Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grants And Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
STA outlines SB 1 competitive programs and 2026 corridor opportunities; board discusses corridor priorities and rail capacity
Summary
Staff summarized SB 1 competitive programs, past awards to Sacramento County and corridor planning work needed to access 2026 funds. Directors asked about Stockton Boulevard BRT, the Capital Corridor third mainline track and how STA can coordinate multi‑jurisdictional applications.
The Sacramento Transportation Authority board received an update May 8 on state SB 1 competitive programs and how STA uses Measure A funds to leverage those opportunities. Staff described the three major state competitive programs and identified corridor planning work that will determine the region’s competitiveness for 2026 applications.
Staff explained that roughly $144 million is available statewide in the Local Partnership Program (LPP), $500 million in Solutions for Congested Corridors and $900 million in the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program in the current multi‑year cycles. The presentation reviewed prior Sacramento County successes: approximately $432 million in SB 1 competitive awards across multiple cycles, including the Capital Southeast Connector, South Watt, US‑50/Gold Line improvements and other projects that used Measure A or local matching funds to position them for state funds.
Staff noted the December 2024 application round results are pending and that announcements were expected in roughly four weeks. For the 2026 cycle, staff said several corridor planning efforts are underway — US‑50, SR‑99 and I‑80 — and that only corridors with completed planning documents become competitive for the Solutions for Congested Corridors program.
Directors discussed STA’s role in coordinating multi‑jurisdictional projects and local match. Director Jane Dickinson asked whether Measure A can be used as match and whether multi‑jurisdictional Measure A projects could be combined into single SB 1 applications. STA staff answered that Measure A projects exist across jurisdictions but that coordination and “match‑making” among cities, the county and transit agencies often lacks dedicated funding or an ongoing countywide mechanism.
Several directors raised project‑specific interests. Director John Kennedy reiterated interest in a bus rapid transit lane on Stockton Boulevard and asked whether local funds are available; staff said Stockton Boulevard is not a Measure A capital project but that some smart‑growth matching funds remain for planning. Directors also asked about advancing a third mainline track for the Capitol Corridor between Sacramento and Roseville; staff said STA has supported corridor planning and could provide local match to update corridor plans, which then could be the basis for competitive applications.
STA staff told the board the agency can play an advocacy and coordination role to ensure projects that jurisdictions prioritize are included in corridor planning and competitive submittals. Staff recommended STA remain engaged in corridor planning and prioritization and said staff will work with SACOG and partner agencies to identify which corridor(s) to emphasize for 2026 submissions.
No board action was required at the meeting; staff will return with recommended priorities and coordination steps for future grant cycles.
