00:00:14,230 We’re in the Tom Baker room of the Bismarck. Uh, city. Bismarck City-County building. This is going to be the Bismarck Mandan Metro. Planning. Metropolitan planning organization policy board meeting. However, before we start the meeting, we’ll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag. 00:00:40,070 United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. If we can call roll to call the meeting to order, please. Mayor Berglund. Yes, Commissioner. Zach Meyer. Mayor Freilich. Here. Commissioner bacon. And chair Schmitz. Here. Did we miss? Um. Commissioner Bacon isn’t online yet. Did they call your. Okay? I’m sorry. I was I couldn’t. 00:01:24,330 Yes, instead of here. Oh. All right, we’re in order. Then we have the consent agenda. Is there any item on the consent agenda that needs to be pulled? If not, what are the wishes of the policy board? Make a motion to approve. I’ll second. Any discussion. Hearing none. Roll call. Roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Mayor. Froehlich. Yes. 00:01:53,600 And chair Schmitz. Yes. Move to the regular agenda. We have item six, which is a 2026 to 2029 tip amendments. Kim. Thank you very much, Chair Schmitz. Members of the board. Um, item number six, exhibit R. B in your packet begins on page nine. I’ve shared my screen. 00:02:14,970 So those folks who are attending remotely online at home can also see this is a Tip amendment that the MPO processed for the 2026 2029 tip. This amendment is being advertised for its required 15 day public comment period, and a public hearing will be held tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. 00:02:35,230 in the David Black Stead Room on the second floor of the City County Office Building here. Uh, the amendment addresses a project for micro surfacing on North Dakota Highway 1810 from the Memorial Highway interchange to the expressway bridge. Now, the North Dakota Dot has provided a higher cost estimate for this project. 00:02:53,970 As noted on the amendment form, MPO staff is seeking a motion to approve the amendment contingent on no substantive public comments being received at tomorrow’s public hearing, and TAC did recommend approving such. Are there any questions on the amendment itself? Okay, members, what are your wishes? Moved to approve? Second. Okay. We have a first and second. 00:03:27,000 Any discussion? Yes. I just hope it goes better than it did last year. Right? Yes. All right. We’ll call it. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund? Yes. Mayor. Froehlich? Yes. Commissioner. Bakken. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Item seven. The 2026 Transit Development Plan. Pilot. Thank you. Chair Schmidt. As we bring it up here on the screen for you. 00:04:21,470 Oh, I can smell it, too. I have a question about it. Are you good? Thank you. Okay. Item seven. Exhibit. Arc is a 2026 request for proposals or RFP for the Transit Development Plan, or TDP. As you’ll recall, it was presented in October of 2025. And at that time, TAC recommended approval. 00:04:45,730 And the policy board voted to delay the study approximately three months pending service changes that were being implemented by Boozman Transit. The service changes are now anticipated to occur on or about April 1st, 2026. The RFP has been revised to include date changes to the project schedule, and the scope of work has been further refined. 00:05:07,670 But beyond that, the RFP has not been modified from what was presented in October. The TDP is approximately an 18 month study with a budget of $180,000. It is programmed to begin in 2026 and conclude before year end of 2027. It is already included in the 2026, 2027 Up. The Active Budget and work program of the MPO. 00:05:31,970 Bozeman Transit provides a full local match amount of $36,000, and the BMT board has already approved the full amount to be budgeted in both 2026 and 2027. For the study. Revisions to the scope of work are on pages 1213. They include an item two A under the. Evaluate the effectiveness of the current fixed route system. 00:05:56,030 We have specifying the evaluation of headway times and frequency routes, and the flag system that exists now versus a designated stop system, and to be the limited analysis of service and peer communities. 00:06:21,670 Comparisons to specifically exclude the anticipated April 1st, 2026 transit service changes, as they will not have been effective for a sufficient period of time to provide an accurate analysis, and three be the evaluate alternative types of transit services. We’ve added community circulator routes, mobility hubs, and flex routing. 00:06:47,470 The Bismarck, Bismarck Mandan MPO believes the revised transit development plan for RFP aligns with the best interest of Bismarck Transit and the MPO jurisdictions likely to be impacted by the recommendations resulting from the plan, and staff Rec staff requests its approval. Any comments or questions.? So, just as a comment, I met with the MPO in transit to ask them to refine the RFP. 00:07:10,230 To be more specific and specifically not to study the effect of the changes of expanded hours, because we don’t really know what that means this early on. And to be more targeted to do, we have enough routes. Do we need a circulator route? Do we need a hub? And so I’m far more comfortable now. 00:07:30,700 I one request I do have, at least from my standpoint, is, um, I understand you know, the it doesn’t have a lot of report back to the city or cities and municipalities during the study, and I would like it if there was some kind of format, more than just reporting back to Transit Transit Board and MPO so that, you know, there’s so we know because there might be some changes that we could 00:07:48,300 see coming as a result of the study in the process that the two cities might say, okay, transit, bring us the request to enhance some of those studies right away or processes right away, because 18 months is a long time. Um, so that that’s just a personal request. 00:08:04,370 I don’t think it needs to be a mandatory thing, but a request just to staff. I don’t know, Mayor Freilich, how you feel, if that’s beneficial to you or not. Is that possible? Periodic updates to the, uh, this board and also. The two city commissions? Yeah. 00:08:21,770 Yes, we discussed that this morning and that was recommended as well to bring it up with the commissions as well, to keep them updated. Um, and invitation to public hearings as well. Our public comments. Excuse me. Okay. So I’m much more comfortable than I was in October now. Okay. I make a motion to approve. And I can second that. 00:08:38,800 Do we have any further discussion? Hearing none. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Mayor. Froehlich. Yes. Commissioner. Bakken. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Moving to item eight, the Bismarck Mandan MPO bylaws. Um, I guess changes would be appropriate. Uh, Kim. Thank you again. Chair Schmitz. 00:09:12,000 Uh, item number eight is the track changes to the bylaws of the MPO. And that is exhibit Ardi on page 27, in the packet. I’ll bring that up. All right. We brought this forward to the board last month as just a heads up type item, letting you know that we were going to be taking a look at the MPO bylaws and, uh, making sure that they 00:09:45,100 were brought up to up to date. Um, and so in your packet, you had the track changes item that did show all of the proposed changes. And I’ll just kind of go through those very quickly, beginning on page one with the title, we deleted area from the official organizational name of the MPO. 00:10:05,300 We are the Metropolitan Planning Organization, not the Bismarck Mandan area Metropolitan Planning Organization. Um, also in the first paragraph of article one organization, again, we removed the word area from the organization’s name. Also in article one and throughout the document, we revised metropolitan area to read Metropolitan Planning Area. This was to be consistent with CFR language. 00:10:36,230 The MPA, or Metropolitan Planning Area refers to the entire MPO area for planning, not just the metro areas. Also line for was a modification that was recommended by our TAC this morning, and that was for the addition of the word transportation to read. The MPO shall perform metropolitan and area wide transportation planning. Forgive me. 00:11:09,300 I don’t know why it was just jump many pages backwards on me. Okay. The next significant change you’re going to find on page five of the document under article seven Technical Advisory Committee. This addresses the composition of the committee and the requirement for um member votes to achieve a quorum. 00:11:43,030 Uh, in this portion of the document, we replaced the director of the Community Development Department with Bismarck planning director to reflect the recent restructuring of this department. This change was also made on page six of the document. 00:12:07,030 And then regarding the quorum requirements in the final sentence of this first paragraph, the requirement of eight voting members has been changed to at least a majority of to allow greater flexibility in the event that not all seats or member positions are filled, as is the current circumstance, and that is the issue that we ran into last month at our TAC meeting. We weren’t able to achieve audible votes for all members that were actually present at the meeting. 00:12:26,770 Some were online and we could not we could not get our, um, um, our technical difficulties ironed out, um, momentarily. And so we had to actually delay the start of the meeting until their votes were audible. 00:12:49,770 Uh, now, this change isn’t going to be super substantial, but it just requires that we have a majority of members in attendance, and that allows that to float with filled positions of the membership. So this morning, TAC did recommend the adoption of the changes that were presented, including that textual change on page one, as noted. And staff would request the same from the policy board. 00:13:09,600 But in the meantime, I would be happy to stand for any questions you might have. Are there any questions? What are the wishes of the board? Move to approve. Second. And that’ll include the the change that TAC made this morning. Right? Yes. Okay. Okay. 00:13:35,070 We have a we have a motion, uh, any discussion? Um, I, I guess on my side of it, I think that rather. And this could. Be for next year’s, but instead. Of a representative for. The. City of Lincoln that we have the Lincoln City engineer. Listed. Rather than because that would be our.. Certainly. And we can be very flexible on that. 00:13:57,070 We actually broaden that language because in the past, it was kind of uncertain as to who the representative would be for the city of Lincoln. And, um, it kind of oscillated back and forth. And so we just broadened that a bit. 00:14:12,970 But if you would like to narrow that, we certainly could do that as well and be very specific to the engineer. Thank you. Yes. You’re welcome. Okay. Um, call roll please. Mayor Berglund. Yes, mayor Froehlich. Yes. Commissioner bacon. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. And I have to apologize. 00:14:41,900 I missed an agenda item because there wasn’t really anybody in the room, but there should be public comment, and I’m going to call that now. So anyone wish to make public comment? A second call for public comment. And a third call for public comment. Seeing no one, I’m going to close the public comment, period. Thank you for my indulging me. We’ll move back to the agenda. 00:15:07,500 Item nine 2026. Uh, fringe area Road Master Plan update. Who’s online. On Bolton and Mink. Okay, I’ll go ahead. Sorry about that. Um, well, good afternoon, board members. Uh, we’re giving you an update this month. 00:15:32,030 It’s a little bit more detailed than what we’ve given in the past, because we’ve gotten past some of our initial project kickoff and early public outreach. And the plan is really diving into taking findings from technical analysis and starting to think about, you know, recommendations and how the plan moves forward. 00:15:54,500 Um, our agenda packet that we provided gives you some background on a few of the things that we have been discussing with MPO staff on this. And I think to try to summarize it succinctly, it seems like the plan is at a place where it can evolve from what it has been in past iterations. And so we’re looking at doing that. 00:16:11,130 We started out thinking this will be an update that maybe adjust the overall road network as shown in the plan, and maybe changes terminology and definitions. But we’ve been getting good feedback from the plan steering committee. 00:16:31,230 Um, but we’ve also had some outreach activities that have brought feedback and thoughts from the general public and the broader Bismarck Mandan community, and are seeing that there are some opportunities to maybe rethink how the plan even functions overall. And so our summary and the agenda packet starts hinting at some of that. I’ve got some slides that I will share here to kind of walk through that quickly and summarize, um, the basic thoughts. 00:16:51,330 I think the, the short summary of all this, though, is to say that you’ll be getting more information from us in the coming months, and we will be asking for more feedback and thoughts on these things, because we want to make sure that some of these changes and how this plan operates, some of which will include a stronger role for the MPO and 00:17:07,200 decision making and the policy board kind of being the the main decision making body for that as a regional representation, we want to make sure that these are headed in the right direction for you. So I’ll go through quickly just to give you an update on schedule. 00:17:20,970 First of all, we are at a point, uh, sorry, bear with me here as I get this set up. I had some trouble this morning, too. Um, we are at a point in the schedule. We’re kind of at this midway. Um, finishing up our technical work and starting to craft this into recommendations. 00:17:42,900 Um, we have, as we talked about in our last update, engaged attack, the Advanced Traffic Analysis Center from North Dakota State for, uh, some additional work with the regional forecasting model, which will be very helpful for the team to take a look at regional growth as it’s forecast in the future and understand some of the implications of changes to the 00:18:02,570 transportation network. Um, so their work with the MPO is going to run through next month, and we are actually going to be meeting with them just after this for some updates. 00:18:17,030 So that’s very much work in progress that will maybe push some of our technical work out a little bit further, but it doesn’t really affect the overall schedule. We’re starting to take these findings into early recommendations for the plan that we will begin sharing in March and April. 00:18:39,970 Uh, but as we had shared with you before, we did an initial screening of the current fringe area roads network against physical factors in the, you know, in the world, in the natural environment that would affect how roads get built and how the fringe area roads plan gets implemented. And this was coming from feedback from the steering committee. 00:18:58,100 A lot of these things are pretty common conditions that, you know, require you to make some changes in how a road gets aligned or how connections get made. And rather than requiring the local governments who are coming to that determination to write formal amendments to the plan and have to go back to the MPO and, you know, go through a process, a lot of this can probably be dealt with with, you know, good technical guidance. 00:19:16,730 Uh, setting a path for how road connections can get made for most of the roads. But defining in cases where we’re doing something bigger, you know, looking at freeway interchanges, having to cross over a railroad and negotiate with the rail company on new crossings, those might be places where we need to have, 00:19:33,830 deeper discussion and maybe more of a regional focus and things. And that kind of led us to look at a few different approaches to this. Most of the, um, the fringe area roads network is defined in the previous plan is going to happen when development happens and, you know, the urban 00:19:50,030 footprint of Bismarck and Mandan reach out to those areas. So making these connections happen, you know, can be something that the local government development review process continues to, to shepherd through like it does today. And maybe the plan can focus on setting some good practices and technical criteria and technical factors to follow when that happens. 00:20:09,630 But you don’t if you’re if you’re moving the the alignment of a road a little bit to make it work around topography or natural features, you don’t have to go through and amend the plan every time you’re doing that. As long as the spirit is being met. 00:20:24,200 However, there are probably some bigger connections that have regional significance that do need that regional, you know, scale of discussion. And that lens. And that’s where we wanted to find the governance role, you know, for the MPO and its partner agencies in that. 00:20:44,900 But however that take shape, which we’ll be sharing in future updates and future discussions, there’s probably a concept of the plan that gets defined on its own. This this idea of regionally significant corridors or connections that do need a bit more scrutiny and maybe lead to future study. Maybe they lead to involvement of the state dot. 00:21:04,100 Maybe there’s, you know, intergovernmental agreements don’t quite know what that looks like in terms of how it happens. But they are they are the corridors that need to be preserved and need to fill this, this bigger regional function. 00:21:20,170 So instead of having a large network that’s dealt with that way, it’s a smaller set of corridors where most of the network can fill in as development. Um, brings up that opportunity. So we’re not necessarily asking you to comment on this today or put you on the spot, but I’m kind of giving you notice that in future discussions, we want to hear more and welcome your feedback on this, because there 00:21:36,230 are some new ideas being presented here. New even from the original kind of scope of work as we had defined it, because the feedback we’ve been getting from our participants in this process has really opened our eyes to, you know, we could streamline some things, but we could also 00:21:48,970 elevate some things to a different level of review. Um, in terms of what that regionally significant corridor network is starting to look like, I want to emphasize that this is a really abstract graphic. 00:22:05,100 This is not supposed to say this is these are the four shown here, but the idea is that we’re making bigger connections and more regional moves. Um, when we look at what has been happening with development in the region, this is a map showing you where amendments to the fringe Area Roads plan have happened over the last ten years, or at least the ones that are getting kind 00:22:22,630 of recorded and documented as such. And these all pertain to growth areas. You know, these are subdivisions or developments being approved. When you look at where those are relative to the forecasts that the MPOs member jurisdictions have provided for the region, it lines up developments happening where we 00:22:41,430 kind of forecast and thought it would happen. That gives us a pretty solid starting point to be able to say we’re seeing where the transportation system is not matching up to that yet, or needs to get caught up, and we’re seeing where, um, some of these connections probably do merit that, that regional level 00:22:58,900 of importance. So this is helping us to map out what that network could look like. And we hope to to share that with you. And and coming updates, um, from this abstract concept of something a bit more concrete. 00:23:13,970 Um, but what that means is that these corridors would need to be dealt with in a different way than the rest of the fringe area roads plan, and there’s probably a different level of review and decision making on that, that we will also be defining further and sharing with you in future updates. 00:23:30,830 Another update I wanted to give is that our engagement, um, our entire strategy for community engagement has been evolving as well. Again, thanks to excellent feedback from the steering committee for the plan. 00:23:48,130 Um, we’re seeing that there’s an opportunity with stakeholders to get them more involved and actually thinking about, you know, this regionally significant network and some of these ideas in a more concrete sense, and maybe go beyond our typical approach of listening and kind of gathering feedback and then synthesizing it all together. We can give people a bit more of a hands on role and how we’re thinking about this and where some of these key connections are. 00:24:05,570 So, as discussed in your agenda packet item, we’ve proposed an outreach approach that follows three different tracks. One of those is going to be a conventional kind of listening group for the for the landowners and the developers and those who are more immediately affected by these changes, um, who, you know, are not really wearing a hat as a, um, a major institutional 00:24:26,370 stakeholder, but they’re members of the community. But that track two workshop that’s discussed, there is more of kind of a hands on effort to involve key institutional stakeholders and show some real concepts and say, let’s talk about what your needs are. 00:24:45,170 Let’s figure out how you know, this, this overall regional network is meeting them. And at the request of the Dot, we are going to set up a third track of engagement to work with multiple Dot staff and understanding the implications of this plan’s recommendations on future project programming, future coordination with the Dot, and what that could look 00:25:01,530 like. So that’s our update for now. Again, I don’t want to put any of you on the spot here to, uh, to opine on any of these things or ask specific questions. But I am saying generally that in future updates, we encourage that we would love to have more direct feedback. 00:25:18,870 And if the format of how we’ve shared information in the agenda packet works pretty well, that we give these kind of written narrative summaries. Um, I don’t want to ask you to read too much with those, but want to give enough background so that this all makes sense. 00:25:33,170 We’ll continue doing that in future updates, and encourage you to share thoughts and have more discussion when we get them. Thank you again. Okay. Are there any questions? I do think the written summary is helpful because it helps us in advance. I have one comment I think you need to to look at. Uh, it’s this first page of exhibit R e. 00:25:52,400 Whoever wants to look at this, but your invoicing indicates it’s for the Bismarck. Bismarck man and safe Routes to Services project. I don’t think that’s correct. We will take a look and change that. I apologize, that might be a holdover from past work that we had done with the MPO. Not getting correctly flagged in our system. 00:26:12,170 So thanks for thanks for pointing that out. Okay. Thank you. Uh, moving on. Item ten, the 2026 big Sky Passenger Rail Authority update. Kim. Thank you, Chair Schmitz, members of the board. After you may recall late last 2025, we did renew our government Partner program membership. 00:26:38,370 Um, for the MPO and its partnering jurisdictions in the big Sky Passenger Rail Authority’s annual membership program, uh, that began on January 1st. And also as part of that, the MPO and its jurisdiction signed into a memorandum of agreement, which just basically outlined roles and responsibilities in being government partner program members. 00:26:59,230 Um, one of the benefits that we do have as being a GPP member is to attend the board sessions or the board meetings of big Sky Passenger Rail Authority. They do hold those board meetings every other month. Um, I believe it is on the second Wednesday of every other month. 00:27:23,270 The first was January 14th of 2026, and while I would encourage all of you to attend, um, via zoom if possible, I also attend. And so if anything comes up that seems to be of note or interest, I am very happy to pass that information along to you and and convey it in whatever sense that might, might hold for you. 00:27:40,370 But, uh, from the January 14th meeting, I can tell you that they had the election of board officers, and they basically reinstated the entire board that was in previously for 2025. And as part of that, they did ask the returning officers to please, um. 00:28:01,630 just give an idea of what their priorities would be for 2026. And three of those officers did indicate that their highest one of their higher priorities was to conduct outreach to North Dakota and very specifically to the Bismarck Mandan area. And we’ve received correspondence since then from Jason Stewart, who is the vice chair of the big Sky Passenger Rail Authority. 00:28:28,430 And he said specifically that they are planning in-person visits to North Dakota’s, uh, North Coast corridor. Communities including Bismarck, Mandan, of course. Uh, that would be for sometime later this year after the snow melts. Um, so stay tuned. We’ll see when that happens. 00:28:54,970 Could be tomorrow, but, um, he said their desire is to coordinate with us and the teams. Um, on scheduling some public meetings and forums in this area. They have an aim towards engaging not only the public, but also elected officials informing both local leaders and the public. Um, I think that we could probably get a little jumpstart on that. 00:29:22,170 It has occurred to me that, um, my main concern is making sure that the principles of Bismarck, Lincoln, Mandan, Morton County, Burleigh County are coming together and are included in any pertinent conversations that might be had. Uh, and so that would be my focus. 00:29:48,300 But it was also suggested to me that if I were to coordinate, say, some kind of a roundtable discussion or meeting, that perhaps it would be very beneficial to include principals from those communities along the potential passenger rail line, such as perhaps even Valley City, but definitely Jamestown Dickinson, as they have both professed their commitment to be sprays, corridor ID program and the return of passenger rail in our 00:30:12,370 area. It was even suggested perhaps as far out as beach since beaches. Right. You know that border town right on the the cusp of North Dakota and Montana? Um, and so I just wanted to kind of run it past you as my, my board and my advisory board, for sure. 00:30:36,370 Um, as to whether you would like to offer any direction in that regard or if you would just want to give me the green flag to go ahead and get something coordinated. And I kind of feel that perhaps the sooner that we do this, the better. 00:30:56,930 Um, it gives us some time to see where, uh, each of our priorities lie, and we can kind of formulate what our, our ultimate goal is for the return of passenger rail in our region. And then that way, we will be good and ready. Once spray does reach out to us to provide them with, um, you know, some of our, our formulated suggestions, needs, wants and desires. Is that. 00:31:18,000 I think you have consensus that you could invite some of the other jurisdictions along the path. Okay. All right. And I think that’s kind of what I was looking for as well, since that, um, lies just beyond, um, my focal point of the MPO area. So. All right, I thank you very much. 00:31:39,000 And you can look forward to hearing more in the meantime, just as a reminder, the, um, uh, big Sky Passenger Rail Authority does have that corridor ID project underway. They did inform us at that January 14th meeting that they have completed fully completed phase one. 00:31:59,700 Uh, they also mentioned that now phase two is going to be the service development plan. The Federal Railroad Administration has, um, actually enacted some changes that may lighten some of the requirements in that regard, because it’s a very onerous and arduous, um, part of the corridor ID program is the development of the service 00:32:20,430 plan. So, um, any, any burden that can be lifted from them in that regard would be good news. And we’ll be looking forward to hearing more as far as their progress in that phase. So thank you very much. Thank you. Moving to item 11 2026 Bozeman Transit Update. Deidra. Good afternoon, Chair Schmitz and policy board members. 00:32:47,330 I don’t have a ton of stuff to update on because I was here last month, but, um, effective April 1st, transit service hours will be expanded for both our fixed route and our demand response services. 00:33:03,770 The fixed route Cap bus service will be increasing its operating hours by four hours daily Monday through Saturday. This extension is aiming to support late shift workers and residents who require early morning and late and evening transportation. Currently, we operate 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Saturdays. 00:33:20,930 With the change in place, we will now begin service at 6 a.m. Monday through Friday and end at 10 p.m. and on Saturdays we’ll start at 7 a.m. and end at 10 p.m.. Paratransit service will also be extended on Sundays by 3.5 hours, ending service at 6 p.m. instead of the current 2:30 p.m. 00:33:37,900 the Sunday paratransit demand response service will also be open, or the demand response service will also be opened on holidays to our general public riders, as well as our Sunday service. Um, for the first time, they’ll be able to utilize public transit on those days, which we’ve never had any services on Sundays or holidays for these users. 00:33:57,200 These individuals, uh, general public riders will be able will need to follow the same guidelines for scheduling as paratransit riders. They must be scheduled to at least one day in advance, but they can schedule up to 14 days in advance to evaluate the impact of the cost of the new public access component. 00:34:11,570 We’ll be operating the buses for paratransit eligible riders and general public riders separately during the initial phase, general public riders will follow the same scheduling protocols as paratransit riders, and the fare will cost $3 per ride due to increase in service hours. We’ve entered contract negotiations with Ridgeview as our contractor. 00:34:31,870 Um, a few key components of these negotiations include reducing their hourly rate and accepting a three. The three additional contractors that we have as options within our contract. At this point, we need six additional CDL drivers to cover the expanded service hours. But we do have four drivers in the hiring pipeline. 00:34:49,600 Um, and hopefully they’ll make it through background and training. So we’ll be sitting in a better position once April comes. We’re also in the process of updating our website rider guides, and working on some proportional promotional material for the service changes. So be on the lookout for all kinds of advertising. Come in March to promote the service. 00:35:07,100 We have several upcoming projects in addition to our service expansion, including our National Transit Database reporting, which is due to the federal government, um, our audit and then some procurement projects, including a number of facility maintenance items out at the transit office. We have received one replacement paratransit vehicle this month. 00:35:26,130 Um, that was that’s a replacement for a vehicle that was totaled at a non at fault accident. Um, which we are currently preparing to put in service and are hopeful that should be ready to go by next week. 00:35:40,470 Um, we do have four replacement paratransit buses on order to replace some vehicles that have reached the end of their useful life, and we’re hoping by July we’ll have those vehicles at the facility on the ground side of things. We’re currently waiting for our fiscal year 2026, 5350 307 grant appointments, which are typically announced here on this time of year. 00:35:57,830 Um, unfortunately, we don’t have any word on when we’re going to see those, which is a little bit challenging. Um, basically what that means is transit absorbs all operating and all expenses that would typically be charged to that grant until we have those apportionment. Um, and then we’re able to set the grant up with the MPOs assistance. So right now we’re in limbo between grants. 00:36:13,770 But that was all that I had to update. And I’d be happy to answer any questions. Thank you Deidre. Thank you.