 Hi, Donna. Am I in the right place? Good morning, everyone. Yes, you are, Mike. Thank you. Or at least you're here with all of us. Yeah. I got three links, so I didn't know which one. Make sure I get the right one here. You're in the right spot for now. Mike, you can be ready to do your explanation of it. The SCCIC is. I'll do my best. Thank you. It's always quite good. 25 words for the last. Well, now I'm in trouble. Ready? Looks like there is a quorum. Yeah. Just. Okay. Yeah, I was just looking at the other attendee list to see if anybody was in the wrong room. But it looks like we're all in the right place. Okay. Can we call this meeting to order? Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District Board of Directors Meeting on March 25th, 2022. May we have a roll call, Donna, please? Okay. Director Downing. You're muted. Director Downing. Here. Thank you. Director Dutra. Don't see Jimmy. Okay. Director Voluntary Johnson. Present. Director Lynn. Here. Director McPherson. Here. Director Myers. Director Pagler. Here. Director Parker. Here. Director Peterson. Present. Director Rockin. Here. Director Northcutt. We do have quorum. All right. Thank you very much. Our next item is to recess to the SCCIC meeting. And Director Rockin often has a concise explanation of what that meeting entails. Mike, would you care to explain? Okay. In the history of this agency in the early 80s, we floated a bond. And in order to do so, under FCC regulations and banking regulations, we're required not to take the money directly that comes in from the sale of the bonds, but to have it pass through another entity. The rules are that that entity cannot be exactly the same as the board of directors, but can include a portion of the board of directors. And so we created that agency. It took some expense and time to create it. So when we were done with the bond issue, rather than just killing that little civic association that we had created, we kept it alive. And it has, as you'll see, the momentum sum of something like $275 or something in the bank account. Just enough to keep it legally enacted. And it's only function is the pass through function. It doesn't have any other function. You get the money, you have to keep an account of how much came in, how much went out. Usually it only requires one meeting for that to happen. I will tell the people that are serving, I'm not serving on that now, and the people that are serving on it from the board, we got the sumptuous meal of a sandwich and a bag of potato chips at the time for our meeting. So you should stand up for your rights when you come to your meeting. But that's basically what the function is. It's because we're now about to float. We've already agreed and supported the idea of floating a bond to help support our operations and to bring down our costs significantly, actually. That organization is being reinvigorated and you'll have a meeting, a staff will inform you about it and so forth. As I said, I think you should ask for a sandwich lunch at the minimum when you meet. That's how it works. Very good. Thank you, Mike. And with that, I would turn this over to the president of this group, Bruce McPherson. And you may run this meeting, sir. Okay. I don't think that there's, we'll just call the minutes. I don't have the agenda on that. As a matter of fact, I didn't get it. So I think it's just to approve the minutes of the past meeting and then, so I could entertain a motion there. No, your first item actually is, I can tell you, Bruce, is to consider appointing directors Myers and Parker to serve as the SCIC board of directors. And so you can do that with a motion and a second in action. I would make a motion to that effect. Thank you. Second. Okay. So first by director Pagler and second by director Koenig. Correct. And then we'll do a roll. Director McPherson. All right. Director Parker. She won't be voting on this until she's actually appointed. Yeah, I was going to say, I'm sorry. We're voting on her voting. Director Koenig. Hi. And director Pagler. Hi. All right. And the motion passes. Now you should do a roll call of your new of your new board. Yeah. Okay. Director McPherson. Here. Director Parker. Here. Director Koenig. Here. And director Myers. I don't see that she joined us yet. And director Pagler. Here. I'm sorry. Donna, this is Shebra. I just got a note from director Myers. She's finishing up a work meeting and she should be here shortly. Okay, great. Thank you. We have sufficient votes. So to carry that, right? Yes. Yeah. So next Bruce, you should ask for a roll and written communications. Yes. Are there any. Thanks. Are there any world communications that came to the SCC? I see. There are no written communications. Okay. All right. Anybody from the public would like to. Make a statement. I see one hand from Lonnie Faulkner. To this item. Oh, I apologize. Is this just a regular public statement? No, no. You'll get to that. That's coming up in a moment. My apologies. I just hopped on. Thank you. It's okay. It's okay. We'll come back to this one. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. We'll come back to this one. Roger McPherson. I have the agenda up to if you'd like some support on that. Now that I'm official. Oh, good. All right. I'll let you take over and tell them what the next item is then. Okay. So we just finished with oral written communications. Do we have any additions or deletions to the agenda? And there are none. There are none. Okay. So we're approving prior year minutes of March 26, 2021. It's in your attachment B of that. I'd move approval. Second. Okay. We have a motion and a second. I'm sorry. Who was the second? McPherson. Bruce. Oh, okay. Thank you. All right. And a roll on that. Director McPherson. Aye. Director Parker. Aye. Director Koenig. Aye. And Director Pagler. Aye. And the motion passes. Super. Our next agenda item is acceptance of the financial statements for year 21. That would be on attachment C. And I don't know if anybody could bring that up for those people who do not have. This is where Mike would know. It's in the agenda. Okay. It's in the agenda. Yeah. All right. So we have operating reviews. I'll tell you your total operating expenses. We're 250 bucks. Yeah. Dude, I was just going to be so exciting as to tell them the. I'm sorry. Move. Move acceptance of the item. Second. That was okay. Bruce again. Okay. All right. And a roll would be director McPherson. Aye. Director Parker. Aye. Director Koenig. Aye. And director Pagler. Aye. And the motion passes. All right. So, um, uh, Bruce, I'm going to leave it to you to adjourn. Okay. I, um, I move that we adjourn the, uh, the meeting of the SEC. I see. Very good. And with that, we're going to reconvene to the board of directors meeting. How the announcements I have today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. And again, as I have today, are noting that the meeting is being broadcast by the community television of Santa Cruz County. I'm looking to the board of directors if they have any comments in general for today's meeting, not seeing any hands. Let's move into oral and written communications to the board. We've received a number of items, uh, that has arrived there are numerous things at the end of the day yesterday I believe and you reported on the number of of letters that you had received was over a hundred I believe. Correct. Thank you. To the public may go to the public for any comment now I see some hands and the first is James Sandoval. James would you like to speak please. Yes. Hi. Thank you Larry. James Sandoval here general chairperson for smart who represents the drivers here at Metro. This is section 7 on the agenda. Correct. That's correct. Okay. I just wanted to speak on the the written communication from someone from the public asking for support on SB 94942 for free fares or reduced fares for public transportation. I just wanted to make sure that you know on that subject alone we just I love the idea and theory but we piloted for six months but I think it was where we had free fares and we created a lot of problems. There was a lot of issues. We had a lot of a number of you know not so regular riders jumping on our buses especially our highway 17s with free Wi-Fi and comfortable seats and it was really hard to regulate and it was at a point where you know our regular riders were actually asking for us to go back to charging the fare to get some rid of some of these non-regular riders. So this is something that I wanted to point out because it's you know such a great idea and theory but we just don't want to create another problem by solving one right so I just wanted to make sure that we understood that part when considering that. Thank you. Thank you James. Looking next I see Lonnie Faulkner. Hi thank you so much. I just wanted to mention what because I had a chance to watch the last board meeting to remind folks that with funding that might be available for example the state rail funding that this brings wonderful potential opportunities to bus metro. There's a lot of the funding that is available for rail is also available for buses that access the rail and if you look back at the studies the Unified Quarter Study and the TCAA studies these studies have shown that actually bringing robust transit through rail would actually improve our ridership and offer more ridership and funds for our bus metro which is of course very very important especially to South County and just having heard the last speaker I believe that was bill 1919. I just want to say that from a standpoint of improving our ability to get more kids on board and set a habit of getting kids riding public transit at an early age. Bill 1919 would be such a wonderful way to establish bus ridership for youth and then as well we know that a lack of public transportation a lack of transportation is a number one barrier to both getting these kids to school on time. Communities that have implemented similar projects on a local scale have shown that it more than pays off for itself because it decreases truancy it keeps kids off the streets it lowers crime the longevity the long-term positive implications of a bill like 1919 are really positive and so I would offer to do more research on that and take a look at some of the benefits because the benefits are long-standing thank you so much. Thank you Lonnie just to clarify I think the previous speaker had been referring to bill SB 942 I know there are several transit fee measures of foot but just to clarify any other comments from the public. Let me the last speaker was referring to a bill that actually would have the state fund free rides for young people which is very different than what had been proposed a year earlier which was that we would bear the cost which we don't have the money to do so that that bill at least is currently still marked up looks very promising and we're our legislative lobbyists are looking at you know keeping track on it to let us know how it's going. Very good. Thank you Mike. Any other comment from the board? All right moving on we're going to the labor organization communications. I know we've received some written materials. I'm looking to see hands. Let's see I see Jordan. Jordan Vasconas would you like to speak to this? Hi good morning board. Today's a very important day and I'm excited to enter this new era of Metro. I'm looking really forward to meeting the next CEO. I feel very confident that our extension proposal our contract extension proposal is very reasonable and I have confidence that if it was accepted that it would pass very easily when taken to a vote of our members. I'm also very excited for our state Senate bill SB nine five seven. I'm not going to go into too much detail there well we can go into that later. I think that that bill will help us achieve labor peace and harmony and I'm going to be doing my best to forge a positive relationship with all these things considered and you know James and I are going to be doing our best to make everything positive around here. So that's it for now. Thank you Jordan. James Sandoval. Thank you chair. Yeah, I mean you guys all got our email to the context as to why we proposed what we did. I mean it just came down to things that happened around us when we're going back and forth over contract extension negotiations and and then this going over the history of what happened from 2014 at 2018 where you know Metro was in a structural deficit and Metro came to our you know unions to ask for help and we we you know actually froze our wages for five years you know and so and we haven't really seen what we would have had come back yet and so that's why there's that feeling of you know we're just hoping that you know at least to get back what we would have had but not only that when I was referring to earlier with things happening around us is that we had VTA you know just just give a great deal to their transit workers where they offered a 10 percent over three years and also a $3,500 check and in the article I provided you for you all and it says this despite you know deficit or structural deficit concerns they still took care of their workers and we also have SAM Trans that gave their workers 11 percent over the next three years and a $3,500 check and SAM Trans I mean Golden Gate just ratified a strong contract from my understanding but I don't know the details of it just yet but things are happening around us where you know transit agencies are really making the moves to make their transit workers feel appreciated for doing what we've been asked to do and to build the morale up you know because of how much stress and how much you know we've been through and not only that but we're all having a difficulty recruiting and retaining people right now not only just Metro but I'm sure other transit agencies too but we need to do things to start making ourselves competitive because right now we are losing people a lot faster than we're bringing them in I mean just this week alone we've lost four more drivers our last class was only three and we are looking to hire 12 more drivers with this upcoming class and we're only interviewing 11 people and you know not all 11 people more than likely will make it let alone you know not everybody will make it through probation so we might be looking at another class of three people and that's offering four thousand dollars so something needs to happen whether that's you know being more competitive or boosting the morale for the drivers to where we start you know really feeling good about this job and you know start recruiting some of the people that we think would be a great fit for this job I don't know but something needs to happen and and we just read also I just want to emphasize we also really wanted to get an extension because what we find valuable is the relationship between you know the CEO the next person and our unions I mean we saw what happens when we don't get along and we find you know contract negotiations to be very rough and to start off with somebody like that I just don't think it's a great idea especially with how you know burned out everybody is the last thing we need is contentious bumpy you know the bumpy road of negotiations with somebody new I'd rather start off fresh and work on that relationship so we could start focusing our energy together in the right direction and move forward so I really hope you consider an extension and and to emphasize on the process whatever you whatever you guys come up with it's not up to the union officers we have to bring it back to our membership and they have to decide by taking a vote on whatever you guys propose and let's just give them something that's going to pass please so thank you so much for your time thank you James any other speakers from the public on this is from labor groups of labor groups excuse me thank you Mike I do not see any more hands I believe we can go on to the next item number nine which is written communications from the metro advisory committee and we didn't have any thank you additional documentation to support existing agenda items I think you've distributed what materials there might be yes all right there's nothing else all right we're about to go to closed session Julie I believe I asked the public if there are comments related to closed session correct all right so public comment on the items we're addressing closed session like there be any give it a moment I see James Sandoval go ahead James I think I captured for the most part what I wanted to say before closed session but I just I'm really really excited and I'm looking forward to seeing who you guys chose as our next leader for Metro and I'm just hoping we could arrange something soon where we could start establishing that relationship but I just want everybody here to know the board of directors including this next person you have my word we're going to do everything we can to make this work and I'm just I just want to emphasize we're really really excited so thank you so much thank you James any other comment Jordan go ahead please hi there I just wanted to second exactly what James said I'm really looking forward to this I look forward to meeting this next new person and I also will be doing everything in my part to make sure we have a very positive harmonious relationship thank you thank you Jordan checking for any other hands I think with that we're ready to go to closed session and I just want to check that all the directors have received the closed session link one came this morning all right then we will see you over there sense agenda and if I could interrupt director I just want to do a quick report out from the closed sessions thank you the first closed session the board has determined to appoint a new CEO and as soon as we do the consent calendar the very first item will be a lengthy report on that appointment the second closed session there is no reportable action thank you Julian all right so again our first item is the consent agenda there are any comments from directors Manu thank you sir Pegler I just wanted to point out this this plan to acquire the more zero emissions buses is pretty extensive not to mention expensive over the years I guess I had a couple questions on it one it seems like we're only acquiring a few electric buses and really in the short term and moving towards all hydrogen in the long term you know this is just from an infrastructure perspective of trying to continue to support those the electric charging for the buses versus you know building a hydrogen infrastructure you know what's why even bother acquiring the few electric buses in the short term if we're not really going to support them in the long term is that a question for I guess I mean I mean I don't know if it's a good question yeah I think it was um so if I can answer um Margo CEO and so though it does seem that way in the plan as they explained to the committee the plan is very flexible it doesn't really commit us to hydrogen buses it doesn't come you know obviously we have to go with something currently we are meeting with CTE to kind of figure that out it's very expensive but most bus purchases are made through grants federal grants with matching funds so it's not kind of out of pocket if that makes sense the committee that I formed is looking into what is right for metro we know that a hydrogen fuel station is approximately 23 million dollars and you know it's very very expensive we know that we have the bandwidth for six more chargers and so kind of CTE and a group of people at Santa Cruz is looking at that question the biggest question also for us is a southern facility which will certainly help with you know either looking at a hydrogen station or the purchase of electric vehicles so to your point this plan is very flexible very open something that we wanted to put together to make sure that we had the ability to contract or expand either to hydrogen or electric and that's kind of all I can say now until we kind of answer that question and you know certainly I didn't want to go too big because I knew we had an incoming CEO certainly wanted their input and we had to go with something if that makes sense and some of that was obviously the direction of Alex as well but we understand that the cost is tremendous anywhere from 280 million dollars to 3.400 I can't even say the number it's so large you know an amount so yes we know it's a big number yes the infrastructure number is is is large but we know that going in and we're going to set a budget and set locations and and make sure that it works for us Metro okay great I mean as long as there's opportunities to have more substantive discussions in the future I mean and this is really just sort of authorizing the submission of a draft report because as you said there's a lot in here close to whatever about hundreds of millions of dollars of expenditures on various technologies and I mean I think even the question of whether we're going to replace 70% of the fleet with new CNG buses over the next six years is something we want to discuss further too so man I'm fine with submitting this report today but yeah we'll have a more substantive discussion in the future certainly that's it for me thank you you lost Larry all right we don't have a vice-chair either I'll just quickly ask her any other board members have concerns okay I'm back sorry my network dropped off for a moment all right um any other comments on the consent agenda I see a hand from the public I'm James Sandoval James thank you chair um I just wanted to speak on section 13.8 on the consent agenda of the board considering continuing to have these board meetings over a zoom although you know I agree that it's very convenient but I'm just maybe it shouldn't be something on the consent agenda more of something that should be discussed and talked about I mean it's it is difficult to have you know for a lot of people great internet enough to you know speak up during these meetings and we have connection issues and it's not the same as in-person meetings I'm just hoping we're not disadvantaging people from our community by continuing meetings over zoom but although I do understand the you know convenience of it but and uh and the safety you know precautions but um there's something I think about thank you thank you James any other comments public board from the directors we have a motion of approval of the consent agenda second that was rockin and the second was McPherson yeah thank you Donna okay uh director Downing hi director Dutra hi director Colin Harry Johnson hi director Koenig hi director Lynn hi director McPherson hi director Myers hi hi director Pagler hi director Parker uh yes uh director Peterson hi and director Rockin hi and the motion passes unanimously very good with that we're on to item 14 of the regular agenda consideration of appointment of a CEO general manager and approval of employment agreement we have been in closed session and Julie I believe I can read this announcement I correct yes and if Donna could screen share the resolution and to inform the public that all of the materials the board is approving are posted on the metro website on the landing page okay can everybody see that yes yes well part of it it needs to be scrolled at some point yes yeah so I will I will read and uh we can scroll as needed but uh this is the announcement following the nationwide search and many hours of work by our recruitment team the board of directors proposes the appointment of Michael Tree as Santa Cruz Metro's new CEO general manager Michael joins us with more than 27 years of experience in public transit and city management and most recently served as the executive director at Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority LAVTA while simultaneously serving as in the same position of the executive director for the Tri Valley San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail Authority during his tenure at these agencies Michael focused on increasing connectivity and ease of use for riders by improving route frequency and expanding travel options for commuters and passengers with disabilities in his career Michael has been named transit manager of the year by both the California Association of Coordinated Transportation and the California Transit Association the board of directors and I are excited by Michael's extensive expertise and knowledge of public transit as well as his proven track record in increasing connectivity for the public and we look forward to him expanding our zero emissions bus plan so Metro can continue to reduce our emissions and our impact on the environment and if you'd like I will read through this bulleted item that is up now this contract date is effective today March 25th contract terms five years commencing April 25th of 2022 the job description appears below and I think is available on the web termination at will was severance equal to lesser the lesser of 18 months salary or B salary for the remaining term of the unexpired contract resignation oops I was reading that too thank you at any time within 30 days notice is resignation based salary effective April 25th of the 21,250 per month annual increases after the first year five percent if satisfactorily meets board performance evaluation metrics deferred compensation of up to 14 percent of annual salary vacation of 23 days per year health welfare and other leave benefits consistent with management compensation policy life insurance term life policy in the amount of 200 percent of annual salary and relocation expenses of up to 10,000 for moving costs plus plus car mileage up to $5,500 for temporary housing maximum of four months and $5,000 toward home purchase in Santa Cruz County and being moving through the rest of this be it for the resolve that the board approves revisions to the management wage schedule to reference the chief executive officer general manager's salary schedule be it for the resolve that the board approves the chief executive officer general manager's salary schedule which will reflect the compensation terms and the chief executive officer general manager's employment agreement and be it for the resolve that the board chair is authorized to take any and other actions necessary to give effect to this resolution and here we are with an action item I believe I will move approval of this resolution I think we'll hear from the public before we vote on it we have a second is that second donal in yes all right looking to the board and the public for comments I see any looking at the attendant list not seeing any hands directors I'm not seeing anything okay I believe we can proceed to a roll call Mr. just please I just want to say I wanted I know Mr. Treat's gonna address this but I want to thank Don Crummy our acting CEO and the whole administrative team for the work they've done and the interim it's been fantastic we've had a great research team too but thank you acting CEO Don Crummy and the whole administrative team of Metro agreed very true and I also want to add that the recruitment team that we hired did a really fabulous job for us I mean I when we started this process I was really worried that we might have a very difficult time finding anybody at this point and they and as it turns out they did not approach this at the level of going out looking for you know people who were you know send out an advertisement that's your response they went had to go out and actually get people interested in the application and that's how we were able to find Mr. Treat for this position and they did a really wonderful job with us and in terms of handling negotiations to set up the final compensation package that Larry just reported on it CEOs are expensive I think everybody has to understand that they make a lot more than most of us the rest of us do and that's just the reality of the world that we live in but I think he will that he will be well worth the funding that we're going to be putting into this you're very excited by by his resume and the work that he's done in our interviews with him particularly excited by his a positive experience working with employees and his current and previous jobs that was a big issue for us and we wanted to make sure that we hired someone who was going to take that issues very seriously and so I feel very happy and proud to be part of the process of delivering this information to the public about the person we've chosen for this important position. Thank you Mike. Any other comment? Go to Rockville. Director Downing. Aye. Director Dutra. Aye. Welcome aboard. Director Cullin-Terry Johnson. Aye. Director Koenig. Aye. Director Lind. Aye. Director McPherson. Aye. Director Myers. Aye. Welcome aboard Michael. Director Pagler. Aye and welcome Michael. Director Parker. Aye and welcome to another newbie. Director Peterson. Aye. Director Rockin. Aye. And we have the motion passes unanimously. Very good. Do we have Michael around here? I did just text him. He should be trying to sign in to say hello to everybody. We can say in the meantime that he'll be starting a month for he has to give notice in his current position. He'll be starting a month from today and in the meantime again I also want to join in the comments about Dawn's wonderful job in this transitional period which is not quite over. She has another month of work as our acting CEO. That's right. Thank you Dawn. Thank you very much again. I could not do it without all of the Metro staff. Great support from everybody. Donna Bauer. You're my hero. Monique Delfin. Margo. Isaac. Couldn't do it without any of you. John and his team with the grant stuff, the legislation stuff that I just didn't have. So I'm only successful because of them. So thank you very much. Appreciate it. Very good. And thank you for hanging in. I mean I know you've hit some challenging times and you've done an outstanding job. We really, really appreciate you. Agreed. Michael has joined us. Michael, are you able to, there you are. Okay. Any words for us? Welcome to the group. Hey, appreciate it. Thank you for bringing me on board. I am super excited to come over to Metro. Really appreciate the confidence in the board. Look forward to working really closely with the board and also James and Jordan really look forward to establishing a productive partnership and working closely with our passengers and also the employees. You have a fantastic agency and I'm looking forward to picking the agency into its next chapter. And I really see a lot of potential moving forward, potential for improving quality of life for residents through good connectivity with public transit and taking advantage of opportunity to grow your zero emission fleet, which I think is important for the community. So I'll just wrap up by saying I'm excited and look forward to joining you soon. Great. We look forward to having you here. Welcome to the team. Thanks. All right. We'll leave them on to the next item. Would that be item 15? Discuss the position on SB 957 in response to the cure and correct letter. Don, are you presenting on this? I am with some help from our legal counsel. So just as a reminder, Senate bill 957 SB 957 introduced by Senator Laird would place Santa Cruz Metro under the curb jurisdiction. As you know, the smart union circulated a letter to Metro board members for signatures outside of a notice public meeting. And the letter was signed by a number of board members, at least some of whom did not intend for the letter to be presented as an official action by Metro board. That letter was shared with Senator Laird and he accepted that as evidence that the Metro board supported the legislation. However, the Metro board had not held a discussion on this matter in a public setting yet. As a result of the union circulated letter, a union flyer thinking certain board members and the senator for supporting the legislation, Metro received a public comment and a cure and correct letter asserting a Brown act violation. Our new CEO GM is expected to begin working in April of 2022. And in light of the new CEO coming on board along with a number of other reasons described herein, Metro staff recommends that the board take a position opposing SB 957 and allow the new GM to get acclimated and engage the Metro bargaining units in order to establish a positive working relationship with the unions before the board determines whether any changes to the context of Metro's labor relations are considered. Metro can support legislation similar to SB 957 at any time, so there is no urgency to make this change now. In accordance with the with the Brown act Metro staff also recommends that the board approve the cure and correct response letter as prepared by general counsel. So a little bit of discussion, PERV is a quasi-judical administrative agency charged with administering the collective bargaining statutes covering the employees and California's public schools, colleges and universities, employees of the state of California, and employees of certain California local public agencies. Metro along with the vast majority of public transit district is not subject to PERV, rather labor disputes are governed by the processes set forth in Metro's enabling legislation and agreed to in the union's MOUs. So at this time Metro staff does not believe it's necessary to bring Metro under PERV jurisdiction. Some of the reasons are Metro has not had any cases go to court relative to any alleged violation of a collective bargaining statutes which are subject to PERV preview for those agencies that are under the jurisdiction of PERV. Gravance disputes relative to the discipline and contract interpretations have either been resolved in the lower level of yield process or in arbitration and those are rare. Becoming subject to PERV would result in significant expense to Metro as any case being filed against Metro in front of PERV would result in attorney I'm sorry an additional attorney's fees and a significant dedication of staff time including union staff and other resources. The PERV process which includes I won't read through all of the steps but it's basically eight to nine steps to be able to file something into PERV and to hear back and PERV also does not require any threshold to file charges nor does it require any preliminary discussions between the parties before filing a charge. Currently Metro and the unions must work out differences over the bargaining table but PERV makes it very easy for parties to instead resort immediately to litigation. The PERV process would also permit Metro to file unfairly for practice against the unions which would essentially escalate disputes in terms of both time and money for both sides. The language in the Metro is enabling legislation. The public utilities code section 9800 and the union MMOs already provide the unions need of protections including Metro's obligation of bargaining of faith not necessarily afforded other entities who are covered by PERV. PERV also continues to experience unprecedented backlog sometimes 12 to 18 months. So this time Metro staff recommends the board take action by motion to oppose SB 957. In addition the Brown Act here in correct letter the Brown Act prohibits the legislative body meetings outside of properly noticed public meetings. A Brown Act serial meeting is a series of meetings or communications between individuals in which ideas are exchanged among a majority of legislative body through persons acting as intermediaries. Metro received an anonymous hearing correct letter which is the first step in challenging an action under the Brown Act. Alleging that the board violated Brown Act in connection with the letter circulated by smart union in support of per legislation which was signed by several board members because the hearing correct letter is anonymous meaning Metro really has no way to respond to the letter writer as required by the product. It's very unlikely that the letter would lead to let to litigation. Nevertheless because of hearing correct letter was received at this time Metro staff recommends that the board approved the attached letter which was prepared by general counsel to respond to the anonymous hearing correct letter and B place a copy of the letter signed by the board chair in the minutes of this board meeting. I would just like to offer comments my personal comments to the act of Metro going under PERV for the reasons that the unions have given. I feel that I do have a very open relationship with the unions. I have never denied a meeting if requested by a union leader. I take all phone calls and if I miss a phone call I'm 99% of the time I'm shooting a text message saying hey I'm in a meeting I'll call you back or do you still need me you know so I'm always making that connection. We've talked about employee situations on the weekends at night I was on the line with one of the unions on Christmas Eve as I was making dinner. So I just want to make it known that I I've never had a labor violation brought to my attention between management and the unions and I've always worked even when I didn't technically have to it wasn't in any writing or in a contract that said I had to do a give. There's many times that I did do a give with meeting with the unions because my philosophy is sometimes you have to give even when you're when you're when you don't have to even when you legally don't have to because that's what opens up the relationship, the communication, the collaboration and sometimes they may be the union will will will give in a in a in a sense where they don't necessarily have to in writing as well. I just I don't think it's necessary to rush this through I do strongly believe that the new CEO deserves to come in and create his his bridges with the unions and I feel like it would be very different than the past and so I feel like we should have a chance to to go that route before we do this it's going to be a very expensive thing. I may not cost a dollar amount to actually file a charge but I'm not an attorney I cannot go and sit down in a in a hearing in a pub hearing and and act like I am an attorney so of course we're going to have attorneys there with us and that that's very expensive even if the charge goes nowhere even if it they file the charge and it's it's not really a labor dispute that should go under Herb and and we receive that letter back saying that somebody still needs to reply to that they need to file them the their answer and all of that and and all of those things cost money. So I wanted to share that that part before you all open discussion. Thank you Dawn. I have a procedural question. Yes, I want to ask Julie if it's we can divide this question and simply vote on the accepting the cure and correct letter separate from the substantive issue of how we feel about the per and just just be done with that. I I would propose to the chair that he consider that as a sort of procedural matter because those are in a way a separate issue and I'd like to quickly dispose of the you know we do need to respond to that legally respond to the cure and correct letter and I think we should do that quickly and I don't think they'll be disputed I so I hope there will not be dispute about that and then we'll move on to the more substantive question we have to discuss. I appreciate that. Jay Rockin. Do we have a motion to that effect? I'll make that motion. I'll second that. Right I heard a motion from Rockin a second from McPherson and just to repeat Mike this is the motion for the cure and correct. Right this we've been presented with a cure and correct response. Everybody has a copy of that it's on the website so forth and it was referred to earlier and I just think we should approve that send it off and dispose of that matter and then because I say have a more full discussion in the word that people want to speak and so forth. I see multiple hands from directors is this in comment to this motion? No. No. Director Koenig. My original question was essentially the same as what Mike just asked but does this if we're going to make a motion to take these and separate items do we not need to bring that out for public comment first or would we wait until it now becomes its own item and then take it out for public comment? You will need to allow public comment you have a motion and a second there should be a board discussion if any and then allow public comment before you all vote on the cure and correct letter. Very good. Thank you. So questions to this motion from the directors? Is this for the cure and correct motion or is this to separate? Yes this is for the cure and correct motion. I'm sorry to clarify I thought this was the motion to separate the cure and correct from the no no no the chair has the authority to make that the separation according to our attorney and so this is actually substantive it's not about the issue about how we feel about her but whether we should approve this cure and correct letter to be into our minutes. Got it. Thank you. Is that clear? All right. Any comments? Thank you chair. I appreciate you chair Peggler for for clarified. All right. Any comments from the public? Not seeing any and if already checked no other comment from the directors I believe we can vote on this motion on the cure and correct letter. I actually had a question. Please. I actually had a question first. Because this was an anonymous letter and one of the things that it mentioned was this action taken on February 25th by members of this board I don't believe that actually happened on the 25th so I'm trying to understand why you know why this letter is being written to someone who's we don't even know who that is. I'm just trying to understand better why we would do this. Julie you can help me. Yes. It's a good question and what I can say is that I'm doing it to be exercising the utmost caution to protect the agency. You could take the position that hey we don't think a brown act violation occurred and we're not going to cure and correct. We're not going to respond. That that is an option. I don't recommend it because I don't think you're losing anything. You're not admitting any brown act violation occurred and the letter says that and and I'm not saying a brown act violation occurred. However, if someone does challenge anything that has happened in the past legally this letter takes care of that. So I don't see any harm in doing it. You you are you absolutely could not do it. But as your legal counsel it's the least risky path for Metro to do this letter that admits nothing but complies with the law. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other questions from the directors? I saw none from the public. Donna I think we can vote. Okay. Director Downey. Hi. Director Dutra. Hi. Director Cullen Terry Johnson. Hi. Director Koenig. Hi. Director Linde. Hi. Director McPherson. Hi. Director Myers. Hi. Director Pagler. Hi. Director Parker. Hi. Director Peterson. Hi. Director Rockin. All right. And the motion passes unanimously. Thank you Donna. Thank you chair. Next time I see well this is on to director McPherson. You had your hand up. Yes. This is in relation to Senate bill 957 about regarding PERB. And I can't think of a worst time that something like this could come before us with the new CEO coming on board. Especially after the board there was members that had indicated we should at least weigh 90 to 120 days to see if we really do need something like this. I really believe in local government is the best government. And what we're doing here is transferring a huge part of our operation to a state agency in San Francisco or Sacramento or wherever. It's going to cost us thousands of dollars and months and years and time that our staff really does indeed to have on their plate. I really disappointed that this has come to this point. I think that I heard that some people said this gives us some insurance. I think the right term is there's an assurance that this is the bargaining chips of Metro are highly going to be transferred to a state agency without our own CEO and our administrative team bargaining with the union. I think it comes at a terrible time. It's really disappointing. I think it's not something we should put on or leave from our incoming CEO. And I think we can handle our situation just fine. Thank you. I'd rather do it to an unnamed state agency somewhere else. Obviously, I'm very strong in this opinion and I hope that we just back off from supporting SB 957 as is recommended by our staff. Thank you, Director McPherson. Director Cohnett, you're next. Thank you, Chair Peggler. I would just suggest that we table the discussion for now. I mean, the intent of my motion from the January 25th meeting was to give our new CEO time to weigh in on the matter so that we could have a substantive discussion of this input. I think it was to delay this item until after such time as the new CEO was hired but within 90 days at that point. So, I mean, I suppose effectively we've approved the agreement but I think he's not technically started. So, I mean, this sort of, in my mind, trying to dispose of this issue completely at this time is just a little bit premature and I'd prefer to wait. I guess if a question would be is there any reason that we would have to submit a formal opinion in support or opposition to 957 at this time? Julie, are you able to respond to that? Well, I can't really speak for the senator. I know that and I wasn't part of the discussions with the senator. So, I can only tell you what I've heard from your lobbyist which is that the senator has said he would not put forward the legislation without both the board and the unions endorsing it but then he went ahead and put it forward because of that letter that was circulated. So, I guess I don't really know what his position would be now that we've made clear that that wasn't an official action of the board and that the board has not officially endorsed or opposed because the board, if the board says we don't want to take a position on that legislation, you've got legislation that's out there and he may be looking for a position. I just don't know and I don't know if any board members have spoken with the senator and they could tell you what they know but I don't know. Thank you, Julie. I'm going to move through the directors. Director Koenig, is that appropriate for you? Yeah, that's fine. It may just seem to me the soonest we would want to bring this back to a meeting would be May since our April meeting is actually still before the official start date of our new CEO. Right. Okay. Thank you. Director Peterson. Thank you. I appreciate Supervisor Koenig's comments and I think that it's really important for us to consider one, as noted in in the staff report and and and others have brought up as well that no official action of the board has been taken on this. So, the board has not taken a support or opposed position on SB 957 at this time and while several of us within our legal rights expressed our personal support for it, it's unfortunate that it's come to this kind of situation. However, in the staff report, it mentions specifically that we would want to wait to allow metro bargaining units to establish a positive working relationship with our new CEO amongst the unions so that labor relations are are positive moving forward. And so I think if the idea here is that we want to offer a clean slate for our new CEO to come into then voting right now to oppose 957 essentially does the same as if we were to vote right now to support 957 in that it puts something some kind of notation out there about whether the board is supporting or opposing, which then gives an idea to the new CEO as to how we feel about this. I think if the idea is that we do want to have some kind of neutral position and then either we do as Supervisor Koenig recommends and table this or if the board feels that it's important that we take some kind of action to out of abundance of caution show that the board has not previously taken a vote to support this, that we should take a vote of neutrality essentially saying that we are of a neutral position or of no position at this time until the time that our new CEO can come on and then we can take a vote specifically saying whether or not we support or oppose. But I think that if in the staff report we're suggesting that we allow time for the new CEO to acclimate then opposing taking a vote to oppose a bill essentially does the same thing as it would take a vote to to support it. So I would highly recommend that all of the all of my colleagues consider that we either remain neutral or take no action at this time and consider it later as as a body. Thank you Director Peterson. Director Lin. I did speak with Senator Larratt and he did tell me I told him that the action that was taken or the position that was taken January 28th and he said well that was contrary to the letter he received that he acted on moving the legislation forward based on receiving documentation that a majority of the board supported curb and he said that was the position he would publicly give is that he based moving this legislation forward on a letter that he believed to be official action and I told him at the time that I did not believe that was the intent and he said that's not what he'd been told that and he pointed to the flyer and said you know all these photos are here I'm moving he said I moved I didn't make a decision to move forward until I received the majority of the signatures so it was taken with that understanding on his part that's what he he told me I've I've not been supportive of per based on what I've learned as far as the expense from the attorney fees that the information I have that it takes at least 12 months and often more than that 18 months for any complaint to move forward and you know talking to Don and others on the staff on how things have been handled and the work that they've done Don gave an example on on someone who reached our quit rather than retire and lost medical benefits and and the work she did to help resolve that that would not have been able to be done without if it were in per and so knowing and looking at and getting the information I've received as far as one expense not only to Metro but even to the unions and their attorneys having to handle these issues that would be brought forward and you know the work the good work that our staff has done to resolve issues I just feel like you know I I would at least want to see us wait for through the year and see that things continue but my concern is that the bill moving forward was based on John's Laird Senator Laird's understanding that there was official action taken so I'm thankful the cure and correct letter was done and you know I think at very least I agree with Mono that let's let our CEO get in place and get a chance to to be able to present all the information staff report with both sides and hear all the information and hear his input thank you direction Lynn director Rotkin um I moved to table this item until our June meeting if it gets a second it's not debatable except for to when the timing if somebody wants to pick a different date that could be debated but it's not it ends debated we get seconded we just have a vote do I hear a second second that was from director Conig so all right help me here Mike we're somebody wants to argue no unless June is the right time to do this is this is not a debatable motion and move motion to table is not to be able it simply gets voted on that could be discussion there's discussion though no no a move to table is not discussed read Robert Schultz of order Julie except for the time except for the time to which you can disagree with June I think August is better or May or whatever I'm pulling up the rules of procedure right now just give me a sec I know we have at these two directors that we're going to speak and two members of the public okay I I checked the board's rules of procedure and a motion to postpone or table is not debatable and cannot be amended and requires at least six affirmative votes for passage Mike's right okay Julie do we postpone public comment on this as well no I I think that that the rules of procedure just have to recording in progress okay there we go it just gave me here you are thank you thank you thank you very much for that chair pigler but board members on moving cost down the state legislative director for smart transportation division and I am a smart transportation division and member have been for 25 years so I appreciate the opportunity this morning I want to I want to try to clarify a couple of things that are that are misconceptions first and foremost there is no transferring of board's business to a state agency that that's just simply not the case of her currently the status quo is that if there is a unfair labor practice charge that is not identified within collective bargain agreements or the the governing charter of the transit agency those are the only cases that go to superior court for adjudication as was the case in 2020 when the union sought relief from the increase in the number of passengers allowed inside of the buses during the pandemic those are the only cases that will go to those types of cases that are not already automatically covered under collective bargain agreements or under the grievance and arbitration procedures that are in place today so the current status of how you conduct business remains exactly the same the unions are still going to come and try to resolve all of their issues that they can for any of the collective bargaining things but the bargain doesn't even fall under the purview of her or the jurisdiction of her because it's already covered under the cba so there's a misconception that this is going to have some grand uh state agency overseeing your your your board and the and senator's metric the board retains fully autonomous and how it governs itself there is no oversight by perp it's there as for the same purpose that the superior court is now in the event that there is a a unfair labor practice that is not previously covered that's where the the relief is that's where the remedy is for either the board to go to or for the unions to go those are the only cases that would fall under perp's purview or the jurisdiction that's it i mean it says if not every single case if there's a problem like like the medical situation that uh that was discussed that would have still been handled in house that wouldn't have been something that would have gone to perp because the unions are going to continue to fix everything or try to fix everything locally that's only in their best interest and the best interest of their members so there there's the misconception of so what this is i think i mean it's only a very select number of unfair labor practices that would fall under perp's jurisdiction and so far in the past two years there's only been one that i'm aware it's not like the floodgates are going to open up and all of a sudden there's a whole bunch of both sides are are being good actors so i just wanted to make sure that that was clarified and as far as the extra expense that's involved the the listing of the nine or so items the first five or six i believe are all online and perp allows for non attorneys to represent in fact many of the cases and perp as as we stated in our in our rebuttal to some of the the staff's comments that we took exception to um they allow non attorneys and they allow self representation so instead of having to hire outside counsel you can represent yourself at perp as it can center whose metric um they can use in-house counsel they can use their their new ceo to make the case through the administrative process until there's a formal hearing at that point if they choose to hire outside counsel they can use so the only thing that changes with this with this bill with sp 957 the only essential change for the way things are now the status quo now is that the venue for addressing an unfair labor practice that is not already covered by statute or by agreement would change from superior court to perp that is the only real change so i just i think that there's a misconception as to what exactly this means the board remains fully autonomous in handling its business and the only things that would go to perp are the things that would go or the cases and the charges that would go now to superior court not that what is collectively bargain not that what is is uh grieved and arbitrated under the current procedures none of that would change the only things that would go to perp is what would have eventually ended in superior court so i hope you read our answers to the to the staff's report and the exceptions that we took and i hope you take those to heart going forward and i'm always available to answer any questions if possible to help resolve this issue we think that sp 957 would benefit both metro and its employees and we would urge that you support this legislation thank you for your time i appreciate it thank you for your comment i want to reiterate that we're looking at a motion to table this item until june i don't i believe we can still go to public comment jordan you're the next jordan best on us hi all um pretty much with this we're just asking for the same right to perp that city has the county ucsc cabrillo and countless other public agencies already have i mean if you're talking about private sector unions they have access to the nlrb public sector in almost every regard except for transit have access to perp we want the same right that all other the majority of all other unions have so i'll just keep it up that thank you jordan james you're next james sandoval teacher um yeah i just want to reiterate what uh louis costas said i mean we literally have a recourse right now to go to court instead of going through perp and with court you have to hire attorneys with perp you don't have to hire attorneys you can self-represent and you know the arbitrations that we've handled so far in the last two years our drivers me and our team of drivers have represented ourselves in that if metro chooses to hire attorneys that's on them on you guys but you have the option to self-represent with perp but you're forced to hire attorneys with court so i could actually argue that it's way more expensive to keep our report recourse that we have right now and um you know and then this sucks to be accused that we're going to take every single dispute through the formal process that for any of you that know me what really well you know i i do my best to handle things at the lowest level as possible um i i will continue to call i will continue to email i will continue to do whatever i can to handle in house and say it even gets to the point where we do file a charge against each other what's to stop from any board member to you know from inserting themselves to help the situation from you know progress any further uh it's just it seems like there's a huge misconception of what this is and that it's brand new it's been around for a really long time many other unions have this type of recourse and can deceive both the union and metro a lot of money for having this type of recourse and accountability that's all it really comes down to is accountability and for our unions to come forward and commit to not committing unfair labor practices because we're not afraid afraid of accountability we're just really hoping that metro's willing to come forward and do the same thing and you know uh and and metro is using public money when it comes down to this stuff and work if we're going to be hiring attorneys to go through litigation every single time that's public money and for the union side it's hard earned money through dues that we're using and it doesn't benefit us when we're colliding like this especially spending the money and resources and energy that we could actually use moving forward and so I just um I'm really hoping that you guys got the time to take a look at that letter where we um addressed a lot of the false and misleading and misconceptions of perp and also the over 130 emails that we you know that the public sent in in support of SB 957 you know um we hate when the public gets caught up in the middle of our disputes but that can happen and and having something like perp would make sure that each side is always working with each other I'm not accusing the next person from being going to be a problem at all but you know I just it does not hurt to have something like insurance and it is like insurance that being placed just in case something something were to happen and we don't have to go through court to get it handled and instead go to an expert agency that's designed in public employment relations for free thank you very much thank you last public commenter cesar laura good morning board uh cesar laura with the monterey base central labor council in regards to the question I um I'm uh um I'm saying some comments opposing to the motion that was uh set on the table I think that the board needs to vote on um the on on what's being proposed and we actually would support against uh opposition um but it's uh would like for it to be acted on today thank you thank you uh all right that's the last comment mike your hand is up uh no no we're sorry I should have taken it down okay just checking all right we're back to the motion I think we are prepared to vote donna okay this is just to delay uh for the discussion until that's correct delaying action until June it is tabled until June or June meeting thank you donna director that's the June that's the June 25th meeting correct yeah correct and when does michael tree start April 25th that's two two months yes I said people could argue what's so what is debatable is whether that June's too early and somebody could argue for august I'm trying to be reasonable I thought there was no discussion I'm trying to answer the procedural the procedural question not the substance of it all right donna can okay you got it all right donna can we proceed with the vote okay rebecca downing hi rebecca dutra or excuse me director oh jimmy oh sorry no because I had comments to say hi sorry director colin terry johnson hi director conig hi director lend hi director mcpherson hi director mires hi director pagler hi director parker no and director peterson hi director rockin hi and the motion passes okay leave we are now on to the next item which is retiree resolution of appreciation I'm going to read a bit of bio about the luterio also Pedro Garcia somono raised his children while working for metro and is very proud to have two of his sons working for metro as well Pedro has always been one of those operators who understood the importance of customer service he started each day with a great attitude laughter and smiles Pedro can even be heard singing as he walks down the hallway when he ends his day metro staff have always appreciated his hard work and professionalism especially on one particular morning when his route in Watsonville came across a toddler walking around in the dark Pedro was acknowledged for going above and beyond by being aware and stepping into action when he saw the child in danger he kept the child safe until authorities took over Pedro has always been a professional safe operator in his conduct and appearance he will be remembered as a driver that always wore ties and had time to laugh with his coworkers although he will be missed by all we wish him well as he retires to a ranch home with his wife in the Deira second second resolution is for Christopher sands chris enjoyed his position as a bus operator and took pride in helping the public by getting them to their destination safely he always went out of his way to make connections for his passengers his co-workers and metro staff and the board wish him well on his retirement he will spend his time with his wife and son enjoying Santa Cruz those are our two retirees hand appreciation possibly thank you next item we have a hand you have a hand up I think oh I'm sorry on a marine as a hi so I just I have Pedro here and he'd like to share words with to the word thank you great oh hi hi welcome oh thank you so I want to say thank you for everything that we say but and I appreciate it so I'm I'm excited right now because I mean I have to do something different than I used to do it but and so I can say you know thank you very much and thank you so thank you Pedro we really appreciate your years of work wish you all the best in retirement thank you thank you all right and thanks for bringing him on that's great all right our next item is the CEO oral report dawn are you ready I'm ready there you are okay and I'll try to move as fast as I can I know we're going pretty late this morning so I've cut a couple of items off that I think you can live without hearing about right now so just to report want to move thanks to and Margo Ross attended our legislative conference in DC earlier this month and so wanted to report a couple of takeaways from there they conducted meetings with staff members of Congress of Senator Alex Padilla Rev Anna issue and rep Panetta they expressed our appreciation to those senators and representatives for the COVID-19 stimulus funding it helped us offset extraordinary direct costs and revenue losses that we continue to experience as a result of the pandemic and help us avoid layoffs of our critical workforce continue serving right and and also helping continue server serving writers who rely on Metro to conduct essential business access vital services and play an indispensable role in region social and economic recovery from COVID-19 and then we also brief them about Metro's immediate capital funding needs including zero-emission best fleet transition plan wanted to give a quick update Governor Newsom proposes 11 11 billion relief package for Californians facing higher gas prices so up to what that is is up to 600 million to pause a part of the sales tax rate on diesel for one year 523 million to pause the inflationary adjustment to gas and diesel exercise tax rates 750 million incentive grants to transit and rail agencies to provide free transit for Californians for three months the Newsom administrative administration will meet with the legislature to negotiate the details of the proposal in the coming days and once approved through legislature the first payments could begin as soon as as early as july now what does that mean for Metro's funds st a funded by gas diesel taxes well it's funded entirely from the state sales tax on diesel fuel and the st a program account for as much as 3.5 million to 4.4 million which is 6 percent of the total budget for Metro we did receive clarification from cta that the governor is only proposing to suspend the sales tax on diesel portion that goes to the general fund not to the st a program so they don't propose to touch that stream for the diesel sales tax pause the intent is to fill back the lost revenue for the general funding the general fund funding so that it net zero impacts to all programs the mechanics as to how the general funds would be transferred out would still need to be worked out but this is the general idea behind it a great thing to record is that Metro successfully completed the fta fiscal year 21 covid-19 echo review so it is a significant accomplishment as Metro provided responses that address all identified issues prior to the final report this will help us have a smooth fta try annual audit later this year sometime between october and december and fiscal year 23 congressionally directed spending requests year marks are now live so in the coming week staff will submit project requests for the members of congress representing the Santa Cruz area to advocate for the inclusion of the earmarks for Metro capital projects one other thing to report is our very own safety and security risk director Curtis Moses was invited to speak at the national sgr conference in washington dc this topic covered how a transit agency safe safety plan so how it supports the fta requirement for maintaining transit assets in the state of good repair i'm trying to go really fast so that you can all get back to your lives we do have a new customer service window at the pacific station and so it's more visible to the public it's right where it used to be by the double doors that for people to access the public restrooms but the new window is much larger and more visible and easier to access another thing to note is tsa mask mandate is due to expire on on april 18th which will discontinue face masks required on buses and transit hubs unless it gets extended again but it is due to expire on april 18th one thing i did not want to report to you and i feel like i jinxed myself is because up to yesterday we didn't have any positive since our last any covid positive since our last meeting however we have had five employees test positive over the last two days they are unvaccinated employees so we're wondering if maybe this new variant is is is stronger against non-vaccinated we're not really sure but that's that's the data that we have right now and then on to end with a pause on a positive note we'd like to welcome our new hires we have maximillion valera he is our new payroll specialist who started with us in march we have patrick sepe and raul guzman who are our two new paratrans operators that also started with us this month and that is all i have unless you have any questions for me don any questions it's been brought to my attention that i failed to get a motion to accept the resolutions of appreciation for my the two retirees so mike so motion second anyone i'll second thank you jimmy probably no need for discussion if we could vote on that donna then we'll take care of that problem okay great thank you director downing i director dutra i director colin terry johnson hi director konig hi director lind hi director mcpherson i director mires i director pagler hi director parker hi director peterson hi director ruckin hi and the motion passes unanimously thank you very much my apologies for skipping that uh on the item 18 uh chuck we have a fiscal year 23 and 24 preliminary operating budgets and the fiscal year 23 capital budget for review okay um if we want to go ahead and pull it up i'm going to go pretty quick so please stop me if we want to stop and and hang on anything we have to do this um because rt rtc needs this information but it needs to be approved by the board this is very very preliminary we're still making adjustments today and like i said we'll come back in may with kind of our final numbers but at least it gives you directionally where we're going um if we want to just hop on to the first slide because line slide 40 right so this is our new operating p&l this aligns more with ntd database as well as other transit agencies uh what we've done is basically taken out all the i'll just say non passenger related revenue that we've put up at the top and kind of moved it down to non operating revenue there's a debate between whether or not passengers go against that revenue and so forth but it's directly uh the passenger revenue now is at the top we have our operating expenses how we run our business and then where it says operating surplus well in this case is a deficit um this is how we're really operating the agency and the sense of our revenues that come in and how we operate going forward so our fy 23 budget right now is about 3.2 million dollars higher in a loss but that's because we've had inflationary items as well as just stagnant the flat operating passenger revenues down below uh on our non operating revenues and expenses so this is like our sales tax our major d state and federal grants and so forth as well as our pension ual now going over to the bond payments and then what i call cove really costs these are like one time costs that are eventually going to go away but this is for like supplies as well as people here for testing um ultimately what that gets down to is that we're actually running about 5.8 million i'm sorry um we're running about the 7.6 million dollars favorable at least um at this point versus our 22 budget um but that still means we're still kind of in the hole and we're one we're running right now it's about 1.6 million dollars unfavorable for the year for fy 23 we still have to cover that we got to figure it out we got to figure out the you know wage increases we got to figure out whether or not we're going to hold steady with our um sales tax or whether this inflation and the interest rates going up if that's going to suppress it so there's a lot of still external factors we're still looking at and we have some timing issues things come in in april and may that will update with actuals bills and so forth so if we want to move on i'm not going to i'm going to go through these fairly quickly so these are the assumptions around just the operating passenger revenues primarily our passenger revenues as a total are only up about 500 as primarily as our ridership is up but after we've negotiated our ucsc and our caprio college contracts we've actually kind of come down so the net net is about uh about four forty three k or about five percent um above our fy 22 uh budget and like i said this is operating around this ours passenger fares and our contracts with the colleges and in the city of santa cruz it's point five percent five percent right point five percent yet i'm sorry i'd say five percent i'm sorry i point five percent all right move to the next slide on our operating expenses this does not include labor increases um this does include step and longevity so our personnel if you look at our labor line is up 2.6 percent for the year but like i said that is just our step increases in longevity i'll mention the positions in a minute then we had some overtime increase and of course medical that we're assuming 5.6 is going up on the non-personnel cost fuel is going to be a big driver along with utilities as you've seen nine percent increase in our electric electric bills here um in the county and like i said if we started getting electric buses it's going to go up even more and fuel i mean who knows what that's going to be it's been taken off it's slowed down hopefully it'll come back down so if we move to the next slide our um and but here's where it's actually been good but we're still looking into it our sales tax as you know has been doing very well this year so we're actually increasing that to about 4.5 million dollars or about 17 percent increase over year over year so that's why it's way up and our federal and state grants have increased to about another 3.9 million dollars so that's been good and like i said as part of our UAL and we've gone out with this bond year over year it's about 900k savings which is actually really good um had we stayed with the UAL it's more like another 1.6 million savings but um it's 900k year over year and then on our transfers this is money that we take off our operating PLP and we move it over to specific items it's primarily capital so we we're moving an additional 200 000 for our bus replacement fund and another 3 million to cover ERP and our capital reserve replenishment so capital reserve is think of that as money that we need to do some of the smaller projects around here that uh have to get done broken air conditioners broken stairs whatever the case may be so if we want to move to the next slide so on our personnel pieces what we're going to do is we're looking to fund 8 and defund 2 so the first two above mobility training coordinator is going to get funded and we're going to defund the accessibility coordinator same thing with the next one marketing assistant coordinator is going to be funded customer service coordinated it's going to be defunded so think of those as a wash we are going to ask for a new account 3 position and then and then also an IT project coordinator and that's provisional so it's only for two years so those are really the two additional pieces that we'll need to cover there we are asking for three bus drivers and one parent cruise uh van driver and that's going to be funded by um our major D revenues so the IT project coordinator has to do with our uh move towards the um ERP new ERP system right yes and all systems associated so then so net six positions uh two are really ones that we're looking to that actually have funded whereas the other four are going to be covered over the major D revenues flip to the next slide and then quickly on the capital budget and like I said this is very very preliminary and we're still having discussions today so if we move to the next slide so right now we're looking at a budget about 16 million we still have some timing issues and we still are vetting through uh which was a great discussion between what type of electric vehicles or whether we're start moving towards you know hydrogen because we're looking at possibly doing that as well as what are we going to do infrastructure wise and specifically with the new ceo coming in they may have a new vision that we may have to change this dramatically don't know and we won't know until may when we come back to the board but at least right now we have satisfy this requirement for right now for the month of March and that is i mean for the most for the most part this is it the rest of it is just kind of timing that we're going to be coming back um in brazil so that's all i have very good thank you chuck any questions from the board mike oh he's just going to move approval for claims purposes we have a second second i'll second i'll second that bruce thank you bruce all right we had a motion from rothkin second from mckerson any discussion people are ready to roll on how about uh that's for the public i think oh i'm sorry thank you mike any comments from the public i don't see hands um i am giving it a moment but i think not don't i can we do a roll call okay uh director downing hi director dootra hi director collin terry johnson hi director conan hi director lin hi director mcpherson hi director mires hi director pagler hi director parker hi director peterson hi and director rockin hi and the motion passes unanimously very good thank you that was great chuck all right um we are down to the end here i want to announce our next meeting it will be friday april 22nd at nine a.m. and it will still be by teleconference and with that we adjourn our meeting at 12 o'clock six thank you everyone i appreciate your time and i hope you have a wonderful weekend thank you everyone have a great weekend take care