Okay, I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority Board of Directors for October 9th, 2025.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll and establish a quorum?

Absolutely.

Hume?

Here.

Kennedy?

Sandu.

I'm sorry, Kent.

Maple?

Here.

Rafel.

Here.

Spees?

Present.

Vang.

Here.

Chair Cerna?

Here.

Can you have a quorum with those members present?

Very good.

If you could please read our statement.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Okay, we do not have a quorum.

Um, I want to be respectful of everyone's time, Mr.

Executive.

Are there any presentations or agenda items that we can hear in anticipation of another member that do not require a quorum to vote?

Yeah, absolutely.

I think we can do the item number six as well as the executive director's report.

Okay, so the clerk will note that and uh now we'll read our statement.

Thank you.

This meeting of the Sacramento Transportation Authority is live and recorded with closed captioning.

It is cable cast on Metro Cable 14, the local government affairs channel on the Comcast and Direct TV Uverse Cable Systems.

It is also live streamed at Metro14Live.sackCounty.gov.

Today's meeting replays Sunday, October 12th at 2 p.m.

on Metro Cable Channel 14.

Once posted, the recording of this meeting can be viewed on demand at YouTube.com/slash Metro Cable 14.

To make an in-person public comment, please complete a speaker request form and hand it to the clerk.

The chairperson will call your name when it's your turn to make a comment.

You may also send written comments via email to board clerk at SACCounty.gov.

Your comment will be routed to the board and filed in the record.

Very good.

Thank you very much.

Uh Director Hume, will you do us the honor of leading us in the pledge, please?

Sure.

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

Again, I want to welcome uh members of the public that have joined us here in chambers.

Uh friendly reminder if you are wishing to address the authority board.

Uh please uh complete a speaker slip and give it to our clerks.

Um here in front of the dais.

And uh I will as chair call you in the order that we receive those requests.

We ask that you keep your uh testimony to two minutes or less.

That way anyone who wishes to address the board has that opportunity.

So with that, madam clerk, our first item.

We're going back to the original agenda sequence.

Item one is comments from the public regarding matters not on the agenda.

Are we in receipt of any speaker slips for off agenda matters?

We have not.

Very good.

Next item, please.

Your next item is your consent matters, items two through five.

Okay, any uh member of the board wish to pull an item for separate consideration, discussion, vote.

See none.

Um Madam Clerk, do we have anyone sign to speak on consent?

We do not.

Okay, very good.

Then at this time uh move consent.

Very good.

We have a motion, is there a second?

It's been moved and seconded.

Please vote.

Chair, we're gonna have to take a roll vote.

Chair, we're gonna need to take a roll call vote.

134.

I'm sorry?

We're gonna need to take a roll call vote.

Okay, very good.

That's fine.

Okay.

Dickinson?

Aye.

Gera?

Aye.

Hume?

Aye.

Kennedy?

Kent.

Aye.

Maple?

Here.

Yes.

Aye.

Rafel.

Trying to record that.

Whatever.

Rethel.

Spees?

Aye.

Vang.

And Chair Cerna.

Aye.

And you the motion passes.

Very good.

Next item, please.

Item six is receive an annual presentation on Sacramento Transportation Authority debt program.

Okay.

How am I doing, Board Member Spees?

You are doing fantastic.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Trying to keep up the pace here.

All right.

So I'm Justin Jurens and your two presentation.

We need your mic on first.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Well, good afternoon, board, board chair, and vice chair.

I am Dustin Purenton, the CFO of STA here to present the annual debt program status update.

So first thing to summarize is our current debt portfolio.

We are 100% fixed rate.

So this chart right here represents the the basically all the debt service payments over the course of the maturities and I want to call attention to the debt service ranges from 20.3 million to 35.3 million uh the larger of which is towards the end of the debt service where we're paying the most back in principle so this slide covers the additional bonds test and the covenants that the bonds hold so the table to the right is are the bond covenants and we are within all of them and the table to the left I want to highlight the two numbers there the 8.6 is our current debt service coverage on under the repayment of the 2022 series and the latter or the one to the right there the 4.9 is the debt service coverage when we start paying back the larger of the two debts and both of which were under our maximum annual debt service of two times so last slide here is the 2023 refunding potential update and we are currently projecting a 6.7 million net savings on repayment or on on the re restructuring of this debt and that's assuming rates as of September 24th so that does give us a little bit of room for interest rates to increase before we are beyond a break even point.

So the break even is 1.47% rates can increase by that amount before we reach a break even point.

The table below just summarizes the different years and the net present value savings if we were to refinance under rates on the 24th.

So that concludes my presentation if you have any questions or comments I'm here to take them.

Thank you Dustin any questions for staff.

Okay seeing none madam clerk do we have anyone in the public that assigned to address this matter?

You have no public comment all right very good thank you very much thank you next item please item seven is receive a presentation and authorize the executive director to submit a letter on Sacramento countywide priorities and applications for SACOG's 2025 regional project prioritization program.

Mr.

Busey you're up wonderful good afternoon chair vice chair board members um here ready to present item seven um so this is SACOG who does a 2025 regional project prioritization we're gonna talk about that and what STA's role uh is in that process uh so what is SACOG's regional project prioritization what they do is they develop six county regional priorities uh for grant funds in the following categories first category being federal grants that that agencies might apply for the second being SB1 grants that the agency might apply for and the third category is projects that are not applying for very large capital grants but are maybe in development so why does say or how is SACOC prioritizing they're trying to identify the number one priority grant um one number one priority for each of these grants across the six county region they evaluate those grants based on does the does the actual project support the 2025 MTP SES or the regional plan is the project a regional serving is the is the project competitive for the grant uh and is the project ready to receive the grants um so what are the benefits of being uh prioritized by SACOG one you get that regional endorsement uh two stake ox staff will do do a variety of additional services for you one they will review your grant application before you submit it they will provide technical assistance to you they have uh data available that they can that can be used and they can support or they can do run some new data to actually support the need for your project so you can put that in your application and then finally advocacy um your project is included in the um in the in the transportation team uh handouts that go go with the cap to cap and then um at cap to cap we advocate for those specific projects um there's a similar advocacy effort done uh for SB1 but more at the CTC level um kind of a little bit about why does SACOG prioritize so what they're trying to do is they want to advance these large regional projects that are in the blueprint um they also want to try to maximize uh state and federal funds and increase competitiveness and so that the problem they're trying to solve is you could have potentially four or five projects within the region all submitting for the same grant it's very hard at the staff level and at we and with congressmen congresswomen trying to figure out which one's the priority here you're asking me to support all of these and that's becomes really challenging and so they're trying to prioritize and really narrow it down so we can be you know instead of losing all five we actually win one of those.

And so that the problem they're trying to solve is you could have potentially four or five projects within the region all submitting for the same grant.

It's very hard at the staff level and at we and with congressmen, congresswomen trying to figure out which one's the priority here.

You're asking me to support all these, and that's becomes really challenging.

And so they're trying to prioritize and really narrow it down so we can be, you know, instead of losing all five, we actually win one of those.

I'm sorry, Kevin, with the exception of the SP1 grants, right?

Then I mean the what would the what would our congressional delegation have to say about that?

Yeah, that it's I'm giving that federal example.

On the SB1 side, you're looking at state legislators and you're looking at CTC commissioners to find advocacy standpoint, right?

I think it's an important note just because uh I know at least in Sacramento County, we can I I can speak to that, as can my other uh colleagues here from the county board of supervisors.

You know, our our focus as is uh referenced just by our uh discussion during final budget is to really um try and direct resources to fix it first on so many levels uh in terms of our deteriorating um PCIs.

So I I just wanted to make sure for the record that there's uh some acknowledgement that SB1 is not just kind of an ancillary consideration here, it's a pretty significant one.

Yeah, I I mean I agree.

Um and then I think obviously this also helps support local projects, right?

It helps for local project sponsors when you have have that.

Um and then you know, why would SDA be be part of this process, right?

Well, I think it's important that you know the align there's an alignment along priorities between the local agency, the countywide agency of STA and SACOG.

Um there is some collective advocacy work that can be done along when you have everybody in alignment, and then we can leverage the combined resources at the local, countywide, and uh regional level.

Uh so how does S SDA staff develop these countywide priorities, right?

Um so what we do is we request the agency's priorities, we consider the evaluation criteria, and then we uh coordinate eight with the agencies to understand their priorities.

And then ultimately what we do is we work with the professional advisory group to build a consensus on what those priorities would be.

In in the last uh the last cycle of this, um we're lucky to have the fact that projects within Sacramento County predominantly were not competing against each other.

They weren't going after the same grants, but we had a few of those that did that.

And so we had to sort of work that out.

Um but um ultimately what we want to do is identify what are the countywide priorities at the federal and state level, and then let SACOG know here's how we see it.

Um and it's also been helpful in that fact that we are a little closer to the projects in SACOG, so when there are issues, we can help sort of navigate those issues.

Uh so here's the schedule.

So what they're planning to do is um in October, we're gonna have the professional advisory group meet with SACOG and go over kind of high level what this what the regional project prioritization is, as well as the uh any questions they might have, and then about a week later the applications are due.

And then in November, hopefully um we can have consensus on what you know the countywide priorities are, send a letter to SACOG while they're still reviewing the applications, and then by December, SACOG will actually determine what the priorities are.

One caveat to that is they've done a delayed call for projects, so the federal and the sort of projects in the pipeline or project is still in development.

Um that's happening now, and then the SB1 projects, which are which are due much later, um, are not going to be until spring of 2026.

Excuse me, Kevin.

Director Dickinson has a comment and or question.

I can wait till the end of the presentation.

Okay.

So one thing we're we're talking about a little new is you know, when should STA be an applicant, right?

I think if SDA is an applicant to for these projects, it demonstrates regional significance, you know, it's an additional lever for that.

And especially when there's measure A funding, which shows the project is more competitive given those funds.

Um what we're thinking is uh when working with the agencies on these projects that are gonna submit it, does it make sense for STA to be a co-applicant or the applicant on some of these projects?

So I'll give you a couple of examples.

SAC5 managed lange project is a Caltrans project, right?

It's also a measure A project.

Does STA submit that application?

Does Caltrans to submit that application?

Do we jointly submit that application?

I think we do whatever's most effective uh for the project.

Um I'm gonna skip these comprehensive multimodal quarter plans because they're related to SB1, but uh farm to market routes.

Um so there's this is another good example.

So Sacramento County has done a farm to market route study in South Sacramento County, it has identified all the farm to market routes that are in that are in Sacramento County, the cities of uh Elk Grove Gault and Ialton.

And so the the thought here is you know, given does it make sense for the county to submit this application, or maybe a regional agency like SDA should submit this application.

Uh in addition to that, if we're pursuing Federal dollars, um would it make sense to uh also pick up routes in an adjoining county as an example uh like El Dorado County in particular?

Uh maybe it should make sense for SDA and El Dorado County, EDCDC to submit this, showing and it's much more viewed as a regional priority.

There's also some benefits to us given that the uh given the alignment of particular congressmen and congresswomen in Illinois County.

Um then we've got a couple other projects uh working down the list here that are multi-agency projects where we can work with applicants to determine whether it makes sense to be part of that.

Um we have the Stockton Boulevard multi-corrent multimodal BRT corridor.

You know, I think that one, the applicants are the county of Sacramento, City of Sacramento, and SAC RT.

Does it make sense for SDA to be on that?

We can have those discussions.

I think we do have some smart growth incentive program funds on that, so maybe it makes sense, maybe it shows a little more of a countywide commitment.

Um but that's kind of that's one of the things that we're we're talking about today.

So really what we're asking for is to you authorize a letter on those countywide priorities to SACOG and then to submit applications for multi-AG projects that for prioritization.

Um that is the that is the ask in the end of this.

Um uh open any questions.

Okay, great.

Thank you, Kevin.

Uh any questions?

We'll start with Director Dickinson.

Uh thanks.

Thanks for the presentation, Kevin.

Um I I had a couple things that I was curious about.

Uh one actually hadn't occurred to me before, but uh uh over all these years, but the professional advisory group, uh do you do you include uh um Capital Corridor and the San Joaquins in that group?

We we haven't traditionally because they're not an agency that receives measure A funds, but in the most recently we've been in we have been including uh Valley Rail, um, primarily because they have been included as a funded project in measures that we have put on the ballot or tried to put on the ballot.

So we have included Valley Rail, but not Capital Quarter, because Capital Corridor is not uh hasn't really yeah, we haven't included them.

We can include them.

I can invite them to meeting for the other.

You know, it to me uh to me it we uh uh it doesn't seem that there's a downside, and it seems to me there being uh there could be an upside.

So for example, when we're talking about the the Placer uh Sacramento Gateway, part of that is potentially Capitol Corridor service.

That's what really made me think about this.

And the other thing uh that uh uh is certainly germane, uh at least it is to me, if no one else is the third main line track uh from Sacramento Valley Station to to uh Roseville.

Um as distant as that may seem, uh uh it seems to me that it's something that should be in the mix.

I mean, there are some things to talk about.

It makes it worth having their perspective in the room when when you're going through the uh the these discussions.

Uh so uh Yeah, I have no concern.

You want to include uh I think it's Jim Allison, I think, yeah.

Or Jim.

Oh.

Yeah, I'll include him though.

Yeah, I mean Rob Padgett is, but Rob's the uh ED, not the not the planning director.

So the second thing I was curious about was uh to understand how uh uh your uh approach works with respect to um some different categories of of funding.

So for example, uh uh in long ago times like uh the 2000s, uh uh if my recollection serves each each jurisdiction would make their nominations to to SACOG in the county would would make their recommendations or nominations to SACOG and then the SACOG staff would come to the SACOG board with its recommendations and the SACOG board would make its its decisions on on those things.

So this changes that that approach, and I think probably in a in a beneficial way.

Uh but what's the scope of that?

Does it does it mean that only those projects that are multi-jurisdictional or uh include uh SB1 or federal funding are, which is most projects, I suppose, but are the ones that you're looking to come up with uh with the priority list for or um uh uh uh does it it does does it include uh if uh the city of Sacramento has a project to add sidewalks uh uh in Oak Park as a uh one of its projects on its list that it wants to recommend or nominate to SACOG, would that be included uh as an example in these in these discussions?

Would that be included uh as an example in these in these discussions?

What what what's the division point here between what you are looking for in terms of uh a recommendation from the from the group uh and those that, if any, that individual jurisdictions would continue to make to SACOG?

Yeah, so I mean probably maybe I should have been more clear in my presentation.

And the I think what the when I was talking about Federal funding, there is Federal funds that go to SACOG, and you're talking about how the SACOG awards those projects.

And I and I'm I'm talking about uh Federal funds that are awarded at the national level by FRA or F yeah or um uh USDOT or F.

So that's build, that's infra, that's RAISE, those those programs.

Um so what what we're what we're this prioritization is purely for uh that process.

However, um you know, you can use the SACOG's funding round, the regional funding round, to position projects for larger national awards, right?

So there is some synergy there between those two things.

And so there is a benefit, there is a benefit, at least in my book, of prioritizing these regional projects.

If you get a project prioritize, and then you say, especially in the project development category where, hey, we're not ready to sub award a lot, you get a large construction award, but I want to complete environmental the environmental work.

I don't have funding for the environmental work yet.

I need to have SEQA completed, I need to have NEPA completed, and then once I have those completed, I am much more competitive at the Federal level.

So if you get you say, hey, I have got this great project, it's in development, it gets prioritized for a project in development, and then you can apply for SACOG's funding around and get the environmental work funded.

And then you know, once that work is completed, you're in a good position to compete at a much higher level because you have got that milestone behind you.

So I think that they can work together, but they are they are separate at this, they are still separate.

Okay.

So if if I have understood what you have have said, it's you're looking strictly at what you would would would call regional projects for this prioritization.

So if uh uh uh uh in my example, the City of Sacramento has a project that is totally within the city limits, uh even if they were looking for SB1 funding, for example, for like let's say a local partnership grant, that would not be that would not be in the in the prioritization that you are talking about.

It would that would proceed on its own separately, either through SACOG or directly to to Caltrans and the CTC.

So the SDA currently prioritizes the local partnership program for competitive.

SACOG prioritizes for SB1 solutions for congested corridors and trade quarter enhancement program.

And so they are looking for regional serving projects.

So a project solely within the City of Sacramento and only serving the City of Sacramento would likely be at a disadvantage.

Um I think there's there's a ways to address that, uh obviously.

So solutions for congested quarters, you are trying to address the corridor.

And so historically we've done for Plaza Sacramento Gateway Plan as an example is we've included projects along the corridor.

And combined, they're all combined, they all provide a quarter-wide regional benefit.

And so we have included City of Sacramento projects as an example under solutions for congested corridors.

But it wouldn't be the City of Sacramento specifically submitting a project, it would have to come through whoever is putting that application together, which is why we partner with PCTPA on the Plata Sacramento Gateway Plan, so we can be sort of at the table when we have those discussions.

That's why we are partnering with SACOG on U.S.

50 so we can be on discussions on what happens along U.S.

50.

Uh okay.

So you're what you're saying is if there if there was a project that was uh a portion of a larger regional project, you would look to incorporate in the regional project and then make that part of this discussion for regional priorities.

Yeah, that that would be helpful.

And so what we did, we've done is we've identified uh our Federal Prioritors or State Prioritors and then other projects that were priorities.

We kept them as we just call them countywide priorities, even if they so we had a list of, hey, what are the priorities across the county for all the projects?

And so that that gives me as STA an idea of knowing, hey, what your priority projects are and how they can fill into these various opportunities as they come become available.

Okay, I think I have got a sense of that.

Let me let me turn it around and see.

Um what projects, if any, would uh an individual jurisdiction be applying for directly to SACOG on under this template?

If if Folsom had a project that it wanted to it wanted to seek funding for and want uh and it wanted to go straight to SACOG with that project, is there is there an opportunity to do that, or uh because you made reference to all projects a moment ago.

Or uh because you made reference to all projects a moment ago.

So I'm just trying to understand that.

I think I think we know I think the challenge here is to ensure you know you have to show that your project is regionally serving, right?

Um but you know it's it's also you have to show that your project is the most competitive across the region.

So maybe you are lucky you're the only project in that particular grant category who is going to apply for build and it makes it easier, or you may have to uh prioritize.

So I think City of Folsom, they have some projects.

They they've been talking to me about those projects.

So they have I'm gonna give one as an example.

I hope that's okay.

Okay.

Uh so they have this roundabout that they want to do, uh uh, which is on a road.

I forget the name of the road I use it all the time, but Justin is gonna tell me.

The uh East Natoma and uh Falz and Lake Crossing, that roundabout?

Yes, yes.

Uh so there's a there's a roundabout used.

And so uh on that road, it rode that road is used as a cut through between Placer and El Dorado County because right through Sacramento County.

Um it also serves as access to the Johnny Cash Trail and the American River Bike Trail.

And so that project, I mean it's a it's a project in the City of Folsom, but it does seem very regional serving when you think about the amount of volume of traffic that comes through El Dorado County, into Sacramento County, out to Placer County, and as well as the active transportation connections.

So they can probably make a strength uh a case that that project is regional serving.

I I think they have the the benefit of that.

Um but not every project can do that.

Not like uh it would be challenging for like a complete streets project alone to do that, especially if you can't show the traffic volumes or supporting other regional movements and that kind of thing.

Excuse me.

What's the relationship but but uh between this and uh just because I haven't uh not paid as close attention to it in the last few years as perhaps I could have or should have.

What is the relationship between this and the TIP?

The the Federal TIP?

No, no, I mean uh the the R tip.

The Oh, the R tip?

Yeah.

Oh so R TIP is a programming document, right?

As it relates to how do we program in the Federal, State, and local funds that uh that SACOG maintains, right?

So it also includes projects.

Actually, absolutely, including projects.

So as projects are um either awarded grant funds or um or you are locally funded, those projects in there are some sort of significance, they're added to the RTIP.

So but that that's post-award, right?

And so the only thing only a connection between this and the RTIP would be that uh if this priorization effort helps you get funding for a project, then it has to be added to the RTIP.

The RTIP is not just post-award, is it?

Uh it's well, it's not just grants, it's also locally funded projects as well, yeah.

So in and that so this is really connected but separate from the R R TIP.

In other words, for Folsom.

Connected but separate, yeah.

It's a great enough.

Right.

And I'm not sure that project is in the RTIP yet, right?

It's still just as an example.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank thanks, Chair, for indulging me in that.

Yes, absolutely.

Uh Director Kent?

Thank you.

I think it's highly advisable to accept this proposal and identify consolidate priorities, achieve consensus, and coordinate that for SACOG's consideration.

Presuming this is a new effort, the resources that to be expended on this travel, consultancy, any other staff time, is that identified or covered under the current budget?

Yeah, so I think the the current really we're we're absorbing this through the our administrative costs only, and we're not asking for any additional funding or resources at this time.

Anything further?

Okay.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Thank you, uh Kevin, for the uh the report.

Uh Madam Clerk, do we have anyone time to speak on this matter?

You do not.

Okay, very good.

Next item, please.

Uh we have to do that.

Do we need to move item number seven?

All right.

Very good.

We have a motion or a second?

Second.

Okay.

It's been moved and seconded.

Do we have our electronic voting set up or not?

Please vote.

The item passes with those members present by unanimous vote.

All right.

We will go to the next item now.

Thank you.

Item eight is the executive director's report.

I'm going to go fast if I can.

So is Kevin giving you the eye?

Kevin.

Kevin, I failed you.

It started as a bit of humor between myself and Director Maple.

There is no reason why you have to accelerate other than for brevity.

Let me back up.

I'm gonna try to accept anyways.

Yeah, I'm I'm a fan of expedition.

All right.

Wonderful.

Uh so at the direction of the chair, I will uh we'll go quickly.

Hey, uh legislative update, assembly bill 1223.

We are still waiting for the governor, and he has about four days left, and hopefully he'll sign that bill, uh, which will give us some additional geographic flexibility as it relates to future transportation sales tax measures as well as other things.

Um countywide VMT mitigation program strategy update.

Uh we presented to two workshops to the board so far on that.

Uh we are coming back with uh like we are looking at coming back with high high level recommendations in November.

We may push that.

Um trying to we have a stakeholder survey out to go to the various agencies uh that are on the working group asking for their input on on those recommendations.

Uh we have a meeting next week on some proposed recommendations.

Um but we're trying to sort of wrap that up and bring something for either in November or as it could be as late as February.

Um I would say that the challenge we're having now is there's a lot of different options that are not mutually exclusive and that could build upon each other, um, as well as some overall concerns that we need to try to address and to try to get something cohesive and that works together and is integrated is gonna take a little more time than I anticipated.

Um but we so we we uh we we could be back in November, but I think it's gonna be a February thing.

Uh new transportation funding activities.

I'll speak briefly about that um because we're I think we're getting an update in under uh reports.

But um we are been working with Lucas Public Affairs on the outreach.

They've been doing stakeholder stakeholder surveys and interviews.

Um we did have we have polling results that are back.

Um we prant we plan to bring that to our transportation committee or uh our new transportation funding subcommittee shortly.

Um you should have all received an email with those results in case you had so you have those.

Um I will note that S SACRT sent those to all their board members probably earlier in the week, so I felt it was made sense to send those to everyone else.

Uh and I think that's I should cover the update.

Very good.

Thank you.

Any other questions for our executive director seeing none?

Madam Clerk, do we have anyone sign up to address the executive director's report?

You do not.

All right, very good.

Thank you.

Next item, please.

Item nine is comments and reports from authority members.

Okay.

Um comments from board members.

Um I know that uh we don't have uh board member Talamantes here for a Carter report out.

Um Mr.

Guerra, would you like to report out on uh the transportation new transportation funding subcommittee activities?

Uh yes, thank you, uh Mr.

Chair.

First, I want to thank a Mr.

Buse who may have sent out information earlier uh today to all the board members.

The uh the subcommittee uh will meet to dive deeper into some of the results.

I would say the results are both um you know uh heartbreaking but also extremely fascinating with seeing what we how we digested them.

And I do want to thank our vice chair and chair for participating in a conversation with the leadership of our T and our chair of the subcommittee who is also on STA there.

Um but I'll just say that we're we will have a uh deeper dive with the subcommittee uh and then a full report out to the board uh at the end of the month.

That's it.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Very good.

Thank you.

Uh any questions for Mr.

Guerra?

Uh Director Spees.

I do have a quick one.

The um so the information will that be available at the city level as well.

Uh it was uh it yes, it does avail uh at the city level, but uh when you at least when the poll with the way that the polls are described it, when you get to the smaller cities, the variance is much larger.

So it doesn't give you as clear of a detail um at that that that level.

But it did break out the individual cities and the unincorporated county.

Right.

And and all I was saying, as I was looking through it, there were nuggets of information that were helpful not just to the transportation issue.

And so I was wondering if it would be made available to the cities at that level.

Oh yes.

You know what?

Let me that that's a good question to ask and also to see if there's any kind of cross-tabulation that's being worked on that that actually might uh help with that that uh specific discrete information that you may be looking for.

Oh, thank you.

Mr.

Busey, you have a quizzical look on your face.

Do you want to add anything?

I can coordinate that.

Um what I'm just curious, Kevin, what specific information were you or how about you we we get in touch and we'll work out what information you need.

I can give that to you.

I'm assuming that I can provide whatever level of information you want.

I'll try to provide that the same to the full board.

Uh so that if they have the same questions, it will be answered by that.

Okay.

All right, very good.

Uh thank you.

Um I'm uh of the understanding that uh Director Hume uh has nothing to report out on the region committee.

Um I don't see any other members of the board that uh have um registered in the queue to speak up.

I think that concludes our business.

Uh does it not, Madam Clerk, for the afternoon?

All right.

As such, then we will stand adjourned.

Thank you.