July 11, 2012
1:30 – 3:30 pm
BD Biosciences
2350 Qume Drive
San Jose
Minutes
Transportation Policy Committee Meeting
Click for original background Agenda & Materials at the
Transportation Policy Committee Members Only Site (password: BARTtoSV)
1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
The Transportation Policy Committee meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m.
Transportation Committee Members:
Kerry Haywood, representing NetApp
Denny Yau, San Jose State University
Otto Melara, San Jose State University
Eyedin Zonobi, San Jose State University
Jessica Herrera, Facebook
Paul Shepherd, Cargill
Patty Pine, eBay
Greg Davies, Lockheed Martin
By phone:
Justin Bean, Streetline
Pamela Bohlmann, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital
Betty Garza, NXP Semiconductors
Robin Suzuki, Casto Travel
Staff:
Jessica Zenk, Senior Director of Transportation
Bena Chang, Senior Associate of Transportation and Housing
Alex Tucker, Membership Policy Coordinator
2. TPC Minutes Approval
Motion—M/S Kerry Haywood / Robin Suzuki —Carried unanimously
Approve the minutes of the June 2012 TPC meeting.
3. ECO Pass Reform Principles
Lilia Scott and Jason Kim from the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) returned to the
committee to continue a discussion about reforms for the ECO Pass program that commenced
at our April Meeting. Please see also a copy of the VTA presentation and Leadership Group staff
background and analysis of the program.
VTA has offered the ECO Pass program since 1996, and has done so without any changes to the
program’s basic structure. It started as a way to increase employee ridership with the goal of
also being revenue neutral for VTA; revenue neutral has been defined by the VTA Board as
bringing in at least as much revenue per ride as the average fare. The basic program structure is
a bulk discount where employers pay a reduced rate for an annual pass for their entire
employee headcount, regardless of how many employees actually use the system (like an
insurance program).
As outlined in its presentation (see link above), VTA has compared itself to a variety of other
programs around the country as part of its analysis. It found that the ECO Pass program
generally costs employers less than other programs and brings in a smaller percent of the
system’s revenue. VTA staff is considering a variety of options, and comes to the Committee
with questions about the business model it should pursue and existing and potential employer
use.
Questions & Discussion:
In some cases (like with the universities), the assumption that increases in fees can be passed on
is not exactly accurate; for example, at SJSU, students have to vote on whether to increase fees
and they may not approve an increase, which then eats into reserves of the Associated Students
and/or could force a change in program usage.
LS: Good to note that; this type of thing is one reason that VTA staff is considering a different
model for educational institutions, residential developments and private employers.
In response to how to run the ECO Pass like a business, VTA should look at the marginal cost of
each ride; in many cases, there is excess capacity on buses/trains, and thus adding riders – even
at a small fare – costs little to nothing. Would have to take a look at the areas where additional
riders requires greater services (ie. the scenario with DeAnza College coming on board and
additional system along the Line 23/323 corridor) vs. those where there is little to no additional
cost. In the later, you’re just maximizing utilization and profitability of existing assets.
How much does the ECO Pass program bring additional riders who wouldn’t otherwise use the
system?
LS: Academic studies have shown anywhere from 30-200% increase in usage that is “induced
demand” from ECO Pass-like programs. VTA has assumed that roughly 70% of employees and
50% of students or residents who currently use their ECO Pass would buy a monthly pass if they
didn’t have an ECO Pass.
TPC members agreed with the principles laid out by Leadership Group staff.
4. Corporate Bicycle Engagement & Strategy
Jessica Zenk, Adina Levin and Andrew Boone (volunteers with the Silicon Valley Bicycle
Coalition), and Jessica Herrera (Facebook) spoke about corporate engagement in bicycle
advocacy and infrastructure. Please refer also to presentations at SVLG and Facebook and
Leadership Group bicycle subcommittee recommendations, background and analysis.
Jessica Zenk reported out on Bike to Work Day/Month (May 2012). Participation in Santa Clara
and San Mateo Counties was up 26% in 2012 over 2011 levels, with more than 30,000 cyclists
participating. Member company participation in the Company Bike Challenge was also up over
50 percent, with more than 150,000 miles logged by member companies. Notably, six member
companies each logged over 10,000 miles, demonstrating the use as a commute transportation
mode. Jessica reviewed activities the Leadership Group did in 2012 to engage member
companies and asked for feedback. One suggestion by Denny Yau was to follow up with
information on what you can do to keep biking once you’ve tried it on BTWD. Jessica Herrera
mentioned that, even though Facebook chose not to emphasize the Company Bike Challenge,
they did a big internal push and doubled participation over 2011 levels.
Jessica Zenk reviewed the recommendations from the bike subcommittee to increase corporate
awareness, advocacy and support in bicycling by: 1. working with partners to establish an online
bike commuter community and 2. Targeting physical bike infrastructure improvements near
major “anchor” employers to benefit their employees and the surrounding community.
Andrew Boone and Adina Levin discussed the online bike commuter community opportunity in
greater detail. This would build on the success of the SF2G group that orchestrates rides from
San Francisco to Google and other major employers. Angus Davol (via writing) noted that this
community should be approachable for bike commuters who ride for shorter distances, not only
the “SF2G’rs,” as most people have shorter commutes where biking is attainable given the right
information and encouragement.
Jessica Herrera reviewed Facebook’s investments in bike infrastructure as it moves to its Menlo
Park campus. This includes lane improvements, the reopening of a key bike/ped tunnel and a
0.5-mile portion of the Bay Trail network. This last investment leaves only another 0.5-mile gap
in the Trail to connect 100-miles of continuous Bay Trail. Other companies are encouraged to
step up advocacy and/or funding to close this gap.
Jessica Zenk also provided background on the funding that Santa Clara County has available to
invest in bike/trail infrastructure in and around Stanford University. The County Board of
Supervisors is slated to vote on the process for allocating this funding in August. The Committee
generally agreed with the criteria that staff recommended, but noted that the criteria needs to
be put in measurable terms so that one project could be compared to another. The criteria
could also prioritize connections to trains/other transit that increases the utility of the
infrastructure for people farther afield.
5. Transportation Work Plan
Jessica Zenk reviewed the TPC’s Mission Statement, 2012-2014 Work Plan and progress to date,
and timeline for establishing the 2013-2015 Work Plan, and solicited TPC input into the 20132015 Work Plan. See presentation. Paul Shepherd commented that one infrastructure project
that doesn’t appear is the Dumbarton Rail project, connecting the East Bay and Peninsula
directly. Jim Helmer shared comments via email that the concept of connectivity should also
include technology, such as sensors, detectors, lighting, and data collection/dissemination. We
must be sure that as our governments struggle for funding for basic infrastructure and services
that we miss no opportunities for "connectivity" to improve our quality of life, economy and
social justice. Changing demographics, climate and fiscal stability are all key drivers. Denny Yau
commented that a lot of good new projects are getting underway – car-sharing, bike-sharing –
and a challenge will be making sure they succeed. Similarly, many specific projects are
underway; perhaps the Committee could think of the Work Plan in issue area buckets (ie.
Connectivity, Sustainability) rather than as specific projects moving forward. On logistics,
Committee member noted that providing call in information would be good, lunches would be
welcome to allow for informal conversations/relationship-building, and that they liked the use
of links and the website.
6. Announcements



Legislative Wrap Up – Report out on Federal Transportation Authorization, AB 57 (MTC
Representation), HSR/Caltrain, California Transportation Agency reorganization & more. . .
7/24 @ 11-1pm: Technology & Transportation Roundtable with the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce **High-impact opportunity for companies that provide technology changing the
way we get around**
7/25 @ 10-11:30: High Speed Rail new CEO Jeff Morales & Caltrain
Modernization at Centennial Towers in South San Francisco




7/31 @ 8:30-5:30pm: CalStart presents Workplace Charging: Filling a Critical Infrastructure
Gap at Google
8/1 @ 1:30-3:30pm: Transportation Policy Committee meeting (password BARTtoSV) –
Note: Joint Housing/Transportation Meeting & Tour of New Facebook Campus
8/23-8/24 (1.5 days): Silicon Valley Leadership Group presents Charged 2012: Silicon Valley
Electric Vehicle Symposium, hosted by SAP
We need to know what you’re doing regarding Electric Vehicles!
o By 7/20: Please complete the Employer Plug-In Electric Vehicle Readiness Survey
o By 7/18: Nominations for this year's Bay Area Electric Vehicle (EV) Readiness
Awards are open! Nominate a business or housing development. Awardees will be
announced at the Charged: EV Symposium 2012. For more information, visit
our webpage.
7. Meeting adjourned at 3:30pm.