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

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF