Sharwin Snelson, who identified himself with a street address in Knoxville, used public comment time to list recurring problems he said he and other CAT Lift riders have experienced: uneven trip distribution among drivers, excessive wait times, insufficient travel time allowances (particularly during heavy morning traffic), inconsistent response from dispatch, and the inability to leave voicemail for managers. He told the board that although staff had sometimes acknowledged improvements, problems have reoccurred and that the pattern of repeated failures is concerning.

Snelson said operators sometimes tell riders that an automated system generated trips and that human staff are available to make necessary adjustments. He said dispatch should use available technology to locate vans and reassign trips when vehicles are running late. He added that wheelchair securement and sufficient time in scheduling must be prioritized to avoid injury. At one point he summarized his concerns this way: “Once is an incident, two is a coincidence, and three is a pattern.” He also reported a call result that said, “Your call cannot be completed as the called party declines the request,” indicating callers could not leave messages for a manager.

After public comment, a staff member said they had made notes and would meet with Mr. Snelson immediately after the meeting to review his concerns. Staff also told the board that operations monitoring of on‑time performance is now being done centrally under the OCC (operations control) and that new lift buses had recently entered service. Staff said an earlier meeting between Mr. Snelson and operations staff (including the operations director) had taken place and that they would continue follow‑up to ensure progress on the issues he raised.

Why it matters: Paratransit riders are often dependent on door‑to‑door service for work and medical appointments; repeated scheduling failures and lack of clear complaint channels affect a population with limited alternatives.

Next steps: Staff committed to meet with Mr. Snelson after the meeting, monitor on‑time performance through OCC, and review operational options such as an extra driver board or additional vans during peak periods. No formal board action was recorded; staff follow‑up was described as part of operations practice.