Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Active Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SBCAG approves north/south split of Active Transportation Program Cycle 8 funds after debate
Summary
SBCAG staff briefed the board on ATP Cycle 8 guidelines and a reduced local pot (~$1.1M) after loan repayment; after discussion the board voted unanimously to adopt Option D — a geographic split allocating roughly 52% to North County and 48% to South Coast.
SBCAG staff presented funding options for the California Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 8 at the April 16 meeting, and after discussion the board directed staff to pursue a geographic split of the available local MPO pot.
Sarkis Kacik explained the ATP structure: 50% of funding is a statewide pot, 10% is for small urban/rural counties and 40% is distributed among large Metropolitan Planning Organizations. For this cycle the regional formula produced $3 million, but after repaying a prior $1.9 million loan to other MPOs SBCAG’s available balance is approximately $1.1 million.
An ad hoc committee and the Technical Transportation Advisory Committee recommended a package (Option B) that would fund a regional active transportation plan update (estimated $350,000) plus investments such as signage, lighting and cameras. The board discussed alternatives including a countywide call (C) and a north/south geographic split (D). Supporters of a split said it would produce tangible, deliverable projects on both sides of the county; others warned that outreach budgets complicate small project funding in a geographically large county.
Director Prieto moved to support Option D (52% North / 48% South split), the motion was seconded by Director Julian, public comment was received (Scott Wince opposed broadly to some active‑transportation spending), and the board approved the motion by unanimous roll call.
What this means: Staff will prepare guidelines and calls for projects consistent with the board’s direction; project proposals will be evaluated through the scoring committee and returned to the board for final approval and submittal to the California Transportation Commission.
