DRAFT Meeting Minutes. Central Oregon Area Commission on Transportation COACT May 14, 2015

Transcription

1 DRAFT Meeting Minutes Central Oregon Area Commission on Transportation COACT May 14, 2015 Members: Attendees: Mike McCabe (Crook County), Gary Farnsworth (ODOT), Wayne Fording (Jefferson County), Alan Unger (Deschutes County), Wendy Holzman (Sisters), Jack Seley (Prineville), Jeff Monson (Commute Options), Bill Braly (BPAC), Dana Cook (BLM), Mike Folkestad (Jefferson County), Jeff Hurd (Madras), Pat Hanenkrat (Metolius), Karen Friend (COIC Cascades East Transit), Charlie Every (Trucking Representative), Gary Judd (Aviation Representative). Guests: Bob O Neal (Crook County), Phil Stenbeck (Prineville), Nick Arnis (Bend), Bill Duerden (Redmond), Bob Bryant (ODOT Region 4 Manager), Nettice Honn (?) (Redmond Airport), Savannah Crawford (ODOT), Justin Mason (DOWL), Jim Albin (DOWL) Phone: Sal Hernandez (OSU), Mary Stern (AOC); Staff: Scott Aycock and Kiley Rucker Clamons (Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council) 1. Call to order and introductions Chair McCabe called the meeting to order at 3:09 pm. Introductions were made. 2. General Public Comments There were no public comments. 3. COACT Business a. Approve March 12, 2015 minutes Judge McCabe introduced proposed amendments to the March 12 minutes. Alan Unger motioned to approve the March 12 minutes as amended. Michael Folkestad seconded. Minutes were approved by consensus STIP/Enhance Process Updates a. Overview Gary Farnsworth passed out the handout STIP May 2015 Update Status. He clarified that everyone is welcome to come to the OTC meetings. He attended the April 16 th meeting and the handout is a compilation of notes that ODOT staff put together based on that meeting. There is a meeting next Thursday, May 21 st, in Salem on this topic. Gary reminded the group that he has been sharing information with the COACT board about the STIP process since January and the conversation continues to evolve. b. Debrief from April 16 OTC Session Gary referenced the handout, explaining that there is still a lot of uncertainty around funding, especially on the federal side. A fiscal cliff situation is expected to play out in the coming weeks. He mentioned that with the growing Oregon economy there are a lot more people out on the road, which has helped stabilize the state highway trust fund and gas tax

2 revenue. However, ODOT has committed most of its state funding to maintenance activities, debt service, and operation costs. Therefore, ODOT relies heavily on federal funds for capital projects. For these reasons, ODOT continues to conservatively look forward. Dialogue between the Commission and the ACT chairs suggests there continues to be resounding support for Fix-It projects. Given limited funds, the Commission has not yet determined if there will be an Enhance program and its future is still up in the air. It will be discussed at the upcoming Commission meeting on May 21 st. Last time around, Region 4 received $19 M but ODOT was receiving a pretty strong and clear message that the money would be less than that this time. One of the things the Commission has been looking at, and they shared with the ACT chairs, is that there is some level of commitment to spend money on non-highway projects, such as bike/ped and transit. Although it s a pretty small amount, there is a lot of flexibility with what can be done with the money, not only with what modes but how the money can be used. For example, it can be used for non-highway improvements like bus replacements or rehabbing existing facilities. ODOT estimates that roughly 15% of the capital program funds will go to Regions 3 & 4. One reason why there is interest in using some of the money for Enhance-type projects is to not miss opportunities to match federal grant funds. Gary mentioned that Region 4 has been very successful in using the Federal Land Access program in the past. There are also other leveraging opportunities that make sense to match. Gary explained that the Commission continuing to engage the ACTs is the other part of the discussion and is very important. He stated that Commissioner Baney went out of her way to communicate its importance to the Commission. Gary expects that once the Commission lands on an approach, especially with significantly reduced non-fix-it dollars, they will be looking for an opportunity to engage the ACT chairs once again. If the numbers are very small, the Committee may use a competitive process or do set-asides for program areas. Gary passed out another handout, Potential Enhance Bucket Scenarios The bucket scenarios are in response to a set-aside scenario. The money set-aside would be saved for emerging needs during the timeframe. With such small numbers, there is some interest in not committing those dollars right away and waiting until the budget picture is clearer. For example, there may be opportunities to leverage improvements off of ODOT s Pavement Preservation program with the state highway system. A classic example of this is what is happening in the City of La Pine in the next few years. There is a Pavement Preservation project going through La Pine. The City, with support from the COACT Board, was successful at getting funding for better sidewalks and bike/ped improvements. Money from Enhance will be used to match dollars with the Pavement Preservation program. Gary believes it is more likely that there will be more of these types of scenarios moving forward. Another example of potential uses for leveraging funds that are set aside is emerging opportunities with highway traffic control devices, from signals to central signing. Referencing the Bucket scenarios handout, Gary explained that the values in the running total column equals $30 M, which was the estimated budget prior to the more recent, drastically reduced projections. However, the idea is the same in the sense that money is held in strategic areas and then invested when opportunities arise. There had been some interest in continuing to invest in the 97 corridor when the projections were much larger. Also, Bucket Scenario B would support the use of money on Fix-It type projects, which some areas, or areas within a region, may want to pursue. Bob O Neal confirmed that this list does not include Highway Bridge Replacement & Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds? Gary confirmed. He then referenced Attachment B in the materials packet, which lists potential projects that fit into the Fix-It category. Region 4 staff will be conducting scoping on these projects through the end of the calendar year. ODOT will work with the affected local jurisdictions and any of the modes that might have an interest in the projects as they engage in scoping efforts. Butch Hansen and Gary are framing up the scoping assignments for these projects and once the teams are put together they will be seeking input from COACT board members and/or their staff.

3 Alan Unger asked about how the projects in the bucket scenarios were created? Gary answered that it was a lot brainstorming and back and forth among the region s staff. The concepts listed in the bucket scenarios handout are a different way to frame up the conversation about interests or opportunities that exist, especially given dollar amounts decreasing. It gives board members or their staff something to reflect on as the topic is discussed. Mike Folkestad asked if it was possible for OTC to take money back from our buckets if it is not spent? Gary responded that the impression he got from the formal meeting in April was that the Commission would treat the categories like they do the Immediate Opportunity Fund (IOF). The commission actually holds the money. As leveraging and emerging needs come up, we work through the process with partners and staff to present a proposal to the Commission. They could also choose to delegate the program, but is more likely that it will be centrally managed. Although, the Commission is interested in engaging the ACTs to get input on strategies, criteria, and even how the program is managed. Once IOF funds are approved they are intended to get on the ground in a very short time period. Mike followed up with a question about what the options would be later in the first year or in the second year of the timeframe won t there be slim to none options? Gary answered that timing is very important. The criteria may need to be worked or set so that timing is factored in. A theme to the conversation is maintaining flexibility and the ability to move on things. Jeff Hurd asked if there has been any more thought about putting money into the D-STIP so that we can design projects so that they are ready once the funding is available? Gary answered that there has been an interest in readiness. However, it s a tricky discussion to have because money set aside for readiness, preparedness, or leveraging is money not spent on fixing things and getting things done on the ground. Even on the Fix-It side of the conversation, ODOT has made an effort to identify shelf projects but they ve had to be careful about how much is actually spent for those projects. The dialogue that Gary is hearing is not leaning too far to one extreme. It seems that people want to stay flexible, ready, and prepared for leveraging on opportunities to maximize dollars. Alan asked if DSTIP and scoping are the same thing? Gary answered that they do not mean the same thing in ODOT lingo. In this context, ODOT uses federal dollars through planning to build programs. Scoping is used to identify and prioritize projects to get into the program, whereas DSTIP is for projects that are already accepted into the program. c. Draft Fix-It 150% List Referring to Attachment B in the materials packet, Gary Farnsworth explained the different funding sources for the Fix-It programs. ARTS is the All Roads Traffic Safety projects. Preservation is the Pavement Preservations program. Bridge is Bridge Preservation. OPS covers many things in operations but it is largely the signals and signing programs. ODOT will be very deliberate about working with people that are affected by these projects. The listed projects represent approximately 150% of the program allocations. There will be about $35 M a year for the Fix-It category. So, ODOT is over-scoping because they re not sure how the projects will be prioritized. Karen Friend asked if non-highway dollar projects need to be on the Fix-It list in order to be considered? Gary said that the short answer is no. Region 4 has been consistent in investing in Travel Demand Management and Transit. Some of the operation program dollars are being redirected towards a mix of several different sources. He recommends engaging with Joni Bramlett and keeping the needs in front.

4 Wendy Holzman asked what does OPS-ITS stand for and some of the other acronyms? Gary explained that OPS-ITS is a sub category of the Operations Fix-It program. It stands for Intelligent Transportation System, which may include variable message signs, remote access, emerging technology around autonomous vehicles, and even dispatch operations. There are also Operations sub categories for signs, cameras, and rockfalls. 5. Region 4 Transit Program: Outcome a. Project List and Discussion Gary Farnsworth explained that Joni Bramlett, who has been updating the group on this topic, could not attend the meeting, otherwise she would have covered this agenda item. She has been taking us through a pilot project for ODOT. ODOT engaged Ken Mulenex and others from the Region 4 area. Then Joni received proposals from across the region. Referencing Attachment C in the materials packet, Gary highlighted some of the projects that were proposed and asked for any reactions about how the process worked for people. Karen Friend spoke about how the award recommendations worked great for CET. They were approved for 5 Dial-A-Ride vehicles and upgrades to cameras in their vehicles for security. It also contributed to the Bend transit expansion project. She stated that this program was a great infusion of very needed dollars for their system. Scott Aycock further explained the Bend transit expansion project. Partners (OSU, COCC, City of Bend, St. Charles, Bend Parks and Recreation, Bend Chamber) have been meeting since November. Needs have been identified, as well as transit service improvements that address those needs, and now we are reining in funding commitments. Several commitments have already been made. The expansion is $1.1 M per year in operating costs and this grant contributes about $90,000 per year for three years to the project. Jeff Monson discussed how the Award Recommendations benefited Commute Options. They used the grant funds to leverage promotion and outreach programs in Regions 3 & 4, specifically The Dalles, Klamath Falls, and Lakeview. He explained that the funding allows them to tie the 3 ACTs together for Drive Less Connect. Using the funds and existing infrastructure and momentum, Commute Options now has leverage to work with other commute option programs. Alan Unger asked if the projects listed are in order of priority? Gary answered that they are not in order of priority. He explained that the projects were selected to help providers leverage and that they tried to have a good geographic balance, as well as a balance of the types of projects. Alan then asked why project #1, Basin Transit Service, was getting one vehicle for essentially the same price that COIC is getting five vehicles? Karen explained that CET has not evolved to the same size of bus that Basin Transit Service uses, although it is coming. Currently, CET s fixed route buses are half the cost of traditional transit buses, and the smaller dial-a-ride vehicles are even cheaper. Being in the beginning stages of a transit system, CET is maximizing their dollars by putting more buses on the road in order to create fixed routes. This means using less expensive, yet less efficient buses. Although CET s buses seat the same amount of people as the buses Basin Transit Services uses, they are not as convenient for wheelchair loading, which effects efficiency. Mike Folkestad asked if CET s fixed route buses are at risk with complying with ADA? Karen clarified CET s buses are ADA accessible vehicles but they take more time to load and unload, which is an efficiency issue. If the traditional transit buses were not so costly they would purchase them, but because CET is still a struggling system they ve had to put their dollars to use in other ways.

5 Mike then asked how many wheelchairs are currently loaded in a month? Karen replied that she didn t have the exact numbers but several in a day. The load time of a wheelchair is a minimum of 6 minutes with their current buses, whereas traditional transit buses are much faster. So it becomes a huge efficiency issue as the system evolves. Gary asked if there were any further comments. No one commented. He said he would inform Joni that there is general support from the Board. Karen Friend noted that CET provided the Opportunity Foundation (which had applied for grant funds but didn t receive any money) with 5 wheelchair accessible vans with low-mileage on them. They were very happy about it. The vans were not meeting CET s needs for Dial-A-Ride service but they were going to work great for the Opportunity Foundation. 6. Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan a. Informational Update and Request for Feedback Gary Farnsworth introduced Savannah Crawford from ODOT Transportation Development Division. She is a Planner and Project Manager for the Oregon Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. Savannah stated that they are currently in the policy and strategy development phase of the project, so feedback is welcomed and would be very helpful. The Oregon Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan is a 20 year multi-modal perspective plan providing vision and framework for bike/ped efforts. She stated that they are really trying to tie in with other transportation option plans, in addition to some freight coordination. Developing the plan is a 2 year project and it has been going on for about 1 year. During the first year, they ve established a plan coordination team, which is an internal ODOT team that helps with milestone projects. There is also a Technical Advisory Committee made up of practitioners from across the state, which has been helping the team understand the technical components needed for implementation. There is a Policy Advisory Committee, which is essentially the decision-making body. It is made up of elected officials and stakeholders across the state. Commissioner Tammy Baney is the chair of this policy committee. To date, the team has held a variety of different surveys and interviewed practitioners to really understand the key issues and opportunities throughout the state surrounding bike/ped efforts. The team also held publicity meetings and public open houses. There was great turn-out to those events and for those that could not attend, the team hosted a virtual public house and had great turn out for that as well. The team is hoping to have developed a draft document by the fall of 2015 and to present it to the ACTs for the public review period. Key issues the team has discovered include fatalities and safety components, comfort and security issues, network gaps, inconsistencies in applications and data, maintenance coordination needs, and changing demographics. The policy committee has established a vision of a safe and connected system for all users. Within that vision there are 9 different goals areas. Safety - How can this document help guide design conversations? It needs to be updated regularly as new innovations and approaches happen. Education The message has been that all users need to be educated on the rules of the road, not just motorist or just cyclist or just pedestrians. Also, support programs like Safe Routes to Schools are important for early childhood education.

6 Enforcement ODOT does not have legal enforcement but needs to coordinate with local enforcement to ensure codes are being followed. For instance, if a new development is supposed to provide bike parking, there needs to be some follow through to make sure it is actually happening. Accessibility/Connectivity This is about identifying gaps and improving connectivity throughout the system. It s focusing on critical connections, looking at transportation disadvantaged populations, and providing access to other modes. For example, is there adequate bike parking at bus stops? Regional Pass is also part of this goal. There is a need to coordinate with the Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation to tie in with what they are doing at the state level. Mobility This involves reducing/removing impediments where it is feasible, such as adequate sidewalks for people that have disabilities or may use wheelchairs. Another component of this goal is to balance mobility for all users including freight and bike coordination. Community/Economic Vitality This goal is about land use coordination with local jurisdictions. The team has examined how tourism is related to bike/ped use and discovered that it is important to identify people who want to come out to areas for recreational purposes. It was also discovered that having adequate bike parking to encourage those types of uses is important. Equity This goal is about recognizing that some users are transportation disadvantaged and it is important to make connections and fill gaps where there are people that have limited options for travel. Data Having adequate data or at least working towards having better data is important. Health This goal is about how bike/ped can tie into health partnerships. The Oregon Health Authority is on the Technical Advisory Committee and it is important to coordinate partnerships with them and other health agencies. Sustainability Recognizing sustainable transportation options and zero emission modes is consistent with other plans that ODOT has been working on and they ve recognized that it is important to consider sustainable options as they move forward on projects. Strategic Investment This goal is about seeking new funding for dedicated bike/ped uses and also looking at a variety of funding scenarios, including leveraging for bike/ped coordination with other projects. Coordination, Cooperation, and Communication: This section emphasizes the need to coordinate and cooperate. For instance, how do we encourage partnerships? The team looked at partnering with utility districts. For example, if the utility company is putting in a new gas line, ODOT could coordinate with the utility on road repairs after the line is installed. The last phase of this plan involves looking at investment scenarios, how to implement all of these policies and strategies, and ultimately there will be a draft plan finished by this fall that will be presented to all of the ACTs. Savannah opened the presentation up to questions. Wayne Fording asked if the team had discussed a stewardship program? For instance, what if a tax could be implemented on the purchase of new bikes or part of a bike registration program to help fund an Enhance system/ better bike paths? Savannah answered that there haven t been any specific discussions about that to her knowledge outside of some recent legislative proposals. They haven t discussed specific funding sources but they will look at options and ideas of where to get funding. Alan asked how this state bike/ped plan trickles down to the local level?

7 Savannah answered that local jurisdictions will be required to be consistent with the state plan when they update their local plans. For this reason, the team understands that this is not a one size fits all approach and the document needs to be designed to not impede local jurisdictions. It is intended to act as a guidance document for local jurisdictions. Alan asked when is the state plan updated and how does that work with local 20 year Plan updates, e.g. TSPs and Comprehensive Plans? Savannah explained that the state plan is also a 20 year plan and they would like to see it updated every 5 to 7 years; however, the last time it was updated was 20 years ago. Wendy Holzman asked when will your recommendations be available to cities because the City of Sisters is looking to update their plan soon? Savannah answered that the plan is slated for adoption in early All of the draft policies and strategies, as well as white papers, are available on the website for local jurisdictions to access in the meantime. Gary mentioned that local representatives can also contact himself, Amy Pfeiffer, or their Community Development Director and they can get people in touch with the right person to make sure everyone is on the same page. Scott Aycock asked if this plan, through criteria or broad goals, will shape state funding decisions around bike/ped? Savannah answered that there is strategy in the document. It states that in a situation where less money is available, maintenance and safety is the first priority, then critical connections, next is enhancing the system, and with a large budget then they would be able to elaborate the system, such as create regional paths. The plan is setting the framework for those discussions. Alan asked if the plan will give guidance on how bike/ped projects can expand match in light of his experience working on the Connect Oregon project, which only had one project with a significant match? Savannah replied that they have not had that explicit conversation, although leveraging and its importance is included in the document. Gary mentioned that he spoke with the Economic Development Representative for Wheeler County and he was talking about their efforts to implement a scenic bikeway. That led into a conversation about the tourism economy and how that is important to Wheeler County. Gary asked him how important high speed web service was in bringing tourism into the county and the representative said that it was very important. He was explicit in saying that people who want to recreate in a rural setting also want to be wired-up for different reasons. They want to feel safe. They want to feel like they have access and that they can get in touch with family and friends. Gary thought this was interesting and a good example of how bike/ped recreation is connected to internet access. Savannah replied that the plan does discuss wayfinding from a security perspective but that involves signage and doesn t include Wi-Fi, so that is something to consider. Jeff and Alan commented on how the team has done a good job of incorporating and aligning other transportation related plans so that there is not a lot redundancy. 7. ODOT Truck Parking Research Project Gary Farnsworth said that Amy Pfeiffer could not make it to the meeting to update everyone on the ODOT Truck Parking Research Project but he introduced Sal Hernandez, a professor at OSU, who was attending the meeting via phone. Gary passed out a handout titled Truck Parking An Emerging Hazard to Highway Users.

8 Gary pointed out that several people were instrumental in getting us to the point of having a funded research project. It s a statewide issue that many people are talking about. Sal Hernandez explained that the research project is funded by ODOT. The idea of this project is that it will provide some guidance and direction on the topic of truck parking. A key point of the project is seeking input, especially from groups like COACT. Truck parking is not only an issue but it can also be an economic opportunity for the region. Another key point the research project will focus on is the possibility for public and private partnerships. Lastly, the scope of the project will focus on Central Oregon. The project is slated to start Aug 1 st, 2015 and last 21 months. Therefore, the project will be wrapped up in March In the first year, the research team is looking to communicate with the public and private sector and get input from industry and government agencies. Depending on the contract, the project could actually start as early as July. Gary explained that the research team will be reaching out to many of the people in the group for input and to serve on the Technical Advisory Committee. He then asked for any questions or comments. Judge McCabe commented that he didn t like the timeframe. He thinks truck parking is an immediate need and it s going to take years to have results. Sal responded by stating that if there are specific needs, the timeline can be arranged to address those specific needs and get results sooner than the entire project s timeline. Bob Bryant commented on how this is not the only approach that is being taken. Although, the research project is a great approach for mobility of trucks there are other things going on regarding freight mobility. If opportunities arise to address it, we would not have to wait for this project to be completed before taking advantage of those opportunities. Gary reiterated Bob s comment by citing what is happening in Biggs right now to address truck parking. He also noted to Sal that if implementable projects come out of the research they should be communicated in real time to this forum. Bob O Neal asked if the Truck Parking Research Project was looking at the development of wide spots on highways or is it for urban areas? Sal responded that Central Oregon is the scope of the project, therefore the research project will look at both urban and rural truck parking. Bob Bryant added that the project is focused on being strategic about the needs for truck parking all along the corridor. Currently, truck drivers are pulling over to any nook and cranny they can find but that s not necessarily safe for the driver or for other users on the road. As the area grows and gets busier it is going to become a bigger issue, so a plan needs to be developed in order for us to be strategic in how we accommodate this need for the trucking industry. Charlie Every commented that this was the beginning stages of the project. First the funding needs to be finalized and then they ll look at whether it is parking lots or wide areas that are needed. Gary clarified that the funding is available. He expects that there were be a regular update at COACT meetings about this effort and ODOT will be soliciting input from members of this forum. Charlie added that the truck parking is not only an issue in Oregon. He read an article recently in a truck driving magazine about this being a national problem. Sal confirmed that truck parking is a national issue and that Oregon is at the forefront of this kind of work. Other places around the country will be looking at this project as an example of how to address the issue.

9 Alan Unger commented that he was excited about the truck parking project. He wondered if drivers have to pull-over after so many hours then are the correct questions to survey drivers with What s your destination and origin? and Where do you need accommodations? Charlie responded that drivers all start at different places so it s not as straight forward as that. He is hoping that the governments will be able to work together to solve some of these issues. For instance, south of Bend there is a chain-up lane across from the scales that only has a white line dividing the drivers from traffic when they pull-over to sleep. However, across the street is a northbound set of scales that are off of the highway, away from the traffic, yet there is a sign that says No Overnight Parking. There was general consensus around the room that there was definitely work to be done on the matter. 8. State Legislative Update Mary Stern joined the meeting via phone. She said there was finally talk about a transportation package in Salem. There s leadership from both parties and both houses meeting with the governor. Representative Reed sounded optimistic about the possibility that the Democrats may make some concessions about clean fuels to bring the Republicans to the table. If there is no package they are looking really hard to find funding for the DMV IT upgrade project. The project would cost $90 M dollars over a period of 7-9 years. This would come off of the top of the state highway fund, which means it would be a reduction of about $9 M of the counties share and reduce ODOT s share as well. Along with that they have fees that come from debit and credit use at the DMVs, which the DMV currently covers. ODOT is working with us to identify cost recovery for these and other services that don t require a 3/5 ths vote. The DMV is only collecting about 40% of licensing cost. If they could get 100% that would more than cover the cost of the IT upgrade. Mary asked if there were any questions about the transportation package? Wayne Fording asked if the new computer system at the DMV has anything to do with the motor voter bill that passed? Mary replied that they are saying it doesn t. They claim motor voter can be done with the current system, however it is very inefficient. Mary moved on to discuss Connect 6. She explained that there was a state bill up the following day about lottery bonds that included $58.6 M for Connect 6 and $10 M for the Oregon Infrastructure Opportunity Program, which would include transportation improvements for economic development. She will be testifying on that bill. There is also a Connect work group that will start meeting next week. Initially, the Connect program was supposed to give out loans and grants, but it has only been giving out grants. So they are going to look at if they should also be giving out more loans, as well as what these programs should look like. Mary asked if there were any questions about Connect 6? Alan Unger asked why Mary didn t mention transit when she discussed the work group? Transit interests have noted that they have a hard time with the match for Connect Oregon, which makes it difficult for them to come to the table. Mary responded that it is true. She thinks the work group will address this issue, yet whether or not they make any changes will have to be seen. Mary noted the revenue forecast that came out earlier in the day. The kicker will kick about $480 M. The revenue forecast was better than anticipated, which means there will be more dollars coming in. Additional money may go to schools, public safety, and human services. There was no talk of additional money for transportation, which Mary believes is because they want to keep the focus on a transportation package.

10 9. COACT Roundtable Judge McCabe asked if anyone had any issues they d like to talk about? Gary Farnsworth mentioned the OReGO program. He asked if anyone had the chance to look at it? No one responded yes. Gary was hoping to have some representation from COACT. They are hoping to have wide involvement to pilot the project. There is a calculator on the website that allows you to calculate whether or not you would get a savings by using the program. The website has a lot of good information about the pilot project. Scott will send out the link. Bob Bryant added that there has been a lot of comment and concern from rural users that OReGO is more of an urban thing. For this reason, it s even more important that rural users participate in the pilot so they can provide feedback from a rural perspective. The program launches in July, so there is time for you to do research online to see if you are interested. Pat Hanenkrat asked if there will be something in your car that tallies your miles and will that include municipal vehicles? Bob Bryant answered that it could. There are a number of mechanisms other than the little black box that you plug into your car, including smart phones or any other device you may carry in your car. There are more options today to address the privacy concerns and to also open up opportunities to 3 rd parties. Wayne Fording questioned how more road funds were going to be generated if drivers were getting savings by using the program? Gary answered that the pilot will look at a range of vehicles, average miles driven, gas burned, etc., to determine what an appropriate cost would be for the rolled-out program. Judge McCabe commented that the state needs to be part of the pilot project because they need to understand what they are implementing. Dana Cook asked how OReGO worked for off-road driving? Bob Bryant didn t know the answer but he believes someone has the answer to that question. For instance, the sensor knows if you are driving out of state, so they ve addressed those issues. Judge McCabe commented that it would be a big issue for off-road driving in rural Oregon. Gary said that there is an expectation in the pilot that drivers will provide information about where they re driving, which will help inform the program. Bob Bryant stated that this methodology lends itself to being able to determine whether a driver is using urban and rural roads. It then could charge different amounts for different types of road usage. The group discussed circumstances where understanding the details of how the program worked would be necessary, including agriculture related uses. 10. Adjourned Meeting adjourned at 5:03 PM.