City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee · Tuesday, September 13, 2022 · City Council Digest

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of Aug. 9, 2022

packet pp.5–6

▶ Watch from 3:43 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 08-09-22 City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Page 1 Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee 6:30 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. August 9, 2022 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Transit Shuttle Options for Squak and Talus Neighborhoods ID 1116

60 min · John Larson-Friend, Transportation Program Coordinator · packet pp.7–32

Topics: Land UseTransportation

▶ Watch from 0:57 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

The Administration recommends that the City pursue the “Option 1. On-Demand Pilot – Partnership with Metro” option.

2487 segments .txt ↗

0:00 ↗ we can

0:02 ↗ go ahead and

0:04 ↗ start to mean good evening and this is

0:06 ↗ the

0:07 ↗ mobility and infrastructure committee

0:09 ↗ for the city of issaquah

0:11 ↗ september 13th 2022.

0:14 ↗ russell joe chair the

0:16 ↗ attendance will show that barb d

0:18 ↗ michelle is here council member for city

0:20 ↗ of and deputy council president

0:23 ↗ uh

0:24 ↗ what's your name again

0:28 ↗ got it

0:29 ↗ deputy council president zach hall

0:31 ↗ president first thing on the agenda is

0:33 ↗ public comment before

0:35 ↗ we start that i will read a brief

0:38 ↗ preamble here that uh we're still under

0:41 ↗ um

0:43 ↗ some covet 19 restrictions

0:46 ↗ for our meeting tonight there'll be two

0:48 ↗ public comment opportunities there's a

0:50 ↗ general public comment opportunity at

0:51 ↗ the beginning of the meeting

0:53 ↗ or members of the public may make

0:55 ↗ comments after the presentation of each

0:57 ↗ individual agenda item

0:59 ↗ the chair will share a summary of any

1:01 ↗ comments that have been emailed

1:02 ↗ regarding tonight's agenda

1:04 ↗ after public comment's over but

1:08 ↗ if there are members of the public that

1:09 ↗ wish to address the council at this time

1:11 ↗ in person or virtually

1:13 ↗ we'll go ahead and give them that

1:14 ↗ opportunity we'll start with those that

1:16 ↗ might have signed up in advance to make

1:18 ↗ comments they'll be called on first

1:20 ↗ do we have anyone that signed up deputy

1:22 ↗ clerk

1:25 ↗ chair joe cynthia crass the chair of the

1:27 ↗ transportation advisory board would like

1:29 ↗ to speak at public public comment

1:32 ↗ that's great please approach the

1:34 ↗ lecture and you have five minutes but no

1:36 ↗ one's calculating the time tracking the

1:39 ↗ time

1:42 ↗ i'll be very brief my name is cynthia

1:44 ↗ krass i'm currently serving as the chair

1:46 ↗ of the transportation advisory board and

1:49 ↗ i came here this evening just to be a

1:51 ↗ resource if there's any questions you

1:53 ↗ guys have about what the tab had to say

1:56 ↗ i also just want to set expectations

1:58 ↗ that i will do my best to recollect how

2:01 ↗ we all felt and provide any feedback but

2:03 ↗ i'm not representing the full tab at

2:05 ↗ this time i'm representing my best

2:08 ↗ recollection of what we all decided with

2:10 ↗ of course my own

2:12 ↗ interpretations mixed in there so happy

2:14 ↗ to be here and happy to be establishing

2:17 ↗ a better connection between the tab and

2:19 ↗ this committee to the extent that's

2:21 ↗ reasonable and appropriate and so you

2:24 ↗ might be seeing me a little more at this

2:26 ↗ or others

2:27 ↗ as well but i didn't have anything

2:29 ↗ prepared

2:30 ↗ nothing i'm going to go ahead and let

2:31 ↗ staff

2:32 ↗ share what they have to say about the

2:34 ↗ topic so i just want to introduce myself

2:35 ↗ thank you

2:37 ↗ thank you chair krauss we appreciate

2:39 ↗ your dedication and the time that you

2:41 ↗ put

2:41 ↗ forward as a volunteer for the

2:43 ↗ transportation advisory

2:45 ↗ committee there

2:48 ↗ other members of the public that wish to

2:49 ↗ speak do we have anyone

2:52 ↗ in the chamber or online

2:54 ↗ chair joe we have uh nobody else in

2:57 ↗ council chambers and nobody online okay

3:00 ↗ that's fantastic

3:01 ↗ um if

3:03 ↗ there is anyone online watching this

3:06 ↗ now or in the future just as a reminder

3:09 ↗ written comments can be submitted at any

3:12 ↗ time to city council at issaquah.gov

3:16 ↗ i will go ahead and summarize um

3:20 ↗ one of the

3:21 ↗ well actually i'll wait on that i'll

3:22 ↗ wait for um

3:24 ↗ our deputy administrator to talk about a

3:27 ↗ recent email

3:28 ↗ uh as we go forward

3:31 ↗ all right

3:33 ↗ so we'll now move on to the main agenda

3:38 ↗ and the first the i'm sorry

3:40 ↗ councilmember joe can i interrupt and uh

3:43 ↗ we skipped over approval of the minutes

3:45 ↗ yes i was going to go to number three

3:46 ↗ approval events right now thank you um

3:48 ↗ those the august ninth minutes that

3:50 ↗ hopefully everyone has had an

3:51 ↗ opportunity to review

3:53 ↗ any changes

3:56 ↗ modifications

3:58 ↗ okay i'll set to motion then

4:00 ↗ motion to approve the minutes as

4:02 ↗ presented in tonight's agenda

4:04 ↗ second

4:05 ↗ okay any discussion

4:09 ↗ all those in favor please say aye aye

4:12 ↗ opposed that motion carries unanimously

4:17 ↗ we'll move on then to agenda item number

4:19 ↗ four id 116 transit shuttle options for

4:23 ↗ squawk and talus neighborhoods we have

4:25 ↗ john larson friend transportation

4:27 ↗ program coordinator here to give us a

4:29 ↗ presentation

4:31 ↗ um as many that have lived in the

4:33 ↗ community for

4:35 ↗ for years know that

4:37 ↗ the council has been wrestling with this

4:39 ↗ idea of potentially

4:42 ↗ extending our transportation to

4:45 ↗ some of our neighborhoods

4:47 ↗ this is a discussion of the squawk and

4:49 ↗ talus neighborhoods tonight and we look

4:52 ↗ forward to the presentation and then the

4:54 ↗ committee will decide what action or

4:56 ↗ recommendations to make back

4:58 ↗ to the council or to the administration

5:00 ↗ for budget discussions this fall

5:03 ↗ without further ado john larson friend

5:05 ↗ please uh go forward

5:08 ↗ thank you councilman joe

5:10 ↗ uh good evening my name is ze said i am

5:13 ↗ john larson friend i'm the

5:14 ↗ transportation program coordinator and

5:16 ↗ tonight we're talking about the transit

5:17 ↗ shuttle options for the squawk and

5:19 ↗ dallas neighborhoods

5:24 ↗ so first the purpose tonight is to

5:26 ↗ present the three most viable options

5:28 ↗ for a shuttle service for the squawk and

5:30 ↗ talus neighborhoods to connect to the

5:31 ↗ transit center and other other major

5:34 ↗ locations in nisswa

5:37 ↗ we're looking tonight for direction on

5:39 ↗ how the city uh how should the city

5:42 ↗ better connect squawk and talus

5:43 ↗ neighborhoods to transit in other parts

5:45 ↗ of issaquah while reducing single

5:47 ↗ occupancy vehicle trips

5:49 ↗ we are presenting

5:50 ↗ three specific options and a fourth

5:53 ↗ do-nothing option the first being an

5:55 ↗ on-demand pilot partnership with metro

5:58 ↗ the second being a city-run shuttle and

6:00 ↗ that would be an investment in a

6:02 ↗ third-party system

6:03 ↗ and third an alternative to a shuttle

6:05 ↗ which would be an uber or lyft

6:07 ↗ partnership and of course the fourth the

6:10 ↗ do nothing end proactive efforts to

6:13 ↗ connect squawk and talus to the rest of

6:14 ↗ issaquah

6:18 ↗ so first i just wanted to uh orient

6:21 ↗ anyone who might be watching i know

6:23 ↗ council members are well aware of the of

6:25 ↗ the community and its shape but

6:28 ↗ uh first we have the uh talus

6:30 ↗ neighborhood uh kind of in the pink

6:32 ↗ fuchsia color there it is a newer

6:34 ↗ neighborhood it's quite hilly

6:37 ↗ lots of a lot lots of

6:39 ↗ grade there and it is separated from the

6:42 ↗ transit center and the other downtown

6:44 ↗ and central business district areas by

6:47 ↗ sr 900 and

6:50 ↗ does not have very very good pedestrian

6:52 ↗ or

6:53 ↗ bicycle excuse me bicycle infrastructure

6:56 ↗ that people might be using and of course

6:58 ↗ we also have squawk mountain which is a

7:00 ↗ mountain

7:01 ↗ and uh does not have uh great

7:05 ↗ uh infrastructure as far as sidewalks

7:07 ↗ bike lanes etc

7:08 ↗ and uh the topography of of the

7:11 ↗ neighborhood prevents uh most people

7:13 ↗ from pro from even attempting to walk to

7:16 ↗ the downtown or central business

7:18 ↗ district

7:21 ↗ i also put together this map

7:24 ↗ this is this is a map of the distance

7:26 ↗ from transit stops as you can see from

7:29 ↗ the colors there

7:30 ↗ there's we have the bus stops in pink

7:32 ↗ and the active transit routes the

7:35 ↗ current transit routes in purple there

7:38 ↗ and as you can see as we get into the

7:40 ↗ talus and squawk neighborhoods as we get

7:42 ↗ further and further away from those bus

7:44 ↗ lines

7:45 ↗ we're getting a quarter mile half mile

7:48 ↗ even to two miles away from any bus stop

7:52 ↗ really preventing

7:53 ↗ anyone from

7:55 ↗ really successfully getting to those bus

7:56 ↗ stops in any serious way we know from

7:59 ↗ transit transportation planning that a

8:01 ↗ quarter mile is the kind of the golden

8:03 ↗ distance for people who might be walking

8:05 ↗ around in an area

8:07 ↗ and uh anything beyond that people are

8:10 ↗ more likely to use a single occupancy

8:12 ↗ vehicle

8:13 ↗ and this map

8:15 ↗ isn't even including the fact that the

8:17 ↗ topography really prevents

8:19 ↗ would prevent most people from even

8:22 ↗ attempting it

8:26 ↗ so i want to first turn to uh some

8:28 ↗ history just to kind of uh

8:31 ↗ get everyone familiar with where we've

8:32 ↗ been so that we can successfully move

8:34 ↗ forward

8:35 ↗ so previously

8:37 ↗ we're going to start kind of wide and

8:39 ↗ i'll zoom in over the next three slides

8:42 ↗ so it starts in 1995 the city formed a

8:45 ↗ temporary transit advisory committee and

8:47 ↗ which led to the development of the 2003

8:49 ↗ transit needs study

8:51 ↗ in 2003 in addition to that transit

8:53 ↗ needs study metro started a freebie

8:56 ↗ transit service which was the first

8:57 ↗ iteration of route 200 which was free

9:00 ↗ for community members to use

9:03 ↗ between 2003 and 2013 the city did try

9:06 ↗ to initiate a metro run shuttle service

9:08 ↗ with no success

9:10 ↗ 2013 a new effort involving the

9:12 ↗ highlands neighborhood emerged to

9:14 ↗ consider a local shuttle for them

9:16 ↗ in 2015 the highlands efforts resulted

9:18 ↗ in route 200 being extended to the

9:21 ↗ highlands and swedish hospital

9:24 ↗ and it also led to the to the creation

9:26 ↗ of route 628 which runs the north bend

9:29 ↗ and snoqualmie

9:31 ↗ in 2020

9:33 ↗ highlands again explored a privately run

9:34 ↗ shuttle option but due to high operating

9:36 ↗ costs and the effects of the pandemic it

9:38 ↗ was ultimately voted down by the

9:40 ↗ highlands council

9:41 ↗ budgetary problems due the pandemic also

9:43 ↗ led metro to suspend route 200 and the

9:46 ↗ route was ultimately canceled altogether

9:47 ↗ in 2021

9:52 ↗ yes we have a question from

9:53 ↗ councilmember d michelle absolutely um

9:55 ↗ john you know i know that i was actually

9:58 ↗ involved in the early studies of uh

10:02 ↗ the shuttle but i

10:04 ↗ i don't remember when we first started

10:06 ↗ that shuttle way back in

10:09 ↗ 2003

10:10 ↗ was it completely subsidized by the city

10:13 ↗ or was it a partnership with metro

10:16 ↗ i know it became a partnership later on

10:18 ↗ but

10:19 ↗ do we have a historic memory of

10:21 ↗ how that got started

10:24 ↗ uh councilmember d michelle this is

10:26 ↗ andrea snyder deputy city administrator

10:28 ↗ um you're asking about the route 200 is

10:30 ↗ that correct what became the route 200

10:32 ↗ yes

10:34 ↗ it's it's my understanding that the city

10:38 ↗ partnered on um farebox only and we

10:42 ↗ provided the estimated

10:44 ↗ fair uh fair that would have been

10:46 ↗ collected by metro and so that's the

10:49 ↗ partnership i do not believe that the

10:51 ↗ city adopted 100 of the costs or offered

10:54 ↗ 100 of the cost of operation i think we

10:56 ↗ just contributed towards the service

10:58 ↗ okay thank you so much i just

11:00 ↗ you know i'm in the

11:02 ↗ dim past

11:05 ↗ and then and then uh as the city we took

11:09 ↗ took metro took more control of the

11:11 ↗ program and we continued to subsidize it

11:13 ↗ for a while at least

11:15 ↗ right

11:18 ↗ yes that's correct yeah okay thank you

11:23 ↗ perfect thank you councilman or council

11:24 ↗ member

11:28 ↗ uh moving on to

11:30 ↗ zooming in a little bit further uh

11:32 ↗ the formal efforts to initiate a shuttle

11:35 ↗ service for specifically the squawk and

11:37 ↗ talus neighborhoods started in 2017.

11:40 ↗ 2017 the city applied for metro's

11:42 ↗ community connections program which has

11:44 ↗ been renamed since uh to community ride

11:48 ↗ 2018 the city uh was selected to explore

11:51 ↗ a new project uh by metro to uh to

11:54 ↗ connect the squawk and talus

11:56 ↗ neighborhood to the greater iskwa area

11:58 ↗ in 2019 a group was formed to explore

12:00 ↗ more options the pilot was getting ready

12:02 ↗ but was asked to be reevaluated by metro

12:05 ↗ leadership in late 2019.

12:07 ↗ in 2020 major changes to metro's project

12:11 ↗ management and coven 19 forced the

12:13 ↗ project to be put on hold

12:15 ↗ and in 2021 metro announced that

12:17 ↗ multiple community ride projects

12:19 ↗ including issaquahs were no longer

12:20 ↗ prioritized and were later cancelled

12:22 ↗ altogether

12:25 ↗ so that brings us to our current efforts

12:28 ↗ so in june 2021 as you might remember

12:31 ↗ following the cancellation of the

12:32 ↗ community ride projects the

12:33 ↗ administration returned to city council

12:35 ↗ for guidance on next steps

12:37 ↗ the staff had been chatting with metro

12:39 ↗ about collaborating on an isquash

12:41 ↗ shuttle and council advised

12:43 ↗ council advised them to move forward

12:45 ↗ with the metro partnership

12:47 ↗ however between

12:48 ↗ june 2021 and march 2022

12:51 ↗ when i was hired

12:52 ↗ metro suspended all pilot projects until

12:55 ↗ further notice i will mention that

12:57 ↗ recent chats with metro that

12:59 ↗ i have had have led to a new willingness

13:02 ↗ to talk about the project again in the

13:03 ↗ near

13:04 ↗ future

13:06 ↗ and then we went to tab in august and

13:08 ↗ september with our findings which of

13:11 ↗ course brings us to this evening tonight

13:14 ↗ and then i will also add that

13:16 ↗ in 2024 plus because the project keeps

13:19 ↗ getting moved

13:21 ↗ down the line

13:22 ↗ changes to bus routes in issaquah

13:25 ↗ will occur as a part of the east lake

13:27 ↗ expansion

13:31 ↗ and i want to just

13:32 ↗ just note that this is this uh as far as

13:35 ↗ i know is the adopted uh bus route

13:39 ↗ map that metro is will be moving forward

13:41 ↗ with whenever east link does

13:44 ↗ open

13:45 ↗ so metro is consolidating their bus

13:47 ↗ lines to create more efficiency bring

13:49 ↗ the number of lines down uh to two or

13:52 ↗ sorry to five routes and that's down

13:54 ↗ from eight uh before route 200 was

13:56 ↗ cancelled so it's actually down from

13:57 ↗ seven

13:59 ↗ so in transit planning there's always a

14:01 ↗ tension between coverage and frequency

14:03 ↗ uh metro seems to be moving forward

14:05 ↗ forward with a frequency model for this

14:08 ↗ area

14:10 ↗ 554 will move to gilman from newport way

14:13 ↗ so of course that kind of moves those

14:15 ↗ routes even further away from squawk and

14:17 ↗ telus

14:21 ↗ which brings us to our options that we

14:22 ↗ are offering tonight

14:24 ↗ so again the first one is to pursue a

14:26 ↗ partnership with a metro run on demand

14:29 ↗ pilot program

14:30 ↗ second create and implement a city

14:32 ↗ funded third party run system

14:35 ↗ and uh and third partner with uber and

14:37 ↗ or lyft on a subsidized ride share

14:39 ↗ service and then the fourth of course we

14:41 ↗ can choose to do nothing

14:47 ↗ so before i move in and really dive into

14:50 ↗ this first option i just kind of want to

14:52 ↗ go over the evaluation criteria just so

14:54 ↗ it's clear

14:55 ↗ so first at the top there we have a cost

14:58 ↗ of user per ride which the is

15:00 ↗ approximately how much riders will have

15:02 ↗ to pay for per ride

15:03 ↗ cost to the city per year is the

15:05 ↗ projected city investment into the

15:08 ↗ program option per year

15:10 ↗ city support is the level of needed

15:12 ↗ program participation by the city

15:14 ↗ convenience is the ease in which the

15:16 ↗ service is accessed by riders

15:19 ↗ reliability is the likelihood that the

15:21 ↗ service will arrive when and where

15:22 ↗ riders need it

15:24 ↗ scalability is the service area increase

15:26 ↗ process complexity and feasibility

15:29 ↗ equity concerns are any potential

15:32 ↗ barriers to ridership including income

15:34 ↗ smartphone access place of residence

15:37 ↗ mobility limitations anything like that

15:41 ↗ timeline is the year of the potential

15:42 ↗ start of service which is

15:44 ↗ usually a guess but our best educated

15:46 ↗ guess

15:47 ↗ and finally we have risk which we added

15:51 ↗ since tab we did not have the risk

15:52 ↗ category but we felt it was important to

15:55 ↗ bring it to tonight and that's the

15:57 ↗ likelihood that the city's investment

15:59 ↗ will not work in the long or short short

16:01 ↗ term due to outside factors

16:05 ↗ so moving into the actual option one

16:10 ↗ so the first option would be

16:12 ↗ the on-demand pilot that partnership

16:14 ↗ with metro

16:15 ↗ and

16:16 ↗ we would want to work with metro to

16:18 ↗ create and implement a micro transit

16:20 ↗ service for the squawk and talus

16:21 ↗ neighborhoods likely on demand

16:24 ↗ similar to the other community rides

16:25 ↗ programs like for example the one in

16:27 ↗ sammamish

16:30 ↗ so right now metro is in a request for

16:32 ↗ proposal process

16:34 ↗ and they're working to consolidate all

16:36 ↗ their on-demand services under one

16:38 ↗ provider most of them are kind of all

16:41 ↗ over the place different different types

16:42 ↗ of providers and they're trying to kind

16:43 ↗ of bring them under one umbrella

16:47 ↗ i also followed up with metro today

16:50 ↗ concerning a question about whether

16:51 ↗ metro is working with any other

16:53 ↗ jurisdictions on future on-demand

16:55 ↗ projects and their answer was and this

16:57 ↗ is a quote

16:58 ↗ at this time we currently do not have

17:00 ↗ any have funding or staff resources for

17:02 ↗ additional expansions of our on-demand

17:04 ↗ services

17:05 ↗ metro is not working with any other

17:07 ↗ cities on new pilots on demand services

17:09 ↗ except for the three previously

17:11 ↗ committed grant funded pilots that are

17:13 ↗ part of the link light rail bus

17:15 ↗ restructures

17:17 ↗ metro will consult with issaquah and

17:19 ↗ others who are considering launching

17:21 ↗ launching their own services and will

17:23 ↗ consider a partnership and grant

17:25 ↗ opportunities though at this time staff

17:27 ↗ resources and funding are very limited

17:30 ↗ unquote

17:33 ↗ so looking through and i'll just kind of

17:35 ↗ walk us through the different categories

17:37 ↗ and why we came to those conclusions

17:39 ↗ very briefly

17:40 ↗ um so the first of all the cost of user

17:43 ↗ per ride we classified as low it would

17:46 ↗ be a part of the orca system there any

17:48 ↗ transfers between a shuttle or on-demand

17:51 ↗ service to a bus for example would uh it

17:54 ↗ would just carry over there wouldn't be

17:55 ↗ any extra cost to riders

17:58 ↗ the cost of city per year uh we we have

18:00 ↗ classified as high

18:02 ↗ uh a hundred thousand to two hundred

18:04 ↗ thousand so right now metro is

18:06 ↗ expressing uh a desire basically for if

18:09 ↗ we were

18:10 ↗ uh to be serious about some sort of

18:12 ↗ partnership with them they're looking at

18:14 ↗ okay how much are you willing to put on

18:15 ↗ the table

18:16 ↗ and uh due to past discussions with

18:19 ↗ council

18:20 ↗ 200 000 seemed to be a golden number

18:23 ↗ that had came up multiple times

18:25 ↗ during the the research and the history

18:28 ↗ and other presentations and so that's

18:30 ↗ why we put 100 to 200 000

18:35 ↗ uh city support

18:37 ↗ so it would be moderate it would be we

18:39 ↗ would require a half to a full-time

18:41 ↗ person to to manage the relationship the

18:44 ↗ marketing the check-ins just to make

18:46 ↗ sure everything is running smoothly

18:49 ↗ though metro would handle the majority

18:51 ↗ of the work of course

18:54 ↗ as far as convenience and and

18:56 ↗ reliability uh we find that those would

18:59 ↗ be high and those are based on their uh

19:01 ↗ current programs especially you know

19:03 ↗ some amish and uh

19:05 ↗ i'm forgetting the other ones that i'm

19:07 ↗ thinking of but uh the existing ones uh

19:09 ↗ that they're very convenient they're

19:11 ↗ very reliable so we have every

19:12 ↗ confidence that

19:14 ↗ they would continue to be so in this

19:16 ↗ community as well

19:18 ↗ scalability would be moderate

19:21 ↗ and that's because

19:23 ↗ you know any changes that we would might

19:25 ↗ want to

19:26 ↗ make from the city side like hey we want

19:28 ↗ to expand it here to this or whatever

19:31 ↗ you know there would have to be a fairly

19:32 ↗ robust

19:34 ↗ conversation and process to go through

19:36 ↗ with metro so that's why that's moderate

19:40 ↗ equity concerns

19:41 ↗ much like convenience and reliability

19:44 ↗ low because

19:45 ↗ they've done such a good job in these

19:47 ↗ other communities of making sure that

19:49 ↗ those who need to access it can and

19:52 ↗ giving alternatives to

19:54 ↗ you know hailing it or you know phone

19:56 ↗ numbers or just ways to to give more

19:58 ↗ people more access

20:01 ↗ the as far as the timeline goes

20:04 ↗ metro's uh request for proposal uh

20:07 ↗ they're aiming for it to be completed by

20:10 ↗ early 2023

20:11 ↗ um and that that's kind of them being

20:14 ↗ aspirational about it so we believe that

20:17 ↗ once

20:18 ↗ any partnership that they choose to go

20:20 ↗ forward with to implement all of their

20:23 ↗ all of their programs you know they

20:25 ↗ would have to get going and set and of

20:26 ↗ course then we would have to come to

20:28 ↗ them and go through the same process of

20:30 ↗ evaluation and testing and all of that

20:33 ↗ so we believe the earliest that we could

20:35 ↗ get this going is 2024 if not further

20:38 ↗ out

20:40 ↗ and we we evaluated this risk as

20:42 ↗ moderate it's

20:44 ↗ there is a decent chance that metro will

20:47 ↗ ultimately say no this is not what we

20:48 ↗ want to do

20:50 ↗ let's just take it off the table

20:52 ↗ and so we we have to kind of live with

20:54 ↗ that risk as we're having these

20:56 ↗ conversations

20:57 ↗ could i ask a question absolutely

21:00 ↗ really appreciate the presentation night

21:01 ↗ the thoroughness of it as we're

21:03 ↗ evaluating it um

21:05 ↗ just for those of us that think you know

21:07 ↗ visually what would this service look

21:10 ↗ like would someone have an app and they

21:12 ↗ would

21:13 ↗ contact metro that i need a ride at a

21:15 ↗ particular time and and where does the

21:20 ↗ um

21:21 ↗ are there limitations as to the the end

21:23 ↗ points for uh the rides etc if you just

21:26 ↗ give us a little picture of what it

21:27 ↗ might look like

21:29 ↗ yeah using the uh the sammamish uh

21:33 ↗ program that they have um

21:36 ↗ anyone who wants to use it and this is

21:38 ↗ this is not including any phone numbers

21:40 ↗ if people don't have access to a

21:41 ↗ smartphone just kind of the the general

21:43 ↗ project is or the pilot i should say is

21:46 ↗ uh there's an app you would put in your

21:48 ↗ location it would probably be using

21:50 ↗ location services

21:52 ↗ and uh you know i think i believe you

21:54 ↗ can schedule ahead of time and then

21:56 ↗ it'll also show you know how far away it

21:59 ↗ might be to get to you if you were to

22:01 ↗ book it uh and then uh it would stay

22:04 ↗ within the coverage area

22:06 ↗ it's not like like an uber or lyft where

22:08 ↗ you could start somewhere and just go

22:10 ↗ outside the the system they have

22:12 ↗ very specific boundaries that you can

22:14 ↗ travel within which is why they expanded

22:16 ↗ it to the isqua highlands station a few

22:19 ↗ years ago because they were finding that

22:21 ↗ people really wanted to get there and it

22:23 ↗ was the best way to access the the

22:25 ↗ larger bus system but they weren't able

22:27 ↗ to get there because there was a line

22:28 ↗ basically um

22:31 ↗ so yeah that does that answer your

22:32 ↗ question

22:34 ↗ yeah so

22:35 ↗ um

22:38 ↗ a person that was asking for a ride

22:40 ↗ could basically go to

22:42 ↗ anywhere in the service area and

22:44 ↗ primarily it's going to be

22:46 ↗ in issaquah proper as i yes okay and so

22:50 ↗ um

22:51 ↗ that would then include the the two

22:54 ↗ parking rides

22:55 ↗ in essence so that we are

22:57 ↗ funneling people to

22:59 ↗ uh

23:00 ↗ the the system so to speak that they

23:02 ↗ could you know from there link up and

23:04 ↗ get to bellevue or seattle the the

23:06 ↗ employment centers is that kind of the

23:08 ↗ overall intention

23:10 ↗ uh yes but i would say that uh if we're

23:14 ↗ planning on just serving the squawk and

23:16 ↗ talus neighborhoods it would probably

23:17 ↗ just be the valley transit center

23:20 ↗ and not extend all the way up to the

23:22 ↗ highlands great appreciate that did you

23:24 ↗ have a question

23:26 ↗ deputy administrator okay no thank you

23:28 ↗ thank you for that clarification

23:29 ↗ appreciate it

23:32 ↗ if

23:33 ↗ yeah deputy council president hall thank

23:36 ↗ you i've got um two quick questions

23:38 ↗ about option one here uh one for you

23:40 ↗ john and one for our deputy city

23:41 ↗ administrator so

23:43 ↗ first with regard to city support for

23:45 ↗ this option my understanding is it would

23:47 ↗ pretty much be

23:48 ↗ in the pre phase right so standing it up

23:51 ↗ implementation but then

23:53 ↗ would we have any kind of staff

23:55 ↗ responsibility

23:57 ↗ or burden

23:58 ↗ onwards after the pilot program has been

24:00 ↗ stood up

24:02 ↗ to some degree yes just because of

24:04 ↗ community engagement and whatnot um that

24:07 ↗ would probably be

24:09 ↗ a conversation that we would need to

24:11 ↗ have with

24:12 ↗ with metro on specifically what the city

24:15 ↗ uh staff role would be it would be more

24:18 ↗ limited than it would be on the front

24:19 ↗ end okay yeah so if it started off as

24:21 ↗ one fte it might morph

24:24 ↗ to half or something sure okay

24:26 ↗ um and then for the timeline since the

24:28 ↗ timeline for this is potentially

24:30 ↗ starting in 2024

24:32 ↗ and i don't want to

24:35 ↗ get ahead of budget presentation next

24:37 ↗ week but has this been

24:38 ↗ thought of

24:40 ↗ with regard to the biennial budget and

24:42 ↗ is this something that there's a place

24:43 ↗ setting or will it need to be a budget

24:44 ↗ amendment

24:45 ↗ we would need this is andrea we would

24:48 ↗ need a budget amendment

24:51 ↗ we did not given the

24:53 ↗ great variation in costs among the

24:55 ↗ options we felt uncomfortable proposing

24:57 ↗ a placeholder number for this budget

25:08 ↗ um

25:09 ↗ no we're not quite there we're

25:11 ↗ interspersing questions for

25:12 ↗ clarification i guess at this point

25:14 ↗ okay okay

25:16 ↗ go ahead

25:18 ↗ great i will move on to option two

25:21 ↗ so option two is invest in a third party

25:25 ↗ shuttle system um so this uh this

25:27 ↗ specific option we would uh basically go

25:30 ↗ through an uh request for proposal

25:32 ↗ process

25:33 ↗ uh put out a call for

25:35 ↗ uh third party uh shuttle system

25:39 ↗ uh runners

25:40 ↗ companies that do this professionally

25:43 ↗ and

25:44 ↗ you know go through the rfp process and

25:46 ↗ choose the best one

25:49 ↗ and so then

25:51 ↗ there

25:52 ↗ the city would be highly involved in

25:53 ↗ this sort of

25:54 ↗ this sort of system but of course the

25:56 ↗ day-to-day operations would be left to

25:58 ↗ that third-party provider

26:02 ↗ so i think i'll just dive into the

26:04 ↗ criteria because i think i can describe

26:06 ↗ describe it a little bit better as i go

26:08 ↗ so first of all the the cost of the user

26:10 ↗ per ride we said is moderate it would be

26:13 ↗ an additional cost to the rider we said

26:15 ↗ one to two dollars

26:17 ↗ um because that's that's generally what

26:20 ↗ my discussions with

26:21 ↗ several a couple of

26:23 ↗ third-party providers that's kind of the

26:25 ↗ threshold that they that they operate

26:27 ↗ under

26:28 ↗ and of course that is an additional cost

26:30 ↗ on top of uh say if they're trying to

26:33 ↗ get to the transit station they would

26:34 ↗ have to pay that one to two dollars and

26:36 ↗ then they would have to pay the trade

26:38 ↗ the orc affair basically so it would be

26:40 ↗ a compounded cost uh doubling

26:43 ↗ essentially the the the amount of money

26:45 ↗ that somebody might

26:47 ↗ pay

26:49 ↗ moving to the cost of the city per year

26:51 ↗ we said this is high

26:53 ↗ we put a range of four hundred thousand

26:55 ↗ to eight hundred thousand

26:56 ↗ um and that is because uh

26:59 ↗ it's kind of variable depending on what

27:01 ↗ sort of services uh that you want to run

27:05 ↗ so generally at this point and i think i

27:08 ↗ this may not include inflation this is

27:10 ↗ these are the numbers that i i was able

27:12 ↗ to ascertain from

27:14 ↗ those who run

27:15 ↗ current services but i think they were

27:17 ↗ operating from this is what we paid last

27:19 ↗ year total and we don't we're not really

27:20 ↗ sure what the uh the inflation is going

27:23 ↗ to do but

27:24 ↗ that that number is around 85 to 115

27:27 ↗ dollars an hour to run

27:29 ↗ per vehicle

27:30 ↗ and so the good news is is we have a

27:32 ↗ local example so the highlands when they

27:35 ↗ explored a partnership with liftango

27:38 ↗ in 2020 2021

27:40 ↗ they did come with them with an actual

27:42 ↗ proposal with hard numbers granted these

27:45 ↗ numbers are 2020 numbers but

27:47 ↗ they were looking at a two shuttle

27:49 ↗ system and they were pitched 471

27:52 ↗ thousand dollars per year

27:55 ↗ this was for two 14 passenger vehicles

27:58 ↗ nineteen thousand six hundred twenty

28:00 ↗ four dollars a month per vehicle to run

28:03 ↗ uh it would have run on a flex route

28:05 ↗ which basically is a

28:07 ↗ fixed route with some door to door you

28:09 ↗ know within a quarter mile half a mile

28:11 ↗ depending on how the system is set up

28:13 ↗ someone might be able to

28:15 ↗ to call it to their doorstep

28:17 ↗ but generally runs on that fixed route

28:21 ↗ now

28:22 ↗ the 471 thousand dollar number comes

28:24 ↗ from limited hourly uh limited hours in

28:28 ↗ operation so monday through thursday it

28:30 ↗ was only peak hours it was only i think

28:33 ↗ uh like six to

28:35 ↗ nine am and

28:37 ↗ something like

28:38 ↗ uh four to six pm or something like that

28:41 ↗ it was only those peak hours during the

28:43 ↗ day

28:44 ↗ friday and saturday it ran for 12 hours

28:46 ↗ during the daytime hours and sunday

28:49 ↗ would have run nine hours during the

28:51 ↗ daytime hours

28:53 ↗ and

28:54 ↗ because of the the peak hour only

28:57 ↗ these drivers would have been only

28:59 ↗ part-time drivers which right now

29:01 ↗ there's a driver shortage kind of

29:03 ↗ nationally anyway and it's even harder

29:05 ↗ to find part-time drivers so looking at

29:07 ↗ that lower

29:09 ↗ lower 471 thousand dollar number

29:12 ↗ there are a lot of additional kind of

29:13 ↗ background things that kind of come

29:15 ↗ along with that lower cost

29:18 ↗ uh so city support

29:19 ↗ very similar to the metro although at a

29:21 ↗ higher level you know that day-to-day uh

29:24 ↗ week-to-week contact with with the

29:26 ↗ provider to make sure that the service

29:28 ↗ is running well running appropriately

29:30 ↗ any uh you know public comment that

29:32 ↗ might come up to that might need

29:34 ↗ addressing so that's why we put moderate

29:38 ↗ convenience and reliability uh both

29:41 ↗ moderate because uh there there is a

29:44 ↗ fear well let me start with convenience

29:46 ↗ so convenience uh is maybe an issue

29:49 ↗ because uh due to state law

29:51 ↗ our city run city-run

29:54 ↗ service wouldn't be able to overlap

29:56 ↗ whatsoever with metro service

29:58 ↗ uh and that's just because of

30:01 ↗ the way things work and state law and

30:03 ↗ whatnot and so we would have to ensure

30:06 ↗ that

30:07 ↗ that service would would run

30:10 ↗ basically on any street that the buses

30:12 ↗ aren't and uh and wouldn't be able to

30:14 ↗ drop off you know right at the transit

30:17 ↗ station it would have to be a block away

30:19 ↗ stuff like that little logistical things

30:21 ↗ that would prevent a specific

30:23 ↗ convenience from occurring

30:25 ↗ reliability

30:27 ↗ tab specifically had concerns over

30:29 ↗ staffing

30:30 ↗ and that kind of comes with that bus

30:32 ↗ driver's shortage and if it's since it's

30:34 ↗ a local very hyper localized service

30:37 ↗ then you would that like

30:39 ↗ that definitely would shrink the pool of

30:42 ↗ potential drivers uh

30:44 ↗ for sure

30:46 ↗ and we also would be operating with

30:48 ↗ limited vehicles

30:50 ↗ i believe that

30:52 ↗ some amish started with one vehicle

30:55 ↗ upped it to two they're thinking about a

30:56 ↗ third you know they have that ability to

30:59 ↗ uh to change as things change but

31:02 ↗ because of the budgetary restraints that

31:04 ↗ the city might have

31:06 ↗ we might have to cap it at two and you

31:08 ↗ know and there's there's a high

31:10 ↗ likelihood that maybe that's not enough

31:12 ↗ for the specific service area that we're

31:14 ↗ looking at so that's why we had those

31:15 ↗ two at moderate

31:17 ↗ scalability we would be able to adjust

31:20 ↗ the service areas if we needed to but we

31:22 ↗ were not really sure of what those

31:24 ↗ limitations actually are until we would

31:26 ↗ get into conversations with

31:29 ↗ with a third party system operator

31:33 ↗ looking at

31:34 ↗ equity concerns

31:36 ↗ basically all the above are constraining

31:38 ↗ equity

31:40 ↗ there's

31:41 ↗ you know and plus the massive amount of

31:43 ↗ money spent each year would take away

31:46 ↗ from other community programs as well

31:48 ↗ the timeline we're looking at is 2024

31:51 ↗ for much the same reasons as metro we

31:53 ↗ would have to go through the rfp request

31:55 ↗ for proposal process we would have to

31:58 ↗ work with the operator to figure out the

31:59 ↗ best

32:00 ↗ type of service where to go uh

32:03 ↗ you know the virtual bus stops or the

32:04 ↗ physical bus stops that we might create

32:06 ↗ with them or anything like that it would

32:08 ↗ be a process that we need to go through

32:10 ↗ and 2024 is probably the soonest that we

32:14 ↗ get that going

32:17 ↗ and staff and tab

32:19 ↗ definitely agree that the risk of this

32:22 ↗ failing is very high

32:24 ↗ because of basically of all the above

32:26 ↗ everything that i've described

32:28 ↗ it's a big risk and uh for that amount

32:31 ↗ of money it mean it probably wouldn't be

32:34 ↗ worth the experiment because that's

32:36 ↗ that's kind of what a metro partnership

32:38 ↗ would be it would be a pilot to figure

32:40 ↗ out uh how this if this could work

32:43 ↗ and to spend that amount of money as a

32:45 ↗ city on an experiment is very very risky

32:50 ↗ i'll pause for any questions or clarify

32:53 ↗ michelle

32:54 ↗ so um and

32:56 ↗ uh thank you for the presentation again

32:58 ↗ it's very thorough um

33:00 ↗ we would end up having to sign a

33:01 ↗ contract with this

33:03 ↗ and that would be

33:05 ↗ what would be a standard um

33:08 ↗ industry contract would that be a five

33:10 ↗ years yeah i mean we would be obligated

33:12 ↗ whether or not it survived

33:15 ↗ to pay off that contract right

33:18 ↗ that is very that's very likely i'm

33:20 ↗ getting a nod to my right uh

33:22 ↗ i i believe that their our abilities to

33:24 ↗ flex that you know to a year to start

33:26 ↗ and see how it goes i think that's what

33:28 ↗ liftango was with highlands but uh once

33:30 ↗ that goes into place yeah it would

33:31 ↗ probably be a much longer contract time

33:33 ↗ over time

33:40 ↗ okay

33:42 ↗ i will move on to our third option

33:45 ↗ so this one um

33:48 ↗ i have some information up front and

33:50 ↗ i'll address

33:51 ↗ uber and lyft kind of independently

33:53 ↗ since we were able to have conversations

33:54 ↗ with both independently

33:57 ↗ so

33:58 ↗ the third option is an alternative to a

33:59 ↗ shuttle it would be an uber lyft

34:01 ↗ partnership it would be using local

34:03 ↗ drivers private drivers and and

34:06 ↗ subsidizing that relationship with that

34:09 ↗ with those companies

34:11 ↗ so first of all thinking about uber

34:14 ↗ so

34:15 ↗ the data that we got from uber is there

34:17 ↗ currently an average of six 000 uber

34:19 ↗ rides per month in issaquah which is

34:21 ↗ higher than i expected

34:24 ↗ and internally uh usually uh those rides

34:26 ↗ are about one to three miles so just

34:28 ↗ kind of those quick trips uh ones that

34:31 ↗ that is addressed in in this type of

34:34 ↗ shuttle uh system

34:36 ↗ they offered uh

34:37 ↗ several different program options uh one

34:40 ↗ is a subsidized voucher program uh so

34:42 ↗ what we what they would do is uh well

34:45 ↗ what we would do as a city is we would

34:47 ↗ subsidize each ride the average uh cost

34:51 ↗ per ride for uber in within issaquah is

34:55 ↗ about twelve dollars

34:56 ↗ and so we would subsidize it down to two

34:58 ↗ dollars for them we would pay the ten

35:00 ↗ dollars they would pay the two dollars

35:04 ↗ they can also restrict the length of the

35:06 ↗ subsidized rides so

35:08 ↗ if someone tried to do a subsidized ride

35:10 ↗ and happen to be going six miles it's

35:12 ↗ highly unlikely that they're staying

35:13 ↗ within issaquah so they could you know

35:15 ↗ they could restrict the length of those

35:17 ↗ particular

35:19 ↗ rides they can also create geofence

35:21 ↗ zones to trigger those subsidies which

35:24 ↗ scooters it's the same idea

35:26 ↗ as those scooters

35:28 ↗ and they could you know keep those

35:29 ↗ subsidies within a certain geo-fenced

35:31 ↗ area

35:33 ↗ the city

35:34 ↗ would only be responsible for subsidies

35:36 ↗ subsidies and marketing they very

35:38 ↗ specifically wouldn't market that would

35:40 ↗ be on us as a city city staff to do they

35:44 ↗ did offer an example in tolleson arizona

35:48 ↗ it's a former shuttle system

35:50 ↗ and they got tired of their shuttle and

35:52 ↗ they reached out to uber

35:54 ↗ and

35:55 ↗ formed a relationship with them they

35:57 ↗ were able to create virtual virtual bus

35:59 ↗ stops they would put up little qr codes

36:01 ↗ in different places people would use

36:03 ↗ their phone

36:04 ↗ and it would auto populate the app with

36:06 ↗ the subsidy

36:07 ↗ information and stuff like that

36:10 ↗ i did reach out to them but i have not

36:12 ↗ heard back yet so hopefully i'll hear

36:14 ↗ hear back by the time i might go to

36:16 ↗ pole council

36:19 ↗ um so if we pursued this option uh they

36:23 ↗ really stressed that they're john

36:24 ↗ can i interject and say something

36:26 ↗ absolutely okay thank you very much uh

36:28 ↗ this is andrea again so one of the

36:30 ↗ things i just wanted to highlight um is

36:32 ↗ that

36:33 ↗ john talked about some of these

36:34 ↗ different options of what the service

36:36 ↗ could look like there's a lot of policy

36:38 ↗ decisions within that in order for us to

36:42 ↗ estimate costs and

36:44 ↗ think of what this could look like we we

36:46 ↗ used some assumptions just to be able to

36:48 ↗ compare these options with one another

36:51 ↗ so what he was talking about the level

36:53 ↗ of subsidy

36:54 ↗ that he was suggesting what those

36:56 ↗ services could look like all of those

36:57 ↗ would require

36:58 ↗ future policy discussions future

37:01 ↗ detailed discussions with council it's

37:03 ↗ really just for the scenario for this

37:05 ↗ purpose and exercise of trying to figure

37:06 ↗ out what could this look like what could

37:08 ↗ the cost be

37:10 ↗ john

37:11 ↗ looked at like he said other cities

37:13 ↗ talked to uber and lyft and figured out

37:15 ↗ what's kind of a typical arrangement in

37:16 ↗ terms of level of subsidy etc but all of

37:19 ↗ those discussions should we move forward

37:20 ↗ this option would really need to occur

37:22 ↗ decisions have not been made yet

37:24 ↗ um and he also mentioned uh geofencing

37:27 ↗ the idea of you know us the city being

37:29 ↗ able to control where these trips would

37:31 ↗ occur

37:32 ↗ within the city one of uh as i

37:35 ↗ understand it one of the goals of this

37:38 ↗ shuttle program

37:39 ↗ has been to reduce sov or single

37:42 ↗ occupant vehicle trips in the city and

37:44 ↗ so you could have a question of how does

37:46 ↗ an uber or lift really reduce

37:49 ↗ single occupant vehicle trips within the

37:51 ↗ city and one thing that we would look at

37:53 ↗ again future policy discussion you need

37:55 ↗ to have is do we want to restrict

37:59 ↗ any city sponsored

38:01 ↗ service like this to between squawk and

38:04 ↗ talus and the area around the transit

38:06 ↗ center so it's not like they can

38:08 ↗ necessarily take an uber or lift the

38:10 ↗ city would subsidize and go on a

38:12 ↗ shopping spree somewhere with anissa

38:15 ↗ quest certainly not outside of issaquah

38:17 ↗ but that would again need to be another

38:19 ↗ conversation we would have

38:21 ↗ about

38:22 ↗ exactly what are the goals of this

38:24 ↗ program if we want it to be really

38:26 ↗ focused on reducing single occupant

38:28 ↗ vehicle trips then it would be just used

38:30 ↗ as a connection point to connect people

38:32 ↗ to the transit center and make it easier

38:34 ↗ for them to access transit

38:39 ↗ deputy council president paul thank you

38:41 ↗ a very very well or well-made point can

38:44 ↗ we just make sure then

38:46 ↗ um as

38:47 ↗ this continues to evolve that we capture

38:50 ↗ all of the policy questions that we need

38:52 ↗ to answer and some sort of document

38:54 ↗ uh yes and thank you you know we um what

38:58 ↗ we're asking for in terms of direction

39:00 ↗ from council this evening is which of

39:01 ↗ these options should we continue to try

39:03 ↗ to flesh out more and have more

39:05 ↗ discussion so we didn't want to fully

39:08 ↗ develop all of the policy questions for

39:10 ↗ each of these options that would be a

39:11 ↗ little overwhelming tonight

39:13 ↗ really just wanting to know where would

39:14 ↗ you like us to focus among these three

39:16 ↗ or

39:17 ↗ you know pick two out of the three or

39:18 ↗ whatever council's direction may be

39:24 ↗ excellent thank you for clarifying those

39:26 ↗ points i appreciate it um

39:29 ↗ so jumping back to uber briefly um so if

39:32 ↗ basically if we pursued this option with

39:34 ↗ them uh there'd be a lot of testing

39:36 ↗ which we talked about uh

39:38 ↗ there they said that there was about a

39:40 ↗ three to four week startup time

39:42 ↗ post-contract signing

39:45 ↗ they said when close the agreement was

39:47 ↗ getting close to being signed uber would

39:49 ↗ begin to set things up they would then

39:51 ↗ do some testing within the community

39:53 ↗ they'd do a soft launch of of the

39:55 ↗ subsidized uh or

39:57 ↗ the program um then there would be a

40:00 ↗ stretch of marketing and then there

40:01 ↗ would be a formal launch

40:04 ↗ so that is uber and then jumping over to

40:06 ↗ lyft which is they gave us a lot more

40:08 ↗ data

40:09 ↗ but less program ideas so it's kind of

40:12 ↗ the opposite

40:13 ↗ so the first of all the first thing is

40:16 ↗ the average ride in issaquah for lyft is

40:19 ↗ 13.50 so 1.50 higher on average for a

40:23 ↗ lyft

40:24 ↗ the average estimated time of arrival

40:27 ↗ once a lift is ordered is 10 to 20

40:31 ↗ minutes which for us really does

40:33 ↗ indicate that these are drivers coming

40:35 ↗ from outside the community getting here

40:38 ↗ to then

40:39 ↗ drive people around

40:41 ↗ currently there is an average of 2 400

40:43 ↗ lift rides per month which is you know

40:46 ↗ less than half of uber

40:49 ↗ and but specifically they offered an

40:51 ↗ average of 260 monthly rides began or

40:54 ↗ ended in squawk and dallas

40:57 ↗ the program options that they offered

41:00 ↗ they have a lift pass

41:02 ↗ program organizations essentially cover

41:05 ↗ all or a portion of

41:08 ↗ the cost of a ride

41:10 ↗ currently they said that they could

41:12 ↗ support a partnership like that

41:14 ↗ with a cap of 600 subsidized rides per

41:16 ↗ month

41:18 ↗ so they are putting a cap uber didn't

41:19 ↗ mention the cap but they did

41:21 ↗ the example that they gave us is summit

41:24 ↗ new jersey uh so they they have a some

41:26 ↗ kind of a centralized train station that

41:28 ↗ goes into new york city uh they worked

41:31 ↗ with uber or sorry they worked with lyft

41:33 ↗ to create a kind of a to and from

41:37 ↗ station system

41:39 ↗ it limits people to two rides per day

41:42 ↗ zero dollars for those who pay for a

41:44 ↗ train station monthly parking pass and

41:47 ↗ two dollars a per trip without the

41:49 ↗ parking pass so basically how how it

41:52 ↗ works is you have the train stations the

41:54 ↗ central location going to there or from

41:57 ↗ there specifically

41:58 ↗ the city then subsidizes the ride to the

42:01 ↗ train station or from

42:06 ↗ so then moving into the analysis piece

42:10 ↗ so the cost of user costs a user per

42:13 ↗ ride

42:14 ↗ we set as moderate for the same reasons

42:16 ↗ as the third party system

42:18 ↗ uh

42:19 ↗ uber mentioned uh that it's good to have

42:21 ↗ a monetary barrier for those who might

42:23 ↗ take advantage of the system for someone

42:25 ↗ just hop in and just ride around

42:27 ↗ um

42:28 ↗ but

42:29 ↗ we

42:30 ↗ shouldn't look at more than two dollars

42:32 ↗ per ride otherwise the uh access to

42:35 ↗ right or basically ridership drops off

42:37 ↗ after two dollars

42:39 ↗ um

42:40 ↗ looking at the cost to the city per year

42:44 ↗ so

42:46 ↗ we put this as high

42:48 ↗ the 50 000 to 100 000 and we put it as

42:50 ↗ high

42:51 ↗ because even though it is the lowest

42:53 ↗ cost it's the least reliable option

42:56 ↗ so lift as i mentioned put a cap of 600

42:59 ↗ subsidized rides per month uber did not

43:00 ↗ specify

43:02 ↗ um and tab recommended that this be

43:04 ↗ classified as high due to the potential

43:07 ↗ ballooning of of cost to the city

43:11 ↗ uh city support much like the other

43:13 ↗ three uh options is moderate for much

43:17 ↗ the same reasons we have to manage the

43:19 ↗ relationship figuring figure out if if

43:21 ↗ it's working for the community make any

43:23 ↗ tweaks uh have meetings you know uh make

43:25 ↗ sure that it's really working in a in

43:28 ↗ the best way possible

43:30 ↗ uh convenience we put as moderate

43:33 ↗ transit riders and those uh who use

43:35 ↗ rideshare don't always overlap

43:39 ↗ i personally use can use both but that

43:41 ↗ is not true for many people

43:44 ↗ so just because someone might be very

43:46 ↗ comfortable taking the bus into say

43:49 ↗ seattle uh it doesn't mean that they're

43:52 ↗ you know jumping into an uber or lyft to

43:55 ↗ get to the transit station

43:58 ↗ uh looking at reliability we put uh this

44:01 ↗ is low

44:02 ↗ tab expressed great concern over having

44:04 ↗ enough drivers in the area

44:06 ↗ um

44:07 ↗ and and due to that 10 to 20 minute

44:09 ↗ pickup uh average it really kind of

44:12 ↗ stressed that uh that the reliability

44:15 ↗ could could be low now the market could

44:18 ↗ shift and drivers knowing that there's a

44:20 ↗ subsidized service and if it's used

44:22 ↗ a lot and you know the the algorithm

44:25 ↗ really pushes drivers that way

44:26 ↗ that might change but to start off

44:29 ↗ there's no guarantee that

44:31 ↗ uber and lyft can't shift their drivers

44:33 ↗ you know physically over to a different

44:35 ↗ area it's really driven by what's

44:37 ↗ available

44:40 ↗ go ahead councilmember d michelle yeah

44:42 ↗ yeah i had a lot of questions about the

44:44 ↗ uber and lyft drivers uh you know

44:46 ↗ they're trying to unionize for one thing

44:48 ↗ and then there's been a lot of criticism

44:50 ↗ of both of uber and lyft on

44:53 ↗ working conditions and

44:56 ↗ you know if they do unionize that might

44:58 ↗ drive up the cost of the

45:01 ↗ drivers

45:03 ↗ but it also might make it more

45:04 ↗ attractive to

45:06 ↗ local

45:07 ↗ folks who

45:09 ↗ then they would be able to actually make

45:10 ↗ a living wage doing that so

45:13 ↗ you know

45:15 ↗ i know that it's a volatile situation

45:18 ↗ but

45:18 ↗ do you have any idea about how any of

45:21 ↗ that might affect the overall cost if

45:23 ↗ the for example let's just say the the

45:25 ↗ drivers did get a union and were able to

45:27 ↗ start getting 25 dollars an hour

45:30 ↗ would that be a huge increase in in what

45:33 ↗ they're doing right now

45:36 ↗ i believe we asked a version of that

45:38 ↗ question in one or both of the meetings

45:41 ↗ and they didn't immediately offer

45:44 ↗ you know because you know that they're

45:46 ↗ salespeople as well that they're running

45:48 ↗ a business which is is great right um

45:50 ↗ but uh

45:52 ↗ theoretically yeah it could drive the

45:54 ↗ cost up and

45:55 ↗ then

45:56 ↗ and then the cost of the city would go

45:58 ↗ up as well

45:59 ↗ and have they had situations where they

46:01 ↗ weren't able to get enough drivers and

46:03 ↗ had to cut back on services or

46:06 ↗ i haven't read about anything on the

46:08 ↗ national level you're hearing a lot

46:09 ↗ about their

46:11 ↗ getting higher wages and things like

46:13 ↗ that but i haven't heard

46:15 ↗ that

46:16 ↗ that they're having to cut back service

46:18 ↗ i noticed that metro

46:19 ↗ is cutting back

46:21 ↗ some service right now because they

46:22 ↗ can't get enough drivers so and and

46:25 ↗ those are good wages too so

46:28 ↗ yeah um

46:30 ↗ two things i guess i'll say is first

46:32 ↗ there has been an increase in uber and

46:35 ↗ lyft drivers as of late because of

46:37 ↗ inflation people are going out

46:40 ↗ in a at a higher rate than they used to

46:42 ↗ when driving so that is a little bit

46:44 ↗ there

46:45 ↗ um and then the second thing

46:49 ↗ which i'm forgetting

46:50 ↗ um

46:53 ↗ well we'll just move on from that i

46:54 ↗ guess yeah deputy administrator

46:57 ↗ thank you

46:58 ↗ uh it's a great question uh

47:00 ↗ councilmember d michelle and the reality

47:03 ↗ is that there are many factors that

47:04 ↗ drive uber uber and lyft pricing so one

47:07 ↗ is

47:08 ↗ availability of rides as you know they

47:10 ↗ also do peak pricing depending on demand

47:13 ↗ and the availability of drivers nearby

47:16 ↗ so there would be a lot of factors that

47:18 ↗ would be something that should council

47:21 ↗ direct the administration to pursue this

47:22 ↗ option we would need to understand the

47:24 ↗ answers to these questions

47:30 ↗ yeah and that that really comes back to

47:32 ↗ that high high cost rating is you know

47:35 ↗ it's just it's it's the least reliable

47:37 ↗ option that we we have at the moment

47:40 ↗ um

47:41 ↗ thank you i appreciate the questions

47:43 ↗ um

47:45 ↗ the good news is uh looking at

47:47 ↗ scalability now uh the scalability would

47:49 ↗ be high we'd be able to shift

47:52 ↗ the the boundaries around much like much

47:55 ↗ like the shuttles

47:56 ↗ or the the scooters my my bet um so the

47:59 ↗ the scooters uh

48:01 ↗ that has a very similar scalability in

48:03 ↗ in figuring out where uh those subsidies

48:05 ↗ would be able to to be

48:09 ↗ and then looking at equity concerns uh

48:12 ↗ again much like the the city run

48:15 ↗ shuttle

48:17 ↗ we find it to

48:18 ↗ the equity concerns over this are very

48:20 ↗ high especially with you know the uh the

48:22 ↗ unreliability of drivers the possible

48:25 ↗ unreliability of drivers

48:27 ↗ uh the uh additional cost to to riders

48:30 ↗ on top of everything

48:32 ↗ the

48:33 ↗ uh convenience reliable all those kind

48:35 ↗ of contribute to to big equity concerns

48:38 ↗ okay we have a question for council

48:40 ↗ member d michelle

48:41 ↗ sorry you know this is one of my areas

48:43 ↗ where i really like to get into it um on

48:46 ↗ equity concerns especially with

48:49 ↗ the kind of cars that that they use i i

48:52 ↗ think the highest equity concern for me

48:54 ↗ would be with people with disabilities

48:56 ↗ and

48:57 ↗ so did they talk at all about

48:59 ↗ having

49:01 ↗ some cars set aside for people with

49:02 ↗ disabilities or no

49:05 ↗ generally no um yeah that is a huge

49:08 ↗ barrier for sure yeah absolutely

49:11 ↗ also on the subject of equity under

49:14 ↗ some of the options um

49:17 ↗ was varying discussion at tab in terms

49:20 ↗ of

49:20 ↗ we're thinking about

49:22 ↗ putting these in two of our more

49:25 ↗ affluent neighborhoods let's call it um

49:28 ↗ was there some concern that we are

49:30 ↗ servicing these areas and leaving out

49:32 ↗ perhaps areas that might be more income

49:34 ↗ challenged or have other challenges that

49:37 ↗ so that equity is kind of playing

49:39 ↗ against it if you could comment on it or

49:40 ↗ if uh the chair could comment on any

49:43 ↗ discussion there i'd appreciate that

49:45 ↗ no yes i i'm

49:48 ↗ i can yield to you for sure yeah

49:52 ↗ again this is cynthia cross and i would

49:54 ↗ just say generally that was a huge

49:55 ↗ concern i would say with the program

49:57 ↗ overall

49:59 ↗ and specifically this option

50:03 ↗ i'll leave it at that

50:07 ↗ thank you

50:08 ↗ um

50:09 ↗ yeah that definitely played into the

50:12 ↗ discussions of tab as uh

50:14 ↗ uh chaircraft mentioned um and uh

50:18 ↗ certainly

50:19 ↗ um

50:21 ↗ we there is a fear that other

50:22 ↗ neighborhoods might come

50:25 ↗ that that contributes to the potential

50:27 ↗ ballooning cost of this too is why are

50:29 ↗ these neighborhoods getting it and these

50:31 ↗ other neighborhoods are not um and

50:33 ↗ there's a higher risk of that becoming

50:35 ↗ an issue

50:37 ↗ than the other two uh options so i'll

50:40 ↗ leave it there at this point yeah

50:43 ↗ okay depending on

50:45 ↗ which option

50:46 ↗ we choose it may be wise you know if it

50:50 ↗ if it's just going to be a pilot

50:52 ↗ initially for squawk and for talis

50:54 ↗ that perhaps we have some

50:57 ↗ price estimates for

50:59 ↗ let's say

51:01 ↗ the

51:02 ↗ you know

51:03 ↗ the sycamore neighborhood for instance

51:05 ↗ just so we

51:06 ↗ show that we're thinking about it for

51:07 ↗ areas where the population is is

51:10 ↗ condensed enough to make it actually

51:11 ↗ work

51:12 ↗ um and that's just a suggestion as as we

51:15 ↗ move forward perhaps

51:17 ↗ i i do really appreciate that um that

51:19 ↗ was a question that arose uh during the

51:21 ↗ tab as well

51:23 ↗ they asked several times why aren't we

51:26 ↗ like why are these the neighborhoods

51:27 ↗ that we're looking at tonight or

51:29 ↗ whatever night we were talking and our

51:31 ↗ response at the time was well this is

51:33 ↗ what council directed us to do so if

51:36 ↗ there came a time that uh council would

51:38 ↗ want to expand

51:40 ↗ uh the scope of this uh

51:43 ↗ we definitely could but up until this

51:45 ↗ point we've kept it just to to squawk

51:47 ↗ and talus just because of that

51:53 ↗ uh

51:54 ↗ getting close to the end of my

51:55 ↗ presentation so uh and so we we believe

51:58 ↗ the timeline we would be 2023

52:01 ↗ this type of relationship and

52:03 ↗ partnership would take months

52:06 ↗ weeks even in some cases

52:09 ↗ depending on how expedited the process

52:12 ↗ was to become so we think that a 2023

52:17 ↗ start wouldn't uh be with with uh

52:19 ↗ outside the realm of possibility

52:22 ↗ uh we also

52:23 ↗ decided that the risk is also moderate

52:26 ↗ there are no easy there are no low risk

52:29 ↗ options in this particular

52:31 ↗ uh project

52:32 ↗ we would like to note that um

52:35 ↗ that these systems

52:36 ↗ well again we like to okay in my notes

52:39 ↗ uh that these these systems might prompt

52:42 ↗ other neighborhoods to ask for uh

52:44 ↗ their own version of the subsidized

52:46 ↗ service could balloon the cost

52:48 ↗ um and the the tab was so unsure of the

52:52 ↗ risk of this one that they chose not to

52:54 ↗ recommend the program either way they

52:55 ↗ didn't say absolutely not but they also

52:58 ↗ didn't say

52:59 ↗ yeah let's let's go for it it was kind

53:01 ↗ of a

53:02 ↗ we're unsure we don't really know which

53:04 ↗ direction to go

53:07 ↗ so that

53:08 ↗ concludes the specific

53:11 ↗ the specific

53:12 ↗ options i will

53:15 ↗ go over to here so our administrative

53:17 ↗ recommendation this evening is we

53:20 ↗ recommend that the city pursue option

53:22 ↗ one the on-demand pilot that partnership

53:24 ↗ with metro option

53:26 ↗ we believe that this is the best option

53:28 ↗ if we can get metro on board and that's

53:30 ↗ a that's such a huge if

53:32 ↗ um but of course i'm i'm excited to have

53:35 ↗ to hear the discussion tonight about uh

53:38 ↗ how

53:39 ↗ those other options kind of play into

53:41 ↗ the to the narrative as well so

53:44 ↗ at this point i will return it to the

53:47 ↗ direction needed slide and say thank you

53:50 ↗ and we can i'll take any additional

53:52 ↗ questions

53:53 ↗ great thank you very much for that

53:55 ↗ presentation

53:56 ↗ appreciate that

53:59 ↗ we'll open it up for

54:00 ↗ questions from

54:02 ↗ the committee first and then we'll go to

54:06 ↗ see if there any people in the public

54:08 ↗ that would like to comment as well so

54:12 ↗ barbara d michelle you had your finger

54:13 ↗ up so go ahead

54:17 ↗ okay i'm just going to jump right in

54:18 ↗ here

54:19 ↗ so it sounds like

54:22 ↗ if we

54:24 ↗ yes

54:25 ↗ uh i'm trading lightly here but it

54:28 ↗ sounds to me like what the message that

54:30 ↗ metro is sending us is

54:32 ↗ you come to us with a proposal

54:35 ↗ four hundred thousand let's say six

54:37 ↗ whatever we're willing to lay on the

54:38 ↗ table

54:39 ↗ and if that meets their needs then um

54:43 ↗ they might be willing to talk to us is

54:45 ↗ that

54:46 ↗ am i making it too

54:48 ↗ blunt

54:50 ↗ is that but it sounds to me like that's

54:52 ↗ the situation come up with a dollar

54:54 ↗ amount that we could also work into our

54:56 ↗ budget

54:57 ↗ and

54:58 ↗ be able to guarantee that that's what

55:00 ↗ the city is willing to provide if

55:02 ↗ they're willing to work with us

55:04 ↗ um this is andrea again i

55:07 ↗ um

55:09 ↗ i think they have made plain that they

55:11 ↗ would not consider providing these

55:12 ↗ services without a significant city

55:15 ↗ contribution now exactly what that

55:18 ↗ contribution

55:20 ↗ needs to be in order for them to provide

55:22 ↗ some service we have not talked to them

55:24 ↗ um anything specific or what that

55:26 ↗ service would you know then look like

55:28 ↗ depending on the level of support from

55:31 ↗ the city so it's it's pretty clear that

55:33 ↗ they would not provide it without a city

55:35 ↗ subsidy um but we have not been able to

55:38 ↗ discuss with them how much would be

55:40 ↗ required

55:41 ↗ and even then i think from our

55:43 ↗ conversations with them it sounds like

55:45 ↗ they still are

55:47 ↗ not able to guarantee that they would

55:49 ↗ provide this service is just okay maybe

55:51 ↗ we can consider it and really talk about

55:53 ↗ what this could look like how much it

55:55 ↗ might cost etc so

55:58 ↗ that's that's really where we are right

56:00 ↗ now

56:01 ↗ as you may have seen in the next steps

56:03 ↗ portion of the the memo and the

56:04 ↗ materials offered tonight

56:06 ↗ we do have a meeting set up with metro

56:08 ↗ in about a month

56:10 ↗ to see if any more developments have

56:12 ↗ happened

56:14 ↗ through the chain of command and metro

56:16 ↗ with those who can make these decisions

56:18 ↗ and provide us more information

56:22 ↗ so just a follow-up thought on

56:24 ↗ on

56:26 ↗ putting money on the table so to speak

56:27 ↗ as as we are going to biennial budget

56:31 ↗ we would have the ability to say that

56:32 ↗ we're putting money on the table for two

56:34 ↗ successive years and perhaps that might

56:37 ↗ draw them more into the conversation

56:40 ↗ along the way and i'm sure we'll have

56:41 ↗ that discussion within the council as we

56:44 ↗ look at

56:45 ↗ budget for for next year and the next

56:47 ↗ year after that

56:49 ↗ uh

56:50 ↗ yes i believe that's a that's a good

56:51 ↗ point um

56:53 ↗ typically

56:54 ↗ in services like these and this is also

56:57 ↗ somewhat similar to the route 200

56:58 ↗ partnership

57:00 ↗ you know we start with services at a

57:02 ↗ certain level and then we use some time

57:04 ↗ to evaluate what's working what's not

57:06 ↗ working and provide some tweaks and so

57:08 ↗ having a multi-year

57:10 ↗ pilot would allow us time to really

57:13 ↗ understand

57:14 ↗ what's working what's not working make

57:16 ↗ tweaks measure etc

57:21 ↗ deputy council president hall

57:24 ↗ oh

57:27 ↗ okay

57:29 ↗ um

57:31 ↗ real quick on option one um

57:34 ↗ would metro be able to support any

57:36 ↗ community outreach or education

57:38 ↗ initiatives or would that be entirely on

57:40 ↗ the city

57:43 ↗ generally metro supports their own

57:46 ↗ outreach and i believe that's the case

57:48 ↗ with these specific programs so we

57:50 ↗ wouldn't really have any

57:53 ↗ major role to play in that work other

57:55 ↗ than maybe putting it sharing it in

57:57 ↗ social media newsletters

57:59 ↗ whatever their current communications

58:01 ↗ network is right okay

58:03 ↗ yeah probably a little bit more than

58:06 ↗ say what we do for what we what the bus

58:09 ↗ service that we have currently yeah okay

58:12 ↗ um and then i would love to hear so in

58:15 ↗ the memo and what we heard tonight tab

58:17 ↗ did express some concern with only

58:19 ↗ providing this pilot service for the

58:22 ↗ talus and squawk neighborhoods so if

58:23 ↗ there was any more context around that

58:25 ↗ discussion that the chair or john

58:27 ↗ yourself would like to

58:30 ↗ share with the committee i i would

58:31 ↗ personally appreciate that

58:35 ↗ i'll i'll invite

58:37 ↗ i'll invite to chair crass to come and

58:39 ↗ share any thoughts she might have

58:42 ↗ thank you and um it's a great discussion

58:45 ↗ and thanks um yeah we we ended up

58:47 ↗ spending quite a bit of time talking

58:48 ↗ about all of this i think

58:52 ↗ we did ask ourselves the question why

58:54 ↗ these neighborhoods and

58:56 ↗ i think that you know a lot of people

58:58 ↗ that serve on the

58:59 ↗ tab are systems thinkers there's some

59:02 ↗ engineers on there we

59:03 ↗ we we weren't really clear about

59:06 ↗ um

59:07 ↗ the analysis that led to these

59:10 ↗ neighborhoods being the ones that were

59:12 ↗ right for this

59:13 ↗ program like what the objectives were

59:15 ↗ what the analysis was that led us to

59:18 ↗ those neighborhoods and in if there was

59:21 ↗ one and so i think that question came up

59:23 ↗ a lot um so there was a little bit of

59:26 ↗ lack of like the history and i don't

59:28 ↗ think anybody on the tab really

59:30 ↗ understood the history from the very

59:31 ↗ beginning and i'm not sure

59:33 ↗ but that wasn't really made super clear

59:34 ↗ to us so we were really we felt a little

59:36 ↗ bit flying blind of like why these

59:39 ↗ neighborhoods and what were the

59:40 ↗ characteristics of these neighborhoods

59:42 ↗ that was driving this and has that

59:44 ↗ analysis been done across

59:47 ↗ all neighborhoods that don't have the

59:49 ↗ same kind of service and um and so

59:53 ↗ that coupled with just this idea of

59:55 ↗ wanting a needs analysis like are they

59:59 ↗ are they asking for this as a community

1:00:01 ↗ is it you know like what what's the

1:00:03 ↗ likelihood of the uptake like what

1:00:05 ↗ they're just they felt like a little bit

1:00:06 ↗ of a lack of analysis and i think

1:00:09 ↗ um that was making us that was causing a

1:00:11 ↗ lot of anxiety for us um and so we we

1:00:15 ↗ all decided it was above our pay grade

1:00:16 ↗ and then we would give the follow the

1:00:18 ↗ assignment as best we could but that was

1:00:20 ↗ that was in the background for us a lot

1:00:22 ↗ um

1:00:24 ↗ and i want to make one more comment

1:00:26 ↗ about the dollar figure i mean high low

1:00:28 ↗ medium compared to one another certainly

1:00:30 ↗ can be compared but

1:00:31 ↗ we just felt without having a really

1:00:33 ↗ good needs analysis and um and some of

1:00:36 ↗ the analysis like it was hard to know if

1:00:37 ↗ that was a high number or a low number

1:00:39 ↗ um and without having a clear sense of

1:00:41 ↗ the goal like is the equity concerns

1:00:45 ↗ about who would participate

1:00:47 ↗ maybe could have been offset if the

1:00:49 ↗ direction was clear it doesn't matter

1:00:50 ↗ who

1:00:51 ↗ is going to get off the road we just

1:00:52 ↗ want people off that we want to diminish

1:00:54 ↗ you know single occupancy use because it

1:00:57 ↗ was pointed out if there's fewer

1:00:59 ↗ vehicles on the road that benefits

1:01:01 ↗ everybody so

1:01:04 ↗ those kinds of questions we felt like

1:01:06 ↗ you know there was this like a lack of

1:01:07 ↗ analysis and

1:01:09 ↗ so that made us a little bit

1:01:10 ↗ uncomfortable and that's hopefully um

1:01:12 ↗ captures d is that

1:01:14 ↗ kind of your recollection of yeah yeah

1:01:16 ↗ so

1:01:17 ↗ thank you great thank you

1:01:19 ↗ do you have another question um yeah

1:01:21 ↗ based on that um context is some of this

1:01:25 ↗ kind of needs analysis around

1:01:28 ↗ transit going to be i'm assuming to be

1:01:30 ↗ captured in our transit master plan

1:01:34 ↗ and those efforts is that correct

1:01:36 ↗ yes i i have spoken to steven perdua

1:01:39 ↗ about the specific that specific

1:01:41 ↗ question and his hope is to include

1:01:44 ↗ those sort of other neighborhood

1:01:46 ↗ questions within the transit study it's

1:01:47 ↗ not specifically built in at the moment

1:01:49 ↗ but it is on their minds at the moment

1:01:52 ↗ okay

1:01:54 ↗ okay

1:01:57 ↗ councilmember d michelle go ahead

1:02:00 ↗ so um this is maybe getting into the

1:02:02 ↗ weeds too much but i think it's related

1:02:04 ↗ to the um

1:02:06 ↗ the needs analysis um

1:02:09 ↗ and you mentioned too we have this

1:02:11 ↗ topography that we've got to deal with

1:02:13 ↗ in all these hills

1:02:15 ↗ um

1:02:16 ↗ but the highlands have exactly the same

1:02:18 ↗ situation sycamore

1:02:20 ↗ i don't actually know how you could get

1:02:22 ↗ a bus up up there because of those

1:02:24 ↗ narrow winding roads

1:02:26 ↗ so

1:02:27 ↗ uh i have exactly had exactly the same

1:02:29 ↗ question you know why talus why squawk

1:02:32 ↗ when um the highlands has that high hill

1:02:35 ↗ and when i was out campaigning to to be

1:02:38 ↗ on the council talked to a lot of people

1:02:40 ↗ in the highlands who said i would love

1:02:42 ↗ to take a bus

1:02:43 ↗ but i don't want to have to ever walk up

1:02:46 ↗ that hill you know and i think we have

1:02:48 ↗ the same situation and tell us the squad

1:02:51 ↗ so

1:02:54 ↗ i guess the question would be if we're

1:02:56 ↗ going to do a look at the needs analysis

1:02:58 ↗ and look at the whole

1:02:59 ↗ city

1:03:00 ↗ um

1:03:02 ↗ how adaptable i guess would be would

1:03:06 ↗ buses be in some of these

1:03:08 ↗ some of the roads in the in the hills

1:03:11 ↗ that we have

1:03:13 ↗ how successful will transit service be

1:03:16 ↗ in terms of delivery in uh in some of

1:03:19 ↗ the of the topography that we've got so

1:03:22 ↗ i just wanted to make sure that we've

1:03:24 ↗ got that on our radar

1:03:26 ↗ the highlands also has a high level of

1:03:28 ↗ immigrants and elderly people

1:03:31 ↗ so again i don't know why they got left

1:03:33 ↗ out of of the analysis so

1:03:36 ↗ um

1:03:37 ↗ i think we need to kind of go back and

1:03:39 ↗ rethink that too thanks

1:03:41 ↗ and i and i can make a short comment on

1:03:44 ↗ that too um i remember going back and

1:03:46 ↗ watching uh steven padua's presentation

1:03:49 ↗ last i think june 2021 and highlands was

1:03:53 ↗ sort of floating in the background of

1:03:54 ↗ the situ of the presentation it was

1:03:56 ↗ mentioned it wasn't but the the focus

1:03:58 ↗ was more on uh squawk and talus so

1:04:01 ↗ during the course of uh my learning

1:04:05 ↗ about the project and starting to dive

1:04:07 ↗ into it i kind of asked the question

1:04:08 ↗ like should we include highlands in this

1:04:10 ↗ and the the answer at that point from uh

1:04:14 ↗ i guess my supervisors was well focus on

1:04:17 ↗ squawking tiles for now

1:04:19 ↗ but you know keep highlands in the

1:04:20 ↗ background

1:04:22 ↗ um so that's kind of the reason why it

1:04:25 ↗ uh

1:04:26 ↗ why i've specifically been discussing

1:04:29 ↗ swat can tell specifically this evening

1:04:32 ↗ deputy administrator schneider

1:04:34 ↗ thank you

1:04:35 ↗ um well as as you know and as council

1:04:38 ↗ remember joe knows very well we have had

1:04:41 ↗ this idea of a squawk and talis shuttle

1:04:44 ↗ for a very long time many years and

1:04:47 ↗ i know that in my uh previous service

1:04:49 ↗ with the city i was helping work on this

1:04:51 ↗ for a time period and so what i recall

1:04:54 ↗ from those early days of discussions

1:04:57 ↗ is

1:04:59 ↗ the feeling

1:05:00 ↗ that squawk and talus in particular had

1:05:03 ↗ fewer

1:05:04 ↗ transit options

1:05:06 ↗ than neighborhoods like

1:05:09 ↗ the highlands where they do have that

1:05:10 ↗ challenging topography

1:05:13 ↗ the highlands uh at the time and i have

1:05:16 ↗ to admit i am a little out of date with

1:05:18 ↗ all the pandemic changes in transit

1:05:20 ↗ service but

1:05:21 ↗ at the time they did have a dial-a-ride

1:05:24 ↗ service so that which is somewhat

1:05:27 ↗ similar to the on-demand service we're

1:05:28 ↗ talking about today except required a

1:05:30 ↗ little bit more forethought in planning

1:05:32 ↗ to be able to book that ride service and

1:05:34 ↗ so they had they had that they had um

1:05:38 ↗ and i i think the desire was to provide

1:05:41 ↗ something that could work for squawk and

1:05:43 ↗ talis uh because the esquire highlands

1:05:45 ↗ already had

1:05:46 ↗ some type of option

1:05:48 ↗ so i i think that's one of the

1:05:49 ↗ reasonings um you should council wish

1:05:52 ↗ for us to explore how to expand uh this

1:05:54 ↗ pilot project to other neighborhoods in

1:05:56 ↗ issaquah we'd have to uh look again at

1:05:59 ↗ you know what are those criteria for

1:06:00 ↗ service and

1:06:02 ↗ have that discussion

1:06:06 ↗ other questions from the committee real

1:06:08 ↗ quick go ahead um back to the transit

1:06:10 ↗ master plan um

1:06:12 ↗ do you happen to know off top of your

1:06:13 ↗ head andrea what the next steps are on

1:06:15 ↗ that and what the timeline for that plan

1:06:17 ↗ is

1:06:19 ↗ uh i i know some of the immediate next

1:06:21 ↗ steps so we've just secured a consultant

1:06:26 ↗ to do that so i think

1:06:28 ↗ i think we're finalizing that contract

1:06:31 ↗ and then as we are looking at kicking

1:06:34 ↗ off that work before the end of the year

1:06:36 ↗ we're trying to find a time to to go to

1:06:40 ↗ the transportation advisory board

1:06:42 ↗ to talk about public engagement and

1:06:44 ↗ steps in public engagement for that

1:06:46 ↗ transit plan and then really kick off

1:06:48 ↗ those efforts the beginning of next year

1:06:51 ↗ so it's uh

1:06:53 ↗ we also hope to get some information

1:06:55 ↗ from the transit

1:06:58 ↗ the transit plan to help inform the cip

1:07:01 ↗ and tip update next year we're probably

1:07:03 ↗ not going to have it all but we're going

1:07:04 ↗ to

1:07:05 ↗ try to try to have some of that

1:07:06 ↗ information to help inform looking at

1:07:08 ↗ projects and what types of

1:07:10 ↗ projects we could prioritize for that

1:07:12 ↗ process so that's those are some of the

1:07:14 ↗ the next steps within the next um

1:07:16 ↗ four months uh to six months that i

1:07:19 ↗ understand

1:07:20 ↗ are we expecting the work to be complete

1:07:23 ↗ end of calendar year 2023 or will it

1:07:25 ↗ spill over into 24. uh i think it will

1:07:29 ↗ spill over a little into 2024.

1:07:33 ↗ all right thank you

1:07:36 ↗ other questions from the committee

1:07:38 ↗ so i guess

1:07:39 ↗ my question

1:07:42 ↗ relates to

1:07:43 ↗ the experiences that we've seen in saman

1:07:45 ↗ which i think you mentioned you know

1:07:47 ↗ they've tried a system similar to ours

1:07:50 ↗ do we have any

1:07:53 ↗ information or data on

1:07:54 ↗ how many people were writing how many

1:07:56 ↗ people took advantage of it

1:07:58 ↗ was it successful because of x was it

1:08:00 ↗ unsuccessful because of

1:08:02 ↗ why reason along the way if you could

1:08:04 ↗ kind of expound on that

1:08:06 ↗ yeah definitely i

1:08:09 ↗ have that data it's not coming to me

1:08:11 ↗ immediately it's in my notes somewhere i

1:08:13 ↗ did have a chance to talk to them

1:08:15 ↗ specifically about the writership and

1:08:17 ↗ you know their successes and and and all

1:08:20 ↗ of that so that is something that i can

1:08:22 ↗ go back and find and pass along

1:08:25 ↗ i also i remembered the second part

1:08:28 ↗ of the thing that i forgot earlier for

1:08:30 ↗ uh council member david shells uh

1:08:32 ↗ question earlier and that was about

1:08:34 ↗ access and equity

1:08:36 ↗ so one of the towns that i talked to and

1:08:39 ↗ i don't remember what the name of it was

1:08:41 ↗ right off but i believe it was down in

1:08:43 ↗ arizona

1:08:44 ↗ um so they this was separate from the

1:08:47 ↗ example that they gave me this is one

1:08:48 ↗ that i stumbled upon and contacted and i

1:08:50 ↗ actually got to talk to them

1:08:52 ↗ and so they through with lyft do have a

1:08:56 ↗ kind of a service area subsidized

1:08:59 ↗ program

1:09:00 ↗ but they have an additional additional

1:09:02 ↗ paratransit uh

1:09:04 ↗ service that is kind of on top of it um

1:09:07 ↗ actually more of a venn diagram it's not

1:09:09 ↗ quite over the top of it but it it meets

1:09:12 ↗ um and on that note i do want to uh

1:09:15 ↗ mention that

1:09:17 ↗ my recent research has uncovered that

1:09:20 ↗ the metro dart

1:09:21 ↗ access no longer

1:09:23 ↗ operates south of i-90 in issaquah so

1:09:26 ↗ that's also some specific context that

1:09:29 ↗ is probably important to this

1:09:30 ↗ conversation

1:09:34 ↗ okay so if we did pursue

1:09:36 ↗ number one for additional conversation

1:09:40 ↗ um

1:09:41 ↗ based on what you're saying

1:09:43 ↗ uh am i hearing you correctly that there

1:09:45 ↗ wouldn't be

1:09:47 ↗ the ability for people with disabilities

1:09:49 ↗ to

1:09:50 ↗ ride on this metro

1:09:52 ↗ bus

1:09:53 ↗ or would they still have that

1:09:54 ↗ opportunity i guess that's a

1:09:56 ↗ concern that i think i've heard this

1:09:58 ↗ evening and and does kind of influence

1:10:02 ↗ any decisions we might be making

1:10:05 ↗ yes i believe

1:10:07 ↗ if my memory serves me correctly looking

1:10:10 ↗ at the this the design of the sammamish

1:10:15 ↗ shuttle specifically i believe it has

1:10:18 ↗ a spot for wheelchairs i could be wrong

1:10:21 ↗ about that okay

1:10:24 ↗ uh

1:10:24 ↗ metro prides itself on having its fleet

1:10:26 ↗ be 100 accessible to those who use

1:10:29 ↗ mobility devices such as wheelchairs

1:10:32 ↗ great thank you

1:10:33 ↗ and i guess my my other question that's

1:10:38 ↗ kind of been

1:10:39 ↗ pressing for me is is

1:10:41 ↗ if a person does not have a smartphone

1:10:45 ↗ how are they accessing the system or is

1:10:48 ↗ it

1:10:48 ↗ something that's of limitation

1:10:52 ↗ yes i believe this the statistics at

1:10:54 ↗ least nationally i think it's

1:10:56 ↗ a

1:10:57 ↗ low eighty percent of people have

1:10:59 ↗ smartphones uh i believe it's high 90s

1:11:02 ↗ of people who have cell phones at least

1:11:04 ↗ so that's a good thing and the these all

1:11:07 ↗ three of these systems have uh hotlines

1:11:09 ↗ that basically people can call

1:11:11 ↗ specifically the hotline say hey i'm at

1:11:13 ↗ this address i need a pickup because

1:11:15 ↗ that was a concern of ours too what if

1:11:17 ↗ someone doesn't have a cell phone even

1:11:19 ↗ they might leave their house and have a

1:11:21 ↗ landline but what happens when they need

1:11:23 ↗ to leave safeway uh do they go up to the

1:11:26 ↗ front desk and ask to use their phone

1:11:28 ↗ which is a possibility but that is a

1:11:29 ↗ that is a barrier

1:11:30 ↗ um and something that we would certainly

1:11:33 ↗ need to consider

1:11:35 ↗ yeah and i think

1:11:37 ↗ the question has some

1:11:40 ↗ urgency for me in the sense that

1:11:42 ↗ not to put people into

1:11:44 ↗ certain categories but people that don't

1:11:47 ↗ have smartphones

1:11:48 ↗ in general are those that we're trying

1:11:50 ↗ to reach and

1:11:52 ↗ give that opportunity to to go other

1:11:54 ↗ places and and um

1:11:57 ↗ hook up with

1:11:59 ↗ the larger transit system and go all the

1:12:01 ↗ way into seattle or to bellevue and we

1:12:03 ↗ may be unknowingly or

1:12:06 ↗ unintentionally excluding a population

1:12:08 ↗ that this

1:12:10 ↗ program is specifically designed to try

1:12:12 ↗ to try to reach

1:12:17 ↗ okay if there are no other questions

1:12:18 ↗ from the committee

1:12:20 ↗ we'll go ahead and open it up for any

1:12:23 ↗ public comment that

1:12:24 ↗ might be out there from

1:12:27 ↗ either

1:12:28 ↗ people in the chamber tonight or online

1:12:34 ↗ okay i don't see anyone in the city

1:12:36 ↗ council chamber with a desire to speak

1:12:39 ↗ uh deputy uh clerk are there any

1:12:42 ↗ individuals online that wish to speak

1:12:45 ↗ chair joe there are nobody no attendees

1:12:48 ↗ online that have indicated a desire to

1:12:50 ↗ speak

1:12:51 ↗ we're a very popular tv

1:12:54 ↗ draw i understand that okay

1:12:57 ↗ we will open this up for

1:12:59 ↗ discussion amongst the committee and um

1:13:04 ↗ we'll see

1:13:05 ↗ where we want to go with with this

1:13:07 ↗ particular item

1:13:09 ↗ and i i guess the the administration

1:13:11 ↗ recommendations to go with uh number one

1:13:14 ↗ uh pursue a partnership with metro

1:13:17 ↗ run on-demand pilot program it would

1:13:19 ↗ require us to

1:13:21 ↗ put a significant amount of money on the

1:13:23 ↗ table

1:13:24 ↗ so to speak to

1:13:26 ↗ get them to come and

1:13:28 ↗ talk to us about our potential options

1:13:31 ↗ there's no guarantee that they would

1:13:34 ↗ even

1:13:35 ↗ offer a program in the future but

1:13:38 ↗ the the conversation is probably the

1:13:40 ↗ most important first step has has been

1:13:43 ↗ outlined tonight so

1:13:44 ↗ any discussion from the committee

1:13:50 ↗ councilmember d michelle is recognized

1:13:53 ↗ thanks so first of all thanks to the

1:13:55 ↗ transit advisory board for their

1:13:57 ↗ extensive discussion and clear direction

1:14:00 ↗ and

1:14:01 ↗ i greatly benefited from sitting in on

1:14:03 ↗ your initial discussion

1:14:06 ↗ there is a lot of nuance to this and a

1:14:09 ↗ lot of things that need to be hashed out

1:14:11 ↗ and

1:14:12 ↗ i just uh admired the discussion that

1:14:15 ↗ was held the first evening so and thank

1:14:17 ↗ you for

1:14:18 ↗ for the really um

1:14:20 ↗ excellent recommendation that came

1:14:22 ↗ through and thank you for being here so

1:14:23 ↗ that we could talk to you directly

1:14:26 ↗ so i think we should go ahead i mean

1:14:29 ↗ obviously metro would be by far the best

1:14:32 ↗ solution if we can

1:14:35 ↗ get them to uh cooperate with us

1:14:37 ↗ so um but i think that we need to be

1:14:40 ↗ really clear that we need to come up

1:14:42 ↗ with

1:14:43 ↗ a level of financial

1:14:46 ↗ support that we're willing to put on the

1:14:48 ↗ table

1:14:49 ↗ i think we have to figure out how we're

1:14:50 ↗ going to structure that with a biennial

1:14:52 ↗ budget

1:14:54 ↗ i i think that we're pretty clear that

1:14:56 ↗ nothing would be getting going next year

1:14:59 ↗ so do we want to put in a modest amount

1:15:02 ↗ of money for 2023 that would help us

1:15:05 ↗ with the negotiations and perhaps more

1:15:08 ↗ of a in-depth need study and then a

1:15:10 ↗ larger amount of money in 2024

1:15:13 ↗ that would be i think something

1:15:15 ↗ administration might want to come back

1:15:16 ↗ to us with the recommendation

1:15:20 ↗ and then

1:15:21 ↗ [Music]

1:15:22 ↗ i also think that we

1:15:25 ↗ we have to acknowledge that metro is not

1:15:28 ↗ a enthusiastic

1:15:32 ↗ participant in this discussion

1:15:34 ↗ and that maybe we are going to have to

1:15:36 ↗ look at a plan b

1:15:39 ↗ and

1:15:41 ↗ i

1:15:43 ↗ uber and lyft have many drawbacks and i

1:15:46 ↗ think that we need to really explore it

1:15:47 ↗ but i think it would be well worth our

1:15:50 ↗ while to continue to

1:15:53 ↗ vet that option as a possible plan b if

1:15:56 ↗ metro just simply says

1:15:59 ↗ no amount of money on the table is going

1:16:00 ↗ to convince us to come out here and work

1:16:02 ↗ on this so

1:16:04 ↗ um let's see

1:16:08 ↗ i think

1:16:10 ↗ yeah i mean there are concerns about

1:16:14 ↗ obvious concerns about our running uh or

1:16:17 ↗ contracting with the company to run our

1:16:19 ↗ own service

1:16:20 ↗ and

1:16:21 ↗ my and my concern there again would be

1:16:23 ↗ the equity issue for disabled people

1:16:25 ↗ with

1:16:26 ↗ uh if we can't drop them off at the

1:16:28 ↗ transit center that's a huge barrier

1:16:31 ↗ for

1:16:32 ↗ how do they get from their drop-off

1:16:33 ↗ point to the transit center and so forth

1:16:35 ↗ so

1:16:36 ↗ um

1:16:37 ↗ state law is kind of a barrier there so

1:16:41 ↗ i would support going forward with

1:16:43 ↗ conversations with metro

1:16:45 ↗ that would be our best outcome and then

1:16:48 ↗ i think we also need to still keep plan

1:16:51 ↗ b

1:16:53 ↗ on the table and see if we can work

1:16:55 ↗ through

1:16:56 ↗ the problems that we have with lyft and

1:16:58 ↗ uber

1:16:59 ↗ to get to a good solution if that's the

1:17:01 ↗ only alternative that we have

1:17:07 ↗ deputy president thank you yes um

1:17:10 ↗ councilmember d michelle said it

1:17:12 ↗ basically perfectly

1:17:14 ↗ i feel

1:17:15 ↗ pretty similar

1:17:16 ↗ pretty similarly although i'm kind of of

1:17:18 ↗ two minds here because you know a really

1:17:20 ↗ interesting point has been brought up in

1:17:22 ↗ that

1:17:22 ↗ we don't really have a clear

1:17:27 ↗ needs analysis

1:17:29 ↗ understanding of the data and how data

1:17:32 ↗ is pointing us toward a problem

1:17:34 ↗ statement that's clear that then points

1:17:36 ↗ us toward potential solutions i think we

1:17:38 ↗ all know

1:17:40 ↗ what the problem is but being able to

1:17:42 ↗ quantify that

1:17:44 ↗ to help us

1:17:46 ↗ when we go to metro or when we go to a

1:17:49 ↗ partner is helpful too so

1:17:51 ↗ sharing once again

1:17:53 ↗ my support for the master transit plan

1:17:55 ↗ and all that

1:17:56 ↗ important work that will feed into this

1:17:59 ↗ that said i do think there are reasons

1:18:01 ↗ to move forward now

1:18:04 ↗ without that

1:18:07 ↗ system of data and

1:18:10 ↗ storytelling in place right away

1:18:13 ↗ for a couple reasons one

1:18:15 ↗ as was said um

1:18:17 ↗ it has been a community priority in

1:18:19 ↗ these neighborhoods to have a shuttle

1:18:21 ↗ for some time now it's been a priority

1:18:24 ↗ stated on council for some time now

1:18:27 ↗ and

1:18:29 ↗ our priority to reduce single occupancy

1:18:31 ↗ vehicle trips and also to just expand

1:18:34 ↗ forms of transportation that don't

1:18:36 ↗ include getting in your car has been

1:18:38 ↗ stated multiple times as a priority for

1:18:39 ↗ this council so there are

1:18:42 ↗ benefits to doing that another one is

1:18:44 ↗ that i think of right off the top of my

1:18:45 ↗ head is metro is currently in the

1:18:47 ↗ process of

1:18:48 ↗ eliminating consolidating routes

1:18:50 ↗ in cities that don't have a lot of usage

1:18:53 ↗ issaquah is a good example of that

1:18:55 ↗ upcoming but if

1:18:58 ↗ if this is a big if

1:19:00 ↗ we were to move forward let's say metro

1:19:02 ↗ says yes issaquah we would love to

1:19:03 ↗ pursue option one with you and we have

1:19:06 ↗ great touch points with the community

1:19:08 ↗ community starts to love it and really

1:19:10 ↗ use the system

1:19:11 ↗ metro and other transit agencies might

1:19:13 ↗ look at issaquah then and say okay there

1:19:15 ↗ is actually a foundation of people that

1:19:18 ↗ are very interested in not using their

1:19:20 ↗ car they're very interested in

1:19:23 ↗ routes and transit routes and so i see

1:19:25 ↗ that as a net benefit as a potential but

1:19:28 ↗ that's also going to take a lot of work

1:19:29 ↗ on on the city's part

1:19:32 ↗ so there's that

1:19:35 ↗ i

1:19:37 ↗ sympathize

1:19:38 ↗ with the concern that tab has

1:19:41 ↗ expressed about serving two communities

1:19:45 ↗ out of

1:19:46 ↗ a very large network of communities here

1:19:48 ↗ in issaquah and why not others i think

1:19:51 ↗ that this is a good place to start

1:19:52 ↗ though if we really are framing it as a

1:19:54 ↗ pilot program and then knowing that all

1:19:56 ↗ of that conversation needs to be folded

1:19:58 ↗ into the transit master plan so

1:20:01 ↗ perhaps we could communicate back to the

1:20:03 ↗ mobility

1:20:04 ↗ or the transportation advisory board

1:20:06 ↗ that those comments were very well

1:20:08 ↗ received and because of that feedback we

1:20:10 ↗ want to really make sure that that's

1:20:11 ↗ tied into the transit master plan

1:20:16 ↗ some other

1:20:17 ↗ considerations um or resources direct

1:20:20 ↗ costs and staff is a big one that we

1:20:21 ↗ have to be mindful if i appreciate you

1:20:23 ↗ bringing that up our ability to collect

1:20:24 ↗ and receive useful data i think is going

1:20:27 ↗ to be helpful to you

1:20:29 ↗ if we were to pursue option one we would

1:20:31 ↗ have a partner who is collecting that

1:20:32 ↗ data so we wouldn't necessarily have to

1:20:35 ↗ then also have resources to collect our

1:20:36 ↗ own data like option two or to

1:20:40 ↗ work with uber lyft and option three to

1:20:42 ↗ collect their data which i imagine some

1:20:44 ↗ of that might be

1:20:47 ↗ owned by the company or proprietary

1:20:48 ↗ although we would have had a um you

1:20:50 ↗ bring up you brought up scooters a

1:20:52 ↗ couple times which is a source subject

1:20:53 ↗ by the way so

1:20:55 ↗ but um

1:20:56 ↗ you know we had an agreement with them

1:20:57 ↗ that they would share data so if we were

1:20:59 ↗ to ever explore option three that would

1:21:00 ↗ definitely be something we would want to

1:21:02 ↗ explore with them is sharing data

1:21:06 ↗ option one is also really compelling

1:21:07 ↗ because of system consistency with the

1:21:10 ↗ network of metro already and also

1:21:12 ↗ familiarity was one

1:21:14 ↗ thing that highlands

1:21:16 ↗ had thought about a lot well how are we

1:21:18 ↗ going to brand the trucks how are people

1:21:19 ↗ going to know that this is a resource

1:21:21 ↗ for them if this highlands logo isn't

1:21:24 ↗ on the side of the vehicle so being able

1:21:26 ↗ to see a metro vehicle you'll instantly

1:21:28 ↗ know that this is an isoqua service um

1:21:32 ↗ opportunity for bus route expansion i

1:21:34 ↗ already said that

1:21:37 ↗ um i think i echo councilman we're doing

1:21:39 ↗ a show that council we need to be clear

1:21:41 ↗ that we're committed

1:21:43 ↗ to pursuing this pilot pro pilot program

1:21:46 ↗ option one with metro

1:21:48 ↗ and

1:21:49 ↗ if they're starting to feel timid i feel

1:21:52 ↗ i think we should feel comfortable to

1:21:54 ↗ say

1:21:55 ↗ why are you feeling timid what would get

1:21:56 ↗ you

1:21:57 ↗ to the point where you would feel

1:21:58 ↗ comfortable and then we can have a

1:22:00 ↗ conversation of is this threshold too

1:22:02 ↗ high

1:22:03 ↗ or is this too high a price

1:22:05 ↗ because if it is

1:22:07 ↗ it might just be worth saying we need to

1:22:09 ↗ delay this work and fold it in with the

1:22:11 ↗ master transit plan

1:22:15 ↗ i'm feeling very uninterested in the

1:22:18 ↗ uber lyft

1:22:20 ↗ program at the moment for all of the

1:22:23 ↗ equity and risk reasons that were

1:22:24 ↗ brought up earlier

1:22:26 ↗ but

1:22:27 ↗ we might have to pursue that option if

1:22:30 ↗ metro truly is not able to come to the

1:22:32 ↗ table for option one or for whatever

1:22:34 ↗ reasons they're not able to i don't want

1:22:36 ↗ to necessarily it's not out of spite or

1:22:38 ↗ anything like that they they have

1:22:39 ↗ budgets just like we do so i completely

1:22:40 ↗ understand um but we might need to

1:22:43 ↗ pursue option three if option one

1:22:46 ↗ doesn't work out i don't think we

1:22:47 ↗ necessarily need to commit a lot of

1:22:48 ↗ staff resources to that now but because

1:22:51 ↗ if we pursue option one it doesn't go

1:22:54 ↗ our way i would think it would be good

1:22:56 ↗ to have another touch either at this

1:22:57 ↗ committee or a council meeting of the

1:22:59 ↗ whole

1:23:00 ↗ to then say okay we've struck out a

1:23:02 ↗ couple times we have this uber lyft

1:23:05 ↗ option or the other option is to wait

1:23:07 ↗ and do it

1:23:08 ↗ with

1:23:09 ↗ data and storytelling of all um with the

1:23:12 ↗ master transit plans so i think that

1:23:13 ↗ there are kind of two paths there

1:23:15 ↗ assuming option one doesn't

1:23:17 ↗ work out

1:23:18 ↗ so those are my comments and eager to

1:23:21 ↗ hear what uh councilmember joe has to

1:23:23 ↗ say now

1:23:24 ↗ great thank you i appreciate the

1:23:26 ↗ conversation this evening i also

1:23:28 ↗ appreciate that

1:23:29 ↗ our tab chair is here giving us the

1:23:32 ↗ perspective that

1:23:33 ↗ we're having that we had from from our

1:23:36 ↗ citizens uh they are volunteers and yet

1:23:39 ↗ they give so much their time and

1:23:40 ↗ expertise to the city and it's not

1:23:42 ↗ something that

1:23:43 ↗ i think we appreciate enough and

1:23:45 ↗ acknowledge enough so thank you for all

1:23:47 ↗ that hard work

1:23:48 ↗ um appreciate the staff presentation

1:23:50 ↗ this evening very

1:23:51 ↗ thorough to give us

1:23:53 ↗ the options and outlining some of the

1:23:55 ↗ concerns and give us the color behind uh

1:23:59 ↗ some of the reasons why there might be a

1:24:00 ↗ red box there there might be a a green

1:24:02 ↗ box indicating that it might be okay to

1:24:04 ↗ go forward

1:24:06 ↗ in general

1:24:07 ↗ i would support moving forward with

1:24:09 ↗ option number one taking it to a budget

1:24:11 ↗ conversation to figure out

1:24:13 ↗ if the amount that we have talked about

1:24:15 ↗ tonight is appropriate or if we need to

1:24:18 ↗ up the ante a little bit just to make

1:24:19 ↗ sure that um staff has that authority

1:24:22 ↗ and that leeway to go to the table and

1:24:25 ↗ see if they can get a partner is willing

1:24:27 ↗ to have that conversation with us

1:24:29 ↗ through metra

1:24:32 ↗ it's difficult because you're pushing on

1:24:33 ↗ a string in a lot of ways just use an

1:24:35 ↗ analogy you're trying to get someone

1:24:37 ↗ else to come to the table that's not

1:24:38 ↗ interested in really extending the

1:24:41 ↗ service out to us

1:24:42 ↗ we need to be a willing partner that

1:24:46 ↗ that has the backing of of the council

1:24:48 ↗ and is very clear in terms of what you

1:24:51 ↗ know kind of leeway they have uh coming

1:24:53 ↗ to the table so i look forward to that

1:24:55 ↗ conversation in the budget discussions

1:24:58 ↗ i think that um

1:25:01 ↗ the equity

1:25:03 ↗ issues do concern me in the sense that

1:25:06 ↗ i live

1:25:07 ↗ on squawk i know that there are a couple

1:25:09 ↗ of other members on council live either

1:25:12 ↗ in squawk or on in telus and so it um we

1:25:16 ↗ need to make sure that we're looking out

1:25:17 ↗ for everyone in the city and trying to

1:25:19 ↗ have policies that uh generally provide

1:25:22 ↗ for the the welfare of of everybody

1:25:25 ↗ with that in mind i think they're

1:25:27 ↗ stressing this is a pilot to see if it

1:25:29 ↗ works it's the chicken and egg paradox

1:25:31 ↗ in the sense that they're not going to

1:25:33 ↗ provide the service unless they have the

1:25:35 ↗ number of people that

1:25:37 ↗ give a ridership that's equivalent to to

1:25:40 ↗ make it profitable for them or at least

1:25:42 ↗ pencil out and then

1:25:44 ↗ we don't have the ridership until the

1:25:45 ↗ line's there right and so

1:25:48 ↗ at least going to the table with the the

1:25:50 ↗ authority and the money that

1:25:52 ↗ we're going to talk about through the

1:25:53 ↗ budget we'll um show that we're coming

1:25:56 ↗ with good faith to have that

1:25:57 ↗ conversation and try to extend it out

1:26:00 ↗ and and

1:26:01 ↗ if we're not able to get a willing

1:26:02 ↗ partner on the other side i think

1:26:05 ↗ deputy president hall brings up a good

1:26:06 ↗ point that we should perhaps reevaluate

1:26:09 ↗ it at mid-year whatever it might be or

1:26:11 ↗ at the end of year one

1:26:13 ↗ and um look at the options again but um

1:26:16 ↗ i'm i'm willing to give option number

1:26:18 ↗ one a a a good try and and um

1:26:22 ↗ give the administration and the staff

1:26:24 ↗ the the

1:26:25 ↗ resources they need to go the table to

1:26:27 ↗ try to have that conversation so we go

1:26:29 ↗ forward

1:26:30 ↗ deputy council president hall thank you

1:26:32 ↗ you just reminded me of one other point

1:26:34 ↗ i wanted to make was that um i'd like to

1:26:36 ↗ really hammer home with council in the

1:26:38 ↗ community that this is a pilot program

1:26:40 ↗ it's a pilot program that will then

1:26:42 ↗ influence

1:26:43 ↗ potential future programs or change and

1:26:45 ↗ priorities in the future so i wonder if

1:26:47 ↗ as this morphs into an agenda bow we

1:26:49 ↗ could change the title to include pilot

1:26:52 ↗ in it so that also the community knows

1:26:54 ↗ we're not just starting a shuttle in

1:26:57 ↗ these communities willy-nilly and

1:27:00 ↗ haven't done the due diligence in other

1:27:01 ↗ neighborhoods it is a pilot program to

1:27:03 ↗ influence then should we look elsewhere

1:27:05 ↗ too

1:27:07 ↗ i appreciate that thank you and and i

1:27:09 ↗ guess um

1:27:10 ↗ just one last concern that i

1:27:13 ↗ remembered was

1:27:16 ↗ certainly one of the goals is to reduce

1:27:20 ↗ the trips in town and having a shuttle

1:27:24 ↗ service

1:27:26 ↗ that's on call or any other options

1:27:29 ↗ doesn't really accomplish that goal is

1:27:31 ↗ deputy administrator snyder pointed out

1:27:34 ↗ if i'm taking my kid to school i'm

1:27:36 ↗ taking them to school and then i'm

1:27:37 ↗ coming back if there's an uber driver

1:27:39 ↗ coming or an on-call person they're

1:27:41 ↗ coming to my house and then taking

1:27:43 ↗ my

1:27:44 ↗ passenger to the school we haven't

1:27:46 ↗ eliminated any trips at all

1:27:48 ↗ and so a fixed route

1:27:50 ↗ you know is is certainly a pipe dream

1:27:53 ↗ for us at this point but that at least

1:27:55 ↗ consolidates the trips and reduces the

1:27:57 ↗ trips in town if we if we do it right um

1:28:00 ↗ so you know it's ultimately the the goal

1:28:03 ↗ that i see is as being pertinent and one

1:28:06 ↗ that we want to try to try to strive for

1:28:09 ↗ and none of these options as we pointed

1:28:11 ↗ out really accomplish that but we have

1:28:13 ↗ to take small steps as we go and and

1:28:15 ↗ it's at least a start so i'm willing to

1:28:18 ↗ give it a go and we'll see what our uh

1:28:21 ↗ competent and uh talented staff can come

1:28:24 ↗ back with and i know that they've done

1:28:26 ↗ great in other negotiations for us so i

1:28:29 ↗ have all the confidence that they're

1:28:30 ↗ going to

1:28:30 ↗ give the best product back to us they

1:28:32 ↗ possibly can

1:28:33 ↗ yep

1:28:35 ↗ okay

1:28:37 ↗ announcements

1:28:38 ↗ anything that

1:28:40 ↗ people would like to talk about

1:28:43 ↗ go ahead um just uh

1:28:47 ↗ deputy administrator uh snyder and i are

1:28:49 ↗ aware that the regional transit

1:28:50 ↗ committee is going to take up this

1:28:52 ↗ this same topic

1:28:54 ↗ um a week from now at their

1:28:57 ↗ monthly meeting and we will both be in

1:28:59 ↗ attendance

1:29:00 ↗ and

1:29:01 ↗ i haven't seen the packet yet but we

1:29:03 ↗ will be

1:29:05 ↗ very very interested in what they're

1:29:06 ↗ going to discuss at that

1:29:08 ↗ meeting

1:29:10 ↗ great any other announcements

1:29:12 ↗ um i guess just to say

1:29:15 ↗ behalf of the

1:29:16 ↗ administration that next monday for any

1:29:19 ↗ interested community members listening

1:29:20 ↗ in next monday i believe the mayor will

1:29:22 ↗ be presenting her proposed biennial

1:29:24 ↗ budget um for the next two years so

1:29:26 ↗ that's very exciting for us on council

1:29:29 ↗ also for the community so if you're

1:29:30 ↗ interested in gauging that process

1:29:32 ↗ please do connect in with us and we'll

1:29:34 ↗ make sure you're in the loop

1:29:36 ↗ okay and my announcement uh concerns

1:29:39 ↗ uh salmon on sunset which is being held

1:29:42 ↗ at the fish hatchery september 17th noon

1:29:45 ↗ to 6 p.m there'll be live music

1:29:48 ↗ a fly fishing

1:29:49 ↗ exhibition art in action activities

1:29:52 ↗ tours and more and the reason i

1:29:54 ↗ mentioned there is a tie to the city of

1:29:57 ↗ course

1:29:58 ↗ our ltch daughters dollars our lodging

1:30:01 ↗ tax advisory council dollars were

1:30:04 ↗ given to the hatchery along with some

1:30:07 ↗ other community groups to try to

1:30:09 ↗ encourage tourism and encourage

1:30:12 ↗ people more than 10 miles outside of

1:30:14 ↗ town to come into town and enjoy

1:30:16 ↗ what escua has to offer it's a ramp up

1:30:18 ↗ to

1:30:19 ↗ of course our salmon days uh festival so

1:30:22 ↗ that's september 17th on sunday from

1:30:24 ↗ noon to six

1:30:26 ↗ and uh it should be a great activity for

1:30:29 ↗ the day and it gives us an opportunity

1:30:31 ↗ to actually look at

1:30:32 ↗ the hatchery and see the salmon without

1:30:35 ↗ all the crowds right you really can't

1:30:37 ↗ get there on salmon days you really kind

1:30:40 ↗ of have to plan

1:30:42 ↗ an opportunity on a visit there before

1:30:44 ↗ it happens and this festival will give

1:30:46 ↗ us a chance to do that so just thought

1:30:48 ↗ i'd share that with everybody

1:30:51 ↗ all right

1:30:52 ↗ if there's no other business or issues

1:30:54 ↗ that this committee needs to address

1:30:56 ↗ this evening we are adjourned at 801 pm

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (3)

Russell Joe

Barbara de Michele

Zach Hall

Staff (2)

Andrea Snyder, Deputy City Administrator

Chris Grabowski, Deputy City Clerk

Recommendations & actions (1)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

The Committee unanimously recommended that staff move forward with Option 1 to explore an On-Demand pilot program in partnership with Metro.