HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/2004, COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT #1 - SLOGOG & SLORTA MEETINGS FEBRUARY 4, 2004 M- iNGAGENDA
DATE ITEM #L�u
LIAISON REPORT
February 17, 2004
To: Council Coll
From Ken Schwartz
Copies: Ken Hamp' George, Mike McCluskey, John Mandeville
Re: SLOGOG& S ORTA meetings February 4, 2004
COG staff planned for this meeting to last well into the afternoon to provide time for
considerable discussion given the anticipated need to restructure funding priorities due to
the drastic cuts in transportation programs that have occurred in Sacramento. Happily,
COG staff determined that with some inventive juggling between fimd sources along with
an unexpected multi-million dollar influx of Federal fimds,we could keep many of our
projected programs alive, albeit several would be slightly diminished in scope and/or be
delayed for one or more years.
As a result,the anticipated squabbling between Board members did not develop and we
even ended the meeting before noon—which is remarkable in itself
For SLO, our Orcutt Road project was actually advanced one year but our Santa Barbara
widening project will be delayed a year. The LOVR median("enhancement"budget
item)will continue to move along as will the study of the Broad Street Corridor that is
fimded from still another account called PLACE3 S. Pieces of our Bicycle program
appear to remain in place but the more critical aspect of this program remains in the
hands of Union Pacific RR I am told that UPRR western reps have taken our plan to UP
headquarters in Omaha and that we should be hearing from them shortly.
The COG Board concurred with staff recommendations without dissent..
The Board held a public hearing on unmet transit and bicycle needs. There were a
number of people who spoke and several petitions that were received. The most common
complaints continue to be frequency of service and lack ofnight service. Staff will study
the testimony and make recommendations back to the Board at out next meeting.
Prior to the SLORTA meeting, Tim.Bochum of our staff expressed some concerns about
shiffing administration of County transit services to SLORTA. Tim felt that there were
some cost implications that could result in a negative impact on SLO's fair share of
transit funds. Happily, T nn and Dave Lily, SLORTA's exec director,were able to clarify
the fiscal ramifications and we are not going to be penalized. Generally, our staff as well
as the Board believes this shift in administration will result in overall efficiencies in the
transit system