And we are at the C-TRAN
Board of Directors meeting. It
is 530. And let's go ahead and
start with the Pledge of
Allegiance. All right. Cyndie,
if you could call the roll.
>> Ryan Davis, Will Fuentes,
Bart Hanson present. Tim Hein
present. Sue Marshall, Anne.
McEnerny Ogle. Eric Overholser
here. Kim. Harless. Tia
Robertson. Joshua waits here.
>> All right. Thank you. Now
taking a look here. Next up is
the approval of the agenda. Are
there any additions or changes
to the agenda. Do I hear a
motion to add the executive
session purchase or lease of
real estate? R c w 42.3 .11 01B
to consider the selection of a
site or the acquisition of a
real estate by lease or
purchase. When public knowledge
regarding such consideration
would cause the likelihood of
an increased price.
>> I make a motion to approve
the agenda with the addition of
r c w 42 .3.1 ten one B.
>> Second.
>> Got a motion and a second.
Any discussion? All those in
favor, say aye. I opposed I.
And motion passes. Next up we
have board recognition.
Recognition. The retirement of
coach operator Lawrence Alan
Moore. And that would bring up
Annette.
>> Good evening. Before I begin
the resolution, I just wanted
to say that when I came here a
little over two years ago,
Larry was one of the first
people, one of the first
trainers that I met. And there
was some talk about him
retiring at that time. And, you
know, they said he's going to
retire. He's going to retire.
We just waved it off. So a
couple of months ago, I saw him.
Had he had the countdown clock
at his at his desk. And I'm
like, you're not going anywhere.
I don't believe you. And he
said, no, I'm I'm leaving. I
said, no, you just buy another
car and stay another two years.
So I didn't believe him. But
now I have to say, I believe
you. Now, Larry, thanks for
your service. A resolution
adopted upon the retirement of
C Tran, transit operator,
instructor and coach operator
Lawrence Alan Moore, and
expressing appreciation.
Appreciation for over 35 years
of dedicated service. Whereas
Lawrence, also known as Larry,
became a member of the agency
in February 1991 following his
service in the Navy for four
years, and Larry dedicated 15
years to the role of coach
operator before being promoted
to transit operator. Instructor.
Instructor Larry has served as
a transit Operator instructor
for the past 20 years,
demonstrating exceptional
mentorship to new operators and
establishing lasting
professional relationships
throughout his tenure as a
transit operator, instructor,
Larry has trained over 700
operators for the agency. In
addition to training most
supervisors and management
staff, Larry has earned
recognition through steady,
reliable performance,
demonstrating situational
awareness, defensive driving
skills, and the commitment to
policy training and best
practices. Upon his retirement,
C Tran recognizes his
outstanding contributions,
professionalism, and positive
impact on both colleagues and
passengers alike, and Lawrence
were retired from C Tran on
August August. April C I still
don't believe you. On April
30th, 2026. Now therefore, be
it resolved by the C-tran Board
of Directors on behalf of
C-tran employees and citizens
of Clark County, we hereby we
hereby express our sincere
appreciation to Lawrence Alan
Moore for over 35 years of
exceptional service and wishes
for his health, happiness and
full and fulfillment in
retirement.
>> A few words, Larry. Cyndie,
if we look online, is a council
member Harless joining us as
well.
>> Yes, sir.
>> Can we reflect that?
>> We noted that she joined at
534.
>> Thank you.
>> Next up is public testimony
or communication. This portion
of the agenda shall be limited
to items on the agency's
business, which are properly
the object of board
consideration testimony is
limited to three minutes. We
ask that comments shall be
respectful and courteous to all.
As a reminder, you can email
comments to the clerk of the
board and these will be
accepted as part of the public
record. I now open the meeting
for public testimony. I will
take the first person first.
Let's see here. First up I have
Melo.
>> Hello. Hey. Yeah. So my name
is Carmen de Leon. I go by Melo
and I didn't know that you're
supposed to be on agenda items.
I thought it was supposed to be
open topic on anything you want
because.
>> Actually let me address Melo.
>> Sure. Yeah.
>> Go ahead with your three
minutes.
>> Okay. So well what I wanted
to say was that, you know, as
humans, we are creatures of
habit. So when you're in the
habit of making money, that's
what you become is a money
maker. But when you're in the
habit of losing money, well,
you should just be upfront with
people because c-tran and like
over there in Portland, see
trends on welfare because I
mean, the state's funded,
everything else is funded. You
guys aren't making any money.
And I guess that's just the way
you guys do things here.
Because I mean, if Portland is
actually making things smaller,
less bus services because
they're losing by the hundreds
of millions, I mean, I don't
see how you guys would want to
invest anything into light rail,
which is going on billions of
dollars when there's no money
to be made. So why is it a
money pit? Why is there no
regard for the people of
Vancouver's votes, which has
been since 1996 or 94, that
they don't want light rail, and
yet the city of Vancouver has
voted for it to go all the way
to. What is the library when it
hasn't really been approved by
the people. So did you guys
just not care about the people?
Because obviously you don't.
And the people have voted out
year after year for, what is it,
decades and you guys don't care.
So how come you guys are
already approving something
that the people have not agreed
with, and it's not even safe?
When you look at what's going
on with the the new what is it
bridge? Because they want to go
up way up seven, seven stories
high and you can't get up there
with the bike. It's dangerous
in the snow. It's dangerous in
the rain. It's no good for
anybody in a wheelchair. So why
do they want to add all that to
to the I-5 bridge when they can
just make two other bridges?
And why is anybody listening to
the city of Vancouver when
they're in the whole. The city
of Vancouver should not be
trusted. Anything that comes
out of the city of Vancouver
has not been tested. Everybody
there doesn't have any
experience in scheduling and
obviously in making money,
because I've seen that even
just the mayor alone has spent
$25,000 on her personal
expenses and $90 for her
mayor's dinners. So losing
money is seems to be the way of
life for the city of Vancouver,
and all of Clark County should
not participate in it. All of
Clark County wants two other
bridges and no light rail. And
why isn't why isn't anybody
listening to 500,000 people in
regards to only 30,000 people?
Tiny portion that voted in the
last election. So I mean, no
wonder people are mad at you.
You're way out of touch with
the population of Vancouver and
Clark County.
>> Thank you. Next up.
>> Just a moment, chair. I
absolutely object to the
comment that is inappropriate
and inaccurate.
>> Noted.
>> What do you think about.
>> That is a that was on the
agenda and that's something
we're looking at doing. Next
time, please feel free to go up
there and speak for your three
minutes.
>> Okay? Because you change it.
It has to go on. The Reule and
changes. Okay. You'll notice I
have a great deal of difficulty
getting up here. I thank you,
board members for the
opportunity to address you
again. Hello, mayor. Can you
stop what you're doing?
>> Please direct me.
>> To Deborah.
>> This time. I'm talking to
you. On a personal level, I
think you really don't want to
operate the C band program and
make it nearly impossible to
take advantage of it. It is my
knowledge and understanding
that C-tran makes it impossible
for disabled people to use. And
in particular, you discriminate
against disabled people like me
just because I have a scooter.
Have you ever talked with
disabled people who use or
can't use your C van as an
applicant for this event?
Services I would ask you to
would like to ask you to
reconsider your guidelines. So
rude. I understand that you
don't base approvals on a
person's health condition
because well, that would get
you into legal arguments.
However, I think you ought to
consider the whole person. I am
legally disabled. That should
be sufficient because I have a
scooter, not a wheelchair. I
can only use Kyvin based on the
weather. I have a conditional
use. Permission. Really? I
barely managed to function. I'm
a 68 year old widow living on
social security with no living
family to assist me. Medical
transportation vans cost over
used to cost $200 round trip
and only with days in advance
notice. I'm a very independent
person in C van would be a
great asset to me. Should my
mobility van no longer be an
option. I've applied twice for
this event and have given the
conditional usage based on the
weather, how many factors that
and have many factors that make
it difficult to use your busses,
especially the C van. First of
all, I live in a transportation
desert. My house is directly
behind the Andreasen Sound wall
between northeast 63rd and
Andreasen. Access is up and
around two blocks. If I want to
go south and down at the
Andreasen and 63rd intersection
going north, the only other way
to get to a bus stop is through
my neighborhood, and it's a 1.3
mile route. If I go this route,
would you, as an able bodied
person, be willing to walk that
distance? I don't think so. Why
shouldn't I be expected to? My
health conditions make it
impossible for me to spend that
much time on my scooter. I was
born with cerebral palsy and
have had 14 surgeries on my
legs since I was five years old.
Achilles tendon length and heel
bones cut off and realigned
with screws. My feet ligaments
were realigned and tied to my
big toe, toes straightened
fuzed and broken them and fuzed
them again. Screws through my
feet, through my toes. Both
knees were replaced with my
latest one done in December
last year. My right shoulder
was replaced due to arthritis.
My spine is extremely arthritic.
I will ask for just a leniency
for one more minute. If you
would.
>> One more minute might be a
little please.
>> I've lived in constant pain
for 24 hours, 24 hours a day
for the last 20 years. I
bilateral neuropathy in both
legs. From my shins to my toes.
My back has scoliosis,
compressed disc, degenerative
disc disease, fractured discs,
and massive osteoarthritis,
which is pressing on my spinal
cord, creating a whole host of
other problems. I have severe
chronic fatigue, thyroid cancer,
which has destroyed my thyroid
hormones, lymphedema, due to my
lymphatic system being shot, is
a horrible disease that causes
immense swelling due to fluid
buildup. I cannot perspire and
cool down as other people can.
Heat and humidity make me sick,
and cold weather makes my bones
ache with the screws and things
I have in my feet. It is
ludicrous to base my usage on
weather conditions because
you're telling me to anticipate
the weather two days in advance.
Better than the weatherman. You
don't care about my ability,
just that I have disability.
Just that I have a scooter.
Really. Please consider
redesigning your Kyvin
qualifications to allow
disabled people, regardless of
their mode of mobility. This
makes me furious to ride
without me having to be a
weatherman to predict whether
or not I need Keirns
transportation, and to make it
more usable and inclusive. I
can't get in to see a doctor
till September. You mean I have
to base whether or not I asked
for transportation based on the
weather at that time? So yes,
I'm mad. I'm mad as hell. Thank
you.
>> Deborah.
>> Next up we have William
Burke.
>> Hi, my name is William Burke
and I'm just basically
appearing on behalf of the
drivers at the request of some
of the drivers. On the issue of
air quality, the device that I
brought in is a little. It's a
VOC meter, so it measures the
air quality and like microns
and through a through a laser
system and a sniffer. So it
just all the vault of the
volatile organic compounds is
what this device registered in
reads. So this has to do with
the the filtration the Merv
eight through Merv 13. These
are the various. Filtration
systems that are used on bus,
on board the bus, and the cost
associated with them might be a
concern as to how often they
get changed, which is should be
changed every 90 days according
to the manufacturer's
recommendations. But in having
those things changed, it can
prevent the spread of the
pathogens that are constantly
changing, ever more now than
ever with the new variants that
come in and and such. And this
has to do with the well-being
of the drivers themselves. If
they're exposed to dirty
filters and stuff like that.
And the bus is acting as a
petri dish, essentially to
spread whatever the current
variant is or might be, and
they get held for missing work
three days or more without, you
know, a doctor's letter or
whatever. And they can be let
go. I guess this, this is
something that should be
evaluated, you know, maybe the
maintenance level to maybe have
a device such as this where it
would be a simple walk through,
they could read, you know,
maybe this is dirty because
we're getting a heavy reading
on this and have the internal
filter changed. If there's
funguses that have formed
inside the fence, things that
might not be readily seen on an
inspection, stuff like that.
And I think that there have
been since I initially made a
complaint, I think they've
addressed it. Tim Schellenberg
Schellenberger, I want to say.
Now, when I get on the bus, I
can't breathe and I appreciate
them at least taking a look at
that. But a bigger look at that
is how it affects the drivers
themselves and not being able
to make it in and becoming sick
from the filtration itself.
That might have been dirty and
might be partially to blame for,
you know, just not having those
things always in the, in the
top shape of being replaced.
That's about all I have to to
add on that note, otherwise,
the most of the drivers really
would like to see.
>> Thank you, Mr. Burke.
>> Thank you.
>> Next up, John Lee.
>> Good evening. Trimet Max.
Light rail operating expense
per mile is up 75% in two years.
Their bus operating costs are
up 26%. C-tran operating
expense per mile is up just
10.5% max. Cost per mile is $34.
Trimet bus cost is $19 a mile
and see trans $14 a mile.
Trimet Max operating cost per
mile is two and a half times
that of C-tran. These are
numbers reported to the FTA.
Trimet lost $850 million last
year. They've burned through 6
billion taxpayer dollars over
the last decade. Trimet also
has 40 spare Max light rail
vehicles, 226 spare busses.
C-tran has just 18 spare busses.
Let's talk about the IBR.
Tri-met demanded we buy them 19
new light rail vehicles as part
of the IBR. I'm told they
reduced that to just three
vehicles after slashing
ridership estimates last year.
Why would we buy them any when
we have when they have 40 spare
light rail vehicles? The
original demand was for
taxpayers to pay between 10 and
$15 million per vehicle for
each of those light rail
vehicles. That was possibly
triple the cost of the 4.5
million they paid for better
red vehicles. Two years ago,
the IBR refused to validate the
light rail vehicle costs.
Here's a news flash. In January,
Tri-met signed a contract for
56 new light rail vehicles for
$370 million. That's 6.6
million each. The contract
includes spare parts and
maintenance manuals. Therefore
the price is likely less. My
take Trimet's hoping to rip off
taxpayers in the IBR has been
turning a blind eye. Clark
County taxpayers should have
nothing to do with Trimet. In
the latest revelation, the IBR.
In an effort to save money by
phasing the project is going to
end the light rail at the
Vancouver waterfront. At a
station roughly 90ft in the air.
We don't need a transit stop
90ft above the ground with an 8
to $10 billion funding
shortfall, the IBR should
eliminate the transit component
altogether. They should simply
build a $2 billion bridge that
adds lanes and vehicle capacity
to I-5 over the Columbia River.
A simple, cost effective bridge
would avoid the need for
tolling. Trimet is slashing bus
and light rail service. They
only carry 1.6 of daily trips,
according to the Cascade Policy
Institute. People want to save
travel time and reduce traffic
congestion, allocating 54% of
the bridge surface to transit
bikes and pedestrians is
ridiculous. You know the costs
cross River transit ridership
has been flat for many years.
We need lanes, not trains.
Thank you.
>> Thank you John. Next up
Douglas tweet.
>> Hello Lord. Thank you for
the opportunity to speak this
tweet Kapmar. Okay, there we go.
I sent this earlier. You should
all have a PDF of it. There's I
presented versions of this. I'm
giving some updates and new
information based on the EIS
that just came out last week.
So in the text, there are
details about exactly how the
analysis was done and the links
and everything like that. I'm
going to focus because I have
limited time on the figures. So
the first figure is on the
second page. You've seen this
before. Different versions of
this about the actual ridership.
This is from C Tran, NTT data I
got from C-tran showing how
ridership plummeted during
Covid. And now this is across
the I-5 bridge. The green is
express busses. The red is the
route 60. That's the only route
that will be replaced by light
rail. The blue is the sum. This
is an estimate of weekday
average. You see that for the
last three years, the route 60,
which will be the light rail,
is been saturated about 990,
about 900 per day, about 450
people roughly. Now, if you
look at this, the next picture,
this is historical data. You go
2006 CRC did a survey and they
got a total of about 3300 total
express busses and route 60 in
20 in 2006. And then you can
see the, the new data, the more
recent data. So it's plummeted.
We're right now about 1500
total versus 3300, less than
half of what that is, of what
it was 20 years ago. But the
FSI predicts that in 2045,
somehow it's going to go up
about 20 times to nearly 30,000
in bus and transit. And it's
gone down by half in the last
20 years. And somehow it's
going to go up by 20 times.
That's just not believable. Now,
if we look at the distribution
of the the layout, John alluded
to that. So if we look at the
details, I don't have time to
go into that. You'll see that
roughly half is devoted to
light rail, active
transportation and bus, rapid
and bus, and then the rest is
going to general traffic and,
and freight. Now, if we take
the two, nine, 2019 data from
the FSI, you'll see that we
plot. Bart plots about 143,000
general traffic and then about
14,000 freight. And then you've
got the route 60, the express
busses and the active down here.
But if you add up the number of
lanes, it's about half of is
devoted to 3% of users, less
than 3% of users, and the other
97% are crammed in the other
half. Now, if we take the FSI s
new data, okay, the new
predictions for 2045, it
adjusts a little bit. You can
see these numbers, but instead
it's 12% gets half and the rest
of us get R 88% get the other
half. So it's still extremely
unfair to the vast majority of
people and truckers who are
paying the tolls.
>> I think.
>> Next up we have Margaret
Trulet.
>> Okay. And regarding the
bicyclists and pedestrians, the
25ft that they are allocated on
the bridge is based on an
October 19th, 2022 observed
count of 296 persons crossing
the bridge. There is other data.
Historical permanent counts
were reviewed and revealed
several irregularities and were
determined unusable. So we're
left with a single data point,
which is the basis to determine
the need for 25ft of the bridge.
That is grossly unfair. And
then regarding the ridership at
the October 14th C-tran board
meeting, I BR presented new
ridership analysis using the
stop's model to forecast past
ridership data. They claimed
Dayley light rail boardings in
the fall of 2024 were about
5000, but we didn't have light
rail in 2024, we had c-tran
busses. There were about 900
bus boardings per Kyann 2024
data on the bus route 60, the
one to be placed, be replaced
with light rail. Steve Witter
of IBR stated, these higher
numbers are ridership as if we
put in that system today light
rail. Again, it wasn't there in
2024. So how can it be an
existing condition? It didn't
exist. When asked by board
member Tim Huynh where these
numbers came from, I wasn't
prepared to answer and
suggested that technical
experts could make a future
presentation with details,
which is hasn't happened yet.
It's April now of 2026.
Furthermore, I note that
regarding the. The year of the
modeling when it began, it says
here in the footnote on the
program and needs 1.3.2 that
the I b r program is using 2019
as the baseline year for
existing conditions, except for
the Metro RTC Regional Travel
demand model, which are from
2015. When did the modeling
start? 2015, 2019, 2024? It's
very unclear from these
meetings, from the
documentation, from the
technical reports, and these
are questions that should be
answered for the board. These
technical experts should be
invited back. Perhaps they're
here today so that we can
understand when the modeling
started, how did these
assertions of 20 times the
ridership, where did they come
from? What are the assumptions?
Thank you so much.
>> Thank you. Margaret. Next up
we have Bruce Barnes.
>> Good evening, Chair and
board of directors. My name is
Bruce Barnes, for the record.
And another thing for the
record I'd like to state is
that I don't have any Clark
County representation here
tonight again. But we know why
that is. The political coup is
already over. Anyways, I would
suggest that C-tran. Slows down
their bus systems here and
reduces some bussing because of
the cost of fuel, because the
next thing the taxpayers are
going to get is a big fuel bill
for driving around in circles
with nobody riding the bus. So
that's one suggestion. A friend
of mine just got back from
Ireland feels $10 a liter.
That's $40 per gallon for fuel,
and it's going to keep going up
here. So we better prepare for
it now before we reach an
emergency situation. Secondly,
I'd like to talk about the the
Interstate bridge project. It
it it saddens me to my core
that my dad started this
project 35 years ago in good
faith to get people back and
forth to work. And still we
have not turned over one piece
of dirt yet. And he's not going
to live long enough to see this
bridge done. His his warranty
is pretty much up. He's 93
years old this year, and he's
not going to live long enough
to see the the bridge
completion, as probably some of
you. The tolling is what I'm
concerned about, right? A $1.6
billion worth of tolls have to
be raised per year. Right? To
pay for this bridge. What's
that equate to? You know,
that's a 12 to $14 each
direction toll. People can't
afford their groceries right
now. I brought this up the city
council. I brought it up the
county council. When are we
going to know the true number
and let the public know?
Because once the public knows
it, it's going to be that
costly. They're not going to
want to cross this bridge. So I
don't know what you're going to
raise the toll to, because if
only half the people start
using the interstate bridge
still, and they all go to the
205 bridge, regardless if it's
a traffic jam or not to avoid
the toll, because nobody's
going to be able to afford
another $6,300 a year out of
their pocket. When groceries
are where they're at, fuel is
where they're at. Property
taxes are where they're at. You
know what I mean? What? What's
enough, you know what I mean?
And, and like the the lady
spoke already. She's a single
widow that, you know, can't
afford to even drive her
vehicle, let alone get a ride
on your Trimet bus system. And
I will volunteer to take you to
your doctor's appointment. If
you do need a ride, I would be
more than glad to do that. But
anyways, that's that's enough.
But the one final thing that
that I'd like to add is I would
like to add that I'm really
thankful that they're cleaning
up the freeways, and it's not
for the sake of cleaning up the
freeways. I think it's more
about that soccer tournament
that's happening in Seattle,
kind of like when, you know,
the Chinese man showed up to
San Francisco and they cleaned
up that hellhole, too. Thank
you for your time. Appreciate
it.
>> Thank you. Bruce. Next up is
Kurt VanGelder.
>> C-tran board. My name is
Kurt VanGelder, lifelong
resident of Clark County. I'm
not happy to have to be here
tonight to once again call out
people who refuse to actually
represent the clear will of of
the people, the voters. As
stated, the county has voted
time and time again that light
rail in Clark County by very
large percentages approaching
70%. There are very few issues
that have that much agreement
across the political spectrum.
And yet several of you voted to
continue to endorse the clear,
voted to ignore the clear will
of your own district's voters.
But it's worse than that.
Article one, section one of
Washington State Constitution
states all political power is
inherent in the people, and
governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the
governed and are established to
protect and maintain individual
rights. That's word for word,
what it says. And I'll remind
you that section 29 says the
provisions of this constitution
are mandatory unless expressed
by express words. They are
declared otherwise. You all
took an oath to uphold the
Washington state Constitution,
therefore binding you to follow
it. It is mandatory, but some
of you voted against the clear
will of voters. You violated
section one and 29 of the
Constitution and therefore your
oath of office. And the
question is why? Why are you
ignoring the will of the voters?
There are only a couple of
possibilities. Number one, your
tyrants who demand your own way,
voters be damned. You know, I
believe the saying is no kings,
you need to resign. Two, you
think you know better than the
voters. You don't. You need to
resign. Or three, you're doing
the will of others, developers,
friends, etc. possibly for
money or future favors. That
would be called corruption. You
need to go to jail. The sad
reality is that we're 250 years
later, once again facing
tyranny of our own government,
oppressing us over taxes,
regulation, tolls, all of that.
Some of you are pushing us back
into having to overthrow that
tyranny once again with our
Declaration of Independence
warned us we may have to do. Is
that what you want? Because
this is about the only option
you appear to leaving us with.
Lord knows we the people have
been very clear about what you
need to do to fix the problem.
No light rail, no tolls. Fix
the problem. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Kurt.
>> Do we have Cyndie? Anybody
online?
>> Nobody online.
>> Okay, well, that closes our
public comment and moves us to
the consent items. Do are there
any items that we'd like to
pull from the consent.
>> Tim.
>> Thank you. Chair, I'd like
to pull item number four, the
contract for executive coaching.
>> Excellent. Pulling. Item
number four. Any other items
that would like to be pulled?
Okay. Do I hear a motion to
approve item one? Item two.
Item three. Item five. Six.
Seven. Eight. Do I hear a
motion?
>> Sure. I make a motion to
approve the consent agenda with
the addition of pulling item
number four.
>> Second.
>> Any discussion?
>> We have a motion and a
second. All those in favor say.
>> I, I, I, I opposed.
>> None opposed moving to item
number four.
>> Go ahead.
>> Thank you chair. The only
question I have on the contract
for executive coaching is I'd
like to I'd like to better
understand what are the details
involving that coaching. I see
the dollar amount. I see a
broad description of the of
what is proposed. I'd like
details on what some of the
specifics are for the team or
the Chief Executive officer,
and how that aligns with T.tran
strategic priorities.
>> Now.
>> Point of clarification,
would you like that tonight or
would you like that.
>> In the future? If.
>> CEO can provide an update on
that tonight? Just a few
details. I don't personally, I
don't need huge details. I'd
just like a few key bullet
points over what what does that
look like?
>> Lehan.
>> Alishia thank you chair.
Thank you, director Tim Heine.
So yes, with the consulting
executive coach, recall that I
initially started out with the
doctor Carroll as guidance for
me stepping into CEO role as we
as if you recall, when I
started, I did a review and
took a step back and asked for
everyone to take a moment to
reflect, review and reset, and
I took. It became apparent that
with the executive team, we
needed some cohesiveness and we
needed to be ready. I needed to
be ready to lead with
confidence and make. Understand
what needs the executive team
needed, needed from me as a
leader and what I needed from
them. So as we grew and started
the program, we've got done
great strengths of creating
cross-functional alignment.
We've done cohesiveness work
together through the coaching.
For me, I've become more
intentional about how I've led
and make decisions in account
and, and having accountability,
which was a, a big staple for
me for creating that foundation
within the executive team. As
we move forward, I learned that
I've had to become a visionary,
strategize and be more
intentional about how I lead
and get out of the weeds of
using to be used to being in
the operations sector. So had
to learn to take a step back,
let my CEO take over with that
and be able to guide them and
be more strategic in what our
decisions are making. We've
been able to establish a people
for leadership approach and,
and around our core values that
you see in our packet and that
we've been utilizing and using
that as something not to just
check a box, but to become part
of how we live and lead and
operate every day. We there's
also greater clarity and
stronger accountability and
better alignment within our
leadership level. And so we're
looking to expand on that and
be able to. Apply those our
practices within everyone's
department from there. Next,
their direct reports on down
through management. We're next
steps we're looking to.
Continue the work. This also,
this contract also would
encompass our board workshop
that we're going to have on the
fifth. She would be leading
that as well. I think that's an
opportunity for the for her to
see as as a cohesiveness for
executive team to be working
together on something together
overall arching for the C
Terren board and for the board
members to see how we work
together with her as well. And
so this through this, I feel
like it's just strengthened our
leadership capacity and
directly supports our long term
organization organizational
effectiveness throughout the
agency and also create
retention and, and be able to
prepare for future for pipeline
filling and being able to have
a good foundation to build on.
Hopefully that answers your
question.
>> Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
>> Any other discussion? Do I
hear a motion for item number
four?
>> Chair. I make a motion to
approve consent. Agenda item
number four.
>> Second, we.
>> Have a motion and a second.
Any discussion. Not seeing any.
We'll move to a vote. All those
in favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed? Motion passes.
>> Now moving on to
presentations. And first up, we
have C Terren Citizen Advisory
Committee. Cassie, update staff
report 20 6-013.
>> Evening chair, members of
the board. My name is Mike
McQueen. I'm the chair of the C
Terren Citizen Advisory
Committee for 2026. I'm also
the bi state commuter
representative and this is my
third year with the committee.
So I'm here to present the
activities on the board since
the last update. So since
January 2026, the CAC has
conducted the following
business reviewed and provided
input on agency funding.
Sources voted to change the
meeting location from the
administrative office here to
the Rose Kitterman Committee
room at the Fisher's Landing
Transit Center. Discussed
express route service, planning
and dispatch and provided
feedback on challenges and
suggested improvements.
Reviewed the Bus Stop
Prioritization Matrix project
with Portland State University
student consultants and
provided comments on preferred
prioritization, reviewed fall
service change plans and bus
stop designs, and provided
comments on preferred timeline
and ideology for changes
supported, the outreach needed
and recruitment for the social
services representative
position. Discussed each
committee members purpose and
intention in joining the
committee and their shared
values. Voted on a change in
the meeting agenda to include
roll call committee sharing for
continued time management and
inclusion during meetings.
Provided regular questions and
feedback to C trans staff on a
variety of subjects, including
training, scheduling and a
variety of fixed route and
demand response issues.
Provided a forum for regular
questions, concerns and
comments from the committee.
And that concludes my report.
>> That's quite a report, Mike.
I mean, when you look at all of
those, I mean, there's 2 or 3 I
could ask a question on bus
stop design. I mean, were there
any that you were going through
that were rather.
>> Than.
>> You know, contentious?
>> Contentious? Changing the
meeting location was a little
contentious. Okay. There was
some good discussion about the
bus stop design. There was
discussion about do we
prioritize bus stops that have
higher ridership? Do we
prioritize bus stops that have
maybe folks with disabilities
that live close by? Do we
prioritize destinations? So
grocery stores where everybody
would be impacted by an
improvement to the bus stops?
And then of course, the, the
express route reliability topic
was really close to me as well,
since I used that multiple
times a week. Interesting.
>> Yeah. Now, as far as the
location, just specimens. That
better connection don't have to
get two busses.
>> There's definitely more
busses that serve that location
compared to here. My bus
actually arrives there as well,
so that's very convenient and
it's a very comfy room. It's a
bit more intimate, which is
really nice to be able to
really converse on a 1 to 1
with C Tran staff. So it's been
well received by the majority
of the committee.
>> Have you had the opportunity
to take the C Terren survey?
>> I have. Excellent, excellent.
>> That's all I have. Thank you
so much.
>> Absolutely.
>> Next up we have the Vinh on
Highway 99 Bus Rapid Transit
update with Randy Parker.
>> Thank you. Good evening
chair. Members of the board.
Let me get my zapper here.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah. That's what my mother
in law calls it. Okay, so I'm
excited to share with everyone
where we're at on the highway
99 BRT project. It's been a
while since we've spoken. This
first slide is the total BRT
vine system expansion. The red
line here shown on Mill Plain
was completed in 2023. The
green Line was the fourth
fourth lane line, which opened
in 2017. The purple line is the
highway 99 BRT project, which
is currently in construction.
I'm going to talk more about
now. And the lime green line is
the extension of fourth plane
along. Fourth plane down 162nd
to Fishers Landing, which
should be targeted opening in
2028. So the highway 99 project
itself is Bus Rapid Transit.
The alignment is highway 99 and
Main Street. It's about a ten
mile long corridor. The
southern terminus is Vancouver
Waterfront, northern terminus,
WSU, Vancouver, excuse me,
includes 32 new stations, four
existing stations and. A what
I'm calling a remodel of Salmon
Creek Transit Center. It's a
park and ride lot right now,
but we're going to turn it into
a transit center, more like the
Mill Plain Transit Center. The
corridor itself is forecasted
to grow with over 7000 new
households and 9000 new jobs by
2040. The corridor exceeds area
averages in many community
groups that historically use
transit more often 26% in or
near poverty, 26% identify as
minority, and 10% don't have a
vehicle, which is twice the
county wide rate and many
existing bus stops and are not
accessible by sidewalk or close
to a controlled crossing in the
corridor right now. Just a
reminder, what is the vine?
Here's a couple images. The
image on the left, the vine is.
We operate 60 foot articulated
busses. We use stations instead
of stops. Each station has is
branded. The whole system's
branded. The stations include
passenger information displays,
cameras, security cameras,
lighting, wind screens. And. I
feel like I'm forgetting
something. Oh, shelters. Don't
forget. The next slide is. This
is a typical station design for
the purple line. It'll look
very similar to the red line.
We made some slight
modifications from the red line.
We moved the the passenger
information displays to the
middle of the shelter. That is
because to get better camera
angles, which then necessitated
that we move the bench so no
one could hop up on the bench
and do vandalism. And then we
added this in front of the
woman walking there, what's
called a leaning rail. So those
are other than that they're
pretty similar to the red line.
Oh and we the trash can design
is slightly different. So this
next slide is a typical what we
call bike bypass station. These
are on mill plain as well. We
made some improvements over
mill plain. You know, you build
enough of these, you get a
little bit smarter every time.
What we did here is we improved
the tactile detection and
wayfinding. That's all the
yellow and the white striping
on that you see on there. And
on highway 99, the bike path
itself is going to be asphalt
instead of concrete, which
should help with comfort and
detectability for the bike
riders. Their first one has
been poured. If you are need
something to do for a field
trip, go out to 139th and 23rd
westbound and that one's been
poured so it's ready to go. As
I said, the northern terminus
is at the the campus, the WSU,
Vancouver. The the station is
where you see that big white
area arrow. It includes a, a
loop road in which is next to
parallel to a road that is used
for emergency usage. That road
is bus only with access
controlled at that intersection
at 29. So there'll be a gate
and a signalized intersection
added there as well. And I
should point out that we worked
a lot, you know, very closely
with the school up there. We
did the windscreen designs in
collaboration with them. The
only agreement was that there's
no purple allowed at that
station. So there'll be one
little purple V up there and
that's it. They were pretty
adamant about that.
>> That's too much.
>> Yeah, I've heard that in
terms of the timeline. We're in
the far right box there. We're
in construction. We are. I'll
go to the next slide here. But
we're starting in the north,
heading south. We started in
earnest around November before
we got all of our permits. I
think I mentioned that we've
had issues getting our permits
and still do a whole nother
story, but and we're still on
schedule to get it opening day
in the fall of next year, 2027.
In terms of the construction
itself, the construction's
phased where, as I mentioned,
we're starting in north and
heading south. The stations are
built in groups. So we didn't
we're limited to like 8 to 10
stations at a time. So we don't
just go through and. You know,
demo a bunch of stuff and then
leave Komes up for months on
end. The impact at any single
station is about three months.
They're working on it. We've
had continuous business and
property outreach the whole
time. Eric's group has been out
ahead of us. We have weekly
meetings with the contractor
and the county. In this case,
this is the map of the county.
We will do that with the city
when we get to the city and we
have a project hotline and
email that's monitored seven
days a week. So we try to stay
in communication with with the
community out there ahead of
schedule, ahead of the progress,
the the map I wanted to point
out. So the orange dots, they,
they show stations that are
currently under construction.
The idea is to we'll start in
the north. We started on 139th
and 23rd and headed south.
We're going to get as far as
88th and then jump back up
north and head south on the
northbound stations. And. This
is all how the county wanted us
to do it. We haven't started at
WSU or Salmon Creek yet because
we don't have a permit yet.
Hopefully we can get those soon.
The blue dots are utility work
that goes out ahead of us, so
they're there all throughout
the corridor except in the city.
And we we hope to. That work
will continue through fall of
26 in the county. We hope to be
in. Oh, let me show you some
pictures and then I'll talk
about city fortune. So on the
left is the station at 139th
and 23rd eastbound that I
mentioned that the bike path
and asphalt is done. That's the
station that we started at its
furthest one along. The one on
the right is highway 29th and
129th near the dental office.
There, there. You'll notice as
I head south, they get
progressively like, looks like
there's less work and SS
because we haven't got that far
yet. But having said that, the
station on the left at 99 117th.
>> Excuse me.
>> That looks like a sidewalk,
but it's actually the footing
for a very large retaining wall
that's going in there. Now, if
you drive up there now, that
retaining wall is there and the
shelter has been set. The image
on the right is highway 99,
107th southbound. That one they
just shut set the shelter about
two weeks ago. I think on that
one. The next one, 99th and
99th. I put this one in here
because it's a really good
sense to give you what goes on
underneath the platform.
There's a lot of conduit and
wiring in those in the concrete
there. And then the one on the
right is 99th and 88, and that
is a Geisen gas pipe and a
yellow. The yellow means gas
that we're trying to get moved
with northwest natural. And
like I said, we're 88th as far
as we're going to go southbound,
and then we're going to jump
back up, which they've done,
and started working on 139th
westbound. And then some of the
northbound stations on on
highway 99. Now the city
portion again, we're going to
start in the north and head
south. Utility work will begin.
You know, in this summer we'll
go out ahead just like we did
in highway 99. Get ahead of
them. The station work will
plan to take place in summer,
start this summer, go through
the fall of 27. And then as I
mentioned, there's four
stations that are existing that,
you know, so those stations
will see some. What we're
calling a minor refresh will
probably. The plan is to
upgrade the technology there.
And do some paint work and that
kind of thing. We're also in
the city. Reconstructing the
intersection at 28. I don't
have a picture of that, but
that's in the plan. And I
wanted to mention also that you
might see some work at around
45th. That's the furthest north
station we have in the.
>> City.
>> And we're going to start
that in August ish to get ahead
of the Main Street project that
you all have going there. We've
been coordinating with them. I
think.
>> That's it. Questions? Yes.
>> Thank you chair. Thanks,
Randy. Really good presentation.
I'm interested on slide ten.
Looking at that, the various
stops along the route, the BRT,
how did you come up with the
disbursement of the.
>> So that was decided in. When
we did the LPA locally
preferred alternative. And at
that stage, all you're trying
to do is get dots on a map
where they may actually land in
construction.
>> Is.
>> A whole nother question of.
>> Like.
>> Is there a utility we need
to try to miss? Is the property
owner not going to work with.
This wood near side or far side
work better, but things like
existing transit ridership at
the most of these stations are
where an existing stop was.
Right? So was that station or
stop heavily used? Is it near
an intersection? Well, we try
to do is get rid. Of sorry,
like mid-block stops or
stations where people tend to
run across the highway. Super
dangerous situation. So that's
the criteria we try to use when
we.
>> Place them. Thank you for
that help. Yeah. Yeah. Right.
>> Thank you. Yeah. I'm I have
really enjoyed seeing this
unfold. I drive by the 139 like
every day on the way home from
school just because well, they
have 50th cut off because of
construction and they have 1/79
cut off for construction. So
that's like the only way to get
back to Ridgefield. But I, I
just, I'm really excited about
this just because it's going to
be able to connect that
northern area all the way to
the waterfront. What is going
to be the anticipated travel.
Time from. From WSU all the way
down to the waterfront?
>> Is it 40 minutes?
>> What's that mean.
>> 40 minutes? About 40 minutes.
>> Okay. Because that's, you
know, that's the closest one
for us. And I, I, you know, I
talked to my son goes to WSUV
Vancouver and when I told him
about it, he was like, wait, we
could go all the way down to
the waterfront. And it's like,
yeah, you know, you don't.
>> Have to. Yep.
>> It's going to be great.
>> I think. I think there's
going to be a lot of people in
the North Side that are going.
To be looking for that as an
option. So that's, that's I'm
really excited about it. I
appreciate.
>> Your work. Yeah. Thank you.
>> Randy.
>> 28th Street 28.
>> Yes.
>> It's got an.
>> Island there.
>> Yeah. And I think the island
goes away isn't it. We do a.
>> Oh that.
>> Okay.
>> Okay. Definitely.
>> It'll have a left hand turn
lane. We won't do that like 90
then 90 thing. It'll have a
left hand turn pocket with like
a y almost that drops down on
pain with a new signal.
>> Clear visibility. As far as
the signage.
>> Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yes.
Excellent. Way safer.
>> Kim? Eric online. Do you
have any questions?
>> No questions. Thank you.
This is great.
>> Okay. Oh, Josh.
>> I know on Main Street it's
pretty tight driving the bus
through there. Is there any
plans for development with the
city to, you know, make the
road a little easier to access?
>> We're not changing the road.
What's it called? The curb to
curb dimensions. I know we were
talking about like from 39th
down to fourth lane. Yeah.
Right, right. We are doing
quite a bit of work there at
Safeway. And there's a yes. Go
ahead.
>> And Taylor.
>> We're not going to be
changing anything with the
roadway cross section, but
we're going to be tying in
pretty closely with the City of
Vancouver's Main Street Safety
and Mobility project. And
they're going to be changing
the cross section of Main
Street. So it's going to be
moving from four lanes to in
either direction to three lanes,
one northbound and two
southbound. So rather than
about nine foot lanes in either
direction, we're going to be
operating in about 11 foot
lanes. So it'll be a much more
comfortable operating
environment.
>> Yeah.
>> Sorry, was that I must have
misunderstood. Then you're
asking, are we coordinating
with their project?
>> How can we help you? Please
turn your mic on.
>> Thank you.
>> There we go. Any other
questions?
>> Comments? All right.
>> Moving on to a C-tran
ridership update. Guess who's
coming back.
>> I didn't bring my water
bottle. Evening, members of the
board. My name is Taylor,
director of Planning and
Service delivery. Happy to be
here with you this evening to
provide an overview of recent
ridership trends as we move
further into 2026. 2025 was a
notable year for ridership. In
C-tran. We saw our fourth
consecutive year of ridership
growth. We eclipsed 5 million
riders for the year, an
increase of 6% over 2024. This
growth isn't isolated to any
one mode or part of the system,
signaling a sustained trend for
the network. A key takeaway
we've observed over the last
few years is that routes where
we've added service in the most
recent service changes
typically experience some of
the greatest ridership
increases the following year.
All C-tran modes, including the
vine, Local, Regional, Express,
the current and seven
experienced growth. System wide.
This growth is continued into
early 2026, where ridership
year to date averages nearly
17,000, up 6% compared to the
same time in 2025 and more than
10% over 2024. The lines on the
chart step up, showing a clear
indication of our regular
growth year over year from 2021
to 2026 today. And you can see
the lines really progressing
from the blue line in 2021, the
orange in 2022 up to the Green
Line showing 2026 year to date.
And it's year after year,
essentially in chronological
order as those lines are
increasing in average ridership.
And as has been the case with
recent years, we continue to
see particularly strong growth
on weekends where ridership is
up 7% over this time last year
and 14% over 2024, surpassing
an average of 11,000 riders in
March of this year. That's the
highest figure that we've seen
on Saturdays in at least the
last decade. So a substantial
figure. This suggests that our
service investments are
addressing latent demand, and
riders are increasingly relying
on our service for non commute
trips, including shopping,
essential services and social
trips on Saturdays and Sundays,
as well as on weekdays. We just
talked a little bit about the
vine. The system remains the
backbone of the C-tran network.
The vine carried 1.9 million
riders in 2025 and continues to
show sustained growth. Weekday
ridership is up 3% year to date
over 2025 and 7% over 2024. The
Green Line and Red line average
3000 402,300 riders per weekday,
respectively. They carry more
than a third of all C-tran
riders on an average weekday.
When the purple line opens, the
vine system as a whole will
carry nearly half of all C-tran
riders on any given weekday.
Ridership. Ridership on routes
crossing the Columbia River
also saw a moderate increase.
As regional travel patterns
begin to stabilize, regional
and express routes, including
the 60, 65 and 67 connecting to
Trimet Max and Portland
International Airport and
routes 105, 105 and 164 and 190,
connecting to downtown Portland
and OHSU all saw moderate
growth, up about 2% over 2025,
carrying a combined 2200
passengers per day in March of
2026. So that's a very recent
figure. Specifically, regional
routes are up about 2% so far.
While our express service has
seen a more robust recent
increase, up about 6% year to
date over this time last year,
this is likely reflecting
additional return to office
requirements over the last year
or so. Route 65 and 164 in the
I-205 corridor have seen some
of our more significant
increases of about 6% and 5%,
respectively, from 24 to 25.
And I'll end by highlighting
the continued exceptional
growth of the current. It's
just above some of our other
high growth routes, including
routes 1948, 74, and 78. It
continues to be our fastest
growing service as it has been
over the last few years.
Weekday ridership year to date
averages about 220 riders per
day, up 35% over 2025 and more
than 50% over 2024. Each
service zone of the current
continues to see individual
ridership. Growth so far in
2026, the battleground zone has
already become our second
highest ridership zone. So, so
far this year, C-tran ridership
continues to show strong growth
indicators, responding well to
added service and accessibility
improvements. It's a little too
early to know how rising fuel
costs will impact ridership.
Historically, transit is a
lifeline during times where
fuel prices rise as high as
they are today. And we do see
ridership increases as a result.
We are likely to see that
through the rest of the year.
It's just a little bit too
early to.
>> Know.
>> But recently, C-tran does
exceed the national average of
about 2 to 4% annual growth
among similar mid-sized transit
agencies in the nation. So I'd
like to finish by thanking you
all for your continued support
of service and capital
investments that really enable
us to continue moving ridership
in this direction. It's pivotal
to us doing so. So happy to
answer any questions you all
might have.
>> Well, Taylor, you got my one
of my questions with the fuel
and the cost of fuel these days.
But second question, and you
don't have to answer this might
be great. As a follow up though,
is how are we doing with the
student Apple Pass? Is are we
seeing increases there as well?
>> That's a great question. We
do. What I can tell you is that
student ridership is a really
significant driver of our
ridership. And we see that in
trends based on spring break,
fall break and summer ridership.
But we can get you specific
numbers on actual utilization
of taps.
>> That'd be great. And email
to the board.
>> That would questions. Tim.
>> Thank you. Chair. Thanks,
Taylor. Great presentation.
It's really good to see recent
information or current
information on such an
important metric in terms of,
and it's great to see the
increase in ridership. So it's
6.3% overall over prior year,
right? That's with 2% growth
across the river, 50%. You said
the current is up about 50%.
>> 35 over last year, 50% over
24.
>> So I mean system wide. So
even the routes in southwest
Washington are higher than that
6%. Yes. Which is great to see
why. What's the feedback in
terms of why is the current so
popular? What is it? What kind
of service does it provide that
gets that kind of growth?
>> Yeah, that's. A that's a
great question. I think one of
the reasons that we've seen
continued growth of the current
is that recently, with changes
in how we've been able to staff
the current, we've been able to
meet demand a little bit more
than we were able to previously.
And we saw that fairly
immediately starting in the
summer of last year. Once we
made that shift, we coupled
that with the extension into
battleground. So we picked up
an additional zone and also
pretty significant additional
capacity to accommodate riders.
But I think combining that with
serving areas that historically
have never had access to
transit is a pretty significant
ridership generator. It's not
the the biggest figure that we
see at 220 riders a day, but it
is tapping into a market that
has never had access before.
And what we're finding is that
we continue to see new signups.
And that really is an ongoing
trend. So that's great to see.
And not only are we seeing
people continue to sign up for
the app, but we're seeing
people make their first trip
and then make return trips. So
that's a really strong positive
indicator for us that it's a
useful service and more people
are discovering it. So it's
going to continue to move in
the right direction.
>> Thanks. The feedback on it's
extremely positive. And you see
literally see the current ban
everywhere. This seems to be
all over the place. Is there
and I needed it, but it'd be
interesting to get an
understanding of the cost
effectiveness of the current
versus regular bus. What's more
efficient or lower cost per
mile? You know, I'm just I'm
curious on what's more
efficient to operate.
>> And I know that as part of
our strategic planning efforts,
we're working on unbundling
some of those metrics a little
bit more.
>> I'll just add, we do look at
it. The thing with the current
is going to be the productivity
side of it from a cost
perspective, because we're not
able to carry as many riders.
So you're going to see a cost
more comparable to C van
service. It's more of a premium
service that we're offering for
those untapped areas. As Taylor.
For smaller vehicles, the cost
for the per hour is going to be
cheaper, but you're not
producing as much with
ridership, if that makes sense.
>> It does.
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you.
>> Any other comments online?
>> Yeah. I just want to say
Taylor, thank you for this
presentation. And it's really
encouraging to see our
community just continue to
utilize the services that
C-tran provides. And I can say
wholeheartedly that the
battleground area is very
grateful for the addition of
the current up here. Just like
Tim said, I see that current
ban or the current vans plural
all over the city. And I know
we've we've been talking about
it from council meetings, but
also in the community of just
the flexibility and the
usability of the current system
with our student population,
but also our seniors. And we
have a pretty good size senior
population up here in
battleground. And they utilize
that as much. And so it's
encouraging to see the results
from your presentation that
really speak to that being a
advantageous added feature to
transportation and battleground.
So thank you.
>> So Taylor, you, you dork out
on these numbers, were you
pretty excited when you saw the
results? I Doerk out on these
numbers. Okay.
>> Sometimes I love to see bike
bypasses get paved though.
>> The look of enthusiasm on
your face right now. Thank you
for the smile. No, this is
something we should all be very
excited about. These are some
of the decisions made by this
board, but that's only a
partial piece of this. The vast
majority of it is the staff
that makes this happen on a day
to day basis. So I would like
to thank the staff, the
operators and everybody that
that does such a great job in
making this happen because it
is a really big deal. We should
be celebrating this. I'm
excited to see more people
using the system and that's all
we have. Taylor.
>> Right. Thank you, thank you.
>> Next up we have the
Interstate Bridge replacement
program update. And we have IVR
Program Administrator Carly
Francis and IVR Deputy Program
Administrator Steve Witter.
Welcome.
>> Press the right button. Good
evening. I am Carly Francis. I
am the interim program
administrator for the
Interstate Bridge Replacement
program. And I appreciate you
all taking the time to have us
here to present. We're going to
present an update on our cost
estimate for the program and
also discuss sort of the
activities that we have,
looking ahead at how to move
the program forward. So really
excited for the opportunity to
provide the update.
>> Thank you.
>> So first and foremost, we
have been talking about a five
mile program for a long time
because there are critical
investments needed across that
five miles, both in highway and
transit components. And the
program does remain in the
states, remain committed to
delivering those five miles
over time. We are here to talk
a little bit about phasing and
how we deliver that body of
work, which is really critical
to moving forward. But this is
just a map of what all of those
improvements look like as a
reminder. Our cost estimate
update is based on a a very
rich dialog among a wide array
of experts, as well as agency
participants that identify for
each item of the cost estimate.
They look at what the body of
work is to be completed, what
all the pieces and parts of
that are, how much concrete you
need, how you would deliver it.
All those pieces, they look at
that and then they also
identify what are risks related
to each of those things. What's
the risk of cost going up on a
certain item? What's the risk
of some delay in delivering? So
there's a big a large
discussion for elicitation of
risks. And that is the sort of
the build up of the work, the
results of that work, as you
may have noticed in the paper
last month when we started
talking about this, did
increase the cost for the five
mile corridor between to a
range of 13.5 to 15.2 billion,
with a likely cost of 14.4
billion. That is at what we
call a 70th percentile figure
or confidence rate. What that
means is you are expecting
costs to come in at or below
that figure 70% of the time. So
we use that. That's the Federal
Highway Administration sort of
preferred plan to figure when
you're talking about planning
what your costs are and how to
match up funds. So we're using
the FHwA standard there. As I
noted, there are composite
activities that are that build
up this estimate. So you have
that base estimate. That is the
identification based on
engineering information about
how many widgets you need and
who you know, what kind of
folks you need to do the work
and all those cost pieces. We
call that the base cost
estimate. So that comprises 7.8
billion of this total figure.
That's a 70% value as well. We
have that risk figure here. So
that's the 4.2 billion. And
then escalation that is moving
those costs out into time to
when we would anticipate those
dollars to be spent based on an
assumption of having the money
needed at that time. So we have
a schedule that goes along with
this body of work that
forecasts when that work would
occur. As a note, the 2022
estimate was assumed to be 5 to
7.5 billion, with a likely cost
of 6 billion. That was at a
60th percentile probability. So
60% chance of it of costs
coming in at or below that
level. That's based on the
typical typical guidance within
Washington state Dot as we were
finalizing that body of work.
So we have adjusted that
percentile factor, just
recognizing that we have key
deliverables with the federal
government upcoming. So wanted
to match up to that 70% figure.
Key within the cost estimate.
Really there are a number of
factors and I'll talk about
more of them. But one notable
item is just the significant
increase we've seen across the
nation in costs for this kind
of construction. I would also
note there is unique
construction for this project.
So the in-water work, that sort
of heavy maritime marine
construction is actually seeing
costs go up at times even more
than this. But as a national
average across all types of
projects, since that last cost
estimate was completed, we've
seen that aggregate figure go
up 58%. So it's a very
significant adjustment, and
we've taken that into account
in this estimate. But I would
also note on this slide that
the context for setting an
estimate, identifying an
estimate in 2022, if you look
back on this chart that the
slope of that line is much less
steep than the slope that you
see between 2022 and 2026. So
you're noticing that you, as
you look back at the past and
think about what it means for
the future, this recent history
is helping us inform sort of a
different perspective on what
we can expect going forward
with cost increases as well.
Next slide. That's me. I get to
do next slide.
>> Never mind.
>> So other reasons why the
costs increase. We have talked
about the escalation in
increase in costs, and also
that 60 to 70% adjustment in
the numbers were reporting as a
factor as well. Another key
component of cost increases is
the schedule extension impact.
So the 2022 estimate had
anticipated construction of
that five miles, basically
across about a ten year horizon.
We have realized a couple years
of scheduled delay specifically.
So we now I forgot to sort of
open with this. We, the federal
government published our final
supplemental impact statement
last Friday. We realized
basically a two year delay in
getting that out. And so that
cost and that delay cost is
embedded within this estimate
already. So it's baked in
because of that time cost delay
that's been realized. The other
piece is recognizing that we
did a significant look at how
we would deliver this program
and that ten year construction
horizon. We have expanded that
to roughly 20 years. The amount
of dialog, we had a lot of
dialog with industry. We looked
at the viability of conducting
that body of work and the
interruptions for travelers on
what it looks like to have that
much construction underway at
one time. And so we've had a
significant review of that.
That's a significant schedule
increase. That means that we
are escalating costs further
into the future and realizing
additional escalation and other
things. So that's a driving
factor in the cost increase as
well. Other pieces that are a
little less material, but worth
noting, we do have scope and
quantity updates. So we've had
additional engineering body of
work, additional clarity on
what we're anticipating to do,
and that has realized some cost
increases. There is just the
risk identification and
valuation process. We've talked
about that a little bit. And
then the increased probability
cost, which I mentioned briefly
before. One item I did not
mention is also when I talked
about the slope going into the
2022 estimate of inflation, and
then the slope going into the
2025 estimate and that
inflationary curve, we also
have a specific inflation curve
looking out into the future for
this program. We looked back,
and the inflation curve that we
used in 2022 looked to be a
little bit either conservative
or optimistic, depending on how
you want to frame it, but it
just wasn't sort of projecting
out into the future. The cost
increases that we've seen since
the 22 estimate. So we've
updated that to a program
specific area specific
inflation forecast. I think, as
I mentioned, the cost
estimating validation process
also includes a schedule body
of work that goes along with it.
It is important so that you
understand how to apply that
escalation, what the delivery
process is going to be. So
alongside providing new cost
information for the program, we
also have an updated program
schedule. So that's on this
slide. We do as I, as I did
mention, final s e, I s is out
on the street now. Hallelujah.
We're very excited for that.
That clears the way for a
record of decision. We are
expecting that in quarter two
of this year, as well as
activities to begin procurement
and construction on the bridges
themselves. So critical steps
this year is a request for
qualifications and a request
for proposals for a bridge
contractor. So starting that
process and dialog so that we
can select a contractor in 2027
and look to start construction
in 2028. Beyond that, I will
note that start of construction
and toll commencement are
typically look to be around the
same time folks want to see,
and the federal government
frankly wants to see that you
are active with construction as
you are implementing tolls. So
we're seeing those dates be
basically concurrent. That's
the intention is have them flow
about the same time. Still
targeting the full funding
grant agreement that is
targeted for the 2030 time
frame with a new bridge open to
traffic 6 to 7 years after
construction begins, that
timeline gets finalized with a
contractor once they're on
board, because they will have
the means and methods to
deliver the work. And then also
noted here is just a light rail
transit opening of 2036 that
does require additional funding,
which I'll talk about in a
minute. So on the near term, we
have a detailed schedule in our
work with the federal
government, specifically to
publishing the final
supplemental environmental
impact statement to achieving
the record of decision and then
completing financial work so
that we can obligate funds from
the federal government. We have
both a bridge improvement
investment, bridge improvement
grant, bridge Improvement
Program grant, and also mega
grant that we're looking to
obligate by the end of
September this year. Some of
those funds can lapse. So we
have about there's over four
$500 million that could lapse
at the end of September if we
don't meet those deadlines. So
we are working very closely to
meet this timeline, and then
also to launch procurement
along the side of that so that
we can get things rolling and
moving forward. We talk about
you had a we had a $14.4
billion estimate. And then the
question becomes, how do you
actually move this forward and
where do you start? We've
always intended to start at the
river. And the team looked at
what was, you know, how we
would work forward from that
and build that bridge, right,
so that we can set the tone and
the case for the program moving
forward to complete the full
five miles over time. So that
core set of projects, those
first steps include replacing
the Columbia River bridge,
connecting it to I-5, as well
as to Hayden Island and SR 14,
extending light rail from the
Expo Center where it currently
ends. Across the river on that
new bridge to a light rail
station, the light rail station
at waterfront, and also
removing the existing bridges.
Those are the first
foundational steps to have both
seismic resiliency over the
river and get those multimodal
connections started into
Washington. So really critical.
The other piece that's
important to note in our
partnership with the federal
government, they want to see
what they will call independent
utility. They want to know that
something is usable when you
build it. So what we cannot do
is start on a program or a
project that is not funded to
complete and connect and
provide service. So that's a
key component of our body of
work. And as we looked at how
to start this program, that was
really essential in considering
how to match things up and make
sure that we had a functional
project to begin with. The
other point here is just to
note that we are, as both the
program and also as identified
in coordination with the
governors of both states, we
are looking to apply the
existing funds. We have to
begin the program and started
dancing it forward. So what
does that look like
specifically? I know I said
these words. You have a visual
here. Now that shows that in
black you'll see that
replacement bridge across the
river and how it connects into
SR 14 and I-5 in Vancouver, and
how it connects to I-5 and
Hayden Island in Oregon.
There's also in maroon you'll
see the river, the bridge,
existing bridge removal that's
there. And then the orange is
the improvements needed to
grade separate light rail from
Marine Drive to build a bridge
over the North Portland Harbor
for light rail to build the
guideway across Hayden Island
and a station on Hayden Island
to connect it into the bridge
where there will be that space
for light rail that's built as
the as the bridge is.
>> Built.
>> And then also to connect at
the north end of that and build
to the station, the waterfront
station. There are also on the
replacement bridge, there is
connected bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. That is
a component of the program. The
costs for this were was
anticipated is anticipated to
be $7.65 billion. So that is
above what we have as funds
immediately available. So then
we started to look at how do we
begin the very first steps that
are necessary to set the path
forward for the first five
miles, for the five miles. So
you'll see that on this slide.
So this is the the black
components of what you saw
previously. So this is
information that we did provide
with our cost estimate update
last month. So this was looking
at just the bridge replacement
and connecting it to i5 Cain
Island SR 14 and I-5 in
Vancouver as well. Both the
core set of programs and this,
this set of this project will
include a toll. Toll
infrastructure so that tolling
can begin. So that is also a
component of this body of work.
As we shared information last
month, the cost for this was
5.9 billion. If you've been
tracking details on the program,
we were coming into this launch
of information with about five
point about $5.5 billion. So
still a little a little bit of
a gap there. So what we've done
since then is worked to refine
the first set of projects. One
of those components was as the
federal government, as we
started our dialog with the
federal government about this,
they emphasized the need to
include bridge demolition as a
part of the body of work. And
so we added that in to make
sure that was identified within
the funds we have. As the first
step of the program. We also
identified the opportunity to
consolidate packages. So we had
previously identified that the
bridge and approaches other
bodies of work would be
delivered in separate
contracting packages. We have
validated the opportunity to
combine those packages, which
does provide cost savings
related to the cost of managing
the interaction between all
those contracts and and less
administrative oversight
because of fewer contracts to
be managing. We also did
identify opportunities to
reduce the number of re
relocates for toll
infrastructure by way of having
one entity that we'd be working
with. So there was a reduction
in the cost for toll toll
implementation and the
facilities needed for that.
There were also some Roske
updates there as you do that
body of work, we were retiring
some risks and other items. The
other piece of this was
updating the toll analysis
between the states. So that is
based on toll rates that have
been discussed at the
transportation commissions to
date in public forum, the
Washington Treasury Office and
Oregon counterparts analyzed
what we could reasonably raise
from tolls so that we have an
updated figure for that, which
has allowed us to close that
gap and find a pathway to work
on bridge construction and
demonstrate to the federal
government that we have that
gap closed. They found they
that is necessary, again, in
demonstrating a independent
utility program. You have to
you also have to demonstrate
that you have the funds to
bring that forward, because we
couldn't start unless we could
demonstrate those funds. So
those updates resulted here.
This really is mostly just to
identify that those both the
additional cost of bridge
removal and those efficiencies
that I described have updated
the cost for this body of work
to be $5.68 billion. So that
brought the cost down. And then
the other piece is to note, I
guess we'll get to it on
another slide. Sorry, this
project includes then
replacements of the Columbia
River bridge. The connections.
It does include transit design
for the orange pieces you saw
on the map earlier, because we
do need to get that body of
work started in association
with our Capital Investment
grant program, advancement. It
does have tolling
infrastructure, as I mentioned,
and that bridge removal. We are
working to build this
information into an initial
finance plan that will be
submitted to the federal
government and also into the
Metropolitan and State
Transportation Improvement
Program documents. So those
list out the funded projects
for the next typically four
years in both states. We need
to be shown in those to
demonstrate financial
constraint and that we are in
those financially constrained
plans. So those are components
that the federal government is
looking for in issuing the
record of decision. So those
are critical pieces to
advancing. And as noted here on
the slide, the funded phase
does provide that sort of
connected usable space for
highway for the bicycle, the
bicycle and pedestrian users,
and then creates that space for
light rail extension in the
future. So available funding,
we do have the top two lines on
this. Speak to the federal
grants that the program has
already has already secured. We
are working to obligate those
funds. So we've been awarded
them but not obligated. So
that's a critical component to
this end of September deadline.
I spoke about $600 million in
that mega program the bridge
investment program. We have 1.5
billion in those funds. There's
a billion here from both states
from Washington and Oregon some
previous state funding. And
then the thing I would
highlight here is the projected
total funding amount. So this
had been 1.25 billion based on
that analysis, this has been
updated with endorsement from
the Treasury offices and those
folks who run these numbers,
the folks who say that you can
do this. So we have this
projected assumption of 1.5
billion, which then brings up
that funding amount to 5.69,
which is, you know, basically
even-steven with the 5.68 costs.
This demonstrates that ability
to advance forward. We are
still looking to advance the
capital investment grant
program to the tune of $1
billion from the federal
government, and have some other
perspectives and have some
other funding that's been
identified previously. The next
steps for light rail critical.
The first step is building the
replacement bridge and building
it with the space for light
rail. That's the essential
first step of the program,
continuing to pursue that 1
billion in capital investment
grant funds. Working on the
full funding grant agreement,
which is expected in 2030, and
then working to do the
construction body of work from
2030. Once we have those funds
in hand in that agreement
through 2036, as mentioned
previously. So those are sort
of key next steps. And it also
note that extending light rail
to Vancouver, there's been
dialog. I know there will
continue to be dialog about
interest in getting to
evergreen as the. Which is the
intention of the States over
time. Absolutely. This first
step of getting to waterfront
was really recognizing the kind
of cost and funding realities
that were out there and trying
to find a sort of least cost
opportunity to get light rail
across the river. So the long
term vision, as noted, is still
to get to the Evergreen Station.
We are working with partners to
talk about how to do that and
identify how we fund that, how
we sequence it. If there are
different priorities based on
what we see with, you know,
costs that are out there. So
that's going to be an active
dialog over the coming months
and probably years to sort of
figure out exactly how to bring
this forward. But just noting
and wanting to make sure it's
clear that the intention is to
get to that evergreen station.
We are approaching the program
in phases, and so the
commitment is to get there.
It's just the time frame that
we need to we need to talk with
folks about. Beyond that, the
additional body of work here is
looking for identifying cost
saving opportunities, pursuing
additional grant opportunities,
possibly with the federal
government, and also working
with each state to consider
both cost savings funding and
financing opportunities. So
those will all be continuing as
we look to figure out how to
achieve the five miles over
time. I've mentioned most of
these. We are working now
towards the amended record of
decision, working on updating
that finance plan and
transitioning the program to
construction delivery. Key
among this is issuing those
procurement documents and then
also working on adjusting the
program team and making sure
that we have the right
resources to manage this
construction. Quite plainly, it
will be the largest active
construction when that bridge
is underway that I think the
region has ever seen. We need
to make sure we have the right
resources to be able to do that.
I would also note on the next
slide, we'll talk just a little
bit about the delivery method.
So we're talking about a
progressive design build
procurement mechanism here.
That's not design build. That's
not design bid build.
Progressive design build gets
you into a conversation and
works on final design in a
collaborative space between the
contractor and the agency and
the agency partners who are
doing that body of work. So you
start that dialog early. You
work on finalizing final design
with them, and it provides you
an opportunity to talk about
maybe cost savings they see
because of their means and
methods for construction. They
could say, I know how to do
this piece really cost
effectively or different than
you had envisioned. So it gives
you those, those opportunities
to sort of say yes to maybe
some things that look a little
different than you anticipated,
and also offers the opportunity
possibly to identify kind of
betterments that may come along
that are also sort of cost
effective, but can be built in
to the program. I've noted
those timelines for request for
qualifications and proposals.
So targeting them this year and
then selecting the contractor
next year and noted some of the
benefits here. There's
efficiencies and also looking
to reduce change orders and
claims by way of that risk
sharing. With the design build
method, you are pricing risk
upfront based on their
interpretation of how you've
documented it. So this provides
an opportunity to manage that
through that dialog. So that's
what I have on the updates for
our cost estimate. We're really
excited about advancing
construction and trying to get
a bridge across the river as as
soon as we can. And I know it's
been far too long.
>> Thank you. Yeah.
>> Questions?
>> Comments. Tim.
>> I know you're probably.
Thank you, Carly and, and Steve
for being here tonight. And the
update, I did get the
assumption from the October
25th meeting. Thank you. You
gave her to the C Tanon board
they provided to me. Thank you.
So I'll reference them in a
little bit. Out of the 13.5 to
15.2 billion update for updated
projection. How much is that
you estimate as light rail.
>> To the cost of light rail
within that are at four to get
to waterfront station is like a
$2 billion figure.
>> Well, in.
>> That roughly yes.
>> To get to waterfront is
roughly a $2 billion figure.
>> To answer your question,
Director Huynh. In the $14.
>> Billion.
>> Number that was a. $3.5
billion.
>> Light rail project.
>> That included 19 light rail.
>> Vehicles.
>> Included maintenance
facilities in Portland and at
the Expo Center included park
and ride garages in Vancouver.
So when I was here last fall,
we talked about the frequency
of the the vehicles going down
that removed the need for those
19 light rail vehicles down to
three. So when I talk about
that $3.5 billion number, that
is the larger project that was
envisioned as part of the draft
environmental Impact statement.
So I hope that answers your.
>> Question and subject to
refinement over time, as we
identify what the service is
and how it needs to be
supported by vehicles and
maintenance facilities, etc.
>> So yeah, thank you. So with
that is the infrastructure for
light rail as part of the
transit part of phase one, the
transit is the light rail
infrastructure included in that?
Or is that just a transit
dedicated lane?
>> So the very first step of
building the bridge
specifically will contain the
34ft width for light rail on it.
And the I understand there'll
be a barrier between that and
the highway components, the
highway road deck. There's also
a different approach to how you
deck what will receive light
rail tracks in the future
versus the highway, the highway
lanes you'll usually look for
around curves on highways.
You'll look for a
superelevation sort of across
slope to make sure that folks
are getting good friction with
their tires. So you look for
that. You don't look for that
with light rail. So it's sort
of a different bed, but they'll
basically be that 34ft and the
concrete deck that's there to
then in the future receive the
track, the systems, all of
those pieces. So that would be
completed in the future. Once
we have the additional funds
and have the F, G, A in place
with the Capital Investment
Grant program.
>> If I understand correctly,
then phase one, the concept of
a phase build makes sense to be
able to. I wasn't sure about it
last time we met, but I
understand it better now. But
the basic approach seems to
make sense so that you can
build it in logical phases that
seem to be the most efficient.
Take care of vehicular traffic.
We all agree that we need a new
bridge, so vehicular traffic.
And then and then at that point,
at what point then when, when
that phase is built, busses are
being used. I assume busses
would be used in that in that
transit lane.
>> So the on the, the light
rail space on the bridge that
will not generally be, that
would not be for the busses.
Busses running across the river
would be presumed to be in
either general purpose lanes or
the bus on shoulder component
that we are anticipating as
part of the program. So right
now you have bus on shoulder
that runs southbound from what,
99 transit center all the way
down to the interstate bridge
currently. So that would extend
across the busses would be sort
of in that shoulder lane when
it is applicable, based on the
speeds on the highway.
>> Okay. Thank you. Tolling
infrastructure you mentioned
that will be tolling
infrastructure on the the I b r
only. Correct. No tolling on
205 separate issue.
>> Yeah. So yeah, no tolling on.
205 this is specific to tolling
on I-5.
>> Okay. And then looking at
the assumptions from last
October and especially looking
at the C trend data tonight
that Taylor provided, I still
think you have a ridership
issue to get to the 2200
currently crossing the river.
I'm just going off to see Trent
Taylor. You can nod your head
at me if I'm if I'm wrong on it.
To get to the current 2200
crossing, but then to look at
the projected in 2045 of 30,000,
that's a 14% increase.
Compounded growth year over
year. Currently it's 2%
increase. There's a big gap in
ridership estimation. Going to
have a problem with ridership
if something doesn't change. I
think the assumptions are
incorrect. Not on vehicular.
>> Sure. Yeah. So I think I
would note that there's this is
part of the Stops model. So I
think that the analysis with
FTA is specific to that model
that we've talked about. So
there are both the estimates
and the final supplemental
environmental impact statement,
which were a little different
than what has been projected
out of the Stops model. That is
that baseline kind of
normalizing across all programs.
And I don't know if there are
additional updates in that in
the CI process as we move
through that, or if that's. We
will.
>> We will update ridership
along the way through the CI
process. And so we will be
refreshing the ridership over
the summer and submitting an
updated ridership based on the
waterfront station interim
location, and that will be
submitted to the FTA this fall.
And then around 2029, when we
seek the full funding grant
agreement, we will refresh that
ridership again along working
side by side with FTA. And FTA
has, let's see, what's the
right term. They are pretty
conservative on their ridership
projections, so they have
issues with the way the 2045
numbers were done. And they've
expressed that. And that's why
we've modified the approach to
be consistent with their stops
modeling so that they are in
agreement with the assumptions
that we that we put into that
model.
>> Thanks. It's just there's a
big gap right now in what
current ridership is and what
the and what the end of summer,
what's got to change going
south with that change and the
economic vitality and way
people were, the economic
vitality in southwest
Washington, combined with the
way people work is changing the
equation.
>> I think that's why the
updates. That's why FTA is
interested in updates as you
continue through the process.
So we'll be continuing to
update.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah. Thank you.
>> This is more of like.
>> What we all.
>> Once we get the ball rolling.
I had a question just even
earlier, what how are they
going to build a new bridge and
not have it impact like the
commute that's going through.
And so I know this is maybe a
little bit off into the weeds,
but I'm really curious about
what forecasted impacts at. You
know, I'm thinking about that
intersection with highway 14. I
mean, anything, eventually you
have to connect that bridge to
I-5. And that's not just
something you do overnight, you
know, once, right? So what will
that look like? So we can start
talking to people about what
that might look like as we get
there.
>> So I will share with you
what I am most familiar with.
So that Essraa 14 thing is at a
level of nuance that I know
will be as strategic as we can
be about it. I think what's
important to note is the
expectation is to build the
bridge to the west of where it
sits now, at least partially.
So building the southbound
bridge first, you can build
over the river while the. So
one. The commitment is to leave
the three through lanes largely
active and operating during
construction. There will be
disruptions to that as we work
on making connections. But also
the commitment is we can't shut
down I-5. So the commitment is
to keep it open, recognizing it
will be a construction zone. So
you build that first bridge to
the west of the bridges that
exist right now. The intention
is to build it wide enough so
that you can transfer
northbound and southbound
traffic onto it to get them off
of the existing bridges, which
then frees up the space to
start building the northbound
bridge, which gets closer and a
little bit over the top of
other of the bridges themselves.
So you basically are working to
build that first bridge, ready
the connections, then you're
going to do some, I don't know,
I think you'll see in the
engineering Whiz bang series
out there, they'll do that like
sort of overnight. They'll sort
of transition some stuff in. So
they'll be readying things so
that you can actually make that
transition over a inconvenient,
but hopefully relatively short
amount of time to connect those
lanes across. And then you'll
have everybody on that single
bridge. You will still be in
the three lanes in each
direction in that configuration.
So it'll be, you know, sort of
still, you know, kind of tight
like it is on the bridges
themselves, but then building
the northbound bridge,
connecting it in and then doing
that final transition of
traffic across onto that
facility.
>> How long do you think that
single span plan will be in
place like I or so?
>> So the, so I, I frankly
don't, I don't know, it takes a
while to actually construct it.
I think there's a lot of you
first. So basically for
construction of the bridges,
again, you're doing that. We
are assuming this is this is
where the conversation with the
contractor will get rich. Right?
So we're assuming you do that
one and then the second bridge
construction, but you first
have to get out there and build
falsework to work from to build
the bridge. So the first step
is getting out there and sort
of building those kind of
platforms and activities, then
build the bridge from and that
bridge, the in-water
construction for the bridges
themselves. I think even just
the southbound bridges is a
many is a multiple year process.
So I think it's, it's probably
for, you know, for us years in
or something. But again, I am
not the guy to have the details
of that in my head. So
apologies. We can follow up if
you're curious.
>> No, I just curious. And then
I guess the second piece I have,
and maybe this is a condition
of some of the state money. Is
there any obligation for both
on the labor side and the
material side, for things to be
sourced locally? I mean, I'm
assuming that the probably the
the general contractor that we
work with that's going to be a
national firm that has
experience with it. But like a
lot of the subcontractors, the
materials, how much of that do
we have an obligation for a
certain percentage to be
locally sourced?
>> So I'm not certain that
there's an obligation. I think
there's an intention to try to
explore opportunities to do so.
So one is anticipating small
business goals on the contract
specifically. So we're, you
know, anticipate talking with
those small businesses here to
ready and have them be aware of
what those opportunities are
going to be. And then also
exploring whether or not there
is, you know, maybe location
based sort of targets for
hiring or other pieces,
obviously, coordination with
labor. So looking to really
explore those things. But there
are, you know, there used to be
a disadvantaged business
enterprise type set of goals
that doesn't exist anymore. But
we are anticipating that small
business goal on the on the
contract.
>> Okay, I appreciate that.
>> I just wanted to mention the
both federal agencies FTA and f
h w a also have Buy America or
buy American policies. So the
steel that goes into it, the
electronics, you know, to the
most part is a majority
American content. So there's
also that as well.
>> Appreciate it. Thank you.
Josh again. You good?
>> Thank you. One more question.
So you brought up tolls tonight.
That will be it was brought up
in public comments tonight
where that's going to be
negatively received. But it's
also if it goes through, it's
also going to have a, I think
in.
>> Tim, sorry to cut in.
>> Sorry. It's going to have a
significant impact on I-205.
Anticipated I-205, collateral
circulation down through all
the way down through 205 the
band fields, everything. What's
been the discussions and how
that's going to impact overall
regional transit pattern?
>> So I would note that with
respect to the sort of, I guess
I heard you say, if tolling
goes through tolling is an
essential component of funding
the program. So it is a it is
necessary. It's endorsed by
both states as a funding
component. So just to be very
plain about that, and also in
analyzing traffic and the
potential to raise those funds.
One, the environmental document
looks at the potential for that
diversion as well as that is
considered a component of when
you look at the financial
forecasting, you also look at
whether or not you can sustain
the toll payers basically to
pay back those debts. So
there's a fair amount of
analysis there. There are a
couple of general observations
I would make about traffic
patterns in the area. This is a
little bit from my last my my
seat prior to popping over here
and being the interim
administrator. What we've seen
in the region. On the Vancouver
side is that there's a
significant there's been
significant growth on 205. So
originally when 205 opened in
1980, it was very clear.
There's a lot of development.
It was really it was the easy
opportunity. It was the easy
option. I-5 was has been backed
up for a long time. And so
folks were making sometimes
kind of odd decisions about
popping over to 205 because it
was easier. But we've seen more
recently as a significant
growth, and the backups on 205
have been much more regular and
recurring. It's frankly why the
region has put ramp meters up
over there to try to help the
flow of the highway as well,
which we've also done on I-5.
So what we're expecting with
tolling is that some folks who
maybe are making some of those
decisions right now, when I-5
traffic gets better because of
the toll imposed, they may come
back. Some folks may choose to
avoid the toll. So we're
expecting some balancing over
time. Initially, folks will
look to avoid that cost. But I
think the other thing you have
to recognize is regionally,
what are your opportunities
depending on where you're going,
what are your opportunities to
then get to your destination?
So if you're going to move from
Vancouver out to 205 and your
destination is downtown
Portland and your options are
I-84 or Columbia Boulevard or
Marine Drive, those are not
particularly optimal
connections across I-5. When
you have SR 500 and SR 14 here,
which are much more sort of
smooth connections. So I think
there's just this. I know
there's a lot of concern and
there will be some diversion.
It's absolutely a factor. But
with the two crossings and the
amount of congestion we see on
both of them, I think it over
time is going to moderate out a
significant amount because of
all those other regional
factors about the facilities
that we have.
>> Thank you.
>> Any other comments?
>> Chair Hanson?
>> Oh, yes. Please.
>> Kim.
>> Yeah, you've already
mentioned it a little bit, you
know, and of course, it was in
the news about Vancouver City
Council's disappointment and
disagreement with terminating
at the waterfront. So I just
wanted to further elaborate on
that disappointment and also
provide an opportunity to
answer some questions. To me,
what it means is that it's
going to primarily serve, you
know, Portland residents and
others across in Oregon. You
know, of course, always love
when people come over here to
go to restaurants and, you know,
spend their money over here,
it's definitely helpful. But
the reality is that a lot of
folks travel to Portland,
whether it's for jobs, mostly
jobs, and they're going to be
paying that toll, but then they
don't have the ability then to
hop on light rail to avoid that,
have a smoother ride. A lot of
congestion happens before the
waterfront station, so it
doesn't make sense to avoid
traffic to go and park and then
try to hop on at that
waterfront station. So again,
Vancouver residents would be
paying for this, but then not
getting the like, you know, the
same level of service. It would
be primarily helping Portland
residents and Oregon residents
come over here. And so my
question then is one, you know,
has that been taken into
consideration? And then how
come, you know, what about
flipping it, right? Like, why
don't we do the, the library
square instead of the
waterfront? And has that been
discussed at all?
>> So I would note that as
mentioned, you know, really
what we were trying to figure
out is what was a, the like
kind of least cost way to get
the bridge built specifically.
So there's a significant
reduction in how we are
connecting to Hayden Island and
SR 14 and I-5 on both states.
On the highway side, we look to
reduce those costs as much as
possible, create as much space
within the funds that we have
to get light rail also across.
And we're trying to identify
sort of the best way to first
get things across the river.
The commitment is to me is to
get to evergreen over time. I
think the other reality is, as
Steve mentioned, there's this
sort of $3.5 billion sort of,
you know, rough cost for light
rail, including additional
things. But that 3.5 billion is
associated with getting both
waterfront and evergreen versus
the sort of two ish billion
that is getting to waterfront
itself. So there's a
significant financial component
to extending to evergreen that
we just need to discuss and
explore with folks and figure
out how and when to bring
forward. Absolutely committed
to doing that work and trying
to find those time frames that
make sense. But also, it seemed
like a significant impediment
at this time to sort of
documenting and demonstrating
funding availability and
ability to advance. So the
commitment is still there to
get there. And we are expecting
to have rich dialog with our
program partners to talk about
how to do that over time.
>> I just wanted to add that in
addition to the financial
constraints of of extending to
evergreen right from the
beginning, there are physical
constraints. Oftentimes we
think about light rail being
next to the highway, but as. It
gets to evergreen, it is on top
of the highway. And so as Carly
said, the highway scope has
been reduced. And so even, you
know, right now that
relationship, those highway and
transit are married at that
point. And so when we're able
to extend the highway
improvements, we are able to
extend the light rail
improvements just by nature of
how they're connected to each
other.
>> For that addition.
>> Well, thank you. And in
agreeing with council Member
Eric, did you have something to
add?
>> No, chair, not at this time.
>> Council Member Harless one
of the the concerns is, you
know, is Taila just pointed out
50% at one point in time of our
ridership will be on the BRT
lines, which are within 6 or 7
blocks. In some cases, about
half the cases, an uphill walk
of, of getting to that transit.
So the C Street, the the
Broadway and evergreen
connection and the distance.
It's I'm really hoping that,
you know, we're going to come
up with some very creative
ideas there because it is quite
a gap.
>> So currently we have planned
two vine connections at the
waterfront station. We have a
lot of work to do to make that
connection as seamless as
possible. The right now there
are just a little too far apart
for what we want. We want.
Those light rail and vine to be
right on top of each other. So
we're working to bring those
two vines there, I think.
Director Hansen, you mentioned
other roadway geometry issues
around the city as a result of.
These project improvements
being delayed. So that needs to
be considered when we work with
the city and the traffic
engineers about bringing those
two fine lines down there. But
the the intent is to maximize
those connections. And I, I
just love seeing the highway 99
drawing today, you know, all
the way from Hazel Dell right
down to the waterfront. And
it'll meet right at that
station. And so evergreen has
the best connections. I won't
argue with that at all. But we
need to start this by getting
to evergreen and then we'll get
to, I'm sorry, getting to the
waterfront so that we can get
to evergreen after that.
>> Thank you.
>> Well, no other comments.
Thank you very much for coming
in.
>> Thanks for.
>> Having us. Thank you.
>> Now we're going to move into
executive session, and the
board will now move into
executive session pursuant to
RC w 42 .3. 1101I, I, I
litigation or legal risks of a
proposed action or current
practice that the agency has
identified. When the public
discussion of the litigation or
legal risks is likely to result
in adverse legal or financial
consequence to the agency
purchase or lease of real
estate. R c w 42 .3.110 1BB to
consider the selection of a
site or the acquisition of real
estate by lease or purchase.
When public knowledge regarding
such a consideration would
cause the likelihood of an
increased price, it is now time
we will return and send someone
to add if additional time is
needed, but we will be looking
for 15 minutes.
>> All right.
>> The time is now. 731.
>> Thank you.
>> And not.
>> Not quite yet.
>> No.
>> Just sort of casual
conversation about what it's
going.
>> To look like.
>> Just how to figure out inner
locals and you know, how
decisions are made and things.
>> Like that.
>> And Leedle does that follow
any particular protocol that
needs to happen?
>> Thank you. Well, I, I'm I'm
assuming that the cities are
working among themselves.
They'll come up with an
agreement and they'll assign
the representatives based on
their decisions. I think it's
best practice to have an
agreement. And I'm sure that
your attorneys are working on
that is my understanding.
>> And then I would assume all
of that is written out, all of
the individuals. Battleground,
Kamea Le Center, Ridgefield,
Washougal and Yacolt signed the
agreement so that we have a
copy of it, so that the CTRAN
board knows what that agreement
is.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you.
>> I'll be working with your
attorneys on that.
>> Perfect.
>> Thank you. Did you have all
that contact information?
>> I'll. If I don't, I'll. I'll
get it.
>> From you. Yeah. Please do.
>> Thank you.
>> Any other comments?
Questions? Seeing none, we'll
move to a vote. All those in
favor? Oh, wait a minute.
Online. Do we have any other
questions?
>> No questions here. Thank you.
>> Hearing none, we'll move to
a vote. All those in favor, say
aye. I and opposed motion
passes. Now moving on to
communications and from the
chair. I mentioned a little bit
early. The survey saw that was
interested in going through and
making sure everybody we're
getting that out to the masses
as far as getting that survey
out there and getting results
back. So that's exciting. Went
to Washington DC with Leanne
and Scott and that was a great
trip. Talk to Senator Cantwell
and Senator Murray's office and
the Federal Transit
Administration. So very
positive trip and definitely
glad we made it. And that's all
I have from the chair.
Questions from the board or
comments from.
>> The board. Jim.
>> Thank you. Chair. I just
received a lot of public
comments over the past two
weeks, specifically regarding
IVR light rail. And I'd like to.
Thank everybody who submitted
those documents, took the time
to put that together and share
it.
>> Excellent. Any other
comments online?
>> Okay.
>> Now moving on to the Chief
Executive Officer.
>> Lannen thank you, chair. And
as you said, we were in DC last
week. Scott and I attended the
Apta Ledge Legislative
Conference and had some good
information. Nothing to solve
all the world's problems. But
there were heavy on the surface
Transportation Reauthorization
reauthorization bill. That is a
big deal for transportation and
keeping the funding for as we
continue forward. And then, of
course, safety and customer
experience were topic as well,
and still a high priority in
the current administration eyes.
And we get, as I said, we got
to visit Senator Cantwell and
Senator Murray's office, as
well as share our annual
reports and our BRT current
status as the time. We didn't
have any specifics for federal
funding requests, but it was
good to chat and give them an
update of the great things that
C trans doing. We're getting
ready for our internship
programs. We'll be partnering
with WSU for the Future Leaders
Leaders Project internship
program. And so we're looking
forward to the summer months
and having internship and
introducing everyone to
furthering their goodness,
furthering their experience and
transportation. And last and
later this month, the next week,
we will also be hosting a
career day in partnership with
the Vancouver Elite Outreach
Outreach Program. And this is
an avenue that we look to
introduce the younger youth at
transportation. We'll get to be
over at our maintenance
department and get to see some
paint booths and busses, and
we'll hopefully spark some
interest for them as they grow
older. And last but not least,
the workshop board workshop is
coming up in a couple of weeks
at the Rose room, Fisher's
Landing, and we'll get more
information out to you as we
get going. That is it.
>> Excellent. Thank you. And I
did not forget about you this
time.
>> Legal.
>> Hong.
>> What's new?
>> Nothing new. Thank you.
>> There you go. There you go.
With that, we are adjourned.
Thank you everybody.