Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission 09/03/2026

Good morning and welcome to the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. Um, can I get a roll call, please? >> Recording in progress. Commission alternate Hurst. >> I'm here. >> Commission alternate Shiffron >> here. >> Commissioner Durpa >> present. >> Commissioner alternate Ritter >> present. >> Commission Commissioner Martinez >> present. >> Commissioner Jensen >> present. >> Commissioner Keelley >> Commissioner Clark >> present. >> Commissioner Montino >> here. Commissioner Downey >> present >> and uh Commissioner I'm sorry Keltrans Exoicio Burch >> present. >> You have a quorum. >> Thank you. With that um do we have any additions or deletions to the regular consent agenda? >> I'm sorry. Commissioner Monttoino, can you repeat that please? >> Yeah. Do we have any uh additions or deletions to the consent and regular agenda? Yes, we have a replacement page for item four, which is the previous meeting minutes. And then we have handouts for item 17. And both of these have been posted to the um website. And just a quick reminder, if you're not speaking, if you can turn off your mic because then the others can't speak. Thank you. >> Thank you for that. And we're now on to our communications. And this time for the public to weigh in on items that are not um at the agenda, but they're um at the commission jurisdiction. >> Welcome. as part of the agenda packet. >> I think >> not on Oh, >> no. There you go. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm Sally Arnold. I was speaking for Friends of the Rail and Trail. I just wanted to point out that in recent months, the decision was made to stop including all of the public comment as part of the agenda packet. One must submit a a PR public records request now to see it. And though that's permissible by law, and it may be what other agencies do, it's really it's a regretful change in policy. Traditionally, the RTC has posted all the public comment as part of the consent agenda packet. And this was a bright spot in RTC public relations because members of the public could see their comments were part of the public record. We could see all the messages that the commissioners were receiving and that might be affecting their decisions and deliberations. Um, and the RTC in this regard was really a model of transparency. Um, but the choice to remove public comment from the packet and make uh the interested citizens wait 10 days to see it gives the public the impression that the RTC doesn't see, read or value their participation and we sincerely hope that you will change that policy. >> Hi Brian Peoples with Trail now. Start out by suggesting that you change back to not just one minute. I think the grand jury kind of communicated that you're not listening to the public and having a one minute limit is really embarrassing. Um, I want to reiterate that the surface transportation board decision on the transition to RTC as common carrier based on freight, not based on passenger rail. So anytime that we believe that we need to continue to look at passenger rail to justify or to help move that decision, it's false. And this board needs to ensure that they communicate that to the public because that's a misin information that again goes back to the grand jury findings that you're not being communicative. So, anytime you say that we have to keep the passenger rail, you're wrong. >> Thank you. >> Good morning. I'm Soladine Sale. This commission has long provided a correspondence log of written public comments received. It was a regular consent agenda item and appeared in the agenda packet. Where has it gone? The RTC discontinued that procedure. What authorization changed the policy? And how's the agency now meeting its separate Brown Act and Public Record Act obligations? Did the commission itself vote to discontinue the log or did staff discontinue it uh administratively? If there wasn't a commission action, why was an established public information procedure administratively abandoned without public discussion? And why does the old language referring to the log remain in today's agenda? The opportunity to read and consider thoughtful comments from one's fellow citizens is an integral part of our democracy. We need to hear more from each other, not less. Thank you. >> Thank you. See no one in public. Do we have anybody online? >> Yes. Yes, we do. Brenda Quirk. [snorts] >> Brenda. >> Hi. The audio isn't working. We can hear you for >> Sue Missy Sue. Oh, >> Bren Brendan, I'm sorry, Brendan. That's I'm I I apologize for that. Brendan, we can't hear you if you're speaking. Okay, we'll come back [clears throat] to you Michael Saint. Is there something with that? Mr. Saint, >> uh, can you hear me? >> Yes, just >> the audio is not working. >> Okay, we can barely hear you. We'll work on our audio in the room. >> Um, I'd like to suggest we recess for about 10 minutes and then we'll come back. Um we'll come back at um 9:21 uh where we deal with um some volume technicalities. >> All right. So we'll reconvene. So thank you for um fixing all those um technical difficulties. So I forgot where we're at. Oh, >> um, >> oral communication >> oral communication from the public. Um, >> okay. It looks like our public is just now rejoining and I currently don't have any um, hands up, but >> so Mr. Chair, I might recommend that the commission maybe move on to the next item and then come back and close oral communications to allow people to join back on if they wish to. >> Before we do that, I I did have a comment on oral communications that I wanted to make. Uh I know we can't act on it or uh really get involved in it. But I am concerned about the issue of the commission finding out what the public has uh sent to the commission. And so I would like to ask uh that uh we asked the director to give a report at the next meeting regarding this issue. Uh I think there is a important value in the commissioners having the ability to hear from the public. Uh whether it's something on the agenda or not. if people are willing to take the time to write to us, we should at least have the ability to um see what they've written. So, I understand that staff is um a little overwhelmed now administratively. I I I get it. Um but I think we should get a report. There may be a simple simpler, more expeditious way of making that information available to the uh commission. So, if it's okay with staff, I'd like to ask that we get a report at our next meeting on the whole uh public uh correspondence situation. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, if if I may, I just want to there were some comments from members of the public today that we just want to make sure the commission has a a clear understanding the public does. Communications that are sent to the commission and to staff related to agenda items are in fact posted on your online agenda. They're identified as handouts. You have them today for item 17 as well too. The the change in the practice has been what used to be on your agenda is identified as a correspondence log. So that might be communications that are unrelated to items on the agenda. So, uh, Commissioner Shiffron, if you're asking us to report on that aspect of it, >> yes, I understand the distinction. Um, >> right, we can do that, but I I did want to clarify for the public that if if communications have been sent in in advance, um, those have been posted on your agenda, and that's been your practice for for years that they get I added to your agenda online so that the public can see them. They're identified as handouts on a on a regular basis. >> Thank you for that explanation and we'll take that into consideration. So, I just want to clarify that that's that we will get a report next at our next agenda >> confirmed. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. And with that, um, we're going to go on to our cons and consent agenda. But before we do that, um, uh, staff has some comments. >> Thank you. Um, uh, commissioners, item number nine on the agenda today is the amendment to the executive director's um, contract. As the commissioners are aware, state law was changed a number of years ago to require that we report out changes to contracts for executive management um and make a verbal report of that in addition to the staff report that's been in your packet all the way through. And so I wanted to report that the um changes in the uh executive director's contract include extending the severance per period that's provided. The original contract did have a severance period that's been extended to 12 months um as a contractual requirement. And secondly, the salary paid to the executive director would be increasing to 303,23 per month. And those are the primary changes. There's an additional non-monetary change as the commission will recall where we're extending the term of the executive director's contract by one year. And so that we just need to report that on the record >> per year and not per month. You said per month. uh per year. >> That'd be pretty nice. >> Yeah. No, thank you. [laughter] >> So, thank thank you for that report. >> I'm sorry. Can um so we're still getting some reports. They can hear us. However, please ensure that you are speaking directly into the mic. And if you are not speaking, if you can turn off your mic, that way we can ensure that the people online can continue to hear us. Thank you. And with that, any um comments or questions on the consent agenda from um Commission? Commissioner R. >> Thank you. Um as an alternate commissioner, I don't have many opportunities to address the commission um nor the staff and uh thought I would take this opportunity to comment on item number nine. Um, I would like to thank Director Christensen for all the work that she has done for the RTC, for the county of Santa Cruz. Um, your job is not easy, Sarah, and we are very appreciative of everything that you've done. Um, you've done a commendable job. So, thank you for your service. >> That's it. Thank you. >> Thank you. With seeing no other commissioners, I'm going to go out to the public. >> Brian Peoples. >> Brian Peoples Trail now. Um um second um Miss Ritter's comment about um our executive [snorts] director doing a phenomenal job. But I do want to say that our bike committee on number item five is broken. There's vacancies in there. I've had people wanting to get on it. They're not getting on it. They're not getting responses. Capolei, you got representatives who are against the trestle. How could you have bike committee members who are not supportive of your Capitol City Council goals? That doesn't make sense. Also, the idea that bike commission people on the bike committee are doing legal actions to try to stop the coastal trail. That's the dysfunctionalness of this organization. when you have a bike organization that puts rail over bike, that's should be a big message. Thank you. >> Thank you. Seeing no one else, um, uh, do we have anybody online? >> We do. Barry Scott, >> Barry, if you're speaking, we can't hear you. >> There you are. >> There you go. >> I wasn't able to earlier and I hope you permit this comment. It's a simple kind of request slash suggestions. I wonder if in future meetings we could have a kind of a regular update on a line um and could include such things as any grants that are being applied for for maintenance and planning uh efforts that staff is taking to uh assure that we remain in the state rail. Uh so I'd love to see something done with that. I appreciate it. Thank you. >> And anything >> that was your last speaker, >> so I'll bring it back for the commission for um appropriate motion and direction. >> Move the consent agenda. >> Second. >> So um it's been moved and second consent item. Um can we just say I everybody um in favor say I. I. >> I. I. Any nos? No. And no obstensions. Um the consent item passes. So we're um I'm going to open up for um uh the oral communication to the public and items not at the agenda for um on Zoom. See if and there's any takers. >> I currently do not see any um hands up. >> Okay, we'll close that up then and move on to our regular agenda. Um commissioners report. Any commissioners have a report? Um, Commissioner um, Downey. >> Well, if you didn't know, Week Without Driving is coming up October 1st through the 8th. Um, I just wanted to uh explain to the public that it is a week that was um, originated in Washington State by a disability rights group to get more attention on infrastructure improvements for people that are disabled. And it is now an international movement. So, we're very excited that this is our second year participating. Um, we just want people to look up, slow down, and make way for folks that are not in their cars. Um, I just wanted to thank the commissioners and the other members of this commission and the city councils who are participating in Week Without Driving. We already have some bus rides planned for folks. Um, there is going to be an RTC go Santa Cruz County week without driving contest. So, if you sign up um and log your rides, you will win fabulous prizes. So, just make sure that you can do that. And I encourage all the commissioners to sign up as well because we would love to see your participation as well. Even if you have to drive all week, you know, that's going to happen sometimes. But just being mindful of people that are not in cars is is really helpful. And um we would just appreciate that. We are going to have an event at the Capitol Mall on October 2nd and uh you can just look for more information. It'll be starting starting to bubble up in social media and around the county. So, thank you. >> Thank you for that report. Any other commission's report? Um where' that director's report come? [clears throat] >> Good morning everybody. Good morning commissioners. Um thank you Commissioner Downing for that. I just um scan the QR code and I'm signing up uh for a week without driving and hope to highlight it more at our next meeting. Um just giving our staff a minute to bring up my director's report. Give me one more second. Okay, that's okay. Uh moving forward, um I have an update on the measure D borrowing process that we had um that the commission approved last month. Uh we recently completed the sale of $66.29 million in Measure D sales tax revenue bonds. As a first-time bond issuer, the commission received an AA minus credit rating from S&P reflecting the AY's strong financial practices and foundation. The bonds were offered through a com compliant, transparent, and competitive electronic bidding process on August 25th with seven financial firms submitting bids. Mezero Financial of Chicago submitted the winning bid offering the lowest true interest cost of 3.93%. Following the competitive bidding process, we issued the certificate awarding the bonds and confirming the final interest rates for the 2026 bond issuance. So, this is really good news. We've heard since that date, the rates have gone up in the fours. So, we got lucky. It was good timing for us. Next, I'm going to announce an exciting um uh news about the Watsonville branch line here in Watsonville. Um we I'm pleased to announce that Chicago Rock Island and Pacific Railroad has arrived in Watsonville. Um, Rock Island has taken over as a new freight, uh, freight rail operator for the Watsonville branch line, uh, marking a new chapter for freight rail service in the region. Rock Island has brought locomotives, switch engines, crews, and track maintenance equipment to the Watsonville branch line as it assumes operations. The company also maintains an inventory of rail and track materials, including rail, ballast, ties, and other components that can be used for track rehabilitation. This equipment and materials capacity is particularly valuable on the Watsonville branch line where infrastructure improvements are needed to support continued and potentially expanded freight rail service. [snorts] Freight rail continues to play an important role in our transportation system and in supporting local businesses and interstate commerce. and we are looking forward to building a strong partnership with Rock Island focused on reliable service, infrastructure improvements, and opportunities to expand freight rail in Watsonville. Next, I have a staffing announcement. Um, Luis Mendes, who's our director of planning, programming, and transportation services, has announced his retirement. Luis has been a vital part of the RTC team for 32 years. He began his career at the RTC in 1994 as a transportation planner and worked his way up serving as the AY's deputy director and then director of planning. Throughout his tenure at the RTC, Luis has had many accomplishments, including being the lead staff for the acquisition of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. Louisa's retirement date will be November 30th. And please, please join me in thanking Luis over his three decades of dedicated service to the RTC and in congratulating him on his upcoming retirement. And that concludes my director's report. >> Any commissioner questions or comments? Um, uh, I'd like to say, you know, um, congratulations to, um, Luis Mendes. you know, he uh he's, you know, was an integral part of the commission for many, many years, even before it was a solo commission. It worked out of the county. So, you know, I just want to congratulate him on his retirement. Um, with that, anybody from the public to wear the director's report? See anybody here? Anybody online? >> We do not have any speakers. >> Thank you. And so we're going to go on to the CLR report. >> Thank you. Um my name is Kyle Burch. I'm a office chief for design and CALR district 5. And I'd like to thank the commissioners for the opportunity to report on behalf of CALR uh this morning. So [gasps] with that, we'll jump right into it. So first off, I wanted to talk about uh sustainable transportation planning grants. Uh Calrans is seeking applications for approximately 35 million in grants across the state. Um, the deadline for applications is October 9th at 5:00 p.m. That's a Friday. And the awards are anticipated to be announced in the spring of 2027. Um, now I'll move on to ongoing construction updates. As you've all probably seen all the construction going on in the in the area, in the county. So, um, I'll start with State Route 9. Um, so on State Route 9, um, travelers will encounter daytime and overnight one-way, uh, reversing traffic traffic control at multiple locations. And I'll highlight a few of the projects, um, associated with some of those closures. So, one one of the projects that's going on is the San Lorenzo River and Kings Creek Bridge replacement project [snorts] that uh, is occurring between post mile 13.58 and 13.69. 69 for San Lorenzo and for King's Creek that's between post mile 15.41 and 15.55. Um just to note on that project, the first phase is to uh basically close down the southbound lanes and uh rec reconstruct uh or construct a new bridge um on that portion and then they'll switch over to the northbound. Uh moving on to Felton. Um we have a uh safety project going on in Felton and um recently um temporary barrier was installed and um so and that's for worker safety so crews can operate safely behind that to construct the improvement sidewalk and bicycle improvements in that area. Um just some a couple items to note on that project. Um, CALR recently um adjusted the signal timing at Graham Hill and uh Felton Empire Road and we've been monitoring that and it seems to have helped uh with traffic flow from what we've heard. Um just you know we encourage folks to to be patient with us. You know it's um we know it's impactful being there and in construction is is challenging on Route 9. And um so we just encourage patients and then um you know there's also you know for beds and cyclists you know if they're if they're able to use adjacent parallel routes that would be great during construction as well. Uh [snorts] so moving on to another Highway 9 project. Uh we have an upper drainage and erosion control project. Uh that's occurring between Brookdale and the upper junction of Highway 236. Uh again temporary signals are in place. um fortunately there, um those [clears throat] are estimated to operate until the end of September. So, um we're getting closer on that one. And then, uh yeah, just to kind of, you know, summarize, you know, like I said, we know there's a lot going on on Route 9. Um so, we just um ask for the community's patience and um while we deliver these worthwhile improvements. Uh so, moving on, I'll move on to uh State Route One. Uh we're actively working on the um state park to bay bus on shoulder project. Um as folks have probably noticed we have the Bay Avenue southbound offramp closed. Um and [clears throat] and so we've we've um you know listened to the community and engaged and we've added some um additional changeable message signs that hopefully alert the public of that closure. And then also we're planning on adding additional message signs in advance of the 43rd annual Capola Art and Wine Festival that will alert uh the public um of the ramp closure and um that there's going to be a shuttle um at the at the mall [clears throat] um for that festival. So yeah, and that that that sign will also say to use 41st instead of uh Bay. And then lastly, I'll talk talk about the project on uh route 129. Um we have a pavement project going on on 129. Um so work will be taking place from Union Street to Southus Creek Bridge Sunday through Friday 8:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Um we recognize that, you know, there may be some noise at night because of this. Um, so again, just ask for the community's patience and uh, you know, maybe probably allow a little extra time uh, for travel um, based on that work going on. And then um, in conclusion, I just like to add that, you know, I tried to provide some of the highlights of work going on um, today, but encourage folks to check out our social media platforms. Um, we have current updates on traffic closures and um, construction zones there. And uh thanks again for the opportunity to report today. >> Thank you for that detailed report. Um any commissioners questions, comments? None. Um any public like to weigh on uh on the couch report? Seeing none here, anybody online? >> We do not have any speakers. >> All right. Well, thank you. Thank you for that report. So we're we're now going to um um 17, which is the Santa Cruz County Civil Grants. for report response staff report. [clears throat] >> Commissioner, I'll be rec uh recusing myself from this item. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. D. Okay. [cough and clears throat] Excuse me. Good morning again. Um I am going to be giving this presentation today on behalf of staff and the um ad hoc committee of commissioners. Um Sarah Christensen, executive director. Uh this item is on the Santa Cruz branch rail line uh responses to the grand jury report. Uh next slide, please. So the process for the grand jury um responses is uh we are required to respond uh within 90 days and the report was issued in late June. So our due date for responses is September 28th. The responses must address every finding and recommendation must be formally approved by this commission. Um, and as you're aware, last meeting the chair of the commission uh appointed an ad hoc committee of commissioners to prepare and review responses with staff. And we have done that and the uh responses are included in the packet today and I'll go over them um in this presentation. Next slide. So the draft responses included in the staff report address all 17 findings and eight recommendations. They provide context regarding our history, statutory role, funding constraints, and recent organizational changes. Um there's uh areas of agreement. There's some partial disagreement and then there's a few that we disagreed on. Um and uh we identify the status of each recommendation and appropriate response. So next slide please. So the responses that we agreed or partially agreed on were regarding the aging condition of the rail corridor, the AY's history as a planning agency and the funding constraints that we face um in the past and present. We partially agreed uh disagreed on some of the um corridor constraints and funding uh obligations under Prop 116 and as well as the board structure. And then we disagreed on um some of the recommendations that highlighted um or or stated that there was a lack of unifying strategic vision. um that the agency has had, you know, such political paralysis and inadequate communication. Uh that's, you know, responsible for creating um some of those advocacy narratives out there. Next slide, please. So um the good news is that we've actually as an agency gone through significant changes over the past few years and five out of the eight recommendations were already implemented through existing processes or recent changes um to our organization. These have to do with capital projects. Um alternative delivery evaluation that was something we already did. um the zero mission passenger rail and trail peer review which we're obviously following. Um we went through a pretty extensive organizational restructuring in 2024 to adapt to some of the new needs of the agency and the community. Um we already prepare a regional transportation plan which really serves as our northstar for decision- making that sets goals and priorities for the region for for um making decisions. Um and then we also recently awarded the coastal rail trail segments 13 through 20 and the approach for that project incorporates many of the uh recommendations. So next slide please. Again just want to highlight that our agency has evolved in recent years. Uh we uh created a new capital projects department and with that expanded our engineering and project delivery expertise. we um added a real property team to manage and maintain the rail line um that we own. Um and so with those changes, we have a stronger technical and project management capacity. Uh and we also have a internal process that um for advancement of capital projects. And so uh next slide want to conclude with the staff recommendation. So staff and the ad hoc committee um recommends that the commission approve the responses to the 2025 2026 Santa Cruz County civil grand jury report so that they may be formally submitted to the court and the grand jury prior to the September 28th 2026 deadline. And that concludes my staff report. >> Bring it back to the commission for um questions or comments. Commissioner Martinez. >> Thank you. Um, I appreciate the report and um, also really appreciate the willingness of the ad hoc members to participate this. I was just wondering if I could hear from any of those members who are a part of reviewing and um, how did did you meet and just kind of let us know how that process went? >> Commissioner Kelly is eager to [laughter] thank you Mr. Chairman, members. Uh, Commissioner Martinez, uh, we had, uh, two in-person meetings. Uh, and in between the two meetings, there were, uh, drafts of what possible responses might provide. Then in the second meeting, we completed our responses. I would say generally speaking, the tenor of the conversation uh was to take a serious look at at the critique, if you will, each one of them individually and really spend time with them um and examine uh the premise of each of the suggestions. And so by taking our time and doing it in what I thought was a thoughtful way, uh we were able to say, "Yeah, but we see what they're saying here." And and some of these are pretty thoughtful and quite helpful. Um some we disagreed with the premise and if you want me to go into any of those, I'd be glad to do it. But on some we disagreed with the premise. Um and therefore we disagreed with the recommendation because we disagreed with the premise. Um the and I think the response reflects that it wasn't a uh either on one end we'll just accept everything nor is it we'll reject everything. It really was a case by case and the folks who were who were there uh commissioners who were there were supported by our staff in terms of laying it out. Um and I at least my judgment having been through an awful lot of these whether it's at the county or here or wherever or the city or whatever over the years I think I might have mentioned this before. Uh the civil grand jury is not a criminal grand jury. It's a civil grand jury. And I think that they they are volunteers who are quite well motivated and sincere about the work that they do. U the other side of that coin and my judgment is that they have one year to go through a range of issues that they're looking at and issuing a range of reports. uh and I my personal view over the years is that both their reports and their recommendations are uneven uh and that's fine because they provide a very important public service. I think it's good whether whether I think their question is rooted well or not rooted well. The mere idea that we have to wrestle with them I think is a good idea. So I hope that's an answer to your question if that's helpful. Coy. >> Yeah, thank you for that. I um again just really uh appreciate the time commitment that that took from the ad hoc committee members. Um when I read both the report and the response, I read it from the lens of you know assuming that that process had gone through with each of you and you kind of wrestled with it and so I appreciate it and I did appreciate the responses that came from the committee. So thank you very much. >> Thank you, Commissioner Clark. Yeah, just a couple of comments, no questions really. Um, well, first of all, I want to thank the grand jury for going through this process and taking a look at it and really kind of forcing us to look and see uh the operation of what we're doing here. And then I also want to thank staff who had to sit through interviews, provide information and had to really with with a a full heart of looking at the organization and looking at where we can do better or where certain things can improve with what we're doing, especially in with respect to the Zepert and the uh branch rail line. [snorts] And then finally, I want to thank the ad hoc committee. Um I you know this was no small lift and through your responses it was it was evident that you had indeed wrestled with each question and really sought to what what is the premise? What are we looking at and how do we best answer this through the lens of what we're doing as an organization? And so I think the process was good. I think your responses to those were highly appropriate and on point with what we're doing and what we're trying to achieve as an organization. So, I just wanted to uh [snorts] give those shout outs, I guess, if you will, to uh the work that was done collaboratively here. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Um with that, um Commissioner Hurst. >> Well, thank you very much, chair. And I I also want to thank the grand jury for their work. they they pose some questions that uh that need some reflection. You know, the condition of the line uh and how did it get to that condition, the you know, the goals that we have, how are we going to achieve those goals? And so there was certainly a a good amount of reflection by staff and I want to commend the uh the the task force the the subcommittee that uh responded and and it's and it's certainly not easy but it's a chance to grow and to reflect and you know to improve our services as well as how we're doing outreach and communicating with the public. And so it's good to see this. What do we do with it now? We need to reflect upon it more about the condition of the line and uh what are we going to do with it and you know the public impressions of what we have done and certainly the proof that what we will do in the future. And so it's a process to go through and hopefully we've satisfied that uh those requirements. >> Thank you. >> So thank you. And with that, see I'm going to go out to the public. The public like to wear this item of the agenda. >> Hi Brian Peoples with Trail. Now we submitted a formal um response. We don't think you've gone far enough. Um the political paralysis still exists. It still exists. That's what's causing our problems. And the simplest example is when you have bike committee members taking legal action [snorts] to stop the trail for you have that organization on the bike committee. That's the simplest example. The other simple example is you got a report on a $5 billion train that move 2,000 people a day. And the idea that this organization feels that that's a reasonable transportation option that shows political paralysis. It still exists. Do you really think you're going to have a $5 billion train and that's hurting our community? You communicating that is hurting our community. It's hurting your mission which is improving transportation. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm solid sale. Recommendation R seven calls for strengthening public communications which in my opinion flow in multiple directions. I've already expressed my concerns regarding the mysterious disappearance of the communication log from the commission's agenda. I further suggest the commission restore the long-standing practice of allowing two minutes for public oral comments as a norm. While it is the chair's prerogative to limit public comment time, it is not the way to strengthen public communication, nor is it a good look. Like safety, participating d democracy usually does take more time and seems less efficient. But it is the price we pay for our system of government for which so many have fought and died. Thank you. >> Thank you. [cough] [clears throat] >> Hi, Sally Arnold again uh speaking for Friends of the Rail and Trail. Um so, uh in the finding number one, it references the poor condition of the branch line and the RTC's response is deferred maintenance that occurred prior to the RTC's acquisition of the line. And in fact, the freight line was operational on freight was operational on the branch line until 2017, 5 years after the RTC's purchase of the line. And most of the deterioration has occurred after 14 years of RTC ownership and neglect. And so I think uh that needs to be noted that um and in finding 12, the RTC does not have direct experience building rail infrastructure. And then they suggest that the commission follow the Zepert peer review. The peer review states several times that maintenance of the tracks is a key need, that the trail should be built in a way that does not preclude rail development, and that the RTC should hire railroad ex operations experts. And as far as we know, none of these things has happened. Um, and we urge commissioners to reread that peer review and direct staff to follow those recommendations. Thank you. >> Thank you. With that, seeing no one else, anybody online? Yes, Michael Saint. >> Uh, yes. Thank you everyone. Uh, Michael Saint here, Aptas and Santa Cruz PRT. Um, the B grand jury missed an opportunity to help shift our transportation focus. Uh, the thing that would help us the most is a paradigm shift concerning our transportation goals. Keep it simple and affordable. Two major goals. Get the trail done. Also, focus on a mass transportation system that has the possibility of relieving congestion and gets us to vision zero. The only way to attain congestion relief and vision zero is to have a dedicated guideway that does not share our roads and capable of carrying thousands and thousands of passengers per day. A single track train cannot do this, especially for $5 billion. We need commissioners with a future vision and willing to say maybe we need a mass transportation system that can be 100% safe and actually release congestion. PRT needs to be studied. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else? >> That was your last speaker. >> I'll bring back for the commission for >> I just had somebody raise their hand. I don't know if you want ahead, >> Barry Scott. >> Uh, good morning again. I just wanted to mention along the lines of things that can be done have been done on the rail line. Um, after we, I guess 3 years after we purchased the line in February of 2015, before there was a measure D, the county replaced entirely the Lava Beach bridge or trestle as people call with a brand new freight compliant bridge. Uh, that was at a time that we didn't have a measure D. It was completely paid for with a grant fund. uh and it I think indicates that uh it can be done and and you know might have been done more maintenance might have been done over all these years and I I think we've been uh bad. Thank you. >> We have no other speakers. >> Thank you. So I'll bring it back to the commission for direction or action. >> I'll move the staff and committee subcommittee recommendation. Second. >> So, it's been moved and second to um approve um the response to the 2025 2026 Santa Cruz County um civil grand jury report. Um all those in favor? >> I >> Any nos? No. Any abstensions? Um yes, Miss Downing. So, >> thank you. >> With that, um it's an adjournment. So, we'll uh we'll see our next um scheduled meeting is October 1st at 9:00 a.m. at the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 71 El Street. Thank you. Yeah, we made it.