<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#467886;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#467886" vlink="#96607D" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi everyone,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Quick correction and update ahead of tomorrow's Board meeting.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>THE AMENDMENT WENT FURTHER THAN I ORIGINALLY REPORTED<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Last time, I told you Director Ruscha's June amendment protected paratransit funding. That was accurate but incomplete. Thanks to ADAPT Colorado's newsletter, we now have the actual motion language, and it does more than protect a budget line:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>"I move to amend the item to clarify that the service modification models exclude modifications to Access-a-Ride and Access-on-Demand, and that RTD continue the practice of preserving the Access-a-Ride service areas for current customers in the event of a reduction or elimination of fixed route bus service."<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>In plain terms: the 5-20% cut scenarios on the table for tomorrow do not touch AAR or AOD directly, and current AAR customers keep their service-area eligibility even if the fixed route in their area gets cut or eliminated. That's a real, substantive win, and Director Ruscha (with Director Guzman) delivered it. It passed 10-5.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>If you haven't already, a thank-you to Director Ruscha (<a href="mailto:joyann.ruscha@rtd-denver.com">joyann.ruscha@rtd-denver.com</a>) and Director Guzman, <a href="mailto:Michael.Guzman@rtd-denver.com">Michael.Guzman@rtd-denver.com</a>, along with the full Board (<a href="mailto:RTD.Directors@rtd-denver.com">RTD.Directors@rtd-denver.com</a>) goes a long way. Several of us have already sent ours.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>WHAT THIS MEANS FOR TOMORROW'S PUBLIC COMMENT<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Because of this amendment, the eligibility-loss argument we've been leaning on is largely resolved for current riders. If you're planning to speak or submit written comment tomorrow, here's the angle that still matters:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>1. The protection is for CURRENT customers only. Someone who isn't yet an AAR customer but lives along a route slated for cuts has no guaranteed path to eligibility once that route is gone. As routes get cut over time and the customer base turns over, that gap will only grow. Ask the Board to commit to extending the same protection to future applicants in affected areas, or at minimum to have the SB 26-150 independent paratransit study explicitly examine this gap.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>2. The larger case against cutting service at all still stands. Whatever cut level the Board picks tomorrow (0-20%), remind them that RTD has not exhausted every other option, and that going to voters in 2028 for more funding will land better coming from an agency that visibly tried everything else first.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>3. Specific routes won't be decided until likely September, so tomorrow isn't the day to fight for individual routes. It's the day to set the tone: acknowledge the win on paratransit, and hold the line on caution before any cuts at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>The meeting is Tuesday, July 28 at 5:30 PM at 1660 Blake Street. Written comment can go anytime to <a href="mailto:RTD.Directors@rtd-denver.com">RTD.Directors@rtd-denver.com</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks for your time!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Tim Keenan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>State Transportation Chair<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>National Federation of the Blind of Colorado<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>