- Welcome to the Bloomington Metropolitan Planning Office Technical Advisory Committee meeting for May
- 27th, 2026. Thanks for being here and everybody online. Katie and Pat, were you guys gonna go over some
- of the online protocol today, or should I mention that first? Go ahead and touch it. Yeah, so for anybody
- here who is a voting member online, please, if you are gonna be voting, you need to have your camera
- turned on before you vote, and that's kind of the,
- The big thing there. Did I cover that? Yeah, I think that's good. So I think we're probably good to
- go. Should we do a call to order and introductions? Sound good. I guess I maybe did the call to order.
- Welcome to the technical advisor committee meeting. Sorry, I got back from a road trip yesterday, so
- I'm a little bit out of it. I guess we can start with introductions. Maybe at the left, Ryan, would
- you be willing to start first? Sure. Ryan Roebling, proxy, David Hittle.
- Jane Fleague, City of Bloomington Utilities. John Baton, GIS Coordinator, Monroe County. Kelly Whitmer,
- Monroe County Parks and Recreation. Tammy Bierman, Monroe County Planning Department, Acting Director.
- Hunter Jackson, Proxy for the Monroe County Auditor. Cheryl Gilliland, Deputy Controller, City
- of Bloomington, Proxy for Jeff McKim, Controller, City of Bloomington.
- Lynette Tavernier, Monroe County Highway Department Operations Asset Manager, alternate for the Highway
- Engineer. Linnea Wellings, NDOT, proxy for Rebecca Packer. Max Dyer, City of Bloomington, GIS, proxy
- for Megan Blair. Amy Garataz, Area 10, Agency on Aging Rural Transit. And we do have one non-voting
- member online.
- Great. Do they introduce themselves? Go ahead, Sam. Hi, Sam Tobin-Hockstadt. I'm here representing the
- Citizens Advisory Commission since John can't be here today. Awesome. Thanks, everybody. With that,
- I guess we'll move to an approval for the agenda from May 27th, 2026 or today. Can I have a motion to
- approve? So I'll move. Second. Thanks, Jane and Ryan.
- And is this gonna be a roll call vote, Katie, or? You should be able to do an all in favor. Okay, so
- if we could get an all in favor, everybody say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay, you need
- to speak into the microphone, Tammy. Okay, so we are good.
- One abstention from Tammy Berman, the proxy for Jackie Gellenexter. Next, we'll move to a motion to
- approve the minutes from April 22nd, 2026. If I could get a motion to approve. Move approval. Second.
- Thank you, Jane and Ryan. And again, we'll do a all in favor vote. All in favor, please say aye. Aye.
- Any opposed?
- Say nay. Any abstentions? Thank you, everybody. And this brings us to communications. Am I going too
- fast, Katie? Sorry if I am. Okay. This brings us to communications from the Chair and Vice Chair. Jane,
- I'll let you go first if you have anything you want to share. I don't have anything right now.
- Thank you. Cool.
- I'm not sure if I guess I'll share this now I didn't see it on the agenda but I do want to let everybody
- know that the city is offering a really cool program right now that benefits from public kind of support
- and and and us participating in it and this is the resident led.
- resident-led traffic calming program within the city. What this is doing is trying for residents of
- Bloomington to fill out, basically, it's a really quick survey whether or not they have an interest
- in some type of implementation of a traffic calming program within the city. It's really easy to do.
- The main requirements of it is that you need to have two participants, they can't live at the same address,
- and those participants need to live within 300 feet,
- of the area in which this traffic calming program is geared towards. And so if you guys are interested
- in that, I really highly recommend checking out the city's website. It's a great program that you can
- see the impacts of participating. That's all I have for communications. So I guess we're going to move
- on to communications from Pat and Katie. Did I go too far? Am I in?
- I think we're on number 5 Pat. Did I skip something? Number 5. Number 6. Number 6. Oh, NPO. I'm sorry.
- I'm sorry. Oh, I guess I said communications from officers and or committees, but that's not really, yeah.
- I'm sorry. We've lost our script. Usually we don't plan this like this. Under item 6.1, Indiana Department
- of Transportation news release on single lane closures planned on Interstate 69 in Green and Monroe
- County. I believe those are associated with slide control. There's a landslide issue
- that's always down in that area due to the type of soils that they have down in that area. Please be
- aware of that and please pass this information along. Item 6.2, we've got the city of Bloomington's
- ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act transition plan. This is out of CFRD, community and family resources
- development upstairs.
- This comment period is open until, well, the end of this month. If it hasn't already closed, we were
- aware of this late, so we apologize for having it in the packet late. Please feel free to review this
- to make sure that City of Bloomington is meeting all of its ADA transition plan requirements. This is
- something the MPO also must have
- it must have approved. The plan will be approved in a final form probably around the 1st of July.
- Item 6.3, memorandum is included in the packet on Bloomington Transit's proposed service improvements.
- This goes along with the public meetings that they had three public meetings several weeks ago. First
- one was at Ivy Tech,
- State College, the other two, Bloomington Trans, downtown transfer center. This is a proposal which
- has already been passed at this time now, would combine routes three west and route 13 into a single
- route. I think it's called route 16 is what it was called. This was due to the fact that there was low ridership
- This is an unusual route in that it is an external route, external outside of the city of Bloomington.
- It's under an interlocal agreement. It operates under an interlocal agreement where the Monroe County
- Council provides a subsidy for the operation of this route. The new route would have a 45-minute headway,
- in other words, 90 minutes
- all the way around, round trip, 45 minute headway, but it was Bloomington Transit, I wish somebody from
- Bloomington Transit was here, they looked at seven different scenarios before they came up with this
- optimized version here, and the optimized version will operate at least a year to see how it does.
- under the current routing system out to IBTEC State College, it was only, sometimes only a single rider
- per hour, which is just not functional, and it's not a revenue generating source. So this was optimized
- with a combination of other traffic attractors. Yeah, if you scroll down there, it'll tell you what
- the other...
- Okay, it's got a whole series of traffic attractors there in terms of commercial service. And we received,
- all the meetings were attended very well, received very positive comments on all of the meetings. There
- was one concern expressed at the last meeting, but at the end of the meeting, that individual expressed
- support for the entire concept.
- If you have any questions on that, please let us know. Go ahead. Is Ivy Tech in the city of Bloomington?
- No, this route is operated under interlocal agreement because it exceeds outside of the city of corporate
- limits and the Monroe County Council has funded this and Monroe County Commissioners asked for funding
- for this and the Monroe County Council approved this, so it's supported by
- Monroe County funds since it is outside of the city limits. Does that answer your question? Can I ask
- another question on something you went on actually the ADA transition plan? Sure. Sorry you were going
- so fast. I thought I heard you say that the MPO needs to approve the city's ADA transition plan. Is that
- You didn't say that, okay. No, no, no. City, no, we're including it in the packet for information purposes
- only. Draft, this is the draft. It'll be finalized by July 1st and usually the first or second week
- of July, the MPO sends this ADA transition plan to the Indiana Department of Transportation and to verify that
- the MPO is operating in an environment that is ADA accessible. So it's not required. The reason why
- I'm asking is that the county, I believe, finalized their ADA plan and I didn't recall this MPO step.
- So not needed. Yeah, it's not required by the MPO. The MPO provides it to the Indiana Department of
- Transportation as an FYI type thing to show that the city of Bloomington itself is
- compliant. Does that answer your question? Oh, always. Okay. Yeah, it's one of those check the box items
- that are mandatory that we always do in July of every year with Federal Highway Administration, FTA,
- and also with NDOT. Okay. Okay, next item, NDOT traffic engineering memo. You want to do that?
- Please. Oh, actually item 6.4 is just a quick memo as we usually do. As you know, we have a tip document
- that has information on projects receiving federal funds through the MPO and. It the document also contains
- transit projects as well that will receive FTA funding, but not through us.
- those have to be in there as well. And so sometimes when we have a change to a project or the funding
- that is below a certain threshold, we do not have to bring it to approval to the committee. We do not
- have to bring it to the committee for approval, but we do provide a memo describing what change was
- made so that you are all aware. And so since the last meeting, one of the changes that was made was
- to a transit project
- This was a project that was already in the TIP called Bloomington Transit's EV mobile chargers project.
- We simply changed the funding source for that project. We increased the amount of federal funding. This
- federal funding that they're receiving, I believe this portion is coming from some extra
- MPO funds that were rolled over flexed to transit in a past year. They're trying to get all those used
- up before new transportation bills occur. And in addition to the federal share increasing, the local
- share also needs to increase. And the project total also increased as well. And so you can see the changes
- in funding in the table.
- that's provided as well. Questions? Since the last meeting, there was also an update to a non-transit
- project that was made by MPO staff that did not have to be reviewed. That change was to Monroe County's
- Dillman Road bridge project. Due to environmental impact, they are moving
- the bridge program funds and the local match that they're providing for the project. They're moving
- the right of way phase and those funds from fiscal year 2026 to 2027. So just an environmental delay
- for that is causing a change in fiscal year for the right of way phase. And in this case, this is not
- a use of MPO federal funds, but
- All projects that receive bridge funding through the state also need to be in the tip and everyone needs
- to be aware of it, the local representatives. Any questions? Go ahead, Pat. On the crash severity? No,
- 6.6, the traffic engineer memo.
- Okay. All right. Item 6.6, which is in your packet. We have a memorandum from Taylor Ruval, who leads
- the management of the Office of Traffic Safety at the Indiana Department of Transportation, where he's
- announcing changes to the injury severity determination method for traffic data analysis. Our traffic
- injuries have been all over the place in the last decade due to changing definitions and we've shown,
- well, it's shown a slight decrease or a steady decrease in traffic
- traffic injuries over the period and there was a suspicion there that the methodology had a flaw to
- it. So the Department of Transportation examined this methodology and they've now adopted a new standard
- which will be effective at the beginning of next calendar year. In the memo you'll
- see there that talks about historically Indiana's use following crash severity for analysis, fatal or
- incapacitating injury, non-capacitating injury or property damage only. The termination was usually
- made by the officer in the field, state police or the local law enforcement agency in the field, and
- made the determination on whether it was suspected or not.
- The new criteria which the Department of Transportation, well, yeah, actually there's a table in here
- also that shows how the 2019, 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 suspected serious injury crashes, the numbers
- that are found on the state police data under the new
- There were always a number of errors associated with that. Under this new criteria, crash narratives
- will still be important as part of the safety analysis to verify accuracy. However, they're changing
- the definitions. A suspected serious injury crash with injury nature of fractured dislocation has been
- clarified as a minor broken nose.
- with no other injury or narrative. A non-serious suspected injury crash with an injury nature of a minor
- bruise was found to be unconscious at the crash site. The practitioner should modify this to document
- that change. A minor crash injury of nature complaint of pain has been clarified. A property damage
- only crash
- would show no injuries, but the narrative may describe an injured person or another error. Crash costs
- have also been updated to a national standard. These costs, we've got some heartburn with the costs
- ourselves, but in 2020 for $20, $25 terms,
- The costs are listed there as $857,956 for a fatality and then for the other types of injuries that's
- been listed also. The number of years used in the analysis severe crashes. Since severe crashes are
- rare, in few years or years, the pattern of crashes has not been apparent.
- Therefore, the change in the definition under the updated crash cost analysis system, which is shown
- in a tabular form. I don't know if you can scroll down to that. I'm sorry, we'll get there.
- There we go. Updated crash costs for highway safety analysis.
- This is the 2024 costs in terms of comprehensive unit costs and the application of the costs and the
- processes. Under this new process, the Department of Transportation will have what I would call a more
- accurate and a more consistent definition based on national standards.
- and you can see that in the following tables. The bottom line here is that the number of injuries, suspected
- serious injury crashes that do this definitional change, those numbers will probably change dramatically
- between the current year 2026 and 2027, and then in all outlined years beyond 2027.
- Questions anybody have on this? I know this is highly technical, but it has to do with what we call
- the most serious aspect of the thing is how do we report injury crashes and how do we report property
- damage crashes? I've got a question, and if you guys can't answer it, that's perfectly fine. I can do
- some Googling myself.
- So this data is reported by officers as they kind of approach a scene. They're doing their best kind
- of analysis of the scene to identify whether or not there was a serious injury. They could also be coming
- from a domestic violence situation and trying to figure out what's going on. So there's a lot of pressure
- on the police officer who's actually responding to the incident to get this. Say there's an individual
- who's in an accident
- They appear conscious and everything like that. They're released, but then they go home, or they go
- to a hospital for that matter, and die essentially. Are these numbers going to be edited after the fact,
- or is it once the police officer enters that information into the database, is it just kind of static?
- In terms of fatality, it's dynamic. It is, okay. So they could revise this information. In terms of
- fatality, yes.
- transported to the hospital with a suspected serious injury and they end up with a fatality. That is
- reported as a fatality. The problem came in where you had suspected serious injuries and the individuals
- involved refused to go to the hospital, refused treatment, and ended up later on having something more
- serious, such as a fractured leg or something like that.
- This definition also includes, this is somewhat grisly, dislocations, dismemberment, I'm sorry, I don't
- want to say dislocation, dismemberment issues, where those are now classified as serious injury instead
- of a suspected serious injury. I would probably say that a dismemberment would be a serious, I wouldn't
- suspect it anymore.
- but a broken nose is not. So yeah, the difficulty gets into the narrative of the definition. And then
- trying to, I think, categorize these after the fact, which is what you guys are doing with the crash
- dashboard and things like that to make this more logical. Yeah, and the officers are under a lot of
- pressure, time pressure, first of all, to arrive at the accident scene.
- to report the thing as accurately as possible and then to complete the accident report afterwards. And
- sometimes the after report is days afterwards and full clarity is not always there. And that's not to
- follow the officer, that's just the nature of the beast. They consider a fatal injury to be any injury
- that results in death within 30 days after the accident.
- Awesome, yeah, not awesome. Thanks for the clarity, though, or clarification. You wanna do the other
- one? Sure. Item 6.8 is just a quick memo for you. We've finished editing the crash data
- and GIS is working on getting it up on the website. But we wanted to just provide a quick overview of
- the crashes in 2025 because people often ask for that information. Some of the information in this memo
- is not available on the crash dashboard, but much of it will be eventually. We just have some total
- numbers here at the beginning.
- And then something interesting we haven't really figured out all the metrics for in past years is the
- number of Monroe County, Indiana fatal crashes occurring within the metropolitan planning area, which
- is kind of the area that we have jurisdiction over as a committee here. And so 10 out of 14 of those
- crashes were within the metropolitan planning area.
- which for those of you who are new, includes all of Ellisville and some of the county and all of city
- of Bloomington. Next, there is some comparisons of fatal crashes and total fatalities. In 2025, we had
- 14 fatal crashes, although one occurred in a parking garage, which was not on a public road. Typically,
- we wouldn't
- pay attention to that one when engineers are doing and planners are doing analysis. But one crash did,
- sorry, two crashes did have two deaths in them. Then number of fatal vehicle crashes, pedestrian crashes,
- and fatal bicycle crashes. You can see kind of the history of that in that table. Then next is,
- a basic summary of each of the fatal crashes that occurred in Monroe County in 2025 and their location.
- You'll be able to see those visually on the map once they're up on the crash dashboard. Next is a tally
- of the manner of collision for each of the fatal crashes.
- To be expected, the two crashes that had two deaths each were both head-on collisions. And then some
- language about the metrics and some of the history regarding the metrics of serious and incapacitating
- injuries is there for you again and as well as a history of the amount, the number of serious injuries.
- The state uses incapacitating as their language, and on our crash dashboard we use serious injuries,
- but it's the same thing. And then last is serious injuries by primary factor of the crash. So we just
- wanted to provide somewhat of a summary overview for your information.
- Katie, can I ask a quick question? If you scroll back down to the table where it shows kind of the history
- of fatal crashes or serious crashes, I think it's down a little bit further, it looks like we're seeing
- a really good improvement, yeah, right there, in terms of the number of just crashes and serious injuries
- that have occurred from 2019 to 2025. Do you guys have any idea, like, I mean, is that a policy change?
- some different types of engineering we've deployed or are people being better drivers? Well, part of
- it is what Pat was speaking to earlier about the change in software used at the state level and the
- change in definition of what a serious injury is. So you can see here in this table that with using
- the Areas 5 software in 2019, and then they were transitioning using Areas 5 and 6. Oh, actually, that's
- an increase. I thought it showed a decrease. But the change in definition, it describes earlier in this
- memo how the change in definition and the change in software has perhaps caused some
- the number of serious injuries to appear to decline, but that might just be because of the interpretation
- of serious injuries. Pat, what else were you going to say? I was going to say also with the city of
- Bloomington's adoption of the SS4A plan and the countermeasures, the 25 countermeasures used for crash
- locations. I know the city engineer's office has been very aggressive.
- in terms of investigating all fatal and serious injury locations and applying a countermeasure as quickly
- as possible, usually within 30 days, if they can, 60 days at most. So you will see, and that's only
- been one year, 2025 and 2026, part of 2026 so far, but you will see
- evidence probably in 2027-2028 where there is a measurable reduction within the city of Bloomington,
- mainly because of the aggressiveness that they've used for that approach. Now, the same thing goes with
- the Indiana Department of Transportation Seymour District. Seymour District and statewide have been
- very aggressive in applying countermeasures,
- These are the proven countermeasures approved by the Federal Highway Administration. Becky, not Becky,
- Leonick, correct me if I'm wrong, 25 countermeasures I think it is, something like that. But they've
- been extremely aggressive in applying those measures and also doing what I would call preventative measures.
- In other words, better marking of crossings,
- better marking, well, installing new stop signs in some of the rural areas, installing flashers, warning
- signs, devices, and all of that. I mean, kudos goes to the state and to the local people in terms of
- how aggressive they've been on doing that. I'm sorry, Leigh Ann, I didn't mean to interrupt.
- No, I just wanted to agree with you, Pat. It's definitely safety has come to the forefront and NDOT
- is trying to, like you said, update crosswalks, replace signage if they've faded and people aren't able
- to see them where it's causing some sort of visual inability to stay on the road or whatever the case
- may be. So yeah, it's definitely a push and we appreciate any cooperation we can get. So thank you all.
- Yeah, thanks, and props to everybody involved with that for getting those numbers down. That's good.
- Moving on. Just wanted to give you guys a few updates. I know this is hard to read on the screen, but
- these are some updates. And Lynette, you're probably prepared with
- with some updates, but we just had a quarterly tracking meeting with Monroe County and City of Bloomington,
- so I'll just read what I have from those meetings, and you can add if I miss anything. So City
- of Bloomington's High Street project, the right-of-way acquisition is complete, and utility relocations
- are going to take place this year, with construction anticipated for 27.
- This, the project construction phase will be, does not currently have federal MPO funds through the
- MPO, but we'll be reviewing that today a little bit. The downtown, city of Bloomington downtown curb
- ramp project, there's no utility relocations are right away required for their locations. They're waiting
- on environmental report to come back from NDOT.
- The city's crosswalk phase three project is doing design. North Dunn Street multi-use path is currently
- in design and approaching stage three. They are doing right away appraisals and acquisitions, getting
- going on that right now. College and Walnut phase one is doing the final analysis of corridor study,
- of the corridor study. The anticipated project
- construction date will be pushed out one year though, at least from the original planned date in our
- TIP document. The downtown curb ramps phase five projects is doing design as well. They just issued
- a notice to proceed to the consultant and crosswalks phase four is currently selecting a design, doing
- design consultant selection. West Second Street,
- utility relocations are in progress and construction will start in a couple months. The county's high
- friction surface treatment on Fairfax Road project, their design plans are finalized and soil sampling
- is in progress. They are working on stage three documentation and there will be no right of way or utility
- relocations for this project. The Dillman Road Bridge number 83 project
- Design is in progress and the bridge will have to be closed for the next six months for environmental
- reasons. And they're working on stage two design submission. Old SR37 and Dillman Road intersection
- improvement project. The construction phases will be moving, shifting soon from fiscal year 28 to 29.
- and the right-of-way and utility phases will also be shifting a year up. No car features were found
- on the property and they will finalize drainage and detention in June. That road bridge number 79 is
- a new project. It's not getting federal MPO funds, but it's getting bridge funds from the state. This
- is the bridge over Clear Creek and
- All right away has been approved and the last parcel is being acquired and they are doing stage three
- design plans. I have a question. Is that the bridge by the post office? The little itty bitty post office?
- That is, I thought I had the location on here. I actually think I do have it. Ben says no. Nevermind,
- I'm good. It's over clear creek.
- West of... In the boondocks. West of Walnut. Yeah, West of Walnut, yeah. Okay. The county has completed
- their bridge safety inventories by the required month, which is March.
- The Rockport Bridge number 308 south of Bowlin Lane is beginning construction in June and the Eagleson
- Avenue superstructure replacement over the Indiana Railroad. They are doing pre-construction meetings
- and road closure is anticipated September 26 to July 2027. Lynette, do you have any other additions?
- Thanks for giving the updates on the county stuff. For Bridge 308 Rockport Road, expected to close June
- 2nd. I was just going to share some contact information. CLR is a contractor, Travis Hughes is the name,
- and his phone number is 812-208-5875 if you have any questions. And this isn't in the tip, but we'd
- like to share that Rora Road Bridge is expected to be closed on July 6th.
- and same contractor CLR. That's all. Thank you so much. We'll go ahead and move on if nobody has any
- other questions. I guess we're moving on to new business then.
- So for you today, we have, you can see what the resolution looks like, but resolution 2026-08 will be
- presented to the policy committee this Friday. And we are seeking your recommendation of approval for
- these changes.
- I will go ahead and briefly mention that the changes presented today, this is what our fiscal constraint
- looks like with these changes taking place. After these changes, we would have used all of our fiscal
- year 26 funding, have everything allocated out for 27, and then we will have
- some extra funds we'll need to allocate in the future for fiscal year 28 and 29. So the first request
- is to add a new project to the TIP for Monroe County called that road bridge number 79 replacement.
- This is where I have that link to the location if you want to look and see where it is at.
- The project is receiving local bridge funds from the state of Indiana, and then all other phases will
- be using local funds. The work includes removal and replacement of the existing bridge, as well as upgrading
- the bridge rail and adding a multi-use path with pedestrian handrail. You can see the funding proposed
- for the project. It's $2 million.
- The next proposed change is to update the College and Walnut project in the TIP. It had been programmed
- to potentially be receiving funds in fiscal year 2029, NPO federal funds, but we'll be pushing it out
- and anticipating that the construction phases will be taking place in fiscal year 30.
- if not have to move it again in the future. But the idea is that they hope to do both phase one and
- phase two of College and Walnut quarter project in the same fiscal year instead of separate fiscal years.
- Because of this change, because
- the federal funds, the majority of NPO federal funds for fiscal year 2029 were being put towards College
- and Walnut Project. So because of this change, those 2029 funds had to be reallocated. And so one thing
- we shared at the last meeting that we had a discussion with the LPAs about our plan on how to shift
- that money around.
- And this is the result of that meeting. So one thing that came out of that meeting was that the agreement
- that we would do a trade with another MPO. And so this funding chart for College and Walnut phase one
- reflects that we've done a trade with MCCOG, an exchange. So we will give them 2 million of the 2029
- funds in exchange for an additional 2 million
- in the fiscal year 2030. We also mentioned last meeting the update for old SR 37 and Dillman and the
- county's desire to move the construction phases from fiscal year 28 to 29. And then also having to move
- the right away and utility phases as well. And so this change also
- released money in different years. And so we had to make funding adjustments as well for that. And so
- you can see the proposed new funds for that. Shifting this project from 28 to 29 freed up a significant
- number of MPO funds in fiscal year 28. And so we did
- We did an exchange with another MPO with, you can see that in the next, in item number four, the update
- for High Street. In the proposed new funding table, you can see that we did an exchange with the AP,
- the Area Plan Commission of Tippecanoe County MPO, and in exchange for us giving them 20, 2028 funds,
- will be receiving additional 2.1 million in 2027 funds, which will be applied, which we're proposing
- to apply to High Street project. High Street did not have any federal funds allocated towards it for
- the construction phase. So that is extremely helpful for the city.
- I know that's a lot, but at the end of all of that, we are still fiscally constrained with what we expect
- to receive at this time from NDOT and what we have proposed to allocate to these projects. And so we're
- just looking for a consensus on recommending approval of this to the policy committee.
- I guess would we have questions from folks first, if there's any questions? Seems like none. So I guess
- if I could get a motion to have a positive recommendation to the policy committee, is that worded correctly?
- If I could get a motion for that, that'd be great. I move that this be forwarded to the policy committee
- with a positive recommendation from the tech.
- second awesome thanks Jane and run all in favor say aye aye any opposed nay and any abstentions it's
- saying we don't actually have any members of the
- Public, oh, we do now. But before the vote next time, do public comment, yeah. Sorry, I guess we could
- open it to if there is public comment on this. I can't see on the screen, I just see like the.
- It's okay, they'll unmute if they have. Okay, perfect. Okay, I guess this moves us to
- public comment, if there is anybody here who has public comment, you can come to the podium in the room,
- or if you're online, this is your opportunity. I'm not seeing anybody in person, nor online, so I guess
- we can move forward. So on to communications from committee members on non-voting matters that are not
- included in the agenda.
- speak now or don't speak? It seems like there's none. Topics for future agendas, if anybody has anything?
- I did want to mention that I really appreciated in the packet the table showing the board membership
- of the MPO and the TAC as well. And something that I was kind of interested in, again, because the success
- of organizations or the success of anything in the public kind of sphere
- That success is achieved from participation right and so i'd be interested and I don't want to put a
- lot of work on staff here at all but i'm curious if we could get like.
- or if it's even doable, some type of a roll call tally of who's attended the TAC as voting people over
- the past two years. Because I'm curious if there's some folks that we should maybe be reaching out to
- attend. Because I was looking through this and I see a lot of familiar names and faces, but I don't
- see a lot of those same names and faces here often. And I know everybody's busy and things like that,
- but these are important decisions. And so I think that would make sense for the TAC, but maybe for the,
- I think the policy is a smaller group probably.
- That was just a thought that I had, but I'm not sure how much work that is to pull up a rule call thing.
- I think from there, we're just going to go on to our upcoming meetings. We have a Citizens Advisory
- Committee meeting on May 27th at 5.30 PM, and that's going to be a hybrid meeting.
- We have a policy committee meeting on May 29th, 2026 at 10.30 AM, and that's also a hybrid meeting.
- Then our next technical advisory committee meeting, I believe the July one is canceled, is that correct?
- Or the June one? The June one is canceled. There's a summer recess for the TAC committee, so the next
- meeting will be July. Will be in July. Yes. Our June meeting, everybody here take your nice break.
- Enjoy the summer and all of those things. And with that, we are adjourned. So thank you everybody for
- attending and have a great rest of your summer until July.