📋

Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Orange County Grand Jury • 2016-2017

Required Responses

14 pages

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Findings 3 findings

F3 Page 25

Approval of OCTA as implementer and owner/operator of the OC Streetcar Project, and as subsequent grantee for the Federal New Starts Program, has created the basis for enabling further light rail development in Orange County to include public outreach and marketing/promotion efforts.

F4 Page 25

Creation by OCTA of a draft light rail Master Plan for Orange County that includes both intra and inter county transit connectivity options would be of considerable value to the public.

F5 Page 25

The long project times associated with light rail system establishment require not only careful planning and coordination by OCTA, but also consistent efforts to inform the public by those Orange County cities involved in development or possible development of light rail projects. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2015-2016 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track?” the 2015- 2016 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following eight recommendations:

Recommendations 8

R1
Page 25

OCTA should initiate another “Go Local” effort in FY 16/17 encouraging more Orange County cities to advocate for light rail or other transit connections to assist Metrolink ridership. (F.1., F.3.)
R2
Page 25

OCTA should organize and lead focus groups during FY 16/17 to gauge public reaction to transportation options for Orange County that will be affected by the changes in working and population centers forecast for the next 20 years. (F.1., F.3.)
R3
Page 25

OCTA should use multi-lingual (English, Spanish, Korean and Vietnamese) Web and printed marketing materials to highlight Metrolink Transportation Center and light rail connectivity efforts in Orange County. (F.1., F.3.)
R4
Page 25

OCTA should create a draft phased light rail Master Plan during FY 16/17 that links the County’s high density urban areas and connects with Metrolink and Los Angeles County’s Metro light rail system. (F.4.)
R5
Page 25

OCTA should publish this Master Plan on its Website once it is created and provide a Website progress update every six months. (F.4.) 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track?
R6
Page 26

Santa Ana and Garden Grove should create links on their Websites of receipt of this report that show their efforts to complete the OC Streetcar Project and then update these Websites every three months. (F.5.)
R7
Page 26

Anaheim should maintain its link on the city’s Website that shows efforts to successfully complete the ARC project and then update that Website every three months. (F.5.)
R8
Page 26

Fullerton should create a link on the city’s Website that describes the Fullerton City Council’s policy decision process concerning the best transit option to support the College Connector Plan, and then update this Website every three months. (F.5.) REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected County Official shall comment on the findings and recommendation pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05, subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), detail, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary/or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected official or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code Section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: Responses are required from the following governing bodies with 90 days of the date of publication of this report: 90 Day Required Responses: F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 Board of Directors, OCTA: X X X X X City Council, City of Santa Ana: X City Council, City of Garden Grove: X City Council, City of Anahiem: X City Council, City of Fullerton: X 90 Day Required Responses: R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 Board of Directors, OCTA: X X X X X City Council, City of Santa Ana: X City Council, City of Garden Grove: X City Council, City of Anahiem: X City Council, City of Fullerton: X 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? WORKS CITED City of Anaheim. Anaheim Go Local Transit Master Plan Final Report. Irvine, CA. Dec. 2007. Print. City of Anaheim. Initial Study for the Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) Fixed Guideway CSUF. Daily Titan. May 2014. Web. Jan. 2016. Delong, James V. Myths of Light Rail Transit Policy Study No. 244. Reason Public Policy Institute. Reason Foundation. reason.org. Sep. 1998. Web. Dec. 12. 2015. Expo Line (Los Angeles Metro). Wikipedia. Oct. 2015. Web.27 Oct. 2015 Light Rail in the United States.Wikipedia.24 Aug. 2015.Web.1 Sep. 2015. Mallinckrodt, Jack. Centerline Light Rail Unveiled. Urbantransport.org. Aug. 2004. Web. Jan. 2016. OC Streetcar. Projects-and-Programs/All-Projects/Rail-Projects. octa.net. Web. Sep. 2015. Orange County Transportation Authority. Wikipedia.15 Jun. 2015.Web. Jul. 2015. Pacific Electric. Wikipedia. Oct. 2015.Web.12 Oct. 2015. Passenger Rail Terminology. Wikipedia. Oct. 2015. Web. Nov. 2015. San Diego Metropolitan Transit System. Wikipedia. Jun. 2015.Web. Sep. 2015. San Diego Trolley. Wikipedia. Jul. 2015.Web. Jul. 2015. Santa Ana Streetcar Project: A Study in Local Transit Planning. ocgrandjury.org. May 2010. Web. Nov. 2015. Sprinter. Wikipedia. Dec. 2015. Web. Jan. 2015. Transit Extensions to Metrolink. Projects and Programs/All Projects/Rail-Projects.octa.net. Web.27 Oct.2015. United States, Department of the Treasury with the Council of Economic Advisors. An Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Investment. Washington DC: 11 Oct. 2010. Print. United States. Department of Transportation. Budget Highlights, Fiscal Year 2017 Proposed Budget. Washington DC: Dec. 2016. Print. United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Transit Administration. Final Interim Policy Guidance Federal Transit Administration Capital Investment Grant Program. Washington DC: 20 Aug. 2015. Print. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? Urban Cores, Core Cities and Principal Cities. Newgeography.com. Web. Dec. 2015. Van Stratten, Gina. City Studying Public Transportation Project to Connect Downtown with CSUF. Daily Titan. May 2014. Web. Jan. 2016. Weikel, Dan. Rail Could Make a Comeback in OC. Daily Pilot. Tradvisors.com/resources/news. Web. Aug. 2015. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? WORKS CONSULTED Anaheim Streetcar Economic Impact & Development Study. GB Place Making. E.D. Hovee and Company. Aug 2013. Print. Anaheim Chamber of Commerce. anaheimchamber.org. 2014. Web. Dec. 2015. Board Actions 8 Aug. 2014. octa.net. Aug. 2014.Web. Oct. 2015. City of Anaheim. Council Agenda Report. Department of Public Works. Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) Fixed-Guideway Project Update. Anaheim, CA. April 2012. Print. City of Anaheim. Council Agenda Report. Department of Public Works. Anaheim Rapid Connection (ARC) Fixed-Guideway Project-Selection of Locally Preferred Alternate and Acceptance of Anaheim Transportation Improvement District (ATID) Transportation Funds. Anaheim, CA: 23 Oct 2012. Print. Cooperative Agreement No. C-6-0692 between OCTA and City of Santa Ana. City Initiated Transit Extensions to Metrolink w/Amendment. Santa Ana, CA. Mar. 2007. Print. Cooperative Agreement No. C-8-1157 between OCTA and City of Santa Ana. City of Santa Ana Fixed-Guideway Project w/Amendments. Santa Ana, CA. Mar. 2015. Print. Felgenbaum, Baruch. Southern California Mobility Plan. reason.org.news/show. Nov. 2015. Web. Nov. 2015. Freemark, Yonah. Have U.S. Light Rail Systems Been Worth the Investment? Blog. @yfreemark. Apr. 2014. Web. Oct. 2015. Garden Grove Chamber of Commerce. gardengrovechamber.com. 2012. Web. Dec. 2015. Harris, Marlys. When it Comes to Public Subsidies, Twin Cities Light Rail Seems a Bargain. minnpost.com/cityscape. Jun. 2012. Web. Oct. 2015. Moving into the Future at Hyper drive. Orange County Register. Dec. 2015:News 1,10. Print. North Orange County Chamber. nocchamber.com. 2015. Web. Dec. 2015. Orange County Transportation Authority 2015-2016 Approved Budget. Santa Ana, CA. Jul. 2015. Print. Pacific Electric Right-of-Way Study Update Power Point. Orange County Transportation Authority. Santa Ana, Ca. 2010. Print. Santa Ana Chamber of Commerce. SantaAnaChamber.com. 2015. Web. Dec. 2015. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? Southern California Association of Governments. Scag.ca.gov/about. 2015. Web. Jan. 2016. 2015-2016 Orange County Grand Jury Light Rail: Is Orange County on the Right Track? APPENDICES