Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 09/16/2004MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. September 16, 2004 For Reference: Linda Stanley, Chair 493-7225 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison 226-4824 Lucinda Smith, Staff Liaison 224-6085 Board Members Present Jim Dennison, Ken Moore, Linda Stanley, Katie Walters, Nancy York Board Members Absent Everett Bacon, John Long, Cherie Trine Staff Present Natural Resources Department: Lucinda Smith, Liz Skelton Public Outreach: Melissa Moran Guests None The meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m. Minutes With the following changes, the minutes of the August 18, 2004 meeting were unanimously approved (York abstain, Dennison abstain): • Stanley: (Page 7, Bullet 5) Delete first sentence. • Stanley: (Page 6, Bullet 12, First Sentence): Change to: I'm thinking about this more NRAB than air quality, but I was talking before about how the advisory board... • Stanley: (Page 7, Bullet 3, Second Sentence) Change to: If we advise Planning and Zoning to deny a project because it won't improve air quality, that doesn't have to be followed? Air Quality Public Outreach Melissa Moran presented on the air public quality outreach, including an exhibit of the commercials and also the focus group results. Melissa distributed a summary handout. • Stanley (Re: People buying Energy Star products for money, not air quality benefits): That must cause you great angst? • York: Money wasn't the only reason though, right? • Moran: Well, it was the main reason. You have to consider when we did this. This was October of last year. Then, people were very focused with the monetary incentives. People did say that they are willing to do things to change air quality; they just want to know what those things are. When it comes to purchasing things, air quality isn't a factor until after they figure out the economics. Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 2 of 11 • Stanley (re: Methods of Advertisements) You're on cable TV? How did you decide what stations to target? • Moran: The first consideration was whether or not to go broadcast or to go cable. Broadcast was too expensive. I worked with the sales representative to target specific programs; which was more expensive. It's a matter of weighing the expense and what you get back. Their most popular program is Trading Spaces; both women and men watch that. So we did that on Friday and Saturday nights. The other places we did were Animal Planet, which families watch with children, we did some hard hitting ones like CNN Headline News, Larry King, and Monk. We tried to manage the budget to get specific programs but still get enough runs. We also did the Weather Channel; apparently that's popular at night. Let me explain how we ran them: we've set it up in two stages. The first one is a March -April timeframe, and we ran each of the spots (radio and TV) for ten day successions. We're starting stage two now in the fall. The purpose was to hit people hard, lay off, and then hit them again. This time, the Learning Channel, Weather Channel, and CNN are big on our list. For radio stations, we did the top ones. We didn't do KUNC because it is difficult to have them do "call to actions" because of their broadcasting rules. What I did put it on was TRI102, the BEAR, and K99 (for a male audience). I tried to adjust it to get both female and males, thinking that those most willing to make changes likely are females. • Stanley: I wanted to see them; I never got to. I think you are still hitting a lot of people. • Moran: It's all budget based too. We spent $4,500 just for the TV for a 30 day period. If you think about what SmartTrips is doing right now, with the School Pool program, they are spending about $10,000 so you are seeing them more often. It's a similar message though: "Drive Less". • Stanley: Did Comcast produce the commercials? • Moran: No, Cable 27 did. They are very good to work with. • Stanley: You did the same script for the radio? • Moran: Yes, it's almost identical. That was part of our technique: to get people to recognize the same folks, so people can associate it all with the same program. • Walters: You're in the SmartTrips one? • Moran: Yes, the School Pool. • Stanley: Have you gotten any feedback? • Moran: Not from the public. We've presented it to staff, and they are really positive about it. We did the Good Neighboring Fall Festival this past weekend, and we will be at the Sustainable Living Fair. We captured still shots, so hopefully people are still making that face recognition and association. We are going to try to measure ourselves on the campaign in mid -October when the air quality survey comes out. • Stanley: I'd like to see the same ad, but maybe more humorous. Cars could be stopped for a train and you see fake gunk coming out of their car or clouds coming out with a message. • Dennison: Or a smoking vehicle parked right next to someone else and they're coughing. • Smith: Would there be a call to action in that? • Stanley: I think "Not Idling". I'm thinking of specifically going after idling cars. • Dennison: And tune ups? That would be appropriate. • Smith: Maybe we could get both in. Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 3 of 11 • Stanley: Maybe you could break it down to two. Thirty seconds is so short. You could do one at the railroad tracks and then one for smoking cars. • Moran: Are you all familiar with our program happening at the railroad tracks? That was a direct result of what people said in the focus group. • Stanley: We've been saying that all along! I'd still like to see the billboards there. • Smith: It's over now, the billboards are gone. It started in January and ran 7 months. The little signs are still there at Horsetooth and McClelland. • Moore: I saw it. • Stanley: You were right to go away from the Coloradoan. It's expensive and the TV and radio is the way to go. If you continue with the campaign, if people keep seeing it, in the long-term it will make a big difference. Maybe give them little things to do: Tune up, walk, ride your bike, carpool. • York: Something that would be good as traffic gets more congested is to show the bicycles sailing past the cars through intersections. • Moran: With this one, we consulted our bike expert and she said "be sure to show the bikes in traffic", because, that's the reality of it. • Dennison: The first ad that said "brown cloud 1 out of 4 days", I don't know how many different ads you can run, but there are lots of different measures of air pollution. Some would hit me harder than the brown cloud. Like how many trips to the hospital are precipitated by bad air quality. • Walters: The number of asthmatics in the city would be good too. • Dennison: "Asthma rates doubling". Asthma rates have doubled over the last 20 years and air pollution is one of the reasons. I don't know which statistics to use. The brown cloud is a surrogate for air pollution; it's not a direct measure. • Walters: With the brown cloud, it didn't surprise me that people don't know. We are in it and can't see. Once you get out of the city, you can see it. • York: A good shot would be if you go to Horsetooth. • Dennison: And say "this is what you are breathing". • Stanley: People seeing the brown cloud works. • Moran: They consistently referenced the brown cloud. But I don't think they made the connection with that and what they are breathing. • Dennison: We need to get the point across that it is affecting them. The question is how is it affecting them? Are there premature deaths? I think there are. You did mention the increase in asthma attacks, in an anecdotal way, which may be the best approach. This may already happen, but do reporters of the Coloradoan consent to an interview with somebody from the department to bring out the latest figures on air quality? • Smith: Our department has found that the Coloradoan is not receptive to press releases. We have gotten some stories. We can try. We did approach the editorial board to see if John or Greg could have a regular column and they couldn't support that right now. • Stanley: They have the Neighborhood info column... • Smith: Right, and that's why. They said they would get too many requests. The neighborhood one is most relevant to citizens. • York: The Coloradoan is declining; it's getting worse in content. Especially when our two weeklies are both very engaging. The Bullhorn has radio talk show too. They would be receptive to doing programs on different subjects. The Weekly; I think they would too. One possibility would be to get CSU interested in a study comparing high Au Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 4 of 11 pollution days and the increase in hospitalization. That would be behavior change because people are actually doing research. • Dennison: Is there something unique in Fort Collins that would be the impetuous for study here. They study Denver as part of 6 City study. We've got an Epidemiology department here. If we could think of some angle for them to study in Fort Collins. Their problem is going to be funding. Especially if there was some interesting hypothesis to motivate them to apply for research funds. That could have an impact on people's perceptions. • Smith: That sort of relates to the increased efforts to establish relationships with health professionals. We had that meeting with the group of health professionals, and that idea came up. There is a new professor in Environmental Health, Jennifer Peal. Her background is Air Pollution and Epidemiology. Also there is Steve Reynolds. We are going to meet and talk with them soon. It sounds like Poudre Valley Hospital is starting a local group of regional partners to focus on asthma. Through those two avenues we may be able to form a partnership that could apply for a grant. • Dennison: There is another new fellow who does aerosol and works with Steve Reynolds; John Volkins. • Walters: Is he in the Environmental Health department? • Dennison: Yes. In the Environmental Health department there has always been a tie with industrial hygiene sampling design. They wanted an engineer person who understood particulate matter. I thought it was strange that CSU doesn't do more air pollution epidemiology than they do. • York: Another coincidence, because PVH is a big cardiac hospital. I put out a poster recently about calling for caring for a women's heart, and they are running ads in the paper about having four procedures done and checking out your veins. One of the statistics is it also causes increased heart attacks; heart failures. • Moore: But if you talk to the American Lung Association, they will tell you that increased carbon monoxide helps with the stint process. • Walters: It's all your point of view, I guess. • York: Another thought: if you take these commercials to CSU and have them critiqued by classes, that is another means of exposure. • Walters: That is an age group where a lot of changes will come from. I think college kids are in a mindset where they don't connect what they do with the rest of the world. • York: Even high school kids; they have television classes. • Moran: That is a really good thought. • Stanley: Anything else? • York: More, faster, better. One other aspect is being able to sustain life. We are at capacity with production of oil. OPEC can't increase production. • Stanley: Again, I want to say I'm glad you are going to TV and Radio. • Moran: Great. Newspaper is effective, when you put a large ad for a specific program, like the gas can exchange. Just for general awareness it's not so great. I forgot to mention, those bookmarks were distributed in all the Utility bills. • York: People don't look at the inserts. • Moran: People in the focus group said that they don't read the inserts, but then in our survey people said that is the number one place that they get information on the City. Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 5 of 11 Emissions Testing The board had a continuation of last month's discussion. Ken Moore excused himself due to conflict of interest. • Smith: My response to the question "Is the study valid"; I think it is acceptably valid. They did put a lot of work in to it. The Mobile 6 model inherently has some problems in it. Overall, it is reasonable. The study does miss some important aspects, such as it did not quantify the benefit of pre -maintenance that occurs from the presence of an emissions program. It also did not quantify the phenomenon that would occur if we did not have a program: failing cars in Denver will migrate up here, and failing cars here will not leave. What they did is good enough, but it is not the complete picture. • York: Your point about the pre -maintenance is a good one. I always tune-up my car and change the oil. Now without it, it is real fuzzy. I don't have the time to do it. • Dennison: Remember when John Schroeer used to say, "If you got rid of the I/M program, the first thing you would hear is the sound of people ripping out their catalytic converters". He was concerned there would be a decrement in existing technology. I don't know how you would quantify that. • Smith: That is a point that has been made several times. It will be hard to prove it to the Air Quality Control Commission. One step in that vein was taken when Jiffy Lube did a small in -shop survey for one month. It was about the presence of a "check engine" light on or not. It suggested that, as it is, some people drive with their check engine light on. • Dennison: I wonder if some State's who abandoned the program ever did an audit? That would be the statistic to use in the model. • Smith: There was a study done on tampering in 1992 and it did show some differences. • Dennison: Between areas that had a program and areas that didn't? • Smith: Yes, but in the model, they don't adjust the tampering factor when there is no program. I believe that they did not account for that. • Stanley (Re: partners in Front Range are not agreeing with getting rid of the I/M program): Who are the partners? • Smith: I'm thinking mainly of Larimer County, City of Greeley and representatives of the Emissions Testers. Subsequently, I've talked to the staff person for Weld County and he feels the same way. There was a fair amount of interest in asking the Commission to retain the program as a safety net. Even if we asked, it is not going to be successful. So, as a backup they were all interested in exploring some kind of high emitter program. That has been the main focus of efforts. We thought we could also ask the Commission to ask that the State partner with us on the development of a program. • York: (Re: privacy statute against providing information from vehicle registration): That doesn't even make sense. • Smith: I don't have the statute language that they are pointing to to say that it is not legal to provide this information. • Stanley: High emitter programs, are they always voluntary? Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 6 of 11 • Smith: No, well there aren't that many high emitter programs. There was one in Arizona in the early 1990's and it failed. Though, the technology is evolving. One of the ideas that is emerging is to use remote sensing and pair that with high emitter index, which is a statistical thing. There is a lot of data in Colorado from the past emissions program. You could develop some estimates as to what make, model and engine type vehicles are high emitters statistically. You combine that with the remote sensing, because the whole objective is to reduce the number of false failures. • Stanley: What is the regulation that they would be violating? • Smith: This would mean change in State statue and Regulation 11, which is the emissions regulation. We would have to go to legislature and the Commission. The current legislation and statute are so strict and prescriptive; all we could do within that is the basic existing or the enhanced program in Denver. That's a political issue. • York: What about smoking vehicles? Does it violate that? • Smith: Within City code there is a law preventing gasoline -smoking vehicles. We are not enforcing it. I haven't yet researched the relationship between smoking vehicles and VOC emissions. Mostly we'd be looking at particulate emissions, which is also a concern. That is the other angle: a high emitter program regionally, or the last available option is to ramp up our own local smoking vehicle program. I do think we could do that. Even that requires approval by Council if we made it mandatory. • York: I was thinking of the privacy thing and using... • Smith: We couldn't do a remote sensing program if the privacy thing went south. We rely on the license plate number. • York (Re: the emissions program survey): the program is inconvenient, but it is a good inconvenience. • Smith: And people may respond differently. • York: I go out and tune up my car. I drive it and make sure it is hot. • Stanley: Most people don't do that. I think most people keep it tuned up, but if you have a relatively new car they go get it tuned up and the oil changed. I just drive in and get the emissions done. • Walters: Yes, I was going to say, I just drive through as well. • Smith: We are going to add questions too, like "should the program be continued even if it is not federally required, as long as it continues to provide an air quality benefit". The other is "would you be willing to continue to pay 52.20 at registration to cover the administration costs for an emissions program, even if it is no longer federally required". If we had citizen support, that registration fee might provide enough revenue to run the high emitter program. We would still have all the political hoops to jump through. • Stanley: What about these other ways to reduce ozone? Last time we brought up that there were other ways where you would get more "bang for your buck". • Dennison: For non -mobile sources? • Stanley: Other things: non -mobile, equipment, off -road. You said something like landscaping companies are responsible for 8% of ozone emissions. That's significant. • Dennison: Considering how few pieces that is coming from. • Stanley: Maybe it is worth it for the City to set standards or give rebates, so they will buy better equipment when they upgrade. Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 7 of 11 • Walters: The City should form a partnership with landscaping companies and have an informative session. Many of those people are into natural xeriscaping. I don't think they understand that the stuff they are using is polluting. • Smith: That's a good idea. They have issues of equipment turnover; it's not likely that we would get approval from Council to mandate they buy new equipment because it is burdensome to them. But, there can be some offering of incentives and information. • Dennison: The equipment the City operates as well. They do a lot with fleet, do they do as much with that? Maybe some outreach with CSU. • Stanley: The mowing equipment at CSU does look fairly antiquated. • Dennison: It's not so much getting everyone to buy new equipment. There is a whole energy cost to throwing things away before their useful life. We need to get the change before they buy. Is there equipment for landscape that will pollute less? Are some better than other? There ought to be something we can do to encourage them. • Smith: I don't know. I'll have to check the EPA's emissions standards. I recall that for smaller 2 and 4 strokes there were tighter standards coming out in 2000. • Walters: Aren't 4 strokes better than the two strokes? That's also for snowmobiles. • York: CSU graduate students have worked on the engine. They have been successful, but are not being received. They're not making a practical change in snowmobiles. • Dennison: As a citizen, I wouldn't mind the City saying "all the commercial equipment have to be the low -emitting kind", if it is going to have an impact. • Stanley: We should see if California has that. • Dennison: "As of stuff purchased after such and such date". Is that too far of a stretch? • Walters: They could transfer what happened in California, in that they tried to get locals to only buy the clean diesel engines and the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. They're not allowed to make them do anything stricter than the federal rule. • Smith: That's interesting because we have a strategy in the Air Quality Plan that says "to evaluate City procurement guidelines for products and services that would reduce emissions from non -road sources". • Walters: That's a City decision, which is a little different. This was more like LA telling every diesel operator they weren't allowed to buy anything except for... • Dennison: Diesel being not a regulated compound, I'm not sure how that fits in the SAQDS. Does California have that law that we can't be stricter? I don't know, it may be very difficult. This is not even the Air Quality Control Commission saying it, this is the City saying it. I don't know what jurisdiction the City has to regulate air quality impacts in an economic mode. • Stanley: It's and issue that would need to be looked at. • Dennison: They ought to still contact the landscaping companies with the new program and list out the best equipment so that they have ready access to that data. • Walters: That's what I was trying to get at with the information session. • Stanley: Even give them an incentive. • Walters: Would that evolve out of the Climate Wise program? • Smith: I was going to say, we are considering refocusing ClimateWise and going by sector businesses. We've been mostly focusing on large energy consumers. There might be a lot of value of looking at business that emit VOCs. We would need to do some research on purchasing, provide information, and maybe provide incentives. • Stanley: I like the idea of the high -emitter program, but not if it is voluntary. Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 8 of 11 • Smith: The one I am talking about is mandatory. The details need to be worked out. • Dennison: I'm in support of that. • Walters: That's what the I/M program does for us now. They have to get the car fixed. If we can't mandate..."suggesting" won't work. • Smith: There is all kinds of information showing voluntary programs don't work. • Walter: If anyone is a high emitter, they haven't spent money on maintenance, and they won't spend money on fixing it either. • Smith: We're hitting some important issues; we need a repair assistance program. Without it, it is not a complete picture. There are no models for that. California did one, but it was funded with fines. • Dennison: Can you fine the smoking vehicles? • Smith: We probably could. Right now they are liable for at least a $50 ticket. • Dennison: Could those be used to pay for repair? • Smith: They don't add up to enough to support a repair program. • Stanley: Would that $2.20 add up to support it? • Dennison: Then you would have to defend that. • York: What about $5? • Dennison: I don't think tax dollars should be paying for it. It's rare that you find someone who can't support their family and can't afford it right now. 99% of them didn't want to spend it because it was interrupting with their beer money. Sometimes there are hardship cases; Eric Levine would say "it's not a right to pollute". • Stanley: You could do a means test of some kind; they do it on all sorts of programs. • Walters: That's a group that is going to be the start of change. The population goes up by 25,000 each year. College students drive themselves everywhere and don't maintain their cars like they should. • Stanley: Often times they don't get emissions tests. • York: There is a certain percentage that resists driving cars. The bicycle racks are plum full. Gasoline is $2 per gallon. • Walters: That's another place that could use information on maintenance and its effects. • Smith: We make a point of getting the emissions repair guide there when they sign up for their parking sticker at CSU. • York: These ads on should be on the campus TV programs. • Smith: We should definitely look at getting the ads out farther. • Stanley: You're targeting different people though. They like a certain type of people. • Dennison: They don't see that as relative to their life. Those are adults. • Staley: What else in terms of ozone; what other possibilities are out there that are being done in other places or that you guys have considered? • Smith: I don't have a comprehensive list. One of the most effective is more controls on oil and gas wells. We can't do that on a local level. • Stanley: Is there going to be more regulation? • Walters: There is a new program we are putting together. In the attainment - maintenance area, there are certain controls that they need. The problem is one of those things is a flare and that is a big problem for a community like Fort Collins. 0 Dennison: Is it a fire hazard? Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 9 of 11 • Walters: No, generally they are pretty good. They are in air, and usually not touching anything. It is the best way to control those emissions; there is 95-99% destruction. • Stanley: Does the flare put out its own emissions? Ken Moore returned to the meeting. • Walters: Yes. We are trading ozone for basically carbon monoxide. That's the problem with it. A professor came in and said VOCs are "it" so they are not worried about anything else. It's going to from 300 tons VOC to 50 tons so I think it is a fair trade. • Dennison: Is there going to be additional oil and gas development in Larimer County? • Walter: There is a lot of drilling going on south of Longmont. They managed to find natural gas reservoirs. With us being closer to mountains, there is not as much deposits. I think most of it is planned for Weld County and the western slope. • Smith: One other measure that would be effective is lower Reid Vapor Pressure fuel here in the summer. At the end of this month I gather that the Health Department will have good data on the RVP of fuel based on sampling this summer. It is required in Denver. • Moore: My thought on the RVP; Are they going to go out of their way to do that for Denver and then not do it for the other areas that they supply? • Walters: I was going to say if Conoco is doing lower RVP, probably it is coming up here. • Smith: It would be good to know. • Dennison: Which raises the question of if we are at where we are at with ozone and that stuff was not shipped here; we have no safety margins. • Smith: It wasn't ever factored in, technically, as a safety measure. • Dennison: I'm not clear on how this works, the modeling, does it take into account our current levels? • Smith: Yes. • Dennison: If we are using the lower RVPfuel, and we stopped ... it's factored in to our current levels as a starting point. • Walters: If we used the lower, we'd get below what we think we would? • Dennison: No, if we are using it now... • Stanley: I see. We could move up without actually changing anything except the fuel. • Smith: They did talk about this at the hearing. They mandate 9.1 RVP, but it was actually 8.2 that we were getting. I'm trying to remember if they plugged the real number or the threshold into the model. I see what you're asking. I don't know the answer. • Stanley: We're getting the benefit of it right now and we're still getting close to violating. • York: We get fuel from Wyoming also. I bet you they don't. • Stanley: It depends on where they are shipping it. • Walters: Denver has a requirement; they can't sell higher gas in Denver. Chances are they probably put it at same level here. • Stanley: Would that require change in regulations in the City? Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 10 of 11 • Smith: No the City wouldn't change it; it would be at the Commission. • York: They deliver it by tank load... • Walters: They are in Denver. • Smith: I thought they were. We have stage 1 vapor recovery don't we? I will check. • York: Is it more costly to produce those fuels? • Smith Yes. • Stanley: If more lower-RVP fuel was required though, they'd have some economies of scale. • Moore: For them to add alcohol was cheaper. But yet our price went up. Now we still see alcohol. • Walters: That's also the companies passing on the cost of installing equipment to the consumer. Dennison: Lucinda, please come back in October if there is interim information. City Process for Gaining Input on Health -Related Issues Continuation of discussion from last month's meeting. • Stanley: Cherie is working with Tom to get a Health board for the City. • York: Not to be pessimistic, but the City's administration is not happy with the boards. • Smith: I think that if Tom Vosburg is behind it, he can promote it well. • Moore: What I look at is the conflict of interest. They are over here giving advice and potentially furthering their benefit and then testifying before Council as well. • Stanley: That's exactly what Cheri brought up at last meeting. • Dennison: You run in to, is you ask for them to be on the task force as volunteer. Where do you get people with expertise? Do you pick people that don't have expertise because most who do have a job? • Walters: Cheri's worried that the City is only getting one perspective. They are not going to everyone they possible can. • Dennison: Where is the slant? If you take an issue like Fluoride, none of us are experts, how do you know who knows what they are talking about? It is very difficult to presuppose who is making a good contribution. She's had run ins with certain people; but sometimes she disagrees, and they don't come out with the recommendation she wanted to hear. There is a limited supply of expertise. How can we advise the City to pick the best people? That's tough. • Stanley: With the way that the Air Quality team is trying to bring more people in, for example groups from the American Lung Association, they certainly have expertise. And what was the asthma group? • Smith: It was the Parent's of Asthmatic Children. • Dennison: They are a stakeholder, not an expert. • Smith: An expert represents them, Dr. Janet Sealy, but as a group they are stakeholders. • Stanley: That's a step in the right direction; not going to the same well each time. Updates • Smith: Hard copies of the Air Quality Plan are now available. (A hard copy was distributed to each member at the meeting) Air Quality Advisory Board 8/19/2004 Page 11 of 11 Smith: Also, the City Clerk is taking applications for board vacancies, including at least one vacancy for the AQAB. If you know anyone please tell them. You have to be a resident of the growth management area for a year, and 18 years or older. Smith: The last thing is that next Tuesday at City Council, before the meeting (during the proclamations), Margie Perkins, Director of the Air Pollution Control Division, is presenting the City a plaque for success in re -designating to obtainment for carbon monoxide. Agenda Planning • Smith: Would the board like a presentation on the results of the New Home Stakeholder Committee that met to talk about the results of the Utilities New Home Study? Doug Schwartz or Sandy Hicks could give a presentation. • York: I would like that. • Stanley: Is City Council doing anything with this? Or can we help them? • York: It would be interesting to hear anyways. • Stanley: Should we hear anything on BOB? I'm unhappy with their outreach. There are no neighborhood groups, environmental groups, just business groups involved. I would like to see us get more involved. • Stanley: Yes, check and see if someone can come in and do presentation on the status. • Stanley: What is the November 30`h study session: TransFort discussion? • Smith: They are talking about having TransFort take over Loveland's transit system. • Stanley: Let's hear on that in October. Meeting adjourned 7.39 PM Submitted by Liz Skelton Administrative Secretary I � � ���►!�IrLI/cam