Regional Transit Partnership (2017-2025) Meeting   9/22/2022

She's coming up.

She could not hear us.

Yeah.

We want to mute, so.

Yeah.

Can you hear us now?

Lee Dexter.

I'm sorry, someone just came to the house.

Whatever the delivery was, it was food or something sparkling.

So would you

Okay.

And you're zooming for?

Medical research.

Right.

All right.

All right.

So we have a

Motion by Lloyd and a second by Howell.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Any abstentions?

So we have B.

Welcome to our meeting.

Thank you.

And with that, let's go around as we always do and introduce everybody at the table so that we're all, and on Zoom as well, because I know we have a couple of people up there on Zoom.

Lucinda, do you want to start with, we'll start over here.

I work at the TJPBC and I'm the staff of the Regional Transit Partnership.

Hi, I'm Michael Barnes, I'm from VDOT, I'm the newest of youth who live at the Dome, been around the community for many years, but I'm relatively new in this position as a district planner.

Oh, great.

Sure.

Welcome.

That's great.

We're pleased to have you.

We'll just slip back in the backpack here.

And Gretchen Thomas, I am with the TKPC.

Kelly McKeel, Albemarle Academy Board of Supermasters.

Boyd Snoke, Charlottesville City Council.

All right, we usually go back and back, so tell us who you all are to.

Chris?

Yes.

Great.

All right, welcome everybody.

Great.

Welcome to our meeting.

We will get to your presentation in just a few minutes.

OK.

So we have Wood Hudson, Ben Chambers, Brooke Silver, Ethan Tate, Dave Daley from Albemarle County, Jessica Fersch-Walring from Albemarle County, Juan Lee from Pat, Sean Tubbs, Trevor Henry, Wood Hudson, and Yuri.

Brian Kingston, Charlottesville City Council, sorry to delay.

We're going to hear.

Yes.

All right.

With that, the first item that we need to take care of is approval of our agenda.

All right.

Second.

Second.

So that's how indeed was the second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Next item is approval of our meeting minutes from August the 25th, which were attached to the packet.

If anyone had any comments or any, you may be able to bring up a couple of minutes.

I believe that's baby's dog.

I'll entertain a motion to approve the August 22 minutes.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any abstentions?

Alright so we have our minutes approved.

I don't see any hands up, but I'm not sure I want to speak.

OK. All right.

With that, then, we're really excited

to have Monica Blackmon here, Chief Executive Officer from Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

There she is.

Monica is the CEO and she'll be presenting.

And we really appreciate you joining us today.

There you go.

We can actually see you now.

Thank you.

Sure.

Sure.

And thank you for having me.

I'm Monica Backman, the chief executive officer of the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

Well, I'm sure we will.

We are certainly

This is a topic that we're very interested in right now to see how this is done.

I appreciate it.

We do see your presentation right now, so that's great.

Okay.

And we can just dive right into the very second slide because that really gives the overview of what I'll be talking to you about.

That includes our governing legislation.

On the Zoom side, we're just kind of seeing a

That's okay.

It's important for you guys to see it.

Okay.

Well, and I see the whole slide as well, but I do have a printout in front of me.

Would you go back to the previous slide?

Cause I think that showed

The jurisdictions, the area for your authority.

So we have the second slide.

That was just the overview.

All right.

So as you can see on this slide, there are numerous bills that really govern the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority.

The ones that are highlighted are really the ones that I'm going to speak to you about today.

The NVTA was created in 2002 under Senate Bill 576.

At the time the authority was created, there was a bond referendum that the Virginia General Assembly was considering as well.

The creation, SB 576 passed, the bond referendum to fund the authority failed.

So from 2002 to 2007, we didn't have any money, even though we had responsibilities to undertake under the law.

In 2007, we had a transportation funding bill, HB 3202, which was to generate taxes and fees.

At the time, it was seven taxes and fees to fund NVTA.

The short of it is we filed a bond validation suit,

We won in the circuit court, but we lost in the appeal.

The major reason why we lost, the ruling was

and was determined that although the authority was primarily comprised of elected officials, they were not elected to collect those revenues.

So that was a lesson learned.

And so from 2007 until 2003, we really went and did some statutory requirements, which was to develop the region's long range transportation plan and make recommendations on CMAQ, congestion mitigation air quality funds,

and Regional Surface Transportation Program funds.

The funding bill, which currently governs us, was adopted in 2013 and is HB 2313.

HB 2313, unlike HB 3202,

had the Commonwealth collecting taxes and fees.

And at that time, there were three revenue sources, sales tax, grantor's tax, and transient occupancy tax that will come to the authority for us to make decisions.

And I'll get more into that as this presentation goes on.

The other bill, even though it's not highlighted, but I do want to touch upon is the second bullet in the second column, SB 1468.

That bill, which we did, we asked one of our authority members who was a Senator to patron this bill.

That bill allowed us to pay our operating costs out of the 70% regional revenue.

Before the passage of that bill in HB 2313, what it did, 70% of the revenues came to the authority, 30% went back to the localities where the taxes and fees were raised.

Well, Senate Bill 1468 allowed us to pay our operating costs out of the 70% revenues.

and then finally HB 1414 slash SB 890.

That speaks to additional transportation funds that we received and through the omnibus transportation bill.

Next slide please.

Technology is great until it's not.

OK.

The important thing is I want the room to be able to see.

So that's right.

The screen just before this I could, yes.

Oh, hold on.

Something's happening.

All right.

OK. And we can go to the thank you.

Perfect.

You're all good?

OK.

So when the authority was created, we have a whole host of roles and responsibilities.

But our primary responsibilities are to develop a long range transportation plan

for Planning District 8, which is inclusive of five cities, four counties.

So we do represent the entire planning district.

And then we revise and update that plan.

Additionally, we are to evaluate regionally significant projects.

and that's almost in the entire planning district and to the extent that funds are available for that purpose.

Now that's what the law says.

Now of course we do have funds to do that per HB 2313.

Next slide.

So the creation of the authority identified our membership.

We have 17 members, 14 are voting, three are non-voting.

The law states that the chief elected official from the nine localities that represent or encompass Northern Virginia

are our members or his or her designees.

So one thing we do not have to do every year when the local governing bodies meet and make their committee assignments and things of that nature, we already know that it's the mayor or the chair who is to be represented on the authority.

We have two members of the House of Delegates or the Speaker's appointee.

So the Speaker can appoint two members of the House or he can appoint citizens.

The law allows him to do that.

We have one State Senator.

Two citizen members appointed by the governor.

One of the two citizen members must be a member of the Commonwealth Transportation Board.

And we always have the NOVA representative to the CTB that serves on the NVTA.

And then we have a citizen member.

And I should note that citizen member is the only position that has a term limit.

That citizen member's term is four years.

Then we have the chief elected officer of one town, which the authority abraces.

And what that means is one town among the five towns, there are five towns in Northern Virginia that has a population of 3,500 or more.

If we have, according to census data, if we get additional towns that meet that threshold, then we will expand our membership.

But the law says one member of towns representing populations of 35 members or more, 3500 people or more.

That mayor does not vote.

And the mayor does not vote because citizens of counties also vote on the county chairmen.

And when I say citizens of counties, I should have said citizens of towns also vote

on county chairmen.

So we operate on a one-man, one-vote system.

And then we also have the commissioner of highways or his or her designee and the director of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation or his or her designee.

And again, those last three positions are non-voting positions.

Next slide.

So when HB 2313 was adopted, and it was calendar year 2013, the law specified several things.

The revenues were split into two.

70% was to come to the authority for regionally significant projects that are included in transaction, which is our long range transportation plan, and those that have been evaluated by VDOT for congestion mitigation or emergency evacuation.

The law also specifies that we give priority to the projects that have the greatest level of congestion reduction relative to cost.

Then there's the 30%.

The nine localities that you just saw on the previous slide, they get 30% of the revenues we receive receipt based per their locality.

So it's specifically what 30% of what we receive that's attributed to their locality.

The 30% has a lot more flexibility because the 70% we can only use it for capital investments.

We cannot pay operations or maintenance costs.

But the 30%, you can use it for additional urban or secondary role improvements, capital improvements that are in our long range transportation plan.

And then the catch all that most everyone likes public transportation purposes.

So some of the localities, and I dare say all of the six metro members, they use some or all of their 30% for the operations and maintenance costs for metro.

Now, out of the nine member localities, we do have three localities that are not a part of the WMATA Compact.

However, they choose to use a significant portion of their 30% to support transit needs as well.

So while we can pay capital and we've invested in metro stations, second entrances, VRE platform expansions, electric buses, regular buses, we cannot pay the operating and maintenance costs for those infrastructure investments.

Monica, this is Diana.

I just want to make sure that the members of the table and those on the screen, do we have questions?

Do you want folks to stop or do you want to complete your presentation?

All right.

That's good.

Thank you.

So the revenue sources, HB 2313 identified three revenue sources for MBTA.

Sales tax, which was at 0.7 cents, regional congestion relief fee, which we call grant source tax, and then the transient occupancy tax, otherwise known as a hotel tax.

So in addition to the sales tax, the grantor's tax or recordation tax, when you sold your home, the seller incurred a tax per, I think it was per $100 valuation, and that was borne on the seller.

Then when you rented a hotel room in the region, you also paid a tax.

2018, we had HB 1539.

And that was the bill that spoke to WMATA state of good repair needs.

At that time, it was determined that WMATA needed $500 million to address their state on an annual basis to address the state of good repair needs.

Of that 500 million, 154 million was Virginia's share.

The Virginia General Assembly repealed grantor's tax and transient occupancy tax and diverted it to Metro to meet the state of good repair needs.

So of that 154 million, that was Virginia's share, 102 came from grantor's tax and the TOT.

27.12 million actually came from the 30% of the six WMATA compact members as well.

Then we had 2019, and I had to mention what happened with Metro to introduce the additional funding sources that we received.

Since 2018, we have been trying to recoup that $102 million diversion, if you will.

In 2019, you all are probably aware was the I-81 Corridor Improvement Bill, now known as the Interstate Operations and Enhancement Program.

We are to receive 8.4% of revenues from that program.

Additionally, in 2020, as part of the Omnibus Transportation Bill, we received 10 cent in grantors.

and an additional 20 million off the top from the state from the General Transportation Fund.

So I'll pause there to see if there are any questions regarding the revenue.

Okay, next slide.

So regarding our,

Those are the primary responsibilities.

I told you we have to develop and update the region's long range transportation plan.

Why is this important?

It is important because legally, any project we fund with the 70% revenues, that project must be in the long range transportation plan.

The law requires that any project that we fund with the 70% revenues must be in the long-range transportation plan.

We update the long-range transportation plan every five years.

We are actually in the process of updating it now.

Hopefully we can get it adopted in December.

from the Long Range Transportation Plan because it is fiscally and geographically unconstrained.

We have projects in Maryland and D.C. in that plan.

We develop a six-year program, and that's where the funding goes and comes in.

Given that the revenues, HB 2313, only allows us to fund what is in Northern Virginia,

The law is specific about that because they want to make sure that the taxpayers who are paying into the funding stream are the ones that are seeing the benefit.

So from the long range plan, we do a six year program.

The six-year program, that's where we prioritize the projects as well.

And we also have to run a model to show projects congestion reduction relative to cost, because that is a legal requirement.

Next slide.

So our primary responsibilities, I told you about transaction and the six-year program, but I wanted you to get an idea of how this all folds together.

For the long-range plan, because it's fiscally and geographically unconstrained, it is a need-based document.

And our current plan that's out for draft, total cost, and this is just capital cost, $75 billion.

We don't have $75 billion.

You know, and I tell everyone, we don't have it.

Now, even though the long-range plan has a rising year of 2045, we try to keep it current, which is why we update it every five years.

But it is truly needs-based.

But the needs do shift.

And there are a lot of projects

that materialized that weren't a thing, if you will, or weren't in development when we were updating the long range plan.

But it does give us an idea of the needs to meet those performance measures.

And you will see them on a future slide that we have to help reduce congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, improve safety, the full gamut to help keep the region moving.

Next slide.

So some additional responsibilities that we have, even though our primary responsibility is to update and develop the long-range plan and we do the six-year program, we can provide and provide general oversight of regional programs involving mass transit or congestion mitigation, including carpooling, vanpooling, ridesharing, the gamut.

We can issue bonds for debt, and we do have a debt issuance out.

When HB 2313 was approved by the Virginia General Assembly, we filed a bond validation suit.

That was important because we did the same in 2007 at HB 3202.

And when I told you we won in the circuit court and lost in the appeal, we had filed a bond validation suit.

And unfortunately, when we lost in the appeal, we did have to refund some people because the taxes and fees were coming in.

So when the General Assembly approved HB 2313, we filed the bond validation suit.

This time we won in the circuit court and with the appeal.

And with that, we issued debt on our very first project list.

The law in HB 2313, which was adopted or came into law in calendar year 2013, it went to law July 1, 2013.

That following Thursday, the authority adopted their project list.

Two weeks later, we had filed the bond validation suit.

So things moved relatively quickly because we knew the state was collecting the revenues.

We wanted to be in the position to be able to initiate that work if we could and if we were successful or

Would we be in the position of telling the state, hey, we lost, you have to refund this money.

So that was one of the things that the bond validation suit did for us.

The other thing is, it really saved off any subsequent challenges.

When I told you with HB 3202, we were challenged because they said, oh, the authority, although you're primarily consists of elected officials, you weren't elected to collect this money.

So what changed with 2313, the Commonwealth collected the money.

So this time the challenger said, okay, we're not going to challenge the Commonwealth collecting the money because that's what they do.

This time the challenge or the appeal was the process.

The circuit court judge found the process, and when I say the process, I mean the project selection process.

He found that the process was valid, and this is why we subsequently went on to win.

We can also enter into PPTA.

Now there are some things we can do but don't do or haven't done just yet, but we can enter into PPTA.

We can actually toll.

We don't toll and we have not entered into PPTA, but these are things that the law has identified that we can do.

One thing that we definitely do is serve as an advocate for transportation needs in Northern Virginia.

And we do that with state and federal governments.

And we also recommend to the Commonwealth Transportation Board priorities for transportation projects for receipt of state and federal funds.

So we do that as part of SmartScale.

And I will tell you,

Other parts of the Commonwealth will say, oh, NOVA, they're getting too much money.

They don't need money because they have a transportation authority.

But the law says, and then when I say the law, HB2313, and I am paraphrasing here a bit, the Commonwealth isn't absolved of their funding responsibilities to the region just because we have this revenue strain.

So that is important to know.

Next slide.

So getting to the authority's vision, goals, and core values.

We have an adopted vision, and we maintain that vision in how we operate and how we develop the long-range transportation plan.

And you see the vision.

I don't need to read it for you, but I do want to speak to the goals.

Enhance mobility, increase accessibility, and improve resiliency.

That is important because it really gets to the authority being a multimodal funding entity.

One thing we like to say here in Northern Virginia, there is no one size fit all solution.

I know a lot of people, and it depends on really where you are in the region.

Oh, we need more transit.

Oh, we need more bike pad facilities.

Oh, we need, need, need, we need more walking trails.

We need more roads.

Everything we do is based on multimodal approach to get to the goals and then our core values of equity, safety and sustainability.

We want to make sure that the investments we make are equitable and reflect the needs of the entire planning district.

And of course, they have to be safe and then sustainable.

The last thing we want to do is fund a capital investment that has not or does not reach its useful life.

Because if that's the case, we will have to ask for some of the authority's funding back.

That's not a good conversation to have.

Next slide.

So the performance measures that I spoke to earlier with this update of the long range transportation plan, we have 10 performance measures.

We actually scaled down a bit because of the previous plan that was adopted in October of 2017.

I think we had about 15 or 16 performance measures, too many.

Too many.

If you have too many, they began to cancel each other out.

And in Northern Virginia, and this is also applicable in Hampton Roads, by law we are required, as I stated earlier, to give priority to congestion reduction.

So if you see the goals, then you see the objective, and then in that third column you see the performance measures and how each of the performance measures are weighted.

I should note the met the objectives with the asterisks.

These are

some of the congestion reducing objectives.

And so if you look across at the weights, if you total those up, I think we're at 55% to show that in totality, we do give priority

to congestion reduction.

But that does not mean that the other measures are less important.

And I need to note, give priority to.

The law doesn't state you have to select according to the scores.

We just must demonstrate that we've given priority to

the projects that have the greatest level of congestion reduction relative to cost.

We could have a project that costs $1 billion and it does great for congestion reduction, but it could cost too much.

And then we do have to document that.

Next slide.

Some of the key components of our project selection process as we do our six year programming and we just recently adopted our six funding program, we do the eligibility review, and this is really a pass fail system if you will.

As I noted, the projects must be in our long range transportation plan.

We cannot fund a project that is not in the long range transportation plan.

And by this time, everyone is aware of it.

So we have no hiccups or mistakes when people are submitting their projects.

We also require a resolution of support from the governing body.

We do that because the authority we do not implement.

While we could, we just don't have the resources to implement.

So we need to make sure that the governing body is in full support of the projects that are being submitted for consideration.

And we actually asked for a resolution of support twice.

Once you submit, and if your project is approved for funding in the six-year program, you also have to submit a resolution

is part of your standard project agreement, because we understand sometimes local priorities change, and we need to make sure that the governing body is still invested in the project.

Again, we do the quantitative analysis, which is the congestion reduction relative to cost, and then HB 2313 also has something called long-term benefits.

and it is very generically worded in the law.

It says, over time, each locality, and the law defines the locality as the nine member jurisdictions, five cities, four counties, over time, each locality shall get the proportional share of revenues that they put into the authority.

Early on in HB 2313, we did ask the General Assembly, well, what did you mean by that?

And they said, we can tell you what we didn't mean.

We did not mean dollar in, dollar out.

So in December of calendar year 2013, the authority adopted principles on how we would determine long-term benefits.

Number one, we said it would be 10 years look out on retrospect.

And actually, we are hitting that 10th year next year.

Number two, it would be 50% project location.

So if your project is located in Fairfax County, 50% of the cost is already assigned to Fairfax County.

Then lastly, it was trip origin and destination.

Where are the trips starting and where are they going?

Now, we established the whole 10-year look back thing.

While that's great, we do the long-term benefit assessment every two years because we do a funding program every two years.

We want to show and be as transparent as we can where every locality is on long-term benefits.

It is never going to be a zero-sum game where every funding program, everyone is even.

And I have to remind people of that.

You may be a little under in this program.

You may be a little over in the next program.

And sometimes funding decisions have to be made and saying, hey, this locality has received too much or this other locality has not received enough.

And again, we get to the qualitative analysis.

And I just want to stop there.

Qualitative analysis being the project readiness.

We're nine and a half, almost say nine and a half years in HB 2313.

We've collected or received a significant amount of money.

We have six funding programs where we've adopted 122 projects investing $3.1 billion.

We need to make sure that the money is moving.

We need to make sure that the money is moving.

So what I always tell the locality, make sure you include contingency costs in the projects.

whatever you think the costs are.

And that's a difficult conversation because we're required to look at congestion reduction relative to cost.

So in their minds, the project sponsors would like to keep the cost of the project small, or I shouldn't say small, to the extent possible to keep them contained.

And then lastly, public comment, public comment and public comment, very important to the process.

Next slide.

So I won't go over all of this, but I know that we have six funding programs to date totaling $3.1 billion.

But if you look at the last two columns, it shows the amount, or I'm saying the last two, the second and third column, it shows the amount requested versus the amount approved.

Our funding programs are always oversubscribed.

Next slide.

So what we're doing is part of the regional investments, because I told you we are multimodal, we try to make sure we show the breakout of funding per mode.

So that's what you see on this slide.

Something else that we're doing with this long range transportation plan update, we have a regional bus rapid transit working group.

and we do have Marilyn, DDOT, WMATA as part of this working group in addition to DRPT and some of the other local agencies because we all know commuters do not want to be restricted by jurisdictional boundaries.

So it's important to reach across

the water in some cases or these jurisdictional lines to make sure that we look at a holistic BRT system.

What we have told the authority is that we once transaction is adopted we would like to move from a working group to a BRT study and potential deployment plan.

Next slide.

I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on here, but this just goes to show what we've been investing in.

Oftentimes, and I know you won't hear this because you have a transit authority, but people say, oh, you do too much for roads.

We have 258 million on Metro.

And even though we can't pay operations and maintenance, we are funding new stations, second entrances, traction power upgrades, buses, bus rapid transit, VRE platform extension.

So we wanted to show that we are truly multimodal in our approach and in our investments.

Next slide.

Lastly, the thing I wanted to show, economic impact analysis.

The investment you make when you have a transportation or transit authority does impact the economic climate.

We're talking about jobs, saving travel time, the momentum that's created that people can say, hey, I get my time doing other things instead of spending my time commuting.

But just to note, from the authorities' investment, and we hired an independent firm, so these aren't numbers we went public with ourselves, this is what the firm told us, 30,000 new jobs created.

And of that, 90% of those new jobs are long-term jobs.

They're just not jobs where people come in, build the infrastructure, and leave.

We look at the savings and travel time.

information, 225 million hours of travel time saved.

So we are doing what we were created to do, getting people out of their cars, their single occupied vehicles, getting them into transit or other modes, and we get a carrot in this, positive impacts on the economy.

Next slide.

The coordination around the region,

You saw earlier the membership of the authority but it doesn't stop there with the authorities membership.

Of the $3.1 billion in investments that projects we funded, VDOT is actually administering 700 million of that.

We work with VDOT, we work in tandem with the CTB, DRPT, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the Transportation Planning Board because they're the federally designated MPO.

And we have to have that relationship because we fund regionally significant projects, our projects must be sent to the Transportation Planning Board so that they can undertake the air quality conformity analysis.

That is a federal requirement.

The feds do not care who is funding a project.

If a project is regionally significant, it must undergo air quality conformity analysis.

And you'll see the other entities we coordinate with, the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, OmniRide, Virginia Railway Express, WMATA.

We really reach out and make sure that the investments and the coordination is inclusive of the entire planning district and beyond.

And I think we have one more slide here to show, which is our NOVA Gateway.

One thing we learned is as we continue to do these funding programs, we wanted a dashboard so people, the public, the members, whomever, stakeholders can go in, look at this dashboard, novagateway.org, and get information on any project that the authority is funding.

You can look it up by project type, funding type,

corridor, the location.

Again, this is to make sure we're being transparent as possible and responsive as possible.

So I thank you for your time.

Nice presentation Monica.

It looks like your agency is a planning and funding group, not an operating group.

And it's also multi-modal.

It's going to be a hard question to answer, but politically to get the funding you needed to do everything

Was the multi-modal nature of the organization essential?

I would say, or some would say, when HB 2313 originally was drafted and signed into law, people called it the highway funding bill.

That's what it was called.

All this is just to fund roads, new roads or widened roads.

but we made sure that, because number one, we knew that the region could not just fund roads.

In Northern Virginia, it really depends, your needs and your primary commuting choice really depends on where you were in the region.

And that's what we focused on.

But early on, I will note, I had to have a lot of conversations with some members of the legislation regarding the projects we were funding.

even when we're talking about bus stops.

Some people didn't like that we were funding trails, but again, it got back to where you are in the region or goes back to where you are in the region and the primary modes you need.

But I would say initially a lot of people, oh, that's just the highway funding bill, but it wasn't written that way.

If it were a highway funding bill, it would have said this money is just to use roads.

But I do think some tried to make the case that, oh, congestion reduction means newer, widened roads.

No, it means making sure that we can reduce travel time and getting people out of their single occupied vehicles.

And that's where the multimodal nature came in.

Now I would say for WMATA, because WMATA is more than Virginia or Northern Virginia, there is a resolution and it's a resolution because we said, hey, don't put this in the law, we will do this.

Before we can fund a WMATA project that requires funds from the district in Maryland, they have to show proof via action, board action, that they have their funding as well.

Now that only, to this day, is for buses and traction power upgrades.

When we fund stations, these stations are right here in Nova.

So that's not a problem.

We don't fund stations outside of the region.

But to answer your question, some said, oh, there's going to be a problem if they're going to put all their money in one moat.

So having that multi-modal sounds like it was a crucial

He used to be a secure, one-sided approval for your funding packages.

I would say that, and I would say more than that, I think for us at least, it was the 70-30 split and long-term benefits that really helped with getting the legislation adopted.

At one point during one draft, you know, there was the discussion, oh, should it be 50-50?

Should it be 80-20?

What was the split that the General Assembly would feel comfortable with?

And then the long-term benefits because no one wanted to be in a position where all or the bulk of revenues we were receiving from that locality were being programmed in another locality.

But one thing we always strive to do, we do an annual report every year and it's actually required, we include a map.

I think you said your initial capital stream, your initial funding stream was for capital only and you had to add operating later on.

Was that just an oversight or was it hard to sell legislative and operating piece and you settled to get the capital first and to get the operating later?

Was the capital only kind of a

the localities can pay operating out of the 30%.

And I think the concern was, and they've been, they've always been able to do that.

The concern was regarding the authority being able to pay operating out of the 70%.

There was such a backlog of projects in the region, the capital investments needed.

The concern was that if

We paid operations as well, we really wouldn't be able to get to some of the capital projects that were needed.

So that really was the train of thought at that time.

Now with the 30% being able to be used for operations, it definitely helps.

But as you all know, trying to run and operate a system, even you have these capital investments, you still need the funds to operate.

And I should note, we just don't give the 30%.

The law requires that we have to certify that all of the localities meet their maintenance of effort agreement.

So on HB 2313, the way that the localities get the 30%,

They have to demonstrate that they've spent the average annual on transportation that they spent for fiscal years of 11, 12, and 13.

We have that number and we have to show that they have their own dedicated transportation fund.

And every year we certify this and then we put the 30 percent in.

As it comes in, we ship it out.

We don't hold it.

Hi Monica, thank you so much.

I'm Becca from UVA.

I had a couple of questions, I guess, about the member organizations, you know, Steve Alexandria has, operates Dash and City of Fairfax, that brings Q and all that.

So, so really though, what I'm looking at your website, it looks like the membership is really the elected officials,

Okay, no, that's a great question.

Yes, the membership are the elected officials.

Now in Nova, most of the local bus services are ran through either the cities or the county, or run by, I should say, by the

cities or the counties.

And because the law says the member is the highest ranking elected official, we usually have the mayors and the chair who can, I guess, go a little further with the decision making and representing his or her board.

However, we do have the relationships on the staff level with QR-Connector because we need to know what they are planning so when they come to us for an application, we'll already know how the funding will be best used.

We try to make sure we have those conversations and so the first time we're hearing from them isn't at the application process.

It is ongoing and continuous conversations.

We actually do a quarterly check-in with the localities and agencies.

Is there anything on the horizon?

Is there anything we should know?

Or we use the opportunity to tell things to them.

Additionally, we have what we call the Regional and Jurisdictional Agency Coordination Committee.

They actually met today.

This committee meets monthly.

It's comprised of all of the localities in Planning District 8.

and all of the regional entities.

And we all, and that membership also includes some of those transit operators.

A quick question about the citizen membership.

There's two citizens that look like

What sort of, the rest of the people there look like the usual suspects are well defined, but who is your sort of usual suspect when it comes to that citizen member and how do they apply?

Do they get appointed?

So the law says they are appointed by the governor.

and so I wouldn't say it was the governor.

Do they serve at the pleasure of the governor?

You know what, it's interesting that and I think that's why that seat has a four-year term but I will note our current citizen member was appointed by Governor Northam or he was reappointed

by Governor Northam.

He was first appointed by Governor McCaula.

Term expired.

He was reappointed by Governor Northam.

Now we have Governor Youngkin.

He cannot be removed by Governor Youngkin so that Governor Youngkin can put his own person because the law says that seat has a four year term and his term, his second term has not expired.

So that's a long way of saying no.

So he's actually in the transportation field on the federal level, on the federal policy side, which is very helpful to me because there are some things that we need to be aware of that's happening on the federal front, IIJA.

And I should note Senator Mark Warner was Governor Mark Warner who signed the bill creating the authority into law.

Thank you.

Very interesting.

Good question.

I have one question about the cooperation component of that, the 20%.

Is it for new services or for existing services?

It can be existing.

And see, this is why, and I think some of the authorities, attorneys help write that code or edit that section of the code where it says public transportation purposes.

It is written like that on purpose.

So it doesn't have to be new O&M costs.

Yeah, I would say there is a level of coordination and when there isn't, we usually catch it, but they usually coordinate before an application gets to us.

But sometimes we'll see two applications and say, hey, this affects this neighboring jurisdiction and you won't need to have a conversation about that.

We also have a PIO group, a public information officers group.

We bring all the PIOs in the region representing the localities and agencies and transit authorities in so we can all be aware of what each entity has going on.

We don't want to duplicate efforts.

And we spoke about this a little bit on the phone, Monica.

This is Christine Jacobs.

But it was interesting for us to learn that NVTA does the long range transportation plan the unconstrained portion, but the Regional Transportation Planning Board does the constrained for the long range transportation plan.

In Northern Virginia, because we do a fiscally and geographically unconstrained long-range plan, the Commonwealth also does one as well.

which they call V-Trans.

And then the Transportation Planning Board, which is the MPO, they do a constrained long range plan, which they call Visualize 2045.

And the last thing we want to do is have the dynamics or these plans being developed in silos because there are overlapping utility when it gets to this long range planning.

And for us,

Even though we have a dedicated revenue stream, we never, as you saw on that chart, we don't have enough funding to really do everything and nor should we, to be honest, do everything.

So regarding the relationship with the Transportation Planning Board,

As I noted, they are legally required to do the air quality conformity determination.

So our projects through VDOT, because we are not a member of the Transportation Planning Board as an entity, we are not a member, even though there are several members of the authority, they are sit on the authority representing their localities.

but we submit our projects through VDOT to the Transportation Planning Board for Air Quality Conformity Determination but we also participate in the TPB's working groups like tomorrow one of my staff members is presenting to the TPB's modeling working group.

We participate in their working groups so they can know what we're doing and we need to know what they're doing because they have federal laws that they have to meet and these federal laws govern all of us.

So we want to make sure that we're in tandem with them, and then they want to know what we're doing because we are a funding entity.

We take our planning, and then we go a step further and we are a funding entity, so they can be aware of the projects that are moving or being implemented in Northern Virginia.

Early on in HB 2313, I went to the Transportation Planning Board to present.

I received a lot of questions from Maryland asking how did NOVA or how did the Virginia General Assembly give bipartisan support to really be in a position to adopt a transportation funding bill of that nature.

But I think everyone realized we were just so backlogged on the needs.

and there's something needed to be done.

But then getting back to the relationship with the TPB, the director of the TPB is actually a former VDOT employee.

So I knew him when he worked for VDOT.

Thank you.

Looking around, other questions?

This was really, it was really an open presentation.

Thank you very much.

And I'd also love to share that Mona was so gracious in the conversations that we had with her, that she did say like, as our region is going through what we're going through and learning and adapting, that anytime we're able to reach out to her just to

Well, you can move down here.

Because one thing I would know that operations costs, if you can get that as part of the revenue sources, especially as a transit authority, that is critically important.

Sometimes we have these discussions at the authority level because we have all of these transit systems in addition to the Virginia Railway Express, in addition to Metro, and I don't know if you know how Metro is funded on the Virginia side, but it's really the localities.

The Commonwealth does pay, but the localities, when there's a new metro rail station, the locality has to pay.

When they want a second entrance, the locality has to pay.

And the law isn't written like that in Maryland and the district.

So we want to make sure that the burden, if you will, is alleviated.

For us, it's really been interesting.

And I think the question that started off was, oh, what not being multimodal or not presuming that the legislation was multimodal.

I think it helps to be clear.

on how you want the monies to work, what projects you wanted to fund, transit projects and getting the operations and maintenance included.

Because I can tell you early in HB 2313, every General Assembly session, I dread it.

There was complete dread because there was another bill.

I knew another bill was coming to further legislate the work of the authority.

And I think as the General Assembly got comfortable with us, and I would have to say the second part would be the relationship building, making sure you're building and establishing the relationships with the legislators.

Because once they got comfortable with us, oh, well, yeah, we know you're okay and we don't have to put in another bill.

But that takes time.

Yeah.

All right.

Any other questions?

Well, again, thank you very much.

Will you send the presentation?

Yeah, I have it on Sunday.

OK, that's great.

All right.

We really appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Have a lovely weekend.

You too.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Wow, that was fascinating.

The observation I'm kind of coming up with is I don't know what the clear goal of an RTA would be here.

The last two presentations focused on a planning funding mechanism and then the operators and other entities within that kind of operating on their own.

When I hear people talk about RTA around here, I hear more of a cohesive organization, which is different than what we're hearing.

And if the goal is to generate more revenue but have more energy and then operate it to be relatively independent but coordinated, that may be a different solution than an RTA.

I don't know if I see that here or not.

Where I'm getting with this, coming from the Midwest, they had other mechanisms on multi-jurisdictional

and plan multi-jurisdictional transportation findings.

We call them transportation improvement districts or something like that.

Maybe that authority doesn't exist in Virginia.

Maybe the only way you can do that is through an authority.

But when I think of an authority, I think of some kind of a coherent organization like WMATA or I don't know many other ones.

The examples we're getting point one direction, what I hear is a different direction.

And I don't know, are we really clear as to what we want this RTA to do?

What problems are we trying to solve?

I know Carla wants more money.

And so do I. Becca, she's got plenty of money.

So I'm coming into this late.

Maybe this has already been discussed.

I'm just missed it.

I don't see a discussion of goals in the scope here.

Can I say a couple things?

So part of what I think the study is trying to do is take a look at, there are many models out there, right?

And trying to figure out what makes sense for this region is a part of the goal I want for the consultants, bringing in and figuring out what that looks like.

Overall, I think the first piece is the money.

The operational structure in my mind is second.

We're going to have a huge, that's a huge haul just to get the funding in place before we worry about the structure.

The structure is the easier part that will come later.

That's going to be around with the specialists too.

at a very high level about what ultimately that looks like.

But getting the money to allow the CTA to be able to buy service from entities like that is the primary in my mind and it needs to happen.

The general funds for the city and county

will not be able to support transit to the level that it's needed.

If we do not get the funding, then we're going to, the whole overall systems, both of us, all three of us, is going to continue to start to stay at a very flat level.

So really what the goal here is to create a better, more sustainable funding mechanism for transit systems.

We're talking about that, so the question really is, is a multi-jurisdictional taxing thing of some kind a better approach than each individual entity creating

What does that look like?

What type of...

So that to me is the issue.

Maybe they come together, I don't know.

So I'm one person who thinks

Maybe I am looking at this through rooms colored glasses, but if the funding is there, eventually a conversation will happen that says, are we using the funds in the most efficient way?

Are we spreading it too thin between too many providers?

Or can there be a consolidation of some services

that will make it more efficient for all parties.

Well, you're like officials.

I mean, you're the ones that go to the voters.

I mean, so if you're talking about getting them, so let's focus on the money for sale.

If you know that Albemarle gets a certain amount of money from the taxes, the city gets a certain amount of money from the taxes, great, whoever wants to be in the mix.

That number is already sitting there as a dedicated funding source to fund whatever transportation needs they want per jurisdiction.

Now, if the question becomes, can the region come together and fund multiple projects that don't necessarily represent just them, that's a different kind of conversation.

But you will also relieve some of the pressure from the general funds than the existing services right now.

Everyone's numbers continue to go up as we continue to get raises,

as services, as a gas fuel, whatever builds up, every year is going to get you up.

I've never seen anywhere a regional funding mechanism for transit that didn't start with some kind of a plan.

I think Phoenix must have been through like seven referendum before they found the right combination of projects and of course traffic congestion after seven hours is way worse.

That addition plan you come up with, that kind of starts to answer that question.

My bigger question is, in transit only, be it viable

referendum by itself without something else being there.

Again, everything I've ever seen is usually multi-modal.

So it's almost you've got to start with a plan.

You've got to start with what politically will work best for voters or your legislators.

And then what does that plan look like to get your Senate approval to a certain level?

Then you go ask for the money.

You don't ask for the money and then figure out what you're going to do with it.

Well, and the existing legislation gives a transit priority.

Right.

It is what it is.

You might not be the right thing, and that's what a common checkup, but

Esteemed to do.

We know what we want and politically what is feasible to occur.

A transit only tax may be perfect.

Not good.

They wanted to implement community rights and they went out and did polling

to see a commuter rail by itself would attract boats.

They got some.

They added in elderly services.

They got more there than bikes and trails.

They got more.

And the combination they came up with was a bike trail, services for elderly and disabled, and commuter rail and some bus that seemed to get, and when you're doing your calling,

I think you want to get 60% approval before you feel comfortable going after it.

Because not everybody answers honestly about the poll.

So if you get 60, then you may get 51%.

So it was that kind of a process.

And then there was a multi-step process after that to actually get a yes vote.

Yeah, our understanding, and I may expect that you might be able to speak to this as well, but I will put you on the spot.

If you want to jump in after me, our understanding is that we don't need a referendum.

This will be a discussion by the General Assembly.

I understand that's cool, let's pray.

but they're going to want to know that their constituents aren't going to vote them out long.

In fact, if I were to go to the legislature, who's kind of on the fence about transit, that person would probably want to know what his constituents think, right?

So that's why you do the polling and say, hey, Mr. Pinkston, your constituents, 60% approved transit, help get a lot better about voting for transit in the legislature.

But what about parking rides?

So, again, I don't want to sound like you know what I'm talking about.

Well, I think that what Mr. Williams said is unique.

important.

I think that he's right, this community, at least Charlottesville, Albemarle, maybe we could, should do some more like open work or whatever, but there certainly seems to be a really, really strong desire for multi-rural transportation.

And it does sort of seem like it's a

I think that once the funding mechanisms are there, I think that finding projects that people will support will probably be straightforward.

But the defense are confident that you can get the funding mechanism in place without any more back office work.

was at GRTC and it took 12 plus years to get them to where they are and start collecting.

And when they started collecting revenue, they weren't allowed to spend it.

For the first year, they had 20 plus million dollars that just sat on their books because their projects weren't identified, right?

So now, but that was a big

budget mechanism in my mind because you know the next year how much you are able to spend.

Like, so you have $20 million bank that's going to allow you to invest in these services.

In our model, whether it was Henry Rhodes, who took, you know, five or six different iterations was where they figured out what taxing

what taxes they were going to allow them to use as a funding source.

It took them a better part of a decade also to figure out what that looks like.

This is not going to be kind of a one and done piece.

There's going to be a lot of conversations over the next six, eight years to figure out getting the right mix of small incremental taxes that are going to allow us to make this thing work.

Hopefully it doesn't take us 10 years, hopefully it takes us 4 or 5 to make that all happen.

Since the first piece is already done, I mean the structure is already basically good in place.

They never funded it, but they allowed the structure to be good in place.

Well, I mean this area is much more pro-transit than I've ever seen, so that's great.

But again, would there be any benefit

Just for maybe a next speaker, be it a lobbyist or political strategist to come in and kind of, you know, give some thought about that, or do you think any kind of, just get into the study and see where that goes?

Is there some benefit to thinking about what the strategy ought to be?

Well, let me interpose a few political thoughts.

The first is, as the city discovered in trying to get approval for a sales tax increase to fund school construction, the Republican House is adamantly opposed as a matter of religious principle to any new tax.

And the one time we, you know, there was a brief opportunity when Democrats had control of both houses.

Two years.

When something might have happened, and also the governorship when something different might have happened.

Glenn Youngkin has made it fairly clear that he's going to be with the Republicans in the House in opposing any new taxes.

So even at the moment, even if something got through both houses, it's not likely to get passed over.

So, and one thing we heard from Northern Virginia was that it took a lot of different tries to get something through the General Assembly before it could finally work.

And most of the times that they were having problems, they were having problems when there was a Republican governorship, or when there was a Republican majority in

and the House actually for almost all that time it was.

And it was only in Northern Virginia they have the advantage of both Republicans and Democrats in Northern Virginia know that they get voted out of office over traffic.

We don't have that situation here.

Well, I understand what you're saying.

The political situation in Richmond may not be favorable to Charlottesville.

But I got to tell you, I came from the reddest state of the country, Illinois.

And based on personal relationships, and we were going, I was president of the statewide association, and we were going after increase in transit funding in the state.

Hadn't been an increase in 15 years.

We were able, again, the story is still on the works.

The Speaker of the House was a personal friend of one of the transit operators.

In fact, she used to babysit him when he was home.

I'm sorry, can I finish real quick?

Well, I'm going to tell you that they were able to get the red legislator and the guy that handled appropriations

and both Republicans to be able to vote for it.

So there is a message, I believe, to get that done because I've seen it elsewhere.

It's a worthy conversation, and I get it.

And I do think we're going to have to sort it out.

Unfortunately, though, I'm looking at your official time.

No, I don't have anything more to say.

I did want to follow up on one small piece, if I may, that came up in the last RTP meeting is related to the grant that we have for this study.

And I did reach back out to the RTP, and they are willing to fund this study with its existing scope.

And if it were to change into something broader than that, Transportation Authority, anything like that, that would need to be locally funded.

Okay, so that's helpful, at least for Trump folks.

All right, we'll come back to this.

I'm sure we'll be back to this.

I'm going to ask, because of the time, if you all don't mind our updates, if you all could be really brief, because we do have a couple of other things we want to deal with here.

I'm so sorry.

I just kind of know people don't understand.

Charmaine called me and said she could not make it today, but she'll see us in the next one.

So, faculty, D.S., okay.

Garland, we have.

And Neil, we have somebody from DRPD up there.

I think Mr. Hudson.

Oh, there's Wood, okay.

Wood, did you have anything to add today?

Sure, I'd just like to remind everybody that it is Tri-Transit Month for the month of September.

and then to head over to the DRPT website for more information and to take our tri-transit pledge and be entered to win some pretty cool prizes.

Also, we have an upcoming public meeting for the state rail plan on the 27th at 6 p.m.

This is a public meeting.

If you're interested in participating, you can go over to the DRPT website and click on the state rail plan section.

Great, thank you.

Just rode the train this week to DC and it was great.

Just saying.

Yeah, sure.

Yeah, so we

We just submitted on September 15th a grant through the IIJA bipartisan infrastructure law bill for discretionary grant funding to develop a comprehensive safety action plan for all sex jurisdictions in our region through the Safe Streets for All program.

So this is a grant program that has two funding opportunities, one for planning, one for implementation.

But in order to be eligible for the implementation funding, you first have to have a qualifying safety action plan.

And the grant guidelines specify that there are different components that are required for these.

None of the jurisdictions in our region have one, and so the TJPDC will hopefully be working to develop a qualifying application for everybody that

I agree to participate.

So we're really excited that that came together.

These comprehensive safety action plans are very robust and so they take a lot of what you all are used to seeing in your smaller area plans or outdoor studies or things like that that identify these really specific

transportation improvements that would be helpful to improve safety or operations on roads.

And it takes a much more comprehensive view, collecting data on traffic safety and crash analyses through the entire network of transportation systems, helping to identify some of these recurring or systemic issues that are contributing to crashes.

The overall goal of the program is to significantly reduce or eliminate motor vehicle-related roadway deaths and serious injuries.

And so the strategies, so basically we're going to take all this information, identify what's causing these significant injuries and fatalities from the roadway system, and then start working with each of the localities to develop specific strategies.

that will include infrastructure improvement, but it will also include other factors that may also be contributing to roadway safety.

So things like what kind of policies are in place that maybe could be implemented or reevaluated that could support safety improvements, public information, what kind of coordination with other stakeholders might be helpful.

So really trying to go beyond sort of this like really location specific infrastructure improvement process that we go to and take in a much more holistic view on how can we work together as a community to really address this from multiple levels.

One of the key facets of this is that they assume that humans are going to make mistakes and that our systems need to be designed to minimize the impacts of the mistakes that humans make.

So that's going into it.

The application ended up coming in at just, or the amount of estimated funding for the grant ended up coming in at just a little over $1.1 million for all the regions, so this would be a pretty significant project.

There was a 20% match and we were able to secure match commitments from all the localities, which was really exciting.

Regardless of the outcomes of this grant funding, we are going to be working with NEDOT through their highway safety improvement program to start collecting this crash data.

This one will really be nice.

We're really struggling in Albemarle.

The crash isn't speeding.

Yeah.

And when the supervisors looked at this, we were really excited because this could address some of the issues that we've been talking about for years.

And the other thing I want to mention for you all is that this is not this is also inclusive of all roadways regardless of ownership.

So it also includes privately owned roads outside of the state or locally maintained system.

So there's a lot more opportunity to fund projects that maybe

Yeah, I want a term like, or is there a word that I've heard now?

Yeah, make sure I get some others.

Well, and Cindy can speak to this better than I can with the scope, but a significant portion of the cost is related to engagement in each of the six jurisdictions.

It's a very large

to make sure we're reaching the parts of the community that don't always give input on what's needed in specific places related to transportation.

Right.

Thank you.

Okay.

And the next one item is government studies scope award Lucinda.

It was fascinating.

Yes.

Yeah.

So I just wanted to make you all aware of it, share the updated scope of work.

There weren't any substantial changes, but through the process of hiring AECOM, we just made a few small tweaks to it.

Instead of doing

And we'll have a steering committee made up of one elected official and one staff person from each of the jurisdictions.

We plan to start a kickoff meeting for the steering committee in October.

And yeah, I just wanted to make sure that everybody has the scope of work.

I actually learned a lot just reading it.

It was interesting.

Were there any questions about this document?

All right, then the next item, Afton Express anniversary celebration.

Well, we can go ahead and kind of start.

They're just fun, visual pictures of the reminder.

Many of you were here last year when we began presenting.

on the Afton Express, which started September 1st, so we are in our anniversary month.

But a reminder, or even for anyone who maybe wasn't with us then, the Afton Express is a public transportation that connects Stanton, Fishersville, and Waynesboro area, so with the Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission, over with various stops in Charlottesville, and of course, the Fifth Street Station in Albemarle,

The bus service is managed through the CSPDC, but since the Rideshare program goes through both Planning District Commissions and the bus service is designed for commuters, it's been a very natural partnership for us to work together on that because the whole vision or part of Rideshare is to get folks out of single occupancy vehicles and this fits the bill.

So again, that service started on September 1,

but it was a very long and lengthy process to get us through there.

So the process actually started many, many years ago.

It started with first looking at van pools to get commuters across the mountain.

That didn't go so well for a number of reasons.

I think I alone, who I started in August of 2010, was involved in five attempts

from the saw area to Charlottesville.

We had one that did finally go and it lasted a whole six months.

And a lot of times it came down to the same general process is that no one wanted to drive across the mountain, which is why they all wanted to be in a vanpool to begin with.

So many times we get up to the point where we needed to have two drivers, we can find one and never find a backup.

The reason that the one failed after six months is that driver got transferred to a different location.

I think they were transferred up to the north part of UVA, therefore the van did not work for all the people who were on the medical side or the academic side of campus there.

So that proved, after all of that hard work, and this is my new mantra, that trying ideas

even if they fail, it's still progress, was that that was not the solution that was needed for this particular situation.

And DRPT needed to see those attempts to really buy into the idea and the concept that a bus service was going to be the right model.

And we are still in the demonstration part of this, so we're still working to make sure that we group that as well.

So just a reminder of all the folks who come together to partner

with the Outback Express.

We have the City of Stanton, the City of Waynesboro, Augusta County, Albemarle County, UVA, and City of Charlottesville.

So as you can see, there's a lot of folks working together to get this service coordinated.

There are four runs in the morning and four runs in the afternoon.

The pickups

There's three across the mountain and then here where they're essentially dropping off employees, which I know is the important part for us to know over here, is at two stops there at UDA, the Amtrak station to further promote an activity with multimodal ideas so that folks can jump on trains there or buses.

There's also a stop downtown, so just here at the transit center.

and then two stops at Fifth Street Station, one there at Leggman's and one a little bit further up at that Cat Bus stop as well.

One of the really exciting things, in addition to this demonstration grant, the folks there at CSPDC have also received funding this year to start an additional route.

And the idea behind this one is that it will serve

the UVA health system employees, many of them that work the 12 hour shifts.

Right now, they're in that gap where one route, they can do one, but the other doesn't work.

So they're looking to bridge that gap because they have done some surveys that have shown a great need there.

They are in the process, like I said, they secured the funding.

They, I believe, have purchased a vehicle.

They're in the process of hiring a driver, which we all know has been a great topic of discussion here, which I think they just started it.

So fingers crossed, but

It may take a little bit of time for that to happen.

It is a $3 one-way fare, so $6 round trip.

However, there are great opportunities there as well.

You can do $25 for the fare card, and then UVA just recently this spring, I believe, started a program where their employees can purchase through the parking and transportation system, and they get another $5 off on that.

So it is quite an affordable trip for those employees.

And we were just out doing outreach last week as part of the celebration.

And folks were really talking about how right the service was and how affordable it was as well.

That is true, yes.

We ended up having to do it outside of Wright.

We couldn't do it through Wright's system.

We had to do it through our system.

But I mean, any employer can do that.

You get to be the leader on that one.

Yeah, so how does service works?

So CSPDC manages the grant and then they contract out for the actual bus service.

So that was kind of, I think, where that piece fell hard to getting it done through them initially.

So lots of great marketing and promotion has been done.

This is kind of where we started with.

And I wanted to update you just on a real quick run through of all we've done in the year.

The first month of service, so last September, was fare-free.

Emails were sent to members in their rideshare databases.

So anyone in our agile mile that does ride matching or trip logging, as well as our guaranteed ride home database.

Emails were also sent to UVA employees a few times per year, based on zip codes for folks that the service would work for.

We had a lovely ribbon cutting ceremony last year.

There have been outreach events at the UVA parking lots.

We also did an outreach event again in the spring where we set up outside of the West Hospital complex where the stop is, where we were able to pass out information to folks there.

In last October, we did a guaranteed ride home promotion.

So anyone who was riding Afton Express or started riding it and also signed up for guaranteed ride home, they were entered for some prizes and for some drawings.

There has been targeted digital marketing

through CBS 19 both online and through their TV service as well as with a weather app.

There were free holiday swag bags that were given away that also included a trip pass as well as again some guarantee ride home information because that's a really key piece.

Since these folks are taking alternative forms of transportation, we want to make sure that if something happens in an emergency, that they are not stuck.

And again, we've always heard that that's one of the number one deterrents is people feeling that they may be stuck somewhere.

So we have something in place for that.

We want them to know.

In addition, there have been so many bus shelters that have been installed in the Waynesboro Park and Ride lot, which is one of the stops.

And that was part of the improvement that was done for SmartScale project.

We also did a couple really fun campaigns.

We did find a leprechaun.

So during the week of St. Patrick's Day, we did leprechauns around the bus stops.

And if folks took a picture of it or scanned the QR code, they would be entered for drawings.

We also did a ring of money.

So if you got on the bus and you brought someone new who'd never ridden before, you both got to ride for free.

So again, it's a lot of it dealing with making sure that we're getting the word out, helping folks understand

how helpful the service can be and that it's as easy as possible to use.

And the good news is, is all of that wonderful outreach and work has generated consistently increasing ridership.

Most days they're seeing between the mid 40s to the mid 50s in daily passenger trips and we've even had a couple of days that have been over 60.

So that is a great question.

They have offered free fare rides on the first.

There were cupcakes given out, like I said last week, at the two UVA stops.

This morning, they did a swag drop for riders at the Stanton Mall.

And then next Thursday, there will be a live radio broadcast over at the Waynesburg Rock and Ride lot with prizes, giveaways, and hopefully some breakfast provided.

So we have had a lot of fun in celebrating this huge milestone for this project that was a long time coming.

All of you want to have some fun.

So it's back on the table.

So thank you very much, Sarah.

I'm going to adjourn us to the cupcakes.

And we will see you all on October the 27th here for our next meeting in October.

Awesome, feel free to grab one.