Chapt 10.42 Trans Demand Mgmt iTY A IPI31 LL
70 NORTH FIRST STREET
CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 95008
(408) 866-2100
FAX # (408) 379-2572
Department: Planning
Mr. James J. Lantry
James J. Lantry Consulting
4103 Hilldale Road
San Diego, California 92116
September 14, 1992
Subject: TDM Ordinance
Dear Mr. Lantry;
Attached is a copy of Campbell's TDM Ordinance and a resolution
authorizing the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency (CMA)
to administer the TDM Ordinance. Campbell's TDM Ordinance follows the
model ordinance format coordinated by the Santa Clara County CMA.
The Santa Clara County CMA is located as follows:
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
101 Metro Drive, Suite 248
San Jose, California 95110
Mike Evanhoe, Executive Director
Colleen Mc Carthy, Director of Commuter Network
telephone (408) 453-4030
fax (408) 453-4145
The Santa Clara County CMA can assist you with general questions regarding
development of the ordinance and its administration. Please feel free to
contact me if you have specific questions regarding Campbell's ordinance.
Director of Planning
CC:
Mark Ochenduszko, City Manager
Mike Evanhoe, CMA Executive Director
ORDINANCE NO. ~85o
BEING A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL ADOPTING A TEXT
AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL,
CALIFORNIA ADDING CHAPTER 10.42 -- TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT. CITY INITIATED APPLICATION FILE NO. TA 92-01
After due consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council of the City of
Campbell, California does find as follows:
The City Council held a public hearing for consideration of Application TA
92-01 on March 3, 1992.
2. The public hearing was given proper notice as required by law.
Proposition 111 requires that all cities in urbanized counties adopt a
transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance.
The Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency prepared a model
TDM ordinance for use by cities within Santa Clara County.
o
The TDM Ordinance seeks to reduce vehicular trips from homes to places
of employment.
5. An Initial Study has been prepared on the Campbell TDM Ordinance.
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the City Council concludes that:
A Negative Declaration is appropriate as no significant environmental
impacts have been identified to be associated with the project.
o
The TDM Ordinance is consistent with the requirements of Proposition
111.
The TDM Ordinance is consistent with the model ordinance prepared by
the Congestion Management Agency.
4. The Ordinance will help to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution.
5. The Ordinance will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals,
comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the City, or
be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the City or
the general welfare of the City.
FURTHER, the City Council of the City of Campbell does ordain as follows:
SECTION ONE: That Chapter 21.42 be added to the Campbell Municipal
Code as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto.
City Coundl Ordinance No.
Pa~;e -2-
-- TA 92-01
SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days following
its passage and adoption and shall be published one within 15 days upon passage
and adoption in the San Jose Mercury News, as newspaper of general circulation in
the City of Campbell, County of Santa Clara.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Campbell this 3rd day of t~arc,h1992, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Councilmembers:
Kotowski,
None
None
None
Conant, Ashworth, Watson, Burr
APPROVED: /s/ Donald R. Burr
Donald Burr, Mayor
ATTEST:
Barbara Kee, City Clerk
ta92-01.ordl(mc13)
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
ON FILE IN THIS OFFICE.
ATTEST: BARBARA KEE, CITY Ct_EPK,
CIT['~ OF CAMPBELL, CALIFOF~NIA.
Sections:
CHAPTER 10,42
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
10.42.10
10.42.20
10.42.30
10.42.40
10.42.50
10.42.60
10.42.70
10.42.80
10.42.90
10.42.100
Purpose
Definitions
Applicability
Administration
Average Vehicle Ridership Goals
Implementation Schedule
Designation of Manger and Commute Coordinator
Baseline TDM Report
Annual TDM Report
Enforcement
10.42.10: Purpose
The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the development of transportation
demand management (TDM) programs at employer work sites with one
hundred or more employees during the morning peak traffic period to reduce
traffic impacts and improve air quality within the City. To accomplish that
purpose, this Chapter establishes certain reporting requirements to enable the
City to evaluate the effectiveness of existing TDM programs and to chart City-
wide progress toward achieving the average vehicle ridership goals
established in Section 10.42.50. It is also the purpose of this Chapter to require
certain employers to designate specified individuals to ensure the proper
coordination and implementation of TDM programs.
10.42.20: Definitions
For the purpose of this Chapter, the following terms are defined and shall be
construed as set forth in this Section:
go
"Average vehicle ridership" (AVR) shall mean the total number of
employees assigned to a work site between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday divided by the number of vehicles they drive
from home to work. Credit may be given for employee work trips
eliminated during a biweekly period due to the use of compressed work
weeks or telecommuting.
Bo
"Carpool" means a motor vehicle occupied by two or more employees
traveling together.
C. "Commute" means a home-to-work or work-to-home trip.
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
Pase -2-
February 13, 1992
Do
Ee
Go
L
"Commute alternatives" means any form of commute transportation
except by single-occupancy vehicle.
"Commute coordinator" means an employee or contractor of an
employer, whose responsibility is the day-to-day management of any
TDM Program.
"Compressed work week" means a work schedule for an employee
which eliminates at least one round-trip commute biweekly. For
example, forty hours of work in four ten-hour days or a work plan that
allows one day off every other week, known as the nine-eighty plan.
"Designee(s)" means any private entity or governmental agency
designated by the City to administer all or any of the provisions of this
Chapter except those related to the bringing of enforcement actions
under this Chapter.
"Employee" means one who is assigned to the designated work site in
the a.m. peak period. An employee is one who works in the service of an
employer for either wages or salary, as a contract employee under the
direction of the work site employer or through a temporary service
agency during a period of more than ninety continuous days.
"Employer" means any public or private employer which has a work site
in the City. For purposes of this ordinance, the maximum number of
employees on the day shift at the designated work site shall determine
the size of the employer.
"Flexible Work Hours" means a variation of an employee's work hours
to provide an incentive for the employer to use commute alternatives.
"Peak period" means the hours from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding federal holidays. Peak period trips shall mean
employees' commute trips to a work site where the employees' work day
begins.
"Person" means an individual, trust, firm, joint stock company,
corporation, partnership, association or other business entity, City,
county, district, the state, any department or agency thereof, or the
United States, to the extent authorized by law.
M. ""in~ gie-occupancy' vehicle" means a motor vehicle occupied-by one
employee for commute purposes.
·
O. "Telecommuting" means a system of either working at home or at an
off-site work station with computer facilities that link to the work site.
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
. Page -3-
February 13, 1992
P
go
To
"Transportation Demand Management" ("TDM") means the provision
of information, assistance, incentives or other measures designed to
increase Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) and which is intended to
reduce the number of motorized vehicles driven to the work site.
"Transportation Demand Management Program" ("TDM Program")
means a plan implemented by an employer designed to carry out TDM.
TDM Programs may include any or all of the following TDM services
and incentives:
1. Rideshare matching
2. Preferential parking for ridesharing vehicles
3. Carpool/vanpool subsidies or rewards
4. Transit ticket sales
5. Transit ticket subsidies
6. Shuttle to transit line
7. Flexible work hours for people who do not drive alone
8. Compressed work weeks
9. Work-at-home programs
10. Telecommuting
11. Establishing fees for employee parking
12. Membership in a Transportation Management Association that
provides TDM services and incentives
13. Contribution to a Transportation Systems Management program
administered by a Member Agency
14. Cycling and walking subsidies or rewards
15. Site design amenities that would encourage transit use, ridesharing,
cycling and walking
16. Other programs approved by the City's designee to reduce the
number of employees who drive alone to the work place
"Transportation Management Association" ("TMA") means an
organization through which developers, employers and/or local
governments cooperate in designing, implementing, and evaluating a
TDM Program.
"Transportation Systems Management" means low-cost improvements
to the transportation system (roads and transit) which increase the
operational efficiency and/or capacity of the system.
"Vanpool" means a van occupied by seven to fifteen employoes who
commute together to work.
"Vehicle" means a vehicle as defined in the California Vehicle Code, but
for the calculation of AVR does not include public or private transit
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
Page -4-
February 13, 1992
buses or nonmotorized bicycles.
Mo
"Work site" means any place of employment, base of operation or
predominant location of the employer. All buildings or facilities
operated or occupied by the employer within the City and within a
radius of 1.5 miles of a single centrally located building or facility
operated or occupied by the same employer shall be deemed a single
work site. For the purposes of this Chapter, the actual boundary area of a
work site will be identified in submittals made pursuant to this Chapter
and approved by the City or its designee.
10.42.30 Applicability
The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to all work sites within the City
with one hundred or more employees during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00
a.m.
10.42.40 Administration
The provisions of this ordinance shall be administered by the City or by any
designee authorized by the City Council to administer the provisions of this
Chapter on behalf of the City. No designee shall be authorized to bring any
legal action on behalf of the City for enforcement of any provision of this
Chapter.
10.42.50 Average Vehicle Ridership Goals
The following AVR goals are established in order to achieve and
measure progress toward a net increase in the use of commute
alternatives and a reduction in vehicle trips to the work site during the
peak period:
1. By July 1, 1993, the AVR goal shall be 1.18.
2. By July 1, 1995, the AVR goal shall be 1.26.
3. By July 1, 1997, the AVR goal shall be 1.33.
Non-attainment of the AVR goals shall not constitute a violation of this
Chapter and shall not subject employers to the enforcement provision
contained in Section 10.42.100.
10.42.60
Implementation Schedule
A. It is the intent of this Chapter to establish an implementation date for
every employer subject to the provisions of this Chapter. For purposes
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
Page -5-
February 13, 1992
of establishing an implementation date, the employers shall be divided
into the following four categories, based upon the employers' work sites
within the City:
Category 1 consists of all work sites operated or occupied by the City
and all other work sites having 1,000 or more employees;
2. Category 2 consists of all work sites having 500 to 999 employees;
3. Category 3 consists of all work sites having 250 to 499 employees;
4. Category 4 consists of all work sites having 100 to 249 employees.
Be
All actions required by this Chapter to be taken by an employer shall be
taken within the period of time specified by this Chapter measured from
the implementation date established in this Section for the work site
category within which the particular work site falls. It is the intent of
this Chapter that the implementation dates for Categories 2, 3, and 4
shall be set at approximately six-month consecutive intervals following
the implementation date for Category 1; however, the exact
implementation date for each category shall be established by resolution
of the City Council and shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation within the City pursuant to Section 6061 of the California
Government Code.
10.42.70 Designation of Manager and Commute Coordinator
Within forty-five days after the scheduled implementation date, every
employer within any of the categories in Section 10.42.60 shall appoint a
designated manager for each work site. An employer having more than
one work site within the City may appoint one manager for all work
sites or individual managers for one or more of the work sites. The
manager shall have the obligation to and shall carry out the following
duties, responsibilities and functions:
Manage the operation of any TDM Program implemented at the
work site;
Compile, review, approve and submit the baseline and annual
TDM reports for the work site(s) to the City or its designee;
File with the City or its designee such other material or inforanation
as is required by this Chapter;
4. Serve as management liaison with the City or its designee
concerning TDM.
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
Palge -6-
February 13, 1992
Bo
Within forty-five days after the implementation date, the employer shall
appoint a commute coordinator for each work site within the City. The
commute coordinator shall have the day to day responsibility for
administering any TDM Programs implemented by the employer. If the
commute coordinator has not had a total of twelve months experience as
a TDM program coordinator the coordinator shall complete, within sixty
days of appointment, a commute coordinator training course. The
course may be conducted by any recognized TDM consultant or
association or public entity or employer in-house training program with
a TDM training program which is approved by the City or its designee. ^
designated manager may also directly administer the employer's TDM
Programs without a separate commute coordinator being required.
However, any such manager shall meet the qualifications set forth in
this subsection.
Within thirty days after making the appointments required by this
Section, the employer shall notify the City or its designee in writing of
the appointments. Such notification may be mailed first class, postage
prepaid, to the officer and address designated by the City or its designee.
The employer shall assume responsibility for determining that such
notification has been received by the City or its designee. The notice
shall include the following information regarding each appointee:
1. Name
2. Title
3. Business hours
4. Business telephone number
5. Business mailing address
The employer shall provide similar written notice to the City or its
designee within thirty days of any change in any such appointment.
Do
In the event any employer or work site becomes subject to this Chapter
after its effective date, the employer shall comply with the terms of this
Section within the times specified measured from the date on which the
employer or work site became subject to this Chapter.
10.42.80
Baseline TDM Report
go
Within 185 days of the implementation date for any work site, every
employer within any of the categories set forth in Section 10.42.6.0 shall
file with the City or its designee a baseline TDM report for all work site
within the City. The baseline report sl~all be in such format as may be
established by the City or its designee. An employer having multiple
work sites within the City may, with the consent of the City or its
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
,Page -7-
February 13, 1992
Be
designee, establish a schedule for submittal of baseline TDM reports for
its various work sites which vary from that set forth in this Section.
The baseline TDM report for each work site within the City shall be
submitted not later than the scheduled filing date for any work site
pursuant to this Section.
The information to be provided in the baseline TDM reports for each
work site shall include the following:
1. Number of employees by work hours and work site of the day shift;
2. A residence zip code breakdown of employees by work site;
The average vehicle ridership (AVR) as determined by one or more
of the following means:
ao
bo
co
An employee survey developed by the City or its designee. The
distribution of such survey shall be accompanied by
information affording each employee the option, at the request
of the employee, to receive a carpool or vanpool match-list
and/or transit information.
An employee survey developed by the employer and approved
by the City or its designee. The distribution of the survey shall
include information affording each employee the option, at the
request of the employee, to receive a carpool or vanpool
match-list and/or transit information.
A statistically valid random sample survey utilizing a
methodology approved by the City or its designee.
Parking lot counts utilizing a methodology approved by the
City or its designee.
Gate counts using a methodology approved by the City or its
designee.
A description of all TDM services and incentives offered to
employees.
5. A listing of all parking charges imposed on employees.
A description of the factors that might influence use of commute
alternatives.
Co
Such other information as may be required by the City,. or its
designee.
Regardless of the reporting schedule used for parking lot counts, the
measurement of the AVR for the 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. peak period shall
Chapter 10.42 -- Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
Page -8-
February 13, 1992
be performed between 9:00 a.m. and 10:45 a.m. on Tuesday, Wednesday,
and Thursday of the same week. Regardless of the reporting schedule
used for gate counts, the measurement of the AVR shall be performed
from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of the
same week.
Measurements shall not be taken in a week falling within those times of
the year established by the City or its designee which would be expected
to result in a distortion of the results based on holiday, annual rideshare
promotion or other similar occurrences.
Any work site or employer which becomes subject to this Chapter after
its effective date shall file a baseline report for any work sites subject to
this Chapter within 185 days of becoming subject to this Chapter or
having an additional work site become subject to this Chapter.
10.42.90: Annual TDM Reports
Every employer required to file a baseline TDM report shall submit an annual
TDM report to the City or its designee every twelve months (12) thereafter.
The information submitted shall be current to within 9 months of the annual
report due date. The annual reports shall contain the same type of
information as is required in the baseline report.
10.42.100: Enforcement.
A. Criminal Penalties:
It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to violate any
provision, or fail to comply with any requirement of this Chapter
with the exception of Section 10.42.50. Except as otherwise provided
in Section 10.42.100.A.2, any entity violating any provision, or
failing to comply with any mandatory requirement of this Chapter
is guilty of an infraction, and upon conviction shall be punished by
a fine of not more than on hundred dollars.
Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, any person, firm, or
corporation committing any act made unlawful pursuant to Section
10.42.100.A.1 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction
shall be punished by a fine of nor more than one thousand dollars
and/or imprisonment of not more than six months, if any of the
following circumstances exists:
ao
The violation was committed willfully or with knowledge of
its illegality;
The violator does not cease, or otherwise abate the violation
Chapter 10.42 - Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
. Page -9-
February 13, 1992
after receiving notice of such violation;
The violator has previously been convicted of violating the
same provision of this Chapter within two years of the
currently charged violation; or
The provision violated specifies that such violation shall be a
misdemeanor.
o
Each person, firm, or corporation violating any provision, or failing
to comply with the mandatory requirements of this Chapter shall be
deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during
any portion of which any violation of any provision of this title is
committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm, or
corporation, and shall be punishable as provided in this Chapter
B. Civil Penalties:
Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter with the
exception of Section 10.42.50 shall be liable for a civil penalty not to
exceed five hundred dollars per day for each violation. The civil penalty
shall be assessed and recovered in a civil action brought in the name of
the people by the City Attorney. In any civil action brought to seek such
civil penalty, and/or to obtain injunctive relief for violation of any
provision of this Chapter in which action the City prevails, the court
shall determine and impose reasonable expenses, including attorneys'
fees, incurred by the City in the investigation and prosecution of the
action.
C. Remedies Not Exclusive:
Remedies under this Chapter are in addition to and do not supersede or
limit any and all other remedies, civil or criminal.
ta92-01.txt(mc13)
RESOLUTION NO. 8251
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
DESIGNATING THE COMMUTER NETWORK OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNFI~
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY AS THE AGENCY AUTHORIZED TO
ADMINISTER THE PROVISIONS OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
ORDINANCE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency (CMA)
operates the Commuter Network on behalf of its Member Agencies to provide a
consistent countywide Transportation Demand Management Program; and
WHEREAS, said Commuter Network is jointly financed by the Member Agencies
and has staff and facilities in place to administer a Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Campbell proposes to adopt an ordinance addressing the
need for such a TDM Program and defining the procedures, and requirements pertinent
thereto; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Campbell deems the Commuter
Network to be an appropriate and cost-effective Agency for the administration of the
provisions of the proposed ordinance.
WHEREAS, the Congestion Management Agency adopts an annual budget, funding
formula and work program for the Commuter Network TDM Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Campbell agrees to pay an annual assessment for the
operation of the Commuter Network TDM Program based on an annual funding formula
for the Commuter Network adopted by the Congestion Mangement Agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Campbell does hereby designate the Commuter Network as the Agency authorized to
administer the provisions of the TDM Ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Campbell, duly held on the 3rd day of March, 1992, by the following roll call vote:
AYES
Councilmembers: Kotowski, Conant, Ashworth, Watson, Burr
NOES:
Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
· City Council Resolution No.
Page -2-
March 3, 1992
APPROVED: /s/ Donald R. Burr
Donald Burr, Mayor
ATTEST:
ta92-Ol.rso(mc13)
/s/ Barbara Kee
Barbara Kee, City Clerk
THE ~E~OINS' IN~T~U~ENT
AND cORRECT COPY OF
ON FILE IN ~lS OvFtCE.
ATTEST: C/'~'~K'~ ~:i ~, C'.~' CLLR~
~LUTION NO. 8 2 5 2
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL,
CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY CONGESTION
MANAGEMENT AGENCY AS RECIPIENT OF, AND OVERALL PROGRAM
MANAGER FOR, AB 434 (SHER-1991) VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE REVENUES
WHEREAS, the State of Califomia enacted the California Clean Air Act of
1988, requiring air districts to adopt, and cities and counties to implement, certain
transportation control measures in order to improve air quality; and,
WHEREAS, the State of California enacted Congestion Management
Legislation in 1989 and 1990, requiring cities and counties to implement
Congestion Management Programs (CMP) to reduce traffic congestion and
improve air quality; and,
WHEREAS, the county and the cities of Santa Clara County have in
response to the aforementioned State Legislation created the Santa Clara County
Congestion Management Agency; and,
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
operates the Commuter Network Transportation Demand Management Program
for the benefit of its member agencies; and,
WHEREAS, the State of California enacted AB 434 (Shed in 1991, to
provide vehicle registration fee revenues to fund certain transportation control
measures through the subvention of forty percent of the County' s proportionate
share of the revenue to a designated county-wide overall program manager; and,
WHEREAS, in order to qualify for the subvention of forty percent of the
County' s proportionate share of the revenue, the majority of the population must
designate, by resolution, a county-wide overall program manager to implement
local programs and projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Campbell designates the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency, as
the County-wide Overall Program Manager for projects and programs, and for the
recipient of the County's forW percent proportionate share of the fee-paid
vehicle registration fee revenues, according to the following terms and conditions:
The Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency shall:
Develop, implement and administer transportation control projects and
programs as set forth in state statutes. -.
The projects and programs so developed, implemented and administered
shall be incorporated into the annual budgets and work programs of the
City Council Resolution No
Page -2-
March 3, 1992
Congestion Management Agency, and into the Commuter Network
Transportation Demand Management Program.
The Congestion Management Agency will encumber the funds within two
years of receiving the funds.
The Congestion Management Agency will, at least once every two years,
undertake an audit of each project or program funded, according to the
conditions set forth in state statutes.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Campbell this 3rd day of March, 1992, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers: Kotowski, Conant, Ashworth, Watson, Burr
NOES:
Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
APPROVED: /s/ Donald R. Burr
Donald Burr, Mayor
ATTEST:
/s/ Barbara Kee
Barbara Kee, City Clerk
ta92-01.rso2(mc13)
ANL coFREC C' ~ t
CN FILE ' '~ - % ~' ,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
~'NVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ~ BE USED BY ~'HE GlOrY OF CAMPBELL IN WLAKING ilNITIAL 3TUDY
L
!I.
ENV! RONMENTAL IMPACTS
(EXPLANATIONS OF' AL1. YES AND MAYBE ANSRERS ARE REQUIRED ON ATTACHED SHEET)
YES MAYBE NO
1. EARTH. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in
geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
d. The destruction, covering or modification of
any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or,~ff the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean
or any bay, inlet or lake?
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
1 of 6 pages
2. AIR. Will proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or tempera-
ture, or any change in climate, either locally
or regionally?
3. WATER. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or 'flow of flood ¥
wa ters ?
d. ~Change in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any altera-
tion of surface water quality, including but not
limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
f. Alteration to the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
exca va tions ?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding or tidal waves?
4. 'PLANT 'LIFE. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species or number
of any species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic
plants) ?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare
or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment
of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
~s
~A~ NO
[]
[]
2 of 6 pages
14.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION ~ Will- the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement.
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or.
demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, 'rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public' facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
16.
ao
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energu, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Co~muunications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
° X
n 0
[]
n
[] o []
4 of 6 pages
MAYBE:
NO
13..
14.
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
result in:
Will' the proposal
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement.
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, 'or..
demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, 'rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
'PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public' facilities, including
roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in:
16.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
UTILITIES. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications spstems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
° X
[]
[] []
X
×
X
[] D
4 of 6 pages
YI~$ ~ MAY~ NO
17. HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result in:
18.
19.
20.
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities?
'ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL. Will the proposal result
in an alteration of a significant archeological or
historical site, structure, object or building?
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a'fish or wildlife population to drop below
self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal co~,~nity, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the~roject have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A short-term impact on
the environment is one which occurs in a rela-
tively brief, definitive period of time while
long-term impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which are indiv-
idually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(A project may impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on each resource
is relatively small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on the environment
is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
5 of 6 pages
I ! ! . DISCUSSION OF EN~/I~TAL EVALUATICf~
L_
IV. DETER~ I I~IAT !01~
AFTER REVIEWING THE ENVIRONMENTAL INFOI:~V[ATION SLIBMITTED BY THE
APPLICA~, ~D AFTER ~TING TE ~V! ~N~TAL CHEGKLI ST USE
By TE CITY OF. C~B~L 'IN ~KING ~ ~VI~NM~TAL ASSESSM~T
I find the proposed projec~ COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not'
be a significant effect in this case because the m~ti-
gation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect
on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required.
DATE
6 of 6 pages
CITY OF CA1VIPBE_L_'[
70 North First Sueet, Campbell, CA 95008 · 408.866.2140
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
FILE NO:
APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
APN:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
TA 92-01
City of Campbell
City-wide
N/A
Adoption of a Transportation Demand
Management Ordinance intended to reduce the
number of vehicular trips to the workplace. The
Ordinance applies to all employers within the
City with 100 or more employees.
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The following explanations are presented in response to all replies to the
California Environmental Quality Act Checklist. The following explanations
are keyed to the number and letter of the item contained within the checklist.
13c. Impacts on Existin_~ Transportation Systems:
Discussion:
13d.
The Ordinance seeks to reduce the number of vehicular trips to the one's
place of employment which could ease congestion on the street system.
Thus, the project has a potentially beneficial effect and no mitigation is
required.
Alterations to Present Patterns of Circulation or Movement of People:
Discussion:
The Ordinance will have the affect of encourage the use of alt~'native
modes of transportation such as carpools and vanpools, public
transportation, walking, or riding a bicycle. In addition, compressed
Discussion of Environmental Effects - TA 92-01
Palge -2-
work weeks and flexible work weeks would be encouraged. The project
has a potentially benefidal effect and therefore, no mitigation is required.
ta92-01.dee(mc13)
The Congestion Management Agency
and the Commuter Network:
A Proposal for a Countywide
Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Program
January 28, 1992
santa Clara County
Congestion Management Agency
Merger/Expansion Table of Contents
1. Merger/Expansion Proposal
2. Legislative Requirements for Trip Reduction Programs
e
Commuter Network's Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Ordinance
4. AB 434 Vehicle Registration Fees: A Summary
5. Planning Budget for a Countywide Commuter Network
6. Estimated Income from AB 434
7. Proposed Financial Plan
8. Snmmary of Jobs Statistics
9. Sample Resolution: Commuter Network
The Congestion Management Agency
and The Commuter Networl~
A Proposal for a Countywide Transportation
Demand Management Program
In order to fulfill the trip reduction and transportation demand
management (TDM) requirements of the Congestion Management Program
legislation and the California Clean Air Act of 1988, the Congestion
Management Agency (CMA) Governing Board has incorporated the
Commuter Network into the CMA as a subsidiary service agency and
endorsed for circulation a plan to expand the Commuter Network into a
countywide TDM program. The purpose of this proposal is to present a
comprehensive picture of how such an expanded program would work,
and the financial and organizational implications of such a program.
BACKGROUND AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Cities and counties are required by both the Congestion Management
Program (CMP) legislation and the California Clean Air Act of 1988 to adopt
TDM ordinances and to implement TDM programs.~
To fulfill the requirements of the CMP legislation, Santa Clara County's
adopted Congestion Management Program requires all dories without
existing ordinances to enact the Commuter Network ordinance by March
31, 1992.2
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) adopted Clean
Air Plan for the Bay AreaBthe region's strategy for attaining and
maintaining the air quality standards contained in the California Clean Air
Act--requires the BAAQMD to adopt a regional trip-reduction rule by
June, 1992. This rule will require that employers with 100 or more
employees (and possibly employers with 50 or more employees)
implement TDM programs. All employers must begin complying with the
rule by June, 1993.
Although the BAAQMD is legally charged with implementing the trip
reduction rule, it may delegate implementation and enforcement authority
to local agencies if certain conditions are met) Delegation is beneficial
1 For a fuller discussion of these requirements, please refer to Item #2, 'Legislative
Requirements for Trip Reduction Programs.'
2 The City of Santa Clara must modify its ordinance so that it is 'functionally
equivalent' to the Commuter Network ordinance by March 31, 1992.
3 Two of these conditions are: 1) the local ordinance must be at least as strir~gent as
the BAAQMD's rule; and 2) adequate resources must be dedicated to the
ordinance's implementation and enforcement.
1 1/28/92
because it allows local jurisdictions to tailor TDM programs to the specific
needs of the area and avoids potentially duplicative or conflicting
requirements from different levels of govemment. The CMA Board has
adopted the policy that Santa Clara County cities seek delegation to
implement the trip reduction rule from the BAAQMD and to designate the
Commuter Network as the administrator of the Commuter Network
program. In accepting delegation, the CMA will ensure that the ordinance
required by the CMP is consistent with the ordinance required by the
BAAQMD, and that local agencies and businesses need only comply with
one uniform ordinance.
Both the CMP legislation and the Clean Air Plan require the adoption of
employer-based TDM ordinances; however, the nature of the programs to
support these ordinances is left up to individual cities. There are numerous
advantages in coordinating these programs through a single-service
agency--the Commuter Network that is an integral part of the county's
overall effort to reduce congestion and improve air quality. These
advantages are fully discussed below.
In addition, recently enacted legislation (AB 434) allows for an increase of
up to $4 in vehicle registration fees to implement certain transportation
control measures--such as trip reduction programs contained in the
Clean Air Plan. AB 434 allows for a 40% subvention to counties if they
designate a public agency to be the recipient of the funds. Since the CMA
will be administering countywide programs in response to the Clean Air
Act, it is requesting to be designated as this recipient.
THE COMMUTER NETWORK
The purpose of Commuter Network's TDM ordinance4 is to reduce
congestion and improve air quality by encouraging people to commute to
work by carpooling, vanpooling, using transit, cycling, or walking rather
than driving alone. The Commuter Network ordinance was designed to
conform to the requirements of both the California Clean Air Act and the
CMP legislation.
Commuter Network is a joint public/private partnership that was formed
in 1988 to provide personal assistance to employers in complying with the
ordinance's requirements and setting up commute alternative programs.
Commuter Network services include: training seminars and materials,
surveys and survey processing, legislative updates and interpretation, and
networking forums.
4 For the full text of the Commuter Network ordinance, please refer to Item #3.
2 1/28/92
Commuter Network represents a self-help approach to solving congestion
and air-quality problems. And it represents a unique attempt by local
government to allow individual businesses to meet legislative requirements
with programs tailored to their individual needs and resources.
Commuter Network is currently governed by a Commuter Network
Council. The existing Commuter Network Council, which is composed of
seven private sector representatives and seven elected officials, will be
expanded to include representatives from the new service area. The
Commuter Network Council will serve as an oversight advisory council to
the CMA Board on TDM programs, policy and operations.
Although the CMP requires that cities adopt the Commuter Network
ordinance and implement a TDM program, the CMP gives cities an option
to join the Commuter Network or to create and implement their own TDM
programs. However, there are significant advantages to having one service
agency manage and monitor a countywide TDM program. These reasons
include:
Participation in the Commuter Network would be more cost
effective for individual cities than creating their own TDM programs.
This is particularly true for cities that would be starting entirely new
programs. By joining the Commuter Network, new cities would
benefit from the significant investment (approximately $3 million
between 1987 and 1992) that has been made by the Golden Triangle
cities and Santa Clara County over the past four years. For example,
the Commuter Network now has a computer system and software
to process employee surveys, as well as a fully trained core of TDM
staff.
The final version of AB 434 states that only "designated countywide
agencies"--not individual cities can be the recipients of vehicle
registration fee subventions.5 This means that cities cannot receive
funds directly to start their own TDM programs. However, by
joining the Commuter Network, cities would receive the benefits of
vehicle registration fees as applied towards a countywide TDM
program.
A countywide Commuter Network would provide continuity for
employers with multiple worksites within the county. This would
allow employers to comply with only one set of TDM requirements,
rather than multiple (and potentially conflicting) requirements from
separate local governments, or from different layers of government.
For a full discussion of the uses and conditions of AB 434 funds, please refer to Item
#4, 'AB 434 Vehicle Registration Fees, A Summary.".
3 1/28/92
COMMIYI~R ~ORK EXPANSION
On January 1, 1992, the CMA Board took over operations of the Commuter
Network on an interim basis (until June 30, 1992) and the Golden Triangle
Task Force ceased to exist. This interim period allows ample time for cities
to decide whether they will join Commuter Network prior to full
incorporation of Commuter Network into the Congestion Management
Agency.
To ensure that the transition to a countywide Commuter Network is
successful, the CMA recommends that cities decide whether to join
Commuter Network by March 1992. However, the actual expansion into
new cities will take place in phases over the next 18 months.
The advantage of a phased approach is that it would give new cities an
opportunity to participate in the Commuter Network gradually: appointing
and training designated city staff, notifying employers, and participating in
the process of developing a countywide TDM program, prior to full
implementation in July 1993.
FY 1991-92
During the rest of this fiscal year, the Commuter Network will operate
under the existing budget and workplan adopted by the Golden Triangle
Task Force and Commuter Network Council in June of 1991.
From January to June 1992, CMA staff will continue to participate in the
BAAQMD's regional rulemaking process for the trip reduction rule in
order to ensure that the basic framework of the Commuter Network
ordinance will fulfill Clean Air Act requirements.
During the first quarter of 1992, all cities and the county will be asked to
designate the CMA as the recipient of AB 434 funds. In addition, all cities
without an existing TDM ordinance must adopt the Commuter Network
ordinance by March 31, 1992 and decide whether they will join Commuter
Network or begin their own TDM programs.
FY 1992-93
During this period, the Commuter Network will continue to provide full
TDM services to existing members, as well as staff-up services to new
members. These start-up services will include assisting new membez, s with
appointing and training city TDM liaison staff and preparing for full
ordinance implementation.
4 1/28/92
Following adoption of the regional trip reduction role, the CMA staff will
make a recommendation to the CMA Board on whether it will be
necessary to adjust the ordinance to comply with the regional rule.6
Beginning in 1992, the CMA will investigate the feasibility of charging
employers for participation in the Commuter Network. These fees could
either be charged as a per-employee fee, or for Commuter Network
services.7
FY 1993-94
Beginning in July 1993, full TDM program services will be provided
countywide. This date coincides with the BAAQMD's date for mandatory
implementation of a TDM ordinance.
The Congestion Management Agency also reviewed and approved for
circulation a FY 1992-93 Draft Budget for a countywide Commuter Network
(Item #5). This budget shows a modest increase of three staff positions for
Commuter Network to provide start-up services to new cities.
In FY 1992-93, approximately two-thirds of the Commuter Network
budget would be funded through vehicle registration fees (Item #6). The
County has agreed to pay for 50°,$ of the shortfall, with the remaining 50%
to be split among cities based on a jObs-based formula8 (Item #7). Cities
that decide to join the COmmuter Network during this period must pay the
identified assessment prior to receiving services.
7
Because the Bay Area is a asevere" nonattainment area, the region must achieve a
regionwide AVR of 1.5 by 1999. However, the BAAQMD is likely to require different
AVR targets for different areas based on employment density, number of employers,
and availability of transit within the area. Thus, the AVR target of 1.33 in the
Commuter Network Ordinance might need to be modified for Santa Clara County
and its cities.
If employer fees were charged for Commuter Network services, either individual
cities or the CMA could collect the fees. In the latter case, the JPA would most likely
have to be amended to allow for this new authority.
A jobs-based formula was determined to be the most equitable formula, because the
Commuter Network TDM program is employer based. In this funding formula, the
County pays 50% of the budget shortfall, and the rest of the budget is divided
equally among all cities based on their percentage of total county jobs. For a
smaller city such as Saratoga, which has .72% of total county jobs, an assessment to
Commuter Network of $2,292 would be much more cost effective than starting its
own TDM program.
5 1/28/92
Beginning in FY 1993-94, there could be a significant shortfall between AB
434 revenues and the total budget, as Commuter Network must increase its
staff to provide service to all employers that are required to comply with
the ordinance. To address this shortfall, the CMA will explore various
funding options, including the assessment of employer fees (either for
services or on a per-employee basis).
Although the Commuter Network budget will increase for approximately
three years--until employers located in all member cities are receiving
services--g, he annual budget will then stabilize, as the program will then
become basically a monitoring effort.
SUMMARY
In order to comply with Santa Clara County's Congestion Management
Program, cities without existing TDM ordinances must adopt Commuter
Network's ordinance by March 31, 1992.
In addition, the Congestion Management Agency requests that all cities
within the county take the following actions by March 31, 1992: designate
the CMA as the County's recipient of AB 434 funds, and decide whether to
join the Commuter Networkg.
A timely designation of the CMA as the program manager for AB 434 funds
will ensure that Santa Clara County receives its 40% of these new revenues
beginning July, 1992.
While cities must decide whether to join Commuter Network by March
1992, actual expansion into new cities will take place in phases over the
next 18 months. Full implementation will begin in July 1993 to coincide
with implementation of the the regional trip reduction rule.
A sample resolution designating the Commuter Network as the administrator of the
city's TDM program is included as Item s9. CMA staff are working with BA~iQMD
on a resolution designating the CMA as the recipient of AB 434 funds. This
resolution will be available in early March.
6 1/28/92
Legislative Requirements for
Trip Reduction Prograrn~
Congestion Management Programs
Congestion Management Program (CMP) legislation requires two actions by
cities and counties:
Member Agencies must adopt and implement a trip reduction and
travel demand management (TDM) ordinance.
The Congestion Management Agency (CMA) must ensure that
Member Agencies have adopted a TDM ordinance that is in
conformance with the CMP. The CMP for Santa Clara County
requires that Member Agencies adopt the Commuter Network
Ordinance by March 31, 1992. The City of Santa Clara is required to
modify its ordinance so that it is functionally equivalent to the
Commuter Network ordinance.
Member Agencies must implement a transportation demand
management program that promotes trip reduction and alternative
transportation modes, and improves the balance between housing
and jobs.
In the Base Year CMP, the CMA is only requiring Member Agencies
to adopt the trip reduction ordinance by March 31, 1992. It is the
intent of the CMA to work with Member Agencies through the
Commuter Network to meet the requirement that Member
Agencies implement TDM programs. To that end, the CMA worked
to win passage of AB 434, vehicle registration fees, to fund a major
portion of the TDM program requirement.
California Clean Air Act Requirements
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988 empowers California's
regional air quality management districts with new authority to design,
adopt, implement, and enforce comprehensive plans for attaining and
maintaining both federal and the more stringent state air quality standards
by the earliest practicable date. In addition, the CCAA required local air
districts to incorporate transportation control measures (TCMs) into their
regional clean air plans. TCMs are defined as "any strategy to reduce vehicle
trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles travelled, vehicle idling, or traffic
congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions." T-he Bay
Area Air Quality Management District's recently adopted 1991 Regional
Clean Air Plan sets forth two phases of TCM implementation. Phase I are
reasonably available TCMs. Phase II are TCMs that require major additional
funding and/or legislative authority.
1 1/28/92
Phase I TCMs include both employer-based trip reduction ordinances and
programs. The regional trip reduction rule, which will affect all employers
of 100+ employees throughout the region, is scheduled for adoption in
June 1992, with mandatory implementation beginning in July 1993.
Since the Bay Area is considered a "severe" nonattainmem area for
planning purposes, the Clean Air Act requires that the region attain a 1.5
AVR by 1999. In addition, according to state Air Resources Board
guidelines, ~severe" areas are required to achieve a "significant reduction" in
overall passenger trips and vehicle miles travelled, and create no net
increase in vehicle emissions after 1997.
2 1/28/92
AB 434 Velttde Registration Fees:
A Suxxllllary
Background
In the 1989-90 legislative session, the State's air districts proposed AB 2766
to increase vehicle registration fees for additional revenue to implement
the transportation-related elements of the Califomia Clean Air Act of 1988.
In AB 2766, four southern California counties were guaranteed 40% of the
new revenues for local clean air programs.
In the Bay Area, the regional agencies and the cities and counties could not
reach an agreement on a 40°,6 funding formula. At the insistence of local
Santa Clara and Alameda counW agencies, the Bay Area was removed from
AB 2766.
In the 1990-91 legislative session, AB 434 was introduced to increase vehicle
registration fees in the Bay Area, with a funding formula that would permit 40%
of the revenues to be subvened to cities and counties for local clean air
transportation programs. However, in the closing days of the legislative
session, Senator Kopp, chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, insisted
that specific conditions be added to the legislation if the Bill was to pass the
Senate. Those conditions were added to the legislation and AB 434 was signed
into law by Governor Wilson and became effective January 1, 1992.
Provisions of AB 434
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (The Air Distric0 as of
January 1, 1992, may increase vehicle registration fees by up to $4, and use
the revenue for programs designed to reduce air pollution from motor
vehicles.
The Air District may increase fees effective either April 1 or October 1
upon adoption of a resolution imposing the fee and implementing a
program.
Not more than 5% of the fees distributed to the Air District or distributed
by the Air District to any other public agency may be used for
administrative costs.
The Department of Motor Vehicles will deduct its administrative cost for
collecting and subverting fee revenues.
Expenditure of fee revenues generated under this legislation shall b~,
limited to certain transportation control projects and programs that are
incorporated into the regional clean air plan and local clean air programs in
conformance with the regional plan:
1 ]/28/92
Fee revenues shall not be used for any planning activities that are not
directly related to the implementation of a specific project or
program.
Not less than 40% of the fee revenues shall be allocated to the entity
or entities designated for projects and programs in each county,
based upon the county's proportionate share of fee-paid vehicle
registration.
In each county, one or more entities may be designated as the
overall program manager for the county by resolutions adopted by
the county board of supervisors and a majority of the cities with the
majority of the population in the incorporated area. The resolution
shall specify the terms and conditions for the expenditure of funds.
The agency(ies) so designated shall be allocated the 40% of fee
revenues in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
resolution.
This means that cities cannot receive funds directly to start their own TDM
programs. However, by joining the Commuter Network, cities would
receive the benefits of vehicle registration fees as applied towards a
countywide TDM program.
Any agency that receives fee revenues shall at least once every two years
undertake an audit of each program or project funded. The legislation sets
forth the terms and conditions of the audit process.
Any agency that receives the funds under this program must encumber the
funds within two years.
2 1/28/92
SANTA ~ COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Draft Budget for a Countywide Commuter Network
Estimated FY 92-93 Budget
Estimated Total Expenditures
I. Salaries & Benefits A. Administration
B. Commuter Network
C. Benefits
II. Services & Supplies
III. Capital Expenditures
$219,072
$770,785
$346,450
Estimated
FY 92-93
$1,330,307
$479,262
$125,000
Estimated Total Revenues
I. Vehicle Registration Fees
II. Assessments to Member Agencies
$1,302,517
$638,052
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
Estimated FY 92-93 Countywide Commuter Network Budget
Draft #2, December 12, 1991
I. SALARIF. S & BENEFITS
A. Administration
91-92 91-92 92-93 Commuter Estimated
~laetes Staff Staff Network Portion. FY 92-93
Executive Director $92,000 1 1 $46,000
Executive Secretary $35,000 1 1 $17,500 $18,~75
Director, Policy fir Administration $65,000 1 1 $32,500 $34,125
Policy Analyst $36,500 1 1 $18,250 $19,163
Fiscal & Administration Officer $55,000 0 1 $3~;,850 $36,850
Accountant II $36,500 1 1 $24,455 $25,678
Administrative Assistant $29,500 1 1 $19,765 $20,753
Receptionist $ 22,500 1 1 $15,075 $15,829
SUBTOTAL-Administration
7 8 $219,072
The Congestion Management Agency and the Commuter Network will share an Executive Director
and administrative staff. The administrative staff will be augmented by one position-a Fiscal
and Adminstrative Officer--during 1992-93. This position is necessary to oversee the day-to-day
fiscal, personnel, and administrative operations of the two agencies.
The salaries and benefits of the administrative staff will be shared between the two agenc;es.
For the Executive Director, Executive Secretary, Director Policy & Administration, & Policy Analyst,
salaries and benefits will be divided equally between the Commuter Network and the CMA because
these positions spend approximately 50% of their time on each agency.
The salaries and benefits of the Fiscal & Administrative Officer, Accountant, Administrative Assistant,
and Receptionist will be charged 67% to Commuter Network, and 33% to the CMA, since
Commuter Network has approximately 2/3rds of total employees, and therefore a greater
demand tbr administrative services.
Increased salaries for FY 92-93 reflect an estimated 5% COLA for existing staff:
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
Estimated FY' 92-93 Countywide Commuter Network
Draft t2, December 12, 1991
& mu axrs (c8
B. Commuter Network
91-92 91-92 92-93 Estimated
$.~1~ Staff Staff FY 92-93
D!rector, Commuter ~
Administrative Assistam
Senior Account Mana$evs
Account Managers
TDM Program Analyat
Reportdlmplementatinn Analyst
MIS Manager
Administrative Assistant
Commute Services Techs II
Commute Services Tech I
Data Processing Clerks
Marketing Manager
Production Coordinator
Mar/Comm. Specialist
SUBTOTAL-Commuter Network
$65,000 1 1 $68,250
$29,500 1 1 $30,975
$52,100 1 1 $54,705
$44,600 4 5 $231,920
$36,500 1 1 $38,325
$40,000 1 1 $42,000
$52,000 1 I $54,600
$32,500 1 1 $34,125
$31,500 1 1 $33,075
$27,000 1 I $28,350
$22,000 0 2 $44,000
' $45,000 1 1 $47,250
$30,200 1 1 $31,710
$30,000 1 1 $31,500
16 19 $770,785
100% of salaries and benefits of Commuter Network employees will be paid by Commuter Network.
During the FY 92-93 Hscal Year, Commuter Network staff will be increased by three employees.
One Account Manager will be added to assist new cities who join Commuter Network during this
year. Two Data Processing Clerks will be added as staff positions as a more cost-eft~ctive method of
processing surveys. (During FY 1991-92, temporary help was used t'or survey processing.)
Increased salaries t6r f6r FY 92-93 reflect an estimated 5% COLA for existing stafl:.
Santa Clara County Congestion Manageanent Agency
Estimated FY 92-93 Countywide Commuter Network Budget
Draft #2, December 12, 1991
I. SMARIES & BENEFITS (C(~,
C. Benefl~
Estimated
FY 92-93
Subtotal
Benefits-35%
HCA/Employees portion (7.5%)-
In-lieu of benef~ (27.5%)=
$74,239
$272,211
$989,857
$346,450
Currently, CMA and Commuter Network employees have no benefits, and receive cash in-lieu
of benefits. The CMA and Commuter Network pay only the employer portion of FICA taxes, and
employees receive approximately 27.5 % of their salaries in cash to purchase their own benefits.
However, during the first half of 1992, the CMA Board will be asked to approve a benefits package
(medical, dental, disablity, retiremen0 tbr employees that is comparable to what employees
of member agencies receive.
Sant~ Clara County Congestion Management A~ency
Estimated FY 92-9~3 Countywide Commuter Network B~dget
Draft #2, December 12, 1991
H. SERVICES & SUPPI.H~S
Estinlated
FY92-95
Phone Service
Insurance
· DEC
· Macintosh
Office & Survey Supplies
Equipment Lease & Rental/Copier & STARS
Postage Expense/Metered
External Postage/Courier Service
Professional & Technical Services · MIS Technical Services
· TDM Product Development
* TDM Program Development
Office Rent
Public Info/Mil & Printing · Letterhead
· TDM Product Dev't/Printing
· TDM Program Dev%/Printing
· Survey Products
Education/In-Service Training
travel Expenses
Automobile Mileage
Staff Support-County
(Accounting, Payroll, Purchasing, Legal)
Employer Training & Meeting Expense
$42,000
$5,000
$25,000
$30,000
$30,000
$10,000
$28,000
$20,000
$~5,000
$9,040
$2,750
$15,000
$12,000
$5,000
$500
$85,000
$112,650
$73,000
$10,000
$7,500
512,000
$60,000
$5,000
5%Contingency
$22,822
Services and Supplies were estimated based on current Commuter Network expenditures, and
projections of providing products and services to an expanded service area.
The amount budgeted fbr rent--S112,650-assumes that CMA planning staff will acquire additional
ottice space, and the existing space will house Administrative and Commuter Networ.k stall' only.
~anta Clara County Congestion Management Agency
Estimated FY 92-95 Countywide Commuter Network Budget
Draft #2, D~cember 12, 1991
Estlmated
FY92-93
Office Furniture
Computer Equipment
$25,000
These estimates tbr furniture and equipment assume that CMA staff will move into the additional
office space, and the existing space will house Administrative and Commuter Network stall' only.
However, since the CMA has already purchased new office furniture & equipment ti:)r CMA stafl;
Commuter Network will use that furniture & equipment, and purchase new equipment
the new CMA office space.
Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
Estimated FY 92-93 Countywide Commuter Network B~dget
Draft #2, December 12, 1991
Esttmnte~ -.~come from AB 454, Vehlde Reg~-ation Fees
AB 434 allows for the distribution of 40% of the revenues generated by an increase
in vehicle registration fees to designated county agencies for the purposes
of implementing programs that reduce emissions from motor vehicles.
The following projections are based on previous staff estimates that with a
40% subvention and a $2 vehicle registration fee, Santa Clara County would
receive $964,741 per year, and with a $4 fee, $1,929,744 per year.
Estimated Income
L FY 92-93
Per Month
# of Months
$80,395
$160,812
$2 6 $482,371
$2 6 $964,871
Subtotal $1,447,241
-10% $144,724
Estimated income for FY 92-93 is based on the following assumptions:
eThe BAAQMD will begin to distribute the local portion of the $2 fee
as of July 1, 1992, and these fees would increase to $4 on January 1, 1993.
· 10% of the total will be used for administrative costs
by the DMV and the BAAQMD.
II. FY 93-94
Per Month # of Months
$160,812 $4 12 $1,929,744
-10% $192,974
Estimated income for FY 93-94 is based on the following assumptions:
· Santa Clara County will receive 40% of the $4 fee for 12 months
· 10% of the total will be used for administrative costs
by the DMV and the BAAQMD.
Note: Sums may not exactly equal total due to independent rounding.
Commuter Network Merger
Proposed Financial Plan
FY 1992-1993
Estimated 1992-93 Commuter Network Budget-
Estimated Income from Vehicle Reg. Fees-
Shortfkll-
$1,940,569
$1,302,517
$038,052
The County pays 50% of the Commuter Network budget shortfall, and the rest
of the budget is divided among cities based on their percentage of total county jobs (1).
% of 92-93
Budget Assessment
Existing Commuter Network Members
County 50.00% $319,026
Milpitas 2.15% $13,737
Mountain View 3.87% $24,713
Palo Alto 4.80% $30,648
San Jose(2) 17.08°/$ $108,973
Sunnyvale 8.03% $ 51,210
New Service Cities
Campbell 1.40% $8,921
Cupertino 2.44% $15,557
Gilroy 0.95% $6,088
Los Altos 0.52% $3,320
Los Altos Hills 0.13% $832
Los Gatos 0.90% $5,717
Monte Sereno 0.02% $127
Morgan Hill 0.56% $3,570
Santa Clara 6.79% $43,321
Saratoga 0.36% $2,292
Total 100.00% $638,052
(1) For this option, to calculate cities' percentage of the total Commuter Network Budget, cities' percentages
of total jobs were halved, since the County pays 50% of the budget. For example, the City of
Campbell would pay 1.40% of the Commuter Network budget although it has 2.80% of total county jobs.
(2) This assessment includes services to the entire City of San Jose, which will be expanded in a phased manner.
(3) This subtotal amount, along with vehicle registration fees, would sustain the TDM Program
for current commuter Network Member .~gencies at existing service levels.
Summary of Jobs StatlsticsUs~. ~
ABAG Projections '90
A. Total Jobs-Santa Clara County
(From ABAG Projections '90)
Santa Clara County 3,380 0.38%
Campbell 24,,560 2.79°3
Cupertino 42,830 4.86%
Gilroy 16,760 1.90%
Los Altos 9,140 1.04%
Los Altos Hills 2,290 0.26%
Los Gatos 15,740 1.79%
Milpitas 37,820 4.29%'
Monte Sereno 350 0.04%
Morgan Hill 9,830 1.11%
Mountain View 68,040 7.72%
Palo Alto 84,380 9.57%
San Jose 300,020 34.03%
Santa Clara 119,270 13.53%
Saratoga 6,310 0.72%
Sunnyvale 140,990 15.99%
B. Total Jobs within Santa Clara County Cities*
ICampbell 24,560 2.80%
Cupertino 42,830 4.8803
Gilroy 16,760 1.91
Los Altos 9,140 1.04%
Los Altos Hills 2,290 0.26%
Los Gatos 15,740 1.79%
Milpitas 37,820 4.31%
Monte Sereno 350 0.04%
Morgan Hill 9,830 1.12%I
Mountain View 68,040 7.75%
Palo Alto 84,380 9.61%
San Jose 300,020: 34.16%
Santa Clara 119,270 13.58%
Saratoga 6,310 0.72%
:Sunnyvale 140,990 " 16.05%
Total= iiiiiiii!iiiiiiiiiii!iliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!~ ~;~:~:~:~:~:::::~::~::::~:~:~:~
................................
*These statistics are used for the funding estimates because the county's assessment
is not determined by their percentage of county jobs.
S_~mpl¢ Resolution: Commuter Network
City of
Resolution No.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
DESIGNATING THE COMMUTER NETWORK OF THE SANTA CLARA
COUNTY CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY AS-THE AGENCY
AUTHORIZED TO ADMINISTER THE PROVISIONS OF THE
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND ORDINANCE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Congestion Management Agency
(CMA) operates the Commuter Network on behalf of its Member Agencies
to provide a consistent countywide Transportation Demand Management
Program; and
WHEREAS, said Commuter Network is jointly financed by the
Member Agendes and has staff and facilities in place to administer a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of proposes to adopt an
ordinance addressing the need for such a TDM Program and defining the
process, procedures and violations pertinent thereto; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of deems
the Commuter Network to be an appropriate and cost-effective Agency for
the administration of the provisions of the proposed ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council o'S-the City
of does hereby designate the Commuter Network as
the Agency authorized to administer the provisions of the TDM Ordinance.
The foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted at a
Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of ., duly
held on the __th day of ,1992, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
NOT VOTING:
A'FrEST:
CITY CLERK
MAYOR
1/28/92