I guess that would help, wouldn't it?

So good morning, everybody.

I'll try again.

Welcome to the uh May 5th special meeting of the Hillsborough TPO.

Uh, if you would please uh stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you, everybody.

Mr.

Secretary, would you please call the role?

Good morning, TPL board.

Ross.

Here.

Wolstall's excused.

Miller here.

Cullen.

Bowles?

President.

Council Member Clendon is excused.

Hertak.

Carlson.

Kilton here.

Here.

Clube.

Stevens.

Slater.

King.

Here.

Joseph?

Here.

Thank you.

You have a quorum.

Very good.

Thank you.

And just for the record, I'm told our colleagues at the city of Tampa were previously scheduled for a state of the city event this morning.

And so some of them will probably filter in as they can get here.

So if anybody's wondering where the city of Tampa is, that's where they are.

And that meeting was scheduled before this one.

So has everybody had an opportunity to review the minutes from December 2nd?

And if so, is there a motion to approve?

And seconded by board member Gray.

Any discussion or corrections to the minutes?

If not, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

No nays.

We have two people signed up for public comment.

One of them is on virtual, and one of them is here in person with us.

And the first one on virtual is Hong May.

And so Mr.

May, you are recognized, sir, for public comment.

My name is Hong Mai and my address 14031 North Delma Bree Tampa Highway.

I thank you very much for the opportunity to me up here in front of you to offer my opinion as the capacity of the professional engineer with a strong interest in trampolation industry.

I had the opportunity to examine 11 different MPO TBO with multiple county.

They are falling in the 15 to 17 voting member rents, with the exception of Belusia, Flackler, Auriva to the C TBO and Metro Plan of Lando are 28 and 25 respectively.

Interesting enough, Belusia Flackler TBO creates six member executive leadership committee who provide a guidance to the 28 member of TBO governing board.

I understand you are lending to the regional MBO for 25 voting members, and I also understand the reason behind this decision.

In this setup, Hilbert Gaudi will have 12 voting member, Penelas will be eight, PASCO will be five.

IOD her other counties that Hibro Gauthier will always have the majority, and you might have you might have some you know pushback and you need to defend this, you know, selection.

Uh between I agree with you to include Tamba Pog Authority and Hillborough Aviation Authority in the voting member to the regional TBO.

My point are the Propel 25 member voting risk, slower decision, dispute, accountability, and more politic in every technical choice, which is difficult for DOT district seven to be a your partner, coordinator, and implement a consistent with FDOT work program.

I understand you follow your federally mandate, regional planning transportation organization, but uh DOT district seven with two other Gaute, Citrus and Hugnando, they have to follow.

Should you rest with the 25 governing board member?

I respectfully ask for your TMA and consideration of five or six member of executive leadership committee who provide guidance and decision making to the entire governing board.

Thank you very much for your time and thank you for your dedication and service to Hillbrook, CD of Tampa, Tambo Terrace, and Plan City.

Thank you, Mr.

Mai.

Um, Mr.

Roberts is here in person.

Good morning, Mr.

Roberts.

Good morning, members of the TPO board.

Thank you for having me this morning.

I'm Bill Roberts.

I reside at 1000 North Ashley Drive in Tampa, is my office.

Uh Hillsborough County resident.

I'm here to speak to you this morning about regionalism.

The discussion you're going to have today will lead toward, I believe, the creation of a regional MPO that will be representative of the entire area.

This region continues to grow.

Florida is growing.

We are still seeing a thousand residents moving to the state a day.

Hillsborough County is getting their portion of that representation.

The housing is moving further and further away from the business center.

Transportation is one of the top two or three issues on the minds of the residents who live here and who are coming here.

So it's time for this county to participate in a regional MPO that will be able to implement with its partners at DOT and others, a transportation plan to move people efficiently and effectively and pleasantly throughout our region.

On this issue, I think it's important to keep in mind, as is mentioned, has been mentioned several times, the importance of the uh Port Tampa Bay and Hillsborough Aviation Authority as permanent voting members of any transportation planning organization.

Many of you suffered with me through the T Barda decade.

And that effort, although well intended, was a failure due in part to its inability to move effectively, make decisions, and authorize projects.

So I encourage you today to hear your report from your executive director and think on a regional basis as to what is going to be best for this county and this region in the next 25, 35 or 50 years.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, for letting me speak.

Thank you, Mr.

Roberts.

And so that is all the uh those are all the members of the public signed up to speak.

Mr.

Secretary, would you let the record reflect that um Council Member Carlson, Commissioner Myers, and Commissioner Cohen all arrived at 1007.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Next up, we have a status report.

This is a long-awaited presentation from uh Waymo uh concerning your expansion to Tampa.

Mr.

John Tupps from Waymo staff is uh online here and will provide a virtual presentation.

Good morning, Mr.

Thank you.

Good morning, thank you, Mr.

Chairman, and and thank you, uh board for having the time today.

Sorry I couldn't be there in person with you, but I'm I'm nonetheless very excited to share um information about our company and about um where we're at uh when it comes to Tampa and the Tampa area.

It's it's a really important area for us, and I really uh am excited about all the great things that are to come.

So if you'll bear with me, I'll share my screen and get right into it.

So county staff, we've lost the uh all the audio to this, and the volume was pretty low to begin with, and now we've I think he's muted.

Okay, I'll keep talking and you tell me when you can hear me.

Well, we can hear you now, Mr.

Tupps, but we didn't get the beginning of this at all.

Okay, very good.

Well, I'll I'll start, I'll start over.

So um we are Waymo, uh, and we're on a mission to be the world's most trusted driver.

Uh and the most important uh piece to this for me is the word trust.

And throughout this presentation, I will uh walk through uh our technology.

I'll walk through where we're at on a on a macro level with our company and and some of the some of the places we operate.

Uh and I'll talk about some of the things we're doing every day to build the trust in the communities that we serve.

And I'll start off with uh with a video here.

We're now serving more than 500,000 fully autonomous trips weekly, around 2.5 times higher than the same time last year.

Okay, Waymo is gearing up for the interstate.

Is this her life?

I don't know.

We're in the future.

This is so cool.

We're already next.

Wonderful experience.

Coolest thing.

We made it safely.

Not only will autonomous vehicles save life, they will change our lives in many ways.

Thank you, Waymo.

Thank you, Amo.

Thank you.

Thank you, Waymo.

Thank you, Waymo.

Thank you, Abel.

I I really like to show that video because to me it demonstrates that uh although it seems uh futuristic to have fully autonomous ride hailing service uh in the Tampa area, it's something that we're doing every single day and in other areas of the country, which I'll get into in just a minute.

So as the board, I'm sure is keenly aware, uh, there are far too many traffic fatalities and serious injuries on uh American and US highways uh every single day.

We lose about 40,000 people every year uh to traffic fatalities, and quite frankly, um that status quo is unacceptable and something that our company uh if we continue to deliberately and intentionally deploy our technology will be able to help change uh working together in partnership with uh with some of the some of the areas that we operate.

Um I love this slide because uh I I hear a lot of times that it seems like Waymo's growth is happening uh overnight or is is happening all of the sudden, but uh that couldn't be further from the truth.

So we started in 2009 as the Google self-driving car project, and through uh a tremendous amount of investment and research and development and the world's brightest engineering minds, uh we are proving it every day, and we are uh fully autonomous uh and serving customers and uh in 11 markets currently.

So uh right now we are doing uh uh 500,000 uh paid rides every single week, and we're doing four million miles fully autonomously on US roads every single week.

And to put that four million miles four million miles in perspective, uh it would take the average human driver six lifetimes to drive four million miles.

And uh it's something that we're doing every single week, and our customers are uh are getting uh a top-notch and world-class experience every single day.

Uh these are the uh these are the markets where we are currently operating.

So you'll see uh Phoenix, Arizona is our most mature market.

We've been fully autonomous in Phoenix since 2020.

Uh of note to the Hillsborough TPO, uh, we are uh currently fully autonomous in uh Miami and Orlando.

Uh we recently announced in both of those cities that uh there's no more wait lists.

So essentially uh you can fly to Miami, uh you can uh download the app and you can enjoy a Waymo ride uh in the area where we service in and around Miami.

Same with Orlando, Houston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Antonio, Dallas.

Uh to the right there, uh you'll see Austin and Atlanta.

That's a partnership with our partners in Uber.

So you use the Uber app in those two cities to be able to uh hail a Waymo.

Uh and most recently, we announced uh Nashville, Tennessee, uh, and a partnership with Lyft.

So uh in Nashville, uh currently, you're able to hail a Waymo using the Waymo app.

Uh and then in the future, you'll be able to, we're gonna give our customers the optionality to either use the Waymo app or the Lyft app in Nashville, Tennessee.

Um, a lot of uh a lot of areas and a lot of room for growth uh upcoming, including Tokyo and London internationally.

We're also serving airports.

So uh to the at the bottom there, you'll see the airports where we currently serve, and we're currently testing and working to serve uh airport riders in uh Nashville and also in Dallas.

Um this is a great uh this is a great way for uh to grow economic development for a city.

Uh we have found that people fly into uh Phoenix or SFO uh and then immediately uh want to take a Waymo uh and experience the cities for themselves.

So uh with Waymo, we're giving uh we're giving our customers that option, and we're giving cities an innovative uh way for people to be welcome to explore everything that these cities have to offer.

And let's talk a little bit about the technology.

So what you're looking at there is the top of one of our uh all electric Jaguar eye paces.

That's our current fleet of vehicle.

And we use primarily we use three uh different systems to detect uh and to determine what the way uh what's happening around the vehicle itself.

Uh this vehicle, the Jaguar iPace is equipped with 29 external cameras, six radar detectors, and five LIDAR sensors.

Uh the iconic LIDAR that spins at the top of one of our vehicles, you might have seen, uh, can uh can map and see essentially three football fields away and 360 degrees.

Uh so all of the all of these sensors uh collect data in real time and feed uh that that data to what we call uh to our AI.

Uh and all of this working in congruence is what we refer to as the Waymo driver.

So our AI and the Waymo driver uh navigate city streets after the city streets have been mapped and thoroughly tested by our uh by our team, uh and they're able to uh safely navigate uh various situations and uh that come up in everyday driving, and we're able to do that safer than a human driver.

And let's see some of this in action.

I'm gonna play this video a couple of times because there's a few things I like to point out here.

This was uh in Austin, Texas, and whoop, and you'll see our driver was able to uh to prevent uh a tragedy there.

So uh as promised, let me pause right here.

So uh what you're seeing at the top here is essentially what uh what our riders uh if you were in the back or front uh passenger seat of a Waymo, this is what the screen displays at the top here, and you'll see each yellow uh highlight is a pedestrian, and uh our vehicle understands that this pedestrian is indeed on a scooter, and you'll see before any before the scooter even uh before this pedestrian even uh begins falling into the street, uh our vehicle is already has already made the decision to uh what we call nudge.

It's already decided to give this uh this pedestrian extra space.

You'll see in this green line right here.

And then as this is happening, our vehicle understands it doesn't have to check its left blind spot to know that the left lane is empty.

It already knows that because of the LIDAR sensors that uh that it the vehicle's equipped with, and it's able to not just not just change lanes quickly, but apply a brake and change lanes simultaneously.

One thing that I I also find fascinating about this video is if you look here on the top right, it's picking up a pedestrian pumping gas there that cameras or a human driver wouldn't be able to detect, and finally, a bit of levity, pause there.

Uh our vehicle is able to detect this is actually a food truck, and then behind it, there's a pedestrian back there as well that it's detecting.

So, as you can see, uh our vehicles navigate city streets every single day and prevent tragedies like that from happening, and are able to safely navigate roads.

And because of the amount of uh mileage and the amount of trips that we're doing, uh we encounter edge cases.

We encounter anything that you can think of when it comes to driving that a human driver might uh encounter one of these in its entire in your entire life, but because we're doing 500,000 trips a week and four million miles a week, uh our vehicles are encountering uh situations and are learning from these situations, and we're able to uh when we experience uh one of these edge cases, we're able to make adjustments in our software, and we're able to make changes and perfect our software, and that's something that uh is simply not possible with human behavior.

Uh, my favorite here is potentially the bounce house, also the uh occluded pedestrian here with the balloons, which is um something that I've never seen when I was driving, but uh something that our our service does see and let's talk about uh safety.

So Waymo uh publishes all of our safety data online at Waymo.com slash safety.

It's been verified by third parties, it's been reviewed, it's been poked and prodded, and everything that uh that you can imagine when it comes to our data.

And this benchmark was at 170, about 170 million miles was our last benchmark we looked at the uh our safety data.

And the numbers really speak for themselves.

So we are involved compared to human drivers.

We are involved in 92% fewer serious injury causing crashes or worse.

We are also involved in 92% fewer pedestrian crashes with injuries or worse, uh fewer cyclist crashes, fewer motorcycle crashes, uh fewer injury causing crashes in general.

We are uh magnitude safer than human drivers, and uh this all goes back to uh to that idea of trust.

Um not only is the data uh uh that we're seeing extraordinarily promising, but by releasing it online and being absolutely transparent about our data, we're working to build that trust.

Uh this is uh also a really smart thing that Waymo does is that they don't send uh good old John Tupps out to train uh law enforcement and first responders.

Um we actually uh hire and um hire former law enforcement officers and former fire rescue chiefs and first responders uh to uh well before we begin operating in a city uh to uh train one-on-one and with large agencies trained first responders.

So we have public safety experts in our employee that work directly with uh law enforcement agencies uh to ensure that they're getting the uh the training that they need and deserve and that they get the the the attention they need and deserve.

The um the first responder communities are the ones on the front lines every day working to keep all of us safe.

Uh and it's something that matters a lot to us is to make sure that uh not only uh are they getting trained, but we're listening to them and we're understanding what their concerns are and we're getting real-time uh information from our law enforcement partner agencies to tell us how we can improve uh how what we're doing right and essentially what they need to for that for them to be successful at their jobs.

Uh let's talk about uh Tampa.

So uh in Tampa uh we announced uh late last year that our vehicles are currently uh mapping the city streets of Tampa.

We're doing that uh both in manual and autonomous configurations of the vehicle, so someone actually driving or someone having the vehicle uh drive itself, but currently that's done with the human driver in the vehicle at all times.

Uh we do this because we want to, we we completely uh the Waymo driver in the vehicle completely understands how to navigate city streets, but we want to make sure that we understand exactly how to navigate Tampa's city streets.

So that process is uh is happening now.

Um on a public launch, we're still working towards uh nailing down a timeline on that.

So simply right now today, we're collecting data and we're working with a human driver or human safety specialist in the vehicle at all times to ensure that uh that we're learning exactly how to navigate uh the unique nature of Tampa's city streets.

Um and then I wanted to take just a few minutes to talk about some of the uh some of the programs we have uh happening and maybe potentially even a look forward.

So uh we heard from a lot of places where we operate their desire to for us to share additional data with directly with cities, and uh we announced a couple of weeks ago an initiative uh starting with San Francisco, the San Francisco Bay Area, LA, Phoenix, Austin, and Atlanta, where we're going to be sharing uh real-time pothole data uh with our partners at Waze that directly connects into these cities uh planning uh organizations.

So uh these cities will be able to receive this pothole data and will be able to make smarter decisions when it comes to their road maintenance.

Also, uh we're working to uh to safely integrate uh with transit.

Uh first we we know that we support transit by having a safer uh vehicle on the road.

It makes it safer for people to walk, bike, get to transit any way they'd like, but we're also working to make it more convenient for people to access transit by serving as that first mile and that last mile.

And we are uh we are working towards supporting less car dependent lifestyles by uh effectively plugging into and integrating into transit systems.

Uh this is done uh through a variety of different partnerships that we have in some of our more mature markets, and it's something that we're really excited about bringing to to new cities is learning about what their transit needs are and figuring out how we can connect this technology to the goals of uh of a city's transit.

Um thing that I'll that I always like to touch on um and mention is uh is our commitment to accessibility.

So for uh some of our biggest advocates and advocates not just for WAMO but for autonomous vehicles in general, are uh a lot of communities that for whatever reason can't drive.

Um we're talking about uh a lot of the blind community, uh the elderly community, people that are neurodivergent, or for whatever reason, uh are unable to drive independently.

Um it really hit home with me when um when I've heard stories about people being able to be in an automobile by themselves for the first time in many years, or perhaps ever.

Uh, that's something that we are very proud of, and something that we are are are honored to work with many of these organizations to help deliver this technology to make uh independence uh more attainable for a lot of different communities.

And I'll finish just by touching on uh some of the economic benefits of autonomous vehicles.

Uh so this study was done by the Chamber of Progress, and it just shows the type of jobs that are created uh in and around uh an autonomous vehicle when it when it begins opening and operating in a city.

I'll quickly go to um to this slide that talks about some of the people and some of the occupations that we need to hire when we uh when we begin operating in a city.

Uh obviously we need mechanics and vehicle technicians, dispatchers, facility managers.

We need infrastructure.

A lot of times we work with the trades to make sure that infrastructure is built out.

We need a place to charge our vehicles, we need detailers to clean our vehicles.

So uh I think this story isn't talked about is often brushed over uh the amount of jobs that are actually created by the investment that we bring into a community, um, but it's something that we're keenly aware of and something that we're really proud of.

Um last but not least, we had a study uh published a couple of years ago uh about the economic benefit that Waymo brings to a city.

Uh and they looked at San Francisco, where we've been in operation for for several years, and uh and the tourism aspect of uh of autonomous vehicles and particularly Waymo, uh, and they found that uh that Waymo does support and create a lot of jobs in the ecosystem when it comes to not just the direct jobs of uh mechanics and engineers and uh and detailers, but uh tourism and hospitality and the security and the food service and everything that comes along that makes a community uh vibrant, uh autonomous vehicles help support those jobs uh and something that uh that we've seen uh happen in Phoenix and in San Francisco and in Los Angeles, and something that we're really excited to be bringing to the Tampa Bay area.

And with that, Chairman, uh that is uh that is what I have to share today.

Thank you.

I'm happy to happy to take any questions, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Tupps.

I'm sure we have some before that, though, Mr.

Secretary, I just want to make sure that you caught that council members Clinton and Hertag have joined us.

Yes, sir, it's notated.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um we have some questions.

Commissioner Cohen.

Thank you.

That was that was an excellent presentation, and I have a million questions, and I think this is you know, technology that could potentially change the world.

But I just want to ask you one thing uh about when you roll out in a city like Tampa.

Um is there any manual override at all of the system?

And you know, what actually happens when vehicles do get into trouble?

Is there a way that human beings can take control of the situation if they need to?

Is there a way that human beings can take control of the situation if they need to council member?

Thanks for the question, and that's that's a great question.

The answer, the short answer is yes.

Uh and calling back to the uh our slide uh about training first responders, that's one of the um one of the things that we train first responders is how to uh disengage one of our vehicles and get it out of the way.

Uh I will say in the same breath that that's never our goal.

Uh we uh hire and employ uh wrecking services.

Uh so if uh one of our vehicles gets a flat tire, uh we we have a 24-7 uh system and operation in place to be able to get one of our vehicles off the road ourselves.

But uh in a in an emergency situation or an urgent situation, uh law enforcement fire rescue does have the ability to uh to get our vehicles moved to the side or off of the road.

Board member King.

Thank you, Chair.

Um in an at fault accident with a Waymo vehicle, who would get the ticket if we if the Waymo vehicles at fault a great question.

So we report all of our accidents uh to the federal government through NITSA.

Uh I will say though that we uh as a our vehicles receive citations uh and we pay those citations regularly.

So um it's it's not something that is um unprecedented, but uh but we we do uh follow the law and make sure that uh that if we do receive a citation that it's handled uh it's handled accordingly.

Thank you, but I think my point is is that that your vehicle doesn't suffer the same consequences as the live driver if they're at fault?

No points on their license, no citation.

Well, uh there's a citation and a penalty per se, but you're not going to appear before a magistrate.

That's governed at the state level, so uh different states handle uh A V citations in different ways, and we'll just continue to follow the law.

Mr.

Stevens.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Tupps, uh great presentation.

Um when I'm thinking about this technology, I'm thinking about in the Tampa Bay market, the affordability aspect.

What are your um uh data points on the average trip cost compared to say an Uber or Lyft currently?

Another great question.

Thanks.

Thanks for the question.

Um we're cost competitive with other ride hailing services.

Uh I think what you'll find um eventually in Tampa is is what you will see right now in a Phoenix, San Francisco or Atlanta, where um our customers are able to uh take a look at how much does it cost to get there with a lift, how much does it cost to get there with an Uber, and now how much does it cost to get there with the Waymo?

So uh we're cost competitive with those with those groups.

Um when it comes to uh when it comes to serving as that first mile, last mile, we're actually working on ways and have implemented some ways to provide discounts if uh if you're taking public transit as well.

So open to a conversation about affordability and how we can uh connect those seeking to take a bus or get around uh with traditional public transit and how we can maybe uh alleviate some of those costs.

If I could just uh uh maybe elaborate a little bit, when you say cost competitive, are we talking about a percentage of value higher, lower, or relative parity one?

And then on the back end of that, and again, I'm just looking at it from an accessibility standpoint.

What are your wait times on average compared to uh say an Uber Lyft uh with the technology currently in the markets you're serving?

Uh thanks for the question.

I don't have specific numbers to share on uh on cost or wait times.

I will say uh first on costs.

Um when I say cost competitive, I would uh I would mean um a few dollars within that range, whether it's lower or higher than a traditional ride ride hail uh on wait times.

One of the things that we do to help control wait times is as we are um beginning to serve a market, let's take Miami for instance.

Uh when we began serving public riders and our customers in Miami, um, we had a wait list uh of thousands of people ready to take the service.

Uh and to avoid very long wait times, um, we essentially onboard riders, we call it onboarding, where we just make the service available uh a little bit at a time as our fleet continues to grow to ensure that we keep wait times uh at a reasonable amount that people would want to actually wait for our vehicle.

Um as a private sector business, this is something we take a really hard look at and something that we take real seriously because uh the trust goes back not just to safety when it comes to collisions and safety when it comes to pedestrians, but also providing our customers with the level of service that they've come to expect.

Thank you so much.

Board member Green.

Thank you.

Um this is so innovative.

Uh I represent the school board and um within the city of Tampa, perhaps 50 different school sites.

Uh as it relates to the age group of students, do you have an age group?

I mean, an age um uh an age, let's say, um level that you will accept, in other words, 18 or above, 16 or above to uh to use these vehicles.

Absolutely.

That's um that's a great question.

It's governed by state law, and I am unsure of what that law says in Florida.

Typically it's 18.

However, uh in Phoenix, Arizona, our most mature market, uh, we have what's called Waymo teen accounts that are very popular.

Uh and I believe the ages for the Waymo teen accounts are 14 to 16 years old, 14 to 17 years old, where uh parents can sign up uh and our vehicle will come pick up their pick up their teenager, uh take them to soccer practice while they cook dinner, and then bring them home, being able to be tracked by their parents the entire time.

So a great question, and something that uh something that we're looking forward to in the future is working with uh working with the state of Florida or and working with um working with this organization and communities typically on what they'd like to see and how we can connect this technology to make their lives easier.

You know, that is so cool and it's so relevant.

Um I'm glad that you're picking up information from us and uh as it pertains to our young ones, I can guarantee you they will be very interested in the parents, especially.

So I love the idea and encourage that to be looked in further as far as the teen discount.

I think that would go over very well.

Uh again, thank you for your presentation.

Very well done.

Commissioner Bowles.

Thank you.

Can you just um describe or provide what your service area limits are in this in the Tampa Bay area?

And if there are any restrictions that you have uh are imposed upon you at this point, uh a great question.

Um right now our uh our service area in the Tampa Bay region is uh begins and it's still being worked on through that mapping, but uh typically what we do is we began at a city center, so it would be downtown Tampa and then work our way out.

Uh and I believe the Tampa area we're looking at somewhere uh in the 40 to 60 square miles outside of downtown, encompassing the airport and going up north towards Temple Terrace and covering Ebor is what you could expect to see with the first iteration of service area.

Um important to note that when we began driving uh in Tampa, just as we do in other cities, we began on surface streets only.

So we don't plan initially to be on the interstate system in Tampa.

However, um once that gate is unlocked, and once it's something that we're comfortable doing in the Tampa area, it really helps grow the uh grow the footprint.

Um we are uh operating in uh in the interstate systems, the the freeways in uh Los Angeles and and uh Phoenix End and um and and San Francisco.

Just uh have one follow-up question.

So with uh 275 and IF4 are pretty heavily traveled and they're pretty real uh well relied upon to get around.

What steps do you need to take to actually access those roadways?

In this future, yeah, that's that that would be in the future.

in uh Los Angeles and and uh Phoenix and and um and and San Francisco just uh have one follow-up question so with uh 275 and IF4 are pretty heavily traveled and they're pretty real uh well relied upon to get around what steps do you need to take to actually access those roadways in this yeah it's not a future yeah that's that that would be in the future it's not necessarily a regulatory hurdle we have a great working relationship with F dot it's uh it's more of a um additional testing uh additional data collection and um additional just development uh into a market uh so the technology is capable and able to do it it's just another development gate that we pass when we come into a city councilmember her tag thank you um what are the what do you how fast do these cars go do they follow the posted speed limit exactly or are they allowed to go over a great question we follow the posted speed limit um and uh it's something that um that yeah we're we we're gonna go over the speed limit so you and a lot of times when we we get feedback from local communities that uh for instance this uh in Atlanta uh a month or two ago I heard from a com I heard from neighborhood that said hey the speed limit's 25 here but 25 seems still a little bit fast to us so we even were able to lower it down from there okay um following along the lines of others um who pays for injuries when your car injures someone yeah that's a great question we're fully insured uh and state law it governs how much insurance we need to carry uh when a rider is in our vehicle they are covered by our insurance uh um so who gets the points if it's like this is so I mean Mr.

King had a really good point how I mean how many injuries how many accidents can these vehicles get into before they face consequences I mean the rest of us have a limit what is Waymo's limit yeah that's governed by state law so uh if the state of Florida has a law that says AVs adhere to this particular citation scheme then that's something we would follow but it's all done through state law um and how does uh a police officer pull one of your cars over yeah absolutely a police officer would have their sirens on one behind one of our cars their lights um we would pull over and then a human being would come on to speak with that person through our in through our microphones and uh recording in the vehicle and where are those people located uh mainly in the United States we do have some internationally because I mentioned earlier we're an international company growing into Tokyo and in into London.

So you allow people who don't live in the United States to talk to law enforcement about US laws uh we allow people that don't live in the United States serve as remote assistants but again by and large that group is in the United States yeah that okay thank you Dr.

Wong Hi John this is Johnny I was wondering if you could tell us if the pilot in Tampa is successful and the fleet grows if you can speak to the capital needs maintenance facilities parking charging stations and if you have the info available in the markets where you're already operational if you can tell us how those were delivered whether PPP privately funded publicly funded any of that info would be helpful.

Hey Johnny thanks for the question I really appreciate that so uh we're still in um development and the development planning process when it comes to our infrastructure in and around the Tampa area uh in other markets uh other cities we have uh partnered with um with move in Miami uh to help manage that uh in Atlanta and Austin it's done through Uber so uh we're still early in the infrastructure planning but uh but typically what we what we do is we'll have a depot site where vehicles can come and be charged and cleaned and then we'll also have uh pay parking and charging that we paid for um and uh throughout the city to be able to to effectively use these vehicles and to have them be able to uh to charge and uh get maintenance uh without having to cross the entire uh you know from north to south of the entire service area thank you john i see a light council member corson yeah um we are just getting into the rainy season we have these torrential rainfalls and uh those rainfalls or hail storms uh pretty much disable the camera only systems that are out there that are your competitors um could you talk for a minute about the success of your LIDAR system in going through heavy snowfalls or rainfalls and the safety of that and then secondly um how to if any for anybody watching how do they get an invitation code

Yeah, um we are just getting into the rainy season.

We have these torrential rainfalls, and uh those rainfalls or hail storms uh pretty much disable the camera only systems that are out there that your competitors.

Um could you talk for a minute about the success of your LIDAR system in going through heavy snowfalls or rainfalls and the safety of that?

And then secondly, um, how to if any for anybody watching, how do they get an invitation code?

Great question.

So you can uh I'll take the second question first.

You can download the app and uh sign up today, and you'll be added to the wait list in Tampa.

And as soon as we're ready to start having riders, uh we will um we'll we'll on board.

So uh that's a great question, and you're right.

The um the LIDAR and uh radar of our that's uh that are is equipped on our vehicles is designed to uh to handle any sort of uh of weather scenario.

So it's something that we are iterating and working on every single day.

Uh we have done winter weather testing, which I know isn't necessarily an issue in Hillsborough, uh, but we're we're working on ensuring that um that we're able to handle just as good, if not better, than human beings when it comes to inclement weather.

Uh I will say we also have a team that monitors weather and uh is able to quickly defleet and ensure that safety is always kept at the at the forefront when it comes to our service.

Uh it's all going back to that trust.

We want to make sure that um that we are uh that we are operating in a way that is is safe and safety is is certainly at the forefront when it comes to our uh to our weather program.

Board members are there other questions, Mr.

Joseph.

Yeah, I had one quick question.

I was wondering two-part question.

In the video you showed where the scooter fell and the car shifted lanes, there was no car in the lane to the left of them.

I was wondering what would the car do if there was a car in the lane to the left, and how is that information the decision making between which life gets affected, shared with elected officials in the local communities.

Right.

A great question.

Um essentially our vehicle if there wasn't uh if there was a vehicle in that left lane, it would have applied a an extremely hard break, uh, faster than and harder than uh an attentive human driver can um can affect.

So it's going to uh it's going to break as hard as possible.

And I think what uh what you're what you what the question is is getting at is kind of the trolley problem, right?

Of what life do you save?

And instead of hypotheticals, uh our vehicle is going to take the safest route possible, uh, which is normally stopping.

It's just going to stop and prevent that tragedy from happening happening as best as it possibly can there questions, board members.

I don't see any further questions, Mr.

Tupps.

Thank you so much for being here.

I know this has been a long-awaited presentation, so uh very informative, and thank you for taking your time.

Thank you, Chairman, and and thank you to the rest of the TPO for having me today.

I look forward to being in Tampa in the very near future, and I'm happy to uh meet with all of you individually uh to tell you more about our company, and we'll just keep you informed as we continue to progress in the Tampa area.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So next up, board members, we have uh an action item which is of significance, regional MPO updates and discussion on the apportionment areas of negotiation and upcoming steps.

Um this is following the recent TMA meeting that a couple of us uh representatives from TPO attended with Pasco and Pinellas and Dr.

Wong and Sarah Capers from our TPO staff will explain.

Good morning, board members.

For the record, Johnny Wong, your executive director.

Um as always, thank you for attending today's meeting, especially on this uh hollowed holiday of Cinco de Mayo.

I appreciate you being here, and uh I definitely appreciate the time that each of you have invested in trying to solve this riddle of how we stand up a regional MPO.

Um before I begin, I want to emphasize just how important this work is.

When we started this process, we knew that some parts of it were going to be messy, and we knew that it was going to be difficult.

And um, and that has proved true as a matter of fact.

Um there is no one size fits all blueprint for MPOs to follow to lead to a successful merger outcome.

There just aren't enough case studies for us to look to to establish best practices.

So in many senses, we are charting our own path.

And I think the work that you all have done with us, staff helping lead the way, but really your decision making this study and the outcomes will be very impactful and helpful to other MPOs that may have to one day go through this same exercise.

My presentation today will recap what has been discussed and supported to date.

I'll outline a proposal that's on the table from our partners over in Pinellas, and at the end of the discussion, we'll be asking you to decide how we should proceed.

So for the benefit of the public who's here and those newer to this process, let me recap the journey that we've taken over the past two and a half years.

For many of you, this will seem like old hat undoubtedly.

But this exploration began in response to a bill introduced by Senator DeSigley in Pinellas County, which passed and required Hillsborough, PASCO, and Pinellas MPOs to produce and submit a feasibility study on merging into one.

The staffs worked together.

We submitted that report to the legislature and governor's office in late 2023.

And even after submitting that report, which was all that was requested, we decided to continue the work.

Using our staff time, the three MPOs worked together with our respective boards and the TMA to establish areas of agreement and try to establish some principles that should guide a merger.

And of course, with the goal of standing up a regional MPO in the coming years.

Why?

Well, simply put, because our collective needs and the backlog of projects is already quite large and growing rapidly, growing larger each year, as a matter of fact.

This region has a cumulative backlog of maintenance and construction projects totaling many, many billions of dollars.

And so, what is our path to get out of the hole?

Well, simply put, we need to deliver more resources.

If combined, the Tampa Bay MPO would have the largest metropolitan planning area in the state by population.

We would lead Miami Dade, Broward, North Florida, which is the Jacksonville area, Metro Plan Orlando.

They would all be behind us.

And so thinking about whose needs get addressed first in the state budget and in federal grants, it definitely makes sense to be the largest voice on the block and speak as loudly as we can.

Well, no, not necessarily.

Well, nothing is guaranteed, but speaking with one voice and again speaking loudly certainly adds more credibility to the ask when we're looking for funding to deliver our projects.

And in the funding environment that we're in now, and in the funding environment that we're anticipating over the next several years and looking out into the future, we see that the feds and the state want to help deliver regional projects, but they want to know that there's buy-in from the community.

They're not looking to allocate money to a project that does not have community support.

And this year alone, FDOT is managing a portfolio of projects totaling more than 22 billion dollars.

And they look strongly to MPOs to help inform those investment decisions.

There's a lot at stake in not communicating not communicating our needs loudly and often.

The opportunity cost is tremendous if we lose out on money to Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando.

Our population is growing, the needs are growing.

From a funding perspective, we could certainly be made better off by delivering more discretionary grants, essentially growing the pot of money that's out there.

And when I say that, I'm thinking primarily about money used to design and construct projects.

But there's also federal planning grant money at stake too.

That money goes to support the work that MPOs do, which is allocated by formula.

The surface transportation block grant funding and planning grants currently awarded to each MPO would be largely unaffected.

Both of these funds are allocated by population.

They have to be spent in each respective county that owns the population.

So it's not the case that money intended to go to Hillsboro would leave to go to Pinellas.

It's not the case that money intended to go to Pinellas would go to PASCO.

That's not how this works.

Each of the three counties independently and together has an interest in preserving the value that they get out of each MPO process and not only preserving it, but looking to enhance it.

And to know what is most valuable to each community, it made sense to have the tri-county TMA be the primary forum to discuss these issues.

It was the TMA that helped staff draft the scope of the work for this study, as well as the deliverables and a timeline for completion, which was approved both by this Hillsboro TPO and the TMA last summer.

You might recall that FDOT stepped up to the plate in a really big way, so thank you, Justin and your team.

They provided our organization with $500,000 to bring on a consultant to help with this study.

When this board executed the contract, it was decided that phase one would involve creating a draft apportionment plan.

Essentially, what does the board of the merged MPO look like?

That deliverable would culminate in a go or no-go vote.

If the decision was to go, then we would initiate phase two and begin working on the creation documents, things like the interlocal agreement that establishes the MPO, the bylaws, a staffing plan, and a transition plan.

The thought at the time was let's not jump to phase two unless we have buy-in from all of the local governments to move forward with the merger.

We didn't want to waste the money essentially.

If we knew that the decision was going to be a no, why bother working on the creation documents at all?

All of the work products in this study were chartered out to help inform decision makers, understand what each other's issues are, work together, and optimize a solution around this merged MPO.

Generally speaking, what we've heard from the decision makers to date is that they want to be able to provide meaningful input to the planning process.

They want to be represented fairly, they want to preserve their right to self-determination.

They don't want others controlling what happens in their communities.

And they want their needs to be thoughtfully considered in the planning process.

We know that not everyone can have a seat at the table, but they don't want to be invisible to the process.

And so we have to work on what the structures are in place to ensure that what they need is not lost or vanish, vanishing in the thin air.

At a high level, just about everyone who we've spoken with seems to agree on those points, but the devil's really in the details.

Those operational tech memos that are a part of both phases one and two, but skewing heavily toward phase two are where the details are going to be uncovered.

So looking at the milestones of the study completed today, we produce tech memos comparing and contrasting the operations and policies of each MPO, things like how our advisory committees are structured, how often they meet, our funding obligations, financial policies, staffing plans, and even more.

I'm forgetting all of the details.

But we held a workshop last November with a decent turnout to discuss the desires and the deal breakers.

And right now the study team's focusing mostly on finalizing the apportionment plan.

But what we heard at the TMA very recently is that they still don't feel comfortable approving the apportionment plan without being able to review those technical documents.

And so, unless there are objections that I hear from you all today, I'm going to suggest that we move right into phase two.

Again, what we heard at the TMA is that folks don't want to be presented with an apportionment plan without knowing the details of what's to follow.

And so to make them comfortable and to provide full information, I think we need to start working on the phase two docs right now.

The other topic of conversation, and this is the one that we're seeking action on today, is how we respond to a proposal that's on the table coming from the Ford Pinellas MPO.

Like I mentioned, like we've already established we're in phase one.

The main deliverable is the draft apportionment plan.

After working with our MPOs, the TMA and the Sun Coast League of Cities, we heard that the general preference was to have a board of 25 voting members, four non-voting advisors, one of those non-voting advisorship seats going to each county's respective transit agency, and then the fourth one preserved for the FDOT district seventh secretary.

Staff of the airport and port would be provided voting seats that come off the top of those 25 seats, leaving 23 to be allocated based on population.

With that very clear direction, the staff directors felt like we were getting ready to land this plane.

In fact, each of us was prepared throughout the summer to bring the draft apportionment plan to our MPOs, our respective county commissions, City of Tampa Council in my case, and the intention was to present the apportionment plan and get a non-binding resolution of support.

That's actually what we intended to use this meeting time for today, but we had to pivot because forward Pinellas was set to go first.

At its meeting on April 8th, the Ford Pinellas Board declined to take action on its draft apportionment plan.

Instead, they issued a proposal, or rather a counter proposal for Hillsborough and PASCO to consider.

Let me speak to the why for a second.

So this counter proposal that I'll be discussing with you all in just a moment is in response to a perceived concern that the airport in Port would fall under the direction or which fall under the direction of Hillsborough County in the city of Tampa would vote in alignment with the Hillsborough County Commissioners, Tampa City Council members, any other modal operators that come out of Hillsborough's allocation.

Now, whether or not you agree with that statement, the perception from Pinellas is that this large Hillsboro centric voting block would be able to control the votes on the merged MPO and essentially have TBARTA 2.0.

And that doesn't make any of us comfortable.

To prevent that from happening, one Pinellas County Commissioner proposed eliminating the off-the-top seats for the Port and the Airport.

Instead, they they proposed allocating all 25 seats by population, which effectively would require Hillsboro to determine whether or not we want to provide voting seats for the staff of the airport and the port.

I don't think that anyone in Pinellas or PASCO, certainly not at the TMA, felt that the Port and the Airport don't deserve to be voting members.

I felt strongly that they feel the appropriate position is for them to serve on the board as voters, but it was strongly implied that those voting seats should come out of Hillsborough's allocation.

That was at Ford Pinellas.

At the TMA meeting the following week, that proposal was discussed and an alternative proposal was offered in which the airport and the port remain off the top, but Hillsboro then donates one of its population based seats to PASCO County.

I'm sorry, I skip forward.

Let me stay on this slide for a moment.

So again, the three options on the table are what Hillsboro TPO and the TMA voted on roughly two years ago.

Proposal originating from Ford Pinellas to not have the Port and the Airport come off the top, but instead come out of Hillsboro's allocation.

And then third at the TMA was to keep the Port and the Airport as off the top seats, treat them as regional authorities, but to prevent a majority voting block in Hillsboro, one of our population seats would be donated to PASCO.

I'll walk you through the implications for each one of those options in a moment, but at this time I'd like to recognize my counterparts in Pinellas or from Pinellas and Pasco who are here.

At any time if you'd like to call them up, I'm sure that they'd be happy to offer their version of the events and add a little color and texture to the conversation.

All right, so now getting into the details.

With these three options on the table, let's look at each one of them in turn.

Begin with what has thus far been supported.

Again, the Hillsboro TPO voted on this option roughly two years ago.

The TMA also voted in support of it.

The starting point for all three of these options is an equitable population ratio basis.

So based on the size of the county and within each county, the size of the city's populations.

That's that's how the seats should roughly be allocated.

And the second uh the second starting point is to provide some continuity on the merge board for what we have here.

I'm not seeking to disrupt the synergy in the in the chemistry that you all have cultivated over the years.

As I go through these slides, I'll ask you not to focus too much on the specific seat allocations of how many Hillsboro owes, so that five, three, one one one that you see in the middle, that's just for demonstration purposes right now and to help start a conversation.

Those are still subject to change.

This option provides voting membership for the airport and the port coming off the top.

The remaining 23 would then be divided across the three counties based on 2020 census POP data.

Hillsboro, as of 2020, has 49% of the regional population.

So of the 23 seats in play, we would be entitled to 11.

Pinellas has 32% of the regional POP, they would be entitled to eight.

PASCO has 19%, they're entitled to four.

One mechanism that could come into play is a majority voting provision adopted into either the interlocal agreement or the bylaws.

So a majority voting provision would mean for the long-range transportation plan, the transportation improvement plan, you know, the key documents that this board has to vote in support of.

It would require not only a simple majority of voting members, but a majority of all the members representing each respective county.

So with 25 voting members on a board to pass an LRTP, it would require 13 to say yes, and of Hillsborough's 11, six of them to say yes.

Of Pinellas' eight, five to say yes, and three of PASCO's four.

We believe that that provision would provide some reassurance that no individual county can control the outcome of these key of these key decisions.

The second option is the one that was presented at the TMA.

It would still be a board of 25 voting members.

Staff of the airport and ports still coming off the top, still non-voting advisorship for the transit agencies and FDOT, but instead of Hillsboro allocating 11 population-based seats, we would donate one to PASCO, bringing our seats to 10.

Pinellas retains its eight, PASCO gets five.

If that option moves forward, it may not be necessary to have a majority voting provision because the balance of the population seats would be roughly equitable, and no single county could control the votes.

Pinellas would remain at eight, PASCO would have five.

It would then be Hillsborough TPO, Hillsborough County Commission in the City of Tampa's decision about whether or not to give voting membership to the port in the airport.

So I've covered a lot.

Whether we are going to affirm or reaffirm our previous vote, which is option one or charge and charge forward, or whether we will entertain options two and three.

So I don't want you to feel like this vote could tank the discussion on the merger.

What it'll certainly do is delay the schedule a little bit, but given that we now have to produce creation documents like the interlocal, the bylaws, staffing plan.

All right, let's try that again.

Oh I'll try it without the mic.

Well, the the people online won't be able to hear you.

Oh is that good?

All right, thank you.

Let me wrap up.

So, regardless of what decision is made today, it could delay the schedule a bit.

But again, given that Pinellas, PASCO, and Hillsboro members at the TMA would only feel comfortable voting on the apportionment plan with the interlocal agreement bylaws, transition plan, staffing plan also available to them to inform their decision.

I don't think that it's problematic to extend the schedule.

We're gonna have to work on those documents anyway, and so we might not have a decision about apportionment plan as quickly as we anticipated, but we could still drive this home on time on schedule, regardless of whatever decision is made today.

So if you uh so that that's key, that is the action item that we're requesting of you today.

Inform staff how you would like to respond to Pinellas' proposal.

We would also like to facilitate a discussion on Hillsborough's apportionment scenarios.

We're still far away from that based on whether this board prefers option one, two, or three, we're gonna have to go back to the drawing board and uh kick around some different scenarios for how that could play out, and we'll do that later this summer or early fall.

Um, and then I would also like to uh get your blessing to execute phase two and move into the part of the study where we can work on those creation documents.

Um I've given you more than enough info that you need, I believe, but I'll be here to answer any questions.

And again, my counterparts from Pinellas and Pasco are behind me.

So thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Wong.

So before we open it up for questions, we need to turn this down a little bit, staff, so we can talk.

Oh testing.

Okay.

So Dr.

Wong gave you a very thorough briefing, but in simple terms, what has happened is what we thought we had agreed on a couple years ago in the Tri-County area has really largely evaporated.

Some of this is due to personnel changes, elections, reassignments of different people on the Ford Pinellas board and different people in PASCO and on the TMA.

And so even some of the people from our counterparts and other counties that were previously in support of the apportionment plan are now wavering because of that.

So I I don't know because they haven't officially voted.

But I I do get a sense that it wouldn't pass with a recommendation from Ford Pinellas or PASCO the way it is.

And so after the meeting, um Dr.

Wong and I had some extensive discussions about where to go, what to present to the board, and so that's where these options came from.

And really, it's very simple.

We can either dig in and offer nothing because I know that the airport and the port being off the top are important to several people on this board.

Um I I my personal opinion is that they have more than established that they are regional assets, but that's up for you guys each to decide.

We can offer nothing, in which case I'm pretty confident that Ford Pinellas and PASCO's MPO will both recommend to their BOCCs that they won't support it.

Number two is we could stay put, but offer the majority vote provision, which I personally think is a great idea because it I essentially prevents one county from taking over the block.

You can Hillsborough with the largest number of votes could vote all one way, but if PASCO doesn't have a majority of their delegation, it still doesn't pass for TIP and for long-range transportation.

I think that is a fair compromise to counter-offer.

The other idea that we came up with was part of their offer, part of their negotiation was for us to give up one seat to PASCO.

So we ran the population estimates on the current population apportionment.

That would not put us wildly out of range of apportionment, because if it did, we couldn't get approval through the state and federal for this anyway, if we were wildly out of whack.

But if you if we did decide to offer to give up one seat to PASCO, it would not put us wildly outside of the population apportionment.

So just to simplify it a little bit because I know we heard a lot.

So I do have some questions.

Um board member King.

Yes.

Um thank you, Chair.

For the record, can someone concisely state what exactly it is we're going to be voting on that's being proposed by Pinellas?

Well, a couple things, but one is we need to decide as a group what whether we want to counter-offer what's been presented to us or stay pat.

And that's really up for this group to decide.

And what we the original previously approved apportionment plan involved the airport and the port off the top.

The remaining 23 seats divided by population, which resulted in us having 12, 11, 11, and Pinellas was eight, and PASCO was four.

Pasco four.

So that was what we we can stick with that and do nothing, or we can just come up with an alternative proposal to take back to the the other two counties.

Okay, but we're under no obligation to necessarily approve any one of these three options, correct?

We we are under no obligation, although I do think that it is likely to come in both of those counties.

I think the MPOs will recommend to their BOCCs that they not approve.

Well, and I understand.

Um course, I think the devil is probably in the details, and I think the apportionment numbers from 2020 are probably no longer valid considering the growth that's currently taking place in Pinellas and Hillsborough and uh not Pinellas, but uh Hillsborough and Pasco.

Whereas Pinellas is actually decreasing in population at the moment.

Um Commissioner Cohen, I think you were first.

So a couple things.

Um, first of all, uh I've been it's more important to me that the airport and the port have a vote than whether or not they come off the top or not.

I just want to make sure they each have an independent seat on the new board.

Um I I agree with you that that they should come off the top, but the it's more important to me that they actually have a seat, uh whether it has to ultimately come from us or or not.

Um so uh I mean I I think that can could be worked out.

My question is there's not a huge functional difference between any of these three proposals in the sense that uh all of them would have, for example, five county commissioners and three city council members from the city of Tampa.

It's really the other seats that are the question, particularly the small city representation.

So I I would just make the point that maybe I would throw it back at some of the small city representatives, the airport and the port, the expressway authority, the those because those are the seats that are gonna ultimately be at issue regardless of which of the three choices we make, correct?

I would say that that'll be a part of the conversations throughout the summer if we can identify one, if not two of the options that would represent deal breakers for us that helps us narrow down the options for seating either 10, 11, or 12 Hillsboro voting members or or voting members hailing from Hillsborough in the cities.

Um what it does to um not respond and identify a deal breaker is create too many options for us to kind of focus in and work productively over the next few months.

I I'm just gonna say I I almost could go along with any of this.

My real deal breaker is just I want the port in the airport to have a seat on a voting member seat on the new MPO.

You know, that's the most important thing to me.

How we get there, I'd rather it be off the top, but uh you know uh as long as we can get there, we can get there.

Board member Greg.

I want to thank Dr.

Wong for your uh your time that you spent uh on the phone.

I have uh and I'll agree with um Commissioner Um Cohen that um the airport and the port, uh the airport and the port, excuse me, uh, are very notable to be included.

But I also think there's a big question of why.

So when you look at the interconnectivity of the amount of bridges, well there are three main bridges.

Um you know, when we look at Pinellas, a decreasing population and Hillsboro increasing population.

I wonder why we have to have this apportionment.

Because we are the ones that growing, they are limited, they're uh I want to say almost landlocked.

Pasco county is you know, it is growing, but not at this, not at the rate that we are, and I wonder why um, you know, why we are doing and I we went to the Orange County, but they're not the same, they're not uh dealing with a limited amount of bridges and population as uh Pinellas is.

Um I I also think that what when we talk about federal money, is there any evidence that we have had less as a single uh TPO versus if we had two other uh counties in there?

In other words, what what is the evidence that we would receive less money when in fact this year last year and years before, we've done excellent job with gaining uh grants.

Uh yeah, thank you, Lynn.

That's a that's a good point.

Um, there is no data to show one way or another that we have lost out on funding decisions.

We've heard some information from the folks who play a role in advocating for the needs of Hillsborough County, Pinellas, and PASCO.

Um, you know, certainly it is a hypothesis, but we have been um we have been uh encouraged strongly by the folks who are parts of funding decisions in the budgetary process at the state level that we would be we would benefit if we were to work together.

But that being said, uh this conversation about benefits and consumes no other changes.

Uh a federal transportation authorization bill could add new uncertainties that we hadn't planned for.

Um changes in the regulatory framework could also create new uncertainty.

Uh but what we have to work from now is our legislators are telling us that merging would be beneficial.

Um some folks at DOT are telling us the same, and certainly seems to be of interest.

It is of interest, and it sounds very, you know, uh prosperous in the future.

But right now I wonder if this TPO is broken in the first place.

It seems as though we have a pretty fine uh system here of uh high caliber individuals.

So I you know, I just don't, I'm not comfortable with a you know getting into a bigger regional.

So that's my two cents.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Just regarding the demographic changes, the um the the fact that the 2020 census may not be reflective anymore of populations in Hillsborough or PASCO.

All MPOs after a census are required to reapportion anyway.

So essentially, whatever is agreed to here if the if the jurisdictions were to merge into a single MPO after the 2030 census, we're gonna have to go through the process again looking at new uh population numbers, so changes may take place at that time uh because all MPOs have to do that.

Board member Stevens.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Just uh a few points and uh great presentation, uh Mr.

Wong.

Uh having attended that meeting, it was apparent to me that um doing nothing is essentially doing something, and that's essentially blowing up the fact that we would reach a regional MPO.

I think anybody that attended that meeting uh that was relatively apparent uh to everybody there, and to that end, I think it's just important that we keep our eye on the big prize, and that is the whole notion of the regional MPO.

If not, uh this whole exercise over the past several years has been for nothing.

And to um board members Gray's point, uh, while we have been effective perhaps in getting funding in our respective counties, the the framework is changing dramatically.

As we know at the national level with funding being constrained, um, there is going to be greater competition within regions, even here in the state when it comes to funding.

We're seeing that from an airport standpoint.

Before we used to get significant federal dollars for a lot of big projects such as runways, a whole bunch of other things, that's going away, I suspect similar things at the port in terms of competitiveness.

So the why that we're trying to solve for is to be more competitive with some of those other regions that we mentioned here in the state and and more broadly.

So to that end, as as I look at this, um option one, the supermajorities seem to assuage a lot of the concerns that were presented at the last meeting.

But I I think when you look at option two, whether it is PASCO picking up an additional seat, considering the fact that the 2020 census as uh Mr.

Clark pointed out was the guiding um basis for that apportionment, but even since then, based on uh publicly accessible data, they've grown by 15 to 20 percent since the 2020 census.

And then lastly, I would say to Commissioner Cohen's point, if you look at it from that standpoint, we lose nothing.

Whether it's a supermajority um option or it is giving one uh seat to PASCO, which is reflective of their growth, we lose nothing essentially.

Uh, but we do stand the opportunity to make this thing uh happen and bring this regional MPO about.

So that's my perspective on it.

I I just strongly urge uh board members to consider those basic points that we need to kind of keep our eyes on the big prize that we're gonna be competitive.

Thank you, Mr.

Stevens.

Councilmember Hurtek.

Thank you.

Um a lot of you know I started this process being absolutely anti-merger.

Still not really thrilled with the idea.

Still not something that I wholeheartedly support.

Uh, but I'm also looking at Tallahassee and I'm I'm a realist.

Um the thing that was not talked about that happened at the TMA that I was per I really thought was a great suggestion from one of the forward panellists folks was that they would be fine with port and airport off the top if there was also a land off the top, meaning bus service.

So whether that be a moving seat every year with the three bus um agencies, or if eventually they get merged into one, however, it works.

Um, but that was something that was supported because then there's a dedicated voice and vote for transit, um, which is one of my biggest concerns and my biggest interests.

So uh fall and going along with the supermajority.

So having that was something that I could get behind.

However, as we look at the apportionment for Hillsborough County, I am gonna advocate strongly that the city of Tampa reserve receive a fourth seat because of um this this is it.

This is our option, this is all we get.

So getting a fourth seat deals with the fact that Tampa feels like we're gonna be run over, and having the supermajority helps to some degree, but also knowing that people come into the city, and this is something that I know that we've talked about, Commissioner Cohen at these meetings, about looking at the city of Tampa and how important it is that we still feel like we are at the table instead of on the table.

And three seats to me still feels like on the table, but at the table with four and having that land seat instead of going to PASCO, that seat would go to a bus service group.

So that is definitely something that was talked about, and I don't want to not bring that forward because to me that was a very reasonable move forward.

That for me sitting in my seat helps Secretary Hall, did you have something or did you change your did it point the point passed?

Okay, Mayor Kilton.

Yes.

Um I want to make sure I understand the supermajority position again.

Could you just explain that one more time, please, Dr.

Wong?

So for votes on core documents, the two that are treated that are treated distinctly in state statute are the long-range plan and the TIP.

Those two votes require us to do a roll call.

Um so you know, they feel like the ones that require special attention and special recognition.

Um so when we are approving or amending either the long-range plan or the TIP, it would require a simple majority of the members present as well as a majority uh of the representatives hailing from each county.

So if you assume that we have a board of 25 voting members and they are all in attendance to approve the LRTP, 13 at least would be required, as well as six of Hillsborough's 11, and five of Pinellas' eight, and three of PASCO's four.

If any of those four criteria are not met, then we couldn't pass the LRCP tip or an amendment.

Yeah, so I have to say that I really don't like that option.

I think that gives a disproportionate uh amount of control to PASCO County, for example, if they have to be in a supermajority position on that.

So I agree with Commissioner Cohen that um I think the port and uh airport should be off the top and have voting seats.

But I if I'm what if one if what I'm hearing is that Pinellas and PASCO are afraid that Hillsborough County could vote in lockstep with the poor in the airport, then I would almost offer a fourth option and say rather than a 50 percent on the tip in the L RTP that it has to be 60 percent, then that way everybody in full concert on um the you know in Hillsborough County uh couldn't couldn't get there on their own.

Mr.

Cork.

Yes, um so the and I understand the supermajor as I understand them a supermajority requirement that's been discussed is creative.

I I think the hurdle is in and this is uh especially the case in what you just described, Mr.

Mayor, is the only voting requirements that are in state law on MPOs relate to the TIP and to the LRTP, which are as Johnny said, those are the two major documents that the TPO votes on.

And that's the one that does the roll call vote, but it also requires a approval by a majority of the membership present.

In plainest language, you know, if you've got a 25-member board, you need 13 votes to be able to pass the tip.

It doesn't give any description of imagine you have uh something that uh gets a majority like a unanimous among Canels and PASCO voters, but you have one vote shot of majority for Hillsborough, where you're certainly above, well above majority of members present.

Um, but if you being short one vote from any jurisdiction, it it sort of creates a supermajority requirement that may be contrary to what the statute's saying.

The statutes just saying majority of membership present.

This is state law, the legislature, if they really want this thing, uh they can change this.

And it doesn't come from federal law, the federal law doesn't speak to voting requirements at all.

It's just this one section of state law that potentially creates that problem.

But it would it would certainly create an issue regarding the 60 percent threshold because essentially that's us internally creating a supermajority requirement where state statute um mandates simply a majority of membership present, not even majority of full board, just majority of who's there, essentially as long as you have a quorum.

Well, if I have to pick with any of the options on the table, my preference then would be to um have the the two seats off the top and to give up one one to PASCO.

Thank you, Mayor.

Commissioner Cohen Um, yeah, I just wanted to um say just because Commissioner Hertak uh Councilwoman Urtak um uh uh referenced our our back and forth.

I guess the question of whether how many seats would go to the city of Tampa or to anybody really under Hillsborough's allocation, that would really be the last thing that would get decided, right?

By all of us when the time finally comes, and it would really be a group of us that isn't even here yet, because it would probably be a couple of years down the road, right?

So we don't have to tackle that yet.

That is not the issue, but for the the issue in front of us now.

Remember, we voted some time ago to allow each county to make their own decision.

Right.

So I was just gonna say, I I tend to agree with Mayor Kilton because that we ought to go with the donate one to PASCO, because first of all, 2030, it's gonna get all jumbled up anyway, and and this preserves the port and airport uh piece.

Uh so I you know, I I would even go so far as to move for that if that's done.

Yeah, okay.

Was there a motion in there?

Because I'm trying to keep track of yeah, I moved for uh I for option three, which is I believe the one that adds the that donates the seat to PASCO.

Okay, can you clarify the motion to to include that you're not changing any other things, just that?

Well, it's it uh my understanding is that the two seats come off the top for the airport and the port, and then it will be divided by population, and once that happens, Hillsboro will donate one seat to PASCO County.

Okay, I understand the motion.

Is there a second?

Seconded by Mayor Kilton.

There's a motion by Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Mayor Kilton.

We still have people in the queue to comment, but now we have a motion, so one of information on the motion.

Yes.

Is what is the requirement in the uh as far as proportionate and population?

Can we just arbitrarily give our positions away and and go away from the idea of uh population proportionment?

Um Cameron I can handle that if you're okay with it.

Um councilman, the term appearing in state statute is population equity ratio basis, and so population is used as a starting point, but there's considerable flexibility in how you allocate seats after that.

This board is a great example.

We're not allocated by population to a T.

Um, we we started with that, but negotiations among board members have resulted in an apportionment that you see today.

So ultimately it would be a question of whether the governor supports it and if federal highway has any uh objections to it.

But um, I wouldn't say arbitrarily, but yes, you can you can modify the population basis with some considerable flexibility.

Well, I'll speak to the motion then.

I still think I think it's um I think it's a wrong move to uh I don't want to say willy-nilly, but to uh and and without a lot of thought uh going away from more of a statistical allocation of of membership um without a lot more going you know diving into the details of the implications of that.

I think I always prefer to fall back on something that is concrete that I can stand on rather than something that maybe see seems to be you know politically um expedient at the moment.

I I think it's I think again I think it's a mistake deviating from uh population or some other uh concrete way of uh allocating positions.

Okay, um Dr.

Wong, and before we leave that topic, we worked these numbers out.

Can you share with the group because the population apportionment is still within equitable parameters?

Do you have those numbers, please?

Um Mayor Ross, no, I don't.

Um, but you're you're right.

We did crunch the numbers on this.

If Hillsboro were to donate a seat to PASCO, um 10 of the 23 would roughly be 42 percent of the population, and we're at 49 percent, so that is fairly close.

Uh PASCO would be at um a little bit more than 20 percent.

Uh their current or their 2020 population is 19 percent, so they would inherit a little bit more.

I would want to know like we're within plus minus five percent of the actual 2020 census pop figures.

I would want to say for one for one person on the TPO, how many persons does that represent?

Period.

So if is it is it one per 100,000?

Is it one per, you know, what is what is that number, what is that actual number?

Uh so you can actually see the just if there's a disparity.

Our 2020 countywide pop figures are about 1.3.

So if we had 10 members, they would be representing you know roughly 130,000 people.

And if you gave that extra person to Pasco County, what would be there?

What would they what how many would they be representing to pull out a calculator?

Give us one second, please.

Yeah, one twelve approximately basically so um looking at the numbers here, and I do have the exact numbers, Sarah Caper, Assistant Director.

So the Hillsboro census population from 2020 is 1,459,762 countywide.

So if you divide that by 11, you're at 132,705.

And then if you take the 145, 962, and you divide it by 10, you go from 132705 to 14596.

And just doing rough numbers for the city of Tampa with three, that means one for we're representing one for 140,000, just FYI.

So the City of Tampa, according to the 2020 census has 384 959, dividing that by three, you're at 128319.

Is that what you're saying?

Yeah, I guess I was using newer figures because we're at 420, yeah.

And unfortunately, as as you heard, the the census is what we're required to use, and it will change in 2030, so usually that does get updated around 2032.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Myers.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I do agree.

This is a conversation we keep going around and around and hear uh different opinions every time this subject comes up.

I do agree with Director uh Stevens.

We're not going to really lose a seat when we just give one to PASCO.

So I'm gonna go ahead and call for the vote at this point, so that we can vote on this issue and move on.

Mr.

King, what's your objection?

Uh I would like to offer a friendly amendment.

I would like to offer a friendly amendment.

Mr.

Clerk, what is the proper procedure under this?

We've had a call for the vote, or call the question, and now we've had a it's it's at the chair's discretion.

You can I mean you were still in discussion phase.

Um the if there's an or an amendment or an amended motion, it would have to be stated to see if there was a second, and if there's a second, you'd vote on it before you voted on the main motion.

And if it succeeds, then you wouldn't need to have vote in the main motion.

That's the standard procedure.

Is that change because the question has been called?

No, it it's it that part that's really up to the chair.

I mean, if you can have a vote on it without allowing the motion, you can do that, but it's it's we're still in discussion phase, so that's really at the chair's discretion.

I'm gonna allow the friendly amendment to be heard.

I think there's less questions surrounding that route instead of the call to question route.

So board member King, you're recognized for a friendly emotion.

Thank you, uh Chair.

If uh Commissioner Cohen will uh accept this as a friendly amendment, I would propose that the transit agencies be uh re-included as voting members of the board, changing the total numbers for Hillsboro County to 13, 7 for Pinellas, and 5 for PASCO, and guaranteeing seats for uh the Tampa International Airport and the Port Authority.

So that that's uh that actually would read as a substitute motion.

That's a that's a yeah.

Then I would offer it as a substitute motion motion.

We have a substitute motion.

Is there a second?

Can we can you restate it?

Uh and what would be off the top?

I'm unclear.

Well, we would still guarantee seats for the Tampa International Airport and the Port Authority off the top.

Uh but what you would do is take the transit agencies and roll them back in as voting members as opposed to non-voting advisors.

And that would and change the totals to 13 for Hillsborough County, seven for Pinellas, and five uh for PASCO, and you wouldn't have to donate one to PASCO County.

If I may, board if I may, the math on that would not be allowable.

Currently, 25 voting members is the max allowed under state statute.

That is only 25.

So that would be that would be 27, if I got it correctly.

I heard Port, Airport, they're guaranteed as a part of the 13 or the uh uh across the top is as they are part of everyone's total.

They're currently in our 16 sitting right here.

I'm sorry, they're currently in the 16 and sitting in this room.

The I meant to say it if I if I said it incorrectly, I'm sorry.

The max allowable number of voting seats of any MPO in the state is 25 total.

Right, that would include uh the airport and the port.

So maybe do a break test.

What's included in your Hillsborough?

You've got 13 right now.

I don't know.

I don't know how you would allocate them other than uh you would uh other than the um airport and the uh port authority, a certain number would have go to uh would be apportioned to the county commissioners and to uh the city of Tampa beyond that I don't know.

And the transit agency.

You're saying you're adding the transit agency, and adding the transit agency back in as a voting member.

Sorry, I'm just trying to so the 13 would be when on your scenario, Hillsboro, your 13 would be the port, the airport, the transit agency, and then 10 members to be assigned.

Right.

I guess okay.

So before we lose control, I know several people want to talk, but let me just point out before the discussion begins that this would violate another previously decided issue, and we would have to go back to Pasco and Pinellas because we have already agreed several years ago that each county would decide the composition of their number of seats, and so this would violate that by saying Ford Pinellas, you're gonna have to have your bus you so well.

There's there's more to this motion that that I just want everybody to understand there's more to this.

Okay, hang on.

I think council member Clinton, did I hear a second?

Was that intentional?

Well, uh if we if we resolve this issue, I I'm I'm uh I'm getting warming up to the idea, but haven't they already said we aren't we beyond violating agreement when they've already pushed back and said they want it they want Hillsborough to give a seat to PASCO?

So we're the all that's that's out the window.

So I just want everybody to know.

So I uh is your is the intention so of the transit seat, where does that transit seat come from?

Whoever whichever's uh agency sits that particular time comes out of the the the meat of that county, yes, sir.

So one out of thirteen or one out of five, seven or one out of five, whatever correct sir.

Okay, then yeah, I was I'll second that.

Okay.

I'm unclear.

We have a motion by board member King.

We still have a motion on the table.

This is a substitute motion.

The substitute motion has been seconded by board member Clenden and Mr.

Stevens is recognized for comment.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I I would just say um as it relates to the addition of transit.

I'm a huge transit advocate.

However, the proposal as it stands is is still unclear.

Are we talking about Hart, PSTA and GoPasco?

Because if we're talking about go PASCO, go PASCO is a subdepartment of PASCO County anyway.

So they're not independent corporate body publics like Hart or PSTA.

So I think you have it an issue right there.

And again, I I think based on the the math and apportionment, uh, what are we solving for?

We're not giving up anything uh with the the uh motion that Commissioner Cohen put on the table and still have the ability to to you know obviously be uh in recognition of the importance of transit.

Um so that's just my two cents.

I I just don't know how the PASCO transit authority kind of fits in uh based on what was put on the table.

Mr.

Klug, you were in the queue and then several distinct kind of bizarre, so are you okay?

Yes, I just want to um perhaps clarify this issue and at the meeting, the TMA meeting.

Um there was a clear um position by Pinellas County is not to try to avoid the West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority, typically water water wars from years ago, and to have a more cohesive type organization, and also the T Barty experience.

So the very seems like there's a lot of trauma there about uh Hillsboro having more votes.

That was one issue.

But when it came to um the reapportionment with respect to the the transit agency, I think it was that one position that at Tampa but having two at the top, but having as opposed to 11 um for Hillsborough County, sorry, Hillsboro having 11, they would have 10, and the transit agencies would rotate that one seat between uh Pinellas Pasco and Hillsboro.

Uh not have uh you know that coming from one of the uh the actual uh counties representations would be a separate rotating position.

Stevens says in Pasco County is different because they're a part of the county versus PSTA and Hart are separate organizations, independent special districts, et cetera.

So just to clarify that, but there were there seems to be a real issue.

Pinellas County said we don't want another vote.

Um work good with eight.

We think that uh PASCO should have one additional vote, the five.

If they didn't have the five, there should be a rotating uh transit member, just to clarify that.

Thanks.

Mr.

Cook, Councilmember Hurtek.

Thank you.

Um and thank you for that uh reminder.

And so that would be my issue.

I wouldn't want the transit person to come out of the counties individually.

I would like it uh across the top because I I do envision eventually, I don't think there will be three transit agencies.

That's the goal.

If we're do if we're going toward a regional transit system, we would like to have a regional transit agency.

So I don't I I don't anticipate the three regional transit systems to even make it ideally to the 2030 census.

Our goal would be to combine them if we're really looking at a regional motion.

So that would be my only concern, and I I can't vote for it unless that third is off the top.

Okay.

I I put myself in the queue here a while back, I promise it wasn't, but the bad part about being chair is you don't get to be part of the conversation.

But so I put myself in the queue, and so I would like to comment.

Um I can support the original motion for a variety of reasons that keeps us within the population apportionment.

It shows good faith to our partners in the other two counties.

Um I still think the airport and port should be kept off the top, which it does.

Um, and I I don't think we're giving up much of anything by giving PASCO a seat, and I think we all anecdotally know that their population is growing exponentially, they would probably deserve a seat in 2030 anyway, so let's just give it to them now.

I'm fine with the original.

I have grave concerns about the substitute motion because I think if we want to blow this up, this is the way to do it, because we we are not moving the conversation forward, in my opinion.

We're going back three three years, and and we've already decided really the one of the few things that all three counties have agreed on is that we all are want the ability to decide our own representation of who we want to put on the board.

And if Hillsboro wants to put a Hart representative on the board as a voting member, Hillsborough is free to do so, so is PASCO, so is Pinellas.

I don't think all three counties agreed very, I mean, this like I said, this is one of the few things that we agreed from the start on was that we don't want the three counties telling every each county how to break up their seats.

Like Mayor Kilton and I, you know, we may wind up each with a seat, we may wind up alternating between Plant City and Temple Terriers, or we may wind up out in the cold.

Who knows?

Uh but I mean that this is not for somebody in Newport Ricky to decide.

This is for this group in Hillsborough to decide.

And I don't think we should be telling each of the counties you got to put like PASCO.

I mean, it's part of their county government.

We're gonna dictate to them that they have to have that.

If we want to put Hart on this board as a Hillsborough seat, we are free to do so.

And so um I I think the original motion by Commissioner Cohen preserves the intent.

We're moving forward because now we're haggling over the number of seats by apportionment, and I think the request to give PASCO another one is a reasonable request.

If I were sitting in PASCO, I'd probably be making that same request.

So okay.

That's in my two cents, and who's next?

Mr.

King, board member King.

Um, we did, yeah.

Well, we have a substitute motion, so I'll let Mr.

King.

My impression from earlier is that we agreed that we're not under any obligation to accept any one of these proposals as submitted.

That's correct.

Okay.

The substitute motion would give PASCO an extra voting seat when they regain their uh vote for their transit agency.

They already which is a part of their county, so that would give them five as opposed to four.

If it's more amenable to have, let's say Hillsboro at twelve and Pinellas at eight, that would tend to balance it out.

And uh you could still have room for uh the airport and the port authority as standing members of of uh the uh regional MPO.

Okay.

That that's that's how I um understand what I'm trying to propose.

Okay, so can we call the question on this?

I can say I think it's time to vote.

So we're gonna um the substitute motion is first.

There is a motion and a second by council member Clendennan.

All those in favor of the substitute motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed?

Nay.

Okay.

The record reflect that board member King and Councilmember Clendennan voted aye.

Now we go to the original motion.

Council uh Commissioner Cohen, would you mind restating the original motion since we've been left at so long ago?

Um, my original motion was to uh uh agree to option three, which is uh essentially that it will be a 25 member board with the port and the airport coming off the top, and then a uh population apportionment that, but then would uh add one seat to Pasco County from ours.

Very good.

And that was seconded by I'm trying to recall who's seconded that Mayor Kilton seconded that.

Okay, all those in favor of the original motion say aye.

Aye aye, opposed.

Okay.

Can you raise your hand real quick so that we can see the nays, please?

It's board member king, council members hertek and Clendennan voted nay.

Okay.

All right, uh Dr.

Wong.

Thank you all for sticking with us, board members.

I appreciate the speed back.

Thank you, board members, for sticking with us.

I appreciate the feedback.

We will um we will uh uh make that announcement to Pinellas and Pasco.

Um and I heard no objections about us expediting and moving into phase two, so we will authorize that second scope of work later this afternoon.

If I had my lineup, oh sorry.

Are you have we're on executive director's report right now, or you have questions regarding that?

Yeah, yeah.

I could call you on a new business if you it's not I was just trying to figure out where the where to go.

Okay, I I just I just I mean it's telling that there was one council member not here, but the two of us in Tampa said this isn't gonna work, and I think y'all need to pay attention to that.

And I I was playing off, and this is reference what we're just discussing what uh director Wong just said about moving forward to this phase two.

Um I don't know how we do that again.

If you're not gonna have support of the city of Tampa without some uh extra work here, we just bent over backwards for Pinellas County, but the city of Tampa still gets the middle finger.

There we go.

Well, let me be blunt.

You want you talked about a population apportionment, and yet the population apportionment doesn't it doesn't reflect you getting four seats.

So why is population apportionment important when it comes to the other two counties, but it's not important when it comes to Tampa?

I I did not discuss a population getting I it wasn't my idea about the four seats.

I'm talking about other accommodations and what we look at how this how this how this board is going to work and how it functions.

Again, it's it's something clear to me.

Again, as you look at urban planning and the city of Tampa and the importance of as we piece together what is going to look at as a um a transportation model, you look at the at the density of the city of Tampa as a whole, and you how are you gonna grow this out?

The emphasis you've got to start from the center out.

I mean, that's that's what's gonna have to work to make this practically uh applicable.

Um, what we're building is basically a a ro a road construction pro uh board is what it appears from my perspective.

Looking at this is promote is promoting a road construction board and without any kind of emphasis on other types of transit opportunities within the three uh three county area.

Um again, that's just how it appears to me, and I think it how it appears to the city council.

I you're not gonna get this by city council without something else.

There's got to be something else in this for the city of Tampa.

Uh or you or or you know that's just it's just not gonna happen.

So Dr.

Wong, executive director's report.

Thank you, board members.

Our next TPO regular meeting will be next Wednesday beginning at 10 a.m.

May 13th.

That will be a very important meeting because we'll be looking for approval of the list of priority projects.

That list is what we provide to FDOT and make recommendations for programming decisions that go into the transportation improvement program.

So there is money at stake.

I would encourage everyone to attend if they're able to.

And then um we have a Suncoast Transportation Planning Alliance meeting June 5th at 10 a.m.

in Lakeland at the Suntrecks facility.

We'll be conducting a joint meeting with the Central Florida MPO alliance that represents Orlando and the central part of the state.

Any questions for me?

Thank you, Dr.

Wong.

Board members, other questions for Dr.

Wong?

Thank you very much.

Any old business or new business to discuss seeing none?

Councilmember Clinton.

Yeah, just I'm more food for thought.

And I know uh Johnny and I have had this conversation about what trying to make these process look better.

Again, when I look at uh at the region, I look at St.

Petersburg as a sister city.

I could see that if the interest of the city of St.

Petersburg is very similar to the interest of the city of Tampa.

If if we there was if there was some cooperative way we could, you know, weight this uh the the these two cities and how they're represented.

I see that there's a maybe possibly a solution.

I think Councilwoman Hertek's discussion about the transit authorities being incorporated in this, I think is something that you need to look at to make this more palatable to the urban core.

So I mean I I it's not that I'm saying in fact I've voted an affirmative every time as far as moving forward and continuing to pursue this.

I have not been op I have not voted in opposition to it.

Because I think it's worthy of exploration.

But again, if you're looking for a result that is palatable to the urban corps, I think we need to just be a little bit more creative and look a little bit and dig a little bit deeper and figure out a way to make it something that we can vote for and vote and be successful for, and just don't assume that the city of Tampa is going to be there.

So that's I'm we have to dig harder, look harder, and figure out a way to make it more palatable to the urban portions of our community.

Just add to that as well that I'm I'm not across the finish line on this either.

I don't think any of us are.

We're just in the beginning stages of the conversation.

I think what we were trying to accomplish today was to get past base here.

So that conversation about transit and all those other things can come into play when we decide how those seats are in portion by county.

So I'm not disagreeing with you in any way, shape, or form.

I just don't think we've gotten to that stage in the conversation yet, is my opinion on the one where we are and how this whole process is shaping out.

Chair.

Mr.

King, Board Member King.

Question.

Um this was a non-binding vote or a binding vote.

Binding in what way?

This this was binding in terms of this was our counter proposal to the other two counties.

The way it was represented to me was this was basically to get uh to test the waters to see where everyone stood, and would be a quote, non-binding vote.

Is that not correct?

The recommended action written on the agenda item is to give us direction for how to respond to Ford Pinell's proposal, whether whether we were going to stand by our previous Hillsboro TPO vote on the allocation, or whether we were going to entertain the two alternatives on the table.

So was this to get a sense of where we're all at, or was this an actual commitment to do X, Y, or Z?

What I heard was direction to report back to Ford Panellas that we're going to um keep port in the airport staff of the Port and the Airport off the top.

The remaining 23 would still be divided by population with Hillsborough's 11.

We're willing to donate one to PESCO.

So we now have 10 seats to suballocate, and those conversations need to need to take place over the summer and fall.

So the final version of this will not be voted on until later.

No, not until staff is prepared to recommend some sub-allocation scenarios.

Okay.

Thank you.

Other older new business for discussion board members.

If not, we will stand adjourned.