CTC draft needs assessment flags transit funding gap; EAC members and public press for clearer outreach on road charge and paratransit

Members of the Interagency Transportation Equity Advisory Committee on Dec. 4 reviewed California Transportation Commission staff findings for the 10-year transportation needs assessment required under Senate Bill 1121 and raised concerns about declining transit budgets, limitations of paratransit and how a potential vehicle-miles or “road charge” would be presented to Californians.

Francescia Sanchez, program manager for the needs assessment at the California Transportation Commission, told the committee the report is a high-level statewide estimate of the cost to operate, maintain and grow the multimodal transportation system through 2035 and “is an estimate of the gap that exists between our expected transportation revenues and our ever growing needs.” She said the draft will be released in January for public comment, presented to the commission in January, and that staff intend to present a final report for adoption at the March 20–21 commission meeting before submitting it to the Legislature.

Committee members and public commentators pressed staff to make clearer how the assessment addresses access for people with disabilities and older adults. Sanchez said feedback captured in Chapter 8 emphasizes that paratransit can be inflexible — “Paratransit must be scheduled at least a day in advance” — and that paratransit service reliability is vulnerable when drivers are unavailable. She said on-demand and ride-hail services can fill some gaps but may not accommodate wheelchair users and other accessibility needs.

Several EAC members said the report should show more detail about how funding flows to regions and which communities benefit. Member Anna Gonzalez urged staff to consider how large commercial vehicles contribute to road wear and said policymakers should examine whether corporations pay more of the cost for heavy-vehicle impacts. “We want to encourage that we think about these policies to ensure that these corporations are paying their fair share and not the taxpayers,” Gonzalez said.

Public commenters in Riverside stressed the same regional concerns. Mike McCarthy of the Sierra Club said the Inland Empire bears a disproportionate share of warehouses and truck traffic and asked the commission to prioritize mode shift from trucks to rail and to pair goods-movement investments with active-transportation projects. Jen Larratt Smith, founder of Riverside Neighbors Opposing Warehouses, told the committee the commission’s 10-year plan allocates little to sustainability and instead favors road expansions that encourage more warehouses in communities already facing poor air quality.

Committee members also debated terminology and outreach strategy around a possible replacement for the gas tax. Sanchez and others noted the draft discusses a “road charge” and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) options; several speakers recommended using clearer, less technical language and planning substantial public education if the Legislature selects a road charge as a sustainable funding source. Sanchez said a state pilot exists and that staff expect any legislative move on a road charge would require a large public education and stakeholder outreach effort, especially with equity-focused organizations.

Next steps: staff plan to publish the draft needs assessment for public comment in January, return to the commission for consideration in January, present a final report for adoption in March, and then submit the adopted needs assessment to the Legislature. Sanchez also reminded members that the needs assessment is scheduled to be updated every five years under SB 1121.