Very good.

Well, good morning, everybody, and welcome to the December 10th meeting of the Hillsborough County TPO.

It's good to see everybody for our last meeting of the year.

I don't know how twenty twenty-five got away from us, but uh here we are.

And so if you would please to remember to silence your electronic devices, and I'd invite you to stand and join me in the Pledge of Legion, please.

Thank you.

Could we please call the roll and establish a quorum?

Good morning, TPO.

Ross?

Here Walstall?

Here.

Miller?

Here.

Myers?

Here.

Cullen?

Balls?

Here.

Uh Councilmember Clendoning was excused.

Her tak?

Here.

Carlson.

Here.

Kelton.

Here.

Gray.

Klug.

Here.

Stevens?

Slater.

Thank you.

Hartfield.

Present.

Joseph?

Here.

Thank you.

You have quorum.

Thank you, Mr.

Streeter.

We Commissioner Cohen is here.

I think you got everybody else.

Okay.

Thanks.

Then Board Member Gray was also here.

Okay, I think you got everybody else.

So before we approve the minutes, I would like to uh recognize Mr.

Stevens, who's going to uh introduce his new alternate from Tampa International Airport, Mr.

Stevens.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Good morning, board members.

Uh yes, Mr.

Chairman and board members, it's my pleasure to introduce the aviation authority.

Our alternate, and many of you may be aware, Gina Dew, who used to be the uh alternate is no longer with the aviation authority.

So I'm gonna ask uh our chief development officer, Miss Uh Smith Arata Krishnan to stand up if you will.

Um Smith will be the alternate for the aviation authority in the event that uh I cannot participate, and we're delighted to have her on our team.

So thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, and welcome.

So uh has everybody had an opportunity to review our minutes from our November tenth meeting, and if so, is there a motion?

Second.

Any discussion or corrections to the minutes?

If not, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed, no nays.

Minutes are adopted.

We do have some requests from the public to speak.

Um like to remind everybody we have three minutes per speaker.

Staff will unmute you when the chair recognizes you as needed.

The chair may allow for additional time later in the agenda.

I don't think that's gonna be necessary.

We have five people signed up.

So our first public comment comes from Carmieta Alexander.

Mr.

Chair Carmelda has not signed in.

Okay, well, we'll move to uh Mr.

Rick Fernandez then.

Thank you, Chair.

Can you hear me all right?

Yes, sir, we can.

All right.

Um again, Rick Fernandez uh out of Tampa Heights.

I uh stand in opposition, and I apologize for my voice and trying to fight off the cold.

I stand in opposition to TIP amendment number 43.

That's the two express lanes uh between uh I-75 and county line road on I-4.

Um we can't pave our way out of congestion.

Yep, here we are again, attempting to do exactly that to the tune of something like 500 million dollars.

Your CAC has recommended rejection of this TIP amendment.

I'll offer more on that during my chair's report.

But beyond that discussion at the CAC, I want to just mention the concept of engineered failure.

We know that the downtown interchange is now being reconstructed at a level less than was originally suggested back in 2015 when TBX was rolled out.

The feeder systems, however, are being expanded, and the plan seems to be to expand them to the old TBX size.

So what you have is expanded feeder systems feeding into a reduced downtown interchange.

That's guaranteed failure, a perpetual failure loop that will lead to the demand or request from FDOT at a future date for yet more expansion.

Now carry that forward to I-4.

Today we're talking about expansion of Interstate 4 between County Line Road and uh 75.

Today it's two lanes.

However, the ultimate plan is four lanes.

At some point, the expansion of Interstate 4 along that corridor will compromise the transit envelope that will be available for Brightline or some future other transit option.

At some point, hopefully today, we're going to be required to make the decision between more lanes or transit.

I'm hopeful that today we begin the process of making that response transit.

I know that's what the folks that live in the urban core want, and it's what we've been arguing for now for years.

With what is left of my time, let me speak to the point of the concept that we've discussed frequently, the point of no return.

If this project is allowed forward in a TIP amendment, we have been given to understand by FDOT that they will consider the project to be but beyond the point of no return, meaning that you will be locking yourselves in to this project.

You will not unilaterally be able to remove it at some future date.

You will require FDOT's concurrence, which is unlikely to occur.

And you're being asked to do this at an expedited rate because this project was not scheduled to unveil for another 10 years plus.

Please do not do that to yourself.

Do not do that to your future TPO board members.

Do not do that to the community.

FDOC can come back next year.

We can't, and you can't.

Please reject this amendment.

Thank you.

Mr.

Fernandez, uh staff did Carmieta Alexander call in.

She has not called in.

Okay, then we'll move on to Dana Lazarus.

Good morning, TPO board.

My name is Dana Lazarus.

I live in North Ebor, East Tampa area 33605.

Um, I'm here to uh speak in opposition of approving TIP amendment 43 as well.

Um so I do sit on the CAC.

One of the things I want to point out is when we were provided the presentation on this TIP amendment, there was no high-level overview of the need for this project and what the impacts would be.

Um this is something that this TPO board has in the past um denied projects over.

Um because you you know you said that you don't have enough information.

And I believe that the same situation um is the case here.

For example, safety uh the safety numbers.

Um, we know that I-4 is an incredibly dangerous uh uh facility.

Um when I take I-4, I I believe that most of the crashes that I've seen are on the inside uh towards the median, and I feel like putting um express lanes where people will likely be driving faster on the inside of the highway uh poses a significant safety threat to a lot of people, but we don't know what the safety numbers are within the 17 mile corridor.

Um the crash count that is and how they were caused, and um if there's any mitigation plan with this uh widening.

Um we also don't know if there's gonna be a significant enough envelope for the transit that is planned within the envelope, um, whether that be Bright Line or something else.

Um so that is something that has to be studied before approving um this point of note return um money.

Um we also don't know what on and off ramps are going to be uh provided within the 17 mile corridor.

Uh if if there are none um or not sufficient ones, then what exactly is the point of widening the road by one lane in each direction for 500 million dollars just for people to be dumped right back out onto the same facility?

It just doesn't make sense.

It reminds me of the Pinellas County lanes that went in that are a significant um uh hazard um over the Howard Franklin uh and then like dumping out right after um uh I don't remember what that one road is, but there's there's a new facility in Pinellas County, you guys probably know the one I'm talking about, and it's kind of bad, and I we don't need another one of those.

Um I would just recommend that you don't approve this.

Uh we now if we don't understand by this point that um roads and highways are extremely expensive uh to fund then I don't know what we're doing.

Um transit is Miss Lazarus, your time is up, ma'am.

Yep.

Oh, okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Chris Vella.

Good morning, sir.

Good morning, Chris Vella, 33605.

I'm against the tip amendment.

Pitch your neighborhood.

Now imagine something bad in it, like a drive-thru plan next door to you.

Now imagine even more of the scene developments plan for the rest of your neighborhood because the first fast food restaurant was allowed to be built.

This is the crux of allowing Lexus lanes on I-4.

Unlike the Crosstowns or Veterans, which are solely owned and operated by the state, I-4, like I-275 is federally owned and operated.

These are freely operated public roadways, unlike expressways built for tolls.

The decision today is the first for every single one of you.

Amfordis County.

Will you support the first Lexus lanes on our public interstates in Hillsborough County?

Will you risk setting a precedent in perpetuity for more express lanes to come?

Are you comfortable knowing that you're asking taxpayers to become risk takers for a $500 million road for just 17 miles?

If you approve this amendment, FDOT will come back and ask for a lot more than 500 million.

They will argue that they must complete 15 miles of Lexus lanes through Tampa between I-75 and the Howard Franklin Bridge.

Then they'll ask for more between downtown and loots.

You'll get a lot of a lot of angry phone calls from the public who can't afford tolls.

You'll get funding threats from FDOC if you don't approve funding these tolls.

You'll be left with the same highways with gridlock and a political career with no solution, no mass transit that your community wants.

No state statute or law defines what managed lanes are.

As a member of the CAC committee, I have asked the TPO staff to clearly define a managed lane, what type of transportation modes are allowed on them.

We still have no answers.

Yet we're asked for recommendations to fund them.

Imagine buying an expensive property without knowing the entitlements, exact location, or if buying means buying in with a group of investors you don't know.

It's funny how we're so afraid of building rail, yet the TPO staff seems motivated, more than likely bullied by FDOT to invest in managed lanes when they literally cannot tell you the laws that govern or codify their use.

Your TPO staff is afraid.

They shouldn't be, but all you all are enabling it by allowing FDOT to carry on this Tallahassee plan.

During our last CAC meeting, we carried out a motion on this TIP amendment.

Staff presented a document outside of our agenda showing public support for the express lanes.

They cherry picked these results from the 2050 LRTP survey.

Despite my chair claiming the TPO staff was out of order, the presenters carry it on.

The LRTP captured only 0.003% of the county's population.

If you go by those numbers, that means only 900 people per day use I-275 and I 4.

Does that sound fair to your constituents?

No.

Do not approve this TIP amendment for I-4 express lanes.

If FDOT does not have enough money for their zombie road plans, then they certainly shouldn't be asking to be the ones handling toll revenue.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Bellow.

Neil Manymala.

Good morning, sir.

My name is uh Neil Manamala.

Zip code is uh 33629, and I'm here in opposition of TIP Amendment 43.

Um I am a physician, a lifelong Hillsborough resident and someone who takes this corridor all the time in taking care of patients from Plant City to Tampa.

And um I just want to share this quote from uh transit expert Jeff Speck.

Widening roads to cure congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity.

Everyone in this room, I believe, shares the same goal.

Um less traffic congestion, more route reliability, safer travel.

And I do want to honor FDOT's good intent.

Um the desire to give people relief on I-4 is real, but this proposal does not change the diagnosis, it only changes the belt size.

What you're being asked to approve today at its core is an expensive piece of cosmetic surgery.

It's an asphalt form of 500 million dollars, a procedure meant to improve the appearance of movement without treating the underlying condition.

And take it from the surgeon.

Cosmetic surgery does have its place, but not if the patient needs a heart transplant.

Anyone who lives in Florida knows this pattern.

Whether you're a commuter crossing uh the county during rush hour on Monday, or a parent driving to Disney on a Saturday morning, or even one of my patients going to South Florida Baptist on a Tuesday night, we widen the highway and it fills.

We widened it again in another five to ten years and it fills.

But we're not reducing congestion, and our own data supports that.

FDOT's own sponsored research shows that managed lanes, even after billions upon billions invested, save the commuter on average just two minutes.

This is a very costly short-term maneuver and not a long-term relief for congestion.

Meanwhile, the same $500 million which is proposed for this project.

Uh, in cities like Charlotte and Phoenix, they were able to build 10 to 20 miles of light rail.

In Hillsborough, that's the equivalent of plant city to Brandon.

The Sunrail built 32 miles of that and connected three counties.

That's the equivalent of Plant City to Sun City Center for here.

That's not just cosmetic, that's transformative change.

So I urge you to support the CAC and reject TIP Amendment 43, because good medicine means choosing the intervention that actually works.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Staff.

I want to go back one more time and check on Miss Alexander if she has she called in.

I do have a number that's called in.

I'm not sure if they're Carmayeta or not, so let me just uh try to verify.

Okay, we'll give you a second.

Hello, the 813 number.

Are you karma yeta, Alexander?

No.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

That's all I have signed up for public comment.

Next up, we have committee reports and advanced comments.

Uh Mr.

Fernandez, you are recognized as the CAC chair.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh sound check.

Can you hear me all right?

Yes, sir, we can.

All right, thank you.

Uh Citizens Advisory Committee.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Uh, for the record, I'm Rick Fernandez, chair of your CAC.

Um, the CAC met on uh December 3, 2025.

We convened at uh 6 p.m., concluded just a little short of eight, as I recall.

Uh we had uh we met quorum easily with between 16 and 14 people in the room, depending on when during the two hours we're talking about.

The TPO um, I'm sorry, the CAC acted on two action items, both of which are on your agenda today.

Uh one was the uh right line station area study, and the other was the uh TIP amendment that we've already talked about somewhat in public comment, the I-4 express lanes from uh I-75 to County Line Road.

TPO staff and and the consultant presented on the Bright Line Station area study.

CAC members asked questions on several topics, including mobility and impact fees, the role of Amtrak and Tampa Union Station, ensuring a strong connection to the streetcar, seamless interoperability of transportation services and payment systems, and the old site for a high-speed rail station.

There was extensive discussion, and CAC members discussed their concerns with funding and impacts to the community, while others highlighted the need of this as a start and to continue to push to advance transit connections and efforts.

The CAC voted 14 to 2 to recommend the TPO board accept the Bright Line Station area study.

The next action item was the uh the TIP amendment number 43.

TPO staff presented the TIP amendment for I4 Express lanes.

CAC members asked questions about the project and its status as it relates to the point of no return, potential impacts to a future Bright Line service, what happens at the ends of the project, meaning when the additional two lanes end and you're dumped back again into the original uh with facility, the PDE and right-of-way impacts and safety.

CAC members express concern that this project would not be able to be changed later, if approved, removing the ability of a future TPO board to make changes without FDOT's agreement.

That by author note is a passing reference to the point of no return concept.

Also, we discussed concerns that express lanes have tolling and crash uh issues associated with them, uh, that this is a big amendment outside the regular TIP cycle and moves the project up 10 to 15 years that uh from its original scheduled timing.

Other CAC members expressed support for the project, noting that it is a critical connection to the east and have significant freight travel.

Motion was made to recommend rejection of the uh proposed TIP amendment.

That motion passed by 9 to 5, and uh in order to provide total context on this, I'm going to read into the record the motion that was actually made because it was fairly extensive in terms of Boraz clauses.

Whereas the TPO CAC has been asked to approve TIP amendment number 43 for the TIP fiscal year 26 through 30, whereas TIP amendment 43 would add I-4 express lanes from I-75 to county line road to the TIP.

FDOT's intent being to add two express lanes, one in each direction along that 17-mile corridor.

Whereas the described project reportedly has $3.7 million in state and federal funds to fund preliminary engineering, whereas the subject project is among those in the governor's moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative, which is expected to expedite project delivery schedules by 10 to 15 years or more.

Whereas there is now guidance that subject project would be considered quote beyond the point of no return, close quote, once added by amendment to the TIP.

Whereas once the project is deemed to be beyond the point of no return, this and future TPO boards would be powerless to unilaterally remove this project from the TIP.

Whereas the proposed TIP Amendment 43 is interpreted as an effort to prematurely commit this and future TPO boards to a construction project estimated to cost $500 million.

Therefore, the TPO CAC recommends rejection of the proposed TIP amendment number 43.

That motion passed by a vote of 9 to 5.

Unless there are other questions, that'll conclude my report.

Thank you for Mr.

Fernandez.

Any questions from Mr.

Fernandez?

Seeing none, thank you, sir.

Uh next up Sarah Caper from TPO staff.

Good morning, Ms.

Caper.

Good morning.

Here are the other committee reports regarding today's action items.

The Livable Roadways Committee, Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee, and Technical Advisory Committee all recommended that the TPO board accept the Bright Line Station Area study.

The Livable Roadways Committee discussed how HART could integrate with a future Bright Line Station, noting that the station, the airport, and downtown Tampa could function as a connected loop.

Comments also referenced passenger activity at Port Tampa Bay and the need for a stronger transit integration, as well as existing Amtrak service to Orlando and Miami.

It was noted that many people are unclear about the differences between rail types, and a suggestion was made for the TPO to create an educational video explaining these distinctions.

The bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee discussed the station area and potential station location, along with questions regarding Bright Line's ownership of stations and the selection of stakeholders, including why USF was not included.

Members highlighted opportunities to connect with the Selman Greenway and the Florida Gulf Coast Trail.

It was noted that Bright Line is generally not proactive in coordinating with local transit, emphasizing the need for local jurisdiction jurisdictions to take the lead.

Additional discussion covered this study's funding and ongoing renovations at Union Station.

And members acknowledge that this type of long-range study aligns with the TPO's role and provides an early opportunity for public feedback.

The technical advisory committee noted that the study was well prepared and leaves room for continued planning.

Questions were raised about next steps for the TPO board and how the identified needs around a potential station could ultimately develop into projects led by the port, airport, city of Tampa, or other partners.

Regional coordination was also discussed with the survey shared across multiple MPOs, and 80% of responses coming from the Tampa Bay region.

Members asked about site feasibility and staff confirmed that a platform can fit at the proposed location, though Brightline would determine how trains approach downtown from I-4.

The technical advisory committee also recommended that the TPO board approve the amendment to the I-4 express lanes from I-75 to County Road County Line Road TIP Amendment.

Public comments were received via email and social media.

Peter Crosby emailed expressing his disapproval of the TIP amendment, citing concerns that tolls could become a burden for low-income residents, and that managed lanes may not reduce congestion as effectively as alternatives such as mass transit.

Clifford Reese submitted questions regarding the potential Bright Line extension and how it relates to the planning, funding, and construction of the I-4 express lanes.

TPO staff followed up by sharing that transit service, inclusive of passenger rail and other modes, is being considered with the express lanes and provided links to FDOT resources that provide further information.

On Facebook, Tatiana Morales requested that the TPO board support the citizen advisory committee and reject the TIP amendment, noting that the same funding could be used for bike lanes, bus lanes, and other traffic improvements.

Mike LaMarca also commented on Facebook, sharing concerns that the plastic lane delimit delineators in the current bike lane design create hazards for cyclists.

This concludes my report.

Thank you, Ms.

Caper.

Board members, are there any questions?

Thank you very much.

Board members, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

Was it Commissioner Cohen and seconded by Commissioner Myers?

Uh all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

No nays.

Consent agenda is adopted.

Next we move into action items.

Uh first item is the 2026 TPO board officers and committee assignments.

Our board attorney Cameron Clark will explain.

Morning board members.

Uh I am going to as I I always do annually do the uh election of officers and then committee appointments for the MPO.

We can do uh the committee appointments we can do relatively quickly, but I'll start with the election of uh chair and vice chair.

Um I'll ask for nominations, no seconds are required.

Um if there's only one nomination, that person is elected.

Um so I would start by asking for nominations for TPO chair.

Mayor Ross is nominated or the end or the nominations.

All right, seeing none, Mayor Ross is elected.

Congratulations, sir.

Thank you.

Uh next it asked for nominations for TPO vice chair.

Are there nominations?

Nomine Wastel.

Commissioner Walsell's uh nominated, any other nominations?

Commissioner Wallstall is elected.

Congratulations.

Um next is the chair of the Transition Disadvantage Coordinate Board.

Uh, presently it is Commissioner Myers.

Uh typically it is uh would ask if Commissioner Myers is interested in reappointment.

I'd start with that.

Yes.

Okay.

Um is there if there's a nomination to that effect, otherwise, if there's an alternate, I can take it.

Yeah.

Okay.

So moved.

Uh all in favor say aye.

All right.

All right.

Um, I take that back.

I didn't even need to vote on that because one nomination.

My apologies.

Uh so next we have uh council member Hurtak is uh presently the the LRC chair.

Um is the council member interest in Marine Reapointment.

Okay.

Any nominations to that effect?

I moved to approval any other nominations?

Councilmember is reconfirmed.

Um and finally is the alternate to the MPOEC.

Um the board chair is the regular member, but the alternate presently is Mr.

Anderson with Mr.

Klug as alternate.

Mr.

Klug, are you reconfirmed?

Okay, any nominations that affect?

Okay.

Any others?

All right, confirmed.

Thank you.

That's all I have.

Very good.

That was quick and painless.

Thank you.

And uh board members, I do want to again thank you very much.

I'm honored that you would place that trust in me.

I I uh it's one thing to be elected in office, that's a big honor, but it's another to be elected by your peers, and and when I look around this room, I don't even consider myself your peer.

So uh thank you very much for your confidence.

Okay.

Uh next, I lost my place here, got so excited.

Drunk with power.

Next is the Bright Line Station Area Study, and Sarah Caper is returning to explain.

Good morning again, TPO board members, Sarah Caper, TPO staff, and I have Stephanie McQueen, our consultant on this project here with me.

I'll start the presentation and then Stephanie will um conclude with more of the content.

So the um committees heard in their November and December meetings, the Bright Line Station Area Study, which we'll present on for you this morning.

We'll talk about the study overall and its goals, the public survey we conducted, the analysis and user profiles that we did, and then the needs and connectivity plan.

So to begin, there were four goals of this study.

One was to identify potential bright line users, another to assess demand for multimodal connections to key destinations, the third to evaluate the mobility and infrastructure improvements, and fourth to develop an early action plan.

So this study was not about where exactly a Bright Line station could be, but it was thinking about if a Bright Line station were to come to Tampa, how do we prepare for that?

And that thinks about what kind of connections and improvements are needed to start thinking about.

So we are ready if a station comes.

One thing that we really focused on as part of our study is thinking about some improvements that would be nice to have regardless.

So while some of them are focused on a station, many of them are ones that could be done, and we see a need for should the jurisdictions like to proceed with them.

But we had to start somewhere.

So based on previous discussions and information shared, we picked a station area study that started on Nuccio Parkway and then expanded out, and you'll see in the presentation these buffered circle areas.

So we did consider different mobility and infrastructure needs from a station site through the areas within different quarter mile areas, a mile area, and beyond, so we can think about what is needed at these different levels.

We do recognize that the area around that line on Nuccio Parkway is underway with a lot of different development, and you'll hear about that briefly.

But we did recognize there's a lot of activity happening in this area and a lot of changes happening to the transportation network and more.

We began this study in February of this year.

We did an initial review of what's out there today, recognizing it's changing rapidly.

We looked at peer facilities, and you'll hear about that in a moment from Stephanie.

We did a survey in May that we received a lot of really responsive feedback from that was helpful for us.

We conducted an analysis of current transportation connections between the different areas and developed user profiles to help humanize who might use this service and what their needs are.

Then we worked on a conceptual connectivity plan, and then we went to the committees and are here before you today.

As part of our effort, we did engage with a number of different stakeholders and study team members.

We met with uh stakeholders multiple times throughout the project, and those include the planning commission staff, staff from the city of Tampa, which included multiple departments.

We included Port Tampa Bay, HART, FDOT TheA, the Tampa Downtown Partnership, the Tampa Bay Partnership, Friends of Tampa Union Station, and the schools in our stakeholder and study team.

We also had several conversations with Tampa International Airport and with Bright Line as part of this process, though they didn't participate in that committee, they did provide feedback for us along the way.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Stephanie to provide the rest of the presentation.

Thank you, Sarah.

Thank you, everyone.

Again, my name is Stephanie McQueen.

I'm with HDR.

Um, and I think this is a this is a really exciting topic.

We had a lot of enthusiasm from stakeholders that we worked with, and we'll talk about the public survey.

As Sarah mentioned, when we started our analysis, we looked at the context of the station area.

And it's probably very different than what our memo from earlier this year is pointing out, given the rapid changes and growth.

But it was a very helpful place to start because there is so much going on in that area related to transportation improvement projects, development, the demographics of the area are changing.

And we all know it's a historic area, so we took into consideration where are those resources and constraints within the area.

We also looked at peer facilities as Sarah mentioned, the Bright Line stations in Miami Central, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach to understand what the stations have within their facilities and within the surrounding areas to understand what users of those stations experience when they travel to and from there, and what are the pieces or amenities or types of improvements that at a Tampa station we would want to include.

And some of the key things that we thought were really interesting were wayfinding and transfers between the different transit modes.

So people getting off a bright line can get easily to another transit mode, bus, you know, another train, and then also just comfort, safety, all those things that make traveling on transit more appealing to people.

Back to our survey, we conducted a survey that we were kind of blown away with how many people responded.

It wasn't a statistically valid survey, so it was a lot of people kind of self-selecting to participate.

But we had over or almost 12,000 people participate, and we advertised it on local media, so it was on you know the Fox News in the morning.

I turned it on one day and saw that, and we promoted it throughout the TPO's email distribution list, social media, as well as our TPO and MPO partners around the state.

So it wasn't just people in Tampa Bay responding this, this was people from South Florida, Orlando that had received the notifications via their TPO or board, TPO or MPO board distribution lists.

Overwhelmingly there was support for a station and Bright Line service within Tampa.

And why we wanted to talk about this survey today with you guys is really trying to understand the access to and from a station because that's that's really what we can focus on this time is not necessarily where it goes, when it comes, the funding, all of those kind of pieces, but really how are people going to get to and from a station.

When we asked people how they would get to the station from the Tampa Bay region, a lot of people said that they would drive, obviously.

That's kind of their their main point.

But almost 50% said that they would be open to using more than one mode.

So if there were ride share, if there was transit, if there was another mode, they would be open to it, excuse me, open to it.

They weren't, you know, only gonna drive by car.

Um arriving to Tampa, obviously, people won't have cars with them, so a lot more willingness to do ride hailing, Ubers, um, walking to their destination, getting picked up by someone, or taking streetcar or bus.

Um and just generally, like I said, big picture on what we received.

We I think Sarah has mentioned they're digging into the comments a little bit further to understand what what people are really saying.

There were there's a lot of good information in there, but really the enthusiasm, the the need for this regional connectivity, integration with some other destinations within the Tampa Bay area, such as the airport, USF, focusing on safety, focusing on the need to uh expand tourism, the economic growth that it could bring.

People were really excited about the potential of a Bright Line or another high-speed rail option.

And you know, the the sentiments are like please get it done now, um, go let's go go go go go.

Um we did hear some opposition to it.

Some people were really concerned about the cost, feasibility, um, and ridership numbers, but overwhelmingly what we heard from the survey was positive.

This was really helpful to us because we were trying to understand the potential for the number of users of the station.

How would people get to and from the station depending upon where they're coming from or going to?

We developed these zones that kind of looked at proximity to this station area.

So if you're within a quarter mile, you're gonna be more willing to walk, bike, take transit.

One mile, still a little bit potential for those multimodal options, but if you're coming from the 45-minute drive shed, so that's the greater Tampa Bay area, you would be more likely to need a car to get to the station.

Um we use that information along with the survey information to look at the existing travel pattern.

We use that information along with the survey information to look at the existing travel pattern.

So we used a replica data source, so it's an anonymized cell phone-based data source that looks at how people travel already between these different markets, between Tampa, Miami, Orlando.

And right now we're seeing that there's 28 million trips that are going on each year between all of the different existing and planned or potential Bright Line stations.

So that's a lot of people moving around the states within the areas that are proximate to the existing or planned stations.

This helps us kind of understand there is definitely a market.

There are existing trips that are going on between these service, these bright line service areas, and we can better understand where people are going to and coming from, along with what we heard from the survey.

We heard a lot that people from Tampa would want to go to Orlando specifically.

We heard more that they would go down to Miami.

So there's this inner city passenger rail is definitely a uh a call, there's been a call for uh that service, and we put some faces on these types of people that would use a Bright Line station.

So it goes from you know young professionals that live in the channel district who want to go over to Orlando for a business uh trip.

They want to, you know, get to the station by a scooter or taking a multimodal, another multimodal option, and they have different concerns about you know safety on the sidewalk, safety on lighting, um, folks coming in from Orlando or Lakeland to take a cruise.

How do they get to the cruise ship port with their luggage?

They have different concerns.

So kind of taking this into mind, putting a face to these people and what their issues, concerns are will help us identify the needs and some of the solutions to improve the the multimodal access, including parking, including access to streetcar within this station area.

Um so the next part, the final part of our study was really trying to uh enumerate these needs within the area and identify some different solutions.

And we did them in three different areas.

So white right within the station site itself.

So this would be probably more likely in Bright Line's control.

What do they build within their station or the the immediate site?

Then what are the needs within one quarter mile?

So walking, biking, access to the streetcar line, providing a direct connection because it probably would not be co-located with a streetcar, with a streetcar stop, just given the ex the existing layout of things.

And then what are the things that are needed greater than a quarter mile?

So access to downtown Marion Transit Center, access to the airport, access to USF, access across the Tampa Bay over to St.

Peter Clearwater.

What are the things that we need to do to better serve a Bright Line station?

For our connectivity plan, we developed it by mode.

So our first mode that we looked at was roadway and parking, and really the need that we identified was improving that local street connective street connectivity, enhancing safety, managing congestion, management on the curb side, so people are dropping people off.

How do we manage that traffic getting to and from a Brightline station?

And we came up with a few ideas based on some of the existing projects that are underway on I-4 and 275.

There's a new on and off ramp proposed right there on 14th and 15th Street.

So maximizing that new connection, how can we improve the street grid?

Um we know Gasworks is going to improve the street grid in that area and connect over New CEO, so that will help improve.

But there are some other ways to make sure with wayfinding and curbside management and speed management to make sure that the roadways within this general area are safe for all users.

For transit, we looked at how to really maximize that connection with the streetcar.

If the station comes in along Nucio, there's several stations that it could connect to.

How do we make that easy for people to do a transfer?

And with heart, their bus lines, obviously, that could change if a station comes in, the bus routes could be realigned.

So how do they do so in a way that makes that transfer easy for all users?

And generally, even if Bright Line doesn't come, having access between the heart routes and streetcar would also be a really important consideration.

For bicycle and shared youth paths, the the access that we were really thinking was needed was obviously to the station, but there's an existing facility, the green spine cycle track that is underway or recently completed along New Cio Parkway and will continue north.

So, how do we make east-west connections to that green spine network that is already a really valuable route for bicyclists through this area?

And so we're proposing enhancements on some of the major east-west roads, and then also we heard Nebraska Avenue was kind of a safety pinch point crossing the railroad tracks right in front of Union Station.

So that might be another might be another future need that could be realized with an improvement project.

On the pedestrian and shared use shared use paths, um connectivity plan, we really focused on safe crossings on Muceo Parkway.

So adding more mid-block crossings, um traffic lights, or just um pedestrian, you know, push-button crossings.

Um there's already been a study that kind of shows where the sidewalk gaps are, so completing those highest priority projects is recommended, and then looking at other ways to connect channel district up, um, connect downtown over, connect Tampa Heights over, really you know, stitching these neighborhoods and the urban core together.

And finally, technology and wayfinding, that's what's gonna help people get around, make the connections between the different transit modes, make sure they feel comfortable parking, um, make sure the lighting is um adequate for safety at night and things like that.

And I'll turn it back over to Sarah.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So we did focus on these three different levels for the connectivity plan, the ones at the station itself that could be a useful tool to our partners as a site gets developed, and then these different geographies by mode.

And so our ask of you today is to approve the Bright Line Station Area Study, and we're happy to take any questions you might have.

Thank you, board members.

Are there questions for Ms.

Caper or Miss McQueen?

Yes, board member Gray.

Thank you, uh Chair Ross.

Thank you, uh Ms.

Capers and Ms.

McQueen.

What a great expansive uh presentation.

Um it seems to me for the information that you have given us that seems the will of the people, 11,000 perhaps 12,000 definitely are on the uh are our pro-transit.

Um looks to me like this is a it's a Mecca area where you can just make this grow.

But that's the part of the question I have.

So when we look at the district, the um the whole county, how uh how many folks you might not have this information, but took part in the survey as it relates to Southeast, Tampa, North, East and West, and South County Wyamama, because those are huge growing areas.

Sure, and I don't have that number on the top of my head, but we do have on the website a map that shows um in one of the documents where we heard from.

I will say we heard a lot from people in the downtown core, but we did hear from pretty much every corner of Hillsborough County, and then we also heard from outside of Hillsborough County and Pascoe County, Pinellas County, Sarasota, and Manatee counties.

But we can follow up with that exact uh numbers for you.

I appreciate that.

And do you have an estimated cost uh of the service?

Is there any parameters?

We focused on the infrastructure and access pieces since Brightline is a private company and that's not out in our control.

Um we did not develop cost information because most of this is at a very high level, but that certainly could be a next step if there's interest in proceeding with some of these recommendations, then we would look at refining them and costs could be a piece of that.

I would like to to know to have that information, speaking on behalf of myself.

Um and last, what other connections?

You mentioned, of course, heart lines, but if we're going to extend this service to other areas of the uh Tampa Bay region, um what other connectivities do we have right now?

An example is right now PSTA operates a service that does cross the bay and it ends at the Marion Transit Center.

So one option could be for that current service to continue on to wherever the Bright Line Station area or the Bright Line Station is.

Um so that would be one example of an option is if they're willing to extend that.

Alternatively, we'd have to think of another way to get from the station to Marion Transit Center.

One thing we are very aware of though is that people want minimal connections and fast service, and so that's a calculation we have to keep in mind as we think about what that looks like is that it has to be easy for people, it has to be quick.

We heard from one of the committees about trying to integrate the payment structure.

So those are all things that we'd have to keep in mind as we look at those connections.

Yeah, in addition to see how the heartlines uh interface with the overall plan, because that's the only connectivity that I I know of.

Uh, I might be missing something, but that's yeah, some of the only uh you know mass transit we have.

So that concludes my remarks.

Thank you.

Board member Hartfield and then Councilmember Carlson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um again, thank you for great presentation.

I would just ask um if the board approves uh moving forward that we look at an opportunity to position heart as a viable uh solution provider in all modes.

Um heart, as you're aware, has been significantly underfunded for years based on our last study, it's a hundred million dollars underfunded based on comparable mass transit systems.

So if we could position heart uh to be a viable provider um in moving people from this station throughout our city, throughout our county, and throughout connections in the region, I think it positions heart for long-term sustainability and self-sufficiency.

Um so I would love to see Hart positioned in that way as a credible resource and a priority uh to provide connections for for people as they're coming in and out of our our area.

Thank you.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, thank you.

Councilmember Carlson.

Yeah, a question and then a couple comments.

There the motion that's gonna be made is it to just accept the report is there or is it to somehow endorse the information in the report?

I I would think the goal is to accept it, but just accept it.

Okay, up to the motion maker.

Yeah, I just want to I'm new to the board, but I I just wanted to state um uh I I have strong opposition to putting the station in Ebor City.

Um city is a historic district.

Um it's also somewhat on the periphery of Tampa, and um the area that uh I don't know from official sources where it's gonna go, but I know from unofficial sources where it's gonna go, and the area is too tight to handle thousands of cars a day with no mass transit, uh meaningful mass transit to get out of there, um, it either is gonna become uh, and I visit other bright line stations, but this is either going to become a major multimodal center, or uh there are going to be thousands of cars going in and out.

I think that multimodal center is more appropriate on the northern part of downtown, or at um at uh West Shore or even at the close to the Conract at TIA.

Um I I don't think it's appropriate for a um for a historic district.

The second thing is that um, and this came up the last two proposals for high speed rail.

I think it this is a huge threat for um for Tampa Airport.

Um unfortunately I'm not allowed to talk to Michael about this outside this room, but um the uh before Joe Lapano and Michael took over, we had 14 years of mismanagement, undermanagement of our airport.

We lost 60 percent of our international flights.

We lost uh many of our domestic flights to Orlando, um, and there were lots of excuses about why that happened.

Um Joe's team, Michael's team are bringing those flights back, uh, but still we're competing heavily with Orlando.

Um, the ability for someone to get on a on a high speed rail go essentially directly to from Ybor or downtown to Orlando Airport and potentially save money, save time by flying nonstop.

I think that's something we have to seriously consider.

Um I think it would be um more appropriate if it was closer to the airport so that people from Orlando could come to our airport or people coming into our airport could easily get to Orlando.

That's a discussion for another day, but I just want to put it on the record.

Thank you.

Thank thank you, Mr.

Carlson.

Mr.

Clark, could you just clarify for the board that when we accept this confirm that when we accept this report, we're not necessarily approving the location of the station typically, unless that's part of the motion or part of the request.

So all of the items have a recommended motion.

So um I would defer, I guess, to Dr.

Wong as to what the recommendation is from staff on the item.

Recommendations just to approve or accept the requirement microphone.

Oh Johnny Wong, TPO executive director, the requested or recommended action from staff is just to accept or approve the report.

Okay.

Clarification on that.

Uh thank you for bringing that up, council member.

Commissioner Wastel.

I was stealing a microphone from my colleague here.

Um thank you for the report.

I was pulling up your map.

U at first I was excited when I saw the number of respondents, but then when you said that you sent it to other TPO meller lists, I it it it tells me why from a data standpoint, why the results were so skewed in favor of it, and you only got one to two percent um negative feedback, and that's because in in my experience is that the people that are often plugged in to these types of environments and boards and that are in constant contact are the transit activists, not not the people, not everyday citizens that just that just drive on the road.

Um and and that's that's why I believe it was so skewed in one direction.

Um if I can tell you that out of 1.6 million people in Hillsborough County, um, if you really got aggressive in the unincorporated area, you would see a huge swing back the other way than than the results you got here.

Um seeing some respondents were in Tallahassee, uh Gainesville, Jacksonville, um, Palm Beach, Cape Coral, Sarasota.

So a lot of those, you know, for me, junk in, junk out um type of scenario.

Uh I've always said I'm not a I'm not opposed to um bright line, and um they just have to come and do it with their own money.

But I I think that that's why from a data standpoint, you got subscribed in in one hard way.

I I was looking though, um, you know, a lot of the transit activists they scream affordable transportation, affordable transportation.

Um well, it's it's clearly proven bright line is is very unaffordable for the average family.

I mean, that's without debate.

That is just the price of their tickets right now.

And I noticed that on the demographics of your respondents, the almost supermajority of them were household income 100,000 plus.

If I think that that's a key data point that everyone should be looking at um is is if that's your goal, um, that's not what the respondents um are reflective of, and that's that's not what you're gonna get with what's currently on the table.

I would look um to um you know, FDOT gets all this um um unnecessary flack, but you know, they they heavily subsidize the Sunrill, I think it was, and they are massively upside down on revenue now that that's ending, and I mean, where that goes is is probably catastrophe unless somebody um Uncle Sam comes in and saves them.

Um I would say that I you know the I I disagree entirely with the comments and suggestions that were said about heart, you know, heart is its own thing, um, supplying it's and struggling to supply its its one current um source.

You know, the the numbers about you know that were underfunded, those are those are made up numbers that are regurgitated, and and I I want to make sure that we we leave that with here.

Um our CEO of Hart has said multiple times on the record, I believe I've had him say it um six times, that even if he received double the revenue that he has right now, which is 130 million dollars a year of operating revenue serving no more than 20,000 people.

I think that the real number is closer to 10,000 Hillsborough residents.

It's 130 million dollars a year for about 1% of Hillsborough County's population.

And he has said numerous times with clarity that even if he received double the revenue, he would not be able to expand the current service area.

He would only be able to improve the current route times.

And that is a very clear testament about where Hart is and the service that it's providing.

So suggesting that they come into some operator to South County.

There's never there's not gonna be a train in South County for 20 years.

Um Hart has also said very clear on the record multiple times that the res four density that all of that area has grown into absolutely will never support the ridership for a train.

So I think we should just remove ourselves from that notion.

Um if there is an opportunity to get it to the city of Tampa at um Bright Line or whatever operators' own expense.

I'm can I'm happy to continue to support studies for those things, but I just don't want us facing um chasing fairy tales in this adventure.

It's it's been a moving goalpost for for decades and and and getting outside of the box, I guess, is just not helpful.

So I just um if we're is there an additional is the study done, the money spent?

Yes, sir.

So I I would just point out those those points of view about the data is that you know, getting respondents from Tallahassee, etc.

You know, around the state, I don't know how helpful that was as an indicator of what support it's going to get locally, because that's that's what really matters.

Um maybe or the Orlando question um is is interesting to see how much back and forth you would get.

But um I think that that's just I don't know.

I'm kind of left agnostic after after the completion of the study.

I was I was I was hoping for more of like a centralized, like, hey, this is this is what expectations you could see.

And I I would imagine I'll just close on this, Mr.

Chair.

Um we talked about we had a gentleman come in um several months ago now, maybe a year ago, um times running together on me, and he was talking about what it would cost to convert a lot of our CSX rails to from commercial to passenger, and he said no less than 10 billion dollars for us to try and just complete our little triangle here.

I I bet that that key data point wasn't included on the survey of a hey, did you know, right?

Because that's a massive figure to um get by the community.

So um, anyways, I I appreciate it, and um, you know, I look forward to see what the next steps are in deciding what location.

Thank you.

Commissioner Souncil Member Hertek and then Commissioner Colin, but I do want to remind sorry I turned this off.

Councilmember Hertect and Commissioner Cohen, but I do want to remind board members that we have a hard stop at 11 30 in this room, and we have a probably interesting tip amendment coming up.

So council member Hurtag.

Okay, I I just wanted to say thank you for the survey, and for me, it was a focus on like where the station goes and what we can do surrounding it.

Um, knowing uh that now TGH is going to be building another hospital not too far away from this possible possible um uh bright line station is also something to really consider, and that happened after your uh survey went out.

So I really appreciate um the consideration of what we're going to do to get people in and out, regardless of where it is.

But I believe it starts the conversation, and that's what we need to do.

So thank you very much.

Commissioner Cowen.

Thank you.

I'll be I'll be very brief.

Um I think the reason, or at least the reason that uh while I'm obviously support accepting the report, I think the reason that there's some trepidation is because implied in all this, at least to me, is that there has to be a part two.

There has to be an ability to get people from wherever the station is to downtown and to West Shore into the airport, and maybe even over the Howard Franklin Bridge.

Well, definitely over the Howard Franklin Bridge.

And heart could it could be hard, it could be PSTA, it could be some other new entity, it could be an expanded Tampa Street car going in another direction toward USF.

But if this thing just comes and terminates, it's gonna fail.

The only way to avoid what Councilman Carlson brought up is to make sure that when this happens, there's a plan for a connection that will get people to the airport and to some of our major business centers.

So to me, this is uh a beginning.

And the reason that people I think I I think that the public comments about this, whether 98% positive or 98% negative, are very unreliable because people don't have any details, they don't have any facts, they really don't know what this might be able to mean or do for them.

And uh until you have a program that's really comprehensive, I don't see how people can make an intelligent decision about whether they support it or not.

But I am gonna obviously vote to accept the report, and I hope it's the beginning of the discussion rather than the end of the discussion.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh Mayor Kilton, and then uh Mr.

Clue.

Very briefly.

I think we keep having the conversation like bright line is a done deal and it's gonna happen.

I think it's just still the huge if, and not just if, but what the timeline is gonna look like.

I think that the conversation still might be a little bit premature.

I think it's important to have, but you know, if if if it happens, it's gonna be a long way down the road, and we're gonna have to revisit this conversation in the future.

So I think that point is well taken, and I'll support it today, but uh I just don't until until we have more clarity from them on what they're actually gonna do.

This is kind of a moot exercise in my opinion.

Good.

Mr.

Kluk, yeah, and I just say that there's a lot of questions or reservations of a report.

And I think a lot of people uh you know like seeing the report.

I would just move that we accept report versus approve it.

So just change change the recommendation to accept.

We have a motion by Mr.

Klug is seconded by Commissioner Wastel.

Discussion of the motion to accept the report.

If not, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye, opposed, no nays.

Thank you very much, Ms.

Capers, Miss Uh McQueen.

Next, we have 28 minutes to discuss the TIP amendment proposed for I-4 express lanes from I-75 to County Line Road, and Elizabeth Watkins is here to explain.

Good morning.

Elizabeth Watkins, TP of staff.

So this TIP amendment is before you today, partly because it was announced through Governor DeSantis' moving forward forward initiative to accelerate this project from I-4 from I-75 to county line road, nearly 10 to 15 years to go to construction in 2028.

And at the core of what's proposed is one single or single express lanes in each direction.

So a total of two lanes.

So part of the need for this project is that the number of trips on I-4 will are estimated to nearly double over the next 20 years, as well as it's a really important freight corridor, and currently travel times are very unreliable.

Here's a typical section of what's proposed.

So there will still be three general purpose lanes going east and west, and then one express lane in each direction.

As was mentioned earlier, while this project is just one express lane in each direction, the full build out is anticipated to be two express lanes in each direction.

So what this typical section is showing that even with the future full build out of this project, there would still be about 44 feet preserved for transit in the right of way.

Currently, the construction schedule is to let in fiscal year 28 using a modified design build.

And the construction cost is estimated to be about 500 million dollars in 2028 dollars.

The um planning and development project development and environmental study was approved in October of 2019.

So the action that's being requested of you is to move this project into the transportation improvement program.

You'll see there are about 3.7 million dollars of state and federal funds to do the design for this project.

So the recommended action for you today is to consider approving by roll call vote the amendment to the fiscal year 2630 tip.

Thank you, Ms.

Watkins.

Board members, are there questions?

Mayor Kilton.

If I may, I think it might um be helpful if we could have Secretary Hall weigh in on some of the objections from the public comments CIC before we get too far into the uh into the discussion.

Okay.

I mean, I can.

Um the you know, I've heard I think the two things I heard prevailing were the transit envelope, seems to be the concern, which uh Elizabeth shared the approved typical section from the NEPA document, which clearly shows the transit envelope, so like I'm not really sure where uh that discussion is even coming from.

Um it's uh commonly understood with the NEPA document that when you get through the plant city area that the transit envelope next down and that Bright Line would have to go on structure unless right-away is acquired.

So, like that's uh been commonly understood since uh 2019 and is an understanding that Bright Line has.

Uh what we're proposing right now does not impede on that plan.

Um if the second express lane comes in, uh we would have to widen to the outside.

So if people are kind of doing the math and going, you're at an express lane to the inside, if you add a second express lane, then you know you don't have 44 feet in medium.

Well, that's right, because the widening would occur to the outside when you add the second express lane.

Um, really the plan to add it uh this way was part of the PDE.

Uh one of the components of the PDE had a um uh staged implementation plan.

It's in the PDE that was approved in 2019.

So what we're doing is literally just executing what we talked about back in 2019, uh, which is a staged implementation plan.

Um I don't really I don't really know that's the only objection I really feel like there's something to address.

Uh the rest is just conjecture.

Thank you, Mr.

Hull.

Councilmember Hurtek and Commissioner Wallstall.

Um is it is it 40?

I mean, according to the diagram, it's it's 44 feet of right-of-way, and uh that's is I so I guess the question is what do we need for a train?

44?

Okay.

Yeah, the just so you know the the 44 foot preserved envelope was established when the Florida high speed rail was discussed, that was the width designated.

Okay, and it's 44 feet, the entire how how many miles is this?

It's not the entire that's what I was clarifying.

So through Plant City, there's not 44 feet, there's never been 44 feet.

But the understanding through there is that Brightland would have to go on structure or right-away would need to be purchased along the entire stretch.

Is there 44 is there 44 feet there now?

No.

No, I'm saying there's not there now, and there won't be in the future unless right-away gets acquired, because the current plan right now is that Brightline would go on structure through Plant City, because right now there's less than 44 feet.

Okay, so this is my this is this is the thing that concerns me the most is that in this motion to approve we actually talk about preserving right-of-way for tra for possible transit.

That is that is the thing that I've got to stand up for with the community because as we just heard, I mean, regardless, uh the citizens at least of the city of Tampa really want to make sure that we have that we preserve right-of-way for whatever type of train comes.

So just understand that the transit envelope in the median does not change with this project.

So the areas where there's 44 feet, which is what was specified by the pre certain the uh precursor to Bright Line, which was the high speed rail, but Bright Line has said the same specifications 44 feet.

Where there's 44 feet, there will still be 44 feet.

In the areas right now where there's less than 44 feet, there will still be less than 44 feet.

And the only reason why I'm not using the numbers because it varies through Plant City.

It's 19 feet in some areas, it's 21 feet in some areas, but we are not impacting that.

So that that corridor, 44 feet, 19, 21, it stays the same.

Like this project is not changing that.

And and really the way to explain that is out there we have a full a wide shoulder, and we have some other space that we're utilizing on this project with a little bit of minimal widening to the inside that does not impact.

And so just understand that when we're building this job, we're building with the inside line that we've always proposed, including a transit envelope.

And that's why I'm saying when we come to build the second express lane, we will have to go to the outside, which is what's approved in the NEPA document, is that we would widen to the outside to add the second express lane.

And how many on and off ramps?

That that is kind of an interesting question, because I've ridden the one in St.

Pete and it's or not ridden it, but I've seen it.

So I'm yeah, so so the I-4 express lanes, the approved, there's no dedicated on and off ramps out of the express lane.

There's ingress and egress from the general purpose lanes.

Yeah, that's what I meant.

I believe there's three or four um uh through there.

There's uh one basically right at 75.

Okay.

Uh there's one, it would be kind of in the Forbes Road area.

There's one, then a little bit further at the Nona Sassa, and then obviously the final ingress egress, which is at the Polk Parkway.

Um we use County Line Road, but it's the Polk Parkway.

Okay, and so basically what you're saying is that the on and off ramps would be close to the the big areas that people would need to get on and off.

100 percent, yeah.

So when the when the travel when the when the um study was done back, you know, 2015 through 2019, ingress and egress was the main focus of the federal government when we were going through it, and so we are not changing the ingress and egress from what was approved.

Like we're literally we're just building what was approved back in 2019, is what we're doing.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Uh Commissioner Wallstall and board member Gray.

I'll move for approval.

Second.

Second by Mayor Kilton.

Yes.

Can can I do a friendly amendment that just guarantees that we uh support the um that that we have the space for transit in that envelope.

So this has nothing to do with that, right?

That's what I just said.

Yeah, I think just to understand.

So the TIP amendment, the tip amendment is so this is our funding, right?

This is DOT funding, this is SIS funding.

The TIP amendment is just authorizing us to spend the money that we've allocated for it.

The preservation of the transit corridor is documented in an EPA document, a federal NEPA document.

So for me to in it to reduce that width, I'd have to go back out and do a NEPA document, do public engagement.

I'd have to come back to you and say, hey, I'm I'm shrinking the transit corridor.

This instrument right now is purely just a funding instrument.

It's not like it like I'm just saying you could add the language, but it doesn't impact it it won't hold us to what you're wanting to hold us to.

That's the NEPA document that holds us to that.

Okay.

Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Wastel, seconded by Mayor Kilton.

Board Member Gray, you're recognized first for comments since you were up next.

Thank you, Chair Ross.

Um, I think the questions have been answered.

I think the uh recognition that um this is the State of the Union USF and uh has done a study every year.

Many of us have gone to it.

Um they recognize that the number one cause of poverty is lack of transportation.

So whenever we talk about having a uh activist in transit, I speak for a lot of our students, 69 percent are in poverty and their families.

Transportation in my mind is solidly critical.

So with regards to the motion, I thank you, um Justin Hall, for being very um you know, uh right on top of the possibility of transit, because I think we need to keep that open.

Some of us may agree or may disagree, but that opportunity needs to always be open in my mind for the reason I just gave.

Um I'm going to thank you.

Thank you, Roser.

Any other discussion of the motion?

Hey, Chair Ross, just wonder clarification because I heard it broke on one of the comments is transit vehicles can operate for free in the express lanes.

We get asked that all the time.

A trend like a bus, uh whatever anything that's tied to transit operates for free in the express lanes.

We we've been asked that before, and I think it's just important to be very clear and transparent.

They operate for free in the express lane.

There's no cost.

Thank you, Secretary Hall.

Other comments on the motion.

All right.

If not, Mr.

Schreeder, would you please call a roll call vote?

Ross.

Yes.

Wallstool?

Yes.

Miller?

Yes.

I'm sorry, in the microphone, please.

Yes.

Sorry.

Yes.

Thank you.

Myers?

Yes.

Cullen?

Yes.

Balls?

Yes.

Her tak?

No.

Carlson?

No.

Yes.

Gray?

Yes.

Klug?

Yes.

Stevens?

Yes.

Frey?

Fry, yes.

Hartfield.

Yes.

Joseph?

Yes.

Thank you.

Motion carried 13 to 2.

Members Hert and Carlson voted no.

Thank you, Mr.

Streeter.

Dr.

Wong, executive director's report.

That's all right.

I'll lean over.

Forgive my reach.

Um thank you, board members.

I'll be very quick.

Um this Friday we have a TMA SCTPA meeting that will be held at Theo.

Once again, thank you, Thea, for hosting us.

On that agenda, the regional body will be approving the list of 2026 major regional priorities.

There are no significant changes.

The updates include um new phases of projects that have been funded for construction.

There are a number of legislative updates that I wanted to brief you on.

I'll be very brief on these because I know we're running short on time, but some that I have my eye on are uh bill related to school zone and pedestrian safety, which would require that design and construction plans for installation of crosswalks within school zones include head hybrid beacons or rectangular rapid flashing beacons.

There is a uh DOT bill that would require DOT to increase the minimum yellow time on all steady lights by 0.4 seconds.

There is a provision of that bill requiring the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to implement next gen traffic signal modernization.

That initiative would involve using AI and machine learning to dynamically re-time signals on the fly.

That is it for the legislative updates.

I wanted to point out that in front of you you have the 2026 wall calendar celebrating some of the TPO successes over this year.

And also want to mention that our staff had an opportunity to speak with Waymo executives earlier in the week.

Um we got a lot of interesting uh information and we're very excited for the deployment.

We're looking to bring that presentation to you in February, probably at the regular board meeting, which is on the 10th.

That's all for me, unless anyone has questions.

Thank you, Dr.

Wong.

Board members, are there questions for Dr.

Wong?

Seeing none, is there any old business or new business to come before the board?

Okay, well, I'd like to wish all of you a happy holiday season, whether it's Christmas or Hanukkah, but uh it's been a tremendous year working with you.

I look forward to next year, and we will hit the ground running in January.

So thank you very much and have a great holiday.

We'll be adjourned.