Senate Standing Committee on Transportation

Senate Transportation Committee will come to order Let me just indicate most you probably heard, but a caucus that went a little bit overtime is just concluding and the rest of the Members Committee Members should be here shortly for today's hearing.

We will be hearing all of the panels of witnesses on the agenda prior to taking any public comment, so all of those panels first. Once we've heard all the witnesses, we'll have a public comment period for those who wish to comment on the topics on today's agenda.

I also want to announce all the hearing materials, including the agenda. Background materials and handouts are posted and can be accessed on the Senate Transportation Committee's webpage. There are also agendas and copies of the background available in the back of the Committee room.

I would like to thank all of our panelists for taking the time to testify today. I think we have an excellent group and set of panels and their expertise is much appreciated.

I also want to thank our Committee Members for attending and participating in the hearing today and I'm sure I'll remember to thank everyone again before we conclude. I do want to thank Committee staff for the hard work early in the in the legislative session for getting this together. It is a lot of work.

Today's informational hearing will serve as an overview of the state's transportation system. The Legislature has not convened an informational overview hearing on this topic in over 10 years.

As policymakers, it's imperative that we receive a timely overview of the roles, responsibilities and functions of all our state transportation departments, as well as understand how the local public agencies and private sector partners amongst each other and to build, manage and operate California's entire transportation system.

Transportation in California, of course, is one of the most important issues for both residents and businesses in our state, from the registration, inspection of vehicles to providing sufficient public transportation to ensure bicycles and pedestrians are safe, to the management and maintenance of our state highway system and many, many more sub issues of transportation.

As we all know, transportation impacts all of us today. We will hear from our key transportation leaders on how their respective departments manage and operate our transportation system. We will also hear from our local transportation partners in at least a couple of cases on their roles and responsibilities.

We will further hear from our private sector partners on how they engage with the public sector in managing and maintaining our transportation system under all the challenges that they are facing currently. Now let me invite up our first panel, starting with Caltrans Director Mr.

Tony Tavares and the rest of the panel, which would include Tanisha Taylor, Executive Director of the California Transportation Commission, Sean Durye Commissioner of California Highway Patrol, and Steve Gordon, Director of the Department of Motor Vehicles. You may proceed with your comments.

As I said, we will take public comment at the end, but we'll have an opportunity for Committee Q and A at the end of your panel. And I'm going to just ask Committee Members to wait until we hear from each of the four. Okay, well, that's good. Thank you. Thank you. We want to make sure we get everybody in, and sometimes lively Q and A will slow things down too much. That said, please proceed. And maybe we could just start with Mr. Tavares.

You know, the order which I called people would probably be the easiest way to go, but if you decide you want to switch it up for some, you know, sequential reason, just let us know. But with that, Mr. Tavares. Thank you, Director, for being here.

Thank you, Chair Cortese. I hope you all can hear me. Well. Yes, very good.

And I do note that on prior hearings, we had to keep these microphones pretty close. Pretty close up so that the audience could hear. Sometimes even so that we can hear. So it's the only caveat I have.

Very good. I do have a short slide deck. I don't know if you are able to see that as well. We have. oh, very good. So. Good afternoon. I'm Tony Tavares. I'm the Director for Caltrans, California Department of Transportation.

I thank you for this opportunity to share some insight on how Caltrans is working to create a safer, a more accessible and a more efficient transportation system for everyone throughout the state. I want to also thank this Committee and all of you for your continued partnership with Caltrans as we move transportation solutions throughout the state.

Thank you for that. I know that some of the Members in this Committee have worked with Caltrans in the past in one way or another. And I do realize that each person in this room relies on our transportation network throughout the state.

As was mentioned by Chair Cortese, it really connects people in communities and moves goods and freight through our state. Continue ensuring our economy hums as the fifth largest economy in the nation or in the world. Excuse me. So Caltrans is made up of 12 districts and a headquarters that is here in Sacramento.

We have approximately 23,000 employees that work for us. We maintain more than 50,000 highway lane miles and more than 13,000 bridges and structures.

We provide permitting for more than 400 public use airports, and we provide funding and transit support to more than 200 local and regional transit agencies, as well as three of Amtrak's busiest intercity rail services throughout the state. We are what we call a people first organization.

We're very human centric in the work that we try to do moving forward. Put simply, this means that our work is done with the end goal of improving the lives of every Californian and all those who visit our great state. In other words, we are more than just a agency.

The work we perform is not limited to constructing and maintaining state highways, for instance. We build community and park spaces, we install broadband in partnership with the California Department of Technology, and we operate employment programs that help people get back on their feet and into permanent housing as well.

Improving lives and communities is our mission and transportation is a conduit through how we do this. If you ask probably the average Californian, what does Caltrans do, they might say something along the lines of they maintain the highways or they fill potholes.

This is because most people know Caltrans from the logos on our maintenance vehicles that you see down on the highways. And while building and maintaining our roadways is one of our most vital functions, there are There are many ways in which we shape transportation more basically or broadly, I should say.

Our Division of Local Assistance, for instance, oversees more than $1 billion annually that is available to more than 600 cities, counties and regional agencies for the purpose of improving their transportation infrastructure or providing transportation services. Our Division of Rail coordinates and plans California's rail network integration efforts, including the development of the California State Rail Plan.

And our Division of Aeronautics provides technical assistance and guidance to local agencies and airport operators, performs aviation system planning, assists in regional aviation planning, and performs routine inspections at public use airports and hospital heliports.

Those are just a few examples, but the point is that our work at Caltrans caters to diverse modes of travel and we believe in a system where everyone has access and safe and efficient transportation options.

Caltrans serves a lot of different functions, but by far the most important thing we do and the thing that each function has in common is improving safety across the state.

This graph shows the trend in traffic related fatalities that have occurred in California since 2003 and if you notice, from about 2005 to 2009 the trend was going down and somewhere around 2010-011 we started seeing an uptick in the name in the fatalities across our state.

This is a trend that we've seen both not only here in California, but nationally. And while we have recently received provisional data showing a decrease since 2022. We are working to reverse the overall trend until we reach zero fatalities per year.

Our top priority is to reach a Vision Zero by the year 2050, and we are working to make Vision Zero a reality through the Safe Systems approach. This model takes a holistic view of the state highway system to address safety in a more innovative manner. It puts safety at the core of every decision we make.

And as you know, there are many contributing factors to roadway fatalities. And bringing that number down to zero requires a multifaceted approach that addresses driver behavior, education, engineering, and enforcement, among other things. The Safe System approach does exactly that by updating our planning, our project delivery, our maintenance and operations policies, guidance and trainings. It ensures resources are focused to expedite progress towards Vision Zero goals.

Coordinating a whole of government, state, federal and local to improving safety through the Strategic Highway Safety Plan, including the California Highway Patrol, the DMV, and many others as key partners and pursuing intentional partnerships to meet collective safety goals across the state, both on the state system and the local system.

In 2012, Caltrans was investing about 125 million per year in safety projects. In 2022, that number increased to 450 million per year. And today we are investing close to $1.0 billion per year to deliver safety enhancement projects throughout the entire state.

Some of our key focus areas are improving safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, investing in safety technology, and implementing worker safety innovations. For instance, last year we committed to spending $1 billion specifically on bike and pedestrian projects over the next four years.

This means that in the next four years we will add or improve 210 miles of bicycle lanes and add or improve 38 miles of crosswalks and sidewalks on the state highway system. That's an increase. Just over the last five years we were able to deliver 67 miles of bike lanes, and now we're jumping to 210.

And so that's a huge improvement going forward. We also worked with the California Department of Technology to award two generative artificial intelligence vendor contracts to help us improve safety and increase traffic efficiency. One of the two contracts is specifically exploring the use of the technology to enhance safety for our most vulnerable road users.

Those who walk, those who bike, those who take transit, including helping us analyze a multitude of variables including vehicular traffic, pedestrian cyclists, and scooter riders, each exhibiting distinct movement patterns and safety requisites.

Work zone safety is another area where Caltrans is working to utilize new safety technology such as remote control, traffic, attenuators and the use of drones in our work. These initiatives don't just benefit Caltrans workers and our contractors that we work with. They also improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the chance of crashes in work zones.

And that's very important. Caltrans, just as Informational, has had 194 employees killed in the line of duty while doing their work on the state highway system. I could go on and list literally dozens of additional ways in which we are working to improve safety, but I know there are several others colleagues here that have to speak.

What I would like to say is that although we may face big challenges ahead, we also have ambitious solutions going forward. I'm confident that the solution we create today will make our roads safer, more accessible and more efficient for everyone tomorrow. So I thank you all for your time and I look forward to questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. Taylor.

Thank you. Chair Cortese and Members My name is Tanisha Taylor and I'm the Executive Director of the California Transportation Commission. I'm pleased to be here today to give you an overview of the Commission's work. The Commission was created nearly 50 years ago out of a desire for a unified transportation policy across the state.

This is the role the Commission continues to play today to act as a bridge, excuse me, between the state and local and regional governments to build and maintain a transportation system that serves all Californians.

The Commission is comprised of 11 Members, nine of whom are appointed by the Governor, with one appointed one each appointed by the speaker of the Assembly and the Senate Rules Committee. We also have two ex officio Members, one from each house of the Legislature. Chair Cortese is one of them and Assemblymember Lori Wilson is the other.

As the Commission's Executive Director, I lead a staff of about 40 who are headquartered here in Sacramento. We hold seven business meetings a year in different parts of the state, as well as two town hall meetings in rural communities and two joint meetings with the Air Resources Board and the Department of Housing and Community Development to coordinate our respective transportation, air quality and housing policies.

The Commission's primary statutory responsibilities are setting guidelines for long range regional and state statewide transportation plans, advising the Legislature and Administration on transportation issues, and perhaps most significantly, programming and allocating transportation funding to projects throughout California.

The Commission plays a role in administering about a dozen major transportation programs that are funded through federal formula funds or state revenues like fuel taxes or the SB1 transportation improvement fee. We partner closely with Caltrans and local and regional transportation agencies in carrying out this responsibility, as well as the California State transportation agency.

A few of these programs are competitive grant programs, but most most of our funds are allocated via formula based distributions or are specifically for Caltrans. In total, these programs provide roughly $8 billion per year for state and local transportation priority projects.

Parameters for the types of projects that can be funded and the funding levels for each program are set by the Legislature and the Commission adopts guidelines to implement the statutory requirements. In addition to the Commission's programs, there are numerous other federal, state, regional and local programs that also Fund transportation improvements throughout the state.

The accomplishments and outcomes of each of our funding programs are described in the Commission's annual report to the Legislature which is submitted in December of each year. For the sake of time, I'll briefly describe some of the programs you may be familiar with.

The State Highway Operation and Protection Program or shop, is the state's Fix it first maintenance program for the state highway system and California's largest transportation funding program.

We are required to adopt a four year program of projects every two years based on an asset management framework developed to meet specific 10 year condition targets for assets like pavement and bridges included in Senate Bill 1.

The shop is intended to improve safety and maintain the existing state highway system and cannot be used to add traffic lanes. Last year's shop included $21.2 billion for specific repairs on the state highway system over four years, as well as reserves for things like emergency damage and restoration.

The next largest program is the Senate Bill 1 Local Streets and Roads Program which passes $1.2 billion a year to cities and counties on a formula basis. These local jurisdictions can spend their apportionments on road maintenance improvements they choose such as pavement resurfacing on city streets as well as adding new bikeways and sidewalks.

Next, the State Transportation Improvement Program or stip, funds priority projects identified by each individual region of the state as well as inter regional priority projects identified by Caltrans. Each stip covers a five year period of projects which total about $2.9 billion.

For the most recent program adopted in 2024, funding for the program is divided up among each county in the state on a formula basis with local agencies identifying their projects according to statutory requirements and the Commission's guidelines.

The Commission also administers three programs created by Senate Bill 1 the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program, or TCEP, the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program and the Local Partnership Program.

TCEP Funds Improve TCEP funds improvements along key corridors that improve throughput of freight, Solutions for Congested Corridors funds projects that relieve congestion by expanding travel options and the Local Partnership program provides both competitive and formulated grants to local jurisdictions that have voter approved taxes or fees dedicated solely to transportation.

Altogether, $1.5 billion is available for new projects in Cycle 4 program that we're currently under, which is expected to be adopted by the Commission later in the spring. Another program you may be familiar with is the Active Transportation program, which predates SB 1 but was augmented with new funding by that legislation.

The Active Transportation Program is a competitive program that funds projects that increase the proportion of trips accomplished by walking and biking and enhances safety and mobility for non motorized users.

Funding is split with 60% of the program funds being awarded by the state and 40% awarded by the 10 largest metropolitan planning organizations in urbanized areas according to regional priorities. This program is highly oversubscribed every cycle with the total requested funds far exceeding the amount available for new projects.

As a result, the Commission has consistently recommended that the Legislature make more funding available for this program. While the program did receive a $1 billion augmentation as part of the governor's infrastructure package in 2022, $400 million was reduced from the augmentation as part of the solution to last year's General Fund shortfall.

This meant only $170 million was available for new projects in last year's funding cycle, with a total requested amount that was 15 times greater than that. The last program I'll mention today is the Local Transportation Climate Adaptation Program.

This program was created in 2022 with one time state funds and new federal funds from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, $400 million was provided to Fund improvements that help adapt California's transportation infrastructure to the effects of climate change, such as more resilient structures or evacuation routes.

The Commission will be adopting the second cycle of projects next week at our March meeting with the expiration of the one time state funds and federal surface transportation reauthorization in the near future, this critical need may not have any dedicated funding beyond this cycle.

Between Senate Bill 1 and the IIJA, we have made tremendous investments in the state's transportation system since 2017 and made great strides improving the condition of our state highway system in partnership with Caltrans.

In 2023, the California State Auditor removed the state's transportation infrastructure from its high risk list after 16 years in recognition of the progress California has made in rebuilding and upgrading the state's transportation system. However, drivers are buying less gas, which is the primary source of revenue for the funding programs I just described.

Senate Bill 1 indexed the per gallon gas excise tax to inflation, which has helped make our funding for improving and maintaining our transportation system more sustainable, but it cannot address the impacts of reduced gas consumption, which depends on both how many miles are being driven and vehicle fuel efficiency.

The projected revenue from the excise tax is anticipated to decline due to a reduction in gasoline and diesel consumption resulting from California's ongoing work to reduce air pollution by encouraging cleaner vehicles on the road.

As part of its SB 1121 state and local Transportation Seed System Needs Assessment, the Commission was charged with identifying the 10 year state and local transportation needs as well the revenues to meet those needs.

The draft needs assessment, which is now available, projects 10 year needs of nearly $758 billion and available revenues of approximately $541 billion from federal, state and local sources. This creates an anticipated shortfall of about $217 billion over 10 years, which takes into account the projected gas tax revenue decline. That's about $20 billion a year.

As a reminder, SB 1 was estimated to provide just over $5 billion a year over 10 years, and the Bill made it clear that it would not fully address the projected shortfall at that time.

These needs cover the state highway system, local streets and roads, transit and interstate rail, complete streets and active transportation, as well as climate adaptation and necessary improvements to support the deployment of zero emission freight infrast.

How to meet California's aggressive climate and air quality goals while also providing for a transportation system that supports communities across the state through a sustainable funding mechanism will be a key policy decision the Legislature must tackle in the very near future.

It will likely take a combination of solutions at the local, state and federal level to achieve this. Sustainable transportation funding is critical to the work we do at the Commission. Last year we allocated $13.8 billion to transportation projects across the state. These investments create over 151,000 jobs.

With the Interagency Equity Advisory Committee convened with CALSTA and Caltrans, we are improving how community voices are reflected in transportation investments. We have incorporated the strategies included in the 2021 Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure, or CAPTI, and are investing in projects that provide more mobility options for Californians and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

These investments make it safer and easier for Californians to get to work, school, the Doctor, and anywhere else they need to go. This is vitally important work and the Commission looks forward to continuing to partner with the Legislature to deliver results for the people of California. And thank you again for the opportunity to speak today and I look forward to your questions. Thank you.

Why don't we go ahead with Mr. Duryea, Commissioner Duryee. And we'll just go in order my left, right?

Yes, Mr. Chair. Members of the Committee. My name is Sean Duryee. I'm an officer with the California Highway Patrol currently serving as the Commissioner. I was appointed in this role two years ago by the Governor. Humbled and grateful that trustees placing me in this important role. Honored to be here with you today.

I want to introduce two of my Members of my staff. Lieutenant Ty Meeks or Captain Ty Meeks. Sorry. And Lieutenant Mark Peachey. They are our representatives of the Legislature and those are the ones that are at your beck and call as you need things to work through these issues, myself included.

Grateful for your staff working with my team and preparing for this. And grateful for the opportunity to give you a brief overview and talk about some of the priorities. California Highway Patrol is one of the eight departments on the California State Transportation Agency led by Secretary Toks Omoshockin, which includes my colleagues here.

The CHP headquarters in Sacramento oversees nine field divisions and five administrative divisions. Here at headquarters we employ more than 11,000 people. Approximately 7,500 of those are sworn police officers. The other are professional support staff. We have eight geographical field divisions, oversee 102 area offices, 34 resident posts and 17 commercial vehicle enforcement facilities commonly referred to as scales.

Each area office is commanded either by a captain or a lieutenant and the divisions are led by a CHP chief. The mission of the California High Patrol is provide the highest level of safety, service and security to all Californians. This includes not only patrolling the roadways as the state police, but protecting the state infrastructure.

CHP provides security for the Governor, state constitutional officers, State Supreme Court Justices, the appellate courts and various dignitaries. Our non uniformed professional staff perform duties and roles like 911 dispatchers, commercial vehicle inspectors, IT and communications experts and various clerical duties. We have a budget of $3.5 billion primarily funded through the motor vehicle account.

I'll rapid fire a few statistics at you that are interesting. Nearly 4 million public contacts per year. Just under 4 million 911 calls handled per year. Over 50 million miles of patrolled roadways every year. We do that with approximately 2000 patrol vehicles, 300 motorcycles, 14 fixed wing airplanes and 15 helicopters. Since our inception in 1929.

I believe the CHP has built a reputation not just in the state but in the country and throughout the world as a premier law enforcement with a focus on traffic and public safety.

During the 1990s we joined the California Legislature merged us with the California State Police which brought on additional roles including providing security at this facility, and I know you see CHP officers here every day.

As the state police, we work closely with other agencies and departments, taking on port security, cargo theft, interdiction, local crime suppression, other major criminal investigations, including retail theft, which has been prominent in the news in recent years. As the statewide police, we have a long history of answering the call of assistance to local law enforcement.

Some most notable either recently or currently, ongoing crime suppression or General law enforcement in the cities of Oakland, San Francisco, other East Bay cities. We're working in Bakersfield, San Bernardino.

We've assisted in significant civil unrest over the past couple years and often called upon to mitigate natural disasters, including the one going on right now in the Los Angeles fires. We were there day one. We remain there.

We'll be there through the entire recovery process. One of our priorities and goals, despite all that extra stuff we do, is to ensure the safe use of our roadways and to minimize the lives lost and the injuries that happen on California roadways. Unfortunately, we make up about 10% of the traffic fatalities of the country, about 4,000.

That's not a title that we're proud of and that's something that we are committed to reducing. To do that. When I was appointed to the Commissioner, we developed commissioners priorities and expectations. I wanted every Highway Patrol officer to know what was important to us and what our focus should be. I'll share with you three of those.

There were several. I'll share with you three of them. The first and foremost and number one and most important to me was to maximize in view patrol. I firmly believe that nothing deters driver behavior like an in view black and white patrol car or motorcycle with a uniformed officer with.

We've all experienced that and I know you could attest to that. Recruitment has been an issue for us just like any law enforcement agency throughout the country. I'm proud of the fact that I think we've cracked the code. We've invested a lot of time, resources and money with support from the Legislature to address that.

Currently we have three cadet classes going at one time. The academy is literally busting at the seams. Each of those started 160 cadets. So right now there's over 400 cadets in training in West Sacramento to address that. We feel like the vacancies will be completely in check by the end of 2026 if we forecast the numbers right.

The second priority I had was focusing on what we call primary collision factors. Things that cause collisions most often. And in California that's speed, reckless driving, driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol and distracted driving. Also, I would add passenger restraints. We know those save lives and that's a big priority for us.

To help in that endeavor, we're preparing to release some specially marked patrol vehicles that will help us go after most aggressive and egregious drivers to assist in reckless and highway violence. We are focused primarily on DUI. Last year we arrested over 60,000 DUI drivers.

In 2024, that was up 1200 from the year before that and nearly 3000 from the year before that. To that, I would pause and just give gratitude to the men and women that are out there literally putting their lives on the line and working hard every day to take those people off the road.

We also have a priority and the third one I'll share with you is using data and analytics to address where we focus our enforcement. It's simply finding out where the problem areas are and focusing our enforcement on those areas. We do that through maximum enforcement periods and a new term we're naming holiday enforcement periods.

So when more motorists on the road, we will be focused on those. We're proud to partner not only with the folks sitting at this table, but other state agencies with local agencies. One way we're doing that with local agencies is this issue of sideshows or street racing.

We have a goal in the next two years to increase the number of sideshow enforcement campaigns that we do. And we do that by partnering with our local partners. We also partner with federal agencies and grassroots organizations.

As the largest police agency, largest state police agency in the nation, the CHP not only leads in public safety, but we're also partners with local, state and federal entities to ensure a seamless, collaborative approach to California's transportation and public safety challenges.

We've identified opportunities to significantly improve safety and security in California by focusing on a few things that we're setting goals for coming forward. Some of these are in transportation, some are in General public safety. Share them with you. Briefly, we'd like to increase the number of retail theft recoveries that we've done to 75 million.

Right now, our balance is about 51.1 million. That's over the next two years. We have a goal to increase street show criminal apprehension. By doing that, we're going to have 60 major operations each year to address sideshow and street shows, which I know has been a priority for this body.

Our goal to get there, we're going to train 1200 CHP officers in how to identify vehicles modified for sideshows and street racing. We're going to aggressively go out and campaign against that. We're going to increase our recovery of auto theft by 5% over the next two years. The specific number on that is 22,407 was last year.

We're going to increase that, recover that number and an additional 1100 on top of that for freeway shootings. Highway violence have become an issue in California. We have a very robust goal of having at least a 50% solve rate of those cases that result in injury or fatality. To do that, we'd like to seize more guns.

I'm proud of the fact that we seize about 2000 crime guns off the roads every year. We'd like to increase that to 2,500 every year. And then finally, something that's probably near and dear and has Touched. Every one of our communities is seizing and taking off the streets a dangerous drug of fentanyl.

We have a goal to recover£2,000 just for the CHP in the next two years. That's an ambitious goal, but I know we're up to it and we're going to build a plan to get there. Look forward to working with this body on these issues and other concerns that you have. We're grateful to be here, and I look forward to any questions you have. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner. And. And last on this panel, but not least, Director Steve Gordon, Department of Motor Vehicles. Thank you for being here. Great, thanks.

Love to be the closer. Thank you. I'll be brief. I think most people know our core business. We're focused on driver's license, ID cards. I think all of us have one of those products, vehicle titles, vehicle registration. That's the core portfolio we have.

There's a number of other things that we touch, but those are the core bodies of work we do. We have goals that I've set with my Executive team. I've been with, I guess, state government now just under six years. So we're focused on digital services, digitizing all the paper that comes into state government.

I'm sure that you guys are well aware of the amount of paper that the government uses to conduct its business. We're trying to get it so it's more digital. And with a mobile first strategy, most of the customers that use our services access those services on a mobile device. Very common supermarket.

You see it all throughout your lives. Mobile is the way to go. And that's where we are as well, modernizing our systems. Many of the systems that are in place today have been around since the 60s, 70s and 80s.

And the people that built those systems, while they've engineered them extremely well, they have left state service, some have left the Earth. So we have to make sure that, in fact, that they get modernized by the people and the resources are there to make them modern.

And we're doing that by building on a common platform, using the Salesforce Technology platform as a service. So we're not building anything from scratch. We're building on top of a commercial platform. So scales automatically focus on efficiency.

I know that sometimes we, when we design processes here in the state, sometimes they are efficient for us, but not efficient for our customers. So we want to make sure things are efficient for both sides of the aisle, make sure that they're, you know, we simplify where we can.

And there are many places where we can simplify, take extra Steps out that are perhaps unnecessary, maybe were necessary in 1960 or not necessary in 2020. Focus on customers as well.

I mean, we measure customers in every transaction they have with us to make sure that in fact we understand how they, what kind of feedback they have on for us and what we're doing well and what we're not doing well. We get great feedback across thousands of people on a daily basis.

And of course, to do all this stuff, we need to focus on our team and we need to make sure our team knows how to cross the digital divide with us, make sure they have the right skills to be able to, as the Commissioner mentioned, use data and make sure we use data to make decisions and so on.

So there's a lot of work we're doing to bring our team along with us. You know, in some ways we enable California to enable the economy. I think there's Director Tavares had mentioned, we license drivers.

I think many of us who got our driver's license in California, that is a rite of passage and very important right of passage. We want to get people to get to a job and be able to conduct whatever business they want to do in our society. We're also very important on public participation.

We are the motor part of motor voter. So we get people into the funnel that go into the Secretary of State and downstream to the register of our voters. So a role we take very seriously.

And of course, vehicle ownership, if you think about assets that people have today, you know, used to be home ownership was the number one asset, now vehicles are the number one asset.

So we take that very seriously, making sure titles are perfected, the right way, lanes are released and so on, because those are the number one assets that people have. We want to make sure that we do our job well. We do that through our people. We have about 8,500 people as part of the organization today.

We have 200 plus offices, some of which we share with the Commissioner and some rural communities. We have about 170 offices that we enable through AAA and about 6,000 business partners that help us reach all aspects of the state.

And so whether you're in Alturas, whether you're in Crescent City in the north, in the Northeast or Northwest, or you're in El Centro or San Isidro, we cover all the terrier at those edges, but all the territory between those, I think the team is great coverage. But even in Alturas, right.

For those of you that know where Alturas is, you can get an Amazon package next day. So the fact of the matter is that technology reaches every corner of California. California, as Director Tavares has mentioned, fifth largest economy in the world. So we know the technology is there and we are leveraging technology to reach our customers.

And we do understand there's a digital divide. We want to make sure that for people that can, we want to make sure that they can do everything with the DMV on a mobile device. People that can't, we want to make sure, in fact we have technology available to them.

It could be just a simple phone call, but we want to make sure, in fact we reach all Californians. And last just a couple facts and figures. I mean we have 36 million vehicle registrations. We do on an annual basis. There are 34 million Idaho holders, driver's license and ID holders.

Those are on a five year cycle typically. So we see those folks every five years. So there may be 8 million a year. Some people, believe it or not, lose their license often. It's crazy, but they do. We get about 74 million transactions on an annualized basis. So we're pretty busy.

And on top of that we collect about 14 billion of revenue for the state. Some of it is from the motor vehicle count, some gets distributed down to the counties and so on. So we're busy and getting those transactions done. We're busy modernizing.

But I do remind our staff, especially our new employees, that look, the customers that we deal with, they are our friends, they're our family, they're our neighbors, they're in our community. More so when you're an alturist because you are living in that community. Less so perhaps if you're in Sacramento.

But we still want to make sure that our staff understands, you know, from my perspective, these are our friends, families, they're our neighbors. They're people that we're here to support. We're here to help them achieve their objective.

And if we can, we're trying to get make sure they can achieve that from a mobile device, from the comfort of their, of their sofa, not waiting in line at the Department. And with that I'll happy to answer any questions you might have.

All right, thank you all. We'll go to Members of the Committee for a Round of questions for this panel. Before we move on to the next panel, we'll try to, I think all of us keep everything concise so we can make sure we get to the next panels. I have Senator Blakespear so far followed by Senator Richardson.

Thank you. I appreciate all four of you for the hard work. You do and your commitment to the state. And thank you for coming here to speak today. I have several questions for various Members of the panel, and I think I'd like to start with Mr. Tavares.

So one of the concerns that I have and that I see reflected from cities in my district and throughout the state is the management of homeless encampments on the Caltrans right of way. So my plea is that you elevate this issue. I think this could be handled internally without legislation.

And in some ways, the reality that cities have private processes to connect people who are living in encampments with interim housing and other services they may need. But Caltrans doesn't specialize in that.

You specialize in roads and trains and all the things that you told us about, having the delegated maintenance agreements, making sure that they are executed timely and that they allow for cities to use their local processes, I think would vastly improve things. And I'll just use as an example that in the City of San Diego, they received 300 complaints a month about property that is on Caltrans, property that they cannot deal with, they can't access.

And when somebody is calling the City of San Diego to complain or flag an encampment, which, you know, you recognize how unsafe it is for people to live in the Caltrans right of way. Obviously, there's the danger of being hit, but there's also the pollution, the noise pollution.

It's just so obviously not a place for human habitation under any circumstances. And I think we have cities and counties that are really trying to make a dent in their homeless encampment problem. But people are not distinguishing between who owns this property. So I would like to, you know, ask, is this on your radar? Are you focusing on it?

Are you aware of the fact that there are across the 12 districts, like many districts that have communicated with my office about the fact that this is a major problem for them, and I'm in contact with the big city mayors who have all expressed, you know, the 12 biggest cities in the state, that this is a problem for them.

Yeah. Thank you, Senator Blakespear. Yes, this is a high priority for Caltrans, high priority for myself. In fact, we've established a homeless and encampments office in our Sacramento headquarters office. Each One of our 12 districts also has multiple encampment liaisons and coordinators that walk work with our local jurisdictions. We also are part of the California Inner ICH.

It's the community housing group where we have assisted cities and counties with grant application for the encampment resolution funds, the ERF Fund grants and more than $100 million has been provided to cities, including counties across the state for that.

We coordinate very closely with these local jurisdictions to provide services to the people who are experiencing homelessness on our right of way.

We have a very robust process on how we deal with each encampment, but it requires providing those services, providing opportunities to these people to move into some type of temporary housing or another type of shelter rather than living on the state right away.

Once that connection has been made and these individuals are able to move, we're able to go in there and remove the encampments as quickly as possible. There are some situations where if it's a fire life safety issue or perhaps concern with the infrastructure being damaged by an encampment, we can move in there much quicker.

But we work very closely with your local jurisdictions to provide those services and move these people in a very humane and compassionate manner going forward.

Okay, so what I hear is that there's an intentionality behind what you're saying and that you believe that there is a lot happening. And I'll just say that from my perspective, there's not enough happening because there are various examples of it takes Caltrans two months to open a complaint and the city could have dealt with it in 48 hours.

Or you require Highway Patrol to be there and Highway Patrol is short staffed and can't make it, or the liaison is out for some, you know, period of leave, or you require hazmat, specialized interventions like hazmat without even determining that there is hazardous waste.

So you know, there's a list of different things that create the barriers to quick action. So I would just encourage you to dive back into that and to really consider that the Governor has communicated through his Executive order and I've seen him out on a press conference, conference in the Caltrans right of way saying this is a crisis, dammit, act like it.

And so, you know, the communication at the very top seems to me that the Governor cares about what's happening on the Caltrans right of way and there's a, there is communication or there's a whole other separate effort about surplus property and turning it into housing and all this.

But in, but in the meantime we have encampments and people need to move into interim housing and get out of the Caltrans right of way. And I think that should be really just a top priority. So I just urge you to continue to look at improvements in that area.

I have another topic I'd like to bring up so I've heard from local governments and I've heard a number of complaints in my district about the dangers of children riding on E bikes. So I think, and I represent a lot of suburban communities in Southern California and I think some of the bike proponents believe that much of the problem is with these out of class E bikes.

So they're marketed, sold or purchased as E bikes, but they're actually more like motorcycles because they're too powerful and fast to meet the statutory definition of an E bike.

And so I'm wondering if this is anything that is being worked on either at the enforcement side from CHP or from DMV to try to educate about what bike is what to be able to have some type of trainings that are offered for kids or parents and then also just for officers to be identifying what's happening on our roads. Yeah.

I'll start off. No, good question. And I agree with you. It is becoming an issue, especially we don't see it as much in CHP jurisdiction. You get into the local roadways and it is more prominent. CHP did develop at. I believe it was a Bill or a request. I believe it was a Bill.

A couple years ago we developed the E bike education online. Last year we added the quiz to kind of test your knowledge at the end of it. That was in response to a Bill as well. And then we continue to do training and education.

Just like anything that's a traffic safety issue, it's about educating the public about the concerns. So we are engaged in that and then educating our officers on what they're doing with so they can take the appropriate enforcement action. And we are engaged in that and agree with you on the concern. Concern.

Yeah. So no particular training that I'm aware of within the Department, Senator, but I certainly would work with the Commissioner make sure that things are brought into the fore. I think that as you're already alluded, there's this regulatory gap between very powerful bicycles that are really motor vehicles.

And so I think we need to make sure that those bills and that statute is clear about when it's over a certain threshold, a certain power range or a certain speed so that things are properly classified. And I think that tends to be a bit of a self certification process, if I understand that correctly today.

And we need to make sure that the manufacturers and the retailers are properly classifying these vehicles, especially when they reach the threshold of a motor vehicle.

Yeah. Okay. I'll just continue with the DMV related. So I feel as if I receive personally and also My district staff receives kind of an ongoing drip of complaints about the DMV processes. And I can just, I'll just give like three quick examples that I remember from the very most recent past, which is an elderly man who's trying to register his motorhome with the DMV.

And he wrote me up an entire page of his interactions and his going there and waiting in line and his calling and his, you know, various efforts there. A second one was a very tech savvy person of my generation trying to pay a toll for his adult or for his teenage driver, a toll fee that hadn't been paid. And the description of dealing with the DMV over this.

And then the third one was a parent who was trying to help their kid get a license and not filling out, checking the right box for the type of license it was and this and that and then having the problem getting in the wrong line.

And so I just, I continue to, I want to have confidence in our state agencies. I want you to do your job as well as you can and I want us to reflect that.

Well, you use the example of Amazon showing up in one day, you know, so to have our DMV be both modern and responsive and intuitive and recognizing the world that we live in, you know, I don't know what the answer to each individual problem was that that person was having, but those people are running into state agency problems.

And I do think we need to continue to care about quality at the highest level, to modernize, to improve our processes, to test them, you know. So your overview of the entire Department is the best way to look at what needs to be done. But I do feel like there needs to be continuous improvement in these areas.

And I have a 16 and a 17 year old and recently went through some of the process of getting the license. And I do believe that it's cumbersome and some of the materials are also very out of date. Like you see visuals of, you know, cars that are still using like a cassette player or something.

I mean it really. Some of the bicycle safety things and bike and PED and the designs of streets and I just, the modernization is really important.

So I don't know if you want to briefly respond to that, but I just, I need to say it at this oversight hearing when you're here that I think we have some improvement that could be done there.

I absolutely agree. I didn't mean to imply that setting a goal of Amazon and delivery and Alturas is the we're there, but that should be our Aspirational goal shouldn't be to be the best state government agency, it should be the best of the best. So I think the way we learn, Senator, is we learn through those examples.

So I'm hoping you're funneling those either to our Ledge staff or to me personally. I contact customers all the time. I work these issues. And that's how we identify pockets of issues so we can go off and attack the handbook. We've improved dramatically since I started. I've become the editor in chief.

But as you point out, the vehicles in there still look like they could have an eight track tape player, they could have a cassette tape player, who knows? Exactly. So there's some work we have to do on that front. And you know, describing vehicle safety and bicycle safety is. It's a complicated topic.

There's a lot of people that want to say, here's how you do this. And there's a lot of technical Jargon about, you know, what's a shed, what's a Barnes dance for these diagonal crossings.

So we want to make sure that that is as done as well as we could possibly do it to make sure we communicate the message about how to drive safely, how to be be safe on your bicycle, safe as a pedestrian. So if you have specific feedback, we're open to that. And we are.

Look, we're rapidly changing and we want to make sure that we hear from as many people. But the law is complicated. Sometimes when you have a motorhome, the world is complicated. The weight of the vehicle, when was it last registered, the fuel source, if it has a diesel engine, behind a certain thing, you got SB 1 rules, SB 210.

It's a complicated world. But I would love to have those examples sent to us so we can make sure that we apply the right rules. We learn as fast as we can and we change as fast as we can.

And we're trying to do that at the speed that we want, at the speed of Amazon, even though we're in a government agency. So those examples help us tremendously if you're willing to forward them on.

Thank you and I appreciate your forbearance chair. I just have two more things to say. One is the so I if you get your license at 16, you can't drive your friends around. You can drive your sibling. But the information about when can I start driving my friends around is not clear at all in the educational material.

And I feel like I went on the hunt to try to be the parent that enforces that. And so not being able to Find that information. I think that should be much, much more clearly taught, tested and also available to the public. And then I just want to flip back to Caltrans for my last.

So the state is leading the process of the rail corridor, the Low sand rail corridor, which I have a Subcommitee on the visioning and the long term planning and the execution for the rail corridor through the San Clemente area, which is, is less, which. So I wanted to know the status.

You know, there was a lot of discussion about who should lead the planning. Should it be a local? The cog, the city? No, the state. You know what. So it's being led by the state. So I wanted to know is there any progress you can report about that long term planning?

No. Thank you, Senator Blakesbury. As you know it's owned by multiple organizations, right? Privately owned as well as publicly owned. 351 mile long corridor. What my understanding is Calsta has re engaged the Low sand corridor working group somewhere around late 2023, early 2024. I don't have a status, but we can report back to you, get that information. Report back to you on that.

Okay, that would be great. Thank you. And then my very last comment, Chair. Thank you. Is about just litter. I've. I've been a big supporter of Clean California and I created and chaired a Subcommitee on litter abatement on the Caltrans right of way in San Diego County as part of the effort to elevate the reality that when our streets look trashy, it really brings down our entire state.

I think that a lot of us have a lot of pride in our state and we want it to look good. And so there are places that are kept immaculately clean on the roads that I drive and then other places that can really look terrible.

And I'll drive in other districts too, like driving up to LA and it seems like it hasn't been clean for months. And so I know there was an enormous amount of money in Clean California, but we didn't quite make it up to the standard that I think we need to.

And I want to make sure to voice that it's really important that we continue to focus on litter removal. And one of the things that I heard back to me was, well, you know, people are the problem because they're the ones littering. But the reality is that people are littering in our state parks on the local roads.

But a lot of times those places are a lot cleaner. Their streets and the natural spaces right next to the street. So getting people out to pick out the Trash, you know, that is just so important that that happens. And I just want to voice that value so that you know that there are those of us who really care about that.

Appreciate that, Senator. We, I care about it as well. And thank you for that.

Thank you again, Chair.

Thank you. Just to set, before we just before we go to Senator Richardson, I wanted to mention that on your first item, Senator Blakespear, I don't know if Director Tavares felt at liberty to go into someone else's conversation, but he's been actually has been doing some work with big city mayors.

I was on a call with, with Mayor Mahan and Director Tavares and the secretary as recently as a week ago on the first issue that you brought up. And perhaps the Director could circle back with you. He had a couple weeks worth of work to do before getting back to the San Jose mayor.

And then perhaps you could find the time for a one on one with Senator Blakespear to fill her in on whatever comes out of that conversation. But I know it was exactly the same issue that she brought up that, that you're already working on. Just wanted to give you some credit for that, Senator Richardson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, here goes because I'm going to add on to what Senator Blakespear just shared with you. But in order to save a little time, what I'd like to ask, I come from the Truman area, which is Trust, But Verify.

I'm glad you're interested, but I need to know what you're doing and what are we going to do to fix it. So what I mean by that is I have serious homeless encampment issues. I'm in your district seven in Los Angeles.

So I'd like to know the homeless encampment office who our liaison is, when are grant applications submitted, who has submitted them, what projects are supposed to be worked on? Do you do the work? Do local people do the work? All of it. Because it's bad. It's very, very bad and it's causing a risk. It's safety, its health.

It's all the things that Senator Blakesphear mentioned. I'd like to also add on the same point about litter as well. You know, who cleans, who cleans the highways, the underpasses, the overpasses, all of it. Do you do it? Do district people do it? Who decides to do it? When do they do it?

Do you come back to certain communities? It is not pleasant or clean or healthy or safe in many of our communities. Ms. Taylor, you mentioned the local partnership program and the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program.

If you could just share with the Committee, it doesn't have to be right this moment, but if you could provide to the Committee more about those programs, how do entities apply, who can apply and so on.

My next question has to do with one of your testimonies talked about a reduction in gas tax and there's also a TIF, which has to do with hydrogen and battery vehicles. And if someone could provide back to the Committee, is there a balance?

And what I mean by that is it's I've been told that hydrogen and battery vehicles actually weigh more and so weigh more physically on the roads. And so is that fee equivalent to make up for that of the damage that's being done on the roads? When was that last increased?

What's your process again to get a little more into that? And then my might be my last question. As I mentioned, I live in District 7. One of your major projects that you're doing is the Vincent Thomas Bridge. It's my understanding that many groups, Councilman Tim McCoster, the Wilmington neighborhood Council, submitted questions to your Department.

When this bridge is shut down for a year, which by the way, supports the largest port complex in the state in the United States and third largest in the world, when it's shut down for a year, what is the mitigation plan for these other streets that are going to be impacted?

And I see in your report you referenced State Transportation Improvement Program, a multi year capital program of transportation projects on and off the state highway system. So I don't know if that applies. But I've been told that the responses from Caltrans are that's not our problem. Our job is to fix the bridge.

But if you're going to take the trucks and the cars off of the bridge and put them on the street, I don't think that we would concur that that's now a problem of the city. So I'd be happy to have an offline meeting for the sake of the Chairman and all of our time here. But those are very serious issues that we're facing in my community. And I think that's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Okay. Thank you, Senator. We'll go to Senator Archuleta, followed by Senator Valladares.

Well, I think I'd start off with a few positives. Commissioner Duryee. I know that on a personal note, I'd like to thank you for your letter of condolences when my granddaughter was killed, killed by a drunk driver over the Christmas holiday.

And I appreciate and not only that when we had the funeral, because I did serve in law enforcement, Montebello Police, as you know, we had representatives from the Highway Patrol station there, Montebello and the county sheriff. But I've got to compliment your station in Santa Fe Springs. And they're the best of the best.

What can I tell you? They seem to think that they're the number one station in the State of California. I think somewhere in Northern California they think they're number one. But nonetheless, they're all fine, ladies and gentlemen. But my question to you is, how do you attribute filling your ranks when so many other agencies are having troubles? Share that success with them.

I appreciate the question. I hope every station feels their number one Senator. I hope they do believe that, and they're out serving the community that way. And again, I meant in the remarks that I sent you these numbers that I rattled off earlier, the statistics.

The fact of the matter is every one of those is an individual and likely every one of us in this room been impacted by traffic safety. So our heart goes out to you, and we live that every day.

I believe the recruitment success we're having goes to the good work of the men and women of the Highway Patrol. If you're a young officer, if you want to go into law enforcement, and you're a young person looking at which agency to join, you want to join one of the best.

And I think the work that they've been portraying, the work that our recruitment's been out there spreading the message, the positive message of what we have to offer our employees, I think is what's paying it off. But it's the work they see going on. Like you mentioned, it's the camaraderie. So my hat and thanks goes to the men and women of the Highway Patrol that are out there doing that. I think that's what's making the difference.

So let me move over to the rest of the panelists in Los Angeles County. We're about to. To embark into probably a tremendous, tremendous opportunity, and that is Los Angeles having the Olympic Games. That means Caltrans, that means Ohio Patrol. That means cleaning the roads, getting rid of the graffiti that's on the bridges and so on.

So here we got. We're in 2025, 2028's around the corner. What I know they're just going to call you Commissioner and say, give me 10 units here, 20 units there. But what about the rest of the stuff? Caltrans, are you ready and you're getting ready? What is your future look like in addressing the issues in Los Angeles city.

So thank you, Senator Archuleta. Yes, we are getting ready. We're preparing, obviously, part of the whole bringing the Olympics to Southern California. LA28 is developing a Games route network on which routes the players, the spectators, the athletes all will be participating on.

So we're working, it's a coordinated effort between the state, between LA Metro and other jurisdictions in the Los Angeles area to develop that. So we're working towards those projects as far as when it comes to the cleaning and the litter and Graffiti. Yes, we have access to all 23,000 employees in the Department.

And as we get closer to the that event, we will be shifting people from Northern California down to Southern California to assist with all those activities that will be taking place in the Los Angeles County and surrounding areas. Also, some of the Games will be played in Riverside County. Some will be played in other locations as well.

Yeah. And Ms. Taylor, in reference to your Department, my last question is the fact that you've got a lot to do, obviously, with what you have to do. My concern is the potential of loss of funding. I know that Senate Bill 1121 Gonzalez indicates that you've got to prepare 10 years in advance, usually for your assessment.

And I mentioned the Olympics. But also there's an issue that's about to hit us all and that is shortfall from the Federal Government. And I believe in your Department, it's going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 16, 13 billion. How many, what do you foresee?

So one of the things that we foresee, a lot of things that are happening right now are process things. So for the what we call formula funds or funds that are given out based on a specific formula to the State of California, those dollars continue to flow. We're continuing to work with the fundamentals.

Federal government not having too many issues there, maybe there's some process delays and things like that, but we're working closely with the Federal Government, things like our discretionary programs.

That is where we are seeing conversations with the feds, where they are reinvesting their priorities and things that's not uncommon, a little more aggressive, not uncommon with the transition of an Administration where the Administration wants to put their fingerprints on the policies and processes that are coming out.

And so we have very close working relationships with Federal Highway Administration Administration and Federal Transit Administration, where the majority of the funds coming into the Commission come from.

And so we're talking weekly on what's going on at the national level so that we can move our processes to ensure that all of our products continue to move on schedule or we are flagging things and finding solutions as need be to any of the challenges that may be coming up in the future.

Yeah. Here we have a panel that's going to work hand in hand, each and every one of you, in the future as we approach. And all eyes will be in California, all eyes will be in Los Angeles. So thank you for your work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, Senator. Senator Valladares.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I represent the areas of Santa Clarita and the high desert and we are a heavy commuter district. There's lots of cars on the road every single morning, sometimes leaving at three in the morning, four in the morning to get down to work, whether in the San Bernardino area or LA.

I also represent an area along the 138 Freeway, which is the Pear Blossom Highway. It's also known as Bloody Alley. And just last year I lost a dear friend, Karen Roseberry, on that highway. And three days before the election I was in a pretty severe accident on that same highway.

And thankfully I was in a big truck, so I was in a sturdy car. So I could be here with you today. So is this what can we do to minimize how many accidents, how many that are occurring on this highway? How can we minimize the destruction? Is it harsher penalties for crossing double lines and high speeds?

Are there additional lanes that Caltrans thinks need to be recommended? What are there other areas in the state where you found effective means of minimizing the real safety issue that my constituents deal with when driving on this highway?

Thank you Senator, for the question. I'm very sorry for your loss and I'd love to dig into that deeper with you and learn the area and talk about some of the strategies we do have. I'm not familiar personally with, with the area, I'm a Northern California guy.

But I'd love to look at the data and figure out what we could do. We do have a lot of strategies we could do. One of the things we're working on as a team is having under the calstone umbrella are identifying some safety corridors and getting out there and looking at messaging, PSAs, enhanced enforcement, increased enforcement.

And an example of that we've seen after the tragedy at Pepperdine when the four college aged young ladies were killed tragically by the guy that was driving in excess of 100 miles per hour on a very dangerous stretch of roadway.

Under the leadership of the Governor and Secretary, we did engage this group and we did go down and look at some of those. One of the things we did specific to The PCH is we put three officers full time on there. That doesn't sound like a lot.

They wrote 4800 tickets, 4800 tickets in a short amount of time and crashes went down 38%. So there are a lot of things we could do. I'd love to connect with you and the local leadership down there and figure out exactly how we can tailor something to that area. I'd appreciate that.

And does Caltrans have any recommendations?

I think the Commissioner said it well, but he said it earlier in his comments that speed is one of the most largest issues that causes crashes and fatalities.

And part of the safe systems approach is looking at how do we re engineer a roadway so that we can potentially reduce the speeds or give the optics of reducing the speeds so it calms people down as they're, as they're going through.

I would be very interested in sitting down with the Commissioner and our teams getting together, working with, I believe it's the NCTC that is the Transportation Commission in the high desert there, working with them on looking at what potential solutions we could do on the 138 and maybe some other corridors in the Lancaster and Palmdale area.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

Senator Menjivar will be followed by Senator Seyarto.

Thank you so much. Mr. Chair. I'd like to start with DMV Director. I think we submitted some questions I'd like to touch on. I'd like to learn about what if anything we need to do regarding non binary status on DMVs and how that is going to impact individuals when they come with the real ID and being able to travel to other states. Are we going to need to change that because of federal rules?

Coming down, my understanding today the way the federal laws are structured, the gender declaration is a state issue. So there's no rules in place that at the federal level that requires require us to declare, let's say a binary answer on the gender. So that has been relegated, delegated to the states. So we own that.

And I've talked to my peers who part of this Association of administrators like myself that run DMVs across the nation. This question's come up frequently, but they all understand the way the REAL ID act is structured and the way the license is structured. The gender declaration is a state issue. Answer. We know of no issues today where anyone's going to be impeded going through a TSA because of a gender declaration.

Okay. So even though we are going to come in contact with the tsa, which is the Federal Government they're still going to accept California's real ID and our ability to put their preferred gender?

Yes.

Okay, great. Thank you so much. My next question is for Caltrans and maybe the Commission as well. I also represent CD7, the CalTrans District 7, which I think is the most under maintained district across the entire California. As state legislators, you can imagine we get to travel to all across California.

So I've driven, I think every single freeway in California and I think the freeways that we represent are by far the worst freeways ever. And it's really frustrating because these are communities of color. Every other freeway that I drive on has beautiful. You got purple rocks here in Sacramento.

I have barbed wires on my pedestrian walkways over freeways that look like they're connecting one prison to another. That's what we have in our districts.

And while I understand and I applaud the Clean California program and investments, I'm wondering how we equitably distribute that kind of investment across California so that we don't create a bigger gap between the nice freeways in the OC and Northern California and make and we're going to fall even further behind. That's one of the questions I have related to that.

That's an excellent question. And at Caltrans we've looked at how the dollar's resources are spread across the entire state. And so we are utilizing equity in the decision decisions we make.

We have an equity index tool that, that we are applying to our projects to determine if the project is in an underserved or historically marginalized community and trying to put those projects where the need is providing access to all Californians throughout, throughout the state. I would love to sit down with you and bring my District 7 Director.

I did, we did a tour in my district which is really great. I recommend the center to do this. You know, we did a tour of the district and I do see some improvements, some recent improvements. But even those improvements I'm seeing iron rod fences to nowhere.

It's a waste of money where iron rod fences are better than the chain links because you always have to go back because unhoused individuals cut them. But I'm now seeing iron rod fences that connect nothing to nothing, that enclose nothing. And I'm being told that it's being utilized as a lane of jurisdiction between cities and state.

In my opinion, a complete waste of money because we need iron rod fences in places that actually need barriers for people that don't go in there. So I implore the top leaders to really look at how we're investing these money because A, some of it is being wasted when we could be utilizing in other places.

And two, we can say, yes, we're looking at everything through the lens of equity. But if you drive down California sideways, that's not coming to fruition. Do you have something to share?

Microphone on. Yes. All right, got it. Just to add, we have different jurisdictions between Caltrens and us, but from the Commission's perspective, one, I want to ditto the things that Tony has said. But from our competitive programs, where we're awarding those SB 1 dollars, those things that we're talking about are some of the things that the Commission considers.

Just like Caltrans, we consider geographic equity because we recognize that everyone who is driving and buying gasoline pays the gas tax.

And so how we look at how that stretches across the State of California, whether it be the maintenance dollars through the SHOPP program, or whether it be through our Solutions for Congested Corridors program or our Trade Corridors Enhancement program, how we touch the residents of the State of California matters in terms of how they view state government. And so that's really important to us.

The second thing that I'll say is that one of the things that we've really found important in our SB 1 competitive programs, when we talk about equity, it's not just have we gone to the community, but what has the community said to us and how has the community's voice been incorporated into the projects, which I know Tony and Caltrans does as well as we do.

But those are things that, to your point, what the community looks like, how the community feels, what those projects do in helping benefit the communities, those are all of the things that we want to make sure that when we're funding projects, whether it be at the state level or the local level, that those voices and the outcomes of what we're hearing are built into the projects as well.

And if there's any other upcoming community meetings, I hope that our offices are aware of that so we can learn more about that. Because I don't think in my short little two years, there's been one. Thank you. Thanks. That's it.

Senator Seyrato. It will be followed by Senator Umber.

Thank you very much and appreciate everybody's comments and questions today. I had a question for Caltrans and our traffic Commission.

So the Inland Empire, San Bernardino, Riverside, and you can probably throw in Kern and some of these other communities, they're being depended on to absorb much of California's growth in the next 25 years and are in fact, going to be the fastest growing communities and areas in California for the next 25 years.

Do we have a strategy from a road building and connectivity perspective that takes that into account? Because the current strategy, our current policies that we've outlined kind of fly in the face of getting anything done out there. And it's really starting to show.

And if we're truly worried about safety, then we're truly going to have to ensure that at least the backbone structure for our roads and I mean our highways are being put in place and being put in place adequately. You know, not just a stretch of pavement.

So we can say we Laid a stretch of pavement so that we can handle what is going to be commuter traffic because people still don't have jobs out there. From an equity perspective, the people that can least afford to live in La, Orange County and San Diego are going to live in those areas.

And so it certainly should fit that category. But our policies don't seem to be pointing towards us getting anything done out there. And in fact, we've kind of abandoned adding roads, adding lanes as a method of dealing with what we need for transportation.

Because whether we like it or not, people are going to drive their cars, whether they're electric, whether they're gas, whatever, they're going to drive their cars. So what kind of strategies are you guys looking at? And do you need policy changes from us to enable that to happen?

Because right now we have a lot of frustrated people that live in these high growth areas, especially being impacted by high multifamily growth with absolutely no infrastructure to support them.

Thank you for that comment and don't disagree with you at all. I would say Caltrans of the past would have looked first at widening highways, at expanding. It's not off the table. We're not saying no, but we are now really embracing this multimodal approach. So we're looking at all options.

There's other options and strategies that we want to look at first. With your regional agencies, obviously SCAG is the MPO in the area we would be working with very closely. Also be working with the Riverside County Transportation Commission, San Bernardino Commission as well on the development of any type of solution going forward. The expansion.

We're not saying it's our first choice, but we'd like to look at other options before we get to that choice. If that's the only choice that's available and that's the right choice, we're not against that, but we're saying let's look at everything, let's put everything out on the table and let's have that discussion and figure out what's the right choice to go forward at this point, is that fine?

Okay. So when you talk about expansion though, and whether it's the right choice or wrong choice, the natural progression is vehicles, buses, small buses, then the larger buses, like, you know, rta and things like that. And then you move to light rail and then you move to the Metrolink and things like that.

The problem with these are that they require ridership to survive. Otherwise we're making massive investments just to keep them afloat. That's a familiar, familiar tone. But anyway, and so they're not practical for now for what's going on out there. And so the immediate need is roads.

And somehow we need a plan from the people that are in charge making the plan for the Inland Empire so that we can put the backbone structure in because we've made substantial investments from a taxpayer, local standpoint.

And, you know, our gas are not just gas tax, I'm sorry, like our, you know, local sales tax measures to build the smaller backbone, the smaller interconnectivity. But then there's also the component of putting in the local roads and key parts of the local. Local roads. And those seem to be dragging along.

And I know, you know, which, which one I'm going to talk. I'm talking about Keller Road, you know, that's been in process for nine years and there's been, you know, issues on both sides.

But when we look at, when I look at the mission statement, basically here is we're going to achieve safety, mobility, equity and environmental sustainability objectives. Two of them fly in the face of the other two, because those last two, the equity and environmental sustainable projects, those require studies, studies upon studies, and those take years.

And while those years are going by, the cost for these projects are skyrocketing. And so we're just compiling the problem. Eventually the road gets built. But at what cost? Because we did the studies that determine who we have to pay to be able to do the road.

The process is broken for areas like ours, the areas that I represent, and we really need to look at that. So I'm going to move on the reckless driving issues. I'm glad that you guys are putting somebody. The problem is if the policeman's there and they can see them, they're not going to do it. We need, we need the people that are out there. You know, just the unidentified, the unmarked vehicles. Yeah, we're sending just do egregious stuff. Right. You're looking at just egregious.

Yeah. We're going to deploy 100 enhanced specially marked patrol vehicles. We've had specially marked patrol vehicles in the past. We've had the all white car or maroon and white back. This is going back 80s, but some of you are shaking heads. Yes, but these vehicles will be the 100 that we're deploying this summer will be Dodge Durangos, Dodge colors, silver.

Can you give me their license plates? No, I'm just.

They'll be barely marked. I would say they are marked and identify as a police car, but you won't know that.

But their objective is. Because some people will be very concerned about that. Their objective is to catch egregious stuff. Not give somebody a ticket for going five to 10 miles an hour?

No, absolutely not. This is. These are the people driving 100 miles per hour. The ones passing on the right shoulder, the ones cutting people off. On my drive in this morning, I saw a motorcyclist roll up beside a car and slap the mirror of a woman's car. Just highway violence, aggressive driving, road rage. Yeah, it's time.

We see it all the time. So I'm glad that they're doing that, and I hope that program is successful in regards to the concerns I've heard about the Olympics coming to town. So, you know, when I was young, we struggled with our housekeeping a little, but when Grandma came over, we made the effort to clean it up.

But, you know, what we found was easier, is just keep it clean all the time. Then you don't have to do all this cleanup stuff. Because when we're talking about a compacted effort, what happens to those other goals? They go away. All of a sudden we're going to get stuff done.

We're not going to do a bunch of studies. We're not doing all that stuff. We're going to get it done. And that's what regular citizens that are here all the time, every day would like to have happen on their roads and their highways and their local infrastructure as well. And last you knew what's coming.

We just talked about the Pear Blossom Highway. We talked about. Well, we didn't talk about Kahalko. We talked Ortega highway. Pretty much the 15 most dangerous highways in California, identifying them and putting resources into them so they can be immediately addressed.

And we kind of turned that down last year, and we're going to work on that again this year. So for people who are wondering when we were going to do something, it was last year we were going to try again, but this year we're going to try again.

And I'm hoping that we can work with Caltrans to ensure that these very, very dangerous roads get addressed. We had the opportunity and we didn't take it, and I was really disappointed about that. But it was exactly what they're talking about.

Long Time roads that we've known are broken, getting funding outside of our normal sources of funding so that we can get them fixed now so we stop killing people. And that's the goal.

So I appreciate all of your input and answers to questions today, and also your cooperation and future cooperation in helping us deliver for our constituents out there, because they expect a lot of you. And by the way, you guys in our area are doing a pretty good job with the litter cleanup. I see the crews out there. And one more question in regards to that. Who does that? Who do you employ to go pick up litter?

So it's a combination. We have a lot of Caltrans employees or maintenance workers that do the majority of the litter pickup. But we also work with other organizations that, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we work with groups that are helping people when they come out of prison and to establish them in kind of with life skills, a job.

And these are what we call the special program. Folks that are part of these programs. Yeah, yeah, they need that transition.

We used to use our CDCR inmates and stuff to go and do that also.

Inmates, but they're out on probation. They've just been released. And so we bring them on board. And many of these employees, actually, that work for these nonprofits become Caltrans employees and go on to do some great things.

Great. That's good. I'm glad to hear that program. And taking a page out of my colleague from Encinitas, I'm not quite done. I forgot about the bike situation. Way out of control. We've made it legal for them to go on sidewalks. We've made it legal for people to blow through intersections.

And the problem is that the biking industry has advanced to where we have, you know, the motorized mini bikes that used to be illegal to drive on the street? Well, now they're electronic mini bikes. We got to do something about it because that's. That. That is a huge issue. It's.

It's hard to spot somebody going 40 miles an hour down a dark road and blowing through an intersection in front of you. And. And so I don't know what the statistics are so far for our. Those are cool laws, right? But I don't know what the statistics are, but they probably are not going to be good in the future. Thank you,

Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, my compliments to the chair and your good judgment in bringing Mr. Leon back to the California State Senate. That's a plus for all of us, number one. Number two, I'm sorry That my colleague from Pico Rivera is not here because I would take issue with him.

In terms of the best CHP station, I think Santa Ana is actually the best station. They're very responsive to our needs, the district office, and they do a wonderful toy drive here. Huge toy drive every year that is a big success in our area. So I'm right, he's wrong.

Thirdly, as to Director Gordon, one of the most common interfaces between the public in California State government is DMV. And I've been around since 1990, off and on. I've gotten myself unelected a couple times, but I have never had anyone call me to say DMV did a really wonderful job.

I just went there and it was really pleasant. Not happen. Now, that's not happened with any other really state organization. But I'm just wondering whether you, acting as a citizen, have ever called DMV to try to schedule an appointment on the phone. Ever tried on the phone schedule an appointment? You have?

Yes, I have. Yeah. I was anticipating this question. I even tried it yesterday and I tried it again today. Okay.

My staff, I was supposed to surprise you, but my staff. My staff. Because I've asked at least two of your predecessors the same question. You're the first that's actually done it.

I know we're trying to wrap things up here, but I will share with you one thing that I ask my senior staff to do and I model is I use all of our services. I use all of our channels because I want to experience how those channels treat me and how they treat the transaction.

I recorded a transaction recently when I was doing my vehicle registration renewal via the phone via the IVR. And I recorded the whole thing. So the folks can see, oh, yeah, it's three minutes and two seconds. What are we doing here? And why didn't we make me back up?

Because that's how, first of all, that's how I learn. That's how I get better. And that's how we as an organization get better. We have to use our services. We have to be invested in them. There are problems, right? This is a complex organization. The laws are complex, the systems are somewhat dated.

But we have to use the services to understand what the experience is. How did it work out? I took the option to get the sms, so it sent me a text message to go to the website to schedule an appointment. And it worked out quite well.

We did, by the way, about 60 days ago, we did change the way appointments are done on the phone. Because in the past, like many Other things, unfortunately, it was super hard. It would force you to go sort of back to square one if you didn't get the right answer.

We fixed that in the IVR now, and I think it works quite well. It's never perfect. There's never enough spots. People are never quite happy. But we're trying to get people for most transactions that can actually be solved online to actually solve them online. There's no reason to come into the DMV for most situations.

Okay, that answers part of my question. But let's say someone doesn't have an iPhone. They're actually calling from a landline to the DMV and they don't want to text or they can't text. Can they make a phone appointment without turning to their PC or phone?

Yes, they can. And just because we look at this from a technological perspective, about 33% of Californians are calling us on a landline. 3%. The good news is. But that means that technology can help us a lot more ways.

But to answer your question directly, you absolutely, without any miracle technology, you have to be off a rotary dial phone. So let's agree on that. So you've got to be on a touchstone phone. With a touchstone phone, which is 99.99% of us, you can make an appointment online without having to text, send anywhere.

Okay, next time we see one, I'm going to ask you whether you've tried to actually make an appointment without reverting to text messaging or computer. I can answer that question today. I have. You have? Yes. Okay, next question. And I don't know if you. This is an easier question.

No, this is actually an easier question because I'm going to. This is a take home exam. So in 2021, I did a Bill to extend the sunset for the vehicle dismantling industry strike team and required DMV as part of the legislative process. I was required to include a provision that DMV would report as to its progress by 2024. I think you've heard this question. Where are we?

I believe the report is in final review and I apologize for the delay of the report. As you know, people differ in where they like to spend their time. I'm a big wrecking yard type guy. I like going out to pick and pull and just roaming around. And I'm not tied to that brand.

That's not actually how you did the report.

That is not how we did the report. But I have been out with my team out to these events making sure that in fact we understand what's being dumped into the ground and these illegal dismantlers. So very invested personally in this part. But the report is final as far as I understand.

I know it's in some final review process and unfortunately some, some aspects of government take longer than they should. So I apologize for the delay, but it will be coming soon.

Can you let us know in the next week not. Not whether it's released? If it is released. Fantastic. But when it will be released? I'll do my best, sir. All right, thank you. Thank you. No further questions.

Okay, thank you, Senator, A couple hopefully quick questions from me and then we'll go on to the next panel. The federal impact issue. I appreciated the CTC Director, you know, responding to that in terms of, you know, kind of up to the moment.

And it's just a request for you, even though I'm ex official on ctc, can you keep these Members informed of. Of impacts real time? When I say real time, I mean reasonably within a week or two of getting the kind of news that can impact policy here.

People are working bills, people are, you know, pursuing policy decisions that can be waylaid pretty quickly by a shift in your report today. You know, in terms of the federal side, it's not your fault, but of course it.

I think you have access to the Committee membership and then Director Tavares, you know, correct me, correct me If I'm wrong, Ms. Taylor, but the. I took the earlier response as more programmatic. The formula funds that we receive and so forth, infrastructure. What we're hearing, and those reports are actually are real time, right?

For all of us, is that, you know, the Biden Infrastructure Acts are basically, for all intents and purposes being stripped out, held up perhaps not 100% along the way, but those included EV infrastructure that we were trying to match with state dollars.

Those included, you know, funds for the ports that, you know, are now evidently being stripped out. Out. What are you. And on and on. I mean, obviously you're, I'm asking, you know, focused on, on your jurisdiction primarily.

And I do want to go over to the Commissioner next and last because I know historically at least coming from a city and a county that law enforcement had, you know, always had its own set of federal grants and, and such that our Department depended upon.

But that's really what I'm asking for is, you know, I mean, we all, you know, have to go down the high speed rail issue right now. We'll get a separate report on that later. I think we all understand what that is. But how many more situations would be of concern to you and this Committee right now in terms of infrastructure.

Now, that's an excellent question. And so we're learning day by day as well. And we work very closely with our partners, the Federal Highway Administration and usdot. At this point, the federal formula funding, the majority of that is coming forward.

Why I say the majority is because the NEVI program, which you just mentioned, the EV infrastructure program, was a formula program. And that has been put on pause right now, just that portion. But the remainder of the formula funding for infrastructure is still going forward.

We are submitting our invoices to federal highways and we are getting the reimbursements on that. So at this moment, I don't have too much concern with the formula.

Now, when you look at the discretionary formula or discretionary funding, such as the raise grants, all of those other grants, all of those have been put on pause for the Trump Administration, federal Administration, to take a look at those and determine if they meet the new policies of that Administration going forward. So those ones are on pause.

What's your approach? And I asked, because I think we should be on the legislative side, perhaps borrowing a little bit from your approach, what is your approach to scenario planning? You know, given where we're at? For example, one of those, we didn't talk about it just now, but lithium battery production was, you know, one of the big investment pieces in the, in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Again, state involvement in that from in every way, shape or form, maybe not directly under, you know, your jurisdiction, but we, you with one would think secondarily or, you know, in terms of a cascading effect on your jurisdiction, you've got no batteries, you've got no, you've got a much different program in terms of what's going on with vehicles and vehicle traffic on the streets, HOV lanes, whatever you're planning in terms of policy, how do you, do you have sort of a strike team or for lack of a better way to put it, do you have a team that's, that's working on trying to make major policy adjustments and informing the governor's office and or the Legislature as to those kind of big swings that are going to be a swing and a miss if we continue on the course that we were on last year?

So we are working closely with the CALSTA Agency, our California State Transportation Agency, on these types of issues. I don't have a direction right now. We're still working through a lot of the different scenarios, playing through that and working with the governor's office as Well, I would say if I could just step back.

I think looking at this Administration, I had an opportunity to speak with the secretary of the US. Back in February, and some of the things he was saying, I was listening to the words he was using and safety came to mind. He used safety as a priority. He mentioned resiliency as a priority.

He mentioned economic prosperity, about how transportation can create jobs and connect people to jobs. And I think my brain started thinking, how do we perhaps recraft our message so that we can continue to be as competitive as possible in California to bring federal funding to the state?

And I know we've talked about certain, we've used certain terms climate, let's say, and now maybe let's look at how do we bring resiliency into this. And we've just had the wildfires and we've had severe storms over the last several years. So I think resiliency could be something that we work closely with this Administration on leveraging federal funding to California.

Well, I appreciate that's kind of a positive frame. Instead of focusing simply on the things that are falling off the ledger, focusing on, on those items where there's something in common driven by one of those criteria, like economic development, for example. I would ask that just give some thought to how to.

I know we have this isn't a Budget Committee. We have a budget Subcommitee that deals with all of you folks, and it's in session for some of the year.

But aside from the budget Subcommitee on the policy side, how we can stay informed here at this Committee level where we're going to be engaged all year long, right up to the point where we end our session in terms of, I think, you know, trying to adjust our own legislative efforts, you know, as a Senate, as a Legislature, as individual caucuses, and then coming right back to the Committee level here so that, so that we can be effective and efficient as well.

I don't want to be in a parallel universe where we're concerned, you're concerned, and you know, you folks have information that could be useful to us, you know, in terms of what you're seeing, and I think it's just an excellent point, is, you know, perhaps focus policy areas where we can get a win, especially in this area of endeavor transportation.

We're not dealing with such contentious social issues or other things here. We're dealing with some pretty basic fundamental issues that are bipartisan much of the time. But if you can. We don't need the answer. I don't need the answer now. That's my question.

But I'd like to figure out a way to have in this particular environment to have more fluid interaction on, you know, information about. Sure. Our Committee staff will have some ideas too on, you know, just how to stay abreast.

Yeah, I welcome that. And we can work with your, your staff and your team.

Yeah. Thank you. And then Commissioner, do you want to just.

Thanks. Senator. Just on federal funding for us and I'll be brief. We receive about $30 million in federal funding specific to commercial enforcement program and so far no sign of that letting up or being an issue. It gets funded through fhwa.

I think the transactional relationship we have, we. We do a half million truck inspections a year and all that data gets put into the federal safer system where these carriers are judged that leads the country. I think Texas is second in that. And so I don't anticipate any issue there.

There may be a smaller part with grant funding that gets comes through the state, California, Ots, that is federal funded and I don't have a temperature on that yet. But I don't have any concerns with the commercial program.

Yeah, well those numbers are at least in a normal environment a little easier for the state to backfill. Sure. If necessary. Thank you.

And then lastly, before we move on, the other question I had was just it's a big issue area but I would just like to ask you to focus on where you see technology entering into the work that you do. You mentioned PCH Highway last year. We brought that Bill through here.

That I appreciated CHP's willingness to go along with that if you will. Because I think historically putting. I agree with you. Putting folks out there in black and white squad cars has always been the best solution. But there was some cooperation with a technological solution.

Where do you see more of that coming in this world of AI or is that something you're looking at?

Yeah. Senator, good guy. Question. If I could just share with you a philosophy and hopefully it answers your question. But you know, I mentioned in my remarks that the seat we're warming ourselves at the fire that a reputation that others before us have built.

But if we're going to stay at the forefront and a leader in law enforcement, then we need to be innovative. We need to be turning towards new technology. I believe one of the most under reported, maybe even epidemic in traffic safety is distracted driving. It's under reported.

Nobody tells a uniformed officer that they were on their phone press to crashing and it's hard to prove so. And there are some technologies that I think we can look at Is there a way to identify people using cell phones and then uniformed officers Address that downstream, if you will. Maybe there is some stuff out there.

And so. And we are looking at other AI and innovative ways to, through our research and planning on ways that can help us do a better job and just be a force multiplier. But I think the philosophy of it is the most important. We're open to it and we think we have to embrace that to move forward.

I appreciate that, certainly. I think all of us, again, in terms of the whole Committee would appreciate any thoughts that you have in terms of, you know, the flip side of the technology, how to manage the technology.

I know coming out of our regional Transportation Commission, and I don't know how far it's advanced, but the effort was already underway to replace fast track devices with cell phone, essentially a cell phone app. So you didn't need to have all the other hardware. But then it raises the same questions about, wait a minute, aren't we supposed to be, you know, hands free in the first place?

Are you going to be adjusting your phone while you're going down the freeway to change it from, you know, zero occupants, one occupant to three occupants, or whatever the hell is case may be just because you come across, you know, a toll lane? There's all kinds of questions like that in terms of distraction. Appreciate it.

DMV, I want to ask you, Mr. Gordon, we, we take up lots of technological stuff that has DMV on the other end of it these days. Autonomous vehicles, for example. How is that not just autonomous vehicles, but how is changing technology?

You were just in a interface here with Senator Umberg about, you know, going to the ease of text scheduling. What else is happening? What's happening and how much of an adaptation is that for DMV? What should we expect to see?

But we deal with budget, all of us, whether we're on the budget community or not, we deal with legislation. What should we expect in terms of technology invading your space? Sure.

So one simple example, and I think it ties back to your meeting with Mayor Mahan. We've been working on digital identity within the state. So you may recall there's a pilot Bill for a mobile driver's license. We've been a leader in the technological front there.

So California has gone from no place to leading, probably even out at the international level with the two standards we've implemented. The derivative works from that are actually instant identifications you can use for people that are unhoused. We've been working with the County of Los Angeles. There's a consortium across most of Los Angeles.

I don't know, I don't recall the exact name of the consortium. We had a meeting with the mayor's office in San Francisco just last week on the same issue. So one of the primary issues you're talking about getting people out of Caltrans space, out of medians.

One part of that is getting an ID to them very, very quickly so they can get temporary housing because in many cases by the time you get an identity, you go to the DMV, we print a physical copy, gets to you, let's call it a 10 day cycle time that may be too long for people that are in these temporary confines to be able to get permanent housing.

So that's one technological advancement that is here today. We just launched the instant idea just like last week and we're working with LA County, we're also working, working with the City of San Francisco because both have, you know, huge issues on this front and we have a solution that is in our, in our midst today.

And so that's one area where you can count on us. And I need to get connected. So you may not recall I've been in many City Council meetings with you in the, in the, in your days in San Jose and I still have a house in San Jose. My, my son lives in that house today.

But I'd like to get connected with Mayor Mahan on this very topic because I think it's, it's timely and I think it's, it's, it's on point to getting people into longer term housing and identification is the number one thing they need to be able to start receiving other benefits. And we have now an immediate solution for that.

Yeah, we'll connect you or help connect you. And we just sell the homeless fair. My office did it at City hall that brought in 550 homeless individuals off the streets. And there were 50 different service providers there, including DMV.

And the most sought after service there is among many good ones including haircuts and showers and things like that. It was the ID program. So being the transient population, obviously one of the hardest things with dealing with the homeless is the minute you get on a first name relationship, they're gone, they're moving around or they're swept.

And so the quicker you can do that work, the more important it is to everybody, I think. So appreciate that. Keep that in mind. I'm going to stop there in the interest of time, we'll have other opportunities. Thank you all very much for being here. I really appreciated the, the breadth of questions.

I don't know if you were anticipating that. As panelists, we basically had to decide whether to narrow the topic for all of you to a couple of these things or, you know, just have a broad, broad based discussion. And I'm glad the Committee Members took advantage of the broad based opportunity. Look forward to working with you this year. Thank.

The next panel to come on up, I believe Beverly Greene is pinch hitting for Carolyn Gannott, who is pretty tied up with some labor issues right now. And Beverly's from Santa Clara VTA, Madeleine Moore, Deputy Executive Officer from LA Metro. Welcome. And Michael Pimentel, Executive Director, California Transit Association. Okay, we can start at your readiness. If you're ready, go ahead and begin and thank you for being here. Those. There you go.

Hello. We can hear you now. Good afternoon. I want to thank State Senator Cortese and the Senate Transportation Committee for inviting VTA here today. I joined VTA as a Chief Government Affairs Officer in June and I had the opportunity to work with some of you in my prior position where I was at AC Transit for about 15 years. This year marks a significant milestone for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation authority. It's our 30th anniversary.

For three decades, this independent special district has provided sustainable, accessible, community based transportation options. While public transit is our most visible function, VTA is much more than a transit agency. We plan, program and Fund transportation projects while also serving as a project delivery entity.

Our responsibilities include planning and funding, funding regional transit partners, managing local sales tax funds, operating express lanes on state state owned highways, and serving as the congestion management agency. VTA provides safe, accessible transportation options and has a role in all modes to improve the quality of life for our communities.

A key part of VTA's funding strategy relies on voter approved sales tax measures and other revenue sources that support transit operations, capital projects and infrastructure improvements. The local measures on the screen represent more than $880 million a and they Fund operating capital, maintenance and other areas.

Our fleet contains 441 buses operating on over 1200 miles of routes serving over almost 3200 bus stops. Buses are the backbone of our transit system, connecting neighborhoods, employment centers and regional destinations. Our light rail system includes 98 train cars running on over 42 miles of track with service to 59 stations.

Light rail provides a fast, reliable and environmentally friendly alternative for commuters, reducing congestion on our roads and improving regional connectivity. VTA has a total operating budget of 604 million in 2024, with an increase to 625 million projected for 2025.

A majority of our operating revenue, approximately 80%, comes from local tax measures, which underscores the from Santa Clara Valley Transit Santa Clara Valley Residents for Public Transit Investments on the capital side, VTA has a $2.8 billion budget for fiscal years 24 and 25. Ridership has been increasing steadily versus our pre pandemic numbers in 2019.

Our bus is 50 is 89% on weekdays and over 100% on the weekends. Our light rail is 59% of pre pandemic on the weekdays and over 50% on the weekends. We rank ninth in overall ridership recovery nationally. Our partners include all of these pictured here.

Highway 17 Express Monterey Salinas Transit Dumbarton Express ACE Shuttle ACE Trains BART, caltrain Capital Corridor we are funding and governance partners for these systems. I'll spend a few minutes talking about caltrain as Members are aware. Caltrain provides commuter rail service between San Francisco and Gilroy.

VTA is part of a joint powers agreement that oversees Caltrain along with San Mateo and San Francisco. As 1/3 partner in Caltrain, VTA has significant interest in the operations of the system. We're working with our partner partners at caltrain to solve their deficit and VTA is a partner for Gilroy improvements.

Caltrain receives funding through Measure RR that was adopted by voters of Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties. Of the revenue collected, 55% comes from Santa Clara County residents. VTA also contributes to Caltrain through 2016 Measure B, which calls for funding for Caltrain system improvements and grade separations in the county.

VTA's BART to Silicon Valley program is a 16 mile extension of regional rail transit into Silicon Valley. The first 10 miles opened in the summer of 2020 and extends from Fremont through Milpitas to North San Jose with two stations. Phase two will add four more stations.

An underground tunnel through downtown San Jose with three stations in San Jose and one in Santa Clara. The cost estimate is 12.8 billion and passenger service is estimated to be in 2036. We're in the New Starts program with a federal commitment for 5.1 billion switching over to BART. We have a much different agreement, a much different relationship.

Santa Clara County is not part of the BART system nor do we have a joint powers agreement like we do with caltrain. Instead, we have a comprehensive agreement and an operations and maintenance agreement which provides the framework for our partnership. VTA is responsible for all costs that are associated with the extension into Santa Clara County.

This includes capital operations and maintenance. VTA also retains ownership of the infrastructure. BART provides VTA with technical assistance and operates and maintains the system.

VTA is also responsible for paying a portion of the BART core system operating and capital modification costs as well as the cost of service into Santa Clara County minus the fares and ancillary revenue that is collected in the county. We have a very strong partnership with Caltrans.

We build and turn ownership over to Caltrans There are hundreds of miles of freeways. We build express lanes into Silicon Valley and the highway interchange improvements south of Gilroy. VTA manages and owns and operates our own toll roads which in the future will provide a revenue stream to support transit operations.

The TOD program is responsible for planning, negotiating and implementing public private partnerships with real estate developers to create mixed use and mixed income TOD projects on more than two dozen sites. These projects implement VTA's affordable housing policy so residential units and TOD projects are available for all.

VTA has developed a plan for culture and support of our employees, their families and their well being. We thank State Senator Cortese for his shepherding of SB 129 and SB 553, among other legislation. VTA is a primary transit provider for Levi's Stadium and the SAP center, hosting large scale events throughout the year.

However, in 2026 we will see an unprecedented level of demand with three major international and national events. Super Bowl 60, the FIFA World Cup, which is actually six different events, six different matches, and NCAA March Madness. These events will attract global audiences and require enhanced transit operations, security measures and service adjustments.

Preliminary estimates indicate that nearly 30 million in funding will be needed to prepare VTA's transit system for the increased ridership, crowd control and security. One of our top state priorities is the reauthorization of cap and trade.

We are advocating for a renewal that maintains and ideally increases funding for programs like the Transit and Inner City Rail Capital Program and the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program. At the federal level, our primary focus is on advocating for the continuation and full funding of the Capital Investment Grant program in order to secure a full funding agreement.

Full Funding Grant Agreement for our bar to Silicon Valley extension. We are also prioritizing transportation funding across multiple federal programs and with that. Thank you.

All right, thank you, Beverly. I'm going to refer to you on a first name basis at least that time. All right, we'll move on to Ms. Moore. Thank you for being here.

Thank you, Chair Cortese and Members of the Committee for inviting LA Metro to participate in this hearing. I'm honored to be here with my fellow transit partners. I am Madeline Moore, Deputy Executive Officer for State Government Relations at LA Metro. I am pleased to be here to give an overview of Metro service and ridership.

Our funding breakdown describe our relationship with state departments and our agency's capital program which is helping the state reach its greenhouse gas reduction goals. LA County is the most populous county in the Nation. It includes 10 million residents in 88 cities plus unincorporated LA County.

Our transportation system is large and complex and includes moving both people and over 40% of the nation's inbound cargo. Metro is the second busiest transit agency in the country and the lead agency for transportation planning and funding for LA County. Metro is multimodal.

In addition to a bus and rail network, Metro operates bike share express lanes and microtransitarians. Metro also funds and develops high occupancy vehicle lanes with Caltrans and operates the Freeway Service Patrol which helps stranded motorists on LA freeways. In addition, Metro is also a crucial funding partner for both Southern California Regional Rail and Caltrans State highway projects.

Metro has over 12,000 employees and 85% of Metro's workforce are represented by one of Metro's five Labor Union partners. As of the end of 2024, Metro's weekday ridership was over 1 million boardings per day or 84% of pre pandemic levels. Weekend ridership recovery is even stronger with Saturday and Sunday ridership recovery at 95 and over 100% respectively.

Metro riders are primarily Low income. The median income for all bus and rail riders is just slightly over $17,000 a year. Metro riders depend on LA Metro to provide essential services. The vast majority do not have access to a private vehicle for their trips. Metro has implemented programs to help Low income people and students afford transit.

We have also implemented new strategies and initiatives to increase ridership even further. Metro established the Ambassador program in 2022 as part of our effort to reimagine public safety on the Metro system.

The Ambassador Program is a key part of our multi layered plan to improve the customer experience and public safety combined with a team that includes Metro Security, law enforcement, homeless and mental health outreach workers and cleaning crews. Now moving on to our fiscal picture, Metro has a $9.0 billion budget for fiscal year 24-25.

The agency is primarily funded through four local sales tax measures. Other local funding sources include Fair Reven Express lane tolls, bond proceedings and advertising. State revenue sources include the Transportation Development Act, State transit assistance and SB1 State of good repair. Federal sources include grant reimbursement and formula funding. State funding is critical for Metro.

In particular, the SB 125 funding has helped Metro advance a number of capital projects and zero emission bus purchases. We look forward to working with you to ensure that the last of the funding is appropriated. Transit agencies are facing fiscal challenges and they are different in different parts of the state.

Our annual fiscal year 25-26 budget is just beginning. At this point in our process we have identified a significant reduction in our near term deficit, largely thanks to the funding provided by the state. However, we do anticipate a cumulative operating and capital deficit of up to $2.3 billion through fiscal year 30.

Transportation planning and operation creates a complex administrative and regulatory ecosystem. Metro enjoys a good working relationship with State Department and agencies.

We value this partnership, particularly with the State Transportation Agency and Caltrans as well as the Public Utilities Commission, the California Transportation Commission, the Air Resources Board and the Strategic Growth Council as well as the Attorney General's Office. As you can see, our work touches almost every aspect of state government.

We even have a Calturn District 7 Director, Gloria Roberts, as a non voting Member of our Board. Without strong coordination between our agency and these departments, we would not be able to serve the public well.

Now moving on to our major capital projects, Louisiana is in the midst of one of the largest expansion of public transit systems in our nation's history, made possible in part due to the 70% voter approved Measure M which passed in 2016. Metro has $26 billion worth of projects in active planning or construction.

I would like to briefly touch on a few major projects. I am pleased to report that the state funding provided for the East San Fernando Valley Light rail project has helped US to secure $900 million in federal funds and we looked forward to starting construction on that project in the near future.

This will replace one of our highest ridership bus lines with fast and frequent light rail service. The Foothill extension of the Metro Gold Line has made steady progress and Construction Authority is working towards issuing a construction contract in the near future for the next phase of the project.

This line has already benefited from 498 million in SB 125 funding with an additional 250 million anticipated this fiscal year. The Southeast Gateway Line is advancing through the environmental process and is Metro's highest priority for federal funding. This line will serve cities with some of our region's densest communities that currently don't have access to rail.

If all of the SB 125 funding is allocated by the state in the coming years, this line will receive $200 million of that SB 125 funding.

We are also pleased to be nearing the opening of the LAX Metro Transit center station which will be a boon to the region and the state, finally connecting the nation's second busiest airport to the transit system and we'll start opening the first of three phases of our D Line subway extension which runs underneath Wilshire Boulevard this year.

These projects create thousands of good paying jobs that keep our economy healthy. Metro uses project labor agreements on all major projects. In addition to supporting local hire whenever possible, we are also taking advancing our zero emission bus program and have recently issued one of the largest zero emission bus procurements in the country.

All of these projects are strategic investments that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help the state achieve its climate goals. And with that I thank you again, Chair Cortese, and look forward to hearing the testimony of my colleagues here as well as taking any questions you may have.

Thank you for your report.

Mr. Pimtel, good to see you again. Good to see you too, Mr.

Chair and Committee Members, I'm Michael Pimtel, I'm the Executive Director of the California Transit Association and by way of background, the Association is a 501c6 nonprofit trade organization that was founded in 1965 to represent California transit agencies in the halls of the State Capitol with the express goal of building a fully funded, efficient and effective public transportation network for all Californians.

Our membership includes 220 Member organizations, including transit agencies, regional entities and transportation authorities, as well as national and international transit suppliers who deliver the products and services that keep our systems running.

Over the last 60 years, we've been engaged in all major state level discussions impacting transit policy and funding and have worked together with the state to enact and implement transformative policies like the Transportation Development act, the Global Warming Solutions act and Senate Bill 1.

Due to this long standing history of productive partnership with current and past Gubernatorial administrations and legislatures, my team and I are often commissioned to serve as subject matter experts on California history, California transit history, policy and funding.

I'm pleased to have been invited to join you today in the spirit of this continued partnership to build a common understanding of public transportation in our state to inform this legislative session.

My testimony today will cover at a high level the foundational topics of transit governance and functions and funding, and will highlight several of the biggest challenges faced by transit agencies today. Before I jump into the technical aspects of my testimony, I want to start with the big picture.

Public transportation in California is fundamentally about the mobility of everyday Californians and shared progress toward our climate objectives.

Over this two year session you will encounter public discourse that seeks to minimize this truth that suggests that public transit in California, because it has not yet fully recovered from the pandemic, is discretionary and that its importance to the fight against climate change is nominal.

As you confront this narrative, I ask that you consider that in 2023 California transit agencies facilitated over 800 million passenger trips. Those are your constituents traveling to work, to school and Doctor's appointments, among other things, and many of them have no means of travel because they lack the resources or the physical ability.

And while California transit agencies continue to struggle, their ridership has only improved since this data was last published, and they have demonstrated some of the strongest ridership recoveries in the nation.

For the agencies with the slowest recoveries, the weight around their necks is remote work or downtown cores that were built as business centers, and the safety challenges we've asked the state to help us address. These are the challenges that other agencies in cities like Atlanta, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.

all face and why they, too, continue to navigate ridership and fiscal issues. If we let our transit network atrophy or worse collapse in the years ahead, we'll push our riders into cars, create gridlock on our roads, and deprive countless Californians who cannot or should not drive of the freedom of mobility.

What's more, we will undercut our state's strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which in California and today are largely derived from the transportation sector. The California Air Resources Board's climate modeling is clear we can only meet our climate objectives with sustained and increased investment in public transportation. So I want to offer a bit of background on transit here in California today.

The State of California is home to just under 200 transit agencies that operate in distinct urban, suburban, and rural environments that adhere to different governance models and to deliver services through various combinations of modes and workforce arrangements and with the support of a constellation of Fund sources.

Generally, transit agencies are organized as special districts in California State law departments of cities or counties, or joint powers authorities.

Most agencies have boards and board structures that are defined and enumerated in their authorizing statutes, agency charters or joint powers agreements, and these boards are typically comprised of appointed Members, often elected officials and civil servants from the cities and counties in their service territory.

The core function of transit agencies is to provide mobility options for their communities, typically through the provision of fixed route demand response and complementary Ada paratransit service. Fixed route service is delivered by bus, rail or ferry and is typified by its operations on a repetitive fixed schedule basis along a specific route.

This is what most Californians will think of when they think of public transit. Demand response service is delivered by, among other modes, vans and cars, and is operated in response to calls or requests from passengers.

This service type has historically included complementary paratransit service, non medical transportation and non emergency medical transportation services, but has expanded to include newer technologies like microtransit service that more directly replicates the operational characteristics and user interface of services like Uber and Lyft.

Complementary paratransit service is a specialized form of demand response service required by the Americans with Disabilities act for individuals with disabilities who are unable, due to functional limitations, to use fixed route service.

While transit agencies prioritize and carry out this core function of providing mobility options, they also satisfy a series of secondary functions that are likely less visible to the public. Among the most critical is emergency response and disaster relief.

This function is facilitated in collaboration with county departments of emergency management with the support of the California Office of Emergency Services and through mutual aid agreements with neighboring transit agencies.

Though the exact mechanics of this function differ by region, when disasters strike, transit agencies are called on by these departments and agencies to assist with a host of activities which may include, but are not limited to, evacuation support, transportation between shelter sites, food and supply delivery, and logistical support for first responders including the National Guard.

Unfortunately, due to the increased frequency of natural disasters in recent years, this function has become increasingly central to agencies work. Additionally, transit agencies are carrying out the function of climate stewardship and technology development by leading California's heavy duty transportation sector on the development of zero emission technology.

This newer function is driven in large part by the California Air Resources Board's innovative Clean Transit Regulation which requires transit agencies to convert their bus fleets to 100% zero emission technology by 2040.

This regulation was adopted by CARB to reduce greenhouse gas PM2.5 and NOx emissions, but also to force the development and maturation of heavy duty zero emission technology by increasing purchase volumes.

CARB's regulatory documents published alongside the promulgation of the regulation presented that zero emission transit buses would serve as a beachhead that spurs market and supply chain development and ultimately lead to the transfer of this technology to other heavy duty vehicle types.

While this transition has been challenging and incredibly expensive, transit agencies have leaned into this function by working through my Association to pursue and help enact policies to support the transition and by accelerating their own deployment of zero emission buses.

Based on CARB's last accounting of the transition completed in 2022, California transit agencies that exceeded CARB's 27 projections for ZEPP deployments and in other words, we're about five years ahead of schedule. Similar work is being conducted by rail and ferry agencies in furtherance of the goals of CARB's in use locomotive and commercial harborcraft regulations.

Of course, there are myriad other functions that transit agencies satisfy here in the state and which further tie us to the goals of the state and regional governments. These functions include, among other things, support for sustainable land use and housing development.

Under SB 370 Workforce Development and Training for underserved populations through high road partnerships and frontline engagement with unhoused populations.

Now, the breadth of these functions is funded by a variety of revenue sources at the federal, state and local levels, sources that we don't have time to go into sufficient detail on today, but that I'll provide a high level overview of.

You should know, however, that according to a recent analysis by the Legislative Analyst Office, in 2023 transit agencies received a total of $14.3 billion from these sources. This funding was principally directed towards supporting the provision of mobility services, but now supports all functions.

In 2023, the largest share of transit funding at $7.8 billion, or roughly 54% of this $14.3 billion total, was derived from local sources, including self help measures, fares and other sources of ancillary revenue. The state and Federal Government, by contrast, contributed 2.8 billion and $3.8 billion respectively.

At the state level, core transit funding is generally derived from the Transportation Development Act and Cap and Trade's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The TDA was enacted by Governor Reagan in 1971 and established two programs that continue to serve as the lifeblood of public transit funding in California, the Local Transportation Fund and State Transit Assistance Program.

The LTF relies on a citus based funding distribution that returns revenues to the counties in which they are collected for investment in planning and programming, transit and rail, and in certain circumstances, local streets and roads.

The SCA relies on formula based distribution that takes into account regional populations and each agency's revenue base relative to the statewide total, and these programs can Fund both capital and operations.

The Greenhouse Gas Reductions Fund's ongoing appropriations were established in 2014 as part of Senate Bill 862 and include the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital program, funded by 10% of all annual proceeds collected in the GGRF and 70% of the state's Transportation Improvement Fee and which generates just under $700 million annually and the Local Transportation Program, funded by 5% of all annual proceeds collected in the GGRF, which generates approximately $200 million annually.

The TIRCP, as you likely know, is a competitive grant program. I'm just going to ask you to wrap up as soon as you can.

So with that, I'll skip past some of the additional funding details and just highlight some of the work that we see ahead, some of the work in which we're hop Some additional support As I started the testimony, I highlighted that transit agencies are recovering from the pandemic's impacts on ridership and budgets.

This lagging recovery, when coupled with the growing cost pressures of the state's mandated transition to zero emission technologies across modes, will require additional state funding in the near term.

As we invite broader discussions on ongoing state and regional support for public transit, I want to note that my Association is actively supporting Senator Araguin and Assemblymember Gonzalez's push for an additional $2 billion in statewide funding for transit operations and capital.

And this is intended to be a near term solution as again we have broader conversations about state and regional support to carry us forward. One of the reasons that I want to make sure that I'm highlighting the need for both that near term and that long term support is that we do see some headwinds on the horizon.

The Legislative Analyst Office projects that the State Transit Assistance Program revenues will decline by as much as 30% between now and 2035. And as cap and trade is expected to sunset in 2030, we do see some challenges on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

Now there's a lot more that I have prepared to cover, but perhaps we can handle some of that as part of this Q and A. So thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all. Appreciate that. And we're going to turn first to Senator Archuleta who has questions. Then we'll come over to this side of the daisy. I saw Senator Richardson first and then we'll go to Senator arguing, please.

Thank you panelists. We have Committee meetings all over the building and we got to run in and out. That's why you see us going in and out. And so your presentation really appreciated but we would like to have some questions.

Metro and I mentioned earlier that we've got the Olympics coming and it's the biggest thing in LA County. And I know you've got a huge responsibility. The number one thing that I think is hurting ridership is security and I know you've got to step that up.

Bring us up to date in reference to I know the Metro board was looking at policing itself and also doing something working with the County of Los Angeles LAPD for public safety with the pending games coming in 2028. Can you address that?

Yes, Senator Archuleta. So we're rolling out, as I mentioned, our multi approach to public safety, which does include using our current authority within the PUC code to reconstitute our own law enforcement. Right now, as I believe you mentioned, we currently contract with the Sheriff's Department, the LA County Sheriff's Department and LAPD.

But we moving forward like to bring that in house and reconstitute that force. In addition we also have our transit ambassadors who are out on our system helping with wayfinding, helping with identifying any issues on the system and reporting them. In addition to that, we do have homeless and mental health outreach.

So we're really working hard in addition to stepped up cleaning efforts as well, to make sure that our riders feel safe and comfortable on the system.

And before I sign off, foothill transit that runs along the 10 freeway in that area, they are just purchased, I think 19 fuel cell battery buses high. And the drivers love it, passengers love it, and it seems that they're able to produce their own hydrogen.

And going in that direction saves a lot of, a lot of money and it's a great way to grow. I'm hoping that Metro will also look to other cities that you might be able to participate with. Yes, I'd be happy to follow up with them. Okay, very Good. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Senator Richardson?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Moore, did I miss it? But did you say what, what was the cost associated you were anticipating from the World Cup, Super Bowl and Olympics? I know Ms. Greene mentioned 30 million, which I'm going to come back and ask her about that. Did you give us a specific number?

I didn't hear one, so no, we're. Still working on that. We are working in partnership with FIFA, but also the LA County LA City has a Committee that is in charge of hosting the World Cup. So we work in close coordination with them. We're still working on that partnership to develop that number.

We're also, you know, we have an ask right now into the Federal Government for 200 million to do some of what we will need for the Olympics. But that does not necessarily take into account the full amount we would need to operate additional bus service.

I would ask sooner rather than later, like this week or very, very soon as budget requests are going forward. And I'm sure you want Los Angeles to be considered. Ms. Gre, you did mention approximately 30 million that you thought was going to be the impact. What would that 30 million be used for?

So the 30 million, do I need to press this? The 30 million would be needed to prepare our transit system. So there's additional need for staff. There's some infrastructure that we have to build. Our light rail system is out there, so it doesn't have fences around it.

And even right now, when there are large scale events at Levi's Stadium, a certain Taylor Swift, that kind of thing, there are massive amounts of people that are there. One thing that we know is that for those domestic events like Super Bowl 60 and also the NCAA, those are people that understand how to use American transit.

We're going to have for FIFA people from other countries who speak other languages, who may be expecting a different kind of transit than we have here in the United States. So we're trying to plan for that also.

Well, I will say that when I've traveled in Europe and used their transit systems, I hate to admit it, but I found them to be actually more superior than ours. So hopefully we're beginning to evaluate what they're normally used to so that we'll be able to incorporate the best that we can. Mr. Pimentel. Okay, thank you.

You mentioned that there were some safety requirements that your agency had made of this Committee. And if you could just briefly, in about a minute or so, explain what were those outstanding safety requirements you had made of us? I'm new here, been here about seven weeks, so I'm not familiar what those might have been in the past.

Yeah, happy to speak to them. In fact, we have one Bill that encapsulates much of what we're asking for that's currently moving through the Assembly. It's AB394 by Assemblymember Wilson. In short, what the Bill is looking to do is to provide enhanced protections to a broader base of our transit employees.

Today we have higher penalties, higher crimes that are assessed against individuals who commit assault or battery against our operators and our ticketing agents. It does not cover custodial staff, ambassadorial staff who may be interfacing with the public.

And so we want to make sure that we are providing that benefit uniformly across our workforce and clarifying in law that those protections extend to our contractors.

The other thing that the Bill would do is give agencies the ability to leverage today's trespassing laws to enforce prohibition orders against individuals who are committing crimes, their systems, who may be offending, other codes of conduct that might provide for safety concerns for those agencies.

The first Bill that we had introduced last year, unfortunately did not get a hearing. What we're attempting to do this year is actually move that forward and have the broad base buying from the Legislature.

The final thing I'll mention on that front is while not every instance of homelessness on our system is a matter of public safety, I would note that there are at times some interactions that are presented by unhoused individuals with folks that interface with our systems.

And we have been asking for quite a few years now for direct access to funding that the state is providing to counties and continuums of care so that we can address homelessness on our systems.

And so that's one of the things that is part of our overall package of requests this year, and that will likely be in the years ahead.

And just a short follow up, yes or no, do those protections in AB 394, because I have not read it yet, do they also apply to the passengers as well? I certainly agree with staff, contractors, all of that, but does it apply to passengers also?

Not as currently contemplated.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Well, I think one of the reasons why transit systems in other countries, including Europe, are more robust and well developed is there's significant government subsidy of those systems compared to the United States.

And I think that's all the more reason why as we're potentially seeing less funding from the Federal Government, the state is going to have to step in to ensure that we can continue operations and continue our investment in expanding our transit infrastructure.

And in the State of California, I want to just acknowledge and thank the Legislature for passing SB125 and the budget trailer Bill to secure the $1.1 billion. Several years ago.

Some of us were involved in the advocacy on the on the local government side for that funding that helped ensure that there was a continuation of bridge funding as the federal dollars were drying up for transit operators in the Bay Area and in LA and throughout the State of California because the pandemic changed the way that we work.

We see less people taking public transit. We're working to increase ridership, you know, whether it's safety measures, whether it's working to try to get more people back on trains and buses, that fiscal cliff will continue if we don't do something.

And I just want to lift up the fiscal cliff at BART in the Bay Area and Muni will face if we don't do something in the near term. And just to talk about vta, we all remember the Taylor Swift concert.

It's definitely important that we make sure that we make the investments to make sure there's adequate transit connectivity. People understand how to take transit to get to these Major events. But we also think about the systems that feed into vta. So BART has to significantly suspend its service or closed stations or caltrain.

That's going to have a huge impact on VTA as well. So it's a system, it's an interconnected system, and we have to think about how we serve the needs of every agency that feeds into that system. So I have a question for Ms. Moore at La Metro.

You talked about the cumulative deficit of 2.3 billion going into 2030. What will be the impact of that on LA Metro? Are you. Is there a plan in place on how to close that deficit?

I think that would be a discussion between our CEO and our board.

Okay. So I guess I just want to lift up in this discussion the $2 billion budget request that myself and Assemblymer Gonzalez have submitted to help ensure that LA Metro and the Bay Area systems and systems all over California have the resources to address the fiscal cliff.

It's particularly important given these large events that California will be hosting over the next several years, you know, from the super bowl and the World Cup in the Bay Area and in LA, and then in 2028, LA is going to be hosting the Olympics.

And having a robust and interconnected transit system is really critical as part of LA's plan for how to serve these major events, which are going to have huge economic benefit to our state as well. So I just want to lift up the.

Making sure that we can continue to maintain ridership and expand ridership is really critical to our state's plan for how we're going to plan for these mega events that are going to be coming over the next several years. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Senator, Senator Seyarto.

I think one of the challenges when we're talking about the Olympics is what happens after the Olympics, our last 2000, whatever. The Olympics, back in the 80s and whenever it was, we built a lot of infrastructure, right? We built a lot of swimming infrastructure and industry hills. And after the Olympics went, everything was empty.

We had a bunch of infrastructure and nobody used it. And eventually we wound up just tearing it all out. So we have to keep an eye on that part of it, too. What's going to be useful? What can we do now that will be useful after we're done with the Olympics?

And what is an investment only into the Olympics? So I hope people are keeping an eye on that when we're talking about budget needs and what we can do to prepare ourselves. But, you know, I would like us to have useful things to continue on.

You know, we had the, we had our meeting on some of this a few weeks back and you know, looking at our ridership, you know, 1.5 million people, that's how many people use transit, public transit, just about like 5%. It's hard to get that number up. We're having a difficult time getting that number up.

And when you talk about, you know, subsidies, the box fares Recovery is with 26-27%. So we're subsidizing the rest of it. That's a pretty large subsidy. I think the reason that also when you look at, if you, if you go to Europe and talk to some of the people that aren't, you know, aren't necessarily connected to whatever thing you're, if you're on a trip sponsored by somebody, whoever's sponsoring is going to tell you what they need you to hear.

So you'll want to do that here. But if you go talk to people that live there, they'll tell you it doesn't take as long to build because they don't have as many regulations in the way and it doesn't cost as much. That's the problem. You know, everybody gets caught up with our bullet train thing. Nobody.

I mean, a bullet train would be awesome if we could build it here at a cost that is reasonable, but our regulatory environment doesn't allow for that. And that's the same thing that happens with right of way acquisition and all of these things that come into play for California only and to some extent in some other areas.

But California's the, I think we are the champions of making everything cost three times as much as it should. And so those are our challenges. And so when you're talking about $2 billion short term, I'm thinking, well, what's the long term?

Because when we're talking about our bullet train, well, we're starting to see the longer term and it's not even done. And that's what people are pushing back on hard. They'd love to have a bullet train if it was useful to them and they could afford it. Right now we're not seeing that in California.

So until we start fixing some of those parts of it, I don't think people are going to see the value in investing as much money into the public transit system. We need a public transit system, especially in our urban areas.

But as the suburban areas grow to the density that is needed to support, you know, that'd be great. But right now we have a lot of obstacles and a lot of them are self imposed. We're the ones creating the obstacles.

And so those are the kind of things that I'm going to be looking at going forward is what are we doing to make this difficult on ourselves? And if you have some comments on that, I'd love to hear them. Mr. Pimentel.