Minutes of a Public Meeting

 

MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
GOVERNOR’S TRANSPORTATION VISION 21 TASK FORCE

2:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 3, 1999

Arizona State Capitol
Executive Tower
Phoenix, Arizona

The Governor’s Transportation Vision 21 Task Force met in official session for a Regular Meeting at 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 3, 1999, with Governor Hull and Co-Chairpersons Martin Shultz and Sharon Megdal presiding. Other members present were Lisa Atkins, Malcolm Barrett, Steve Basila, John Bivens, Tom Browning, Robert Bulla, Patrick Carlin, Priscilla Cornelio, Kurt Davis, Joe Herrick, John Hudson, Gary Knight, Valerie Manning, John Mawhinney, Diane McCarthy, Sheldon Miller, Kevin Olson, Mary Peters, Raul Piña, Barbara Ralston, Rene Redondo, Jim Shipman, Jim Simmons, Lela Steffey, Frank Thorwald, and Steve Wheeler. Also present were Stephanie Bondeson, Transportation Planner; John Carlson, Governor’s Transportation Advisor; and Robert Sokol, Assistant Attorney General.

Pledge of Allegiance and Introductions

Mr. Shultz called the meeting to order and all present joined in the Pledge of Allegiance.

The co-chairs and each member introduced themselves.

Mr. Shultz explained that members were present at approximately 20 broadcast sites throughout the state and recognized the elected officials that might also be present at those sites. He explained that there would be an opportunity for the public to speak from those sites at this and future meetings.

Charge of the Task Force

Governor Hull expressed appreciation to the task force members for their commitment to the effort and acknowledged their ability to produce a vision for transportation for the State of Arizona. She encouraged the task force to examine all modes of transportation and reviewed their charge, as outlined in the executive order. She emphasized the need for the task force to reach a consensus in their report that balances the needs of the state and the taxpayer and meets rural and urban challenges.

Remarks by the Task Force Co-Chairs

Mr. Shultz stressed the importance of all members recognizing the different views that will be expressed by task force members and through the public participation process. He reiterated the importance of the expectation that the task force reach a consensus in its recommendations. He acknowledged the importance of the Arizona Town Hall process and the studies and analysis that have already occurred. Mr. Shultz restated two key directives in the executive order: "acknowledge the growth, the crucial growth and economic mortality of the State of Arizona" and "identify the crucial long-range transportation needs in both rural and urban areas in the state." He suggested what it would take to accomplish these directives and stated that the task force would be meeting at various sites around the state. Also emphasized in the executive order is the need for a fully integrated multi-modal transportation system, the need to look at the governance system for transportation, and finally, the need to look at funding.

Ms. Megdal introduced the project director, Stephanie Bondeson, and provided an overview of how the meetings would be conducted.

Description of Task Force Work Plan and Charge of Each Subcommittee

Ms. Bondeson highlighted the work plan identified for the three subcommittees, the phases of public input, and a gant chart, which depicted a visual layout of what she anticipates happening throughout the duration of the task force.

The first subcommittee will define and identify actual needs, resources and revenues. The second subcommittee will look at governance local government, regional level and state transportation authorities. The third subcommittee will evaluate planning and programming processes, including the evaluation of current multi-modal planning processes at the local, regional and state levels.

There will be three phases of the public participation plan. Phase one (April and May) will gather public input on all aspects of Arizona’s transportation needs. Phase two (September, October and November) will involve a review of what the task force has been presented with. An interim draft of the task force’s report will be due to the Governor on December 15, 1999. Phase three (April and May 2000) will review the first two phases of public input and allow input on the preliminary report.

Ms. Megdal emphasized that the process would be mindful of everyone’s schedule constraints but noted that during the public participation phases of the process the workload wold be heavier. She encouraged everyone to attend a meeting outside of their region in an attempt to understand the perspectives of others.

Mr. Shultz called for comments on the work plan.

Mr. Carlin suggested that the media be given the names of the task members to encourage communication from citizens around the state.

Mr. Davis suggested that prior to beginning subcommittee work that the total task force meet and each member be given the opportunity to state their positions. Ms. Megdal agreed with the benefit of Mr. Davis’ suggestion but noted that the task force meetings can only be broadcast between 2:15 and 4:15 p.m. She clarified that the task force is not delegating the formulation of recommendations to the subcommittees but rather the fact finding and the presentation of information back to the full task force for discussion.

Mr. Shultz stated that the tentative date for the next task force meeting is April 8, from 2:15 to 4:15. At that time the task force will go through preliminary studies and basic data. All task force members will be given an opportunity to speak on this date as well.

Mr. Simmons explained that he was a member of the Arizona Town Hall that suggested the formation of the task force. One of the most significant recommendations was to employ an objective consultant with the highest credibility in the area of transportation issues to work with ADOT, the regional government units, the three universities and all other entities involved with the fact finding portion of the task force work. He suggested that the consultant work with the task force to analyze the problems and opportunities in the state and make recommendations to the task force.

Mr. Shultz agreed that this suggestion should be addressed at the outset. He suggested taking initial reaction comments and then letting the chairpersons consider a process to have the full task force consider the issue and reach a conclusion. Ms. Megdal noted that the use of consultants has been discussed. She suggested that there is already a lot of information available, and it is a matter of collecting that information and presenting it in a form that is objective and useful. This is why resource people from each of the councils of government, MPOs and ADOT staff have been asked to participate in the process. She was personally concerned about tasking a single consultant with the job of working with the task force. She emphasized that the possibility of using a consultant has not been eliminated. She agreed that how the task force might use a consultant is an open question.

Based on her experience with the creation of a long-range transportation plan in Tucson, Ms. Cornelio suggested it would be premature at this point to bring a consultant on board.

Mr. Bivens suggested it would be important to consider employing consultants as necessary to fill information gaps. He further stressed the importance of the task force members being able to back up the recommendations that are made to the public, so that the public supports the recommendations as funding is sought from the legislature.

Mr. Redondo agreed with Ms. Cornelio’s comment. He suggested that the group’s initial task must be to digest all the information that currently exists and boil it down into very basic elements. He suggested that specific tasks may require some consultant work, but basically felt that most of the information that will be needed is already available. He stressed the need to look backward before looking forward to avoid duplicating work that has already been done.

Mr. Thorwald agreed with Mr. Redondo but felt that the door should be left open with respect to consultants. Additionally, he suggested that informal communication should take place between the chairs of the different subcommittees to work out overlapping issues that might come up in those subcommittees.

Open Meeting Law

Mr. Sokol presented an overview of the open meeting law, which this task force is not legally subject to because it is an advisory committee appointed by the Governor by executive order. However, Mr. Sokol noted that the task force has volunteered to abide by the law, which he felt was commendable. In response to questions, he clarified that the task force cannot take action on matters raised in a call to the public. The open meeting law does not apply to the subcommittees unless they so choose.

Mr. Shultz stated that it is the intent to notice all subcommittee meetings and keep a record of those meetings. With respect to public involvement, because the task force will engage in a very aggressive public information/views campaign, it will have to also aggressively manage the time spent on individual verbal presentations. Mr. Sokol concurred that the task force has the right to impose time limits on speaking.

Comments from Task Force Members

Ms. Megdal outlined the guidelines for making verbal presentations.

Senator Mawhinney commented that the emphasis on outreach to the public is an excellent idea. Specifically, he believed sharing information with the public about the massive cost involved with constructing and maintaining the state’s transportation system was essential.

Mr. Barrett noted the timeliness of the appointment of the task force and the importance of getting ahead of the state’s transportation challenge to keep up with the growth and demand.

Mr. Knight, with 1,200 employees on the highways of the state, said he is looking forward to the opportunity to serve on the task force.

Mr. Herrick said he has anxiously awaited the appointment of the task force for two years, and he specifically appreciates the public outreach program that will be instituted.

Ms. Peters also spoke to the importance of reaching out to the public and particularly to groups, such as the elderly and the disabled, which are not often involved.

Ms. Manning requested that the task force be provided with a copy of the background report prepared for the Arizona Town Hall. Further, she asked whether ASU could update that report. She suggested that some type of staff/consultant support that looks at the process of all subcommittees and ensures that duplication does not take place would be helpful.

Mr. Miller spoke to the importance of transportation to the vitality, well being, quality of life and economic development of rural communities.

Ms. Steffey expressed appreciation to the Governor for following through on the ideas generated by the Arizona Town Hall. She is very anxious to have the task force be one of action and to help Arizona achieve a well-planned, long-term and multi-modal transportation system.

Mr. Davis expressed appreciation for the creation of the governance subcommittee, as he feels there has been an overall problem with the governance structure of transportation issues in Arizona.

Ms. Ralston spoke to the value of employing an outside consultant to give an objective point of view and to present alternatives that may have been tested in other market places. She was hopeful that the task force would look beyond just an evaluation of existing circumstances in Arizona toward what has been done in other states.

Mr. Thorwald felt that a consultant could be helpful in summarizing the voluminous amount of information the task force would be faced with. He requested a capital cost comparison and maintenance cost comparison between all modes of transportation. Finally, he suggested that the task force needs to be creative in its thinking, inasmuch as this will be a 20-year plan which will have to address many changes in the problems faced, resources and demographics.

Ms. Atkins, from Congressman Stump’s office, stated that they represent some of the fastest growing areas of the state, and they are very familiar with the interaction of growth and the lack of infrastructure.

Mr. Carlin stressed the need to encourage public input, especially in the rural counties. He suggested that in rural communities the community college serves as a focus point. He invited the task force to use those facilities wherever necessary.

Mr. Wheeler asked if there is a budget available to the task force, i.e. for consultants. He asked for clarification on the Governor’s proclamation as to whether the task force is supposed to come up with transportation plan recommendations and funding analyses, or something more vague. Lastly, he asked whether the task force is supposed to study the environmental or social impacts of transportation in addition to the financial impacts.

Mr. Shultz stated that his understanding of the task force’s charge is that they are to develop a specific transportation plan with all modes represented, as appropriate, as well as a funding plan over a minimum 20-year period. With respect to social and environmental impacts, Mr. Shultz explained that while not called out specifically to study these impacts, it is something that will be dealt with. He stated that the task force does not have a specific budget for its work. However, there are some resources available. He suggested the possibility of fund raising activity in the private sector to support the efforts of the task force, if the task force deems this necessary.

Ms. Megdal explained that the task force would approach its work in the context of the way transportation planning is done under federal requirements, which requires the consideration of environmental and social implications.

Mr. Browning called for the task force to focus on the long-term versus short-term issues.

Ms. Cornelio stated that Southern Arizona has been struggling for a long time to solve its transportation problems, and she was pleased to be appointed to this statewide task force. She asked if Ms. Peters could compile the information that has already been created at the MPO and COG level. Ms. Peters stated that she has asked that resource persons be identified within these organizations, and she will work with them to get the data currently available from them as well as the Federal Highways Administration. She will attempt to provide both a bibliography of the information available as well as summaries of the information.

Mr. Hudson stated that he does not believe the Governor appointed him to the task force to protect the status quo. He noted that since he has been on the State Transportation Board they have worked hard to open the process and bring it up to date. They have also worked hard to come to grips with a 20-year plan.

Ms. McCarthy suggested that the group not minimize the size of the task they have been charged with or the minimal amount of time given to accomplish that task. She implored members of the task force to look at the state as a whole and think about what they can contribute to make this a statewide plan.

Mr. Bulla agreed with Ms. McCarthy. He stated that he has seen many transportation studies over the years, but there has never been enough money to fund the needs. He suggested that the task force focus on finding realistic dollars to couple with realistic plans. He stated that Arizona is in a crisis situation because of the growth and the complexity of society. He was hopeful that the group would work well together to come up with something for the entire state.

Mr. Olson said he was very excited to work with the task force, which has an opportunity to step outside the box and find new ways of moving people and goods around the state of Arizona. He commented on the problems created by what is currently a very incremental transportation plan process.

Mr. Redondo said he is a strong advocate of the partnering process. He suggested that high performance teams celebrate the difference between the stakeholders, which is what he sees in the make up of the task force.

Mr. Bivens stated his support for the long-term focus of the task force. He stressed the critical need to look at the systems approach to all of the modes of transportation and how the individual segments are integrated to serve the rural and metropolitan areas of the state. He indicated the need to look at air transportation between Arizona and international markets that serve Arizona. He was excited about the public participation aspect of the task force process. He urged the task force chairpersons to structure the public participation process by outlining critical issues that should be posed to the public to solicit specific reaction/input.

Mr. Shipman said that he is very impressed with the broad challenge presented to the task force and with the public participation focus. He said he is particularly pleased with the structure of the process.

Mr. Basila agreed with the critical nature of the task at hand and the public participation aspect. He emphasized that the task force can not ignore the private sector. They need to buy into the vision and are very concerned about what the Vision 21 will be.

Call to the Public

Mr. Alex Cabillo, Hualapai Nation, Kingman, acknowledged the talent among the task force members but noted the lack of a representative from Arizona’s tribal communities. He suggested that Arizona’s tribes need to be represented. He explained that TEA-21 mandates that tribes work on reservation-wide transportation plans for inclusion in the state’s plan. The Hualapai Tribe, which he represents, has been working aggressively and has accomplished quite a bit. He recapped one significant project the tribe has been working on in Mohave County at the western rim of the Grand Canyon. They are having to spend reservation road dollars to do an environmental impact statement on a county road. In addition, over the next ten years, they have allocated $4 to $5 million to pave this county road. He spoke to the benefit of cooperation between government entities, especially as it relates to transportation. In conclusion, he requested that four tribal representatives be added to the task force at its April meeting.

Mr. Cisney Havatone, Hualapai Nation, Kingman, stated that it is essential that there is Indian representation on the Transportation Vision 21 Task Force. He stated that it is imperative that the state and Indian nations establish beneficial relationships. He noted that 28 percent of Arizona land is Indian reservation. According to a 1994 study, the Indian communities contribute $424 million to Arizona’s economy, yet the majority of the Indian nations suffer from the lack of basic infrastructure.

Dr. Greg Saxe, Tohono O’Odhom Nation planning department, conveyed a concern with the lack of tribal representation on the task force. He challenged the task force to ensure full consultation with Indian nation representatives and to include participation of council organizations of government, Bureau of Indian Affairs and the sovereign tribal governments, who are responsible for local probative processes.

Supervisor Davis was called upon to speak, but he had left. Ms. Megdal noted that Supervisor Davis provided written comments that would be made part of the record.

Ms. Donna Redford suggested that a population missing from the task force is regular transit users. She suggested that the people who use the transit system need to be represented. She recommended Bill Stokes be appointed to the task force. He works for a community forum and is an advocate for persons with disabilities. She wished to speak on behalf of those persons whose only transportation option is transit. She was hopeful that the task force would come up with good marketing tools to educate the public as to why a transportation tax is needed for transit and how transit could help solve traffic congestion and pollution problems. She suggested that more people could get to work on second and third shifts if expanded transit services were available.

Mr. Lloyd Clark spoke to the benefits of rail transportation. He provided an historical example of a successful railroad financing project in Maricopa County. He applauded the task force for looking at a long-term plan and encouraged them to take definitive action.

Mr. Blue Crowley called for the task force to be expanded to include persons who primarily use the transit system. He emphasized the need for a true multi-modal transportation system. He quoted from a transportation plan created by the Citizens’ Advisory Committee in 1989-90, which calls for consideration of satellite communities within the first phase of implementation of a transit system. He suggested that the task force look at this plan as well as plans created by Buckeye and Gila Bend, which call for a commuter trains to the Phoenix area. He suggested the task force look at things such as the bicycle plan and a short-range transit plan. He agreed that the task force should have Indian representation. Finally, Mr. Crowley called for public involvement at the subcommittee level.

Ms. DD Barker stressed the need for the task force to look closely at transit throughout the state, as opposed to only freeways. With respect to funding, she suggested that the task force consider newly generated sources of funds, such as congestion pricing and increased transit fare box revenues. She said she has a multi-modal background, and she uses the transit system. She encouraged the task force to contact her. She requested that she be considered a candidate if the task force is expanded.

Ms. Pam Allan, Maricopa Citizens Advocating Transit, explained that her group was formed with the goal of getting regional transit with dedicated funding and to increase or expand the existing ADA qualified fixed bus routes in both hours and number of routes. She noted the growing number of disabled persons who have found work but are unable to get there. She offered to share information gleaned from surveys and studies on the issue.

Mr. Cecil Antone, Lieutenant Governor of the Gila River Indian Community, wished to echo previous comments with respect to tribal representation on the task force. If that is not possible, he would like a written statement from the task force about what they are going to do for tribal communities and how tribal communities can get involved.

Mr. Shultz explained that the public participation process was designed to include all of the tribes as opposed to one or two tribes that might be represented on the task force. He felt that it would be an excellent idea to work with the Governor’s office to determine a way to maximize total participation of all 21 tribes in Arizona.

Ms. Megdal stated the record would reflect that the four names submitted by Mr. Cabillo were his, Lieutenant Governor Cecil Antone, Councilwoman Rita Martinez from the Tohono O’Odham Nation and Councilman Herbert Tate from the White Mountain Apache tribe.

Future Meetings

Ms. Megdal reminded the group that April 8 has tentatively been scheduled for the next meeting of the task force. Also, issues will be scheduled for subcommittee meetings in the near future. She directed task force members and members of the public to submit written comments to Ms. Bondeson.

Mr. Shultz reminded the task force members to state their preferences for serving on subcommittees. He noted, however, that the make-up of those subcommittees would have to be balanced, so all requests may not be able to be met.

The meeting adjourned at 4:14 p.m.

MARTIN SHULTZ, Co-Chairperson

SHARON MEGDAL, Co-Chairperson