In today's episode, we're taken to the skies with Hillsborough County Mosquito Control to find out how they combat the spread of disease and the rising mosquito population. So when it comes to mosquitoes, how exactly are we combating them in the sky? Nobody complains about larvae. They complain about mosquitoes and specifically adult mosquitoes, female mosquitoes, the ones that bite you, right? But it's a lot easier to control adult mosquitoes by controlling them than larvae. What we do is we use a larvicide product that attacks the larval in the swamps of the mangrove areas along the coast here. We stop their growth so they never grow up and become adult mosquitoes. Most people to the untrained eye are going to sit here and say that this owner starved for dogs. We're going to head up to that dog hall right now. We'll go out, we'll assess the situation. I'm looking at these dogs, I'm like garbage. I mean, that's just not, did you see those bags through there? She was very upset about losing all of her cats. She called me up a few times in tears. I need my photos. I need to be able to paint this picture for the judge so that he sees what I see. It's been a while since we saw each other, so it's good to see everybody. I hope you're having a great summer. Welcome to the August 12th meeting of the Hillsborough TPO. I'd like to remember to ask everybody to silence your cell phones. And if we would please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. For which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I thank you. Ms. Ramos, would you please call the roll? Good morning. Ross? Here. Wostel? Here. Miller? Here. Myers? Here. Cohen? Here. Bowles? Here. Clinton is excused. Hertek is also excused. Young? Here. Kilton? Board member Lynn Gray is running a little late today. Klug? Here. Radhakristan? Slater? King? And Joseph? Here. You have a quorum, sir. Thank you very much, Ms. Ramos. So, has everybody had an opportunity to review the minutes from two meetings on the same date, June 10th? We had a TPO board meeting and then our TIP meeting. And if everybody's reviewed the minutes, is there a motion to approve? To approve. Any corrections or amendments to the minutes? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? No nays. The minutes are adopted. Public comment. We currently have one person signed up to speak remotely from public comment, and that is Hung May. Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Board member of the TPO, Executive Director, Wong, and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Hung May. It is an honor for me to introduce myself as a member of the Florida Transportation Commission, where I served, you know, since February 2025, with a particular interest in train rotation priority and opportunity affecting FDOT District 7 and Tampa Bay region. My commitment to the public service has developed so many years and across several organizations that I play an important role in setting the future of our region. I spent eight years with the Basin Board of the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and again, the deep, you know, appreciation and relationship with the infrastructure responsibility growth, water resource, environmental stewardship, and regional water supply and planning. I also served six and a half years with the Tampa Port Authority, which gave me the invaluable insight of the critical connection between our transportation system and the Florida economy. Our port, highway, railway, airport, and local transportation network do not operate independently. They are interconnected, and their success depends on thoughtful planning and strong partnership at the local, regional, and the state level. Today, I am very excited to be one of the members of the Transportation Commission, and I bring those experiences together. Transportation is about much more roads and bridges. It's about economic opportunity, safety, mobility, quality of life, and connecting people to jobs, education, health care, business, port, airport, and one and the other. District 7 is one of the Florida's most dynamic reasons, and with that growth comes from both tremendous opportunity and significant remutation challenges. Addressing them requires collaboration among the Florida Department of Transportation, the TBO, local government, business, and our community. Last year, Florida legislation gave FTC another oversight task for 31 transit agencies, and I met with HART Executive Director last month to learn more about HART operations and future projects. And I am very excited to see PSTA implemented the express bus service from St. Pete to TIA, and HART have a Route 1 from downtown to USF. I hope that we will have the Tri-Gauty Express transit system sooner. There are many significant developments in the Tampa Bay region, which represents more challenges for us, especially in funding. That's why we must unite and work together in one voice to get the state and federal attention. I'm looking forward to listening, learning, and working together with all of you to help to ensure the transportation investment we make today serve our community well for generations to come. I am asking the board, the chairman, and the executive director to allow me to appear in your next board meeting as time, you know, certain for approximately five minutes so that you can see me in person. And if you have any questions, you can ask me then. Thank you very much for your service to our region, and thank you again for welcoming me today. And I'm looking forward to working, you know, with you. Thank you, Mr. Meyer. Good morning to you. That is the last person signed up for public comment. I do want to tell the board before I get too far into the meeting that I do have to leave at 11. I've got a meeting in South Florida that I've got to get to. So at 11, our vice chair, Commissioner Wastel, will take over. So I don't know what will be going on then, but I don't want you to think I just got disgusted and walked out. So it is a planned departure. So next we have committee reports and advanced comments. The first speaker is Rick Fernandez, our CAC chair. Good morning, Mr. Fernandez. Good morning, Chair. Can you hear me all right? Yes, sir. All right. There were some technical difficulties getting to you this morning. I appreciate the help from the staff. We had our monthly CAC meeting on August the 5th, 2026. There were no action items on our agenda this month. We had some status reports. The committee received a status report from Hart on their transit development plan, major update, and the urban expansion area planning study, which I don't believe is on your agenda today. We talked about opportunities to participate in the process of that expansion area study. Both items generated questions and discussions, including the TPO's role in each of those efforts. CAC also discussed its member interest items and how to prioritize them. It's unusual for us at the CAC to get much, if any, in the form of public comment. This month we had some. And since one of the principal roles of the CAC is to facilitate communication between the TPO board and the community, a two-way street communication, I thought it was important that I emphasize the community input that we heard last week, although the item that they came to talk to us about isn't actually on your agenda. I guess it's on the Board of County Commission's agenda because apparently some BOCC members are advancing or advocating a position. What I received this morning yesterday, actually, from Amanda Brown, known to many of you, was an email, short one, that communicated the concerns of the Sundance community down in South County at the Manatee border. And I have to admit, I'm not familiar with the area. I wasn't even familiar with this issue until these good folks came and talked to us. I'm just going to read these two paragraphs to put it on your radar. Hopefully, for the Board of County Commission members who have constituents in that area, this will put it on your to-do list. Okay. Message to me. Rick, here's some information regarding the issues with Little Manatee South Urban Expansion Area Study and ways that the TPO may be able to help. Residents, specifically in Sundance, are disappointed in the information, or rather lack of information, being used as part of the Urban Expansion Area Study in Little Manatee South. Dr. Corey Campbell provided the CAC Board with a handout of environmental and hurricane evacuation maps that she said were not used in the analysis. Those items, I'm sure, can be provided by staff to the Board. The residents are asking that all available environmental, flood, and hurricane study safety zone information be used as part of the analysis for the study. It's also clear that the study does not include a broader analysis of whether the expansion is needed and whether areas inside the urban service area can be better utilized to handle growth. Last paragraph, there are also concerns with a possible new interchange on I-75 next to the Sundance community. FDOT has recently started a feasibility study, but they have not informed the community or the TPO board. It is my current understanding that FDOT is only looking at one specific area of the interstate. We request that the TPO encourage FDOT to broaden the scope of the study to include Buckeye Road in Manatee County. Thank you very much, Amanda. I understand that County Commissioner Myers and County Commissioner Miller may have particular interest in this particular item, so I set that up for them, for their good graces in their office. And I want to publicly thank those folks for showing up. That said, I'll be quiet now. If there are any questions, I'll be happy to try. Thank you, Mr. Fernandez. Are there questions, board members? If not, our next speaker, thank you for the report, Mr. Fernandez. Next is Harmony McGee from our TPO staff. Good morning, Ms. McGee. Good morning, TPO board. Regarding today's action items, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee recommended that the TPO board accept the Economic Benefits of Trails report. During their discussion, they expressed a strong interest and methods to track tourism dollars from trails. Public comments were received via social media and email. On Facebook, Christina Clark shared her frustration with Tampa's ranking as one of the deadliest metropolitan areas in the nation for pedestrians. She urged elected officials and partnering transportation agencies to take a more proactive approach to forming Vision Zero policies. In response to the city of Tampa's interactive bike route map, she also said she'd like to see enforcement against people parking at bike lanes. No scooters or e-bikes dumped there, and the bike lanes swept to remove debris and enforce the three-foot rule. The Sarasota Mobility Alliance also commented on Facebook, saying they would like to see buses run as late as local bars are open. Ran Bear Robbins' email to express concern about the decision to discontinue the Transportation Disadvantaged Tampa Bay Cross-Country Service and urged the TPO and other partnering agencies to work collaboratively to identify emergency funding to restore the service as quickly as possible. They cited many negative impacts that can be anticipated by this loss of service, including a decrease in workforce participation and loss of independence for people with disabilities. We also received an email from Ed Mirjewski, who raised concerns about an article on the U.S. Department of Transportation's proposal to cut funding for mass transit, bike lanes, and electric vehicle infrastructure. An email was also received from Kayyem Chakot with recommendations on the regional transportation vision for the Tampa Bay area, particularly ways in which Pasco and Hillsborough counties could become less car-dependent, more walkable, and more financially sustainable. His recommendations included dedicated light rail and tram corridors, separating high-speed regional traffic from residential areas, and incorporating traffic calming measures, protected connected bicycle infrastructure, and transit-oriented development and mixed-use zoning. The full email, including additional supporting materials and a case study, is included in your board packet. This concludes my report. Thank you, Ms. McGee. Board members, other questions? Thank you very much. Okay, we'll move into action items. The first action item is TPO procurement policy revisions, and Jonathan Nixon-Elder from our staff is here to present. Good morning. Good morning, Chair and TPO Board. I'm Jonathan Nixon-Elder, TPO staff. Today, I'll be presenting the proposed procurement policy for the TPO. This policy establishes a clear framework for how the organization procures professional services, ensuring that our procurement activities are fair, transparent, and compliant with applicable regulations. The primary purpose of this policy is to establish specific direction for the procurement of services by the TPO. It applies only to the purchase of professional services, unless a different purchasing procedure is required by federal or state law, or another approach is authorized by a majority vote of the TPO board. In addition, the policy clearly defines the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved in the procurement process. Historically, the TPO has adhered to Plan Hillsborough's policy for our procurement needs. Establishing a TPO-specific policy gives us a clear framework to reference when pursuing future discretionary grant opportunities. It will also provide greater clarity around our own procurement responsibilities and processes for both the general public and our consultants. Furthermore, we would be one of the few MPOs with our procurement policies documented in a manual. The policy provides multiple procurement options, including competitive procurements, sealed bids, RFPs, RFQs, and sole source procurements when appropriate. It also permits piggybacking, allowing the TPO to use existing competitively awarded contracts, which would most likely be used in partnership with Plan Hillsborough. The policy also establishes clear approval authority based on the contract value. Contracts with an award amount under $200,000 may be approved by the executive director. Contracts valued at $200,000 or more require approval by the TPO board, providing an additional level of oversight for larger procurements. Overall, this policy provides several important benefits for the organization. It approves consistency across procurements, increases transparency for both staff and the public, clarifies employee responsibilities, reduces procurement risk, and helps ensure compliance with federal and state requirements. Ultimately, it supports more efficient project delivery while strengthening the TPO stewardship of public funds. All procurements will still follow applicable grant, federal, state, and local requirements. And this policy addresses protest procedures, conflict of interest in lobbying, and cone of silence requirements. In summary, this permit policy provides a structured and consistent approach to acquiring professional services by clearly defining procedures, responsibilities, and approval processes. It helps the TPO conduct procurements that are transparent and compliant while supporting the organization's mission and responsible use of public resources. Our recommended action is that the board approves the TPO procurement policy. Thank you, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Mr. Nixon and other board members. Are there any questions? Commissioner Bowles? When we deal with FDOT, obviously quite often, one of the things is that I heard that FDOT had some comments regarding our process. Do you have any further expounding on that? Yes, so the draft policy was provided to FDOT in conversation with our liaisons. They anticipate noting that this will be a best practice for our next certification. Are there questions? I have a question. So we're modifying the limit that the executive director can purchase up to $200,000. What's the current limit? What's the current amount? I don't believe that's documented in the Planning Commission Procurement Policies Board. Suffice to say, there isn't one. We thought it was a good idea to establish that upper limit because for a planning study above the threshold of $200,000, the impacts are so significant that it might be worth taking another look. As in, before we kick off, I would like to bring it to the board and remind you of the purpose and need, the scale and scope of the contract, and the amount to ensure that everyone is comfortable with the study before we kick off. The problem that we're looking to avoid is the board giving an implicit yes when the UPWP is approved, forgetting about it, and then we elect to take on a study, and there may be issues that come up and that you might be unaware of the details of the work that we're trying to accomplish. So, this is looking to keep everyone informed and on the same page before we spend a significant amount of money on a planning study. So, let me ask you a question. I'm not trying to leave you out, but you're going to ask him anyway. So, let me ask you a question. So, I know this is a different world than the city of Temple Terrace. I get that, and the amounts of money are generally a lot higher. When we did this in our city with a different amount, but it's really not that radically different, when we upped the buying power of the city manager, what we did for the first year was to give us some comfort level was we asked for a report for any time this new rule was exercised in excess of whatever that number should be. In this case, maybe $100,000, or, you know, I'm not trying to give you, every time you buy a paper clip, you've got to report to the board, but we don't want to read that either. But if you are purchasing something over, I mean, I would think $100,000 would be probably a good start, and build right in that, that this is for the first year, and it sunsets unless the board takes action to enact this for another year. That drops – that keeps you from having this administrative duty forever if it is not needed. If the board doesn't take action in the year, it goes away. And what we found at the city was after a year, we felt comfortable letting it sunset because we knew what kind of stuff the city manager was buying, and we were okay with it. I think that's likely to happen here, too, but I don't know how everybody else feels. That seems like it would give the board and perhaps the public some comfort without being an onerous ask. Yeah, thanks, Mayor. That's a good comment, and I think that we would be happy to do it. Alternatively, what I think we could do from a staff perspective is review these on a recurring basis. So one of the biggest procurements that we're responsible for is every five years we have to do an open procurement for new general planning consultants. That's one of the larger efforts that this agency does. And we would want to take a look at the policies to make sure that they're current and still appropriate in the year before we have to go out for that GPC. So my recommendation would be to set a schedule to review the policies at least every five years. If that's too long and you'd like for this provision of the cost threshold to sunset before then, we could certainly take a look at it if the board is willing. But my commitment to you is that we'll take a clean look at the policy at least once every five years before we do that GPC effort. Okay. So, board members, I just throw that out for your consideration. It seems to me like it would provide you a little air cover also so that your major purchase, not 100 grand, I guess, in today's world is not major. But it is if it's your 100 grand and would give you a little cover too to say the board knows about everything I buy. Okay. So, I'm trying to figure out the order because I saw lights came on and I don't know what order it was in. I think Chris was first. Well, I'm sorry? First. Okay. Commissioner Bowles and then we'll figure out and then I know I got you two. I was just going to say that, you know, the county does have a process where the county administrator does the same thing and provides a quarterly report over or under a certain threshold. And I think, you know, I would be happy to either make a motion or second that motion to have the same thing and have a sunset of a year. There's nothing wrong with that. And I think because it's a new process, it's not, you know, it's not an issue for us to look at that. So, can you hold that thought for and let it... Okay. Very good. I don't know who was first. So, Board Member Gray will... Oh, let's see. Yeah. I, in the spirit of comparisons and Commissioner Bowles, the Hillsborough County Public School System has almost mirrors what you're sharing, even to the point of allowing the amount for $200,000 then to be put in front of the board. And I think this is such a... Yeah, it's comprehensive. It's probably much needed. And I agree with Commissioner Bowles, if it's every year, which is what we do, you know, we're going to have much more of a transparent way of knowing where the funding's going. And so, if there's a motion made, then I'll second it, or someone else can second it. But I'm all for this. Thank you. Thank you, Board Member. City Council Member Young or Commissioner? I didn't know if you were... Okay. Commissioner Myers. I agree with Commissioner Bowles. So, if he makes a motion, go ahead. Okay. That was it. Thank you. Are there any questions? I think we have several people eager to make a motion, but are there questions as we kind of strayed off the questions thing? Okay. So, I'll let you arm wrestle. Who wants to make the motion? Commissioner Bowles? I'll make the motion, yes, that the Executive Director provide a report for anything spent between, let's say, $50,000 and $200,000 on a quarterly basis for at least one year. Is it your intent to approve the proposed policy as well? Yes. Okay. So, the motion is to approve the approved policy with those conditions? Correct. Okay. Is there a second? I second. Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Bowles, seconded by Board Member Gray. Discussion of the motion? If not, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? No, nays. Policy is approved. Thank you, Mr. Nixon Elder. Thank you. So, next action item is an economics benefits of trails report from Jenna Gray from our TPO staff. Gordon, I'm sorry. I don't know where I got Gray. Well, I do know where I got Gray, but so, Ms. Gordon, good morning. Okay. Good morning, Board Members. I'm Jenna Gordon, TPO staff, and today I'll be sharing the results of our economic analysis of multi-use trails in Hillsborough County. So, as you all know, our county has a steadily growing regional trails network. In May, we saw the Florida Department of Transportation open the Howard Franklin Bridge Trail. And in June, the newly adopted transportation improvement program that we have now includes funds for the South Coast Greenway, the Bypass Canal Trail, and the Upper Tampa Bay Trail. And as these investments move forward, TPO staff have been investigating the potential returns on our investments. And the goal is to, with our partners with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, to explore the function of multi-use trails as economic infrastructure, to share their key impacts, and inform how to make the most of future opportunities. So, for what this study evaluates, our analysis assessed impacts within the existing multi-use trail network, which adds up to about 48 miles. And we also modeled a hypothetical 25-mile expansion, open-ended in terms of the specific routes, but enough to bring us roughly closer to the connectivity level on the other side of the bay with our neighbors in Pinellas County. We used four basic metrics. For visitor spending and tourism, we drew on trail counter data on the Pinellas Trail and scaled it to Hillsborough locations to assess visitor numbers. From there, we combined these numbers with spending benchmarks from local studies as inputs for InPlan, which is a widely used economic modeling program. Our property value insights are based on a GIS analysis of assessed values for parcels within a quarter mile of Hillsborough's existing trail network, and that's combined with local and national study data. And then we had estimates for household cost savings from using multi-use trails. Those were derived from the 2025 IRS standard mileage rate that taxpayers use to calculate deductions for certain transportation costs. And then finally, for jobs modeling under the proposed expansion scenario, we used a separate program, PI Plus, by Regional Economic Models Incorporated. To begin with some key findings, we found a potential for $8.5 million in household savings annually under the mature network scenario. We also found that 79 jobs are already supported per year under the existing network, representing $3.36 million annually in wages. So we can see that trails are already producing measurable economic returns. Trails also generate spending at local businesses, which include retail, lodging, restaurants. And under the current system, we found an estimate of about $9.9 million in annual economic output, again, supporting 79 jobs. Under the future connected network scenario modeled with M-Plan, we estimated more than $21 million in annual output. That's overall visitor spending and trail user spending, and about 171 jobs supported per year. Our takeaway is that connectivity in a trail network helps to drive visitation, and that increases the economic impact. For property values and redevelopment, we reviewed both local and national studies, state and national, and found that trails often are believed to increase the access, visibility, and attractiveness of nearby areas. Most studies show a typical premium of 3% to 5% in increased property values near trails. And in Hillsborough County, we currently have over 57,000 residential partials within a quarter mile of trails that are already here. And they represent about $23 billion in value as assessed by the property appraiser. For household cost savings, trails reduce reliance on driving for short trips. Again, using that IRS standard mileage reimbursement rate, which is about 70 cents per mile, it is 70 cents. That was our cautious estimate for driving costs. If, under the mature network scenario, people replaced just a five-mile daily round trip, no, a three-mile daily round trip with walking or cycling, would avoid approximately $875 per commuter per year in combined operating and ownership expenses. And that amounts to $8.5 million annually in avoided transportation costs. Right, I should go back. Replacing the five-mile daily round trip avoids about $875 per commuter per year. And, again, yeah, if 5% of the county population made a shift just to a three-mile round trip per week, that adds up collectively to $8.5 million annually. And that money increases people's disposable income, and it supports the local economy. In terms of jobs and infrastructure efficiency, trails support both construction and ongoing maintenance jobs. Our PI Plus modeling estimated about 440 construction job years would be sustained by the proposed 25-mile expansion. That refers to jobs sustained over a one-year period rather than necessarily created. And that is actually a higher job creation per dollar than other roadway investments. And it represents lower long-term infrastructure costs. So it is, in many ways, an efficient investment. For some final big-picture insights that we derived from those state and national studies, there are really three important factors that increase the impact of trail, multi-use trail investments. One is connectivity. Are the trails actually linked together or fragmented and separate? Their design quality and maintenance, are they well lit? Is the debris cleared? Is it a clean trail that makes people feel safe to walk on? That obviously increases usership. And then finally, integration with land use. The question is, do the trails lead to job centers, to commercial districts and neighborhoods? That's a crucial practical element. But the key point is that connected networks generate stronger and more sustained returns than just isolated segments. Our final message would just be that trails can be economic infrastructure and not just amenities. And our opportunity isn't simply in building more miles of trails, but connecting the system in a sustained, targeted way and producing something that's integrated and efficient for daily travel. And with that, I'll take any questions and thank our partners with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. Staff's recommendation is to accept the economic analysis report. Ms. Gordon, Commissioner Washten. I'll spare the board my thoughts about economic impact statements and their reliability. But I will say about the connected networks portion, Johnny, I would just encourage your staff to continue to work with Hillsborough staff. The commissioners identified a large sum of money in the renewal of the 2024 CIT that we don't even start collecting until the end of this year for trails. One thing I've discouraged staff from doing is continuing with the hardened, improved trails prior to the connectivity, because the connectivity will lay the groundwork for us then to go and start improving the quality. But we really need to stop putting the cart before the horse while we're will pay for a very expensive, hardened improvement for a small section to nowhere, similar to our sidewalks to nowhere throughout the county. So, but I will move to receive the report since I, oh, there's somebody else up there. There is another question, but I'll come back to you for that. So, board member Gray. Thank you, Mayor Ross. Thank you for that report. One of the items I think should be included is the idea of safety, because trails, use of trails, bicycle folks, and unfortunately little scooters and everything else, and runners, we use trails for safety versus roads. And I agree with Commissioner Wastel. The connectivity is very, it's a priority, because without the connectivity, you're really not getting the entire route finished, and it is a discouraging situation for many of those long distance or distance trail users. But I think the safety needs to be put within the report, because there is. And share your thoughts on that, Ms. Gordon, the safety aspect of trails. I do think that the safety elements are addressed to a degree under our emphasis on the design quality and maintenance. You're right, that absolutely is important, that riders are safe from both impacts and, yeah, just other considerations as well. I thank you for that. And, yes, I support the report. Thank you. Thank you, board member. Are there other questions for Ms. Gordon? I have a clue. Oh, Radhakrishnan. Board member Radhakrishnan. Thank you. Thank you for the report. To the point made on connectivity to drive utilization and, obviously, the safety aspect and the hardening aspect, you know, we all know Tampa is what touted as number one city in the nation for millennial migration. And there are other demographics that will utilize if it will take them from point A to point B in a safe manner. So, to the extent that is also dialed in when we do the study to meaningfully connect those land users and who the, you know, the end users are going to be. Thank you. Thank you, board member. Other questions? Okay, Commissioner Wastel, did you wish to make a motion? Yes. I move. Or do you need me to? Receive it as. I move to receive the report. Motion. Who is the second? Board member King. We have a motion by Commissioner Wastel, seconded by board member King. Discussion of the motion. Just have one comment. I agree with the comments that were made about let's do the routes before we do necessarily paving and all kinds of. An example of that, Commissioner, is I believe this is in the tip currently, is the trail. The county has a project for a trail between Morris Bridge and Bruce B. Downs. And I asked when that was in the tip, there's already a trail between Morris Bridge and Bruce B. Downs. It goes along the levee. It goes from. And the answer I got was, yeah, but they're going to pave it. And so this is not. Well, I guess it is as a resident of Hillsborough County. It's my government. But I was thinking of Temple Terrace. It's not a Temple Terrace project. But I thought at the time, I mean, and I'm an outdoorsman. My wife and I are hikers and bikers. I mean, we use these trailers. Probably not much trail in Hillsborough County that I haven't walked. And I would much rather see the county invest in expanding that trail south of Morris Bridge to Fowler than I would paving. I mean, part of the reason people walk on these trails is because they're hiking or they're biking. I mean, they're not, depending on your perspective, paving it is not even an advantage. It's like, well, they've ruined it, you know, depending on your perspective, obviously. And so I get it, but I would much rather see the county expand this and go along the bypass canal further south than I would paving a trail that hundreds of people use all the time. So that's my comment on the motion. So, Board Member King, did you have? It would seem to be counterintuitive. I don't think it's going on here. Okay. There we go. I'm sorry. It would seem to be counterintuitive to pave the trail. I mean, it takes, as you say, it ruins the value of the trail itself. Well, to be fair, I haven't had a conversation with staff, so I don't know what led to that decision. So it's a little unfair to presuppose that I know everything they know I don't. And it depends on your perspective. I mean, if you're mobility challenged and depending on the type of device that you're trying to use on that trail, you might feel exactly the opposite that I feel. It's like I want to use that trail and I can't because it's gravel. Well, there would be value in doing that. I don't think anyone wants to deprive someone of the ability to actually use it, but perhaps a little judicious restraint would go a long way. Yeah. So, again, I don't know all the facts there, so I don't want to disparage the staff. Yeah, me either. Okay. Commissioner Myers. In a separate motion, I think we can have executive director to look at extending, as you mentioned, and then come back to us if possible. So the motion is to accept the report. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Nays. Thank you, Ms. Gordon. Appreciate that. Johnny, I don't know if that's a good idea or not. You'll have to. Yeah. I hate my comments here. No, not at all. I think that's a good idea for the commission to. No, not at all. That specific trail segment was prioritized by Hillsborough County for ADA compliance. But that aside, I think the board is absolutely correct to hone in on prioritizing connectivity rather than some of the other amenities, right? Simply due to the fact that the full benefits will not be realized until there is connectivity. There are conditions that trail runners and riders will accept if they can get to their destination. But what they will not accept is not being able to get where they need to go. And so that is a suggestion that we were focusing on for the next wave of priority methodology changes. That was in the grouping that we were going to look at this year that we didn't approve of last year. Thank you. Yes, Mayor Kilton. And just it's not something that I believe this board would have jurisdiction over, but an overarching problem that we have in all of our municipalities are the e-bikes. And they're just so dangerous on these trails for runners and other users and something that we have to consider as part of the conversation on this. Boy, that's absolutely, yes. Okay. So that's food for thought, perhaps for future. We have a couple of status reports. The first one is Route 1 update from HART. And Jesus Peraza-Garcia is here. Good morning. Thank you. Good morning, Chair Ross, TPO board members, and Dr. Wong. My name is Jesus Peraza-Garcia, and I'm HART staff. I will provide today an update on Route 1, which includes a review of the 2025 pilot and a 2026 midway report. For context, the first Route 1 pilot started in January of 2025. The City of Tampa provided funding for increasing weekday frequency and making service fare-free for a year. And then in 2026, the fares came back, but the frequency increase got expanded. And that's the pilot we're currently in right now. So why Route 1? This route connects two major activity centers in the county or the region at large, downtown Tampa and University area. It is tied in first place for highest ridership in the HART system. It connects to the streetcar, and it also connects to 70% of the bus network. This corridor has been, the Florida Avenue corridor has been studied for premium service like bus rapid transit or streetcar extension. And lastly, it serves a lot of people and jobs, including transit-dependent populations. As a couple of examples, one in five people in the corridor don't own a car, and one in four live below the poverty line. The objective of the pilot was to determine if improved frequency and fare-free would increase ridership or grow ridership even more, inviting people to try transit. And I'll use that term a bit throughout the presentation, try transit, kind of inviting people to try it and if they like it, stay. So the 2025 pilot, I mentioned fare-free and increased weekday frequency from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes, 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. And this pilot had a cost of 1.65 million, out of which a million went towards fare replacement. So the frequency part of the pilot was only 40% of the cost. So ridership grew, as you would expect when you make something free, between 42% and 57%, depending on the day of the week. And on-time performance improved by seven points on weekdays, partly associated with faster boarding times, given there was no fare payment interaction anymore. Weekend on-time performance did go down a little bit, associated with overcrowding and lower frequency. Weekends are typically lower frequency than weekdays, and there was no weekend increase as part of this pilot. So you pair that with a ridership increase that was a lot higher than that a weekday, and you get large passenger loads that slow down service. We conducted surveys throughout 2025. From the surveys, we learned that 27% of riders were new to the route, which shows success on this tri-transit goal that I mentioned. 30% of regular riders mentioned that they were riding more than before, but they did comment that overcrowding was an issue. 80% of riders mentioned they would continue to ride when the fares came back, and 60% mentioned they connect to other routes. So almost two-thirds of riders don't realize the benefits of fare-free, because they had to pay for that other route. From the operator perspective, boarding times were faster, but there were high passenger loads, so there was some dissatisfaction, not only from the overcrowding, but also from the high number of non-destination riders. On the ridership front, we noticed that there was some shifting from Route 400 to Route 1, since Florida and Nebraska are only half a mile apart. But we wanted to look at net ridership growth in the Florida and Nebraska corridor as a whole, so adding the two routes. And the graph shows that the corridor did gain ridership about 13% for the year. So now moving on to 2026, that pilot, the fare replacement went away, but the frequency was maintained on weekday and increased on weekends and evenings at a total cost of $1.35 million. This one shows a snapshot of 24 to 25 to 26, so you see the weekday goes from light blue to green from 24 to 25, and then weekend and evening goes from dark blue to light blue from 25 to 26. So some data trends for the 2026 pilot. So here you see three tables. The first two are about Route 1. The last one is system-wide. The first one shows average daily ridership by day of week for the first half of the last three years. Same on the last one table, but that's for the system, just for comparison with Route 1. And then the middle table is about the evening ridership, and I'll touch on that at the very end. When comparing 26 with 25 ridership, you'll see a significant drop in the top table, second to last column. That's because the fare came back, as you would expect. The decrease was less significant on weekends, partially because weekend ridership is more consistent. There was higher frequency, which attracts more riders, and the tri-transit. We suspect that weekends ridership is more discretionary, so we suspect a lot of people tri-transit last year, and they stayed. When you compare 26 to 24, which is a bit more apples to apples because those two years had fares, and that's the very last column on the first table, you see ridership went up by 7% to 10% on weekends, which speaks to the impact of higher frequency, thanks to the 2026 pilot. The decrease on weekdays is part of a generalized decrease we've seen across the board. As you can see on the last table, the system also decreased ridership by 12% compared to Route 1's 8% on the top table, so Route 1 was better able to weather the storm, if you will. The generalized decrease system-wide is attributed to several factors, but this is a trend we're seeing across the state, so it's not an issue specific to heart. And again, on the bottom right, you can see that weekends are not feeling the impact as strongly as weekdays. Even from 25 to 26, the system-wide weekend ridership was fairly flat. I'm pointing at that minus 2% and plus 0.1%, so that's what I'm referring to as flat on the bottom right of the slide. And lastly, at the second table, the evening ridership went up by about 6% when you compare 24 to 26, speaking to the effects of higher frequency on evenings. The main message is that, fare-free aside, the current pilot is a success when you compare to 2024 service levels. We conducted a survey two months ago for the 2026 pilot. One in five respondents mentioned they were new to Route 1. Of the legacy riders, up to 19% mentioned they used Route 1 more than before. Of those, 58% they used it more because of the improved frequency. If not using Route 1, one in four people would not have made the trip at all or would use Rideshare instead. Four in ten respondents used Route 1 to get to work or to connect to other routes. And according to both riders and operators who took the survey, overcrowding is less of an issue this year. To promote the 2026 frequency increases, frequency increases funded by the City of Tampa Heart, invested on a media campaign including billboards, social media, transit advertising, and other digital media. The billboard is featured on the bottom left of the slide. That billboard is placed near the intersection of Fletcher and Bruce B. Downs. And also we conducted public and community partner outreach. We actually brought some rider stories to share. Somebody shared that it's helpful not having to worry about when the bus is coming because it comes all the time now, given the frequency. Somebody else shared they would be using it more. One of the reasons they didn't use it more before was because long wait times and the uncertainty of when the bus would. This was more like a bus overall comment, not so much about Route 1, but the higher frequencies notice on Route 1. And the last rider story is our friend Ingrid Smith, who's featured on the bottom right of the slide. In that photo, she's showing off that she's the all-time rider of Route 1 on the Transit app. And for context, Transit app is the trip planning app that we promote, and that app has a lot of gamification components. So there's like a scoreboard, a leaderboard, and there's like points you get for the more you ride. And here she's showing off. She's the number one. Here are some more photos of the extensive outreach that our community engagement team conducted. I really like the photo on the top center because the rider is showing off his sticker that says, I heart Route 1. Next steps, we will conduct another survey in December for operators and riders regarding the 2026 pilot, and we'll continue to monitor ridership and overall performance of Route 1. Before concluding, I wanted to reemphasize our gratitude towards the City of Tampa for their partnership on this project. With that, I thank you for your time, and I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you, Mr. Parraza-Garcia. Board members, questions. Commissioner Bowles. Thank you for that report. I appreciate it. I have two questions. First question, when the data that we're looking at comparatively were in June, it was a July to June or July to June? Was it all the same or was it there any kind of assumptions made? It was when we compared the different pilots, we did the same portion of the year. So January through June of 26, January through June of 25, and January through June of 24. So then it was only six months of data then? Yeah, because we wanted to do apples to apples. Okay. And you mentioned earlier in the report that, and I'm wondering if you could articulate, that we're seeing the data shows a downward trend in ridership, at least on Route 1, and then in some instances, and then across the board. And you said that there is a general trend across the state. Can you kind of expound on what those, what a few of those reasons may be? Yeah, there are a few factors going into play there. One of our theories is displacement of transit-dependent populations from the service area, so where they get access to a bus to places where the bus is not nearly as available. We have, somebody mentioned e-scooters and e-bikes earlier. I think it was you. No, it was Major Kilton. We also think that e-bikes and e-scooters are replacing a lot of transit trips, especially short ones. For the longer trips, we see people boarding the bus with their e-bikes and e-scooters, but, you know, those short trips are going away, so that it's a way at ridership. We saw some impact from paper pass elimination. That was in January of 2025. We used to issue paper passes at the fare box, and that doesn't happen anymore. So for some people, that created a barrier, so we saw some ridership decline for that. And lastly, Helene and Milton in 2024 changed travel patterns quite significantly, so we saw also some decline for that. Other questions, board members. Board Member King? I have a comment, sir. Thank you for your report, Mr. Perez-Garcia. As the numbers reflect, this was a very successful project. It's been in terms of introducing new riders to the HART system and to improving ridership generally on Route 1. I just wanted to express HART's appreciation to the City of Tampa for underwriting this project, and we hope that maybe in the future we can work on some other cooperative ventures. Thank you. Thank you, board members. Other questions? Okay. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Perez-Garcia. Appreciate your report. Thank you. Next is a 27 through 36 Transit Development Plan major update from HART staff. Not sure who is up. There we go. You guys are tag-teaming. Good morning. Heather Sobush, HART Director of Planning and Scheduling. Good morning, Chair Ross, TPO board members, and Director Wong. This is an informational presentation to give you an update on the Transit Development Plan, which is a 10-year guiding service plan and a requirement for transit agencies in Florida to receive state funding. Major updates are required every five years with annual updates required during intermediate years, and the one we're presenting today is the major update. As shown here, it is built on our comprehensive operational analysis that we conducted last year, and that it's closely tied to the TPO's planning process as it serves as it informs the first 10 years of the transit component of the 25-year LRTP. So this presentation is specifically focused on outreach that was conducted for the plan. We've done this outreach in partnership with the TPO and are very grateful for the assistance with funding and the consultant resources provided by the TPO. Last March, we conducted robust outreach with both riders and non-riders, including a survey, vision workshops, and internal in-reach with employees. We promoted the survey and workshops using the channels shown here. We received about 800 responses to the survey, where we asked respondents to rank in terms of priority, the desired connections, and potential improvements for HART service. The top priority connections included the airport to downtown, branded to downtown, and East Tampa to West Tampa. In terms of priorities for new or enhanced service, we heard better connections to other counties, as well as frequency and span improvements. There was also strong interest in bus rapid transit and more bus stop amenities. We held 10 in-person workshops throughout the county, with a total of 59 attendees. In these workshops, we asked people their priorities based on the area they live and their most desired connections and improvements. The top places people indicated they'd like better connections included Wesley Chapel, the university area, and downtown Tampa. The most desired frequency improvements were for routes serving Progress Village, Brandon, 56th Street, and Delmabry. Other common themes included increased frequency on hourly routes, support for bike lanes and sidewalk connections to bus stops, and improved information on detours and schedule changes. There was support for new types of service, such as bus rapid transit, airport connectors, and the streetcar extension. We also conducted two internal workshops that were held with bus operators, maintenance staff, and HART admin employees. You'll see similar themes here, as we heard from the public. In addition to the public and internal outreach, we interviewed key stakeholders and agency partners, including those shown here, to better understand their vision for transportation for the larger community, and how we at HART can work better with them to advance transportation improvements. Key themes from these interviews included prioritizing service that maximizes benefits to the most people, including frequency improvements on existing routes, improving the airport to downtown connection, and increasing HART's visibility within the community, particularly as it relates to communicating HART's benefits and accomplishments. So now that we've completed the outreach phase, we are working on coordination with the TPO to ensure consistency between the TDP and the LRTP, and we're also working on the development of the vision plan. So within the next couple of months, we will be finalizing that vision plan, as well as a 10-year operating and capital plans, including ridership estimation, financial plans, and a list of priority projects. This will be approved by the HART board in November and HART committees in October, and then in January, we will bring the final approved plan back to, and the vision network, to the TPO board and committees. That concludes my presentation. Thank you for your time, and I will now be happy to take any questions. Thank you for that. Are there any questions? Mayor Ross has departed. You are recognized, Member Gray. You know, my question is, and you may have covered this, but I did look at all the places that Heartlines tries to maximize their transportation system. But what about the growing areas, Apollo Beach, South Shore, Wayamama, and Mayor Kilton, maybe we have this already at Plant City. Those are huge growth areas. Plant City right now is not part of our authority, but for the other areas, we are looking at those development patterns and evaluating what would be the appropriate service improvements for those areas. And one of those options is looking more into possible microtransit-type services, which are typically used in places where the fixed route doesn't do as well because of the lower densities. But we do monitor the growth in all outlying areas and definitely look at how we could make connections. Okay. Well, thank you for that. Thank you. Is it Kluge? Okay, go ahead. Dr. Frisnett. Thank you. Good report on this. A question for you on the next phase, which I believe is going to go into the ridership study and things of that nature, right? Would you all include the top connections that came out of these surveys as well in the ridership study? Yes, we do. We have a model, and then we have input all of the vision plan components, and that will include the ridership estimations for the entire network, including those vision network improvements. Fantastic. And when you do that, you'll definitely take into account the densities, forward-looking densities that we are going to see along those connections. I'm talking about the airport in downtown, for example, right? And ridership is going to be modality agnostic, correct? It will be pure ridership. Correct. Demand. Thank you. Any other questions? I'll just make a couple of quick comments. Member Gray, you'll be pleased to know I've been actively pestering the CEO of Hart for transitioning the three empty 40-foot buses that currently go down from Brandon Mall to the Waimama area and researching the microtransit that was mentioned. And the reason that there is no transit down there is largely because something that we discuss on the Hart board all the time is that residential four density just simply cannot support transit. It's just not dense enough. You just don't get the ridership. So that's hopefully something that we can do. It's a challenge where I think that we have to find a partnership maybe with the county for parking the vehicles down there so they don't have to go potentially back and forth to the main facility. But it is something that we're actively working on, something like a small rotator from, like, Waimama, South Shore area, the hospitals, schools, et cetera. So, anyways, since this was information only, do I have a motion to receive the report? To receive. I have a motion, Commissioner Meyer. Second, Commissioner Bowles. All those in favor say aye. Like sign. Thank you. It's received. Thank you. All right. And we will move on to our next item, item C, which is an update from our former board member, Gina Due, on the Regional Infrastructure Accelerator. Ms. Due, it's nice to welcome you back. Thank you. Good morning. I'm Gina Due. I'm a project director with HNTB, and I am a project manager for the Regional Infrastructure Accelerator grant. And as many of you know, the city of Tampa was awarded a RIA grant from the United States Department of Transportation a little over a year ago. And we had the kickoff last August at the airport, and since then, we've been very busy of getting this to work, and I apologize for the date on that. This was actually when we announced the short list. So, what is RIA? It is a tool from the Build America Bureau that works to leverage innovative financing tools and investigate alternative delivery models. The projects that we're going to go through already had some level of planning done and were adopted into long-range transportation plans. So, these are not new projects. These are just unfunded projects that were existing on plans. So, again, we had the kickoff last August at the airport, and the city, the mayor really wanted this to be a regional approach. So, she brought on to the Tampa Bay Partnership and Demetra Simmons to really bring that regional conversation together. And then HNTB was selected as the technical piece for this. So, we are doing all the cost analysis and working through the list of projects. So, we completed the regional screening list, which was over 100 projects that were identified over three counties, Pasco, Pinellas, and Hillsborough, and also working with our other public agencies, such as Hart, PSTA, the airport, the FDOT, and some other conversations that we've been having with the city of Tampa, the city of St. Petersburg, and identifying these projects. We've conducted over 70 stakeholder meetings. We've executed memoriams of understanding with several of the agencies, and we completed the project long list screening. And then we identified the shortlisted projects, which I'm going to go through now. So, they are the West Shore Intermodal Center, the TPA to downtown premium transit, managed lanes on 275 from Lois to Ashley, the alternate US-19 bus rapid transit corridor, and the Envision streetcar extension. These are not in a priority list by any means. These are not something that we're going to prioritize. Those are, you know, left up to the local governing bodies on how to prioritize these and move these forward. So, you all are familiar with the West Shore Intermodal Center. This site was purchased in 2014 by the Florida Department of Transportation. It has some PD&E complete, and it would increase access to the airport, the West Shore Business District, the potential Rays Stadium, as well as the existing Bucks Stadium, and accepting transit connections from all three counties. The downtown to airport premium transit connection, this is at a feasibility phase. One of the things that is very important when I'm going through these is that we are technology agnostic. So, we are not recommending a form of technology. I know there's been conversations over the past 10 years of light rail, of extending the people mover system, of all of these things. And we think it's very important that everybody is technology agnostic, whether it is the connection from the airport to the multimodal center or this, because we don't know what is out there. And for the cost feasibility piece, we want these to be able to move forward. And sometimes the most preferred might not be the most cost feasible. And so, the local agencies are going to have to balance that out as well. The interstate managed lanes, again, this is from the lowest to Ashley, bringing those up from the Howard Franklin to the downtown interchange. And then alternate 19 bus rapid transit corridors. So, this would move people from South County up to Clearwater through Pinellas. And this is a PSTA one. And then the Envision streetcar extension. This would take the streetcar up to Armature Works. So, you would be able to go up through Armature Works and come down all the way over to Ebor. And really connecting all of those pieces through downtown. As downtown continues to grow, both with a residential and also with the medical district. And you think about, like, where the suns are playing and some of the other things of going to a lightning game and all these other pieces. This is just another way of increasing that mobility through downtown. So, where we are right now is we are going through the capital stacks and we are actually putting together the layer cake of financing of using some of the Build America Bureau tools as well as local revenue sources. We're looking at the CRA funds. We're looking at local tax revenues, those types of things that could be these funding layer cakes. And we are working with the public sponsors right now to go through some of these to show them what is possible. And then we will be publishing our report to the United States Department of Transportation next month. The good news is we've also been awarded a second round of funding. So, we have another million dollars to take these five projects a little bit deeper. But then also revisit some other projects that the public sponsors may not have been ready to move forward for this type of conversation. But that we can have a more robust conversation now. I think that it's two things that are very important to consider in this. That while these would bring these, advance some of these, some of these are still five to ten years out. That this is not, you know, some magic bullet that's going to come in and deliver these projects tomorrow. I think it's also important to understand that these public agencies are going to have to make some hard decisions. Because some of these funding pieces, you might have to weigh those options of this or that type of thing. But we are super excited to have this, this level of engagement across the region and super, I'm very excited as you all know. And, Commissioner, as you acknowledged, I spent a lot of time sitting here. And so, for some of these projects, I've been talking about these for over 13 years. So, personally, I'm excited to see some of these moving forward, as I'm sure many of you are as well. So, and with that, we do have a website that has more detailed information and all those pieces. And I welcome any questions. All right. Thank you for the presentation. Any questions? Go ahead, Councilwoman. Well, one, thank you for the presentation. I'm really excited when I'm, you know, hearing the vision of the streetcar extension. I know that's something that, you know, fellow council members often talk about. And I remember when the conversation about extending the streetcar years ago first came up. And when I was working with some of my students and we took them on the streetcar for the first time. And one of the questions that we asked them was, you know, how would you feel if you can get on the streetcar right from your house and your parent or your parents can get, you know, and go into downtown and go into work. And so, I think that's really exciting. And then also just, you know, as chair of CRA, I'm interested and excited to see when those conversations do come to our CRA board. So, thank you. Absolutely. Thank you. Commissioner Bowles or, you could, okay. Commissioner Bowles, you're recognized. Thank you, Ms. Stu. Just, again, I guess two questions. One, with the short list, four or five or five, I noticed that they're all kind of Hillsboro heavy. Is there a reason why Pinellas and Pascoe weren't included more kind of broadly speaking? Is that because they didn't have projects ready to go? So, yes, part of it was the readiness of the agencies. And, obviously, the city of Tampa was a little bit more ready for this since it was their grant. But when we think about these projects, the multimodal center is truly a regional asset because in our conversations, Pascoe's even talking about doing bus rapid transit down the veterans for the first time. The new PSTA buses that are going to the airport could go to that facility. So, when you think about bringing those people in, the managed lanes, another one where so many of the residents who live in Pinellas work in Hillsboro. So, there's that part of it. And, again, when you think about the downtown to the airport, that becomes a part of a transit system that could go up further north to, like, the growth at USF or continue over and those types of things. So, it's a great question. And we are revisiting with Pascoe and Pinellas as well to see, and we're going back to everybody of saying, okay, you might not have been ready now, but then, but are you ready now to move something forward? Yeah, I think of one particular area in Pascoe, 41 and 54, you know, or, yeah, 41 and 54, where that's, I know that it's scheduled to have something occur there. But, you know, those are the type of projects that, again, I'm not saying that we shouldn't focus on Hillsboro. I'm glad that we are, however, and recognize that we do need to certainly recognize the interconnectivity between the three counties. But, again, it was just kind of an observation. I was just wondering about that. No, it's a great question in that you're absolutely right. And I think that, like, with 41 and 54, because those are funded, they don't necessarily meet this. So, these were, like, unfunded pieces. But we are hopeful with the conversations with Pascoe. It's a great question. All right. Thank you. Member Radhakrishnan. Thank you. Gina, great to see you. On the first and second projects, right, the TPA, downtown connectivity, as well as the managed lanes, both could potentially be looking at the same right away initially because, you know, is that my correct understanding? Yes. So, you could do, like, a bus rapid transit down those managed lanes, and we are having those conversations. We had that conversation with your team on Monday, and we've been having that conversation as well with the Florida Department of Transportation. Because, basically, if you put that lane in there, you could use, potentially, the shoulder. You could use some, you know, the lanes, whatever it is, just the same way that the PSTA buses are coming over the express lanes now on the Howard Franklin. Fantastic. The second question, again, I couldn't help but, you know, connect the dots between the previous presentation and this with Hart, potentially doing a ridership study kind of for the same length from downtown to here, and you all potentially going that next tier below, if there is any synergies between what both of you all are doing. Absolutely, and Hart is somebody that we talk to regularly, just the same. We meet with our public sponsors pretty much almost monthly on these projects. We are in regular conversation with the Florida Department of Transportation. We have regular conversations with the City of Tampa, and we have regular conversations with Hart to make sure that we are in sync on those things. Because, and one of the big unknowns on this premium transit, which is what we're looking at here, is we don't know what the ridership looks like. So, the work that Hart's doing now can then project some of that demand that would help us narrow the scope of this project a little bit more and get more of that information out there. But we are in regular conversation with all the public sponsors. All right. Dr. Wong? Thank you for the presentation, Gina. I really appreciate it. My general question is, what can the transportation agencies and local governments do to be helpful as you start to close out this report and whatever comes next? But more specifically, I'm kind of wondering if you can explain, how do we get connected with private investors who might want to help us deliver these projects? Do we have a role in going out and attracting venture capital or investments from banks, or will they come to us? Like, who facilitates that connection? We are happy to do that. I think that's a great question. A couple of things. Let me, the first one, what you all can do is, we're more than happy to come meet with, you know, you guys, if you guys are presenting somewhere, if you have a group of constituents that you want to, like, showcase the work that's been done. But Mitra and I have been on a road show. We will go anywhere. We call it, we're booking concert dates. And the other piece of it, just, you know, awareness of these and supporting these projects, that these are of regional significance. And the question on the private equity, so the piece of HNTB that's been looking at this is we have a group called Advisory, and they are all financial, like, acumen, all those things. And we can work to identify some of those private developers that would be part of this conversation. And I think that it's also, you know, it's the public agencies going through the RFP process. I know, Thea, you know, I know, Mr. Slater, you've got yours out on the street right now of, I mean, think about what the airport did with the office building, that there are tools in your toolbox that you just have to get comfortable using a little bit. Thank you. Ms. Stu, it's almost like you're trained in media to avoid saying which technology you prefer on those routes. But I do appreciate, I think you made a salient and sobering point, which was that there's the reality that we can't keep expecting that we're going to have all of these different options. We just had a briefing on Route 1, right? Well, that was actually not free. It was a million dollars of City of Tampa residents' property taxes paid into an authority that has property taxing authority already. Well, that million dollars could have been used to potentially advance even one more inch of the rail line, the trolley or streetcar. And the point is that the more we keep spreading thins, the further we're going to continue to get away from bringing any one of these projects to reality. And I think that that's a conversation, a real conversation that we have to say is which one's the priority, and this is how we're going to commit to it. And so I wish you good luck on, I hope that you guys are having conversations. I know that we, I'm a big supporter of AV. We had Waymo in here. I've finally gotten in touch with Tesla's robo-taxi that launched here now. And hopefully you guys are including them in the conversation of a private entity that could be the solution and not just another potentially burdensome government one. And they're here, and I don't think that they're going anywhere. And I would love to share with you their contact information if you don't have it. Yeah, I'll get with you. I'll get with you. Because we have been talking to some of the private companies that could be doing these things, and it's a great point. Okay, great. All right, I see no other questions. May I have a motion to receive the report? Second. All right, Member Gray, motion, and second by Member Kink. All those in favor say aye. Like sign. That motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much, Ms. Dew. Good to see you. I'll talk to you in a second. We will move on to the Executive Director's Report. Dr. Wong, you are recognized. All right, thank you once again, board members, for a great meeting. My report is that the TPO special meeting will be held on September 1st, 2026. That's a Tuesday, not a Wednesday, like we normally have our meetings. We will be presenting you with some of the deliverables from Phase 2 of the merger report. I highly advise, strongly suggest that you attend if you are able to. We'll be covering a lot. So I'm really looking forward to having briefings in advance of that meeting so I can kind of walk you through the details of the interlocal agreement, bylaws, MOU, and a host of other materials. Our regular TPO board meeting for September will be held the following Wednesday on the 9th. There is a tri-county TMA meeting on October 2nd to also review the deliverables of the merger report. I do have some legislative updates to share. I'll begin with what happened in July federally. In mid-July, the comment period closed on a proposed rulemaking that would convert longstanding grant management guidance into regulations. Some of the broad impacts are that federal agencies would have greater discretion to terminate awards if deemed inconsistent with executive priorities. I'm sure that you're aware of this. It's not specifically related to transportation, although DOT grants would be affected by this new regulation. And to date, 20 states are challenging some provisions of that rulemaking. This Friday, locally, this Friday, our staff will be attending the Tri-County BOCC meeting. The agenda is dedicated to discussing the 2027 legislative program. So our staff will be attending and taking notes, and we'll report back to you at the September meeting. I also want to give a brief update on the Fort Hamer interchange, which was introduced by a public comment this morning. That is not specifically, or the initiative that was described is not specifically a TPO effort. The Little Manatee South and I-4 Urban Area Expansion Study is being conducted by the Planning Commission at the direction of the BOCC. TPO is involved only insofar as we're helping them understand the impacts to the transportation network. The specific project that was mentioned, Fort Hamer Interchange, we've spent a lot of time. The interchange is already adopted into the unfunded needs plan. If a federal grant is awarded or if the county decides to go out and bond, we'll need to update the long-range plan to show that as a funded need. But at this time, no action is required of us. And that is it for me, unless anyone has any questions. Any questions for Dr. Wong? Seeing none, do I have any old business? Any new business? Seeing none, this meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.