We ready to the right?

Yeah, that one right now.

Ready?

But they're not.

We can still start, regardless of chair.

Ready to the left.

Oh, there you go.

What do you buy?

Okay.

You just have to pull it up.

I'd like to welcome you to the meeting of August the 11th.

We are doing important matters up here, fixing chairs and making sure that we're at our best for you.

So please forgive us for that.

But to the meeting of the Sacramento Regional Transit Board of Directors.

Um, I would like uh Tabitha to do roll call.

Roll call for us, please.

Yeah, next room.

Annexon.

Director Burr is absent.

Director Budge?

Here.

Director Dickinson.

Director Hume.

Director Kennedy.

Director Maple.

And then serving as alternate for Director Orba this evening.

Director Larry?

Here.

Director Schaefer.

Here.

Director Cerna.

Director Sing Allen.

Here.

And Chair Jennings.

Here.

With that, we have a quorum of 10 votes.

And this meeting of the Sacramento Regional Transit District is recorded with closed captioning.

The recording will be cable cast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel on the Comcast and Direct TV Uverse Cable Systems.

The recording will also be video streamed at Metro 14 Live.sackCounty.gov.

Today's meeting replays Wednesday, August 13th at 2 p.m.

and Saturday, August 16th at 2 p.m.

on Metro Cable Channel 14.

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

Members of the audience wishing to address the board should fill out a speaker card located at the rear of the room and provide it to myself or Adam.

Once the item has been called, additional speaker cards will not be accepted.

The time allowed for public comment is at the chair's discretion.

The timer will chime when you have 20 seconds, and then again when your time is up.

There were two written public comments received, both from Rick Hodgkins on item four regarding the alert SACRT app and item 6.1 regarding the proposed city safe parking item that was on the last agenda.

All right.

Chair to ask uh any directors or questions, comments on the consent calendar items 2.1 to 2.9.

Hearing none, I'll move approval.

Unless we have public comment.

A hypersensitive abundance of caution, I'm going to uh abstain on item two point six.

Okay.

Others?

All right.

Director Budge, I think I heard a motion from you.

Second, and second by Supervisor Kennedy.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Abstain.

But director showed we are unanimous and note.

Director Dickinson.

Actually, we do have one public comment on item 2.4.

Okay, all right.

So we'll go back 30 seconds, 45.

That's what I asked.

And Helen O'Connell.

Hello, board.

I'll try to be kind.

Um 2.4 is another contract with the low floor light rail vehicles and their amendments that we've been working on for a very long time.

Some of them are um addressing the issues that we have been working on about the speakers being in the correct area, um, being able to have a priorities for the um disability button.

Um, these things um apparently are going to be handled on this next round of vehicles, and I appreciate it, but there are still many items that we need to work on.

So we'll just keep on plugging until we get it right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we need to go back and rewind the whole vote.

Yes, please.

Any more public speaking?

Uh, no more public comments.

Thank you.

All right.

So we will now go for items 2.1 to 2.9.

Uh Director Dickinson is abstained from item 2.6.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose, abstain.

The director show we are unanimous.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

We will now move to unfinished business item 3.1.

Customer service response for feedback and comments.

Chair Jennings, members of the board, I am Lisa Heinz by Lisa.

Connect.

Before Lisa gets started on her presentation, I wanted to take this opportunity to kind of explain what we're doing with Lisa's presentation.

So I'd like to take the opportunity to remind the board that uh the board staff and the public about how items that are not on the agenda should generally be addressed in real time.

So, as you all know, under California's Brown Act, the board cannot discuss or take action on items not on the agenda, while directors can briefly respond to statements or questions.

They cannot engage in substantive discussion or deliberation on the matter.

And we receive a lot of excellent feedback from the public during the items not on the agenda portion of the meeting.

And those comments often spark uh some commentary by the board and staff.

And so, in an effort to make sure that we don't tread into prohibited discussion or deliberation territory, um, staff will make this item a regular agenda item, and Lisa will respond to the public comments that were made on the prior board meeting at the following board meeting, and that will allow the board the opportunity to um debate publicly deliberate or anything on uh on the items or at least discuss them.

And um, of course, any item that can be handled offline by staff will continue to be addressed offline by staff with a member of the public expressing the concern, but I just wanted to provide this kind of foundational explanation of what we're gonna be doing going forward.

And so uh with that I turn it back to Lisa.

Okay, let's start over.

Chair Jennings, members of the board.

I'm Lisa Hines, Vice President of Security Safety, Customer Satisfaction and Facilities.

As the lead of the custom as the lead of customer service for the agency, I will be presenting customer satisfaction strategies and responses to public concerns.

I will continue to cover this topic at future board meetings.

Starting with a question regarding how many connect card machines are not working, including at 16th Street Light Rail Station.

Connect card readers are being accessibly vandalized, leaving us with only 70 working connect card machines to cover 53 light rail stations.

Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to replace or repair damaged machines as many parts are no longer available.

Our plan is to focus on the new fare system to address this issue.

We will do our best to maintain the functioning connect card machines during this transitional period.

We are redistributing our functioning readers for maximum benefit by placing two machines at our busiest stations and maintaining one machine at all other locations where feasible.

SACRT will be updating its fare system over the next year.

This fall, SACRT will launch a new mobile app that will allow some connect card users to move over from Connect Card to the new app, which also includes new TAP devices.

During 2026, SACRT will roll out all features of the new fare system, facilitating transition of the remaining Connect Card users to a state of the art account-based ticketing system.

In addition to the cash value on Connect Card, SACRT offers several fair payment options, including our monthly pass, which can be purchased in person or online, fair vending machine purchases at each light rail station, and our Zip pass application, which we are in the process of transitioning to the new account based ticketing system as noted.

We want writers to continue tapping at the working Connect card readers prior to writing.

If a writer cannot locate a working reader for any reason, please contact a transit ambassador to validate your Connect card via their cell phone.

Each of our fair vending machines has a forward facing camera.

Here is a compilation of different people smashing our fair vending machine screens for no apparent reason.

You'll see here this guy walks up and he smashes it multiple times with the tip of his cane.

Look for the spidering spider webbing on the on the screen.

There's absolutely no reason for him to be there.

This guy throws a rot breaking the screen.

And this guy walks up with a big stick and smashes it to smithereens.

And then these kids here are just repeatedly throwing rocks at the screen to make sure that it's completely damaged.

Kind of an endless, endless throwing of rocks.

Some of society has a complete disregard for property in the region, such as the theft of copper, stealing catalytic converters, breaking into parking meters, and stealing water backflow devices to name a few.

In an effort to recoup the damages, I have been working with our legal team to pursue restitution in those cases.

The next question is please provide a customer service response and timeline for investigations.

As I mentioned at the last meeting, all staff take complaints seriously, and complaints made at board meetings are handled just as quickly.

Numerous team members take detailed notes during public comment and board meetings.

Our customer service director logs all feedback into our official tracking system.

The customer advocacy team sends out investigation sheets for each complaint, which is when the clock starts ticking.

All relevant department directors begin investigations immediately.

Customer advocacy checks back to ensure all complaints are being handled in a timely manner.

Concerns are discussed in real time via text, email, or during meetings.

When necessary, action plans are created and all comments receive responses.

Responses may be delivered by email, phone, or in-person meetings.

Oftentimes we have 15 days from notice on complaints to finish the investigation per some collective bargaining agreements.

Each complaint is thoroughly handled and time may vary depending on how long it will take to complete the investigation.

Although I cannot provide a blanket answer on how long each investigation will take, I can ensure you that all complaints are documented and signed for assigned for investigation, videos pulled when available, and communication is made with the complainant.

I would like to share some examples of how SACRT staff swiftly handled complaints to completion.

So first, first I'm going to start by talking about a Watteni 80 writer suggested a service fix, and we implemented it quickly.

At a Monday board meeting, a suggestion was made to adjust the Route 15D tour at Waton I 80 so passengers could be picked up at a more accessible stop.

The idea was well received by our team, and we implemented the change the following Sunday.

It's a great example of how rider feedback can lead to fast and meaningful improvements.

I have two more examples.

Example two, a rider raised concerns regarding the new Q ride app that is for paratransit services.

Staff met with her, brought feedback to Q ride and resolved issues.

Not all feedback comes through, comes to SACRT through board meetings.

In this case, the rider raised her concerns during a MAC meeting, which we treat just as seriously.

Logging the feedback, meeting with her personally, and sharing her concerns directly with Q Ray.

Her input led to several improvements, demonstrating how we listen and how we respond.

No concern is too small.

Our goal is to validate what happened and correct it when necessary.

Ensuring riders know their voices matter and lead to real action.

And my third and final example was Paratransit was unable to find a rider at his pickup location.

Operations updated the geocode and the driver notes.

The issue was on your serve's end.

They were having trouble locating his house.

All the information has been updated now, and the notes are visible to all drivers.

These examples illustrate how quickly we address concerns.

They show that we go above and beyond to address concerns while peer agencies are unable to do so because of technical and financial hardships.

The next question is RT's app was not working for bus route 67 and 68 for this California State Fair.

During this year's California State Fair, SACRT provided special service for two weeks using those routes 67 and 68, serving a CalExpo managed stop inside the main gate loop that is not officially part of our SACRT route system.

While the stop was not visible in the app, it functioned as a pickup and drop-off location for fairgoers.

We've confirmed that it's technically possible to temporarily temporarily activate the stop in CleverCAD for future fares.

However, we will need to coordinate with CalExpo to either place a SACRT decal on their sign, their bus stop sign, or discuss the potential for adding our own bus stop.

Because this stop is treated as a detour and not part of our standard infrastructure, we are working on gathering ridership data through alternative alternative methods, which is why reporting is taking a little longer than usual.

Specifically for SACRT go, we provided 266 paratransit rides to and from the fair.

The next question.

The Zinfandale light rail station typically has five or more bicycles boarding a train at once, the policy needs changing.

As part of our ongoing evaluation of space and accessibility on light rail, we've begun collecting data on bicycle usage.

Over an eight-day period, we observed 1,156 bikes on board our light rail system, with 219 of those bicycle riders located in ADA seating areas, raising concerns about conflicts with passengers who require those spaces.

This is an important issue, and we're taking the time to dig deeper into the data to better understand trends, such as whether these capacity issues are occurring during peak hours, whether they concentrate on certain lines, or whether the root causes a lack of awareness about where bikes are supposed to go.

Bicycle use on light rail data review and next steps.

Currently, SACRT's policy for bicycles is there's a limit of four bicycles, two in the front, two in the back per train.

Seats are for passengers, not for bicycles.

If a train is at full capacity, cyclists may need to wait for the next train.

We want to be clear that this is not about discouraging bike use.

Our goal is to strike a balance between maintaining accessible seating for passengers and maintaining space for bicycle riders.

Next question.

Request for more pedestrian and bike infrastructure and increased route frequency and coverage.

All evening routes currently are 30 minutes or less.

At the July meeting, several customers requested more frequent service, late night service, and more pedestrian infrastructure.

The planning department has reached out to all of the patrons to explain that improved frequency as well as late night bus and rail service continues to be a highly requested service from our customers and work and we are working every day to achieve that.

However, service expansions such as these require funding for operations for things such as staff, maintenance, purchasing of vehicles, et cetera.

The district receives only about one-fifth of a penny and local sales tax funding, which is far below what our peer agencies of the same size throughout the nation receive.

Going forward, SACRT is hoping to secure local funding that will aid us in all our service improvement efforts, such as increased frequency, longer hours of service, and route expansion.

The next question consider adding signal priority to light rail.

We currently have 96 locations system-wide where traffic signals are set up to change for a train.

It's called traffic signal preemption.

Specifically, we have 52 active grade crossings.

We have 44 passive grade crossings for the Central Business District, including the Green Line and Sack Valley, there are passive crossings.

The setup means every location has a way to tell the train, tell the traffic lights a train is coming, so vehicles are stopped before the train crosses.

Additionally, the city of Fulsom is funding a study currently on adding signal priorities for light rail trains.

Next question: Will you add more workshops on how to use the low floor vehicles?

We have held several in-person workshops and trainings over the past year prior to the launch of the new trains and after.

We have also created multiple how to board videos for the new low floor trains, which are available on our YouTube channel as well as how to write information on our website.

We do not have any plans to do additional workshops.

We encourage individuals to work directly with customer service and/or accessible services for individualized training.

Consider joining parking lot day.

It was suggested that we activate station parking lot days at our light rail parking lots.

SACRT has been partnering with many community organizations to revitalize transit ridership, enhance customer services, and create neighborhood amenities by active activating underutilized light rail station parking lots.

Events and activities include weekly farmers markets, monthly concerts and food truck series, job fairs, bike rodeos, regional cultural festivals, art installations, and pop-up art activities and future mobility hubs.

Our VP of real estate continues to work with the community on future events, including parking lot big.

More capacity for ADA passengers and bicycles, remove the seats or poll in front of the door where cyclists enter.

We conducted extensive research before the launch of the S700 trains, including speaking with the Mobility Advisory Committee, looking at what our peers did, and concluded that the poll, which was part of San Diego MTS's specification on the new trains.

We want to maintain it as a safety component on all our trains and feel the removal of the poll will cause severe safety issues.

Safety is our main priority, and as such, we will not remove the poll.

We will have our transit ambassadors assist passengers when possible.

We will ask that wheel pair that we ask that wheelchair passengers with personal care attendants assist them with either pushing the door button or with any other needs they may have.

That concludes my presentation.

Heading on to Lisa's presentation.

So at the board's July 28th, 2025 board meeting, the board was slated to receive an informational briefing on the status of the disposition of SACRT's midtown properties.

The item 4.3 was on the agenda.

But as the board entered its third hour, Chair Bobby Singh Allen asked the board whether they were open to deferring the item and receiving a written summary until the item could return.

The board members all appeared to concur.

The chair directed staff to provide a written summary of the item for the board and the public to review and directed the general manager to return with an item in his general manager's report at the next board meeting.

Immediately after the board meeting ended, the general manager received a complaint from a member of the public that the board, the board chair's action to defer item 4.3 and request written communication from staff about the item constituted a violation of the Brown Act.

I immediately contacted the complainant, explained the item was not removed from the agenda, never to be heard again.

I assured the complainant that it would have ample opportunity that they would have ample opportunity to provide public comment before that on the item before the board ever took any action on the item.

And so what you know, going back to what the board did, summarizing it in this last slide, the next slide.

Yeah, the board at that board meeting, the board chair uh deferred the item, asked uh staff to please put together a written summary of what was going to move forward and um send it to the board and to the public, and then bring it back at the next board meeting in the general manager's report.

And that is what staff has done.

Um Chris Flores, our VP of uh real estate, prepared a written report, written summary of what he was going to present, uh send it to the board and also put it on our website on July 31st, and then tonight um it has come back as item 3.2.

Chris will do the presentation, and there's also um, it's also in the general manager's report.

So that's all.

Any questions?

And uh find out if there are any questions from our directors, comments or questions.

Just quick comment.

Okay.

I love that we're doing this.

I think this is great to sort of address things that come up along the way in a format that doesn't violate the Brown Act.

So thank you for being proactive on this.

Great, great job.

And while it seemed like it was a lot today, if we do this consistently, it'll be less and less at each meeting.

But I too totally agree.

I really like this unfinished business category because it allows us to finish the business that needs to be finished, bring closure to it.

So good job.

Other comments, Mr.

Chair.

Just wanted to emphasize you know, you know, past uh right off the board of meeting with uh the customers who raised this concern, you know, uh behind the scenes, and uh we did not bring this back to the board just to entire public what it would have been doing.

So um we're gonna continue to do this, continue to work with individuals, continue to bring back to the board, so everybody on the same page.

Good.

Okay, do we have any public comment on this item?

We do.

We have Coco Coca-Zella.

Coco Coca Zola.

Um, thank, thank you, Lisa and Olga.

Um, Olga, respect for giving the context that really was very, very useful.

Thank you for that.

And for this whole new paradigm.

Uh, I'm gonna pinball, try to pivot nimbly because I wrote this before I came here and I didn't have access to the presentation.

So please, a little leeway.

I think it's apropos.

Uh today I'd like to focus a little bit more on the what of issues, but not uh not on the what of issues, but the why.

Uh so speaking to the presentation from last week uh meeting, how did we ever get into to begin with with some of the issues that we have encountered?

Um, to name a small number as reference only, uh crossing arm compliance SNAFU that Blanca referred at the last meeting, the impossibly tight tolerance of timing of the passing cars at Glen Holderness, and SACRT's first pass at replacing Smart Ride with a ride chair that had no hope of ADA accommodations in SAC County, in which also had profound impact of would have had profound impact on members of the youth community.

I strongly suggest that there's some aspect of oversight that's not happening correctly during SACRT projects.

Oversight that potentially includes willingness to embrace outside status quo thinking to ensure that all important considerations have been tackled.

In addition, I wonder what type of uh project postmortems are being done.

Uh post-mortems are one of the greatest opportunities for growth that any team can be given.

It's where these key questions are tackled.

What happened?

What do we learn?

What have we done to manage it going forward?

To be clear, postmortem is not time for blaming, finger pointing, passing the buck, shaming, et cetera.

It is a time for collaborative open discussion whereby the outcomes can only be positive since it's all about learning.

Thank you.

And next we have Helen O'Connell.

Thank you, board.

Um, I'm very glad that you guys are have come up with this new method so that the public and the board and the staff all know what's going on.

Um, that is a very good positive step forward.

Um, and being on the agenda every month will be helpful because people that came the month before, if they missed something or they were concerned about something could come to the next board meeting and get the updates.

So I appreciate the efforts that were made, and I'm glad that um the input from the matters not on the agenda are being met by staff in an uh honest open manner, and I hope that everyone will be able to benefit from this new change.

Thank you.

That's all the public comment.

Okay.

This is not an action item, it's just a receive.

So we will continue to keep you updated at our meetings on ongoing basis.

And we will right now move to item 3.2.

3.2 information item midtown surplus properties update, and Chris Flores will present this item.

Thank you top of them.

Um SAC RT board, I'm Chris Flores, Chief of Staff and VP of Real Estate.

I'm here tonight to provide a quick update on SAC RT properties in mid-tone that we have declared surplus.

As was mentioned, this item was deferred from last uh board board meeting two weeks ago.

Since that meeting, they as requested, staff has provided a written update to the board and um put made that material available on our website.

Um, and that also includes a number of previous board items related to the midtown surplus effort.

See if I can get this a go there.

Ooh, what twice?

Um, as a reminder, the board declared these nine parcels of midtown surplus in 2023.

The parcels are located along 29th Street and NO and P Streets.

And SACRT has consolidated our administrative offices here to this building on in Q Street.

Following the state surplus lands act, SACRT issued a notice of availability in January 2024, making the parcels first available for affordable housing developers.

SACRT initially received 19 responses of interest and then negotiating good faith with those parties.

On November 18th, 2024, the board approved the purchase sale agreement with Code Solution, um, who proposed building 304 affordable housing units.

Escrow for the sale was executed in March.

Um, but early last month, during the due diligence period, as it was coming to a close, we were notified by the purchaser that they would be terminating the agreement and be withdrawing their offer.

They say economic uncertainty since offer was made, as well as rising construction costs.

While I was disappointing to see the deal fall through, it allows us to take the next steps with the parcels.

Um, so next step.

SACRT has fulfilled its requirements under a state surplus land act and is able to solicit the properties to the open market.

Under the state law, should the properties be sold for the purpose of housing.

15% of the units must be affordable.

As you can see in yellow on the screen, the two parcels of makeup bus main admin house critical operation staff.

And as such, just like our notes of availability through the Surplus Lands Act, if these properties are involved in the sale, the buyer must either allow us to lease back the properties at no cost or we relocate us to a nearby facility at no cost.

So tonight we wanted to provide an update to the board regarding the termination of the transaction and seek feedback as staff repairs that bring the parcels to the open market, most likely shortly after Labor Day.

As a reminder, SACRT will be seeking fair market value for the properties and a sale which results in the highest and possible highest value and possible return for the SAC RT in the community.

Any sale must be approved by the federal transit administration and per the board approved action on surplusing these parcels, certain uses are restricted, such as drive-throughs and storage units.

And finally, in order to minimize the transaction costs, um, SACRT has a preference to sell the greatest number of parcels in a single transaction.

So SACRT will be working closely with our brokers, CBRE to solicit these nine parcels.

CBRE will be undertaking a local, regional, national, and international marketing campaign for the parcels.

After staff has vetted them, we will bring back viable offers for the board for consideration.

And this chart kind of gives us a tentative timeline of what we're targeting.

We are hopeful for a quick close, but that will depend on the offers.

With that, I'll turn it back to the board.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

The report.

Okay.

Let's move to um questions from the public.

We have Dan Allison.

Good afternoon, Dan Allison, representing Starr.

We had requested a better staff report for the previous item.

We wanted addresses for the parcels, and we wanted a map, and those were provided in the current staff report.

So I want to thank Chris for doing that.

And next we have Robert Copeland.

The housing advocate, I agree.

And that's all the public comment.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, Chris, I I just have a question.

I don't suggest that anything untoward has been done here, but I want to understand surplus lands act uh requirements in that if when if we're required by law to put it out to housing developers, and then um I would assume there's some RFQ, RFP, something where we decide this is the horse we want to go with, that then fizzled out.

We have fulfilled our obligation without going back to any of the other 18 respondents, or did we already go back to the other 18 respondents?

Yeah, no, we we work very closely with HCD and they assured us that.

Um, well, first of all, the of the 18 respondents, there were really only like two or three viable viable offers.

There are other ones were not.

Um, but they assured us that as long as we go through SLA with the selected buyer, and we go through the process.

If it fit if they fall, if we fall out of escrow, which we did, then we don't have to go back.

We can just go on the open market.

And nothing stops any of the other uh proposers from coming back and trying to purchase it.

So they it's they're they're also able to buy, but um we're fine in terms of complying with the SLA at this point.

So we'd only have to go back, not to them, but back through the process.

If a lot of, you know, like maybe five years pass or whatever, and we just can't, we haven't sold it, and um, then we go back to try to sell it, then we'd have to start over.

But um, yeah, no, we we work very closely with HCD and they've assured us you're fine.

Good.

And was there are there any particular uh parameters of reasons that the uh the interested party can fall out of escrow or can decline to to move forward?

Um, I'm just uh I'm trying to play out here as far as if there were a party that were just trying to um rig the system, so to speak, right?

And they were never genuine in their proposal to begin with, that would create a problem with transparency of the process.

It would, but hopefully we would ferret that out, and I think we ferreted it out with the a lot of the offerers before you even say this is who you who you want.

And you know, CBRE helped us with the buyer that fell out of escrow, and really they fell out because of significant changes in the market and capitalization that they the rules were changed under their feet, and all of a sudden they didn't meet certain criteria they needed for their funding.

And so that's that's what happened.

I think they were a legitimate buyer.

I think if things hadn't changed, we would have closed escrow with them.

Or no.

Thank you.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair.

Um, since I wasn't here last year, uh, I'm not as familiar as some others may be, but it wasn't clear to me why uh the parcels that are indispensable to regional transit operations are part of the package here for what's being for what's being offered, uh, because you either want to stay in those locations or you want free relocation uh to anybody who might purchase that that wouldn't seem to draw a lot of interest necessarily.

So um Chris, can you help us?

Yeah, so why those parcels are included?

Um so main admin is adjacent to our bus maintenance facility that we are gonna need to continue to operate as we transition to a zero emission fleet.

So until we can transition to a zero emission fleet, that bus maintenance facility will be there.

We need main out and to house dispatch operations.

You're exactly right though, that may preclude somebody from wanting to bid on it because of the relocation costs or eating the cost of the sale.

Um, but it's something that we are including.

They don't have to bid on all nine parcels, um, but it is something that we wanted to include in the transaction.

Well, it helped me understand why.

Why would you want to include them given that you either need to be in them or be relocated for free?

So, like Olga said, I mean, we've gone through the surplus lands act process and surplus these properties.

Um, and so should the law ever change, we would have to go back through most likely with these properties.

Um so we're including that option to allow for relocation um or to allow us at stay at no cost.

Um, I'm not sure we'll get that, but that is, you know, it's a wish list that we put in there to see if it will happen.

Well, okay, and you're not worried that it would deter anyone.

I mean, you're because what your staff report says is that RT will require those properties for a minimum of 10 years.

Yeah, correct correct.

And this is in our surplus lands act as well for 10 years.

Um, we have by 2040, we have to be zero emission um for our fleet.

So we are operating CNG most likely up until um that time period till 2040.

Correct.

Which um, if my math is correct, is 15 years.

Correct.

But if we can receive additional funding, I mean it's all you're really saying you expect to need those buildings for a minimum of 15 years, or 10 years, depending on funding.

If we were able to get an additional local funding measure, or you know, last year we got a 78 million dollar um federal low no grant that has really jump started us to build out a McLean site, a hundred and fifty million dollar project.

Um but yeah, this is something that um we've discussed with the the real estate ad hoc committee about you know these processes and the transition that it's taking, and you know, Caltrans is uh said we can't park our buses under the freeway because they're electric and they there are no no not allowing electric buses to be charged, so it's part of a larger transition through there, it still remains unclear to me why they're included, so all right, thanks.

Director Cerner.

Thank you, Chair.

Um so I have a more of a process process question, I guess, Chris.

Uh if I heard you correctly, um, you would uh you would have interested uh parties uh I guess work with staff uh initially and you you said staff would kind of vet from that response, uh I I presume whittle it down um to um interested uh potential buyers, then bring it back to the board for board consideration open session.

It would be first in closed session, in open session.

Okay, so what is the expectation then either implied or maybe explicit uh in terms of board members um uh wanting to um know or maybe understand during the staff vetting process, kind of what the status of things are, or is it more a case that staff and management really hope that board members would not um actively um kind of engage while staff is uh kind of administratively sorting things out.

Yeah, I mean, the board is obviously gonna be the ultimate decision maker on this.

Um I think it you know it will be interesting to see what we initially get with these offers and and so forth.

Um we'll we'll vet them, but I'm happy to provide a maybe a written summary to staff if that makes sense, or you know, I mean, we'll see what what we'll want to see pro forma, see what's viable.

Um, but we want to before we engage, you know, want to make sure it looks like a real deal before we we get the feedback of the board.

But I I guess where I'm going with this is I assume that staff would find some value in kind of uh letting you do some of the initial work first before um uh we individually or collectively would engage with you uh while you're kind of initially determining what might make it to kind of the second round of consideration at the board level.

Yeah, and I'm so you know, CBRE will do a summary of all these offers, they'll they'll put it up for staff and that's something we can make available to the board when we if if so requested.

If there's direction you want to provide to us now as we start to go, you know, get ready to solicit the properties.

Please do provide that.

Very good.

Thank you.

Director Kennedy.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh, a couple things.

One is so Chris, you know, just hypothetically speaking, if somebody was to be bidding on this as a package, um, whether it's one or nine, um, but part of that, just to kind of address some of Director Dickinson's, you know, issues, um, part of that proposal could be this is all hypothetical, but part of that could be uh relocation costs uh included.

Um even assisting with building something else that meets our needs, provided that it meets that our current properties meet their needs and they want it bad enough, that type of thing.

That that all could be part of the package too.

It's not just a necessarily a clear-cut transfer of title by sell type of thing.

Correct.

So obviously potentially relocation.

Um, I'll look to Olga and F certain FTA rules in terms of uh disposal, but um we would have to go through for your FTA approval um process and make sure that's all right, yeah.

Um there was one more thing, and that's if I've lost it, so that's what you're when you're 57 years old, that's what happens.

Thank you.

Give you another bite at the apple at the end.

Director Leary.

Oh, thank you.

Um, I just want some clarification on the land use for these parcels, and um apparently each one would either already be rezoned or would that be a part of the process?

And you also mentioned multiple uses, which uh brought up the question um of uh having any affordable housing units um included in these, and I understood there was at least there was a comment and I need clarification on that 15% of the units if they're um if they build as condos or I mean for sale or rental units would be required to be.

So under SLA, um, you know, priority is gonna give go to the affordable housing developer who proposes the most dense and most affordable units, and that's the process we followed with with code.

Um if they fall through, there's a uh restricted covenant for 55 years that says that if you build more than 10 housing units on those parcels, you will have 15% of those units have to be um affordable, and they they define affordable up to from 30 all the way to 110 AMI.

Um so that was it.

The deal we had with code solution was 304 units on basically on all nine parcels over three different um buildings, and they were all going to be 100% affordable.

And nothing's precluding affordable housing developers.

We hope those who had proposed before will come back and bid on this.

We are excited to see some info housing being attracted to that area.

They may need to do some zoning.

It is in midtown where it does allow for higher densities and more uses, but it depends on what's proposed to us.

Well, you but you can have multiple uses, different uses on each one of the nine parcels.

Yeah, and potentially the code solution had basically decided to break up into three different projects.

So they're gonna build one over at the finance building where there's three parcels and one at the engineering, which was two parcels, and then a larger one on N Street, which was six, five parcels.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, all right, Director Singh, Vice Chair Singh Allen.

Thank you.

Um so what will your marketing and outreach look for this opportunity for the public market space?

Yeah, Brian, do you wanna address that?

Uh we have CBRE here who's gonna be doing a marketing um uh for us as we approach this.

So they have uh they have expertise in this.

Yeah, how are you, Ryan D'Angelis with CBRE?

Uh, I mean, our you know, our marketing approach is obviously we start with the local with the local folks, um, you know, and sort of branch out to to our national network of of folks.

It's not gonna be limited to um, you know, residential builders.

It's it's a pretty broad approach.

So we'll we'll hit everybody, but we're not gonna limit anybody.

What's the time frame?

Our marketing approach right now, I think what we've agreed on is uh somewhere likely a 60-day marketing period, and then we will have a call for offers at that point in time.

Okay, yeah.

Can I just add one thing?

Uh last couple years we have done uh extensive analysis and we shared with board last year.

This is really uh just the first phase of that entire you know, campus.

Uh right now we're talking about the line parcels, and then we have the next one.

We have belt you know surplus, which is uh maintenance facility, which is about uh 20 whatever acres and the plus, uh maybe less than that, then the whole uh bus parking lots under the bridge, and uh we had you know uh multiple, you know, just many discussions about how to you know gradually to you know surplus this places, uh this uh you know uh properties, and uh maybe next time, you know, uh next or next board of meetings, we will bring brief board, especially for your director Dickinson and the new board members, just a little recap, you know, the the whole strategic plan on that and uh uh I mentioned last time uh about you know how we're going to transition our existing boss maintenance facility to the potentially uh flown library or station site, which has more than 20 acres.

Uh uh so there are lots of considerations in this whole project, big project right now is just a part of that, and then maybe it's good next time we can do a need to be more comprehensive presentation.

Great.

Sounds like it's gonna become a core agenda item uh for the next few months, which I think would be a good thing to consider.

Okay.

Uh Director Kennedy, you got that question back, came back.

Thank you, Chair.

No, I'm just I was just curious, and this is a question to you as much as anybody.

Are we gonna continue to have the real estate uh subcommittee meet uh during this process?

Is part of this?

So is that subcommittee part of this?

Yes, yes.

Yes, we will have the yeah, the subcommittee meeting first.

Okay.

Then bring back to the entire board for the it's primarily, you know, for the total transparency uh purpose.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Any more questions or comments from the directors?

All right, this is a receive item.

So thank you.

Good job.

All right, this is a category that most of you like very much.

Public addresses board on matters not on the agenda.

We have Dan Allison.

And Alison speaking on behalf of Sacramento Transit Advocates and Writers.

Again, there are presentations that were offered today that were not available ahead of time.

I don't know if the board sees them, but certainly the public does not see them.

And in particular, using an example from the last board meeting, the 3.1, there was an extensive presentation of a large number of slides, and the staff report didn't really even say what it was going to be about.

So the public has no chance to formulate a response to that.

Probably the board does not either.

So our recommendation is that if it's important enough to put on the agenda, it's important enough to get the presentations done 72 hours in advance.

I'd like to offer the staff a chance to develop such a policy, and if they choose not to, I'd like the board to pass a policy that says presentations will be included in the agenda 72 hours in advance.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Helen O'Connell.

Hello, board.

Um I have had many times to be able to voice my opinion, but it's not my opinion because I bring a lot of people other people's points of view in front of the board under this issue, because some people can't do it.

Um they have physical or other limitations.

So I try to gather information from a lot of different people and represent them as well as my point of view.

This is an important part of being open to the public.

They have a hard time trying to figure out how to follow the rules if they don't know what the rules are.

So I'm glad that um uh public addressing the board is on the agenda every time, and it is very important that we know what's going to be on the agenda and what it's about.

And this time we have 201 pages.

That's a lot.

And if we only have 72 hours, counting, you know, comes out on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday's the meeting.

That makes it a little short.

But that's what the Brown Act is.

So I was corrected under my understanding.

I was corrected.

So we'll go with what's the law, and that's the whole idea.

Have a great day.

Bye-bye.

Very much.

And Michael Bevins.

Hello, Michael Bevins.

Uh member of Strong Sack Town.

Also, I don't know, got included last time, but I am happily.

Hence the shirt.

Anyway, um, I'll talk about your uh Meadow View presentation you did last week.

I went to that, and I want to say, great job.

I was we have surplus land that we're not using, and this yeah, three projects, three alternatives, one less expensive, of course, than more.

Then you I think you covered the gamut.

I want to say well done.

Um, keep it up.

Uh I also want to move on to the proposal of the last meeting.

There was uh Franklin about making a temporary housing or a safe harbor for people who are sleep in their cars and as opposed to homeless and shelters of some sort.

And I'd say, yes, that's also a good use of uh space.

Uh please go ahead and approve that.

Um half the park could be used for temporary housing, and you control the park, so you control the aesthetics or how dirty the stuff might be, you can have it clean, you how raucous or whatever you control that property so you can make it not unattractive for people passing by.

It should not be an eyesore if you control it.

And then in general, just surplus parking.

I just went to the movies the other night and I was like, you know what?

I paid a I don't know how much I made for my ticket, then I went and bought a pop one.

And I swear, I think everybody knows that's where the movies make their money is on the concession stand.

So I'm thinking your surplus land, if you could put something there that you own, don't sell it.

You become the renter.

Have a little well, and see.

Also, when I was a truck, I am a truck driver, but when I go out far away, there's a truck stop inside that truck stop, there's a whole bunch of different shacks.

Take your franchise board, put them there, have an in and out right next to a subway and a pizza shop at the transit station.

So people don't just come to the bus stop to get into a train or get off the bus to get in the car and go away.

They can go there, get something to eat, snack bar, make the money, and then put that money towards the system.

And I got two seconds, so I'll stop there.

Thank you.

And Krum.

Hi, my name is Kay Crum.

I'm a member of Strong Sac Town as well.

Um, and I am a transit advocate and an avid rider of SAC RT.

I love the bus 51, the bus 81, um, and also the light rail.

But um, my situation is because in 2021, I gave up my car, and so I've been biking, walking, and taking transit everywhere in Sacramento just to kind of see how it is.

And I don't know if uh many people on the board have actually committed to taking the bus or transit in general, more than like to this thing or that thing, but like actually put in a week or two of your time taking just SAC RT.

And unfortunately, it's extremely limited where you can get to um and how you can get there.

Additionally, the service is not so reliable.

Um, we've done better with the headways.

I think most bus routes have a headway of at least 30 minutes, which is it's acceptable, but it's not great because if a bus goes missing or if somebody calls out or whatever reason the bus doesn't show up, then you are out there for an hour potentially waiting for a bus.

Um, so reliable service is very important, reducing those headways as much as you can so that there are instances where the buses may or may not come and you don't have to stay out there, especially when it's so hot outside, and a lot of bus stops don't have bus shelters, and even the shelter will be hot, so it's just it discourages people from riding the bus and the train.

Um, and I'm saying this is someone who loves doing that every day.

Uh, but I'm not here just to complain about things.

I would like to provide a couple of solutions.

I think one of the big things is limit capital projects.

Make sure that you're putting more of those 40-foot buses out on the street so that we can get better service and the buses show up more reliably, and so people feel like they can actually take them and get to the places that they need on time.

And then the other thing, uh, the next small step that we were thinking of is uh work with the city for those priority signals, not just for the trains, but also for the buses.

Because if the the bus is making it through traffic, people are gonna want to follow behind the bus.

They're gonna like the bus more.

It's gonna be great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Robert Copeland.

I have a question for RT board.

Uh how much how many uh light rail trains have been tested for the oper the ramp?

Because I was at uh Sacramento Valley Station last one.

I found two trains that did not deploy all the way.

And my second question is not to as to the RT board as a board member, but at every city council member and uh county board supervised, provide more low-income housing and jobs.

That would get more revenue in Sacramento County.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's all the public comment.

Thank you so much.

Well, thank each of you for bringing uh your public comment to us.

We value that and continue to want to hear from you.

So thank you for doing that.

We'll move to the next item, item 5.1.

5.1 information, light rail ridership update, and Chris Flores will present this item.

Good evening, board again.

I'm here tonight to provide a light rail ridership update and efforts we are undergoing to attract poor riders to our system.

So let's start first with SACRT's system wide ridership as a whole.

We finished fiscal year 2025 with nearly 17.5 million rides carried.

We had a little over 7 million on light rail and almost 10 million on bus.

As you can see, our bus ridership is fully recovered.

However, our light rail ridership is not at prepandemic levels just yet, which we'll discuss a little bit later.

System wide, we are 85% recovered, although recoveries can fluctuate from month to month, but that um is right in line with the transit industry average.

Nationally, transit ridership has rebounded to 85% of pre-pandemic levels.

Recovery across modes and region is varied.

Bus ridership nationwide is around 85%, while SACRT is well above at 103%.

ADA paratransit ridership nationwide is around 93%.

SACRT is at 107%.

Light rail ridership is 72% nationwide, while SAC RT is at 67%.

And as you can see, recovery has been varied in California, with BART at only 46% recovered, while SF Muni has 75%.

With nearly 25,000 average weekday boardings, we are the 16th highest ridership among 38 light rail systems in the United States.

And our light rail system is experiencing steady growth, finishing the year over year with a 7% increase.

And last week we had a very productive meeting with Congresswoman Berra and about how we can maximize our light rail investment for additional benefits here in the region.

We discussed various ways to attract riders and build housing.

Following the discussion, the Congressman posted on his social media, great meeting with SACRT to discuss how we can grow ridership and better connect communities across Sacramento County.

One of the best ways to do that is to build more housing and businesses near public transit.

Doing so helps reduce traffic, expand access and economic economic opportunity, and build a more livable and accessible future.

So let me share a few things that were brought up during that meeting.

So as you may recall, SACRT implemented a few ridership initiatives prior to the pandemic, as we were experiencing the 7% system-wide increase in ridership growth in 2019.

We have continued to implement other initiative uh innovative ridership initiatives.

So let me list a handful.

It is now year six of ride-free RT, resulting in student ridership increases from 1.5 million to 5 million trips annually.

Earlier this year, we launched improved service frequency on the gold line to the last seven miles servicing the Folsom area stations.

This is a comes on the heels of implementing late night service to Folsom.

We eliminated parking fees at our SACRT parking ride stations, and we have partnerships with SAC State and Los Rios to provide deeply discounted passes to college students.

And with a renewed focus on safety, security, and cleanliness, is resulted in seven of the top national awards in the last seven years in recent years.

As we continue, as we shared last board meeting, we are continuing to improve light rail reliability, resulting in improved on-time performance and reduce triple cancellations.

We continue to look at opportunities to surplus properties to build new housing.

Over the last five years, we've sold nine SAC RT properties, resulting in new TOD projects in the region.

And we're working um closely with SACOG to implement their green means go program.

You can see a picture of the Meadow View study that Michael mentioned, um, where we're the Green Means Go, which is encourages TOD and Infill to meet our state mandated GHG reduction targets.

So far, um, through that program, they've secured over 60 million for planning and infrastructure.

Um we reduced our base fare from $2.75 to $2.50.

Um, that also included a $10 reduction in the monthly pass.

We have secured nearly one billion dollars to help modernize and expand our light rail system in recent years.

Um, excuse me.

Um we conducted extensive community outreach by working with a variety of organizations to promote SACRT, attract riders, and also better understand the needs of our uh our riders and customers.

We progressed conversations with the Department of General Services to implement a pilot program to allow state workers to ride SACRT's services for free in exchange for revenue offsets.

Um we received grant funding and establish mobility hubs at light rail stations to serve assist with first and last mile travel, and we've installed 1500 live fee cameras and a PA system at our light rail stations to address nuisance behavior and security concerns.

And as we focus on light rail, there are a number of things that are impacting our ridership recovery.

First and foremost, Sacramento County, um Sacramento County's largest employer by far is the state of California with nearly 100,000 jobs in the county.

Pre-pandemic, 60,000 state jobs were concentrated in the urban core.

These employees continue to have hybrid work schedules.

Pre-pandemic, state employees made up approximately 20% of light rail ridership.

The Sacramento region also has a strong call culture car culture, and traffic congestion is not nearly as bad as other cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles.

In addition, our region does not have a high population density compared to such piers as Seattle and San Diego.

Um there's a lack of affordable housing density around our light rail stations, which we're trying to address.

And over the last number of years, um, we've been modernizing our light rail system, but that has also resulted in significant construction uh disruptions impacting the rider experience.

The Folsom area station um track stations along the gold line were closed for over a year as we added additional track.

The green line is currently suspended as we construct a new station in the rail yards, and um station renovations that accommodate new low floor vehicles has necessitated bus bridges.

Additionally, perception of safety issues linger as a result of the home the region's high homelessness rate.

And finally, the low level of local funding compared to our peers directly correlates with the convenience which with convenience, which can be delivered in frequency, span and coverage of service, including delivery of expansion projects.

So with that in mind, we continue to brainstorm um solutions to track more riders and welcome uh any other um that you guys may have.

Um some of these efforts include working with work with local agencies to reduce parking requirements, incentivize housing, and prioritize uh transit in their planning, implement mobility hubs at light rail stations to address first and last mile concerns, progress transit oriented development at an expedited rate with a focus on connecting affordable housing and businesses to reduce and expand um to reduce traffic and expand access and economic opportunity.

I will note that we've been working closely with SACOG to meet our regional um goals uh related to infill housing.

SACOG's blueprint calls for um 2025 blueprint calls for 57,000 new housing units in close proximity to our 53 light rail stations by 20 uh 2050.

And we'll coordinate with um and we'll coordinate with local public agencies to improve policies, encourage ridership with less focus on parking and automobiles.

And then finally, we will um look to implement innovative fair subsidy partnerships like ride free and the state worker program.

We'll continuously pursue our mission with a strong focus on improved safety, on time performance and reliability, and address customer concerns in a timely and efficient manner, pursue legislative changes to climate regulations and surplus law lands to make it easier to build dense and livable communities near public transit corridors, and pursue additional local funding that includes proceeds to improve pedestrian and bike um access to our light rail stations, as well as funding to support transit oriented development.

So, with that, um that concludes my presentation.

I'll turn it back to the board and we welcome any suggestions.

Great.

Do we have any public comment?

There is no public comment.

Okay, let me go to my colleagues.

Uh Supervisor Kennedy.

Thank you, Chair.

A couple things, Chris.

So, first of all, um, the light rail, it's kind of surprising the the difference between light rail and bus as far as the recovery.

Um do you attribute that?

Do we attribute that?

Do we have any way of knowing other than anecdotally uh to state workers not coming downtown anymore?

Yeah, I mean, certainly I think state workers is first and foremost.

Yeah, you have 60,000 employees that used to work in the downtown core.

Our light rail system is very much focused on the downtown core.

All three lines go there.

Um I also say ride-free RT has been one of the reasons why a bus has been extremely successful.

Both of our bus routes, students are using the bus and light rail.

So we're victims of our own success.

That's that's okay.

Um, the I guess the the second one.

So you talked about the uh pursuing other opportunities, and you talked about a state worker ride program.

I know that there was talks, there was pretty much backroom talks.

They never really, it's correct me if I'm wrong, but they never turned into anything.

Or what when you say we're pursuing a state employee ride program, what does that look like?

What how are we pursuing that?

Because I I think that the state's foolish, particularly with what the governor's going through in his um backpedaling constantly on whether or not people are coming back to work.

Um it's a small investment that would pay dividends to uh creating those further writer future writers and and helping our system, but also it's a great perk for the workers who are disgruntled about having to come back.

Um what are we doing in that regard?

Correct.

So yeah, you're you're writing that those conversations kind of stalled out after the return to office was delayed.

Um we continue to have those conversations with the state with DGS and Cal STA.

Um Cal STA is very much wanted us to go to the tap to ride devices and the connect, and we can get great data from state employees, which is what they want to see.

And so we're hoping that we can do something similar to Ride Free RT, where the previous fair revenue we were receiving pre-pandemic, you know, 12, 13 million from state employees.

Can that be paid to make it more convenient for them?

Because right now, state workers have to go there.

Their transit contact within their agency, each one's you know different, maybe doesn't even have a staffer.

They have to go and then fill out a multiple forms, then come down to get a connect card.

We want to try to make that easier for the state workers to be able to ride.

Um, and certainly, like you said, build up goodwill, knowing that there's not you know, some of the parking is filled up and there's wait lists for that, the cost um for commute, the lost time.

So wanted to um push that program.

So we're continuing to have those conversations.

It's stalled out, but it's not dead.

Yeah, I wouldn't say it's dead.

I think they they postponed it for a year or positive until yeah, because it's kind of self-defeating in the they're asking for more data, but yet we right you can't get the data that we don't have the writers.

Um are we working with our legislators?

Uh, yes, we are.

Okay.

Good.

Thank you.

Director Budge.

We actually uh worked with uh Motorbus state legislators to ask them to help.

Some of them are very uh interested in that.

And uh we're going to actually we're sending information to them, we're gonna also send the information to the board members.

If you guys can help, that would be great.

And uh uh Chris just mentioned a 20% of the ridership from the state workers' ride laws less than five percent, and uh if uh um uh they come back to work, usually they can increase that to 20%, which you know we make our ridership goes up to uh maybe like 80 67 plus uh 15 that is uh 80 some over close to 85%, whatever.

So that we make our ridership overall is about 90% of some snacks.

And in the meantime, uh, we really want to make this state workers ride free program working.

We proposed about 20 million dollars fixed amount of the revenue previously, we received about 10 million dollars, but uh right now, we even said we just did 10 million dollars.

We will make all 100,000, you know, state workers ride free any time.

And uh unfortunately you didn't come to the work.

Yeah, not gonna write it with us.

But we're gonna continue to work on that.

I'm sorry, uh cut off.

No, that's that's okay.

I think he just answered my question.

Okay.

Because my um it had a real simple question.

You when you talked about um state workers riding free, and you said in return for um fair revenue revenue offset.

So what you're talking about then is a subsidy coming for the state from the state, out of their budget, which is an acknowledgement that they are the anchor tenant.

We're quite different than the other big cities, and you know, we have a 19% greenhouse gas reduction target just like them for our our MPO, and so can they help you know help us reach that goal and honoring their capti and other investments that they've made?

So it's really an off, it's a subsidy.

Correct.

Yeah, okay.

All right.

Director Maple.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, and thank you for the presentation.

I just had a quick follow-up on the same line of questioning.

And um, to what degree, if any, are we talking with SCIU Local 1000?

Uh we have engaged with SCIU Local 1000, certainly uh about a year and a half ago when they updated their collective bargaining agreement to include a 100% transit subsidy.

I don't think we've engaged them just recently on this request.

So I think that's a good suggestion that we can do.

Yeah, because I think, you know, they they have three-year um cycles, and so it might be an appropriate time to start talking with them about what the next bargaining cycle could look like.

And um especially if that's something that's of interest to the workers, could incorporate that into their negotiations potentially if you're not getting movement from the state.

Um and then my other question is around ride-free RT.

I think it's um really exciting to see those numbers.

It shows you how that's such a great benefit to our communities and to the young people who live here.

Um, and I'm just wondering if you have any update on kind of the funding piece.

I know there's been some challenges potentially to getting it fully funded this this year.

Yeah, so I think Henry may touch on his GM report, but we we have commitments to have the program fully funded at the equal level, if not higher than last year.

Great.

All right, thanks so much.

Director Dickinson.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair.

You know, um the uh uh thanks for the presentation.

I thought that was really uh excellent.

Um interestingly enough, the the uh Chronicle had a story this morning that by the nod of your head, I gather you've you've seen it.

Looking at the the four biggest systems in the in the Bay Area, Cal Caltrain, uh San Francisco, Muni, AC Transit, uh, and BART.

And one of the uh striking uh elements of that story uh was that with changing travel patterns, what had really recovered, and in the case of Caltrain had gone off the charts was weekend ridership.

Uh uh for all the systems, weekend ridership was way ahead of historic levels, while weekday ridership was uh struggling.

And you gave a couple of systems.

I noticed um uh you had uh Muni and and BART on your on your chart, but but uh it makes me wonder whether or not uh we ought to look more at that element as well.

Uh and the story made the art the uh uh observation that it seems as if people on weekends in particular now are if it's available, if good service is available, willing to ride to fairs, festivals, games, things, uh sporting events, things of that kind.

Uh maybe maybe it deserves a look at both uh um our frequency as well as our uh location of service on weekends.

Obviously, you don't want to start whole new routes, but but uh some uh the degree of flexibility uh and uh in this regard of looking at weekend service in particular, seems to me as though it it might be productive, especially especially on the light rail side.

And it's the same, you know.

BART's a fixed rail system obviously struggling because it it had depended heavily on uh on those going to and from uh work in the in the Bay throughout the Bay Area, particularly downtown San Francisco.

Um CalTrain struggling uh commute commuter rail service, obviously, for workers, um, with hybrid uh work uh circumstances for uh for a lot of people.

Uh they were having um, I think they were down uh their 58% overall that you had on your chart, and they were down, I think in the about 45% or something like that on their on their weekday ridership.

So I uh while uh those four systems aren't aren't indicative of the entire universe, perhaps.

Nonetheless, I think there may be some lessons there to be to be learned.

And so I I encourage really looking at what we could do uh in terms of weekend service to to augment that maybe even that means reducing some weekday service, um, albeit that's not something we'd prefer to do.

But if we can capture more ridership on the on the weekends, if that's where the riders are, let's go where the riders are.

Yeah, thank you.

And I I saw that article as well.

Um, and I thought it was very time.

I don't have our our weekend ridership data in front of me or broken about by mode, but I know we're well over 100% on weekends.

And we're we're set up well because we had done a year before we did our COA or SACRT forward bus routes, and we we improved service on the weekend and we made sure we had a seven-day route.

So every bus route was running, you know, every day, as opposed to we previously, we had you know a lot of routes that did not run on on Sundays.

So I think it does mirror a lot of what we saw in that article is uh is our similar ridership, and I can follow up with that data.

Yeah, and I don't know whether we're still at 30 minute headways on on the weekends for light rail, but maybe if if so, we should we look at uh on our 15-minute headways.

Um this all these are always trade-offs.

Uh obviously, because we don't have a lot of money just to add in service, but but uh it seems to me strengthening light rail service on the weekends in terms of frequency might actually be a big uh a big driver of uh ridership.

We're gonna have a deep dive on that.

Director Hume.

Thank you, Chair.

Um the first thing I'll say is that I think we should probably send a thank you card to Caltrans, because they're doing their part to raise the congestion frustration of drivers, hopefully get them onto our trains, definitely along the gold line.

Someday those projects will end, I think.

But um somebody suggested in one of the public comments about spending money on the system rather than expanding the system.

And I think that that's something we ought to seriously look at as we uh do our comp uh comprehensive operational analysis is to upgrade and expand existing service before spending so much money on the capital projects to create more uh service or or going into new areas, and because it part of it, it all comes down to convenience.

And if we can have double track on all the light rails to where that now those trains can pass one another, uh if we can drive density uh nearer the tracks, and then the other thing that I would say is is that if our economic strategy is to gear towards the proliferation of uh ride-free programs, we have to be careful about that because the message we're sending with that is that our product isn't worth anything, and if we don't give it away to you for free or or pay you to ride it, it's not worth doing.

And so, to my colleague's point about weekend service, if if I can hop on a train for five dollars for uh myself and my partner and go to whatever event, or I can go downtown and pay $15 for parking and I choose to do that instead, there's a reason.

Because it's not convenient, it's not clean, it's not safe.

Something is saying this is a more attractive um alternative.

And so until we recognize that and make those investments in making sure that it's convenient, that it's safe, that it's clean, and that it feels good, and maybe we expand the area where bikes can go, because that's the other piece of this is as people are looking to e-bikes and e-scooters as um as part of their mobility options.

If they got to know which train car they can be on and which door in that train car they can go in and where they right, like these are all barriers to people trying to feel like, hey, this works for me.

Um, and so those are kind of my my comments there.

I mean, it's it's a tough road to hoe, and and really until we hit a critical mass of population and of uh, you know, people needing to get into a congested area, then it does come down to a choice.

And and we've got to make that choice as like rock solid as we possibly can.

Director Budge.

Yeah, um, listening to them.

Um, I have a real-time example that would be easy to implement.

Um, when we had season tickets to the Kings and the G1C opened, um, every game, didn't matter what day of the week it was.

Every game, there was about half a dozen of us that would converge on the um sunrise station.

And we all rode down, it is one block between where the train lets you off and the front door, and partnering with the G1C and the Kings, so that you pick up both concerts and special events as well as the games, would be a really good idea.

You know, you you get an ad that says, take the train, whatever, because you're right.

Who wants to go down and pay $15 and walk through Lord knows what?

Yeah, thank you.

And we are exploring various partnerships like that one for entertainment.

Um currently the Sacramento Public is working on their event transportation management plan.

They're looking at it, basically, including a surcharge that will your ticket is your fare to ride secret T system.

That also speaks to Pat's point about free.

Okay, it doesn't necessarily need to be free.

And I don't I don't know what the fare is now, but we were paying 250, and we had this really great app that allowed me to buy the tickets while we're walking in, waiting for the train, you know, and um uh that was when we had the um outside security service, and they'd walk up and down and check everybody's tickets, and it was great.

It was so easy.

Uh it's just actually several Bonimembus uh suggestions or so good.

In the future, you know, promotion we should may not say right free, it's really right with somebody else paid for you.

It's really about that.

Like we just need to do it.

Okay, director Leary.

Oh, thank you.

Um I agree with um Director Hume on the comments uh you made A about the free and then some of the difficulties in um identifying where you need to have increased uh transportation between where people live and where they want to go.

And I think the biggest um problem with some of these lines is that you're going out into suburban areas and you it's very hard to identify sites where people want to go on either end of the line.

So, you know, people downtown wanting to take the gold line out to Folsom or wanting to take the blue line out to Antelope.

Um, and um I'm I'm clearly not an expert at identifying those, but those are the kinds of things where maybe we could look at partnerships, and and the other problem that I've always noticed because I like to take the train, um, is when I as it get to the end of the line is identifying a way to get to my destination if I'm going somewhere that's not walkable, and um kind of maybe creating a vision of how that could happen for riders who don't want they'll fight with finding a parking space somewhere in downtown Sacramento over take overtaking a light rail line uh if they knew that there was a different way of of getting to the site where they want to go.

And and you know, part of this too is I think all of the surrounding communities are trying to identify places that people want to go to.

Um, but as those things come up, it would be nice to show how they can connect uh with them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, and our last question or comment will be by our vice chair.

Thank you.

Really no questions, but a lot of comments.

Um, first and foremost, I'll add, you know, my own just when it comes to the ride-free when it comes to the students.

We're also doing a lot to alleviate traffic congestion to and from school.

So I it's a fabulous program as a former trustee for Elk River Unified School District.

I know our students rely on that along with other students, particularly in vulnerable communities.

Um I don't know that I would hang hang up so much time on the free part, at least when it comes to the students.

We're also maybe hopefully building future writers with those behaviors to know that it's convenient and accessible.

So I'm hopeful that there's going to be a correlation with that.

Um I was at the meeting with Congressman Barris.

I wanted to just elaborate a little bit more for my colleagues here.

Um, the central discussion, of course, was increasing ridership, but he also brought to our awareness just some of the things that he's aware of as he's having discussions with colleagues um in Congress, and that one really being important is this the scarcity of resources that is out there.

So really trying to, you know, bring attention to limited funding.

That's not just today, but probably tomorrow.

So, how best do we use the dollars that we do have and the reality of state buildings of the coming back to office work mandates because they're still working.

So I don't, you know, just because they're not coming into an office, there's still work happening.

Um, the hybrid scenario, I personally think is here to stay.

I think that ship sailed when you have not only changed behaviors, but she have productivity.

And that's really an employer perhaps decision, and these are bargain decisions.

So we're gonna leave those entities a part of it, but I don't know that we should be spending a lot of our time and focus on how are we going to get these state workers back.

Um that's not really our space to have those discussions, but we should obviously be prepared.

But part of the discussion that Congressman Barra did bring up, it's not something that we're, you know, it's in our control and authority, but just reimagining those um government buildings for another purpose.

If if the vast majority, if there's going to be hybrid and you just don't need all that space, then what is the best use for that?

Going back to the heart of the scarcity of resources discussion is that reimagination.

Um, and also a really big discussion he brought up was the transit oriented developments and that correlation because you will build capacity, you will build more writership as you have more affordable housing along those corridors.

So he spent a fair amount of time um on that as well.

So I just wanted to just shed some more lights a little bit more on those discussions that took place.

Thank you.

That's great, great.

Very healthy conversation.

Chris, you did this to us.

Thank you.

You did that too.

And we're pushing how many hours now.

Absolutely.

But it's a very good conversation, one that needs to be had and have it more often.

So we'll move to our general manager report, item 6.1.

Uh good evening, Mr.

Chair, the board and the public.

And uh first I really want to appreciate you know the great comments from the board members and from the public, and uh um especially you know, we received two uh written comments uh from our wonderful um Sarkati advocate, Rick uh Hutchinson, because uh he asked two questions.

Uh I think I needed to, you know, briefly answer that question.

First is the safer parking program about you know to take care of the homeless, you know, situation.

He really wanted us to build a more house and a support the safe parking.

And uh last uh right before right after last board meeting, uh I communicated with FTA regional director, uh administrator, and he was very gracious, and he asked us to send uh additional information to him.

We sent it, and we're waiting for uh federal governments you know uh review.

So I just want to give uh very quick update on that.

Secondly, um uh Rick, you know, uh asked us to uh thanks for his comment, you know, compliment about our uh SACAT alert app.

And uh he feels that helps tremendously, but he's also want us to add more features.

So we really want to thank him for you know giving us this type of uh devices and suggestions, and we would definitely will try to add more features like the bus bridge, and uh um I think one advocate uh mentioned about we needed to um uh make sure all the information you know put on 72 hours, you know, the events.

And uh I just want to you know let uh everybody know you know we tried our best because of the last board meeting to this board meeting just two weeks.

So um staff worked down, right?

But in the future, we will try to make sure those presentations that is will be put into the uh uh agenda uh published 72 hours earlier.

Um that being said, uh uh vice chair just mentioned about the conversation with uh Congress, you know, Congressman, and uh we just really want to appreciate his you know support leadership on SAC ID, especially the funding, and I want you guys to know that uh board founding committee chair, Katie Maple, you know, had a multiple conversations with us and meetings with us and working with uh STA's funding committees, and we even try to have uh joint committee meetings, and there are lots of progress on the potential future funding, you know, measure whatever.

And we're going to work with the community partners.

I like to schedule some meetings with our advocates, you know, in normally attend our meeting and the business community and others.

Try to try to get more, you know, feedback.

And in the meantime, maybe in one or two weeks, the first poll, you know, will be conducted from the STA's perspective.

And then by the end of next, or by the end of this month, or early next month, we shall have the poll results to share with the board.

And in the meantime, we are working, we're starting to talk to more community members, and we're going to have extensive outreach to the business community, and talk to you know lots of uh community leaders to say how they you know uh feel about the future and also the smart and uh you know they have about more than a dozen of uh advocacy groups, you know, getting together regularly, you know, uh share their great ideas with us.

So uh two weeks ago uh directors uh Kennedy Maple Sheffield uh myself and some staff members had a great meeting with the new CEO of Siemens Mobility, uh Mr.

Toby Bower and his team, his leadership team.

And uh it's it's so great to see Siemens expense in Sacramento since they set up about you know uh 40 more than 40 years ago.

Uh they expand the employees from less than 100, now it's 2500.

And just recent years, they have about five billion dollars orders for the vehicles, and uh it's one of the largest you know, uh employers in this region, and happened in a supervisor candidates, you know, uh uh uh jurisdiction and uh you know with you know lots of support from supervisor.

Uh and we are very excited to be part of that growth, and we have secured funding more than 450 million dollars to order 59 new modern and low flow trains, and they are actively produced and deliver new vehicles for us every month.

Now we have more than enough vehicles to completely run the gold line service.

Uh next one, please.

Uh last month uh I shared photos uh from our writer along with Sheriff Jimmy Cooper.

Uh our writer alongs uh seemed to be gaining some momentum, and last week we had the opportunity to write with district attorney Tian Hao uh from SAC Valley Station to the University 65th Street and back.

Uh the ride was great and uh you know to provide some opportunity for DA to see how great and clean SACATIS Library Service is.

Uh two months ago about how we work with uh DA's office.

And uh lots of my CEO peers told me they did not support, but our DA since beginning, they support us tremendously.

If you recall, eight years ago when star when we started comprehensive transformation on the safe fund clean and uh reliable service slogan, and uh, we uh we issued lots of citations.

Our site, the number of citations account for more than half of the total citations this country had received at that moment.

More than half of citations from us.

And that is because lots of you know uh attributed to the great leadership and a partnership with our DA.

Um we're looking forward to this month's ride along with uh Sacramento police chief Nester, who also expressed a strong interest in writing Sakai T Naira, and we truly appreciate uh Cooper, Ken Howe and the chief Nester for their support.

And uh this writer lines just help us to show to the community you know uh how we uh try to build partnerships with lots of partners and try to uh have more safe, secure and uh clean service and uh um number one, maybe not number one, but one of the most common talked about reasons why people, you know, you know, uh feel you know safety is a concern, it's the perception of the perception of the common people.

And uh yes, are we absolutely secure, safe?

No.

We have lots of stuff to do.

And uh in the meantime, how we can you know tackle this perception issue is a major task ahead of us.

We're gonna continue to do this to help you know to address this perception issue, and uh that may help us tremendously in the next potential uh transportation sales tech sales tax measure, you know, uh to uh make sure you know some community members, citizens uh feel uh comfortable to write with us, just like uh director uh Helm just mentioned how we can make sure our system was safe and secure.

Can I make a comment?

Sure.

I I think you absolutely hit it on the head.

You know, Pat just talked about putting more money into the existing system.

The thing is, don't you?

It seems intuitive that um people will feel more uh safe, more proud of this brand new shiny, all these brand new, shiny new cars instead of old run-down beat up D cars.

You know, that's bound to do something to uplift their impression of regional transit.

I promise you, Director Baj and uh we staff are you know uh uh discussing the strategies to tackle this issue with these new vehicles.

We're going to add more staff on our trends to make sure, you know, people will see us anytime, any moment.

Can I just finish?

I have two more, you know, uh item.

Uh I also wanted to share a picture from our line real station cameras uh from last Friday morning.

The uh Christian LT Jehovah's Witnesses uh hosted the international conference in downtown Sacramento last weekend.

Uh the three-day conference attracted nearly 20,000 people each day, each day.

And we were very surprised, so many people lined up to write with us, and uh the uh the whole you know uh process was very smooth.

If you recall, we warm us every week, helped on this type of uh events.

Lots of these events are you know, major events.

For example, the uh our aftershock uh event attracted uh close to 200,000 people.

And thanks to Director Um Phil Sulla, you know, for his leadership and we helped work with the organizer uh to take care of those types of uh events uh very well.

And was uh you know uh needless to say you know uh uh G G1C, you know uh to go to one center uh uh events, you know, they were uh that the the the complexity for the G1C is about like a close to 20,000.

And uh uh but the the G1 say each year they attract about one point three million attendees with about two point five million visits visits for the downtown Sacramento and we have been a big part of that a critical part of that and I can proudly say even though there was some incidents in our system for those major events we never have had any major incidents well incidents not you know uh perspective um the last one is the we're talking about right for RT because uh school you know is coming and we are doing some uh extensive outreach and the marketing uh to our school districts apparently teacher associations and the community groups and the non profits to help promote this program this you know uh our advocates groups and uh you know uh our poor members and everybody puts help you know to uh continue to promote this with that thank you very much for the time back to you uh Mr.

Chair thank you thank you great report uh we have any questions from our directors so I want to compliment RT for uh the work that they're doing in the community and getting people to the locations and I think last week's conference the International Jehovah Witness Conference was a great example on how we can get people to that last mile to those events or special events um by it's like whatever partnership or agreement that that was worked out to get people to take RT light rail or just RT, bringing them into downtown that's like a great example of what we can do for future events, larger conferences, larger conventions, but even for those special events that happen at Golden One Center and even as um for the stadium over in West Sacramento as the streetcar becomes more into play those are great examples on how we can get people to that last mile um to those events and so I really want to compliment RT for working out those partnerships and strategies and making that happen.

Any other directors on the GM report good job.

Thank you.

Anytime there's one question just one question you know you did a good job.

All right we have a reports ideas and questions from directors and communication Chair Kennedy I do have two public comments that work in I got you sorry we have Helen O'Connell hello I'm very happy that um things are looking a little more rosy for RT.

Again the the ideas of taking people where they want to go when they want to go is a great great step forward um as far as getting financial long-term support I personally and a lot of people that I've spoken to have um voiced their concerns that if we have a ballot measure that it be for local transit not roads not Caltrans not international communications but local transit money because if you're using a system and you're using it every day and you're paying extra money to get transit to do what they want to do and then the money is gone somewhere else that that becomes a problem because a lot of people think, oh, wait, we had we signed a transit measure, and we only got a fifth of a penny out of all that money.

If they find out that a quarter of a cent is going to stay here, and they're doing a quarter of a cent ballot measure, you're more likely to have people um say, yes, that's what we want money for here from here.

Thank you.

And Robert Copeland.

Okay, since uh Henry Lee spoke about Siemens, we're getting new light rail cars.

Have they fixed all the problems at the current light low floor light rail cars have now?

That's one of my questions.

Yeah.

If we're going to do a sales tax, I wanted to go half the housing and half the uh RT for uh low-income housing.

As far as uh you mentioned uh DA and our sheriff, no comment, or I'll get kicked out of here.

I don't like either one of them.

Thank you.

That's all the public comment.

Okay.

So our next item is um reports ideas, questions from directors and communic and communication.

We have 7.1.

7.1, the mobility advisory council meeting summary.

There's no public comment.

Okay.

So with that, any questions and comments from our directors as we before we close.

Then we have finished the business.

We want to thank all of you for being here with us tonight.

With that said, this meeting hereby adjourned.

Thank you, Chair.

Well done.

Thank you.