MPO Policy Board Meeting   5/24/2023

Here.

Mr. Nelson, VDOT?

Here.

And Ms.

Laundrie, VDOT?

Here.

Yes, she indicated she would be joining us remotely.

She's actually not on just yet, though.

So when when she does vote.

Well, she's not voting, but we can we can wait till she comes on.

OK, so I guess the first line of the line to this is to some members of the public who are provided with a little bit of three minutes per speaker.

Yeah, I'd like to make a suggestion if I could about the smart scale round six when you get to it.

I recommended an alternate solution to the Route 22-250

US 250 intersection improvements.

In round five, there were two separate projects, one for US 250 and State Route 22, and a second one for Milton Road and US 250.

The combined cost to which was over $20 million.

And they didn't score very well at all.

Milton Road one was a score of 1.64 and US 250 Louisa Road Route 22 was only 0.78 so the chances of them getting approved at that rate are slim to none.

So I proposed an alternative where the that aligned State Route 22 with Milton Road in a and so the intersection then would be a single roundabout with 250

The total cost estimate even with the VDOT inflation factors came out to about 16 million.

And I think the score would be much higher.

So it might have a better chance.

So Sean has all the details.

If you want to consider that when you get to that on the agenda.

So just want to make you aware of it.

Well, actually, I was going to say something.

Actually, my name is Paul Grady.

I haven't been here in probably almost 10 years.

I used to come here early.

Y'all are considering the trail from Charlottesville to the Blue Ridge Club.

And I read in a recent email from the county that they're going to pay for the design, three designs, three protection designs.

Twenty five years ago, Ann was the chair of

charge committee.

I presented this proposal of transit grid from Crozet to Scholz.

And Anne went to the president of Buckingham Branch, we were going to talk to him about it.

And he said yes.

And then they went to CSX and

they said, okay, if you can provide the insurance policy.

So now that the state owns that railroad, I would like to see that concept studied alongside the trail design concept so that

One idea doesn't preclude the other and worked really hard to get the two bridges, the roomy road and the draft bridge road bridges built wide enough for dual traffic.

So I don't want to see that extra myth on that bridge only used for a trail when it could actually be used for both.

Okay, I think we can close that question.

I see that a human of mine is with us, and so we need to take a vote to allow Gene here to join us.

No, and she can participate electronically.

Since she's a non-voting member, we don't actually have to vote to approve her participation, because she won't be voting.

Sorry, I led you in, so I have to stay on that.

My apologies.

I have a cold, so I don't want to expose you.

Second.

Yeah, I apologize, Mr. Chair.

This should actually be the March, March 21st meeting minute.

All in favor?

Okay, fine.

So the next item on our agenda is a public hearing with FY 24 and 27 transportation and improvement program.

Yes, sir.

Councilor Pinkston, MPO Policy Board, in your packet, there's a draft FY24-27 Transportation Improvement Program.

In the packet, you will notice that there are several projects, one interstate, two primary, two secondary,

three urban, and then five sets of group projects.

And of course, we've included Kat and John information as well.

In the 24-27 chip, we have included the adopted 2023 MPO and state performance targets and measures, this 2045.

The 2045 LRTP is the basis of this new tip and the John program.

The information that's provided, at least at the time that the document was drafted, included information from John, but there is some, I think, revisions to their capital plan pending.

The recommendation this evening would be for the policy board to review this and to approve.

There have been no public comments received as of really today.

The MPO tech committee reviewed this draft at their May meeting.

They recommended approval.

With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

I can't find it right.

Is there a section in here about the ongoing broken jurisdiction instead of work by going

or a trail like the 20 South Trail or is that something that's not?

Yes, Supervisor Malik.

I would like to ask a very basic question.

Sorry for being here.

So the funds that are identified here in the federal government.

Administration.

So, for example, with the Donnie Pritchard, the N Street Springscape Project, those federal funds that are identified here, how do they actually end up in the project?

Is that coming from VDOT?

Or FTN.

Do you have any questions?

Okay, so I believe we need to open a public hearing, is that correct?

Yes, yes, Mr. Chair.

Okay, so we need to hear it.

asking if there's any more of a line from the person who has any problems in this public hearing.

OK, and we want to see if we can close the public hearing.

Okay, is there any other discussion in the role of the policy?

Okay, let's just do affirmation.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay, sorry.

Yes, sir, Chairman Kingston.

Including your packet is three sets of minutes for the 21-24 Transportation Improvement Program.

The amendments are only in fiscal year, federal fiscal year,

2023.

And those changes are happening in traffic and safety operations, preventative maintenance and safety preservation, and in preventative maintenance for bridges.

So on your screen here, the amendment would be to

The old table shows $4 million.

The updated tables would show $6 million.

For preventative maintenance for bridges, the old table shows $16 million, $16.4 million.

The updated table would be roughly $21 million.

And preventative

maintenance and system preservation.

The old table shows approximately $44.5 million.

Yes, from my understanding, yes.

Yeah, these are groups.

So they cover a real small projects that are in the description of what it's called.

And we do that because

When you have small projects, they're under the sliding scale that make changes to funding.

You have to constantly do the maintenance of the projects that are small.

So we group projects like paying a bridge for that, that makes sense to a group.

Within a group, if an individual project is below or above, you don't have to amend.

These are all amendments, so we have posted them on the website for the 15-day comment period, and they will require action from the policy board.

I don't know specifically about these exact dollar amounts, but it is hyper money that is new through additional uplift, federal uplift, we're getting more money

It's also possible that previously they were using a different font and type to publish one of these projects, and now you switch that from state to private money.

And so it's reflected here, but you're seeing it here as a whole.

So you don't have the state review.

So that's just kind of the

to call it a shell game.

I don't mean that in a tricky way, but it's just how it's reported.

Eligibility is that this year we try to spend this amount first.

Yeah, we have the exception for the policy board.

So that's our motion, please.

Who gave them this?

Second.

Second.

OK, all in favor of who gave them this, say aye.

Aye.

item 6 FY2034 unified playing the fourth program in their room.

Yes, we reviewed the draft work program at our previous meeting in March, so this is the opportunity that we have to go ahead and adopt the work program that was presented to you.

So just as a summary, the work program covers the new federal funding as well as the state and local match that is going to be allocated to our MPO in fiscal year 24.

So you'll see based on this table, which we reviewed last time as well, this is the total of the new fiscal year funding that we will be receiving for 24 from the FHWA VDOT side.

And then we had some rollover funds from both our passive rollover from fiscal year 22 and active rollover from this current fiscal year and the amount of approximately 300

not as a rollover, but 130,000 as the rollover for that total from the FHWA VDOT side.

And then we will be spending down our FTA and DRPT funding allocations this year.

So the only funding on the FTA DRPT side will be the new fiscal year 24 funding.

So we're looking at a total operating budget of $516,000.

And then the state also commits additional funding for their staff to be engaged through our MPO.

This does not come through the MPO budget.

So we presented the draft work plan at the policy board meeting last month.

And I just wanted to note that we have made one revision to what was presented to you last month.

and that is that we have added $13,000 from the on-call services contingency task.

We've reduced that by $13,000.

And we have increased the line item for the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan task that is intended for the MPO staff to provide additional support for the development of the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, in addition to what was allocated or what was awarded through the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant.

The reason we did this is because as we have been working on scoping this project, VDOT has indicated a desire to be engaged in this process and that would be really beneficial to the region to make sure that we have this state as a invested and engaged stakeholder throughout this process.

And so in order for us to do that well, we needed to identify some resources to support their staff involvement.

So we have reduced the TJPDC and the MPO's staff budget in the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant by $13,000 in order to be able to support the budgetary needs for VDOT staff to be engaged in this.

And so we are requesting that we make that adjustment in the MPO's budget in order to support the ongoing staffing for this project from the TJPDC side.

Otherwise, we did review the tasks that were included in the draft work program at our previous meeting.

We did present the adjustments to the MPA technical committee at their meeting last week, and they did recommend approval of the unified planning work program with these revisions that they're needing.

I'd be happy to answer.

So that eliminates some of the work they will do where places work.

So it's all bad.

So you're taking the 13 to about that.

Yes.

We're using 13 of grant money to pay for VDOT staff rather than TJPDC staff.

Excellent.

It's not a passing question, but it's a passing question.

We are now immediately under contract and have met with all six jurisdictions.

We still want to meet with VITA.

Would someone please make a motion to approve the meeting?

You've been hard for me to work with, but I'd like to agree with you on that.

All in favor?

Aye.

Yeah, we are pleased to have Ms.

Erin Belt with us, who is the decarbonization lead for VDOT, who is going to present tonight on the state's initiatives for the electric vehicle infrastructure deployment.

Ms.

I'd like to navigate if that's okay.

Right, so I'm going to share my screen.

It is.

Yeah, we're still in preview.

Fantastic.

Well, thank all of you for inviting me for coming this evening and also waiting.

I know originally we had intended to have this presentation a little bit earlier than tonight, so I appreciate your patience for me to attend.

I'll be it virtually.

So for those of you that do not know me, my name is Erin Belt.

I'm the decarbonization lead for VDOT in our central office location in Richmond.

I joined VDOT last summer after spending about nine years with DEQ.

So state government is not foreign to me but can confirm that VDOT operates very differently than DEQ and I am loving this new position.

So I wanted to take some time and talk to you tonight about the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, also known as the bipartisan infrastructure law.

What that means for the NEBI formula funding program, that's the formula funding allocated to VDOT to install charging stations throughout the Commonwealth.

as well as our deployment plan.

I'll talk a little bit about alternative fuel corridors in the state, the charging and fueling infrastructure discretionary grant program, which is also a component of NEVY, but it is competitive.

It is not formula funding.

How to get involved and then some significant resources for folks across the state.

So for those of you that are not familiar, again, the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act, IIJA, that is just another name for the bipartisan infrastructure law.

I think if we could give it a few more alphabet acronyms, we could.

But this has been signed into law in November of 2021.

And this is the funding that provides improvements for roads, bridges, mass transit, including electric infrastructure, as well as other alternative fuels.

So from the NEVI program, I wanted to specifically talk about what all states, DC and Puerto Rico, have been dealing with when it comes to guidance and information from Federal Highways and USDOT.

So in February of 2022, the NEVY formula program guidance was issued and using only this guidance, all states, DC and Puerto Rico were required to submit a deployment plan to federal highways no later than August 1st of last year.

So all of those plans were approved by the end of September in 2022.

Currently funding for all states is available for fiscal year 22 and 23.

and not until February of this year did the final room making get published.

So for over a year, states have been operating based on guidance only.

So if you are wondering why funding has not been deployed yet for phase one of NEVY, most of it comes down to waiting for those final rules and standards and requirements to be published by Federal Highways.

So where we are right now, VDOT is the lead agency under the Secretary of Transportation.

Not all states are operating this way.

Some states are utilizing their regulatory agency to distribute these funds, their air agency, or directly underneath their Secretary of Transportation.

But VDOT is the lead agency here.

Our plan was approved in late September of last year.

We will receive over $100 million in a five-year period to build out Virginia's alternative fuel corridors.

And while the alternative fuel corridors focus on multiple types of fuel, the NEBI formula program is specific to electrification for light duty vehicles, so cars and pickup trucks.

Right now, we've got $36 million available for fiscal year 22 and 23.

and I'm finalizing a competitive process to award these funds.

I anticipate after we go to the Commonwealth Transportation Board in their June meeting with approval from Federal Highway Division Office that we'll likely be able to advertise at the end of July, beginning of August to distribute these fiscal year 22 and 23 funds.

So I wanted to say a little bit about our plan vision and goals.

These vision and goals mirror that of the federal program to close charging gaps.

maintain reliability and connectivity and most importantly ensure equitable access.

So if you aren't familiar with the Justice40 initiative under the Biden administration, it is a new equitable program that's been developed to ensure that 40% of the benefit of federally funded programs are realized in disadvantaged communities.

That does not mean 40% of the dollars

it's the 40% of benefits.

So we are waiting for additional information on how to gauge that and measure that because that is data that we are required to report to Federal Highways.

So where we are right now, we're still in phase one.

We've gone through the process of nominating additional alternative fuel corridors in round six last year.

Round seven is now open.

It just opened last Friday.

In addition to nominating additional electric vehicle corridors,

and corridors for propane, hydrogen and natural gas for light duty vehicles.

There is a call for the first time to provide input on freight electrification corridors.

So Federal Airways has taken the initiative to go ahead and already nominate the National Freight Highway System that's existing.

and then state transportation offices are asked for input if necessary whether they need to be updates or changes.

I'm sorry that these photos are a little bit too small.

The top map is mapping of the electric vehicle readiness study that was completed by one of our consultants in the last couple of years.

and then VTRANS identified additional corridors of state significance.

So if you are looking at those maps, there is a distinct difference between what's been listed for electric vehicle readiness versus additional statewide corridors of significance.

So during this round seven nomination process that closes next month,

We've only got about four weeks to undertake this process.

We're also looking at what additional corridors need to be nominated for electric vehicle, as well as propane, hydrogen and natural gas for light duty vehicles, including if there are any updates necessary for freight.

And I anticipate having a public survey open in the next couple of weeks.

and we'll share that with you so that if you and your membership would like to provide input on that survey that you're welcome to do so.

So I wanted to just highlight that our deployment plan is an iterative planning process.

So the NEVY program requires that state's deployment plans be updated annually.

Again, we are still waiting for guidance 2.0 to be issued from federal highways.

We've been told this week that likely it will be issued in the next two-week time period.

But we anticipate having to submit this by August 1, and a lot of those updates come in the form of what type of procurement process have you decided to undertake?

Have you installed additional stations?

What type of outreach has been conducted?

And how are you involving communities and determining where stations are going to be located?

So right now, these are the alternative fuel corridors for light duty vehicles in Virginia.

We've got roughly 985 miles along these corridors.

At this time, because of the distance requirement from an alternative fuel corridor and the distance between stations, I-66 and I-495 are considered to be built out.

So until we install charging stations,

across the remaining AFCs in the state and reach a fully built out status.

We won't take NEVY funding and go back and build redundancy on those roadways for 66 and 495 with the NEVY formula funding.

There's a caveat to that that we'll get to a little bit later.

So these, I meant to go back and pull newer numbers, but for better or for worse, these don't update very quickly, but I pulled these numbers in February from the Alternative Fuels Data Center.

We've got roughly 1100 public stations across all charging port types at all speeds.

So that sounds like a lot, but when you get down to

the brass tacks of the requirements for NEVI.

We've only got 137 stations that are publicly accessible with DCFC chargers.

Those are the level three fast charging stations and only 17 of those stations meet NEVI requirements.

The basic requirements that have to be met to be compliant with NEVI include not being more than one driver from an alternative fuel corridor,

not being more than 50 miles away from the next compliance station that's a little bit tricky right now because we don't have enough to fill in every 50 miles but more importantly you have to have four ports minimum and they have to be able to charge at a speed of 150 kilowatts per hour and not reduce that speed if you have multiple vehicles

charging from the same charging station.

So if you've got four ports all hooked to one station, they all have to be able to charge at that 150 at the same time.

So along with our competitive solicitation that I hope to open in the next two months, we're also working with a consultant to develop an interactive mapping tool.

What this will do is show individuals that are looking for host sites or looking

to see where stations are existing.

I didn't give you a very good legend here, I apologize, but the orange dots generally are where there are gaps in the system.

We know that this map is still

Draft, there are still some gaps that need to be identified, but we are not pre-selecting the sites.

So what we will have is a buffer from each of the existing stations, which look like the little markers, the blue markers with the plus in the center.

Those are existing NEVY compliant stations in Virginia.

Once we have this mapping tool up and ready, folks will be able to look along those corridors, identify exits that they can potentially scope out to find suitable existing convenience stations, shopping centers,

or other areas that are no more than one drive mile from the alternative fuel corridor and then work with those landowners for either lease agreements or to purchase property to install those charging stations.

In most cases, we'll end up with landowners that are leasing their property.

and electric vehicle service equipment operators that are owning and operating the stations.

So that model is the most frequently expected and existing model.

For instance, if you happen to have a Tesla and you go to a Sheetz anywhere along I-81 or in some other areas along 95,

you'll see that Sheets is operating their normal convenience location with traditional fueling operations for gas and diesel, but likely behind the sheets, if it's a new one, you're going to see a bank of Tesla chargers.

So that's the type of model where Sheets is doing their normal business operation, likely increasing the amount of area that they purchase for their operation, and then leasing out for that charging operation to another company.

Virginia does have a public input website.

We have a dedicated NEVI page just for Virginia.

The link is here on this page.

I've sent this as a PDF, this whole presentation to Sandy so that she can distribute it.

But this link will get you to our public input website.

We have a slew of resources, whether you are just interested in electric vehicles,

if you're interested in the charging and fueling infrastructure discretionary grants, but we also have additional resources available for local governments if they're planning for electrification in their community.

So I wanted to talk a little bit about CFI, the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program.

In the past, Federal Highways has talked about this being the community grant and the corridor grant.

Those two grants together make up the CFI program.

So originally it opened in March of this year and applications were due by May 30th.

There has been a two-week extension until June 13th of this year.

What I have told most of the localities that I've spoken to about CFI, this came too late for budget planning purposes for most localities.

I'm assuming from a budgetary perspective, it's a little bit late for an MPO as well.

Having worked for locality in Virginia before, I recognize that budget talks usually start right after Christmas.

You're either in the midst or at the end of it by March, April, May time frame.

So for this to come open in March and then ask for applications by May,

It just did not fit with how business typically operates at a local level.

But one of the good things about it is learn from what has happened this year because this is also a five-year program and knowing that this exists and will exist for more fiscal years gives localities and MPOs the opportunity to budget in the future if you're looking to do electrification in your locality.

Also to point out, VDOT is not applying for this grant.

It does not make sense for us to apply for additional funding when we have not yet released the NEVY formula funding in phase one.

If we were to go after this grant, we would be bringing in additional dollars that then have to be distributed.

So what we've decided this year is to not apply for a corridor grant or a community grant.

and instead Virginia Clean Cities is providing a statewide application to community charging and that does two things.

It allows for them to locate level two charging in localities and communities as well as level three charging.

So level three is the fast charging, level two is a little bit slower, usually between five to 10 hours to charge and you typically see those at like hotels, restaurants, shopping centers,

where people tend to spend a long time.

So a little bit more about both of those programs.

Again, community charging is focused on rural areas, low to moderate income neighborhoods and communities with limited parking.

So think apartment complexes, condominiums, where folks may not own the area outside of their physical structure, or they may be renting.

The goal is to deploy EV charging, hydrogen fueling propane natural gas,

and there's a minimum grant request for both corridor and community charging.

Community is $500,000 with a max award.

The corridor charging is a million dollar minimum with no maximum award.

That can be pretty spicy for folks to think about because that's a large dollar amount.

But the benefit to these programs is that you can actually have a joint application with another entity, whether it's a locality or MPO or region-wide.

With Virginia Clean Cities doing the community program grant,

They are asking for letters of support and doing that as statewide.

So what does this mean for you?

One of the common things I talk about when I give this presentation is, are you an eligible entity?

So if you are not a government entity or sub category of government, generally you're not going to be an eligible entity.

So the electric vehicle service equipment operators out there, they cannot apply for this funding, but what they can do is join with a government entity

and apply.

They can be the entity that provides that 20% non-federal match to this 80% federal subsidy.

But does the commitment required make sense for your entity?

We've had some small localities ask, what if we purchase this and we install this and we operate own and maintain this?

That is a significant risk for a locality to undertake because your business is not to own, operate, and maintain electric charging vehicle stations.

That is a company that is not you.

So my suggestion has always been

work with those companies to come to an agreement, whether it's just a lease agreement, whether it's a, you know, agreement where they operate own maintain and do data reporting, and it's not just the dollar amount that 20% non federal match that you're looking for.

Put the onus on the operator that does this day-to-day as their business operation and don't take on that risk as a government entity.

Again, can you comply with the applicable requirements?

Once I get into some of those with the NEVY standards and requirements, most localities shake their head and say, absolutely not, we don't want to be responsible for that.

Great, I'm glad that you know that now and not in year 1.5.

So the non federal match is a big deal.

So while this is an 80% federal subsidy to jumpstart electrification, that non federal match cannot come from another federal program, whether it's Federal Highway, whether it's EPA, whether it's Department of Energy, because all of those those entities are giving out

and distributing funds for electrification.

So what does that mean?

If you're not interested in getting into electrification in your locality or you're nervous or want to put it off a little bit, how can you provide support now?

So providing letters of support as citizens to your local elected officials is a great way to show that the need and the want is there.

local officials can provide those letters of support to your regional commissions, to your MPOs, to your state and federal elected officials, but even more importantly, provide letters of support to those entities that are going after the dollars for you.

So if you're interested in joining Virginia Clean Cities as a support entity, that's perfect.

Allen and his staff would love to get a letter of support.

If you're interested in having electrification, come to the Charlottesville, Albemarle area with those federal dollars.

And so I have a couple of slides here just for resources.

This is a big one.

So the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law landing page is on the White House's website.

They have a guidebook.

There are over 300 programs that are defined to give out and distribute federal dollars for these programs.

Not all of them are transportation related.

So keep that in mind.

Again, there's the NEVI public website as well as Clean Cities website.

And then these are some links specific to NEVI, the CFI discretionary grant, the Buy America waiver, and the last one, if you're just interested in transportation related BIL grants, this website maintained by Federal Highways just has a collection of transportation related.

So you don't have to, you don't have to wade through all the ones on the bipartisan infrastructure law website.

And then if you are interested in contacting me directly, my manager, Chris Berg directly, or if you're interested in being added to our stakeholder list, I keep a list, very, very high-tech Excel spreadsheet of folks that want to receive information from VDOT about our NEVI program, whether we are getting ready to distribute funds,

advertise to distribute funds, but also program development updates.

I think I've sent out three emails in the last nine months, so you're not going to get spammed for me, I promise.

Thank you for that presentation.

So, can someone help me?

Should we submit a letter to you that she described from the same video?

Or is it something that would come from the county, the city government, certain municipalities?

I'm not sure what the question is.

I saw a presentation of an undergrad this time.

Well, yeah.

So it might be an opportunity to invest money in a more robust charging infrastructure in this area and wondering if there's already

plans in place or being developed in terms of what that versus being filled by a private work in?

Well, what we're planning on doing is starting to align with one of the demos that we've actually made a call to determine where we should be doing these level three charging stations in the world where there is some elements.

So hopefully out of that comes a project that we can use to go after some of this funding.

So that's what we are.

So you would see this as a way to basically help bootstrap what you're doing?

Do the facilities that are provided under NEVY, don't they have to be located along the corridors?

That's correct.

So at this time in your area, 64 is designated as an alternative fuel corridor.

Okay.

29 is not currently listed, but it doesn't mean that it can't be in the future.

So there are two programs that could fund chargers along 64.

That's the NEVY formula program where BDOT is distributing those funds.

But then there's also the corridor program that direct application to federal highways is required.

So those funds are not coming to BDOT for us to distribute.

If you're looking for

charging at a level two or level three in the community, that's the community program, both community and corridor charging are part of the charging and fueling infrastructure discretionary grants.

It's not confusing at all.

So if you're interested in community charging, Virginia Clean Cities is putting together that statewide, what they're calling a gap application,

and then they'll be distributing.

So by providing them a letter of support now, especially if you have an idea of what areas of the community would benefit from community charging that might make you more competitive by receiving funding that Virginia Clean Cities would then be distributing.

So they're applying to get the funds and then they will be distributing to communities throughout Virginia.

If you're not ready to do that now, because this is a quick turnaround between today and June 13th, I would still recommend having that conversation with Clean Cities to start that communication if you're not familiar with Virginia Clean Cities and not discussed any of your community's needs with them before.

Great, that's helpful.

and we were having a side conversation.

That wasn't to dismiss, but you're absolutely correct.

So I have a little question.

I was hearing about some of these in distance anxiety, which led to

and the people in Miami that we were talking about and the way to do it was just putting it on the QPA side on education.

So greenhouse gas pollution reduction programs are slightly different angle than what we were talking about.

So only one part of an application focuses on disadvantaged communities.

That's not the only qualifier to receive funding on any of the formula funding or the CFI programs.

So as a justice 40 covered program, there are mapping tools that were developed specifically for electrification.

One of the questions I've had for the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation is that the mapping tool that was provided nationally does not provide enough granular data for any locality or any state.

So they have given us feedback that if we have more granular data, especially if there are studies that have been done at the locality level or the regional level,

Okay.

Is there a criteria for these, though, that it's not just going to mean you have to have a Tesla in order to participate?

I feel a lot of theory.

So there have been talks between Tesla as a company and the White House.

The public information available indicates that Tesla will be opening up their stations and what they call a magic dock that allows for non-proprietary charging, but Virginia has not seen this yet.

The only stations that I've seen available on Tesla's mapping tool are in New York,

primarily in New York and a couple in California.

But one of the things that Tesla's website, their mapping tool does provide is projected stations in from a quarterly basis.

So quarter one, two, three, four.

But I have asked and been told no, that I cannot have their schedule of operation upcoming in Virginia.

But at this time they've got roughly six stations proposed.

along the entire length of 81.

So it does a couple things.

It's exciting to think that a new station may potentially have that non-proprietary charging because what Tesla is very, very good at are installing charging stations.

So if they're willing to do that with no federal subsidy, it means that we can give that money to other entities that are looking to install.

But it also means that they can apply when our funding opportunity opens.

so I don't know how many of Pennsylvania's applications were Tesla specific but Pennsylvania opened up their funding opportunity earlier this year and closed it about two weeks ago.

They received over 270 applications and as the only person working in this program for the entire state I'm terrified at that

perspective number of applications, but I do know a significant number of them were Tesla.

There is no indication that we will only be awarding funding to Tesla or any other large entity.

In presenting this information to the Commonwealth Transportation Board last September,

we were asked how we were going to advertise this funding and the feedback that we got from CTB members indicated that they did not want us to do a statewide award so we will not be just awarding to one company but we also won't be awarding to a single entity to build out an entire corridor so not one entity will be building along 81

and then one entity along 95.

So that sounds like there's a little more provision for underserved communities to have a chance.

Absolutely.

There would be great concern in other meetings about there being no ability for someone

Absolutely, absolutely.

There are a lot of states that are doing corridor wide.

Pennsylvania is one of those states and we chose not to go that route.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Ms.

Absolutely.

So if the localities wanted to provide a letter on top of an MPO providing a letter that's suitable, I would go ahead and have the conversation if you're not in recent conversations with Alan and his team to let him know that you want to provide that letter and what your interest it is.

Otherwise, it would just be kind of out of the blue and he's going to call you anyway.

So I'm happy you can his all of his contact information is available on the Virginia Clean Cities website.

You can actually schedule a calendar invite with him without ever even emailing him because he makes that function available.

They are fantastic.

I don't know at this round if we are ready to move forward, if we have any specific areas of interest identified as an MPO.

I think this could be something that we want to have some discussions about to think about, you know, as Ms.

Do your creative juices get long and all the finger on this?

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

Cause I wonder too, I mean, I don't know if it's applicable to a lot of the past, but I think in some, some level of infrastructure, I don't know, some of these monies could be paired up with, I don't know,

How far are we from I-64 to the bus that Armando's bringing us?

I guess a year?

Maybe a month.

If it's within Armando's, it's I-64.

So we've got some options.

We can work with later.

My question is a question to you.

When it comes to electrification vehicles, we've been working on those things with Gabe, again, the climate office.

I think that there's very interesting policy.

Great.

OK.

All right, Melissa, thank you so much, Ms.

Bell, for coming to talk.

Okay, so next item moving toward 2050.

All right, well, I have quite the presentation to follow.

I wanted to come back to you all as we're moving forward with our moving toward 2050 long range transportation plan to share some updates with you on some adjustments that we've made to some of the documentation and then we're going to be moving forward to public engagement starting next month.

so the first thing that was in your packet was a memo highlighting some changes that we made to the language and this was based on to the language around the goals and objectives and then the lenses so one of the things that started happening as we were working through developing the objectives language specifically is we kept seeing recurring things that were popping up under every single goals related to things like equity related to things like climate change and related to a lot of multimodal concerns

So what we thought is that we could take a step back and sort of indicate how important those things were by creating this lens framework and saying, before we start really talking about the evaluation of goals and objectives, we are pulling out some of these community values that have been identified through

through other planning efforts outside of not just transportation, but through the city of Charlottesville, the county of Albemarle's processes, and then also through the state and federal requirements for transportation planning.

And so these things are so important that we're going to start by building these into the framework that we're going to use to evaluate

evaluate our goals and objectives.

So we created three lenses that we're using.

That's climate action, which we talked about in the previous meeting, equity.

And then we also added a quality of life lens because we really thought that we want to make sure that if we're identifying deficiencies in the transportation system and developing priorities for what needs to be addressed, we are keeping in mind that the purpose of the transportation system is to really serve people in the community.

So we added the quality of life.

We made some adjustments to how we were considering economic development.

There was consistently some confusion about economic development and what that meant and whether it was appropriate to include that with land use and what we are trying to evaluate with it.

So initially we had economic development groups with the land use considerations, really thinking about if we were tying together or making connections between community destinations, that that would also have an economic development impact for businesses that were also being connected better in the community.

and we thought that we could also consider that that's one way to to consider economic development but the other way that economic development seems to be measured more consistently at least with the national goals evaluation is really through the truck travel time reliability and so because there was some consistent confusion about the consideration of economic development we thought it might make more sense to group economic development with

efficiency versus grouping it with the land use considerations.

So we did make some updated changes based on those adjustments to how those were grouped together.

The first is that we are recommending changing the land use goal language to the language that's shown on your screen, connect community destinations in a manner that aligns with local growth management priorities.

And then, since we made the economic development to connect with efficiency, we changed that gold language to efficiently and reliably move people and goods through the multimodal transportation system.

Any questions on this?

we just had land-use neighborhood model design at about 20.

The multi-modal connections were stronger in that area.

This is a place with thousands of cars.

The all that connections there were stronger

they came in and asked to reduce the square footage of business use.

Because it's not in sport, and I felt like I did it.

I've held 40 yard dash speed to be able to connect to that place other than my car, and even the car is a complicated.

So my point being is that the economic development piece surrounding the land use there would be augmented.

It wouldn't just be about getting to a shop or

The fact that one limo is not there, in my opinion, reduce their commercial activity.

It's small scale.

So when I understand a lot of the competition, we think it's just about moving goods through.

It also has to be about, you can only get there by car in only one way.

You're driving from

Out of Route 20, you might stop and get a cup of coffee.

If you're on any other pattern, you're not going there to get your cup of coffee.

And the people that can walk there are only the hundred or so homes that are there.

So if that's happening on such a small scale and we stop looking at that, how does that impact?

So, I'm curious.

maybe the language, even if we just change the last poll back to efficiency and remove the specific reference to economic development, I still like that language because it's still about how we're efficiently moving both people and goods through all modes of transportation.

So I think the real question is related to the land use and this was really intended to provide better clarity and understanding for the general population.

I think maybe one of the questions that might make sense to ask or maybe have a little feedback on is whether the general public taking that would see like access being able to access somewhere like a retail shopping center or

a coffee shop or something like that.

So that kind of development, you're wondering if, I guess I'm more thinking about that term, you're talking about

Not just like what you're talking about the grid or whatever, like the sort of normal daily things.

Yeah, I think there's room for a lot of interpretation and subjectivity with this.

I think one of the reasons that this adjustment was made is that when we were communicating this, there still seemed to be a lot of confusion around the land use.

And so we're really trying to make it as clear as possible as to what we are trying to measure or capture when we talk about land use.

So, that change made useful and connected community destinations in the other lines of what we're looking for.

Is that okay with you?

I mean, I'm still reacting to the idea that it's not just about

is supposed to have offices in there.

Open up businesses.

That's that's that's why.

Belvidere is supposed to have retail.

Project is right out of your road with the commercial about the new product.

and I'm supposed to be having it there, but none of the retail or the commercial loans really go out healthier the way it's designed.

Well, what is that?

It's each transportation that goes in multiple ways to get there plays into that.

That's not only for those who can create the community destination, but that's a bigger picture of what do you need to be economically successful in the area

a multi-modal part of that.

So there were, I mean, I would think there was a better infrastructure around the early side, which was not just commuter travel or the parking area and then the problems that happened in front of the solvent there.

They are the most there, but that would mean you'd have a more economic vitality in the basic coffee shop that restaurant is trying to keep.

There'd be a financial advisor in there.

There'd be a small medical office or something.

He will open up their shop based on how easy it is for their customers to get them out and not just be a place where a concert or a road with a front block is going to happen.

No, I'm calling what you're saying.

Yeah.

Economic development should also include people getting work, getting employees and residents to do their job, that kind of thing.

I'm okay with the language one myself.

the quality of life of course is over all of those.

Well, it's more of the defined areas, at least in the county, we have defined areas where we want to do that.

But if the infrastructure is not supporting the commercial activity, I mean, we've got vast areas in development areas that are not being successful by the 99% point.

So how the transportation plays into that.

So what has to happen in the transportation plan to help make these areas more viable to be economically viable?

I guess that's why I was saying, all right, I get it.

Where are you moving around?

You can't move the side of that.

Especially with like smart scale and things like that, it points to the economic development of that.

That's why we're going to look at the next thing in the agenda.

I'm happy with the principle.

I'm still just reacting to it.

Letting us know it's an important consideration.

But it wasn't on my radar until we did the... Yeah.

And then the Riverside all right upon it.

Started on, oh yeah, these little red pockets that are not really successful because if you're in Europe and I was still in the 80s and started off strong, I mean, everything we've been trying to do is going to bite them off as we go along.

People are going there and charging the car, including their people, and bring out their little sizzling.

So we already talked about the little graph that's showing arrows pointing everywhere.

And this was really intended to demonstrate, as Supervisor Malek had mentioned, the interconnectedness of all of these.

And we haven't added the metrics in yet, which are the ways that we will be evaluating the system as we've discussed through the WIPE

Gap process where we did the project prioritization, that is giving us the data that we can use to help determine where are there the highest needs related to all of these goals and objectives.

And so once we add those in there, that's also probably going to complicate this more and I probably won't be able to fit it all on one slide anymore.

But the intention there is to also making sure that we're capturing

The data isn't necessarily going to align directly one-on-one with all of this.

So when we're measuring access to community destinations, that's also really capturing jobs.

So the voting model, it says it would be kids to what that is all about.

Yeah.

Yeah.

For example, we could have a line from the, if you look at the objective to fill connectivity gaps in the multimodal network, we can also draw another arrow pointing down to economic development, for example.

Actually, there was some debate on that, whether to put that fill connectivity gaps with the land use coordination or the economic development.

We can draw more arrows on here.

Yeah, so the public engagement is planned to start in June.

So the purpose of this first phase of public engagement is first of all to create awareness that we are undergoing the long range transportation planning process.

We want to provide information to the public about what the purpose of the plan is.

what is required to do and how it will be used.

And then we're going to start getting high level feedback on the priorities from the public.

So we've developed a MetroQuest survey that will allow the public to sort of tell us out of all of the goals that we've identified, keeping a pretty high level out of all the goals we've identified, how important are each of these on a scale of zero to 100.

kind of the idea that you give them 100 points and they can allocate those points among the different goals as they want to and then we'll also give them a map and say just start calling us where you see problems with the transportation system.

Based on the feedback from the consultants that we're working with, EPR, they expect that the most valuable comments are actually going to come from that mapping exercise.

so we're looking forward to getting that information and then this will give us an opportunity to use that feedback to determine how much weight to give to the different metrics that we're using to evaluate the data and then we'll be able to run the data analysis and we'll have the public mapping exercise and we'll be able to pull those together and really start seeing where is there like a lot of similarities and maybe where are there some differences where there are problems that the public is perceiving that aren't necessarily showing up in the data or vice versa.

So just to give you all a schedule.

These are tentative dates I think we might be moving the virtual open house meeting up to 530 instead of 630 but we're planning the kickoff.

to occur June 20th, June 21st.

There'll be a drop-in open house at the Water Street Center.

We'll have the virtual meeting to do some informational sharing and that will be recorded and posted.

We have a MetroQuest survey if you are interested.

I'd be happy to pull that up and we can look through it.

and then I've started working to schedule meetings with the community advisory committees.

Mr. Chambers was kind enough to send me the list from the city of Charlottesville with the neighborhood homeowner association contacts for the city of Charlottesville and then we'll be identified some high traffic locations to also do some

some tabling and determine if there are some events that we can also table out as well.

My hope is that once we start meeting with the CACs, once we start doing some of these high traffic locations, and once the word starts getting out, we'll make ourselves available for other organizations that would like for us or are willing to have us

you know, be gassed at their events to speak at that, but probably this will be at least two to three months of really focused public engagement and we can be providing feedback and updates on you as we start getting some information back.

It's one of those things that you all have worked in so long that you're probably not quite aware of the things that I do.

I'm glad to be able to get anything that you can get all that stuff.

Yeah, I can send that.

It is not active right now, but we'll be happy to send that out for you to look at.

No, but I think I already went through that information previously.

So I think that's it.

I ask the Justice Board a question.

Yeah, we have one of the things that Ryan and Curtis have been working on is updating all of our socio-economic data based on the Mystery Science Census that's available.

The other thing that I'll mention

and we'll probably go through this in more detail at our next meeting.

But when we start talking about the metrics that we're using, we really did try to take this equity lens approach to developing how we were going to measure what the impacts were going to be for different types of communities.

So to the extent that we were able to use some sort of indicator of equity impacts, largely the equity emphasis areas that were identified through the states

planning process V-Trans, we try to incorporate that as one of the metrics that we would be measuring under each of the objectives.

So we're trying really hard to build equity considerations into the process of evaluating the system needs.

What that means is that it may not be very apparent, just looking at this from maybe a

The identification of needs are a project perspective that's listed, but that's because it's built into the process of prioritizing the system needs.

Yes.

Yes, I had presented to you all at the previous meeting about the general approach that we're taking.

And as I had mentioned in that meeting, we are in a position where we have worked through the high priority projects on the constraint list and our existing long range transportation plan.

So we're really looking at what are the pipeline projects that have been identified that might be out of state where they're ready to move forward that have still been identified as priorities for the MPO.

So we started talking about that list at the previous meeting and there were a couple of additions and some revisions that I would like to just talk through.

So the first thing that I want to mention is that the District Avenue Roundabout Project at Hydraulic Road

I realize now that I was not at the action meeting for the Commonwealth Transportation Board.

But in the meeting when they were going through the consensus scenario from the Commonwealth Transportation Board, there was an indication that the District Avenue project, the roundabout at a hydraulic road would be recommended for funding in the consensus scenario.

So what that means is that the District Avenue Roundabout Project, assuming that this is what's approved in the six year improvement program at the meeting next month, is not going to be a project we need to submit for a Brown State application.

So that said, this is the list generally of the projects that kind of are ready to go and with our given staff capacity and with the existing projects that the phase of project development that we are at right now, we're going to need to start identifying

the potential projects for improvement as we move through the long range transportation plan.

But these are kind of the best opportunities for us to have projects that are ready for submission in the next round of SmartScale.

The other thing I want to mention is that traditionally or historically we have always been able to submit four applications.

We are kind of ahead of preparing for this process because after every single round of SmartScale, the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the OIP staff go back

and they make recommendations on adjustments to make for the next round.

So one of the things that they also talked about at the Commonwealth Transportation Board is just the staff capacity and the strain that this really puts on staff to go through this process of developing applications.

All that to say, we'll assume that we will be able to submit four projects because that's what we've always been able to assume, but there could also always be adjustments that are made to the number of applications that we are able to submit.

Well, we have these, we have those projects that are listed here, here in gray.

And the reason that those are in gray is because the 250 Louis.

Yeah, that one right there.

The reason that those were grayed out is because they were not indicated at this time that those were a high priority for the localities and those were submitted by the TJPDC, not the NPO.

And they also did not score very well.

But if there is interest from the policy board, those are projects that we could look at.

I would say I think that there is probably still a pretty strong interest from my perspective, and you all can correct me if I'm wrong, that there's probably a desire to continue to look at the 5th Street extended improvements.

So previously we had submitted a project to do intersection improvements at 5th Street and

and was at the street station Parkway, and also do shared use path on both sides of the road so there could be an opportunity for us to look at reducing the scope of that project and resubmitting another project that might score better.

And then the VDOT is also undergoing these two pipeline projects that are intended to prepare projects to be ready to submit in SmartScale round six.

No, those would need to be submitted by the MPO or by Albemarle County.

Yeah, VDOT does not submit projects themselves.

And then the last one I wanted to mention was developed as part of the North 29 pipeline project.

That was the North 29 pipeline project, which looked at the area of 29 from Airport Road in Albemarle County up into southern Greene County.

And that is this intersection at Boulders Road in US 29, which is

We have not submitted an application for this previously, but it is one where there has been indicated a significant need.

And we do have some recommendations that have been developed that we could further sort of refine as part of the public engagement process.

Yeah, I think probably we would want to that we're not going to have projects ready to identify for the US 250 or for the pipeline projects until we're further along in the process.

I think if there's anything that any projects that we want additional staff support, we would probably want to make those decisions by September.

So the bridge, I guess we're currently, we've added a civil budget with a piece of it.

and Hillsdale South.

There's been a whole lot of work done around the city for the last two years.

It wasn't that anywhere closer to getting North ready.

In the same way, the category of survivors could not agree on a ready statement.

I think the name is probably why.

Awarded people like we were to, it was a very upset inconsistency on that.

That would be well advised.

The role of our pedestrians, there was something down there.

The district avenue is coming back in at the expense of those schools.

Yeah, they've been switched.

Are you seeing

And also I think

with the high dollar improvements that are going on there.

You just got a kickoff for having that roundabout queued up to come in sooner than later.

Probably more regionally significant than.

Yeah, I think so.

The early diamond.

The parkway edge of those improvements.

That said, it did score very well, so it could be something that is resubmitted.

and the parking garage community part of that.

There's a big question.

And from what I understand, if there's a developer that is coming in there and developing it, maybe I'm concerned about whether they're parking by that, and also concerned with access management, yeah, they're totally supported.

Yes.

For you to come up to the top to turn right over into

into town and turn right, turn left and turn right.

They were going to do it on a slim island, a small island there, but they still did it crosswalk.

You could get past the right turning traffic, right?

Stand.

Yes.

And then you could continue across those other, what was there, 14 lanes to get there?

And then the same thing over there with the pedestrian.

So it was, those were good improvements.

As well as viable, particularly down the side of people

So to be clear, the walkway did not get awarded by the government?

And just to provide a little bit more framework.

So the MPO the last cycle or two has tried really hard to look for projects that have impacts on both localities that might be a little bit more challenging to do this around depending on what your priorities are.

But the TJPVC also has its applications available.

So some of these two projects right here were submitted by the TJPVC and not by the MPO, but they could be

Question though, it is not all of us.

Okay.

Years ago, you can picture yourself going east on the bypass and cross over the bridge and the daily disaster of people trying to turn left onto hydraulic north end.

There was supposed to be, you know, the bulldozer taken to that grass strip there just filled out, I would think, room for 10 or 20 vehicles in a left turn lane to be able to facilitate the eastbound people to keep going.

And that seems to have disappeared from the face of the earth.

I can't hear anything you're talking about.

There are all the bypasses that are headed east.

Yeah.

By the end of my volume.

Yeah, some cities in the city have a new sharing grant for that.

that then gets folded in the latest design of the buildings.

So that the hydrologers are not available?

That's what it looks like.

So now we're managing that under the design bill?

So that's part of the build sample roundabout?

Yeah.

Also then will be the district roundabout.

Okay.

Well, that's very good.

I would also just say that I don't think the Golden Road is ready for fun time.

Okay.

We'll take that one off the list then.

So what I will do is I will come back to you all next meeting.

We will have a slightly shorter list than we're starting off with right now.

We'll have some information on the Ravana River bike coverage at that point.

Anybody like the one that I think is kind of responsible, I think there's another concept there.

people want to see that it's time to do the opening.

I don't know if that was my time in the back.

I have a visitor there, you know, in the fridge, and I think the grave are kind of here.

I would say, oh, I didn't say that older and broader game, but it is.

I just don't want to have people seem to get out and go get out in front of me to remind them what's going on there.

That's different than somebody in this room thinking we're going to go to science if we're not

I think what I'm hearing is that maybe it should be, if it's going to be considered the private thing, the accountancy, but it's probably going to be the other way around.

Right, sure.

Yes, we're a little light on this agenda item today, but I think we've had some good discussions.

The biggest one that I want to make sure you all are aware of is that we did hear from most of you that the September 27th would be, at least based on current knowledge, a good time to have a joint meeting with the Augusta-Wainsboro MPO.

So we are working with their staff.

They will be hosting it.

It looks like it's going to be at the Fishburne Military Academy.

They have a new event Sunday and it sounds like we're going to be one of the first guests that they get to host and it sounds like they're planning lots of pomp and circumstance for us so we're looking forward to joining them at their facility.

That meeting is planned to be between 10 and 12 and then we'll have a catered lunch to follow.

And then the only other update I have is, I know that we had come to you last month or last meeting to ask for your support on behalf of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation's Commonwealth Corridor Grant application.

We did have a follow up request for the project scope, so DRPT was kind enough to provide that for us.

So the project narrative was considered in your packet just for informational purposes.

The effect of the Commonwealth Corridor is basically they were looking for funding for the Commonwealth Corridor to support improved passenger rail access along the Commonwealth Corridor, but it would also potentially include a direct connection from Charlottesville to Richmond.

bundle and I think I'll need to go.

The current is the same.

So they are going to be de-mobilizing for that.

So that is a good thing.

They're trying to figure out the stable that we need to keep updating.

So we're going to make sure that goes along.

then we've got another design build procurement that we're working on, which we call it the alcohol component of the two, which that includes the RYO, John Warren Parkway intersection, Fifth Street, Whole Lake Road intersection, Fifth Street and 20 intersection when you go around about and we're adding a project that was recently, we've overworked this time, that's smart to be able to get successful day to day.

The RYO and the Belvedere continues green tea,

So we're going to add that to it to try to advance the politics.

So that would be in that pyramid.

And then we've got 2.25th roundabout at Wall Street.

So that is our main design and build project.

Trying to get our bubble hearings scheduled in the summer and RFP, maybe in the fall or winter.

And then, oh Lord, sometime in the spring it's going to be about 4.10.

So we'll need to make a slide a little bit

But you've got to realize you've got to be able to do it all at the same time.

Denying right-of-way construction done all the way at the same time.

Anyone here for a DRMT?

I think she had to step off early.

Okay.

The contents of the plan staff are beginning some public engagement roundtable stuff tonight.

So I think four like roundtable events over the next couple of weeks.

Let's see, we will also be posting, we will be meeting with the CAC, the Fifth and Avon CAC, to discuss the Route 23 staff conceptual design project on June 15th.

That will be open to anyone who wants to see

Thank you.

The chainers, we're sitting there.

So the big news that I have is that we have hired like a technical coordinator, which is going to be super helpful in the meeting.

Now we're looking at all the different projects that we've had, and that includes looking at our transit and energy priorities.

Right now, that has some money to spend on sheltering and benches.

We're trying to figure out where to put those.

We're also looking at our Safe Browse to School program from last year.

We put in about $100,000 worth of temporary improvements to make sure that our students can get to the school safer, especially in New Brunswick, their responsibility zones.

We're currently reviewing all of those to see if there are places where we need to pick some of the temporary projects, put new temporary projects, and work hard on some of those projects.

Those new priorities, two lists of priorities, we'll also get over the middle of the rest of our priorities.

So it's a lot of tension right now.

We're trying to figure out exactly how all of those things match up.

Our doc was there a minute.

We'll be using some video by the end of next week.

That means they'll be under new regulations that require them to be part of the enforcement.

So we want cities to be here all over the place.

We'll also have to provide access programs to low income residents, and they're going to be required to make more engagement, especially with low income residents.

On the transit side, we are moving forward with our alternative disability project that's about to go into a stakeholder engagement phase.

We've also kicked off the transit strategic plan for CAT.

We're on a pretty tight timeline for that.

Transit strategic plans are typically about a year long and a little bit long.

We have it in December, and we're just now taking it off.

So it's going to be a very tight timeline.

We're going to be relying on the work that the RTP has done, the work that we're doing on transit vision, as well as the work they've had.

And that's going to be something for a system optimization factor to the search and gain overhouse.

We're taking all the analysis with those two products until we get that to the transit strategic plan so that we don't have to, you know, need to know how to do those.

There will be stakeholder engagement and public engagement associated with that.

And we'll be starting next month.

We'll see a survey coming out.

We'll see some pop-up events probably at the ground market.

And there will be some stakeholder engagement events.

Right, we'll work on the events in the campus.

We need to evaluate them.

She moved in between the two events and said, I wish it would probably be more than a city one at a time.

That's all I got on that list.

No, you're not issued.

Look on the screener.

They have their address and share this number and email address and send them the number of the screener to call you and send it in the last email address.

But please don't call.

We're looking at service, by 80% service starting in Green County, about 10% kind of bucking and limiting weekend service starting July 1.

Okay, I think it is off.

Okay, great.

So that's the end of our agenda.

Okay, great.

I think now I will ask for a motion to adjourn.

Okay, all in favor?

Aye.