C-TRAN Board of Directors Meeting

0:00 (upbeat orchestral music)

0:30 (gavel bangs) (coughs) - Excuse me, all right. Time to start the C-TRAN Board of Directors meetings for March 10th, 2026. Let's go ahead and please stand and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Cindy, will you please call the roll? - Yes, Chair. Ryan Davis. - Present. - Will Fuentes. Bart Hanson. - Present. - Tim Hein. - Present. - Sue Marshall. - Here. - Ann McInerney-Ogle. - Present. - Eric Overhousler. - Here. - Kim Harless. Michelle Wagner. Joshua Waitz. - Here. - Excellent. Now onto approval of the agenda. Are there any additions or changes to the agenda?

1:29 Seeing none, I would entertain a motion to approve the agenda. - Move to approve the agenda in its entirety. - Second. - Got a motion and a second. All those in favor? - Aye. - Opposed? Motion passes. Now onto public comment. Anyone requesting to speak with the Board of Directors or any agenda or non-item agenda may come forward at this time. If attending virtually, the Chair will call on you when it is your time to address the Board. Public comments will be limited to no more than 60 minutes in total with up to three minutes per speaker. This may limit the number of individuals that are able to speak in person. Comments will be heard in the order that they are received. Written comments are still encouraged and will be accepted for the inclusion of the official meeting minutes. First up, we have Douglas Tweed.

2:26 - There we go. Am I on? Okay, thank you, Chair. Inboard. Douglas Tweed, Camas. So I'm strongly opposed to the extension of Tri-Mass Light Rail as part of the IBR project. I'm reading from this, which you have been given. There's several points. First of all, I object to the authorization last month to sign the IBR FECIS without having even seen or read it. Second point is C-Tran ridership numbers. That would be replaced by the light rail. Route 60 are still very low. I've gotten updated numbers, and the plot is on the third page. You can see it hasn't changed in three years. And then also, whenever Tri-Met light rail trains get in trouble, passengers are rescued by, guess what? Buses. That has happened on March 1st. There was a car accident on Tri-Met, and the passengers had to be rescued not by other trains but by shuttle buses.

3:25 So why spend billions more for a less reliable system? Finally, we need to put the light rail to a county-wide vote since it will affect all of this. So the first point, just my most important one right now, is from the minutes of the February 10th meeting, this is your action items about signature authority. And it says at the bottom, C-Tran signature indicates general agreement with the analysis, impacts, and the mitigation as outlined in the final SEIS. So at last month's meeting, the board with two in opposition voted to allow this FSEIS to be signed by the C-Tran CEO. However, as explained in the presentation by IBR executives, it still wasn't published. It wasn't available to be seen. And it's still not available. I was checking the IBR's website, and I couldn't find it. So how could you agree with analysis, impacts, and mitigation as outlined in this report if you hadn't read it? I was frankly shocked that you could vote

4:24 to approve a document I hadn't even seen. In my years of professional experience as a research scientist in the semiconductor industry, both private and in government laboratories, I would have never signed a report I hadn't seen or read, especially a technical report, that's my field. That would have been careless, unwise, and unethical. At this point, I wonder if it's possible for a board member to make a motion to rescind this vote and delay it until the full board has had an opportunity to study the FSCIS, if it's possible I urge you to do so. Second thing on ridership, this plot here that you've seen, I've got an extension for the last five months, and you can see it's the red dots, it's just flat. It hasn't really changed, about 890 per weekday average, estimated, hasn't changed, so still very low. And then finally, whenever TriMet gets in trouble, the light rail gets in trouble, passengers are rescued by buses.

5:24 Nine days ago, there's a report that's on, you can read that, January 19th, ice storm. Passengers rescued by buses. When it gets hot, passengers are rescued by buses. So why bother with the TriMet? - Next up, Margot Tweet.

5:50 - Good evening, board. I also was shocked at the last meeting that this board voted to authorize a report that none of the board had read. Definitely hadn't reviewed. The draft SEIS was thousands of pages, perhaps 10,000 pages, so it's not something that could be done quickly, even if you had it, but you don't, so I agree. I believe that the proper thing to do is to get the report and have the board have adequate time to consider all 10,000 pages or more and before authorizing approval of the report. One of the things that was very concerning that was given right here to the C-TRAN board was a forecast by IBR for 2024 ridership dates.

6:50 Now there is actual ridership data available, but instead, IBR chose to forecast the past for light rail, but there are no light rail stations or trains in Clark County today. So I've never seen a weather forecast for yesterday, and yet you're submitting this information to the federal government as valid and correct. That would be one thing you should look at. Another thing was a single data point about the number of people crossing the bridge, the pedestrians that was inflated, but a single data point was cited in the draft SEIS, and I sent an email that there was data from 2024 for every month on the north and south bridges that were not in the draft SEIS so none of the public

7:47 could comment on them, but those numbers were very different from that single data point. There's a lot of missing data documents that weren't shared with the public during the draft SEIS public comment period. So that's concerning. You should be concerned about it. I know that I am. And regarding your motion tonight, you should go back to what Michelle Belcott proposed, that it should go back to the original conditions, the ones that were agreed upon in 2022. That is not paying for light rail at all. And there was supposed to be a freight-only corridor. That seems to have gone by the wayside in favor of a bus-only lane that isn't even used for five hours a day. Meanwhile, the trucks are going 24/7, and they have no dedicated lane like they said they were going to do in 2022.

8:47 You should go back to the original conditions, just like Michelle Belcott proposed. Thank you. - Thank you, next up, Bruce Barnes.

9:11 - Good evening, Council and Chair. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. My name is Bruce Barnes, and I've got a couple concerns tonight to discuss, one being the Main Street Promise, where your buses go up and down it. The road is too narrow. It's 20 feet wide. There's not a middle lane, yellow line separating it, which would make it 19 feet. Your bus is 10 feet, mirror to mirror. Or 11 feet. The fire trucks are 10 feet wide. I've measured them both myself. Fire department folks are concerned about it too, and they're trying to do the same thing in the City of Vancouver, apparently on Broadway as well. Also, I did a field trip up to the Department of Transportation Commission meeting, and I'm gonna be making another one. And what I'm gonna do is respectfully ask the Chair to have an investigation of this board, because now there is apparently a text message

10:09 from Chair Sue Marshall from Clark County, basically colluding to remove Michelle Belcott off this committee. And I ask any of you, how would you like it if somebody had done this to you as a politician? As hard as it takes to get elected, as hard as it takes to gather money, as hard as you guys work to do what's right, it's not only an oath of office violation, but it's just wrong. And I would ask the Chair respectfully, before I go there, to try and resolve this with the three people that are involved in this, I would really ask this board to look into this. I mean, Kim, you know, as a city councilman, or woman, she had an ethics charge. She went through the whole process, right? She took her lumps, you know what I mean? And I think that that's what needs to happen, you know what I mean?

11:08 We gotta have ethical honesty, integrity. That's what people expect out of every one of you. That's what I expect. I expect that out of myself, you know what I mean? And I'm not here, there's no gain for me to be here. There's nothing. I'm not making any money off of this, you know what I mean? I'm here because I'm an extremely concerned citizen and a taxpayer. My taxes just went up another $1,000 this year, right? And when I see what I'm getting from my money, I'm not getting the bang for the buck, you know? And when you look at the mayor of Portland and his forecast and how badly in debt they are, what are we doing? I also talked to the director of the Department of Transportation. She was a very caring woman that's in charge of that. She also told me they don't have the money to build this bridge, straight up. She said that we do not have the money. They're trying to get the money, but they don't have the money. They said it's gonna be a 20-year project

12:06 that's gonna impact this area for 20 years. $1.3 to $1.6 billion in tolls they're gonna need. That's $14 or $12 each direction on that bridge. The taxpayers can't afford it. Thank you for your time. - Thank you. Next up, we have Deborah Katz.

12:34 - I'd appreciate it if people would stop reading when people are commenting. It's really rude, so please pay attention. So good evening, board. Has this turned on? Okay, thank you for the opportunity to address you again. I love history. I'm actually an Anglophile. I love British history. Everything old is new again. History repeats itself yet again, except for this time, you are King Henry VIII and the bridge for the light rail is Anne Boleyn. You see, the king was married for years to the same woman who was adequate. The queen even gave the king a daughter who lived, but a female couldn't rule on the throne. Because she didn't produce a male heir, the king looked for his once elsewhere at the behest of his courtiers.

13:34 You must produce a male heir to ensure the safety of our country. So he turned his gaze to a shiny new thing who was Anne Boleyn. She was young, educated, had a French flair and confidence about herself. She wasn't like all the other women at court. Along with that, she had all the promise of being fertile and giving the king a male heir. The thing he wanted most, but it came at great cost. So he pursued her with reckless abandonment, never considering the cost to himself, his marriage or his kingdom. For seven years, he tried to rid himself of his queen so he could have Anne. In the end, he got what he wanted. However, it destroyed his marriage, turned the kingdom on its head from being Catholic to Anglican, broke with the Church of Rome, beheading many of his courtiers in the process, i.e. Michelle Belkoff. Once he got her Anne, she gave him a child, a girl, Elizabeth. How disappointing. Still, she couldn't rule.

14:32 Eventually, he lost the initial lust he had for her. The shiny new thing wore off. He never got the male heir he wanted and never knew that his daughter Elizabeth would rule for 40 glorious years. The effects of those decisions are still in play today in England. You see, the shiny, sexy new thing here is not just the bridge, but the promise of what light rail will be, like having that virginal, new, shy, wonderful thing with all the prospects of joy and a green choice. However, it comes at great cost and will be like the king who wanted one thing, never looking at the possibilities of another answer. These decisions you make here today will have lifelong repercussions and cost to the residents for the rest of our lives. We'll be paying for that lust for the rest of our lives. Only bad men and Englishmen go out in the midday sun. For the sake of the peasantry, don't be King Henry VIII. Thank you. - Thank you. Cindy, do we have anybody online?

15:32 Nobody online? Okay, that moves us to the consent agenda. Would anybody like to pull anything from the consent agenda or? - Sure, I move to approve the consent agenda. - There's a motion. Do we have a second? - Second. - Motion and second. All those in favor, say aye. - Aye. - Aye. - Opposed? Motion passes. Now we're moving on to the presentation and that is C-Trans straight strategic priorities, 2025 progress update from chief executive officer, Leanne. - Thank you. Good evening, chair and members of the board. I know we have some new board members as well as others who were here when we developed the strategic priorities about a year ago.

16:30 So I'd like to briefly provide some context. In March of 2025, we held a two-day staff workshop facilitated by TransPro to identify key performance areas we should track to ensure we're in alignment with our mission and vision values. The outcomes of that workshop were presented to the board during the April, 2025 board workshop. And in September, 2025, the board formally adopted the strategic priority. As you see, since that time, staff has been collecting and tracking data tied to these priorities. What I'd like to do now is walk through the scorecards and provide a snapshot of how we're performing across each of these areas. Because this is our first reporting cycle, tonight's presentation is really about establishing our baseline. Customer experience, our net promoter score. This metric measures customer loyalty and satisfaction by asking riders how likely they are to recommend C-Trans.

17:29 382 responses were collected through the website, social media, and on-street customer service and operators. Many factors can influence the scores that you see before you. But while we did not meet the goal, this provided our first reliable baseline. We take all feedback seriously and will work to improve results over time. The goal will be reviewed and adjusted annually. On our on-time performance, this tracks the percentage of buses that arrive at the end of the route within the scheduled time window. This is for fixed route, and this is more than, no more than one minute early and, or five minutes late with them arriving at the end of the line. For demand response, we had, that measures the percentage of CVAN and current trips where customers are scheduled for pickup and drop-off on time performance. As I know, ADA, we don't really have a,

18:29 we do not have room to cancel or cannot cancel per ADA regulations, so there is no cancellation or drop time that we can present to you on this. But for fixed route, our drop time trips did improve, and we got a good score, and this measures the percentage of scheduled fixed route trips that were canceled or not completed. This measures applies only to the fixed route service, and the only, like I said, the only way we could cancel ADA paratransit is if there was any extreme weather, severe weather that have to be severely, icy roads, snows to even be a possibility for cancellation. For bus cleanliness and compliance, maintenance was able to meet theirs at 100%. This measures deep clean that happens in our yard

19:26 30 to 40 days for all fixed route vehicles. The Vine vehicles do have more frequently clean, as that is our higher ridership buses, and are frequently used more often. As you see, this is in addition to what our vehicle service workers do that are at the transit centers that do the touchpoint cleaning through our day-to-day service.

19:51 Employee engagement, while this goal wasn't met, this was the first engagement survey conducted in several years, giving us a fresh baseline. More than 200 employees participated. The executive team is currently reviewing and working with departments to identify improvement actions and responses to inquiries. Field positions track vacant operator and mechanic positions where they're critical to maintaining our reliable service. And employee retention measures the number of employees at the end of each quarter compared to the beginning of the quarter, giving us a snapshot of workforce reliability. Access is a measure to the percentage of bus stops that meet ADA accessibility standards. The goal is not met primarily due to staff capacity

20:49 constraints and focus on Route 12 infrastructure investments This project prioritized installing new stops rather than upgrading existing stops. This year our focus has shifted towards stop accessibility and improvements. Here you can see how our planning team has over the years been making stop improvements throughout the system.

21:16 For access, there is a, here we go, access, bus stops or goals were not met, but measures the percentage of bus stops that met ADA accessibility standards. The goal was not primarily due to staff capacity strengths and focus on Route 12 infrastructure and POPS, excuse me, investments as we measure, sorry, I got a little off track there. Okay, we're at access to C-TRAN services, excuse me. So measures to the percentage of the public transportation benefit area population within one third mile of any C-TRAN bus stop or current zone. This reflects whether people can realistically access transit within walking distance of their home regardless of service frequency. This measure does not include paratransit,

22:15 which is an eligibility-based service. For stop access, 30 minutes service measures the percentage of the population within one third mile of a stopless service every 30 minutes on weekdays, hourly and weekends. This indicates whether residents can reasonably access frequent and reliable transit options. And our 15 minutes service measures the percentage of the population within one third mile of the service operating every 15 minutes. While this goal was not met primarily because population growth in Clark County occurred outside existing frequent service corridors and no new frequent service corridors were added. One quarter was removed due to low productivity, which is a Route 34. We look to continue partnership with local jurisdictions to promote transit supportive development. The upcoming Highway 99 BRT is expected to significantly improve performance in this area. - Leanne, this seems like a tough metric

23:14 because there's stuff out of your control. If to access the bus stop, there is not an ADA curb cutout. How much control do you have over that because it's gonna limit the access to the bus stop? - That is where the ADA accessibility bus stop improvement comes in to play and how we're looking at how we can provide those cutouts that are needed to access, for access for customers that, so they don't have to ride paratransit or demand response, or B-van to get to where they need to be. So that's where working with our local jurisdiction parties for locating land use and whatnot and how they're gonna build so we can be a part of that plan of having those cutouts available for bus stops. - Thank you. - So fiscal sustainability, our budget adherence,

24:11 the metrics reflects preliminary 2025 budget to actual financial performance. C-TRAN is projected to finish the year approximately 4.6% under the adopting operating budget, which is within our target of less than 5% variance. Maintaining a strong budget discipline will be particularly important as we prepare for potential fiscal deficit in the coming years. As you see, the fixed route cost per hour, BRT cost per hour, paratransit, the current, and vamp pool cost per hours are going to, are establishing starting January of this year with us starting to track this data and change how we track this information. It did not make sense, or we're not able to realistically go back and redo all of 2025. So finance is making, has made changes,

25:11 and we'll be tracking this through starting the first of this year. C-TRAN, we updated financial codings to ensure this metric reflects fully loaded operational cost. So next report out, we'll see more on those areas. Ridership, local bus ridership reflects trips on fixed routes within Clark County, only showing strong demand for shorter local trips for daily needs. And I think as we've expressed prior, we've seen how the, how people's travel demands and patterns have changed over the past year since COVID has happened. So our local ridership has been doing great and has been at or above what our pre-pandemic levels are. Express bus ridership reflects routes crossing the Columbia River to downtown Portland. This goal was not met due to no additional service added

26:10 or no service investments were available. We expect improvement with the opening of Salmon Creek Transit Center to make an improvement. Regional bus ridership reflects routes crossing to Columbia River to connect, crossing the Columbia River to connect to TriMet Transit Center's MAX service. This goal was not met due to no additional service hours needed as well. Planning staff are currently evaluating potential adjustments to the route 65 and 67, and as well as proven connections in Portland, including airport access. Vine ridership represents the red and green lines. Service experience, services experience significant construction delays during Q4 and downtown Vancouver during 2025. And now since then, we are seeing travel times have already improved, especially on fourth plane

27:07 due to City of Vancouver's business access to transit, as you may hear bat lanes referred to as that, is the red line, the red roadway, goodness, the red roadway on the main streets where you can see where buses are able to access their stops and be able to pull out easier. CVAN ridership, as you see, has a negative 3.9 is our goal, and that's because we want to manage our CVAN ridership. This is due to it being our, it's a door-to-door service for riders who are unable to use fixed route transit due to disability or mobility and limitations. This is a vital and critical service, but is it also is one of our most expensive service. So as part of our access card

28:04 with creating the ADA bus improvement stops, this would allow more access to individuals not relying on our CVAN ridership, CVAN service to ride, and they'd be able to have more access to our fixed route and the current. So we're looking to decrease our percentage of CVAN ridership for that. So we're working on that as it will tie into our access. And then the current ridership tracks trips on our non-demand service, which is particularly valuable in areas that are not well served by fixed route. Again, you see a negative in our Q4 results, but this is while the fourth quarter number may appear to show decline, that primarily reflects normal seasonal ridership patterns. As demand typically decreases during the holiday seasons and winter weather months, and our highest riders usage are usually the youth. And so with school and holidays being out,

29:02 that tends to affect the numbers, as well as for the full year, the current provided more than 50,000 trips represented nearly a 50% increase compared to the previous year. So we expect this to start to level out as we have grown the service by expanding it to battleground. And in addition to the part-time, adding the addition of the part-time workers, which allowed us to increase service availability and respond to the growing demands. - So on the current ridership, it's down 10, oh, thank you. Current ridership is down 10.9%. Is that measuring it over prior quarter? - That's for Q4 quarters. So that's why starting this report out is kind of a hard picture to paint, showing that we went into a negative for this,

30:02 just showing what our current numbers were for Q4. Is there more of a? - No, and I think, boy, excuse me, I'm getting choked up here too as well. The numbers that we're looking at here represent just the last three months of 2025. And so when you're looking at the fact that it's 10.9%, my understanding is that's compared to quarter three of the same year in 2025. And in the third quarter of 2025, that's when we implemented the new dedicated operator pool for the current service. And we saw significant percentages on the increased side. I don't know, Taylor, if you know the number off the top of your head, but it was a significant increase. And so as we, as Leigh Ann mentioned, as we moved into the fourth quarter, whether more holidays, we typically see

31:00 throughout the system, not just the on-demand and current service, lower ridership levels. So if you look at 2025 as a whole, and we will be having a more detailed ridership presentation that Taylor's going to give at the April board meeting, you're gonna be able to see that, you know, while we wanna track these metrics on a quarterly basis, when it comes to ridership, it's really important to look at the trend lines and to look at, in this case, all of 2025. So you could see how everything kind of measured out. But at times looking at these, especially when you're looking at ridership in the fourth quarter, the numbers are gonna be a little bit up and down, just because of the time of year it is. - That helps a lot, thank you. From my perspective, it would also be helpful to look at prior year of the same quarter. We're getting a quarter to quarter perspective. You know, how's year looking, and then how is the prior year, same quarter looking?

31:59 We can kind of see that. - Yeah, and I think that's the benefit, since we're just getting started with this type of a reporting system as we're going forward, it's a great idea to be able to look back and compare Q4 '26 to Q4 '25. And so that will definitely be a part of this going forward. - Just looking at this is really helpful, thank you. - Our paratransit service conversion is a measure of how often CVAN eligible riders use fixed route or the current instead. So this is tracked through the hot pass that individuals have. Again, improving our stop accessibility will continue to support this progress and give us progress in this area. And last but not least is fixed route weekend ridership. Reflects weekend ridership on routes within Clark County. This indicates shifting travel patterns toward local weekend trips.

32:58 Again, it's another travel pattern that has expanded and our weekends have gotten busier since COVID. Recent weekend service investments are producing a strong and sustained ridership growth. Like I said, while Q4 is typically, and Scott mentioned our time for lower ridership, overall we are seeing across these measures is the demand for transit continues to grow and our service are adapting to meet the different ways people are choosing to travel in our community. And as we continue tracking these measures over time, they will help us better understand trends, identify areas where we are performing well and highlight where additional attention may be needed. Ultimately, these priorities help ensure that the work happening across the organization stays aligned with the strategic direction set by this board and the needs for the community we serve. They also serve as an ongoing reminder of why we do the work that we do. This concludes the update on our strategic priorities and I'll give it back to you chair for any more questions.

33:57 - Yeah, thank you for this. This is, I agree, very valuable. One metric that I was hoping to see and maybe I missed it, but I wanted to ask about it anyway, is do we have goals related to fare recovery? - We do not at this time. And that doesn't mean that we can't as we continue to make onion layers and peel them back. But at this moment, we did not identify that as metric. - Thank you. - Thank you, chair. - Leigh Ann, as you set the goals for 2026, just for example, in ridership, what might that goal be for CVAN ridership? - The goals we do not, we're not changing on the scorecards. Is that what you're talking about? The goals that are set on the-- - Well, it's a negative 3.9%.

34:56 - Well, that is our goal. So there's room for discussion on that. As we were going through these slides and getting this data together, we did identify that there's room for discussion, not quite sure where that would land at this moment. We're still gonna kind of track and see how it goes and how our accessibility with our ADA stop improvements and all that stuff if it makes a difference or if there's something we need to adjust to make it a realistic goal. - And is that a discussion of staff or in combination workshop with this board? - We would update the board with any discussion if we were to look at changing this 'cause we identified this as an initial goal for the board to initially adopt. So we would update you with that and give you an opportunity to give any input. - So are we, since we're in 2026 and we're almost done with that first quarter, might this be on the agenda for April?

35:54 - It could be, yes. - Are there other goals that you have here that, for example, under the fiscal sustainability, establish a baseline? Could those items be on a board discussion, a board workshop, or is staff establishing the baseline? - So this is, again, we're not looking to change 'cause this is our first time reporting out and creating the baseline. If there's a discussion you would like to have to explore, maybe if we need to look at adjusting, we are more than open to having that discussion and see where we land on that. - Chair, I wonder if the board could be asked which of these items, which of these goals are important to them to have input on that decision-making process?

36:51 And it doesn't have to be tonight. It could be a Survey Monkey or whatever, but if we're basing finances and such on ridership and fiscal sustainability, I believe the board should have input on what those goals are. - And to add to that, ideally, when we get our date finalized for the board retreat, this would, we were looking at to review our strategic priorities, and if there's adjustments, we can discuss them then too, so we can do that for you. Thank you. - Thank you, Chair. To put it back to that, I think that that would be great to be able to review these at the retreat.

37:50 My question was on slide 16, and thank you for the presentation. ADA-Accessible Bus Stops, do all the cities know, like for example in Kamath, do we know where we need to improve and have our ADA-Accessible Bus Stops? Because if-- - The short answer is yes, and we could get some more detail, our planning team interacts very regularly with our partner jurisdictions, and a lot of that, I think we've talked about this in relation to the update of our long-range plan, because the cities and the county are still going through the comprehensive plan updates that we're working really hard to kind of link those long-range plans with some of C-TRAN's future long-range plans. So we're being able to really make headway,

38:48 and I think Taylor can share some more precise data, perhaps as part of the presentation next month in ridership about the advancements and improvements we've made to cut that deficit down. So hopefully in not too many years from now, all of our stops will in fact be ADA-Accessible, and then going forward with new development, we're gonna have things in place that will help ensure that that happens. - Thank you, because if it's happening, if they're identified, improvements are happening with the cities, that's great, but if there's something we can do to improve it quicker. - We'd wanna know, you know, yeah. - It's great feedback, appreciate that. - Thank you. - Any other questions? I see a lot of this, like we would see our fire departments at our local, where we're representing, the standard of coverage is something that is developed by staff and then amended through time. When you take a look at, you know,

39:48 suppression's response to medical or a fire, it could be within nine minutes of, you know, from call to arriving at the scene, and an ambulance arriving within 11 minutes. And then when you take a look at like Marine, for instance, it's new, and you're learning, you know, was that a reasonable metric from the beginning? So that's kind of how I would see this unfolding. Please continue. - Yeah, I'll agree with this. Like I said, this is to set our baseline and further discussion as much needed as we learn and see what becomes realistic. - Are you finished? - I am done. - Okay, I just wanted to make sure. Just wanted to make sure, thank you. Since there are any other questions, we're gonna be moving into executive session. This board will move into two executive sessions.

40:46 The first pursuant to RCW 42.30.1101 III litigation or legal risk of a proposed action or current practice that the agency has identified when public discussion of the litigation or legal risks is likely to result in adverse legal or finance consequence to the agency. The labor representative will be excused for the second executive session begins. The first executive session is going to be RCW 42.30.1101 III litigation or legal risks of a proposed action, no, no, I'm sorry. The second executive session is going to be the chief executive officer evaluation review pursuant to RCW 40.30.1101 G. And the first executive session is going to go 10 minutes. The second is going to go 20 minutes.

41:43 So that's 30 minutes and that would be 641. And now we will go into executive session. You're gonna miss anything? All right. Thank you. Coming back out of the executive session, Cindy, will you call the roll? - Ryan Davis. - Present. - Bart Hanson. - Present. - Tim Hein. - Present. - Sue Marshall. I see you. - Yep, I see you. - Ann McInerney-Ogle. - Present. - Eric Overhulster. - Here. - Kim Harless. - Michelle Wagner. - Here. - Joshua Waits. - Here. - Michelle Belcott. - Present. - All right, first action item is a discussion, possible action, regarding CEO compensation,

42:42 which is a standard responsibility of the board. We will now open this item for discussion. - Chair, point of clarification would you like us to discuss our personal feelings and interpretation regarding the evaluation of the CEO compensation? - Well, your personal feelings are always welcome, Tim. (laughing) But as far as the compensation, was there something you'd like to add to that? - Well. - Yes, Chair, thank you. - Thank you. - And I welcome, obviously, with this motion discussion to follow, but given the discussion, review of the evaluation of chief executive officer, Leanne Kaver, I make a motion to increase

43:40 current base compensation by 2.5%. - I will second that, Chair. - We have a motion and a second, but let's keep this open for discussion. Do we have anyone else that would like to chime in? Eric? - Being rather new to this board, three months in, I did ask my predecessor, Cory, for his input on this as well and just from what I've witnessed and from what I'm seeing, Leanne, you're doing a phenomenal job. And as the board member, I appreciate that, but as a member of this community, I appreciate that even more. And so I would just encourage you to continue on the path that you're on. You're doing a phenomenal job leading this organization and I look forward to the future and what it has in store for you.

44:35 - Any other takers? - I'd like that. Thank you. Leanne, I agree completely with Eric. I know that from the perspective of the City of Kamas, we appreciate the engagement C-TRAN has with our community directly. We also see it in the presence in other areas of the service area. I personally enjoy the opportunity to work with you. I see a very, I sense a high degree of trust with you and your team, which is extremely important, especially as we continue to navigate challenges that will lie ahead, especially fiscal one. We're all gonna have to make adjustments, changes.

45:35 You open a change and trust helps to do that. So thank you. Look forward to continuing to work with you. - All right, not seeing anybody else. I'm gonna jump in. Leanne, I think you've done a fantastic job. I think your team has done a fantastic job because if you don't mention the team, then there really go, but I only have 1/9 of a say in how this works up here. And when I look at where we were last year and where we are this year, any deficiencies that are out there as far as your performance, I take some responsibility on. And the reason that I do is because the guidance that comes from a board can be difficult if you're not getting that guidance and getting that direction. So I'm gonna work very hard this year as the chair to make sure that you do get the proper direction from this board and feel that you are confidently moving forward in what our directives are.

46:33 And I just wanted to relay that I'm gonna end on a good note, okay, and you have done a fantastic job. So any other discussion? Not seeing any, I have a motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. - Aye. - Aye. - Aye. - And opposed? See, I haven't asked twice. Not hearing any, motion passes. All right, moving on to proposed amendment of board resolution BR22-004, exhibit A. I'm gonna go ahead and defer to you, Mr. Davis. - Yeah, thank you, chair. So I have submitted I guess something for us to consider in regards to addressing our current predicament legally as well as the division that we have had on our board for a little bit over a year.

47:33 And so it is a proposed amendment to board resolution that, well, it amends section A.2. Going into this thought process, the three priorities have been, for the city of Bridgefield at least, how do we keep the members of C-TRAN together? How do we keep the bridge project at priority? And assuming the bridge is gonna have a light rail component, identifying that the money that pays for that is new money. And so it was trying to find that middle ground, and I'm hopeful that what I put forward is gonna be something that hits those marks for all of our jurisdictions so that we're able to, for one, move forward together, but also end our entanglement

48:32 with the state of Washington as well and be able to just start pursuing the work that's in front of us. So I'm gonna move to amend section A.2 of the modified locally preferred alternative as follows. C-TRAN may participate in funding the operations and maintenance of the bi-state transit, including any new park and rides that may be constructed or co-located, station maintenance, security, and other operational support as agreed to, and part of the project. Funding authorized as part of this section may not come from RCW 82.14.045 sales tax revenues previously approved by the PTBA voters, which are collected outside Vancouver city limits, or the Vancouver urban growth area. This shall become effective

49:30 after the following actions are completed. Number one, the BCRC recommends to and the C-TRAN board adopts composition of the C-TRAN board consisting of four directors for the city of Vancouver, three for Clark County, and a combined total of two directors representing the cities of Battleground, Camas, La Center, Ridgefield, Washougal, and the town of Yakult, and two request the dismissal with prejudice of Clark County public transportation benefit area versus Washington State Department of Transportation, Thurston County Superior Court number 25-2-04051-34, by WSDOT with the support of named parties of said suit sitting as members of the BCRC. - Second. - We have a motion and a second.

50:29 Now let's get to discussion. We'll put all your hands up at once. - Yeah, I can weigh in a little bit on this. Battleground is in its support of this. I think this is something that'll get us over the hump of the hesitance that we've had to engage with the light rail and IBR and having that weight carried by our tax pick Battleground. Again, we don't want to be in a hindrance or get in the way of the bridge replacement. And if light rail needs to be funded by C-TRAN, I agree with that, that it should be new money, not the existing funding. We know C-TRAN needs that funding to operate at their current operations level.

51:25 And so Battleground is in favor of that. Thank you. - Thank you, chair. City of Kamas also agrees with this as a compromise that we're in support of bridge replacement. We don't want to get in the way of that. We support it. We want to stay as a positive member of C-TRAN. Services are valued and increasing in value. But City of Kamas does not want to help fund additional services for light rail, to have the citizens pay for purposes of light rail. And we want those to be limited to City of Vancouver or the Vancouver Urban Growth County. Thank you. - Sue, you have your hand up. - Yes, I do. Thank you. I think with that, we were on the verge of adopting something very similar to this. It was good that we took a step back and not rush the decision.

52:24 Gave our council a chance to discuss this and I would be supportive of this. - Washougal City Council's been briefed. They're supportive of this new language. - All right, I'm not seeing any else for comment. So we have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. - Aye. - Aye. - Opposed? - No. - And so it passes. Taking a look here that moves us onto communications from the chair, which, you know, last night I took the number 25 and I had my umbrella, I had my backpack and it's been a while. I took it to the State of the City address and it's been a while since I've ridden for,

53:21 other than, you know, having a good time on the longboard. But basically taking the number 25, it was one of those where the buses, the two opportunities that I had for that purpose were full, anywhere between 16 to 18 riders and it was a great experience. So, you know, when you only get a glimpse of using it only so often, it is one of those things when you do use it and you have that experience, it's positive fun. So, good job. Anybody have any communications from the board?

53:59 - Thank you, Chair. Just one, I'd like to thank C-Tran, Leanne, Scott for sending me the assumptions as I requested from the February 10th meeting on the IBR ridership assumptions. So, thank you for that information. - Yeah, thank you, Chair. I just, through conversation we were having recently, internally, we were talking about how in Richfield we have the current service but, and we also have system-wide the Youth Opportunity Plan. And talking about opportunities that we might have to let, you know, our, especially like families of teens and things like that be aware that, you know, for transportation throughout the city, this is a, more or less a free to them resource and how do we leverage that?

54:58 So, I guess I bring that up of saying, you know, I'm hoping we can start maybe having some dialogue about how we can work on that outreach so that, you know, our community is better able to utilize that resource that we provide. So, thanks. - All right. Seeing no other comments. From the Chief Executive Officer.

55:26 - Thank you, Chair. And I'm going to say thank you to the Board of Directors for your encouraging words and your guidance through this past couple of years. And I look forward to, well, we're going on second year, which is crazy, but look forward to further guidance and your leadership through this process. So, appreciate it all. And thank you to my fabulous executive team and the rest of the employees of C-TRAN that make this place a successful place to work in providing service to our community. So, thank you to all. I wouldn't be successful without you. Again, and to, Ryan, to your request, we can have our travel trainer. I can get with our customer service manager. We can work some plans out with getting our travel trainer out in the area to figure out how we can further educate and battleground. I think, yeah. I think we did when we first started the current, but we can do more. So, yeah, just let us know. And Bart, thanks for the kudos. It's always good to hear the positives of what we do in the community, so thank you.

56:26 Speaking of thankful, our Transit Employee Appreciation Day is next week on March 18th. So, this is a national day that is recognized by transit agencies across the country. So, this is a great opportunity to recognize the incredible team at C-TRAN who keeps our system running every day. We will be inviting the community members to share shout-outs about their favorite transit employees. You'll be able to see on our website. So, please make sure to send positives and thank yous to all of our employees that are out there making service successful out there and providing that to everyone. 10 years on March 22nd, they'll be celebrating the 10th anniversary of Poetry Moves, which features local poetry on board C-TRAN buses. Since the program began, we've showcased 15 collections of poems, bringing local art into writers' everyday transit experience. The celebration will take place at the Magenta Theater in downtown Vancouver, and we'll have a bus there

57:23 displaying the current winning poems. So, this program is made possible through our partnership with Artstra, a local non-profit arts advocacy organization. So, that's always a fun thing to do. Another layer too, as we highlighted on our access of ADA stops today, we have partnered with Portland State University's Master of Urban and Regional Planning program. They're working with our planning team to develop a bus stop accessibility plan. So, this goal is to create a roadmap for bringing C-TRAN bus stops up to ADA accessibility standards. So, this supports an important priority for our system while giving students meaningful real-world experience of transit. We look forward to getting that roadmap together and sharing that with you guys as it comes up alive. And last but not least, we're continuing our community partnership with the Vancouver Bears Basketball. If you don't know who that is, they used to be known formally as the Vancouver Volcanoes.

58:21 They still offer discounted tickets for fans who ride the transit to their home games at Hudson Bay. We'll also help highlight the team's community engagement work throughout the season, and they're off to a good start. They won their re-season opener last weekend against Yakima Heat. And that is it for tonight. - Well, the time is 7.47. Oh, did I, oh, I almost forgot our little counsel. Hong, you were ready to jump in there, and I had it coming. - I don't have any comments, but thank you for asking. - Thank you, I'm new at this, okay? The time is now 7.48, and seeing no further business, this meeting is adjourned.