Welcome to the Gap. In episode 13, John Hamry and Sam Palmisano discussed U.S.-China relations and the factors shaping CEO decisions about the two largest economies in the world and how these relations are impacting the global economy. New geopolitical interests by each country are a major aspect of these developments. Late last month in Japan, the leaders from the G7 countries met to discuss the global economy and how to coordinate their economic and foreign policies to seize the opportunities and address the challenges being presented around the world. The nations of the G7 represent approximately 45% of the global economy. They are a significant force shaping the economic policies that govern not only their own domestic markets, but global business. And each has significant trade with China. Their discussions and agreements represent another factor CEOs should consider as you make investment and operating decisions in the months and years ahead. Of particular importance are the agreements reached on economic resilience and economic security. We suggest listeners familiarize yourself with these actions taken by the G7 heads of state as they directly affect U.S.-China relations and how businesses will need to adjust their operating behavior. Building resilient supply chains and resilient critical infrastructure, non-market policies affecting global economic resilience, economic coercion or country actions that exploit economic vulnerabilities and dependencies, and harmful practices by governments that require companies to localize their data and grant access to data without appropriate safeguards are the specific areas called out by the G7. With regard to economic coercion, G7 members have agreed to launch a coordination platform on economic coercion that will allow them to increase assessment, preparedness, deterrence and response to nations using economic coercion in business and foreign affairs. We see the recent G7 meeting and its agreements as additional factors requiring CEOs focus as decisions are made about U.S.-China business matters and about operating in an increasingly reshaped global economy. This is why we are re-releasing episode 13 of The Get. We encourage you to listen to John and Sam's insights about U.S.-China relations and become familiar with the G7's recent actions. Welcome to The Get, the podcast for enterprise leaders delivering timely insights for today's global economy and tomorrow's competitive advantage. I'm your host, Chris Kane, president of the Center for Global Enterprise. And today, we sit down with two people who have been leaders in U.S.-China relations, one in government and one in business. John Hamry is president and CEO of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. He formerly served as the 26th U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense and is chairman of the Defense Policy Board under four secretaries of defense. And Sam Palmasano, chairman of the Center for Global Enterprise. He also serves as chairman of the America's Frontier Fund, a non-profit deep-tech strategic investment fund and was formerly chairman and CEO and president of IBM. John and Sam, welcome and thank you for helping us discuss this defining issue. Glad to be with you. Thanks, Chris. So both the United States and China have recently announced plans and enacted policies that will affect each other and more broadly the global economy. The two largest economies in the world will shape the nature of business over the next 30 years in perhaps more pronounced ways than they have over the last 30 years. Two factors in particular shaped the last few decades of global economics. In December of 2001, the U.S. granted China permanent most favored nation trade status and China was formally admitted into the World Trade Organization. Since then, CEOs have operated their businesses to factor in a relatively cooperative economic and geopolitical relationship between the U.S. and China. But today, things are different. We will discuss how things have changed and what are the factors CEOs need to address as they execute their business over the next few decades. John, perhaps we can start with you. You have served in the U.S. government for many years and in many different capacities. You have directly dealt with many countries of the highest level. You recently wrote about the resurgence of geopolitics over geoeconomics as the organizing force for the years ahead. Can you elaborate on this and what you think it means for CEOs? Thanks, Chris. I wrote that in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And I do think that it marks a significantly different period in our approach to international relations. You know, really for the last 30 years, as you noted in the setup for the question, it was basically a fairly politically benign time in global commerce. We invited China to join the WTO. We worked hard to try to pave a way for that. There was a pretty permissive environment. There were some scratchy episodes, but nothing that really fundamentally changed the underlying economics. But the war in Ukraine triggered something quite profoundly new. You know, we decided to weaponize the global financial system. I mean, to put swift sanctions, restrictions on Russia, we mobilized the most comprehensive sanctions on economic commerce with Russia. This means we took what people for 30 years considered to be maintaining a public utility, you know, global finance, and we turned it into the weapon that we could use in a war that where we didn't want to get involved militarily, but we wanted to affect the outcome. This is a pretty different world. Now, I will say, I think I had personally anticipated in March last year that this would bifurcate the international political order. It did not. And that's largely because China chose not to let it become a divisive point. But I still think geopolitics is going to be a dominant factor. So, Sam, given your former and current private sector activities, what do you think this new U.S.-China environment means for CEOs from a business and an investment perspective? Chris, I mean, I agree with John. I mean, basically what's happened is whether it's national security or nation's own self-interest, whatever you want to be, has overridden some of the things that were viewed as economically beneficial for all. I mean, when the world integrated after World War II, it really did lift millions and millions of people out of poverty. Standards of living are better. Life expectancy is lower. So there was a great benefit to that. And that's not being challenged. I think John, I completely agree with John. The war has exacerbated that and brought some things into focus. But it's been under challenge for the past two years. If you just look at recently at China, then we're talking about China today, I would put my hat as the CEO.  COVID-free has now changed. The pressure on the technology sector innovation is now opening up again. And credit or financing to the property sector has also opened up again. So, yes, there were economic downturn. Forget the numbers that are public. Nobody believes them anyway. But it's either slow or negative. And then fundamentally, these things have changed. The reason I mentioned the question is, what's going to happen next? And as a CEO, you're worried about, because you're making long-term investments. And so you're worried about, is this actually a philosophical change or are they going to go back to their old audiology? Are they going to go back to the malice approach or they go back to done? You will see. But as a CEO and you're planning, you really can't plan that things are going to return to the way they were, let's say six or seven years ago, given what's happened recently and now they're pivot now. But that means overnight they could pivot again. So I guess my only point is, you need a plan B. You need to have a business as usual plan and maybe you assume the next couple of years are fine as far as being able to invest and get returns in China. But you also need a plan to protect your assets, assuming this thing reverses itself again. Well, that's the title of our session today, which is looking ahead at U.S.-China relations and factors shaping CEO decisions. Sam, you're certainly right on point, given the scope of what we want to talk about today. John, from a government perspective, the pivots that Sam just described by President Xi, do you anticipate that this will continue to be kind of a dynamic policy approach by Xi or do you think this is a temporary let-up without necessarily a fundamental shift on his part? We don't really don't know that. I don't think there's a view on that. He held very firmly to his COVID policy as well as to the more restrictive policies that were choking off the real estate sector. You know, pretty firmly up until one weekend, and then bam, it changed. Now, one can say that he had gone through the 20th Party Congress and he cemented his power status. And if you believe that's the case, then you say, well, he has the flexibility to move things around. And he was holding a firm line as long as he could until he knocked off all the internal opposition. The other is that he is authentically worried about the health of the economy and that the decisions that he thought were right were damaging the economy. And he is recalibrating. Now, does that mean he changes his underlying... He's still basically a Marxist. He's a Leninist Marxist. He believes in common ownership of the means of production and believes in a central Leninist party that directs the economy. So, you know, is it tactical or has he made a realistic change? I don't think we really have an agreement on that. I think probably the predominant view is that it's tactical, but I don't think we know. Let's talk a little bit about the U.S.-China economic relationship that has been quite a powerful engine for global growth over the last 30 years and had profound effects on people around the world and countries around the world. There's been a lot of discussion about the decoupling of the U.S. and China economies and the impact it will have on global economic growth. Certain investments in operations in sectors such as semiconductors or deep-tech technologies and certain consumer, even certain consumer technologies are being constrained by both countries. Do you see government policy restrictions expanding? And if so, what areas of business do you see next? Sam, maybe we can start with you and then go to John on this. Yeah, Chris. I completely agree with John. Nobody can really call what's going to happen in China. We know where he is philosophically in ideology. Who knows? It's a little bit of brings uncertainty into the things that you're talking about, like sanctions or tariffs or restrictions as far as the flow of technology around the world. I really did believe at the end of the day these economies, these countries will not decouple. And the reason I say that is because their economies need each other. And either you're going to lower your standard of living for your population, which is probably not attractive, or you're going to defund entitlements of military, which is again, probably not constructive, because you have to have a robust economy to do these things. I admit that I'm not an audiologist. I'm a pragmatist, which says, though, that you can't disconnect completely these two economies and accomplish those goals. However, I do think the points that you've made as you project out to the future, anything that they view as related to national security when it comes to technology, that is going to come under restriction and pressure, not just the short term as far as technology around semiconductors and the equivalent that produces the semiconductors. And that's what you see going on right now. But even future areas like quantum computing, 5G cyber infrastructure, those sorts of things, biologics, biotech, all those areas, I believe are going to be more challenging.  Jeff? What worries me is that we have two political parties that don't agree on much these days in the U.S., but there are two things that they really do agree on. One is a parochialism about America, by America in one form or another. And the other is a fear and loathing of China. And this is bipartisan now. And I think that could become dangerous in months ahead. I think there'll be fighting and scratching at each other nonstop, but they're ready to align themselves together if the right stimulus presents itself. Now, you know, when I thought the major development of the Biden administration was the semiconductor restrictions announced last September, because the most important thing was the accompanying narrative for it. Our historic industrial policy, we don't call it that, but it is. Our historic industrial policy was always we will restrict people from having access to cutting-edge technology today. We will allow our companies to export, sell or older technology, and we will subsidize companies to invest in the next generation. That was our national strategy, and that was coherent because it meant that companies could capitalize on the productive revenue opportunities that came with old technology, use it to invest in new technology, and so there was a logic to the framework. But when Jake Sullivan gave his presentation, he basically said, we're going to try to restrict everything. Now, that's a very problematic shift, and I don't think we really know where it's going yet. I think American semiconductor companies are very nervous about this. I know our foreign partner countries that are in semiconductor are very nervous about this because they continue to want to sell in the China market, and they don't want to give China a protected enclave to develop a competitor. So I think it's unstable, but I think the trend of our macro politics is going to be difficult and challenging. So you and I worked closely together. When you were in government, I was at IBM around that very subject matter, which is those technologies that are leading and developed in the United States, and how do we create a market-oriented approach to giving the United States a lead in those technologies without it being captured by adversaries in a global market, which is a perfect tie-in to the next question that I really want to ask you both about. And in many respects, it's both a policy but also a management question, which is in the previous periods where geopolitics was the organizing force for a global business. Read that to be the Cold War era. The US government oversaw compliance by US business through a spectrum of export controls. You were just referring to that, John. Today, the global economy and technologies are very different than they were during that period. We have cryptocurrencies, we have pervasive computing, we have digital products and services, we have global supply chains. So should business leaders be expecting a return to detailed export control regulation by the US government and be reinvesting in the operating controls to ensure that they are compliant? Because we were benefited greatly during the period of trade liberalization where export controls were allowed to be loosened up around the spirit concept of dual-use technologies, consumer technologies, etc. Are we re-entering a period where the export control environment is tightening and therefore companies are going to have to begin the reinvestment of management processes internally? So John, maybe we can go with you. I think the announcements on semiconductors in September clearly suggest we're heading that way. And at the time, informally, they were saying there's lots more coming. It's going to be in other sectors. We're going to go into biotech, and we're going to go into medtech, etc. Now, we haven't seen that. And I think the administration has been quietly getting a lot of pushback from the business world and from our allies. I mean, I think that there's a general agreement on limiting the most advanced semiconductors that are used for artificial intelligence, but there is not an agreement on constraining semiconductors just generally. So I think they're getting pushback, but I know the administration said that they had a vision of much more expansive controls. Now, export controls only work if there's a consensus on them. What happened at the end of the Cold War was we kept export controls in place, but nobody else in the world did. And so it kind of lapsed, although the mechanism is still there. Americans still have to get an export license for the radiator for a 50-year-old truck design. If it's a military vehicle, it's stupid, but we still have it. But we could be marching down that road again, but it only will work as if there's a broad consensus among affected parties. And right now, I don't think we have that. So Sam as a CEO, what would you be doing now internally in the planning process, given the direction yet the uncertainty that we've just been talking about? Yeah, I think, Chris, that John's right, the world doesn't work this way anymore. And I don't know how effective controls would be. Let's go back to semiconductors. There are five or six key countries that are advancing semiconductors. In China, it's not one of them. There's only ones in the United States. You have Japan, you have Korea, you have the Netherlands. You have a couple of European countries. You have Germany, et cetera, et cetera. That's the industry. So I know the politicians would like it not to be that way, but that is what it is. And you can't get the tooling if you have these controls. You can't get the materials, the design tools. All those things are completely globalized. And the best solution is to have these like-minded nations work together not restrict them. The other thing, that's why I think you see this European reaction to some of these things, even in the automotive industry with EVs, because they view it as biasing the US, you know, for their own self-interest, but impacting our allies. I just quote, I should say, that if I was running the company that some rational behavior would some point occur.  I understand that. They're right to have some kind of logical behavior versus their positions they like to take. But fundamentally, those controls would be destructive to the things they're trying to accomplish. So I would start with if I was a company educating those people why it's destructive. And you see that going on now in semiconductors, quite honestly. And you're going to see it going in biotechnology as well. They're going to try to educate these people so they understand that this is going to hurt us as much as everybody else. Going back to the previous era of geopolitics being the organizing principle, you had allies, as John said, who had less scrutiny from our export control system than other countries who were not considered allies. And therefore, the world was broken up into different lists of countries that were assigned different levels of risk. So the sounds though, like the French shoring concept, which has been talked about by folks in the administration and elsewhere, is one way of finding maybe an HOV lane stand for what you're talking about, which is if Japan and the Netherlands and other countries are considered friends for the semiconductor space, then maybe as a CEO you target your investment into those countries as opposed to someplace else. Yeah, I mean clearly I would not put assets into countries today like Russia, obviously, or China. I would not be putting hard assets into this location. I would try to figure out in China how to operate economically without having hard assets there. And there is a solution to that, quite honestly. There are ways to do that, as you and I know, because it created a lot. But I wouldn't be putting it, if we stay on semiconductors, a fabricator in China, if I was IBM today. I'd keep it. I would either put it in Germany or the United States, quite honestly. That means though, the reason why we'll, and to jump to this American Frontier Foundation, we should be collaborating with these countries. The research for future technologies is very expensive and it's very hard to do. The fact that we think we're going to go along is very naive. It's not technically sound. So what you need to have, you need to do is have relationships with these five or six countries where you have that expertise is my point. So you really can't, in any way, disrupt the system the way it works today and expect to be self-sufficient and leading in semiconductors. You will fall behind. Forget the $52 billion in the CHIPS Act. That's like four fabs, guys. That's nothing compared to what's required from the R&Ds, the tools, the material science, all those sort of things that need to be done. And that's all done globally. So I think it would be destructive to the industry and destructive to our economy if we decided to say it all has to be in the United States. And if you were asked by CEOs and companies who were participating in sensitive industries, or some of these strategic technologies that we were talking about, what countries would be the safest for me to invest in? Can you suggest the top three? Well, I think, Chris, I think the challenge with the question you posed depends on what it is.  You've got to go to certain places to get lithium. If you're talking about building factories and having manufacturing in a country, I agree that there's a chill in the air on China, but there's no country in the world that has put together the whole package the way that China has. The internal transportation networks are dovetailed into intermodal transit, efficient ports. If you need a longer runway, they'll extend a runway for you so that you can get in different...  And I don't see another country getting close in the near term in having it. So I think for manufacturing, I think China is still going to be a pretty central actor in global supply chains for a long time. I don't think that's going to go away soon. I mean, it's a very important point for your listeners here is that last year, the world invested in about 2 million industrial robots. Half of them were in China. Tell me who's going to step in and replace China as a manufacturing power center given the way they've got the package together right now. So I think we've got a long way before we're going to see a shift. So recently, President Xi and Biden met face-to-face in Indonesia and they have announced new high-level meetings in defense, foreign affairs, and financial sectors. But what's notably absent from these positive actions is trade, commerce, and scientific cooperation. So what should CEOs and other business leaders take from this? If anything, is it to be determined and don't worry about it, or is it a message... John, let's start with you. Is it a message that you think is telling as to the geopolitical relationship that these two largest economies are in right now? Well, I think it's a leading indicator of the problems that we're going to have with each other. I mean, part of it is a unique problem with the Biden administration. They don't want a trade policy. There's a proclism about the Biden administration about manufacturing, and it just... There is no trade policy. They've got something they call the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, but it's... there's nothing in it. Just a label. The Asian friends are working with them, trying to get them to agree to put content in it, but I don't think that's happening. But when you get to something like technology restrictions, I think, unfortunately, this is now a bipartisan consensus, partly based on paranoia, partly based on protectionism, legitimate protectionism. You know, the Chinese do spy. I mean, after all, they've been trying to steal secrets. But we're starting to see real restrictions coming in place, and a very little-known thing right now, the Biden administration is talking about doing away with non-compete clauses on business. Well, what they haven't thought through is a non-compete clause restricts foreigners from taking trade secrets back home. So we could see a real ratcheting up of other restrictions in technology controls once the dawn's on them, that one agenda is in conflict with another. So I would be nervous about where we're heading right now if I were a business guy. Sam, so is it a leading... Would it be a leading indicator for you if you were still a sitting CEO with investment plans in place for 23 and 24? You know, I'm kind of where John is. I mean, they had a meeting, but they didn't establish anything that I understand. It's called guardrails of some kind or lanes we could operate with them. I don't know that that's been defined. And so I would just be cautious. I mean, you'd have to watch closely, guys. I mean, you know, as a CEO, especially if you're operating outside your domicile country, whether that's your European United States, it doesn't much matter. You need China for business growth, right? In tech, it's like either the largest or second largest market in the world. So you can't say I'm going to avoid the largest market or second largest market in the world. But my point being is I would just be watching and trying to see where this thing goes. I wouldn't be committing much of anything. You'd be operating your business, dealing with it. You have enough pressure on the business these days called high inflation, commodity prices going through the roof, labor causes going through the roof, economy slowing in a macroeconomic environment.  So I would, I'd be watching. I'd be relying on people like yourself, Chris, to keep us informed what's going on. But I wouldn't be acting quite yet. The title of today's session is looking forward, looking ahead to U.S.-China relations because CEOs and businesses need to know how to plan and they need to know how to plan and informed in the algebra way. So I want to thank you both for joining in the conversation today. Hopefully it's been helpful to our listeners. But before we close, we like to use the last minute or so to give our listeners some strategic insights to think about. We call it our emerging critical issues moment. So in one word or one phrase, please tell us what emerging issue do you see on the horizon that business leaders ought to be putting on their radar? So John, why don't we start with you? There's a proclism that's growing in American politics and the only antidote to that is business has to be engaged in Washington. You got to come here and share your insights. But I don't think this is unavoidable. We now have to have the business world in Washington sharing its insights about what we have to do. And do you see that same involvement by business leaders in other capitals around the world, maybe in Europe and elsewhere? Oh, yeah, no, no. Europe has put together a consultation mechanism with the business world that's much more effective than ours. Now, unfortunately, the regulatory environment in Europe is choking off of their future. So Europe has decided they're going to manage their future by controlling access to their consumers, not by stimulating an innovative economy. And so that's why we're scratching at each other right now. I mean, that's why the Europeans are all pissed off at us over the new green investment stuff that the Biden administration put in, because they don't have it. And so their solution is, we're not going to let American companies sell into our market. Okay, so we're going to have some challenging days, I think, with our allies too. Sam, one thought, one word, that CEOs ought to be putting on their radar.  I would say this whole accept area or chat GPT, I would think about the same way what we thought about digital currencies before FTX. Well, the GPT is getting a lot of attention. And so is so was Bitcoin. And so was the ethics. Across all generations too, right? Not just my generation. Absolutely. Absolutely. All right. Well, great. And we will come back to these critical issues in future shows. Thank you for your time today and your insights. It's been very enjoyable and helpful. And you've been listening to The Get, sponsored by the Center for Global Enterprise, celebrating 10 years of convening global enterprise leaders around the world to the most important business transformation issues.


The Turkish government has expressed redness to partner Nigeria's Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty and Elevation in the areas of social protection and emergency responses. Turkish ambassador to Nigeria, Hediyat Barakta, made this known during a courtesy call on the Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty and Elevation, Dr. Betaydu, in an office in Abuja, describing Nigeria as the rising star in Africa. Barakta said it was important that his country and Nigeria collaborate on humanitarian crisis management, emergency response efforts and poverty eradication infrastructures. What is very important is that they are happy to as soon as possible put boots on ground so they want to open an office for the development, for the Turkish Development Corporation in Nigeria after that agreement has been signed and from this office they can directly implement through the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty and Elevation to reach out to the different states all around the country. So we are very positive that very early next year in January we can get all of this signed both in Turkey and back in Nigeria with the President and we can begin immediate implementation which will help us, number one, tackle humanitarian crisis as well as disaster and then secondly are more importantly we will be able to tackle poverty through the various Development Corporation initiatives that we will be working on with the Ministry. Of course in the field of your Ministry and our country we want to have two agreements to be signed, one on the development area and the other one is the humanitarian disaster area with being Turkish disaster management authority and NEMA of Nigeria and it will give the opportunity to especially in the areas of floods or natural disasters it will have the opportunity to work together and in the field of the development corporation we will have the kind of sustainable development projects that we can help Nigeria as well and then we can work not only in Abusia but all around the country with the local authorities as well for the development of the humanitarian issues in Nigeria.


So it's recording. Okay, thanks. Go for it. Have it here as long as I can make it big enough. Oops. Okay, you're ready. I'm pursuing to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 orders spending certain provisions that open meeting law. This meeting of the attack is being conducted via remote participation. All right, thank you. Great. Okay, so. So our first order of business tonight is intro and welcome to our new members. So I wanted to just do an introduction both for our guests tonight and then also for the new members, including Joe who is here. Tate was unable to attend and he actually just sent me an email that said due to the lack of heat in his apartment in Amherst, which is a situation that recently happened. He expects to have to move to Northampton. So he may not be able to serve anymore. And he was planning to stay in Amherst, but without any heat, he is not going to be. So, but I will, I'm gonna follow up with the town manager's office and see what we can do about that. But Joe, since you're new, would you prefer that we all introduce ourselves? We can all introduce ourselves first and then you can go. Last, how's that work for you? Whatever's convenient for you all. Okay. Hello, everybody. Nice to meet you. Because it says your mic is off, but it's just weird. That's weird. Also, I happen to be in the Caribbean with my family. So. Oh, wow. Well, thank you. Thank you for calling in. Connections. Okay. So I guess I'll start. So my name is Tracy and I'm the chair of the committee. And in my day job, I work at the UMass Transportation Center. We support MassDOT's research program. So, okay. Can we just go around? I'll introduce myself next since I'm already unmuted. I'm Kim Tremblay. I'm a professor of, I teach genetics at UMass. And I've been on the tack for a while. I'm a avid runner and cyclist and know the streets pretty well. And I've been on the tack for a number of years. Christine. Hi. Nice to meet you, John. Welcome. I'm Christine and I recently joined and I have a particular interest of, you know, making sure that the sidewalks and that kids can easily bike and walk to and from the schools in the system. And I personally am an avid walker. I walk, my average right now is about six miles a day since the beginning of the pandemic. So I like it and I live close to downtown so I can keep walking as much as possible. I want to introduce yourself too. Sorry, Trace, is that to me? Yeah, sure. Oh, sorry. I was delayed. Hi, I'm Stefan Chich. I started here with the committee as a member in February, early February of last year. In terms of, I don't, I started late so sorry I missed the question, but the question was... It was just a quick intro, yeah. Oh, okay, yeah, yeah. My background, yeah, my background is I actually worked for the Mass Transit Services here and operated for the PBTA. And I also worked for the MBTA out in the Eastern Mass. And I just finished two days ago, unfortunately, a role with the state senator, Eric Lesser, who was a big component of East West Rail. So he is out of office as of two days ago, sadly. So yeah, so hopefully that initiative will be continued on this year. We have some public meetings set up, so that's exciting. So that is a little bit of a background about me. Thank you. And I also went to UMass twice, so that's also great for other UMass folks here. Okay, so, and Chris and Guilford. I don't know, Joe, have you met Chris and Guilford? Chris. I'm Chris, I'm planning director. Hi, I'm Chris Brestrup, planning director, and I attend these meetings. Guilford is really the staff liaison, but I'm sort of like a secondary staff person. And we appreciate it when you can, which we know planning's very busy. I'm Guilford Moreing on the Pillar Works director. Okay, great. And then, so Joe. Nice to meet everybody. Fairly new to Amherst. We love the town. I just had a newborn, Lucia Monaco. So we've, we've plans to really settle down. We've been highly involved in New York city government prior to this city council, Lincoln wrestler, mostly with issues with the community and stakeholders. So I'm really glad to be here and to participate with you all and to be joining at my first meeting. So really nice to meet you all. Thanks for the introductions. Awesome. Thank you. Okay. So I'll let our guests speak. They can introduce themselves and take it away. Oh, and I'm sorry, Andy, I left you off. Yeah. Sorry about that. That's okay. I'm not a member of the committee. I'm Andy Steinberg. I'm a member of the council, counselor at large and a member of the town services outreach committee. And in that role, I was designated by the council to be a liaison to the attack. And I attend as many meetings as I can and I appreciate all that you are doing, you as a committee are doing for the town. Thank you. Thank you, Andy. So I also want to note that we have five attendees in the room. I don't know. I mean, typically in our attack meetings, we let people in so that they can fully participate and see us fully and see each other as well. Do people feel comfortable doing that? And that way too, they can more fully participate. I know that one reason that the PDPC is here and MassDOT's here is to get feedback on the long range plans. So if everybody's okay with that, I say we do that. And also there are a number of representatives of the attendees who are here from the disability access advisory committee. I'd reach up to the chair to just mention that MassDOT and PDPC would be here today and then to invite them to come. So I'm okay with it. Okay. Everybody, all right. Thank you. I'll load them. Thank you, Guilford. So remove, remove. Oh, I'm promoting, sorry. Don't remove them.  Come on. You're still making bad Zoom jokes, Guilford. I'm shocked after years of using Zoom now. Oh, it's great. Try to get your last free can, I guess. There's two more. All right, one more. Carl's to be there, they're all in. Yeah, he's a student. So, okay. Great. All right, welcome, everybody. And then I know that I had put the public comment period after the presentation and the discussion today with the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and MassDOT but I'd also just in case anybody was here and they just wanted to make any brief comments. I mean, I'm assuming most people are here for the presentations and that discussion but would people be okay? We just offered just the opportunity because I know that this outreach segment is expected to take a good hour or something. So if somebody just had something really quick they wanted to share with us, I'd be okay with that. If any of you do, do you want to just go ahead and raise your hand? Yeah, Meg, you can go ahead. But you can't hear you. Thank you. I'm Meg Gage. I live on Montague Road in North Amherst and I am here to reiterate something I sent in the email I wrote to the TAC yesterday to ask if we've submitted for excellent proposals for resident capital projects. They're all quite modest and they're all related to transportation and we've been encouraged to get your advice about them sooner rather than later. And we would love to be on your agenda on your next meeting on the 19th. They have to do with, I mean, am I feeling about transportation and I'm so admiring of the bicycle pedestrian network plan from 2019 and also the best practices report that y'all did two or three years ago. We feel that the proposals are all aligned with that. We're not going to fix all of our transportation issues with any one thing. It's going to be this and that and this and that with sidewalks and bike paths and other safety mechanisms. So we have four modest proposals to that end and we'd love to share those with you at your next meeting as in your role as advisory. Great. Thank you. Thank you for the A in tech. Okay, thank you for that. Any other comments? Just Tracy, I have another hard stop at 6.30 in case there's any need to go on stuff maybe. Yeah, I don't need the minutes. Maybe we can just put all the minutes in the next meeting. That would be fine with me. I appreciate Amber getting them all to us. Okay. So I think, I mean, Andy, you don't have any other meetings like after this one right away. You don't have TSO tonight, right? I can't hear you, you're muted. Correct, I do not. Okay. So I think at the end of the meeting we could just the question that Meg is asking just about because you're on JCPC, right? About like the role of tech of any in terms of reviewing citizen requests and providing input or anything would be helpful if you have any thoughts on that. I do want it to get ahead to the presentations and the discussion, the main discussion. Thank you. Okay, so I'm sorry about the delay but Miranda and Kerry, go ahead, take it away. Hi, my name is Jerry Ruroma, transportation planner with the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and I'm gonna let Miranda from MassDOT introduce the whole concept of why we asked to be part of your agenda tonight. So go ahead, Miranda. Hi, my name is Miranda. I work for MassDOT in the Office of Transportation Planning in downtown Boston. I'm actually stepping in for a co-worker, Chris Clem who's a regional planning coordinator and works with Erol's region in his day to day. He's just out on vacation. So I actually manage some of our federal programs and one of which is the long range transportation plan which is done periodically, federally mandated and the plan that we're putting together right now called Beyond Mobility 2050. So this document that is being put together through engagements like this and other outreach throughout the year is being put together as a sort of strategic plan guiding transportation decision makers in how investments should be made between now and 2050 throughout our transportation system so whether that's transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, you name it. This sort of plan will be the guideline over the next 27 years about where investments should be made and why. And so through focus groups and outreach like this we're putting together vision and value statements that will help guide the planning process. And we're also looking to hear from people about what barriers exist to you using transportation options that are available to you or not available to you, what else you need and want from your transportation system whether that's improved connectivity, reliability, safety, so sort of putting that into like barriers and needs. And with all the feedback that we're getting in public input, we're updating our own data and assumptions and things that we've put into the plan and making sure that what we've understood aligns with what we're hearing from the public and establishing shared priorities. We do have some priority areas sort of set as a way sort of influence or guide our plan which is safety, connectivity and access, the travel experience, reliability, car free travel, resiliency, technology and electrification. So that was a lot. And of course I can always repeat those and drop those in the chat again. And that said a lot of our conversation today the goal is really just to, we have some questions that we can use to like prompt a discussion but also feel free if there's something I haven't mentioned that you wanna make sure it gets attention and prioritize, please like, the sky's the limit. I think we'd rather have more comments and more feedback from the public just so we can get two decision makers and now a new administration and say like this is what we're hearing from the people who live, work and move around the Commonwealth. So, and this is how we need to support them. Sorry, that was a long intro, but yeah, I don't know if we're gonna share slides, Gary or I don't know if you want to share a bit on how this- Yeah, so we have a presentation that we'll be using to guide this. And as a companion to the state transportation plan beyond mobility, the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission has, again, as a federal requirement the requirement to update our regional transportation plan. So we're actually in the process of updating our transportation plan. And I really feel that most of the comments that would be given as part of a state transportation plan would apply to a regional transportation plan as well. So we saw value in partnering with Mass DOT, they saw value in partnering with the regions they're doing this all across the state. And we're trying to get that feedback as content for our long range plan updates. So I did have a question as far as there's a companion online survey that goes along with this. Is there a way I can share the link? I think when we're in this meeting format, I don't think you can. I don't know, Guilford, can you? I don't think these meetings are set up to have any chat. They're like set up in a format by the town, but Gary, if you wanna email it to me, then I can make sure that everybody who's in attendance today receives it. I did email it to you earlier today. Oh, okay. So you should have it, Tracy. Okay, great, that's perfect. Sorry, I'll share my screen now. I had a one-hour appointment that took way longer because everything was behind, but thank you. And also I do also remember that beyond mobility that there were two rounds of surveys, Miranda, and when I went looking for that second survey, I wasn't able to find it. Is that still active or is that now being tabulated? It might be being sort of analyzed now, but I think it might have been taken down. So a good chance we either do, we're definitely doing another public meeting, probably in the summer, fall, once we put together everything. And I know that we're also, we may consider doing another survey as well once we put out some preliminary things. Okay, great, thank you. So, Miranda, a lot of the first slides are just kind of giving the overview of beyond mobility. And I'll stop on the, we also have this information that we can share with you, Tracy, the entire presentation that has all these links as well. So- Yeah, I sent out to the committee members, I sent out a link to the beyond mobility site, but I didn't send out this presentation specifically, but yes, you did provide it to me, thanks. Right, so that's all we're seeing on this slide. And then you have the follow-up information for MassDOT on this slide as well. And this is just summarizing what Miranda already explained of what the purpose of these long range plans are, their vision for the future of transportation and our guidebook as we develop projects and planning projects. And so not only construction projects, but studies that might be undertaken at the regional or state level in terms of transportation are all parts of how the transportation plan guides us into the future. So again, this is the part of the public participation process. These plans are developed over several months. It's not the only opportunity for public engagement. We will continue to take engagement throughout the development of both documents. And it's important that as you think of things that you contact us and get us your thoughts and your feedback. And what we're doing with the feedback, so again, something Miranda already summarized, but it's shaping the vision statements, the problem statements and the goals of these documents. And then we're making sure that we're sharing it with the decision makers in the, not only at the state level, but at the regional level. And so this next part is intended to be more discussion and answer. It is based on the assumption that you've taken this survey or you're taking it along with it, but I think we'll just keep this informal and we're looking for your thoughts. And there's about nine questions, maybe 10, but really any transportation related items are what we're interested in hearing about. This is the link to the survey. So again, if you want to try to follow along, I add it's up to you, but I'm feeling like it'd just be better when you think Miranda, just be better to try to go without it. Yeah, I mean, like I, our staff doesn't directly have access. This is our consultants link. And I think some of the questions might be helpful, but if you all feel like you'd rather give more anecdotal data and examples, we can definitely just use the questions as a jumping off point. Great. So the first general question is, what's the most important features to improve on our roadways and why? And Gary, if you go to the next slide, it should show the options. Oh yeah, that's, thank you. So these are the options that are in the survey and it's a select all that apply type of option for the survey, but there is another category that's not showing up as well. So if something's not shown, that'd be important to share with us as well. So I think I did pull up the consultants version and the only category that's not showing is other. So on this one. Thank you. So we're okay with that I think. If anybody has any thoughts, any of the committee members or other attendees have any thoughts on any of these? So. Well, I guess, you know, particularly with the new law, I think that just went into place right with the cyclists and pedestrians and other people using the roads having a four foot wide birth from cars and whatever. I think it's really important that a lot of roadways, as you know, around New England are just very narrow. And a lot of us, especially out here in Western Mass live out on these narrow roads and it makes it very difficult to cycle places or for those of us who are a little less adventurous than I am. And so I feel like that's really needed, you know, to increase the infrastructure for walking and cycling. Particularly out here, where we have narrow roads. And there's a hand up from the audience, Jessica. Julie, I think you have to unmute yourself. Thanks. I would like to endorse the idea of safety for vulnerable travelers. But I would like also for us not to think about widening roads, because widening roads invites cars to go faster. So if we could not widen roads and keep traffic speeds down and build pedestrian and bicycle safe accessory units onto the roads, I think that would be a very wonderful thing. Thank you. That's a good point.  I just wanted to put in that I really appreciate you guys saying that we need to make more accommodation space for these types of transportation things. But one of the things we keep running up repetitively, especially because we're a rural area, is we run into conservation restrictions, which don't allow you to put sidewalks on conservation land. We run up against APR properties, which don't allow you to put sidewalks on APR land without some type of compensation, which actually for our small layouts really hampers what we can do out here in the western part of the state. So there's many directives that MassDOT has handed down saying you'll have sidewalks on both sides, you'll have complete streets. But if you don't have the layout and you can't even buy the layout because it's in conservation or as in APR land, it really restricts you. So there needs to be some type of discussion among the state stakeholders about how to accommodate people's need for walking or cycling off the roadways, but then have it so that you can use some of this other land we have because otherwise you just can't, you can't widen some of these roads. Do you even put sidewalks or bike paths on the sides of the roads because of these restrictions? And Gelford, is it as simple as, you know, allowing alteration of some of the example properties that you said when you can demonstrate it's not going to be an impact and it's gonna be for, say, public safety benefits? Yes, it is. I mean, we have one project we did in Amherst, which was Pine Street, and we added a sidewalk to the side of Pine Street, but half the sidewalk is actually an APR land. And the APR people are like, well, it's a small taking, it's okay, you can put it over there. But then when the conservation people, we talk to them, they're a little less willing to go on conservation land. So sometimes it is just the matter of being allowed to go on the land with the sidewalk or the multi-use path. Thank you. And at least since big all speak after, but also Eve Vogel did come in as an attendee, Guilford, if you could also elevate her to be the panelists.  Her name is Elise. None, no. Is there anybody else? Maybe, oh yeah, Elise, sorry, sorry, yes. Elise? Am I allowed to ask a question since I'm not on the committee? Yeah, I mean, this is a public outreach section of the meeting, definitely. Hi, thank you for inviting me in. There is something I've thought about a lot and has been an issue, a huge safety issue. And that is bus stops and sidewalks, bus stops in particular not being shoveled is a huge safety issue. And I would like to see something happen about that. I've seen people, I've nearly fallen and I've seen people, even with my crappy vision, I'm legally blind, but I've seen people nearly fall. And those of us, many of us are seniors and disabled people who use public transportation. And so that's, I'm just putting in my two cents. Thank you for listening. So essentially you're saying upkeep of our spaces or road spaces, particularly, I mean, that's an issue for cycling, for anyone who is not a driver. The snow shoveling especially, I mean, there are so many times there's a snow storm and the bus stops get ignored. They're just neglected. So that I think that's really important actually, we see that a lot in town as well. And I mean, it just goes to the greater use of, so it's not just providing the facilities, it's keeping them, maintaining them and putting in money for those kinds of things. Otherwise, they just simply don't get used. Yeah, somebody's gonna get hurt. Yeah, but that, I think that's really important. Thank you. Thank you. If there are no other, Tracey, did you have a question? Yeah, I did. I had a comment and a question too. Please, would you just put your hand down? Thank you. So one of the things is that, well, on terms of the sidewalk clearing issue, is so one thing that I see as a challenge that we've seen locally, including in Hadley, which is outside of our jurisdiction, but something I think about a lot anyway, is that, I mean, the state, VOT has policies that are great for encouraging complete streets when there's big road redesign, such as a long route nine, but then there can sometimes be issues, particularly in smaller communities that don't have a lot of DPW staffing and so on, in terms of making sure that if you are gonna build facilities, pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes and so on, that they are maintained, like they are cleared in the winter, because I believe this is now like the fifth winter since that one segment of sidewalk along route nine from the Amherst Hadley line on University Drive to the Hampshire Mall was built, which is a fabulous facility, but in the winter, there's really nobody taking ownership or responsibility for keeping that clear. And I'm concerned about that both with that segment, but also the new segment, which is the new MassDOT project that's going from South Maple Street, like to the center of Hadley, just in terms of a bigger issue is, I think it's great to have the commitment to expand the facilities in that way, but just to make sure that they are maintained and accessible throughout the year. And I mean, I do understand that MassDOT now has some grant programs to help fund snow plowing equipment for sidewalks and stuff, which is a start, but it seems like a longer potential issue. And just on the question about the new legislative act that passed with in terms of keeping the distance for bikes and pedestrians along roadways. I mean, one thing that some people have been reaching out to me and asking about is just whether that means if you have to have the four foot clearance, whether that might lead there to be fewer of those facilities just if on narrow roadways if the argument's gonna be like there's not sufficient room, which I hope that's not the case, but I think it would be worth exploring like what the ramifications of that are. So, I mean, it is an act to promote safety and so I think that's really important. And as somebody who walks and bikes along roadways, I mean, there are times right when you can be completely squeezed by the cars trying to pass you in the lane instead of like moving over. So I appreciate all the safety aspects of that, but in just in terms of, so maybe that's something that could be explored both in the regional plan as well as the state plan. Yeah, I think it would be great to have some better education on that new law. I know there's been a lot of media on it, but I share some of your questions, Tracy. And I think it's just something that if we're gonna see the maximum benefit of that law, people need to understand it. Yeah. I guess I also just wanted to say that it seems really important that another, and I guess since this is just an open comment, I feel important to say that we should have more EV charging stations around if it seems like that's the way everything is going. And in the absence of having charging stations, you're not gonna encourage more people to have electric vehicles in the absence of charging stations. So that seems super important as well. Great. Let's move on to the next question. And that's more in lines of the features of our transit network. So it's one of the most important features to improve on our transit network. This includes rail, subway buses and shuttle services. Some of the options are more frequent bus service, more frequent subway service. We don't have that or commute a rail at the moment. More passenger rail options, community shuttle services that would get people to and from and around major activity centers, encouragement of carpooling and ride sharing, improve paratransit service and of course, another category. Are there any comments from anybody? No, has a comment. Hi, yeah. So for this option, I think one item to highlight would be grocery deserts that are found in areas such as Springfield and Chicopea. I think that should be definitely a priority since in the plan, it's a priority to reach out to communities that have not really received that sort of response to their feedback. One interesting area that I hadn't thought of before that's on this list are shuttle services. I don't know if they're cost prohibitive, but if you really use data to line that up with the economic benefit of doing so, that might be something to think about, especially in highly concentrated areas such as Springfield or Chicopea. Thank you. Eve? Eve, sorry. It's having a hard time figuring out where my unmute button was. Found it. Just based on when I was involved in the attack a few years ago when we did the comprehensive service analysis, I just thought I'd mentioned a few things that I remember coming up. And things that I've seen. So one thing is in places like Amherst and some other places, we have a lot of bus stops that are on major roads with no landing.  You can't use them if you're disabled. You can't, you know, there's a lot of... So anyway, that's just one thing that just in a lot of areas just limits who can use and benefit from buses. Another thing you probably know is that much of the PBTA runs on college schedules. And so one of the big challenges for us is always what happens in January. I personally used to bike or bus my child to daycare. And, you know, we could bike in the summer and bike in the spring, but not in January. So there was a real gap in January that was problematic. And then there's always talk about how the heck do we get people to HCC and GCC. And from places like Amherst, there's a really bad transit. It's like a two hour ride at least with a transfer along the way to get from Amherst to one of the community colleges.  Thank you. Christine. I don't need to repeat what Eve just said, but thank you. The idea that my daughter would have to get off, you know, on a major road, she's just now starting to take the PBTA. You know, that becomes a consideration and whether or not I'll let her do that unless there's a dedicated landing and a sidewalk from there. So I'll just bump what Eve said. And also along the college schedule, sometimes it's just hard for her to get from point A to B. Last, I'll state the obvious, which is the rail east to west, west to east. You know, there are lots of people who live in Amherst who work in Boston, who are contributing to greenhouse gas pollution and otherwise having to be another car on the road, at least for some of that commute back and forth because of the lack of a kind of straight shot to get there. So I just felt like, again, the obvious needed to be stated. Great. Anybody else? I mean, I can weigh in with a few thoughts. I wasn't gonna talk about the infrastructure itself and not the service, but I mean, Eve, I mean, that raised some interesting points. I said, Christine, about just the landing area, but then also one thing I've noticed recently is that a lot of the bus stops in our area that do have shelters that there's not always lighting near them, either street lighting or lighting within the bus shelter itself. And it seems like, you know, especially with newer technology or something at least, like people could not be sitting in the dark. And also if you are using those bus shelters that are completely dark, like I was on East Pleasant Street last night, the district four counselors had arranged like a walking tour along East Pleasant Street from Kendrick Park up to Strong Street. And we noticed that the bus shelter that's across the street, which is just a place that you can't see that bus shelter at all if you're on the other side of the street. So like, if it was a new thing, if you know if you were taking it for the first time, you wouldn't even necessarily know it was there. And then also to make sure that the bus drivers are gonna stop for you. Because I know like I've had, my teenagers have sometimes been supposed to take the bus from routes that don't run very often. And if the bus driver doesn't see them, then they need to wait, you know, they either need to like shout down the bus or they need to like wait a whole other hour for the next time. And one thing I think about too in terms of the services is just, and this is something I've thought about ever since I moved to Amherst 20 years ago, but just some of the connectivity, you know, with other towns, particularly with Amherst, like the disconnect with Hadley sometimes is like we have a low income area off East Hadley Road. And the apartments go up close to the Amherst Hadley line, but then there's no direct service that goes from those apartment complexes to for example, the Hampshire Mall. And a lot of people will like walk through the fields or walk on the roads without any sidewalks and things like that. But in order for them to take the bus or as they need to go back into the center of Amherst, like it's a very long route when it's actually just a few miles. And I mean, that could be because of the relationship with Hadley or something, but maybe in some cases when those kind of, those connections are so important if there's like regional funding to help support those beyond municipal funding and like that seems important. I mean, just, and two as Eve was talking about just the community colleges, I used to work in Greenfield in downtown Greenfield. And I know that I could bike faster to Greenfield. I'm not even a fast bicyclist and I could get there on the bus. So like the bus ride was well over an hour, you know, or an hour and a half or something. And so if we want to encourage, you know, both for jobs and training and education and so on, but also just to improve those connections. So thanks. And I think Eve put her hand back up or not. I did one, I just wanted to say in terms of getting data and ideas about routes needed routes and needed hours. One of the things that happened in the comprehensive service analysis was that the surveys went out to existing bus riders and to known community groups. And the problem with that was that in some cases there were apartment complexes or communities or kinds of needs that were not being served and people weren't riding the bus because it didn't exist. And there was no way for those needs to sort of, you know, kind of literally get on the map. So just as you think about setting up some kind of template for figuring out where new routes and new schedules are needed, keep in mind that you might need to survey people who are not currently being served. That's a good point. It's something that I know that PVTA has talked about but I honestly don't know if they have plans for doing that in the near future. So we'll certainly make sure they hear that comment. Well, I just mentioned to Eve, I don't know if you were at the meeting but we did have the UMass graduate students who are like working on the PVTA, like updated service plan, strategic plan come to one of our attack meetings a few months ago and that topic came up about the needs to also reach out to the other communities as well. So, okay. Should we move on? Yes. Okay. So the next is what types of transportation improvement should be funded? So we're talking about pedestrian bike connections to transit stations, bike sharing stations, bus only lanes connecting to transit stations and major activity centers, bicycle or driver parking at stations. Miranda, I assume that means commuter rail stations and then wayfinding at transit stations and the other. We say yes to all of those. All of the above, yeah, that's a good point. I mean, if anybody has like specific priorities but they all seem important. Okay, I guess there's no comments we can move on. Thank you. So what types of improvements are most important for the state to spend funding on? Just more of you rather see more non-motorized projects or would you rather see more roadway projects? I think a lot of the purview of the committee is really towards the non-roadway projects more transit and bike pad. But wait, this is a lot. Christine, is your hand raised? No. Yeah, but I think Guilford and Jessica were before me. Okay, Guilford. I would say other. We just need to maintain what we have because we build stuff and we don't maintain it. I mean, buses will last longer if the roads are resurfaced. So, and you can ride in the road easier if it's resurfaced.  There's no reason to spend two thirds of a project cost competing to win money from Mass DOT. Just divide the money up evenly. We've always said chapter 94 was a great way to divide the money up. Give it to us with no strings attached except where you have to spend it on maintenance and let us do the job that way. Jessica. Hi. I would prefer that money go to non-roadway projects. I think that we really in Massachusetts as elsewhere need to encourage people to walk, to bike, to take the bus, to do all of the things that the committee's been talking about and this presentation is about. And the only way to do that is to make it convenient, safe and affordable for people to do that and less affordable for them to drive their cars. So not maintaining the roadways. I know that this won't be popular but you don't need speed bumps if you've got potholes in your roads. So there's a savings right there. Thank you. And I think the next is Tracy and then Joe. Well, I'll go ahead and speak last since I've talked before. Okay, Joe, please. So for my bid would be for, since this is a long-term plan, would be to high-speed rail and just to looking towards the North Atlantic rail initiatives that some of the governments are working towards if this is interstate. So I was curious where MassDOT is on that currently. I'm sorry, I'm not the one for that question. I started like four months ago. You know, it sounds great, but unfortunately I don't, I'm not in charge. Otherwise, we'd be having a very different conversation right now. I'm not even the real person at Pioneer Valley but I think if there were a real interest by your committee, I know I could get somebody from our agency to come to a future meeting and give you an update on where things stand at least how we're seeing it from our planning staff. Yeah, that would be great at some point. We did have somebody come from the East West rail initiative from like I'm trained in the Valley came and spoke to us. So that was helpful, but it would be great to get an update at some point. And... Great. Saren, I'm a member of Disability Access Advisor Committee and one thing that was that we realized was some of the leisure activities the town was providing needed some bus services. So they were doing trips to areas. However, those of us with mobility impairments were not able to use those systems. So my wish would be like all buses running in Massachusetts, whether they are for public transportation or for leased vehicles should be accessible for people with disabilities. If we're looking into long range wish list. Cool. Thank you. Great. Great. And Sarah, Tracy? Yeah, so I mean, my comment in terms of roadways and part of it was to respond to Jessica. I guess I don't see her anymore. Maybe she's still here. But one of the things is that not just to think about like expanded roadways, but I see funding for roadways. It's also being ways to make intersections safer to make the existing streets safer. And as Guilford talked about to also maintain what we have, you know, the pots and money for building new infrastructure and for maintaining existing infrastructure often different, but the maintenance is such a huge thing. Like even in Amherst where we have been building new sidewalks and things, if we don't maintain them, you know, they're not going to be that accessible. So, I mean, I think they're all important, but I don't see the roadways as only just being about moving vehicles faster. Like I also see them as important infrastructure for all the other modes as well. Yeah, these categories are a bit broad, which if you're not familiar with like what we classify roadways under like to your point, Tracey, intersections and other safeties considered in that. Yeah, so if we want to go on, I guess. Okay, so what are the types, any types of destinations that need better transportation connections and which are most in need? So, access to jobs, food, healthcare, parks and open space, education, public housing or other? Shopping, food, yeah. And I like the idea too of shuttles, you know, for some of these, like as Eve was asking about like GCC and HCC or, you know, for example, healthcare and things like that. So instead of just being part of like the regular bus system or the van service system, which can end up taking hours, you know, to go from Amherst to Bay State, for example, like if there could be, you know, funding for different shuttles. I mean, there are some to a certain extent, like through the paratransit system, but maybe to increase some of the efficiencies with that and also for other people who don't qualify for the paratransit, but who are still transit dependent to like be able to better access some of those. So, Christine. Yeah, I mean, here in Amherst, some, even some local town services, I'm just thinking specifically the library in South Amherst, you know, you can't get there from here. So, you know, those, we would just be thoughtful about current existing services and how people can walk or bike or roll to them. And then, similarly, Lee, you know, the notch Holyoke Range State Park, I mean, it's always been strange to me that you can't really walk or bike there. You know, you can hike there, but, you know, in terms of just encouraging folks to use the facility. So I know that's under parks and open space, but I think Holyoke Range is maybe the top most visited state park in the whole statewide system. I'm not positive about that, but I think spending time to make those particularly popular places more accessible would be good bang for the buck. So for Miranda's benefit, since I know she's not from this area, that location is on Route 116, and it's basically at the top of the hill is your parking and access area to a lot of the trails, very popular hiking area, and you really can't bike that hill unless you're a quite advanced rider. Yeah, and there is a sidewalk, but it only goes halfway, halfway up. Christine, breast drop. Okay, so I just wanted to let you know that there is a plan to improve the trail that goes from Vista Terrace, which is a new subdivision near Atkins Farm. The town just acquired a plot of land there that I think is seven acres, and there's going to be a connection to the trolley line that goes up to the notch. So there will be a place to park off the Vista Terrace roadway and a way to get to this old trolley line, which is going to be improved eventually. I think it's walkable now. And then that goes up to the notch. So you don't absolutely have to go up 116 on your bicycle. You'll be able to park at Vista Terrace and walk. So that's a great news. Thank you, Christine, breast drop. Okay. Do you have a date when you think that might be started, Christine? Well, we just acquired the property from the developer to provide the parking and access. And we already have the trolley line as open space. So it's kind of an ongoing project. The access to it is now in place. Thank you. Should we move on? Yeah, I would just actually, I would just add in terms of connections about like the e-bike system and valley bikes, for example, is, I mean, it seems like a great resource. It can supplement what's happening with the transit system and for people who are dependent on transit or walking, biking, and it makes hilly rides more possible and things, but there are, it would be great to see the number of stations expanded, including in Hadley, just because there are a number of places where, if there were stations where you could park there, like that would be really helpful, like the, you know, Hadley, Hampshire Mall and Mountain Farms and other types of destinations, you know, to expand the types of trips that people could make. So. So there is a expansion project on the tip. I'm going from memory, maybe another 10 stations. Hadley has been discussed, but I don't believe it's part of the proposed expansion at this time. I mean, it seems like the Hadley Select Board is not that supportive, you know, in terms of like the local share. But I guess in some cases, just like with the bus system, if there, you know, are regional benefits for the regional transportation, then, you know, maybe there's ways to finesse that or something, I don't know. But I mean, I would think other smaller towns might feel the same, but they are just such important connection places. Right now, the plan for Hadley would be a public-private partnership where they would have a station probably behind the Walmart and, you know, some type of agreement where they allow that. But it has not been finalized and I don't know that it's part of this project moving forward. But I know that LL Bean, so we had somebody from Valley Bike come and speak to the TAC in the fall and they were talking about LL Bean being willing to subsidize it. But, cool. Great. Okay, move on. So when funding transportation, how important is it to consider equity and fairness? So, scale a one to five with five being the best. Christine, breast-trip. I would say it's extremely important because people who are low income have less opportunity to own cars and therefore need to rely on transportation, public transportation to get where they're going. So it's obviously very important for them to have better transportation. I was also going to say five. Not only do they have less access to transportation, but they have less access to meetings like this. So they need to be considered more on the ground. Just from, or I just wanted to add that, like from hearing everyone's comments, I would deduce everyone would say five. So if you wanted to add any context of not just thinking about equity in terms of income, but geographically, this is a statewide plan, like what are things that you all feel like in your location might not get as much airtime or investment and just equity in a broad sense of the term and in different dimensions. So just wanted to add that to help prompt any thoughts. Yeah, and I think to your point, it's very clear that we need an East-West rail connection that needs to extend out here. So I think we all are in agreement with that too. I mean, we're just lacking out here. We don't get the end, we're the end of the trail. We need it out here. Well, and I mean, and beyond us, right? There's more Western math, like you look at Berkshire County and so on. So I do think that geographic equity is important in terms of just the reach and the resources and support for things in Western math, so. So that kind of plays into the next question, which is how important is considered connectivity and coverage to the places people need to go. And again, it's a one to five. I mean, the connectivity is so essential, right? Because otherwise the trips don't work, so. Yeah, and I think the reason I jumped to this is because it seems to fall right in line with commenting on the importance of rail access out in the Western part of the state. Are there other types of transportation improvements that you feel lack that connectivity? Yeah, I'm thinking of like, there's so many people that are just in slightly outlying areas of town or slightly outlying towns. Housing is just insanely expensive these days and that's just becoming more and more the reality. Most places you have to drive, but that has huge cost to it. So I see it as like it just makes, it makes, yeah, getting that geographic coverage and making it possible for people to take transit or bicycle safely with an e-bike, which makes an e-bike can make a five-mile trip doable instead of just a one-mile trip. So there are just like, there's all kinds of ways that because of housing unaffordability, people are more dispersed and that that becomes even more important. And I guess one thing with the e-bikes too is like the valley bike gets shut down for the whole winter. So I don't know. I mean, there are other e-bike systems including urban areas where they keep them going. So for people who are using that for primary transportation needs, like that's not gonna work out here for those months of the year. I also wanted to just add as a bicyclist, I've been a bicyclist who's taken my kid on a tag along in a lot of times and places and a lot of the bike facilities out in sort of rural roads are really only made for like really strong big adults who are highly visible. And so it's also kind of an equity issue in terms of just making facilities that feel safe for women that have enough light, that feel safe for parents to take their kids on a tag along, that feel safe for elderly people to be able to learn how to ride a e-trike. There's just like a lot of different alternatives that rely on intersections. Like those linkage points, right?   So those things are actually really important. Okay, thank you. Last, when funding transportation, how important is it to consider reliability and limiting unexpected delays? Again, you don't have to rank it one to five. I think just examples of the unreliability you might see in the existing transportation system, unexpected delays that you encounter as you're trying to do your normal commute or travel to and from, say, an appointment or shopping. I feel like our networks out here are pretty fairly reliable, except for the point that Eve made previously, which is we just, it plummets when students aren't here. We have a lack of service when there's not student, during the summer and during the now that extended when January term. What about options to get to, say, an airport from Amherst? Oh, yeah. We don't really have that. I've tried. Yeah, there are no. It's pretty complicated and expensive. But perhaps that's something we should rally for because we all feel like that it's so silly that we have to drive to these places. It seems ridiculous. And Jessica has a hand up. Please don't put an airport in Amherst. Please, please, please. We need to keep our open land open for agriculture because the climate refugees are coming. So please, no airports here. We're not proposing an airport. We're just proposing better connectivity to airports. Yes. I mean, when I've looked up on Google Maps, if I get, you know, when I've taken certain trips, if I was like flying into Bradley late at night and I was transit dependent, it would tell me to stay overnight in Springfield and like take the bus the next day, basically. So there's a lot of added costs. And I've gotten the same messages for financial login and things, you know, there's really limited connections, which some of that could be met with shuttle services or private market, a number of the private market options to provide shuttles to airports in the urban areas like Boston and New York disappeared over COVID. Some are coming back, but it would be nicer if there were more of them.  Me, Christine? Yes, sorry. So, well, we do have Valley Transporter and that has come back since COVID. So I'm very glad to report that. And that is a private organization that provides rides to airports. It's very expensive, but that is an option. So you don't have to drive, but there is no public transportation. Thank you. And that can be in some times, but it's, but yeah. Joe? Just briefly, I was shocked when I moved to the area, the lack of express peak hour rides to areas such as Hartford or, or yes, the airport or Boston.  Maybe that's, maybe I'm not aware, but we haven't been able to find any. I mean, traditionally there were more, there was daily service like on Peter Pan from Amherst to Boston and then it went away. And they do do direct routes, like only related mainly to like student travel. So like on Fridays and Sundays, but it's not a daily service. So. And Eve. So I was going to say, I discovered at some point along the way, I got on a Facebook group for UMass students wanting to do rideshares. And I discovered that that might be why we don't have good transportation linkages because these students were all offering each other rides for $20 to go to and from Boston. So I used to live in the Northwest and the state subsidized a pretty good train linkage from Seattle to Eugene. And I mean, does the state subsidize Peter Pan at all? Because it seems to me that that would actually be a really useful way to do it long before we have East West Rail to just subsidize a certain number of runs and to find a way to discourage students from bringing their cars to campus and have that be kind of a unified campaign. It would have to be coordinated with UMass, obviously. But I think that's sort of ultimately the way we want to be able to go. That's a cool idea, Eve. I have no idea on the subsidy for Peter Pan buses if that's ever happened. But I love the idea. Yeah. And Jessica, did you have another, your hand still up? No, sorry. Okay, great. Well, I mean, hasn't in the past sometimes with the express routes that will run like the 40 bus that runs between Amherst and Northampton like weren't some of the express runs like funded with CMAC funds? Sometimes I thought, I don't know. So maybe there's some options. All right, last question is, if you could design a transportation system to meet your needs, what would it include? Dream Bay. And this could be considered a catch-all as well. This, seeing as the last question, obviously any other comments of items you want us to be aware of? That's great. You did. No, I'm not. You're gonna go, Elise had her hand up first. Yeah, and I forgot to tell you that I'm part of the DEC committee. I would save more nighttime evening options so that people can go to concerts and movies and whatever. So that's my two cents. Great, thank you. And then Christine Breastrop. I would say more frequent bus service. I have a bus that goes right by my house, but I never ride it because it comes at a certain time in the morning and then it comes at noon and then it comes at night. But if I wanted to get home, in the middle of the afternoon, that wouldn't be an option. Or if I wanted to leave at different times at night. So I think more frequent, more flexible bus service would be really important. And I think most of Amherst is covered by bus service, but I bet a lot of people don't ride it because it's not that frequent. And Meg? I agree with Chris and I would add, replace many of the buses with vans so that the cost is cheaper. We live, one of the things, great things about where we live is right across the street is a bus stop for bus 33 that goes to stop and shop. It goes to big Y, it goes uptown. And often it goes by with two or three people on this huge bus and it's just hard. It comes often every 35 or 40 minutes and you can get off at the uptown and wait for it to come back and it's very, very convenient. But it's such a waste that it's these huge buses and there are very few people, but if they had vans instead of buses, it seems they could run more of them. I mean, literally it goes by every 35 or 40 minutes and sometimes there's nobody on it. It's the only bus that goes to the survival center, for example, it's a really important bus. Eve? So I think the overall vision is that anybody anywhere should be able to take non-car transportation to anywhere they wanna go. And they should be able to do it safely, affordably. And if not totally efficiently, then pleasantly. Like so that it's a ride that feels comfortable. You know what I mean? So to me, that's the vision. And we basically have that vision for cars that everybody should be able to drive anywhere they want to, right? So, and we used to, right? Back in the early 1900s, we had systems of transportation where people could use other forms of transportation to get anywhere they wanted to. I think we need to move back towards that and that just requires a rethinking of the lots. To me, that's the big vision. Incidentally, the only place I've ever seen that is Japan and it totally exists there. But maybe that, you know, if what we're talking about is that, you know, the limitation are our roads. I mean, maybe we convert roads to better walking, biking, into public transportation places and put the cars further out. And so we force people, you know, to do those kinds of other transportation. I mean, because I can't even bike from here. My home, which is right in the middle of town over to Hadley Way, which is safely. And I'm a super confident rider. And I really thought twice about doing that last night I did, but it really didn't feel that safe. And it's only a mile or two, for me, that's nothing. And Jessica, you have a comment. Yes, I would like to see trolleys everywhere, especially down the middle of busy streets and down the middle of all of the interstate highways. There should be trains. That there's, we privilege cars, we should stop doing it. And the roads are for the trucks and everybody should ride on a train. Thank you. You said dream big. One of the things I just want to add, when I say anyone, I really mean anyone. So like we need to think not just about adults, healthy adults, but about kids, about elderly people, about disabled people, you know, yeah, about people who are racially profiled that may not feel safe on certain kinds of transportation. Like everybody needs to be able to use these modes of transportation, feel safe. Well, there's our vision. Well, thank you all. Yeah, any other tech members of anything to say? Well, thank you. Thank you, Gary and Miranda for that. And so Gary, can you tell us, or Miranda or both of you, can you tell us a little bit more about the way the processes will work going forward in terms of developing these plans and further outreach and so on? Yeah, I can start with the regional plan. We work with the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the advisory, we have a transportation committee called the Joint Transportation Committee. They meet on the second Wednesday at 10 a.m. of every month. That's their advisory body. So they're the recommending body to our Metropolitan Planning Organization. We will have a draft plan that we will last the MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization to release in June of this year. And we will be asking that body to endorse the document in July. That's kind of the end date when everything has to be endorsed in order for it to be sent over to Federal Highway and Federal Transit for their approval. So over the next few months, we'll be developing many draft chapters and we'll be putting them out through a dedicated link on PVPC's website so that we can get feedback. So our intention is to keep the process moving and to start putting out some content but to start getting feedback on that content over the next few months so that you don't have to get this tone to look at in May or June when it actually gets released. Okay, thank you. So Miranda, not to put it on the spot about some of this, but. No worries. So for the statewide long range plan, I believe originally the goal was to have it done like the summer beginning of the fall but just given things take time and now we definitely have a new administration, new staff to just transition even though we're positive, a lot of the priorities and goals are the same. The sort of final product should be done by the end of the year. There will definitely be at least one other like large public meeting and probably some more surveys. If not, you go to the website for the plan. So it's mass.gov slash beyond dash mobility. There's an email there and you can always send an email to that. It's monitored by a person, I promise. And send comments that way. I know Tracy has my email. So I'm definitely, I don't pull a lot of strings at mass.gov but you have a question, you send it to me. I will do my best to get you to someone who can't answer your question or get you some help. Yeah, so as I said, I did share the beyond mobility link with the attack members earlier. I guess anyone people can sign up for email lists there and so on. And I'm assuming there'll be a big like publicity push if you do another survey and things like that. Because I did find the other two surveys like to be really helpful. So, okay, well, thank you both. Thank you so much. It was great discussion. Great. Tracy, I'll share the presentation with you again so you can distribute it. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thanks, everybody. I did want to remind our committee that we have nine minutes left before we are adjourning. So, I mean, Gary, I'm around to your freedom at least if you want to skip this part of the meeting, but thanks. So, if there's a priority point, that points that we want to get through, we should do that. I mean, I think, I mean, one main item would just be to just make sure that we're all set with our next meeting, the next tech meeting. And I did just have these few other items. I would also like some guidance, not to put any on the spot, but if there is any about the questions, in terms of the capital improvement requests for transportation projects that were, any that were made by the citizens or other projects, like if there is a role for TAC in reviewing those, or if there's any sort of guidance on that. Like I know that our, the tax charge is under revision, which is an ongoing process. There were some questions last year about, you know, whether TAC should have waited on projects or not. We didn't do that. I do think that providing such feedback does fit under some of our existing charge. It could be interpreted that way. So, Andy, if you have any thoughts on that. I am not currently a member of the JCCP. Oh, the JCCP, oh, okay. But I would encourage you to keep track of what the requests are, because especially after Meg Gage's comments earlier, to be aware of what the requests that have come in are and be able to offer feedback. The council, you know, the JCCP provides a recommendation to the town manager, and then the town manager uses it for the budget process, and it circles back to the council after the town manager proposes the budget, which is the 1st of May. So it's really a joint process that involves both the administrative end and the council end. But I would encourage you to at least contact the chair of, either through the finance director or the chair of the JCCP and be able to find out what has been requested. And to offer comments is committee if they would be appreciated. I mean, so Guilford, are you, I mean, I know it seemed the deadline for a citizen request was December 31st. You know, there was a Google form that was available until then. I mean, Guilford, do you have information on the citizen request or? No, I have no clue. Okay. I have no clue how they're doing it and yeah.  So I don't think so, but. JCPC hasn't really met yet because they usually, they meet frequently but it's usually February and March that are their heavy meeting schedule where they're meeting weekly. And so it is a good time to be thinking about this question so that as JCPC forms and gets active for the year that you request that they let you know what has been requested and allow and so that you can make your comments. And I will pass it along to, through people that I work with on the finance committee side. Okay, thank you. I mean, Guilford, do you see that that, could that be something on our future agendas? I mean, will that information come to the DPW about what the requests have been? Or how does that usually go? Usually the, we get for the citizen request we get asked questions like, is the number right? Do you think this is the right? What would you, what do you think? And that's about it. It's really, I guess it's really a question if you wanna ask Paul when you talk to Paul because he'll probably tell you a little more. Right. Yeah, I mean, I was told, I've received an email from Sean Magana that said that. So one of the things is the Google form that for the citizen request did have a section where the requesters could indicate if there had been any endorsement by any committees or anything. So I have heard from a few people just asking, we'll tack review, we'll tack endorse and so on because that was part of the form. And I did reach out to Sean Magano after I received some requests on that. And what I heard from him is that it would be up to the town manager and yourself to decide if any of them come back to tack. So if any of them are considered. So I guess it's still to be determined, but as an advisory committee, we could advise if asked to do so. So. Yeah, I mean, you can actually just take the whole, once it comes out as a list, you could take them all and look at them if you want to. There's nothing stopping you from doing that. Okay. Thanks. So to be continued, I guess, I don't know what the timeframe is for that, I guess we can check in with, maybe by our next meeting or something, right? Because the deadline had passed. I mean, Andy's right. There hasn't been a formal presentation. This is the projects that have been requested or so forth. Got it. Got it. Okay. So just before we are like only two minutes away from seven, I know we like to end punctually. So we typically are meeting on the first and the third, Thursdays, you know, at five 30, does that seem like that still works for all the members who are here today? Yeah. I mean, I know Marcus can usually attend. He just had a conflict with today. And I guess we'll have to figure out what's happening with T and so, and Chris Lindstrom was here, but she sometimes needs to leave by six 30. So, I mean, we can look, I mean, I think we'll keep it as is for now, but I know sometimes if we end up being on the same meeting days as the TSO meeting, right? Then Andy's not as available. And then we also need to like end our meetings quickly. So if, you know, if we want to explore having a different time, like going back to five 30 year, I mean, to back to five or some something. Well, let's talk about it next time. So our next meeting is. The 19th, 19th at five 30. OK. That work. Yeah, and I will say just this other items that I had on the agenda, you know, in terms of the GOL review of the snow and ice bylaw, they didn't get to it at their last meeting, which was yesterday. And there was and the second item was there was that evening walk with the district four counselors and the town manager was there. And there was a little bit of TV coverage and Jim Russell from the Republican was there. And it was in for a short, but it seemed pretty successful. Unfortunately, it wasn't down pouring and they were talking about doing it again in district four and maybe looking, you know, encouraging other counselors to do them in their districts as well. So to be continued. But if for people in other districts, you can always, you know, reach out to your counselors and see if there's interest in that. Because I find it really valuable to actually like walk. You know, some of these corridors in different conditions, you know, in the snow or in the ice or in the dark and see what is actually there on the ground. So which is things you might not notice if you just drive by them every day. And that's how it felt when we were doing it yesterday. Okay. All right. Well, yes, we're at seven and we don't have Bruce on our committee anymore. We didn't need to have a new person to adjourn the meetings. Does does do any of our committee members want to do that? I will. Okay. All right. Well, I will make a motion to adjourn the meeting. I second. All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thanks to our visitors. Okay. Thank you very much. Glad you could make it.