 All right, we can go live if you'd like, Laurie, unless we're already there live. Well, welcome. Welcome to the Vermont House Transportation Committee. It is Wednesday, March 9th, 2022, nine o'clock. We're gonna hear testimony right off this morning that we've graciously asked Ross and John to come in and answer some questions around things that we debate within ourselves. And we need your opinion on them because some of these are questions that only you can answer. And then we'll see if we can make some decisions, but we didn't wanna move forward on some of these without getting your input on them. And so I emailed Ross, and I don't know if that went to John too, but here were the three questions and then we'll get started with that. So we wanted to know about zero fare in Green Mountain Transit because right now in the budget there is rural coverage for fare free through 23, but the urban pace was not there. And the last we knew is that that was not something that Green Mountain Transit was looking forward, wanting to move forward with, but maybe things have changed. So before we make some decisions on whether we do that or not do that, we want to make sure we heard from you and your opinion on that. And then we had as much as I really, really liked the, the electric buses, I know that the agency has ordered 10, and that will be coming in in a couple of years, but there was a great desire in the world to have, our school buses electrified in assistance with electrifying the school bus area. And that typically has not been a part of the transportation T fund. It may be a part of the overall legislative body's desire to support, but just hasn't been through the T fund. And in the past, there was some VW settlement money that was helpful for A&R to work with school districts or whoever to get them. And so we want to get your opinion on, on how we could maybe wear in this building this electric school buses come into play in that place. And then the third was microtransit. Everybody's, everybody's loving it. And we know that there are 12 new pilots beyond Montpelier. But the question that people had asked is about other areas that did not have public transit part of their structure or that, how would they access an opportunity to have a microtransit? So those were the three areas. We've got an hour representative, Sean and I have a meeting at 10. So we're gonna, we will have a hard stop at that time. We'll take a break and then afterwards we're gonna hear some language, climate language that you've seen once or twice. And now we're gonna kick that around with Becca guiding that one until lunch. All right, with that Ross, would you like to go first? For the record. For the record Ross McDonald with the agency of transportation. I am the public transit program manager. And thank you for the heads up and the questions. Madam chair, very helpful to, to help us prepare for this conversation. And very much looking forward to it. There's always so much to cover. And I'm always worried that, you know, we're not getting through the full conversation and nuances that, you know, make up all of our programs. But as far as fair free, I did wanna let the committee know that I am part of a national academy of science plan to investigate a fair free analysis and studies with seven other states to help guide fair free impacts, assessments, benefits and challenges that go along with those on a national scale for the FTA and for DOT. So many places around the state, around the country are considering fair free. We know what transpired through COVID with contact less fair payment or zero fair services. And we are very much looking forward to seeing what zero fairs do on the rural side of things in Vermont over the longterm as we build back our ridership and look to see what the new markets or new demands look like as we come out of this pandemic. But in terms of the urban system, I'm so glad that John Moore, the general managers here to talk about their considerations in the process that led them, you know, to this current budget that they have in front of their own board. So with that, I think it's probably best to turn it over to John. So we'll just go through the questions. John, for the record, please join us. Yeah, good morning. John Moore, general manager at Green Mountain Transit. And thank you, Ross. So for some quick background, GMT does have a FY23 board approved budget that does assume restarting a fair collection in our urban service area, which is Chittenden County. That budget was based on our projected revenues, including the spending down of the vast majority of our direct COVID relief funds. We've been floating the fair revenue on the urban side for the past two years with COVID relief funds. We will not have those available in FY23 to continue that. Having that said, I do want to clearly state that the GMT Board of Commissioners, many of our community partners, our passengers and GMT staff, including our frontline bus operators, all strongly support the language and the transportation innovation bill. And if fair replacement revenue could be provided to GMT, we would be excited and thankful to continue zero fair service in FY23. So we certainly support that language. So John, let me ask you this. So it is a consideration. There are many people here and outside in the cross Vermont that would love to see that continue. And it's been, which is why I asked you to hear because I was a little bit torn as to, you know, if, whether or not you really wanted it, but we have an idea of what it would cost. Do you have a figure that you would find that you would need in order to make that happen? Sure. So thank you. We do have in our budget 1.6 million anticipated for urban fair revenue. Just to note that budget was developed in December and we did our best to project what the fair revenue would be based on ridership. Obviously that's been difficult to do with the pandemic. I will say in our urban system, while our commuter routes have been the routes that have been the slowest to rebound in ridership, our core local routes are at about 85% of pre-pandemic levels. Our Williston route, which is our busiest is at 90% of pre-pandemic levels. So that 1.6 may be at the lower end. We're hopeful that's a higher number because that would mean ridership comes back more quickly, but 1.6 million is what we have budgeted in FY23 for fair revenue. Okay. And I'll just quickly note that also that number does include the ADA fairs. So in Chittenden County, SSTA provides that service. That's a $3 fair as allowed by the Federal Transit Administration. So if we did continue fair free on the fixed route that would include our ADA complimentary service as well. And that's what we did before, right? Or you did before? Correct. John, how does the rising gas prices affect that 1.6 million? I mean, these gas prices are obviously going through the roof where it's anticipation that's gonna approach $5 if not surpass that. How much would that affect, like you said, you did this budget in December? How does that affect that number? Well, historically, high fuel prices have increased transit ridership and we have no reason to believe that it will be any different this time. There is still the pandemic considerations, but as case counts are moving in the right direction and folks start heading back to the office. We do think that the combination of reliable service, which potentially would be free to the consumer in addition to record high fuel prices could drive more folks to GMT and increase ridership. Studies have been done that show the fair free piece specifically increases ridership primarily from existing users. But I don't think those studies contemplated five or $6 per gallon on fuel prices. So it may be a winning combination to get people to try transit potentially for the first time. And if it's free and convenient, hopefully we can keep them as long-term passengers. So I think there could be some positive benefit to that. Okay, thank you. I was talking more about your budget for the diesel and the gas that cost. Oh, it's horrible for our budget. I can tell you that we paid about $1.80 per gallon on average for FY 21. We paid $4.40 on our fuel delivery yesterday, which was over $1.20 more than last week. So we will certainly keep an eye on that. Through January, we're right on budget, but of course the fuel pressures really have started in the last couple of weeks. So hopefully that's a short-term problem, but that could certainly impact our operating budget if it's an extended increase in fuel prices. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. I've got a couple more hands up before we go. John, how many electric buses do you have running in that situation? So we currently have two full-size electric buses in our Burlington-based fleet. And how many in your fleet? Total buses, 68 in our urban fleet. No long way to go yet, right? Okay, gives me an idea. I'll say the, I'm sorry, Madame Chair, but the electric vehicles certainly look more attractive when we're looking at five or $6 per gallon diesel. Right, and I know the agency has purchased 10 in the next block. I don't know, Ross can answer that, and I'm sorry, I'm picking every other representative Stevinstein. Guy, Ross. Yeah, real quick. I just wanted to confirm that we have received funding and are in the process of procuring or receiving 18 vehicles, battery electric buses with charging infrastructure. It's not 10. What we're looking for, we're in this latest low and no bus emissions program, which provides awards at 85% federal, 15% non-federal, would be another seven of those large buses for GMT. And two or three buses for Marble Valley, that's where the 10 electric buses, I think may have come up, which is that that's our planned ask in our next application, which will be submitted in the next several weeks. So we have 18 on order and coming through the pipeline with another 10 for this year, with plans to continue to ramp up and look at the market and the capacity specifications, miles and hours of operations for our smaller cutaways. And once we have a viable option in that for that class, we might be able to proceed with more than 10 to 20 vehicles on any given year in the future. Excellent. Representative Stevin, sorry, thank you for letting me jump in there. Thank you, Madam Chair. And good morning, Ross. Good morning, John, since they're coming in. John, I just wanna say it was a slow but rewarding process. I'm Chair of Burlington Electric Commission. So I remember all the back and forths of the partnership to get those two e-buses. So thank you for that partnership. It's really been invaluable. And thank you also for your support for this. When I speak with my constituents, when I talk to folks, there's a bus stop about like four houses away from my house on Tine Street. And I'm like, hey, how important has this been for you over the last few years in COVID? They said it's been really important. It's just one less concerning investment that they have to like scrounge in their couch cushions for. So thank you. I also wanna, I just wanna say I really hope we can figure this out because I remember Ross, you had a 2019 report that said it would be helpful to like further investigate how to increase public ridership. And one of the things was zero fare, but that was 2019 and then we got COVID. So, you know, continuing this along for a little bit longer. So we can actually see what that impact is. Granted, now we have super high gas prices. So it may not be a perfect study, but I think that would be really helpful. And also just think in terms of our client action plan. There are a lot of things in there that we, you know, we never expected to do all the recommendations because things take time, but we can't do TCI. We're not doing some other elements because we're not ready for it yet. And this is one of the things that was highlighted and it just, it means a lot for our most vulnerable. So thanks for coming in. I appreciate that. Representative Smith. Thank you. Kind of curious. There's no electric buses that we're gonna be getting. How many batteries do they take? Well, the battery packs vary, but they all operate as one large battery of 5,000 pounds or more, but John, if you have more information on that. Yeah, I'm not an expert on that. The Protero buses we have, I believe have two battery cells on the buses. And I think different OEMs have different platforms, but it is a significant weight to the vehicles for sure. Well, thank you for that. What do you do with a 5,000 pound battery when it's no good? Well, that's a very good question. For GMT, we lease the batteries. So at least for the 12 year life expectancy of the bus, those are fully warrantied in terms of disposal. Again, I'm not an expert. My understanding is that they will have some residual value at the end of the 12 years for storage capacity. They go somewhere to a landfill, probably. Anecdotally, and the literature I've seen is they're taking these large batteries and then applying them with other reduced capacity batteries to power machinery and equipment that doesn't require so much power as an electric bus and that doesn't need to move around to roads. And so some machine shops and the like are electrifying. And of course, the industry has a big challenge ahead of them if we are going to be purchasing so many of these batteries requiring so much lithium and the like. How are we going to look at those downstream environmental impacts? But I am aware of some of those solutions or some of those next steps of utilization of those batteries. One last question. Can we get the lithium available in this country or do we have to have it imported? New Mexico, Arizona area, I believe the Reno area have lithium mining going on, but certainly there's a bunch of rare earth materials that make up many of our electronics that do require a international supply chain. All right, thank you, Ross. You're welcome, sir, Representative Shaw. For John, obviously your board would support zero care because it's very advantageous to everybody. But what happens if you receive requests 1.6, but what happens if you receive something less? How would you reduce the fare? Would you use zero fare until the money ran out and then that go to collective fares or have you thought about it? Well, I think one option would be to restart a fare on our commuter routes potentially. So we operate multiple inter-regional routes. So potentially if we had to have some cost saving solutions we would look at potentially charging a fare on our commuter routes and keeping our in-city Chittenden County local routes fare free. I don't know if we'd want to have a lower fare for a short period of time simply because there are a significant amount of startup costs for when we restart charging a fare upwards of $100,000 when you look at training, fare box parts, cash processing. So I think we would probably try to keep one segment of our routes fare free and then go back to a fare on another segment to the extent it made sense. So you have an idea of how much it would cost to just keep the local fare free and charge for your fare routes. We are looking into that today. I actually testified to your colleagues at the Senate Transportation Committee yesterday and that option was suggested. It is a little tricky because as I mentioned our local routes are at about 85% of pre-pandemic ridership. Our commuter routes are about 35% of pre-pandemic ridership. So the dollar amount will be much less. I'm thinking of the 1.6 and maybe a couple hundred thousand so relatively insignificant but we are doing that analysis today based on your comment and then the comment we received yesterday for some of the training. You said when Oliver was a hundred thousand, what can you say to that again, please? So the commuter routes based on the current ridership status if we were to go back to a fare on those routes it's gonna be a relatively small amount based on that total 1.6 million but we are doing that analysis today. And it's based on the, is it based on pre-pandemic or based on current use on that number? So our ridership projection was a base on a mix of both. Looking at when we developed the projections kind of the trajectory of the ridership based on the pandemic. So it was looking at both current ridership but some historical levels as well. And when do you think you'll have that number for us? We should have that today. Okay, hoping you afford that too, Lori. We will. Thank you. Thank you. So that's question number one and I appreciate you coming in with this support and with the dynamics around, well, you know our timing right now we're gonna try to do the will of what people can do and with the data and depending on where we can fit this in because things are going to be, we're gonna need to make some priorities around money crunching particularly tomorrow after we at least see everything that we all wanna think we wanna be able to do and then we'll see what we can fit in the budget. And it sounds like you're doing some analysis and like you said, if you get that to us today, great. Depending on where we are and what we can do I'm sure you'll have an opportunity over in the Senate as well to make some modifications on that to sharpen that pencil even greater. So if you're okay, committee, let's move because we got a half an hour with them and the e-buses, the e-school buses. We know about the e-buses for public transit and or at least we're even hearing a little bit more but talk to us about the school buses piece because there's desire for that and we're just trying to figure out how and where does that come into play. Sure, we're also trying to constantly figure out the best way to provide comprehensive mobility to all of our citizens, including school kids where it makes sense. And the rules are very much bifurcated where transit cannot provide school transportation solely but if it's part of a regular route then it then falls into a category called tripper services. And for example, John and the urban system have several routes that largely accommodate school kids. And so we also have a few dozen routes that do serve school kids along either normal commuter routes as well. But for us and working, we do not work with school bus companies. But what we have done is through our MTI grants of which this committee set up for us, we have provided money for the future of transportation group to work with school districts and to outfit them with electric buses and see if they can incorporate the school bus route into a public transit service which is very much reversed from using public transit and trying to fit in to accommodate school bus. But this is a type of layering or approach that could bring more capacity and more mobility to the general public. So Jennifer Walls-Burdur Wallis, excuse me, VEIC has been a leader in those discussions and we've been part of those presentations but the agency doesn't have the relationships or programs, grants, contracts with the school bus industry. I think we could work with you to get the right people in front looking at these types of benefits but school buses may be a good place at this juncture for some electric vehicles because they operate 174 days rather than 250 or more for transit systems and many times they don't run the miles per day that a transit vehicle needs to. That being said, we just, when we saw that question we were just kind of wondering like how best to try to coordinate that effort to the right people but we're certainly not the right people to speak on behalf of school bus companies but as we electrify our own fleet that is going to serve a level of schools and I'll see if John has anything else to add to the question. It wasn't exactly, John, I don't have to answer if you don't want to because that's, but if you have anything to add, please go ahead. No, that's out of GMT's wheelhouse as well. Yeah, yeah, it's like, so we're wrestling with, we're wrestling with not whether or not Vermont or that we don't see it as an issue around emissions, we're trying to wrestle with who's working on that piece and where does it come out of? You know, AOE, I jokingly some people came in yesterday from the House Education Committee and I asked them how their electrifying school bus conversation's been going in but so with that, your partnership and figuring out is it like through ANR, through admissions and how do we get them help to motivate on the grants that are potentially available out there to get either school boards or communities or school bus companies having them get that little bit of assistance that gets them moving in that direction. And we don't quite have an answer for that just yet but we want to see that relationship, sure not. But, I could see, I got a few people up, I'm just, I got representative Stebbins and then representative White. I think, sorry. You go first with me. Okay. So for, we haven't really, we did like a high level skim of the TIA bill for committee members. And I just want to sort of explain what the language says because VTRANS is so amazing at writing grants and because so many of our school districts are small and really honestly just still digging out of the challenges of COVID and so many schools are still dealing with mergers. The thinking behind this section is we have VTRANS that is brilliant at writing grants and we have a bunch of schools that could use some help from our expertise at VTRANS to apply for like there's $8 million in federal funds for e-buses. So the thing is just to make sure that Vermont students, you know, when Vermont schools don't miss the bus, sorry. All right. Perfect. Help everyone have fun aboard. So we don't miss the bus. I mean, this doesn't mean we're saying put $4 million into e-buses tomorrow because we know that again, that market is still transforming. It's really about making sure that we use some expertise. So that's why it's not in agency of education or elsewhere. The other thing I just wanted to say, the reason why e-buses is besides the cost and the other is so important is because, and I'll quote this because it's pretty scary. For our kids loans, studies have found that diesel pollution can concentrate in studies. School buses lead into even higher exposures for children who ride buses. It's diesel exhaust is considered a class one carcinogen. So if we can like not miss the bus and keep the ball roll using some of our expertise, it's not, yes, it is staff time and it would require coordination with other agencies, but it's not necessarily saying put money into the infrastructure right now here. So we want to maximize our opportunity without like overwhelming. We need our grant writers working for the other buses as well, but I think we do have some expertise that we could willingly consult, have it as a consulting role with somebody. Oh, Michelle, please. Thank you. Michelle Blumkamer, Vermont Agency of Transportation. I think the key thing here that I would put out for you is that our grant writers who are great at doing their job, Ross and his team, their salaries are paid with several transit administration funds, which would not allow us to do that activity. And if we were going to engage somebody to do it with non-feveral funds, I would suggest that we probably need to be looking at the EIC or some other expert agency who has the same skill sets and not be looking within an agency who has a mission that's outside of school buses. Even if you gave the agency of education money, they could contract with the EIC and get the job done. But I would say that this would not be a good fit for us in terms of all the other important priorities you're having us look at and advance. Good. I've got Representative Whiteland and Representative Burke. Thanks, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chair. And actually to that point, Michelle, the language that Representative Stevens was speaking about is section 9D of the Transportation Innovation Act initiatives that the group of five are really interested in seeing move. And we specifically call out, and I have a question, but I just want to say we do specifically call out the EIC within that language. And I have to be careful where I tread on that at this moment. But you do. Because you work for that. Exactly. So, close your quotes. Yes. For those listening and those in the room. Yeah. And I don't work on this program, obviously, but I do want to call out that that's a section we have within that language. And my question would be for Ross, do you feel that the, I don't know if you had a chance to review the language, but one of the key pieces is asking that there be an administer for that AOT, the Agency of Education, ANR, that they administer the funds through creating grant programs similar to what we saw with the BW monies. So I'm wondering if you think that that is an appropriate ask of your staff to work collaboratively, to continue the same program essentially that we were able to administer with the BW funds? Well, I certainly defer to Michelle and her perspective on larger agency capabilities and appropriateness of these types of things. What I can tell you is that the EIC generally writes our low and no emissions grants. And they have been very instrumental in our success of five straight awards for e-buses. They're the ones who go out and work with the local utility, the company that is seeking the vehicles, as well as developing the specs for the procurement of those vehicles. So we would not be close to having the current status that we have with our electrification plan without the critical support of the EIC in terms of those other agencies and the oversight. I don't know, as Michelle mentioned, and we've looked at that before of conducting other transportation related activities, that is off the books from FTA, which were funded by 100% FTA funds. So to put more pressure on our non-federal funds would be something I think we're trying to avoid. Okay, so I got a little confused there at the end. So the program that we're describing in here is to pull down federal funds to the clean. It's not out yet. My understanding is it's a formula amount. Oh, the carbon reduction program. What is the low and no admissions grant program exists now? But we also have the school bus money that will be coming down. Maybe that might be the competitive part. And I apologize, there's a lot of different federal avenues. So I think I need a little bit more understanding of that point, but I appreciate your response. Thank you. So it's representative Burke with them for clarification. What I heard was this much. Actually, VEC writes the grants for AOTs low and no admissions. So as much as we're giving you credit, which is very nice for you to make sure that we appropriately credit the source of some of that because you have the where for all to actually work within contract with them to actually write the grant. There's your source potentially for either education or school bus companies to access through them as well. But these guys have, that makes sense. All right, representative Burke and then representative, oh, I wrote Burke twice. Representative Shaw. Very good at this, Madam Chair. You are. Good to talk. To Gabrielle's point about the lung issue, I have occasion to work in schools sometimes and I've been horrified even though there is a law against idling at the school buses are outside waiting for the kids and they are idling. The ones that I've seen. Another point, I wonder if it would make sense for us to see if we could have a chat with Jennifer Wallace to get some more information. So who's general, Jennifer, she works for me yet. She's been working on the Ross. And actually a question for you, Ross. I know you made mention of that sort of program that the electric school bus public transit project. And is that moving along or I guess that's something we could also get from if we were to hear from Jennifer. Sure. And to be clear, we do participate in weekly calls. We provide the guidance, we provide our perspective. We bring coordination to that, but they provide the grant language to us and then generally me and my staff are putting the application together from that copy. Just full disclosure. The low and no bus emissions program has been a big, there's been big increases associated with the IIJA and there's been a five time level of investment over previous years for the low and no bus emissions bus program. So that is moving forward. It was just announced on Friday, the notice of funding opportunity. And we've already reached out to John at GMT and his staff in Marble Valley with the EIC to conduct a kickoff call to embark upon the application creation process. And we will look forward to moving through that. I'm confident if we were successful in previous years of receiving three or four vehicles, two to four vehicles per year, this year requesting 10 as it relates to GMT and Marble Valley, I like our chances there. The concern there will be the delivery dates. And that's what we had discussed earlier, which is even though we'll be applying for maybe up to a $10 million grant in the next few months, by the time it is awarded and we procure, we could be looking at delivery dates into FY24, very likely. And so there's a timing piece to this that has delayed our procurements. In the past, our small buses have been delayed because of the lack of reasonable specs to bring on to our services. But right now, those larger buses can meet upwards to 80% of our current routes in terms of hours and miles of operations. That's why this year we're focusing on the large buses for our larger facilities who can incorporate these more seamlessly as a smaller percentage of their fleets than another entity that may rely on two or three of those buses alone. When we look at these case studies, we were able to apply and receive funds for two electric buses through the VW program and Marble Valley received those just a few weeks ago. They prepped them and they're out on the street with one in the garage with some mechanical non-battery electric issues. So we have seen some fits and starts with some of these case studies. And so first priority certainly is do no harm and sustain services with these vehicles. I think the next year, next year's plan with the LONO emissions bus program will allow us to proceed and really ramp up when we have those cutaway options. Thank you, and then Representative Shaw. Thank you. Ross, the report you gave us, well, when you're first in in January, talking about the grant program for e-buses, you suggested that the VW funds were gonna be used for probably the state match. So everybody trying to use VW funds somewhere. What's your plan for the match or the next group of buses coming in? Are we still in the VW funds or have you run that dry yet or? We may have run that one dry representative, but for us, there should be enough funds in the FTA low and no emissions bus program to meet our needs. There are match requirements along with the VW funds of which we split with Marble Valley. In Rutland for those two buses and moving forward similarly, we'll have to work with the local entities to come up with the non-federal match. Usually our capital projects come in at 80, 20, 80 federal, 20% non-federal. These electric buses are 85, 15, which certainly saves us 5% off the top. And what I'm trying to do is work with the locals to ensure that they can at least provide the same dollars that they would have provided otherwise if they were to buy an internal combustion engine, gas or diesel. If they were providing us 40 to $50,000 for one type of vehicle and they want an electric bus, we would still rely on that 40 to 50,000, but the state budget would have to make up the difference. The reason being is certainly our local funds we may not have the capacity to raise our local funds by a level of 20, 30% to meet the increased match needs as it relates to these capital investments, but we plan to work on that 15% at either a 10% state, 5% local or some calculation to make up that 15% non-federal match. We're beginning to see the bottom of the bucket on VW funds. I'd let A&R speak on behalf of their VW program. We were happy to get the two vehicles and I think our needs can be met with the FTA 85, 15 funds. Great, thank you. Great, representative Stevens and then I've got one final one and we'll move on to the last question. Okay, so sometimes I just step into the stupid zone here. All right, do we have to write legislation that directs people to have a conversation together to work together? Or can we just say Ross and whoever, I don't consider this in your billy with John. You know, when you're working within your meeting weekly with the VEC, which is Vermont Energy Investment, right, just for those because we've got a big thing this is, watch our acronyms. Can we invite the bus companies and AOE to that conversation? Is there, how would we ask them to the table, so to speak? That's an interesting idea. And one that would just expand what we're currently trying to do, which is on a quarterly basis. Right now we have weekly calls with all of our providers with VEC and the utilities on specifications and charging infrastructure and rates and all of those things. Once a quarter starting in May, these will be opened up to all of the public transit providers so that GMT can see what RCT is doing or what Bennington's doing and contribute to their own processes, which are similar but rather disparate in terms of procurement processes and setup. So to work through VEC and invite other interested entities, ANR and school bus companies, certainly there'd be no harm in sharing our processes with them. Great. I think this is where we wanna go. We want them, we wanna light a little bit of a fire underneath their desire to move in that direction. And Gabrielle, representative Stevens, last question then we'll move on to microtransit. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I'm sorry, clearly this is an area of interest for me mostly because I hate riding in diesel school buses because they make me like have a headache. Ross, do you think that you guys do great early? Like you do a lot of great sharing. Do you think those quarterly meetings are enough to make sure that we won't miss out on potentially a million dollars of federal funds? Because I'm fairly certain our school districts are not gonna be able to work together. Do you think that's enough? I think it's enough to pique their interest but nothing is going to replace the full consideration that comes with an application with working with their local utilities and fitting up the charging infrastructure which will be specific to their own fleet needs and school routes. But this would show them kind of what it takes and what are those sweet or parameters of considerations that they would need to address. There's a way forward and it just takes a little bit of time and effort but that could be helpful but it will not be inclusive and allow folks to just go ahead and receive the funds and move forward. That's unlikely but what it would do is inform them of their own range of considerations. So we could miss out. Or they could miss out. Yeah. Yeah. They're not there. Yeah. Thank you. You're welcome. So that's about as clear as sort of mud at the moment still but what we do know is that there's the most important thing I'm walking away is the EIC is actually the grant writer for many of these things and how do we have a conversation with the others to get them aware of this stuff. So we'll continue to have that and sort of figure that out because it's the desire and it's part of the cap the climate action plan to see this electrification. Okay. And I personally just sort of with the T fund dollars where that line is where we help others move without it's not our circle. Can we move to microtransmitters? Did you have? Let us go. Very easy question for each one of you gentlemen. Can you tell me these boxes are going to be driven in the winter and they're going to be hauling school kids are they going to freeze in these boxes or the heating systems work? Well, 120 below other. Yeah. Thank you to be determined we have experience with our Protero vehicles and John's fleet that are outfitted with diesel heaters on top of the bus. So that you don't draw down the battery to such a extent. They have had issues with those heaters. I've been part of discussions where new manufacturers and new approaches for those, you know to heat the cabin is being addressed. And that could be better insulation of the cabin itself. The the air exchange approach to to maybe offset some of the burden on those heaters. But heating the vehicle is is a is a complication and a challenge. And I would turn that to see if, you know maybe John has something else to add to keeping the buses. We're talking about heaters on top of the buses. What are those? It's it's a diesel fired space heater that works to heat the cabin that is separate from the battery. So they can maintain, you know the reduced miles and hours that cold weather. You know, kind of results in with the vehicle. But you did say diesel fired, didn't you, Ross? Diesel propane. Some people talking about hydrogen, the cold hot air exchange pumps. Those things are all being considered. Now, even the old gas buses, kids freeze in them. So I'm just a little concerned about, you know a first grader or second grader not being able to get to school because the bus won't heat up over 30 degrees or 25 degrees. So there are issues with that, don't I take it? Sometimes I think that it's almost better when you can buy just like eight buses at a time because the technology is going to change it in five years from now. It'll be, again, so different. So sometimes I don't want to buy a hundred buses and now now we're obsolete. So if we're, you know, if you remember like the first e-cars could get like 30 miles, 50 miles and you know, now we're, so it seems like every iteration and every year it just gets, you know they work on those problems, but it's good that there's a backup. It's good to know as we get questions about it, the, you know, that they've got a backup system if they need it because it's not always cold in Vermont just sometimes feels like it. And there's a lot of the time when it's not that cold but it's good to know that we've got that option or they have that option. Can I move on to microtransit because we've got representatives showing I've got a meeting at 10. And so we're going to need to scoop wherever we are in that conversation and we're going to leave you representative for the charge. Wow. I'm just in case you had a run for the door right now. So microtransit, sir. Microtransit, okay. There's a lot to cover here and I'll do my best. Microtransit, we have the one pilot in Montpelier. GMT is running that, it's called MyRide. It is successful and I would call it largely successful but it isn't the slam dunk that has shown such an efficient service with a reduced per mile cost with every user saying this is a far improvement over what we had. As a matter of fact, about 40% of those trips are along the old Montpelier Hospital Hill route. So that's what we're learning with the current case study on the ground. And I've heard so many good things about it. Maybe that caused or created a little bit of a irrational exuberance on my part to talk about how it's going to transform rural transit. But what we've done is move forward and we have funded 12 feasibility studies, not 12 pilots, Madam Chair. And I wanna be clear that what we're looking at is 12 communities that have or don't have transit services now. And what would it look like to incorporate microtransit to switch the fixed route service into a microtransit service or to bring a vehicle or two into an area that has no fixed route services. So those are broad three categories that we're looking at through these feasibility studies. What we're trying to do is try to assess the costs, the ridership benefits, the abilities to provide our demand response services, Medicaid, as well as our elderly and persons with disability program. Do we improve those trips and the costs of those trips through microtransit? And we're learning a lot. In those 12 feasibility studies, we are hoping to finish with at least six of those before the end of next month so that the providers could include the costs and their microtransit plans in their applications for FY23. That will show what the true cost projection is going to be and what it would mean in those communities. And we are working with VIA, who is overwhelmingly the leader in microtransit in the country and have over... You said that you would answer, I'm sorry I missed it. Sure, VIA, VIA. And they are the software provider for the MyRide service. And they use the VIA service and GMT incorporates that software into their vehicles with their drivers. And they have a planning shop with some really great modeling features and functions. And what we're finding is in areas, for example, Bennington, they have three routes serving Bennington. They're well used. There are some lack of ridership in between the areas that they're moving back and forth. And VIA says, you know what? The fixed route service in Bennington is pretty efficient and for the costs to replicate microtransit service with 15 minute wait times, you may be looking at doubling the cost to provide not too much more efficient service. And so GMCN said, well, what about Manchester? They go, well, Manchester, that's different. That's more dense. It doesn't have transit service. It's got some feeder services in with new services serving Stratton. And so now they've pivoted to look at another community. That's just one example of the six that I've been part of that are showing that microtransit may not be the slam dunk that we thought it may be in terms of a better way to provide services rather than fixed route in some of our towns. We'll get through more and more communities. And as we do that, we'll be able to post those against other communities, 3,000 people with this much transit service with this type of demographic makeup and then make better determinations on how does microtransit best fit in Vermont? So we can talk about all of those and I'd really look forward to doing that. So for us, the plan is to award three or more pilots for microtransit and FY23 that represent maybe the disparate range of communities that we're trying to serve. And then to get our second year of the MyRide pilot under our belt with some tweaks and changes there to arrive at maybe a worksheet that would show the considerations and calculations that would result in more microtransit investment, microtransits on demand service. And in addition to the microtransit on demand service, we do have the Medicaid service, our elderly and persons with disability program. This year in FY23, we're including recovery and job access trips. So those are demand response services that we continue to try to expand. And Madam Chair, the question said, not every town has transit service. And that's very true in terms of fixed routes, but every town in the state is part of our demand response services and every town is getting medical rides and essential services on a 24 to 48 hour reservation basis. So I did wanna make sure that the community was aware that transit does touch all of our communities and serve all of our communities. Microtransit is one way to improve demand response. Another way may be with a group like Capstone and we're trying to work on a scope there that would allow them to use their own electric vehicles to become part of the fleet options that GMT would have as they try to expand demand response in central Vermont. And so we have Medicaid demand response, elderly and disabled, recovering job access. And then could there be that last line for everybody else who falls out of eligibility, single moms trying to get a kid to healthcare or somebody broke their leg and can't drive for two weeks, whatever that may be. And that would be able to assess what are the true essential services that we're missing and the demographics that we're missing? So we're working on the demand response front in many ways and we'll continue to work on those and bring the results to this committee. We're going to need to leave or at least representative Shaw and myself and I just wanna thank you for this and coming in on short notice on our last week here of trying to dial it in because there's a great deal of desire to have more opportunity with this. We wanna make sure how we wanna partner with you and how do we make that happen for more people and in a way that makes sense. Okay, and I think representative Corcoran you're in charge and last known was representative White's got her hand up and let me know whatever happens. All right, we'll do that. All right, thanks. All right, go for it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Jack. Thank you, Ross. So I have a few questions but the first one I'll start with is I'm not sure if you had a chance to review the Transportation Innovation Act initiative language that we're hoping to see in the T-bill being incorporated. One of the key components that we identified as the group of five was that we want to see microtransit expanded throughout the state and we had difficulty trying to identify the best way to do that frankly because it's not totally clear how the agency is funding them into the future other than the, even with the FDA funds. So I appreciate that you took some time offline to help me understand that and that you're here today. So my question is you have the 12 feasibility studies. You have, it sounds like three that you believe that you can fund moving forward to FY23, why not try to fund all 12? You know, I really should be saying to the extent possible, Representative White and what we're looking at are applications coming in next week that are going to try to project gas costs, the increased driver wages and labor overheads associated with the service. And when we look at our budget we could see maybe an increase of 20% or more just to maintain the current services that are on the road. As a result, before we started investing in more options and I also have been speaking with GMT and Capstone to inject some more funds into their program for that particular pilot and expansion of demand response services in central Vermont. But when I say three or so some of these feasibility studies may come out without a recommendation for microtransit and may not include microtransit as an outcome. And until we see what those applications come through it's just been difficult to commit to more of these services. But if we can fund four or five or six we will do so. And I need to see what those feasibility studies look like and need to speak with these providers and see what their level of interest is. And if this is truly a priority for them in their region, I think it will be and all I've seen are a lot of interested staff members being part of comprehensive discussions. But that's kind of where we are. And I think at this time next year we may be in a far better position to stay. This is what microtransit can do in these locations. This is the most advantageous community type that could move toward microtransit. But as I mentioned, microtransit, what we're seeing could be not two or three buses running around a particular region or on three routes, but it could be four or five buses serving an expanded region. That could double our operating costs just for that particular community. We've got some additional funds to apply no question and really looking to use those additional funds for more different and better transit and mobility services, microtransit being a primary consideration. But until we see what those are going to cost us, what that means, we may be best served by continuing to expand our current dialeride demand response services through our END program, Elderly in Persons with Disability to keep looking at those line items of needs, whether it's elderly and persons with disability for essential shopping and medical appointments to recovery, counseling and rides that Medicaid wouldn't otherwise cover or that they can't get to. And then job access, a big piece of getting people gainful employment and an opportunity to seek better options. And then again, this capstone program, four or five electric vehicles added to the capacity in central Vermont would allow that, oh, we don't have funds or a program for all of those items I just mentioned, this is now part of a community rides bucket of money that I would like to make available. So then we could really not only determine who are denying but determine who we can serve if the funds were there. Who are we missing in our demand response dialeride services? So concurring to the microtransit comprehensive 50 minute wait times for a vehicle to come through, that's unlikely to be able to be rolled out in 200 communities around the state. It could be a very good fit or a really nice quality of life part of smart growth and those types of land use development plans. It's the demand response and dialeride services that we need to continue to expand out, regain our volunteer network with whom we've lost 50% which really kept the per trip costs down. We've got a lot of work to do for this non-traditional, non-fixed route mobility services, microtransits one of them, the rest is demand response and working with agencies maybe like Capstone. I'm very curious to see what that's gonna look like. Can I ask a follow up question? Sure. Thank you. Thank you, Ross. That was informative and also added a layer of complexity that I was not aware of because you mentioned the community rides bucket of money. So I want to understand that more but my question to you is I really appreciate what you're saying around not yet feeling like you have enough information to move forward with all of the feasibility program, the studies that you've done so far in waiting to hear information. What concerns me is if you aren't even budgeting to have that be a pool of funds available then you have already decided that you're not moving forward with any more of those feasibility studies beyond the three that you're describing to us. So it feels like the decision has already been made in the budget and I just want to understand if I'm misunderstanding that or if there's a pool of funding, maybe it's this community rides bucket you're describing that would open up for these other programs because I think from my perspective, what I hear from the rural part of my district in West Hartford, micro transit and the ability to have that service is where they see us moving as a state. So I'd really love to see how we can best implement more of this in all of the locations that you've identified with feasibility states and do more of that frankly. Absolutely and yeah, I'm sorry if I'm communicating something that doesn't align with what Michelle and I speak about all the time which is how do we build out micro transit as best we can? 12 feasibility studies is quite a bit for us that spends about all of our planning funds for this up to this point, we're using some old planning funds, some new funds we'll have planning funds in our FY23 budget to conduct more feasibility studies. The MTI grant has been used for a few of those. So when you mentioned MTI funds being used in part for feasibility studies, absolutely for our transit providers to identify two or three more communities every year that they would like to consider as we all learn it's like the battery electric just new technology, new ways of delivering service without risking the baseline reliable service that we have in place now. I expect to do feasibility studies far more in the future than just these 12 that we've identified initially. We could be doing 10 to 20 of those a year but if we're seeing results like we're seeing in Montpelier which is a little bit uptick in ridership kind of reverting back to maybe one of the routes of the Montpelier Hospital Hill that would be fed by the MyRide software it's making me a little bit more reticent or less confident that microtransit is going to be the most efficient way to provide essential mobility services. We're talking with Windsor and Springfield now in terms of the microtransit pilot and they're like, well, what if we have one vehicle in each of the locations? What if we have three? And we have none right now. Every vehicle that's in operation throughout the day is gonna cost about $200,000 a year. And we need to look at those ridership projections and the return on investment on those. So I think these feasibility studies will really lead to really good pilots which will really then kind of reveal the value of microtransit in Vermont. Okay, thank you, Ross. I think I understand the point. We've got a couple of questions lined up. Ross, representative Stebbins, representative McCoy and representative Burke. Can I just clarify with you, okay? I think one of the questions that you were asking representative White was, do we have money in the budget to implement the pilots that are finishing their feasibility study? And so that happens in two ways. So if we're doing it like we did for my rides in Montpelier, we are basically taking your existing fixed room service and instead of spending the money on that, we are spending the money on the microtransit. So we already have that built into the budget. And then in terms of the new feasibilities, some of those are in areas where we already have transit operating. So Ross mentioned the grant applications that'll come from the provider soon. They will be building in their anticipated costs for microtransit instead of potentially their fixed room service. And so we already are anticipating the need to fund. We also in all the existing service areas and when we have data that indicates a new service area is right for coming on, which is what these feasibility studies do. We then can access new start funding to try out a new route or to bring out a new service. And that's where this piloting of the microtransit is really important because it's such a new, and then we do the same thing for fixed room bus service. If we fund the bus service for three years and find that it's not performing in the manner we thought it would, then we would likely take it offline. That's typically our sort of framework. So I hope that adds a little context. I think it's just, it's a very thick bush that I'm trying to like lead my way through because what I feel like is being communicated to me is that you are not funding all the feasibility studies. And I'm not understanding why that is, but you also have the full breadth of funding to do that is what I'm hearing. So like you have the ability to do it, but you were choosing not to or it's that you don't have an answer to if they are actually things you should be funding. Is that more? So I think Ross can clarify, but through the MTI grant program, we have adequate funding to so far have provided the ability for a community to do a feasibility study if they were interested. So it's not as though we're getting more demand than we have resources available. But the second half of that is once you finish the feasibility study, it's gonna reveal whether or not this looks like a viable option. And then so far we have been planning for and have had in the case of Montpelier, the resources to move those forward into a pilot to see if they're gonna work. So right now there's no shortage of funding to advance feasibility studies and then viable pilots in our system. And Zach, for after Ross, I just wanna make sure I didn't misspeak. Thank you so much, Michelle, for the added context. You're exactly right. And there are feasibility studies to see if that service is gonna be feasible and what that ridership and return on investment would be. And those early conversations that we're having are revealing a little bit more nuance and more challenges and more costs than I probably anticipated before we started the process. And this is why we're doing the feasibility studies. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Are we done or are we done? Thank you, Chair Corcoran. Continuing along this line, one of the things I've heard from folks in the Montpelier area is that part of why there are some hiccups is because there wasn't enough startup funding. And Ross, to what you were just saying that you're learning through the pilot process where additional funding might be needed or whatnot. So first, I really applaud the fact that you're like identifying where things really are needed. I mean, if we need it in Bennington, great. Screw Bennington, come on. No, I mean, if Bennington is already getting services, you're going to get a straight. I guess I'm just concerned because what I'm hearing from folks who are using the Montpelier system, even President McCormick yesterday, President McCormick yesterday, wanted to take the ride up to the hospital, couldn't get through. So I guess I just want to make sure that the reason why some of these hit issues isn't a result of funding. Like if we're going to go for something, we got to make sure we have enough in there. And that's one piece. My other question, so that's, do you really think you have enough? So that's the one. And yes, I'm going to make you repeat it again. Sorry. And then the other question is, I just, I'm so glad that you keep mentioning the Medicaid, the elder person, recovery and job access. And it's always so hard to get a message out there, but I'm just curious whether like how we can get the message out more and more and more to Vermonters that these are available because for the folks that are really hard hit, I don't think they're like going on their computer or their iPhone to look things up because they know to look things up. So just wondering if you can reiterate, is this at libraries, is this at town halls? Like how do we really get the message out that VTrans is there, a support? So those two questions. Okay, in terms of the MyRide pilot, the data that I'm seeing are people are waiting between 10 and 12 minutes for the bus on average and that they're on the bus for about 10 minutes on average. Those are all preferable to hour long headways with maybe being on a bus for 45 minutes to get to the other end of the circulator which is right over there. So those are positive and it tells me that the vehicles that we have out there most of the time are able to provide that type of service. I don't have, I have heard at the end of the day there's been issues with the buses being full and people saying, well, there's no service available. So John's expanded the hours of the operator instead of the hours of operations so they can clean up those trips after the normal operations would occur. And so those are things that we're learning. We are looking to provide as much funds as GMT needs. I'll say that we were spending about $770,000 in transit service including the demand response service in Montpelier and we're around 950. And so we've added a couple hundred thousand dollars plus for the MyRide service and continue to learn from that. I don't know, when we look at these feasibility discussions that we're having, I'm not hearing a lot of people saying, oh, well you have two buses running around Middlebury now you'll only need two more buses, two buses for microtransit. It could be, well, let's keep this fixed route in place and then add two or three buses. And that changes the full consideration. I was hoping that a move from an in-town circulator like Montpelier or Middlebury would cost at another $200,000 or so. That could be wildly off depending on some of these scenarios that we receive. That is why we're just reluctant to say yes. All of these 12 communities are doing feasibility studies and will be receiving microtransit services. There's gonna be a lot to consider there. But moving forward, we're gonna learn about which, where it makes sense and we'll be able to fund 3, 4, to the extent possible a microtransit services around the state to try to figure out how best these different approaches for these different communities work. That sounds kind of reasonable as we learn more about microtransit and that's kind of where we are trying to be prudent and also working with the providers to ensure that they've got the drivers. If we're gonna add two or three buses, that means two or three drivers and of course we have a driver shortage. And so we have to talk about that in addition to the other costs that I identified earlier. So on the messaging, there are several ways to bring the domain and response dialer ride services to people who need them. Generally speaking, it's through client-based services, the assisted living, the agencies on aging, the independent living and disability community, VAB-VI. These are all partners that we have throughout the state and they many times contribute a 20% non-federal match for those trip costs. So now those and those are being done through regional, what we call E&D committees or elderly in persons with disability committees. We're trying to work with our providers to expand those E&D committees to mobility committees and bring in more people, whether they're town managers or the people who are working in recovery houses or counseling to see again what mobility needs are out there that are not being addressed. And certainly we can use the Goverment site and services and web to promote these dialer ride services. But overall, even DMV has a flyer where people are, when they're told, you weren't able to renew your license, here's some options for you as you're maybe aging out of driving or the like. So those are examples of how we disseminate the information and serve those clients. Thank you. How's that? It's fine. Representative Clay. So thank you. So you have 12 feasibility studies in 12 communities. My question is, have all 12 feasibility studies been complete? And if they haven't, then you have said that you're planning on three or more pilots in FY23. My assumption would be that you've gotten at least three feasibility studies back that you think will work. And additionally, I heard you speak about the Montpelier Myride and that the old hospital fixed route is getting 40% of the service. So it seems like a melding of both a fixed route service as well as a microtransit service, demand service may be more amenable to some communities, especially in a Montpelier city type and maybe a more rural area would be same thing. If I'm going, I don't know, maybe microtransit works better and rural, I don't know. Thank you. Yeah, none are complete. And out of the 12 that we've identified, six are due to be complete. We're the six providers who are looking to provide microtransit. They've identified two communities each and they said, hey, this is the one we need for our application period. And so VIA said, we can't do all 12 before August or April, but we can do six. And I'm part of those discussions on a weekly basis and at least three of those will show away forward. And so that's why at this point we're anticipating investing in microtransit to the extent possible for those communities where the feasibility study shows an increase in efficiency or a significant increase in ridership and mobility access. So those are kind of the midstream decision-making considerations that we get to share with the committee, but at this time I don't have completed feasibility studies, just tons of conversations around the state. In terms of Montpelier Hospital Hill, the hybrid approach, that's what we're seeing in Barrie, maybe keeping the Barrie route that connects Montpelier and Barrie with two microtransit services on either side with capstone coming online, with improved demand response services out in our hinterlands feeding in to these areas that have essential services may be among the approaches that we look at. When we see a small town that has very little service or no service, maybe microtransit twice a week, Mondays and Wednesdays for the community is to be considered. So many nuances and scenarios to consider and what we'd like to do is put our best foot forward in FY23 and try to cover as many approaches as possible to see if one approach seems like a better bang for our buck than others. And in those areas with a few hundred people that are 20 miles away from essential services, that's that expansion of the traditional dialeride services that may be able to provide more essential services for more people that won't include microtransit just because by the time we pick up one or two people and get them from Peachham to St. John'sbury, that person's gonna be waiting an hour just for one trip and that's gonna be probably not feasible. So those are the nuances that we're trying to wade through with these six that we expect to be done in the next month and then the other six that we expect to be done by July, August. Okay, thank you so much. Representative Burr's gonna close it out. Okay, Ross, this has been really instructive and I really appreciate the complexity and the way you've been thinking about this and in terms of not just like, okay, yeah, let's do this and this without really, really thinking hard about what's the best way to proceed. So I just really appreciate your work. I just wanna ask or just get sort of, I think that I know that not all your MTI funds go to microtransit and for other old folks home or other things like that. So I'm wondering if you had more money in that program, could you use it? It might not be able to use it for microtransit, but would there be a needs out there that are unfilled right now that if we were to add more money to that or can you use the carbon reduction funds money? Just trying to get a handle on like where the money is and where it could be used. The MTI program seems to be working as design, which is testing transportation demand management approaches and we've been able to find nine out of 10 applications that have come to us to an extent. And those who are showing promise, we've been able to extend another year and provide additional funding like the Montpelier Sustainability Coalition, Sustainable Montpelier Coalition or SMC who are doing a lot of the outreach for the microtransit pilot. Right now we're not seeing a big need for additional funds. I did notice in the language that there was language specific for microtransit, feasibility studies and we can certainly look to do more through the MTI program. We can also understand that a feasibility study is about 12 to $15,000 and there would be no need to put a $100,000 cap on those. But also when we look at the analyses and the carbon reductions of these steps, not every one of these projects will necessarily be justified to keep moving forward. So that will free up more funds for more of these types of feasibility studies. If that is indeed what our providers would like us to do or the communities that we're serving, what would like us to consider? Okay, thank you. Okay, I think that's gonna go for questions. Thank you very much, Ross and John for joining us here today and providing us with your testimony. Very much appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Take care.