOVERNING BOARD APPROVE THE DRAFT ROOT 2.0 SCORING CRITERIA TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WISH DID GIVE ANY INPUT. LOOKING LIKE NO, IS BACK TO US. ANY THOUGHTS? THE ONE THING WE'RE HERE FOR IS TO ADOPT THE SCORING CRITERIA. THE ONE DECISION BEFORE US TONIGHT OR THIS AFTERNOON IS FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE SCORING CRITERIA. ANY WE GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE? ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS THOUGHTS, COMMENTS, DIRECTOR, SIR YOU HAD SOME? >> I DID IT. I'M OF THE BELIEF THAT REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MAKES A LOT OF SENSE IN URBAN AREAS, METROPOLITAN AREAS. IF YOU LIVE IN LOS BANOS, THERE'S A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SERVICES THAT ARE OFFERED THERE, BUT I MEAN, JUST COUNTY SERVICES. YOU'VE GOT TO TRAVEL ACROSS THE COUNTY TO COME AND BE ABLE TO GO GET A BIRTH CERTIFICATE OR A COPY OF YOUR MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE OR A DEATH CERTIFICATE. I FEEL LIKE IT'S GREAT IN THEORY, IT MIGHT WORK IN THOSE PLACES AND HAVING THAT, IF IT WAS UP TO ME NOT TRYING TO CHANGE YOUR WHOLE SYSTEM THERE, I WOULD EVEN REDUCE IT FURTHER AND PUT MORE POINTS WEIGHTED TOWARD ACCELERATING INFILL DEVELOPMENT. BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS IF THIS WAS MODELED AFTER SOMEBODY ELSE'S, ARE WE IN JEOPARDIZE OF HAVING OUR WHOLE APPLICATION THROWN OUT IF WE, IF WE CHANGE THAT CRITERIA? >> MY SENSE IS THAT THE STATES FOCUS IS JUST FURTHERING THOSE THREE OBJECTIVES AND THEN ADJUSTING THE WEIGHTS BETWEEN THOSE TOP 3 FACTORS. I THINK THAT THE STATE WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A DRASTIC CHANGE. >> YES, I'M JOHN. >> JUST DRILLING DOWN A LITTLE BIT. THE BIG OBVIOUSLY THE STATE IN THIS, THERE ARE THREE BIG CONCERNS ARE ONE, TWO AND THREE UP THERE, WHICH ARE 75% OF OUR SCORING. THEN JUST IF YOU COULD, HOW DID YOU ARRIVE AT THOSE THREE NUMBERS, THE 27, 23, AND 25? THEN HOW MUCH PLAY DO YOU THINK REALISTICALLY IS THERE FOR US BETWEEN THOSE THREE? >> THIS IS THE SCORING THAT WAS USED BY A SANTA BARBARA COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS THAT THE STATE APPROVED. BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS SOME ROOM TO MOVE THOSE AROUND TO THAT STANDARD BARBARA REGION IS DIFFERENT THAN OURS ABSOLUTELY. >> SURE. >> WOULD YOU HAVE ANY HEARTBURN OF I SUGGESTED THAT WE DID 34 ACCELERATED INFILL DEVELOPMENT, 25 FOR AFFIRMATIVE AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING, AND 20 FOR REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED? >. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE STATE. I DON'T IMAGINE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TERRIBLE HEARTBURN OVER THAT. I THINK WE CAN JUSTIFY TO WHY, WHY WE'RE DOING THAT FOR OUR REGION. >> INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND REDUCING VMT GO. >> RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING]THAT'S WHAT I WAS THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. I ALSO THINK I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE TWO OR MAYBE EVEN ASK THE QUESTION, MEG, THAT I KNOW THAT THIS WAS ALL DEVELOPED THROUGH THE GROUP AND THE JURISDICTION STAFF HAS BEEN INVOLVED. DO YOU SEE BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAPPENED THERE, ANY CONCERN AT THE STAFF LEVEL AT THE JURISDICTIONS TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT? THEN MY SECOND PART QUESTION, IF IT ISN'T GOING TO BE ASKED, I WOULD WANT TO KNOW. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA OF WHAT THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE IF WE MADE THE CHANGE, SUBMITTED IT AND IT DIDN'T WORK, [01:45:02] I WOULD JUST ASK I THINK THE BOARD AT SOME LEVEL, COULD WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE ANY MINOR ADJUSTMENTS BETWEEN THE NUMBERS THAT IF WE MADE THE CHANGES THAT DIRECTOR SILVEIRA SUGGESTED AND THEN WE HAVE THESE NUMBERS. COULD WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ADJUST THOSE IN RESPONSE TO ANY PUSH BACK FROM HCD THAT WE MIGHT GET, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, SO THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WAIT A MONTH TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD AND GET BECAUSE THERE IS THAT SENSITIVITY OF THE TIMELINE? >> MY SENSE FROM THE DISCUSSIONS WITH RAPE WORK GROUP, I THINK THAT FOCUSING ON INFILL, WHICH DOES SUPPORT REDUCE VMT AND AFFIRMATIVE FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING. I THINK THAT DOES MAKE SENSE TO THE GROUP. >> ANYBODY ELSE? WHEN THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT FAIR HOUSING, WHAT SPECIFIC STEPS THEY'RE LOOKING FOR? [OVERLAPPING] >> AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING IS MORE ABOUT OVERCOMING PATTERNS OF SEGREGATION AND THEN LOCATING HIGHER-DENSITY HOUSING AND HIGHER OPPORTUNITY AREAS IN THE COMMUNITY. NOT SO MUCH JUST LIKE PROGRAMS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. >> MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS THEY ARE LOOKING FOR. >> MIXED-INCOME. ANY THOUGHTS, DISCUSSION FURTHER? >> [OVERLAPPING] I WOULD LOVE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ITEM 12A WITH PUTTING IN THE NEW WEIGHTED SCORES OF 30 FOR ACCELERATING INFILL DEVELOPMENT, 25 FOR AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING, AND 20 FOR REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, AND GIVING STAFF THE ABILITY THAT IF THEY GET MAJOR PUSH BACK FROM THE STATE, THAT THEY COULD GO WITH SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT. >> IN A SECOND, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ANY OPPOSITION TO THOSE NUMBERS? EVERYBODY IN SUPPORT? SEEING EVERYBODY NOD, MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MEG. >> I'M GOING TO EXCUSE HER SIR. EXCUSE HER. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE GOT WORK TO DO. >> [LAUGHTER] GREAT. >> WELL, GENTLEMEN. [OVERLAPPING] IT TAKES US TO 12 B, WHICH MARY MICHAL'S ITEM, WHICH IS THE ADOPTION OF THE ONE VOICE REGIONAL POLICY PLATFORM FOR 2023. >> THIS IS ABSOLUTELY MISSION-CRITICAL. WE HAVE TO TAKE AN ACTION BEFORE WE USE QUANTUM. >> SOMEBODY'S GLASSES. >> I KNOW YOU DON'T, BUT JUST LET YOU KNOW. >> [BACKGROUND] SOMEBODY LEFT THEIR GLASSES UP HERE. >> ARE THEY NICE? >> MIGHT'VE BEEN THE CONGRESSMAN. OH, MEG DID [LAUGHTER]. >> MEG. >> THERE YOU GO. >> THAT KNOB WAS POINTING TO HIMSELF, BUT THEN HE'S GOT THEM ON RIGHT NOW [LAUGHTER]. I FEEL LIKE I NEED A NEW PAIR. >> I KNOW I DID TOO. I WAS GLAD IT WASN'T HER FRIENDS FROM REGIONAL WASTE [BACKGROUND]. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, I'M PULLING DOUBLE DUTY HERE TODAY. BEFORE I GET STARTED, LET YOU KNOW BEN GOLDEN IS HERE FROM TOWNS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS ON ZOOM. IF ANYONE HAS ANYTHING THAT HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER BETTER THAN I AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION. I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT BOTH FOR YOURSELVES AND FOR THE PUBLIC, WHICH THERE'S COPIES UP HERE. BUT AT THE DAY IS TODAY YOU GOT THREE FACTS SHEETS WHICH WERE RECEIVED AFTER THE AGENDA WAS RELEASED FROM THE CITY OF MERCED SO YOU HAVE THOSE MATERIALS IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. TODAY'S ACTION ITEM IS TO ADOPT THE 2023 ONE VOICE PLATFORM FOR USE THIS SPRING DURING OUR TRIP TO DC. AS YOU RECALL, OUR ONE VOICE GOALS HAVE NOT CHANGED IN THE PAST FEW YEARS AND THEY ARE LISTED HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY AND IN YOUR PACKET. WE WERE EXCITED THAT CONGRESSMAN DUARTE WAS HERE TODAY AND HE SEEMED EAGER TO PARTICIPATE IN OUR PROCESS AND PARTICIPATE IN OUR DELEGATION MEETINGS OR HIS STAFF. APPARENTLY, HIS STAFF HAS ALREADY SCHEDULED DINNER WITH OUR DELEGATION WHILE WE'RE IN DC SO WE APPRECIATE BEN'S WORK ON THAT IN ADVANCE. WE ARE HERE TODAY THAT YOU SAW THIS TIMELINE A FEW MONTHS AGO. THE TRB HAD CONDUCTED A COUPLE OF PLANNING SESSIONS. WE RECEIVE MATERIALS FROM THE JURISDICTIONS AS WELL AS DELEGATION FEES. YOU ARE BUSY IN YOUR JURISDICTION MAKING YOUR TRAVEL ARRANGEMENTS FOR YOUR DELEGATES AND THIS ITEM WAS HEARD BOTH BY THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE TRB EARLIER THIS MONTH. IT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY AND THAT PLATFORM [01:50:02] INCLUDES MAJOR ELEMENT OF THAT IS OUR TRANSPORTATION ITEMS. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE STATE ROUTE 59 PORTION TODAY THAT YOU SEE IN THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE THAT WAS GIVEN TO US BY THE CITY OF MERCED, AS I MENTIONED AFTER THIS AGENDA WAS PRESENTED AND WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE VERSIONS OF THE PLATFORM THAT BOTH THE CAC AND THE TRB ADOPTED. HOWEVER, EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME. WE HAVE PRIORITIES THAT ARE ABOUT INVESTMENT AND RURAL REGIONAL PROJECTS AND WE'VE HAD A FEW SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT THERE. CONTINUING TO SUPPORT EXPANDED PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE TO POLICY POINTS ABOUT YARD SUPPORTING TRANSIT INTO NATIONAL PARKS. THE FIFTH BULLET IS A NEW ONE ABOUT ESTABLISHING A POLICY WHERE FOLKS USING PUBLIC TRANSIT, INTERNATIONAL PARKS ARE NOT CHARGED THE GATE FEE. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH OUR FRIENDS AT THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE ABOUT THAT ONE SPECIFICALLY AS IT PERTAINS TO YARDS. THEN SEEKING EXPEDITED ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES AROUND COMMUNITY AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF JURISDICTIONS LOOKING FOR SOME MOVEMENT IN THOSE AREAS. WE ALSO HAVE SEVERAL ITEMS AROUND COMMUNITY FACILITIES, BOTH THE REHABILITATION AND RESTORATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS, AS WELL AS SOME COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. WE CONTINUE TO HAVE PRIORITIES AROUND PUBLIC SAFETY, CAPITAL AND PERSONNEL AND EQUIPMENT FUNDING. VASH VOUCHERS FOR HOMELESS FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY, A COUPLE OF WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN PRIORITIES, AND THEN JUST A GENERAL PRIORITY TO SUPPORT ANY COMMUNITY FUNDING REQUESTS THAT GO TO OUR FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES, SUCH AS THE ONES MENTIONED ABOUT YARDS TODAY. BUT WE DO KNOW OFTEN THAT OUR CITIES IN OUR COUNTY HAVE PUT FORWARD THEIR OWN PROJECTS THAT WE WANT TO COLLECTIVELY AS THE DELEGATION SUPPORT WHEN WE GO BACK TO DC. THE DELEGATE LIST IS IN YOUR PACKET ON PAGE 257, SO YOU CAN SEE WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO GO. THOSE DELEGATES WILL START MEETING AS SOON AS THIS IS ADOPTED. OUR FIRST MEETING IS MARCH 30TH, YOU'LL SEE THAT SCHEDULE HERE. I WILL JUST MAKE A NOTE. APRIL 13TH, WE'VE CHANGED TO MARK AS TENTATIVE BECAUSE THERE IS A CALLOSITIES CONFERENCE THAT WEEK SO WE'LL CHECK IN WITH THE DELEGATES TO SEE IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT MEETING OR RESCHEDULE THAT MEETING. THEN THE TRIP IS SLATED FOR MAY 9-12TH AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR YOU TODAY. AGAIN, THIS IS AN ACTION ITEM TO ADOPT THE PLATFORM AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> THANK YOU, MARY MICHAL. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MARY MICHAL? DIRECTOR BARRETT >> COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SCREEN WITH THE POLICY? THERE YOU GO. >> THIS ONE? >> UNDERWATER, THE STREAMLINE PERMITTING PROCESS FOR CREEK MAINTENANCE, ARE WE PULLING A FEDERAL PERMIT FOR CREEK MAINTENANCE? >> FOR A? >> LIKE A 404. [BACKGROUND] OH, OKAY. THAT WAS IT. >> ANY QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION, MOTION? >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> ANY OPPOSITION? >> SORRY, WHO WAS THE SECOND? >> [BACKGROUND]. >> THANK YOU. >> WELL, YES. YOU GOT TO DO DOUBLE DUTY. >> YEAH. >> NELSON PAREIRA. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU MARY MICHAEL. TAKES US TO 12C WHICH STACY INFORMS ME AS MISSION CRITICAL. >> IT IS. >> TO GET THIS DONE TODAY. >> WE SHOULD HAVE ELIZABETH FORTE ON ZOOM THAT WILL BE COMING UP SHORTLY. WHILE SHE'S DOING THAT, I DID PLACE AN AMENDED AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY CHECKLIST AT YOUR SEATS THAT HAVE A LITTLE BOX THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. THAT IS A CHANGE TO THAT DOCUMENT THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR BOARD PACKET THAT HAS THOSE CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED FROM CALTRANS. THAT ATTACHED DOCUMENT AT YOUR SEAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE APPROVED DOCUMENT. OKAY ELIZABETH, I TRIED TO BUY YOU SOME TIME, IT'S ALL YOU. >> CAN EVERYONE HEAR ME ALL RIGHT? >> YES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE BIG FINALE HOPEFULLY TO OUR REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AMENDMENT, [01:55:01] FTIP AMENDMENT, AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DOCUMENTS. WHAT TRIGGERED THESE AMENDMENTS WERE A COUPLE OF THINGS I JUST WANT TO BRING UP AGAIN. ONE OF THEM IS THAT SOME OF OUR PROJECTS THAT LOOK LIKE THEY'RE NEW IN THIS PROGRAM, REALLY ARE JUST BEING ADDED INTO OUR FEDERAL DOCUMENTS SO THAT THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PHASES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THEY NEED THE AUTHORITY TO MOVE FORWARD, THAT'S WHY THEY'RE THERE. ALSO, WE HAD A NUMBER OF RAIL PROJECTS, THREE LARGE RAIL PROJECTS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE PROJECT LIST. RARELY SUPPORTED IN THE RTP THAT YOU-ALL APPROVED, BUT THE REQUEST WAS TO PUT IN THESE PROJECTS WITH FUNDING IN DOLLAR AMOUNTS AND TO MAKE THEM ELIGIBLE SO THAT THEY CAN APPLY FOR STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS SO THAT THEY COULD SAY, YES, MCAG HAS US IN THEIR PROGRAMS AND WE'RE GOING TO APPLY FOR FEDERAL FUNDS. IT'S IN SUPPORT OF THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES THAT WE NEEDED TO PERFORM THE AMENDMENT. TWO THINGS WERE TRIGGERED IN THIS AMENDMENT, ONE WAS AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY, WHICH WE OFTEN HAVE TO DO WITH THIS TYPE OF AMENDMENT, AND ALSO A RE-EVALUATION UNDER SEQUEL. THE SEQUEL EVALUATION SHOWED THAT AN ADDENDUM WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE THERE WERE NOT SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES IN THE IMPACTS OR THE SEVERITY OF THEM AND IT DOESN'T REQUIRE NEW MITIGATION MEASURES BEYOND WHAT THIS BOARD ALREADY APPROVED IN AUGUST OF 2022. THE TWO ACTIONS THEY'RE ASKING FOR TODAY IS FOR ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO THE PROGRAM EIR FOR THE RTP THAT YOU APPROVED IN AUGUST AND ALSO TO APPROVE RTP AMENDMENT 1, FTP AMENDMENT 1 AND THE AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS. WE DID HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 2ND, AND THERE WERE NO COMMENTS THERE. AND AS STACY MENTIONED, WE GOT SOME COMMENTS FROM CALTRANS AND YOU SHOULD HAVE THOSE IN FRONT OF YOU. THEY'RE VERY MINOR ADDITIONS TO WHAT THEY WANTED IN THEIR CONFORMITY CHECKLISTS AS FAR AS REFERENCES IN THE DOCUMENT, SO THEY'RE VERY MINOR. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THOSE CHANGES. I'M HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, AND I ALSO APOLOGIZE FOR BEING THE ONE THAT MADE THE AGENDA SO LONG THIS MONTH. >> THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY PAGES, ALL READ EVERY WORD. DO ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ELIZABETH? CAN'T SEE NOW ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC HAVE ANY INPUT? AGAIN, SEEING NONE BACK TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION AND OR ACTION. >> APPROVES THIS RECOMMENDATION >> MOTION FROM DIRECTOR NELSON. IS THERE A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND. >> SECOND FROM DIRECTOR MCDANIEL? ANYBODY OPPOSED? I CAN SEE NONE. ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. >> GOOD JOB ELIZABETH. >> THANK YOU ELIZABETH. IT TAKES US TO 13, OUR DISCUSSION ITEM. [13. Discussion items] >> WHO DOES ALL >> MR. NAB, THE 2023-24 BUDGET. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, DIRECTORS. IT'S THAT TIME OF THE YEAR FOR THE BUDGET FOR THE MPO. ELIZABETH AND I GOT TO BE TAG TEAMING ON THIS ONE, SO ELIZABETH IF YOU WANT TO GET STARTED. >> THANK YOU. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING DEPARTMENT BUDGET, WHICH YOU ALL KNOW AS THE OVERALL WORK PROGRAM OR OWP. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? I CAN'T TELL IF IT'S WHICH. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STATE REQUIREMENTS, FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MEASURE B. SO NOT OUR ADVOCACY, WHICH IS NOT PAID WITH STATE AND FEDERAL MONEY TO MAKE THAT CLEAR, AND NOT OUR WASTE MANAGEMENT OR TRANSIT OPERATIONS. IT'S ABOUT 6.3 MILLION IN GENERAL WITH THIS BUDGET. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AS FAR AS SOME OF THE ONGOING WORK THAT MCAG DOES, I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD SOME OF THESE PHRASES ENOUGH. WE MANAGE A NUMBER OF FUNDING PROGRAMS, CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY, REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM. THOSE ARE TWO OF OUR PRIMARY FORMULA FEDERAL ALLOCATIONS THAT COME DIRECTLY THROUGH MCAG, TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDING, SB1 LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMMING. THOSE ARE STATE FUNDS THAT COME THROUGH MCAG AND IT'S ROUTINE THAT WE AS A BOARD MANAGES THOSE. AS FAR AS PLANNING ACTIVITIES. THOSE FIRST FOUR YOU HEAR A LOT ABOUT EVERY YEAR, OUR REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS, AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY AND TRANSPORTATION MODELING. THERE'S PLENTY OF THAT IN YOUR AGENDA TODAY IF YOU WANT TO SEE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT'S LIKE. ALSO, THE REGIONAL HOUSING PLANNING IS A BIG PART OF OUR BUDGET. [02:00:03] WITH THE REAP 2.0 FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MIKE WAS TALKING ABOUT, IT'S A LARGE PART OF OUR BUDGET NEXT YEAR. WE HAVE A GOOD BUDGET FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATING. ALSO LOTS OF REGIONAL COORDINATION GOING ON, FOR EXAMPLES, IN RAIL AND AIR QUALITY, OF COURSE, AND GOODS MOVEMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS SOME OF THE COMPLETED TASKS FROM 22-23, A COUPLE OF THESE WE'LL BE WRAPPING UP IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. THE AMENDMENT THAT JUST GOT APPROVED. WE CAN SAY THAT WAS COMPLETED, OUR RTP AMENDMENT. EARLIER THIS YEAR OUR TRAVEL MODEL WAS APPROVED, WHICH WAS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. WE PULLED OUT OF THE THREE COUNTY MODEL THAT WAS RUN BY SAN JOAQUIN AND DR. AARON, UNMET TRANSIT NEEDS, REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT. YOU SEE AT THE BOTTOM THERE ARE A COUPLE OF HOUSING OR REAP 1 RELATED ITEMS THAT YOU'LL BE HEARING ABOUT IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. THOSE WILL BE WHAT WE CAN SHOW AT CALTRANS AND THE OTHERS WHAT WE COMPLETED THIS YEAR. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SOME OF OUR MAJOR PROJECTS LOOKING THROUGH OUR DRAFT BUDGET IS THE MULTIJURISDICTIONAL LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN. YOU HEARD EARLIER FROM MARLIN THAT THE COUNTY WAS AWARDED AN HCEP GRANT. THE COUNTY HAS A LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN AND OUR OTHER AGENCIES NEED THEM AS WELL. YOU MUST HAVE ONE TO APPLY FOR HCEP. WE WANT TO HELP EVERYONE GET UP TO DATE SO THEY COULD APPLY FOR THAT PROGRAM AS WELL. OUR MULTIJURISDICTIONAL HOUSING ELEMENT FOR THE AGENCIES ELECTRIC VEHICLE PLAN, SOME OF THESE ARE ONGOING. ELECTRIC VEHICLE READINESS PLAN OR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN, THEY'RE ONGOING. WE'RE HOPING TO MOVE FORWARD. THE UC MERCED TRANSIT CONSOLIDATION STUDY. I KNOW WE'VE BEEN HOPING FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, SO WE'RE REALLY GETTING GOING, WORKING WITH THEM ON THAT. SOMETHING WE'RE PROPOSING THIS YEAR. WE'RE CALLING IT MR. MAP. MERCED REGIONAL MULTIMODAL ACCESS PLAN, AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT OR PROPOSING THIS IS WITH STATE GRANT FUNDS, IS TO HELP ADVANCE OUR DEVELOPMENT ESSENTIALLY IN THE 99 CORRIDOR BY LOOKING AT OTHER TYPES OF ACCESS TO THE CORRIDOR. I'M SURE WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS MORE AS THE YEAR GOES ON, BUT MAYBE AS WE NEED TO EXPAND OUR SCOPE BEYOND WIDENING AND LOOK AT THE RAIL CONNECTIONS AND ACTOR TRANSPORTATION, ETC, AROUND HIGHWAY 99 SO THAT WE CAN REALLY START TO MOVE PROJECTS FORWARD AND WE'RE USING STATE GRANT FUNDS FOR THAT. WE'RE PROPOSING TO. THEN MEASURE THE ADMINISTRATION OF COURSE, MAJOR PROJECTS IN '23, '24. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, AND PASSING IT OVER TO NAB. >> THANK YOU, ELIZABETH. ALONG WITH THE MAJOR PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR '22, '23, THERE'S OTHER FISCAL BUDGET IMPACTS. WE'RE LOOKING AT A CONFERENCE ROOM IMPROVEMENT, BASICALLY IMPROVING THE IT IN THAT CONFERENCE ROOM AND EXPANDING THE CONFERENCE ROOM TO HOLD OUR MCAG GOVERNING BOARD MEETING THERE. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT OF 5%. WE'RE LOOKING AT A ONE FULL-TIME POSITION FOR A PLANNER TO HELP OUT THE MEASURE V FOR PROJECT DELIVERIES ASSISTED JURISDICTION ON ANY OTHER MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO MEASURE V, ALONG WITH SOME OF THE STUFF TAKING PICTURES OR JUST CHECK IT WITH JURISDICTION ABOUT ALL THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN OUR TIP AND ALL THAT. THAT'S ONE. THEN WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT IT. TECH POSITION, WHICH IT'S A QUARTER OF THE BUDGET. SALARY IS IN THIS BUDGET. IT'S NOT A FULL POSITION, SO IT'S ONLY A QUARTER. THE REMAINING THREE-QUARTERS ARE GOING TO RWA YARTS AND TJPA. ANY QUESTIONS SO FAR? QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE A COMMENT. MY LIGHT IS NOT ON. ON THE SLIDES THAT WERE IN THE AGENDA PACKET. >> THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. >> THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. >> YEAH. I MADE SOME ADJUSTMENTS. >> VERY GOOD. I'LL POINT OUT SOMETHING TO YOU LATER. THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] >> NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HOW IS THE MPO BUDGET FUNDED? YOU HAVE PL FUNDING FROM FHWA. YOU HAVE FTA FUNDS OF 5303, THEN YOU HAVE COMPLETE STREET PLANNING FUNDS FROM FHWA. THEN WE GET STATE FUNDS, SB 1 PLANNING GRANTS, AS ELIZABETH TALKED ABOUT, THOSE MULTI-DIRECTIONAL PLANNING GRANTS, AND THEN WE HAVE PPM WHERE WE CALL IT, IT'S CALLED PLANNING, PROGRAMMING, AND MONITORING, WHICH WE USE FOR STAFFING. THEN WE HAVE TDA FUNDS, WHICH IS LTI FONTS. ALL THIS IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY CALTRANS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE BRINGING IN APRIL. WE HAD SUBMITTED A DRAFT BUDGET TO CALTRANS BY MARCH 1ST AND A FINAL DRAFT BY MAY 17TH. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS OUR FUNDING SOURCES OF HOW THE MPO IS FUNDED. [02:05:05] IT INCREASED BY $1.8 MILLION. THAT'S 39%, BUT MAJORITY OF THE INCREASE IS FROM THE REGIONAL HOUSING PLANNING AS MEG TALKED ABOUT TWO ITEMS AGO. IT'S PROGRAMMING THOSE FUNDS INTO THIS BUDGET SO WE CAN DISPERSE IT. ALSO THE SB 1 GRANTS AND YOU CAN SEE IT WENT FROM 204-401 TWO YEARS OF FUNDING GRANT, AND THEN UC MERCED SAID IS GOING TO BRING SOME FUNDING TO THE TABLE TO DO THE STUDY FOR NEXT YEAR. NEXT SLIDE. LIKE I SAID, IT INCREASED BY 39%. MAJORITY THAT INCREASES ARE COST OF LIVING TO NEW POSITIONS, WHICH IS ONE AND A QUARTER POSITION, POTENTIAL MERIT INCREASES. ALONG WITH PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AS ELIZABETH TALKED ABOUT, MAJORITY OF THE PROJECTS LIKE THE MULTIJURISDICTIONAL LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLANS THAT EB READINESS SPENT AND THE NON-MOTORIZED, ALL THAT CONCLUDES IN NEXT FISCAL YEAR. THAT'S WHY IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, THEY WENT FROM $1.9-3 MILLION. THAT CONCLUDES THIS BUDGET. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, ANY COMMENTS, DISCUSSION? NO DIRECTION NEEDED TODAY? >> I HAD ONE QUESTION POTENTIALLY ABOUT THE CONFERENCE ROOM AND JUST WANTED TO GAUGE YOUR BODY'S TEMPERATURE ON THE NEED FOR THE SEPARATE AND HIS PIPE IN DISCUSSION IN THE PAST ABOUT IT, BUT THE NEED FOR A SEPARATE MCAG ROOM TO HOST MEETINGS SUCH AS THIS? >> YEAH. A CENTRALIZED SO EVERYBODY WILL GO TO MCAG INSTEAD OF THE COUNTY OR OTHER JURISDICTIONS. IS NOT JUST THIS BOARD. WE ALSO HAVE A YARD SPORT AND WE ALSO HAVE A CAC, THE COC. WE HAVE OTHER COMMITTEES THAT UTILIZE THAT ROOM, AND AS WE KNOW, THE COMMITTEES ARE GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER AND I'M GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER. WE'VE GOT TO SPREAD OUT A LITTLE BIT. THAT'S BASICALLY WHY IT IS, I MEAN, AND IT'S ALSO OUR STAFF. WHEN WE DO ALL STAFF MEETINGS, WE CAN'T HOST EVERYBODY IN ONE ROOM. WE'RE GROWING OUT OF THAT CONFERENCE ROOM THAT WE HAVE NOW. >> OKAY. >> I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD POINT TO RAISE. I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT BY INCLUDING THIS IN THE BUDGET AND THE BOARD OF PROVING IT AS PART OF THE BUDGET THAT IT IS MAKING THE DECISION THAT THAT'S WHERE THE BOARD MEETINGS WILL BE HELD. THAT'S STILL A POLICY DECISION OF THIS BOARD, BUT IT WILL BECOME AN OPTION AVAILABLE TO YOU. AS YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE A FULL HOUSE HERE, WE BARELY FIT. I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO MAKE THAT BY DOING THESE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CONFERENCE ROOM, IT DOESN'T MAKE THE DECISION TO HOLD BOARD MEETINGS THERE. THAT IS A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT DISCUSSION THAT THIS BOARD WOULD HAVE TO HAVE. BUT AS NAB MENTIONED, WE DEFINITELY COULD USE THE EXPANDED SPACE AND ALSO, I SAY GROWN-UP IT ESTABLISHED THERE. RIGHT NOW I KID YOU NOT. WHEN WE USE OUR CONFERENCE ROOM FOR VIRTUAL MEETINGS, WE PUT THE CAMERA ON A TISSUE BOX BECAUSE OF JUST THE WAY THE ROOM IS CONFIGURED AND TRYING IN. THIS WOULD INCLUDE ACTUALLY GETTING THE AUDIO AND THE VISUAL ALL CONNECTED TO BE IN THIS VIRTUAL WORLD WE NOW LIVE IN AND WE DO HOST OUR YARDS MEETINGS VIRTUALLY AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE'D HAVE A GROWN-UP CONFERENCE ROOM. THAT'S THE TECHNICAL TERM. >> IS GOING TO BE LIKE MERCED. >> NO. THEY GOT TVS THEY GOT LINEUP. [LAUGHTER] >> ANYBODY ELSE? THANK YOU. NAB. >> THANK YOU. >> KEEP TRYING AND WE'LL SEE IF. I THINK THAT'S IT. IT TAKES US TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT AND TURN IT OVER TO STACY. [18. Executive Director’s report] >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD OTHER THAN HAPPY BIRTHDAY WISH TO ELIZABETH TODAY IS HER BIRTHDAY AND SHE DESERVES IT BECAUSE SHE HAD A HECK OF A TIME MAKING YOURSELF AVAILABLE FOR THIS BOARD MEETING BECAUSE OF SOME FHWA TRAVEL AND WEATHER. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ELIZABETH AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT NEEDS MY ATTENTION, I'LL TAKE THOSE DOWN AND WORK ON THEM. >> QUESTIONS. >> IT TAKES THE 19 DIRECTORS REPORTS ON MY LEFT. DIRECTOR LLANEZ. [19. Directors’ reports] >> GOT NOTHING. >> DIRECTOR MCDANIEL. >> THOSE OF YOU WHO PICKED ARIZONA, YOUR BRACKET IS BUSTED. [LAUGHTER] THEY JUST LOST. >> FIFTEENTH. >> WHAT WAS YOUR NUMBER? [OVERLAPPING] >> TWO >> JOE BIDEN DEPICT THEM TO GO ALL THE WAY. >> A LOT OF PEOPLE DID. >> SHOOT. >> I LIKE TO GET UPSET. >> THEY THINK SCOTT [OVERLAPPING] IN APRIL. >> NO. I HAVE NOTHING. >> THEY IMPACT ANYTHING. [02:10:02] >> NOTHING. >> THAT IS IT. I JUST WANTED TO THANK DIRECTOR ESPINOSA LEFT, BUT I WANTED TO THANK HIM. WE'RE GOING TO WORK WITH HIM PARTNERING WITH HIM TO DO WITH IT AND WHAT MARLIN WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, THE CLEAN CALIFORNIA TODAY WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO SHOW PLANADA SOME 11. GLAD TO PLANADA ON MARCH 25TH. HAPPY TO PARTNER WITH HIM AND WE'RE GOING TO GO OUT THERE IF ANYBODY CAN MAKE IT MARCH 25TH, MOST OF THE DAY, FROM 9 TO 3 AND PLANADA WE'LL DO SOME CLEANUP, PULL THE CLEAN CALIFORNIA DAY AND JUST TRY TO HELP UPLIFT PLANADA AS WELL AT THAT TIME. HAPPY TO TRY TO TAKE A LOT OF OUR PEOPLE FROM MERCED OUT TO PLANADA TO DO SOME WORK, SO BE GOOD. ADJOURNMENT, MOTION WAS [OVERLAPPING] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.