Minutes of a Public Meeting
MINUTES OF A
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
MEETING OF THE
GOVERNOR’S TRANSPORTATION VISION 21 TASK FORCE
9:00 a.m., Tuesday, February 13, 2001
Arizona State Capitol
Executive Tower
Phoenix, Arizona
The Governance Committee of the Governor’s Transportation Vision 21 Task Force met in official session for a meeting at 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, February 13, 2001 with Chairperson Kurt Davis presiding. Other members in attendance were Lisa Atkins, Ingo Radicke, Dave Olney, Tom Browning, Pricilla Cornelio and Jim Shipman. Alan Maguire, John Carlson, Matt Carpenter and Lisa Pendrick also attended.
Welcome and Pledge of Allegiance
Chairperson Davis called the meeting to order at approximately 9:23 a.m. and led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Acceptance of Minutes from November January 18, 2001
Action: A motion to accept the minutes of the January 18, 2001 meeting was made, seconded and passed unanimously.
Discussion of Alternative Transportation Governance Structures
Mr. Maguire provided the Committee with a handout showing the Committee’s last revisions to the document entitled "Alternative Transportation Governance Structures." Mr. Maguire pointed out that two categories of changes were made, minor changes or clarifications made by the Board and large changes, mainly on pages 3 and 4. He further stated page 5 was a restructuring of state established regional policies that would be used by all regions to keep state and federal entities uniform and in compliance with state and local regulations.
Mr. Maguire explained that he incorporated aviation planning comments from the last meeting and added recommendations Mr. Browning submitted by letter to the Committee. Mr. Maguire asked for the Committee’s feedback on the changes. He referred to page 6 of the document, stating that clarification between districts needed to be refined.
Ms. Cornelio asked for clarification of metro area and Mr. Maguire stated that, for purposes of the document, only Tucson and Phoenix were defined as metro areas. Ms. Cornelio stated that she liked the idea, but believes the population measure should be increased to a point where Tucson would not be considered a metro area.
Mr. Radicke agreed with Ms. Cornelio and asked how many other areas are close to having a population of 100,000 persons. Mr. Maguire explained that Flagstaff’s growth is projected to equal or surpass 100,000 within twenty years. Commissioner Davis mentioned Yuma has a current population of approximately 65,000. Mr. Radicke asked if smaller adjacent communities could unite and be designated as a metro area. Mr. Maguire stated they could.
Mr. Maguire clarified for Mr. Olney that districts would have the ability to pursue innovative funding, not just tax sources. He noted the Definition of Needs, Resources and Revenues Committee was still clarifying those guidelines.
Mr. Shipman asked who the regional authority would be for Mesa and Mr. Maguire explained that Mesa would be tied to the metro area of Phoenix. Mr. Maguire further stated that, while the idea of two central metro areas was decided upon at the last meeting, the method for identifying rational district boundaries has not yet been determined. He confirmed for Mr. Shipman that the ultimate size of a district would take 20-year long range planning for the area into account, noting it would also require State Board approval. Mr. Maguire confirmed for Mr. Shipman that, once a district was formed, taxing authority would run with the district. He suggested that the district boundaries should be reviewed every ten years. Mr. Shipman asked if communities would be at risk of not being annexed because they do not have the tax base necessary to support what needs to be done in the area. He also questioned if two districts could overlap and include similar jurisdictions in reaching their 100,000 population. Mr. Maguire explained that the determination of new districts would be made by the State Board. Chairperson Davis pointed out the State Board would also have authority to adjudicate differences. Mr. Maguire said the concept of an integrated transportation area would be key to defining districts.
Mr. Shipman asked, in the event the plan were accepted as written, if districts would be granted taxing authority without first having to go to the voters. Chairperson Davis said they would, explaining the intent was to establish a means for the two urban areas to move forward in case other task force recommendations regarding funding do not come to fruition.
Ms. Cornelio said the Pima Association of Governments Regional Council does not like the idea of dividing the state into districts, therefore she believes it would be best to increase the population requirement establishing Phoenix as the only central city. Mr. Radicke pointed out that Tucson would probably double in population in the next twenty years. In response to Chairperson Davis’s question, Ms. Cornelio stated Tucson does not support the establishment of a Regional Transit Authority. She suggested if the population later increased to a point where Tucson wanted to become a district, they could apply to become one at that time.
Mr. Browning thought it prudent to include Tucson, as did Commissioner Davis who cautioned the committee against assuming the attitude of some citizens holds true throughout the entire community. Mr. Browning pointed out that, assuming the plan passed through the Vision 21 Task Force, there would be a public hearing in Tucson before it could be implemented.
There was discussion between the Committee and Mr. Maguire about redefining the 100,000 population guideline. Mr. Maguire stated that the Committee could be redefined to only include Phoenix with permission being given for all areas to apply to become a district at a later date.
Chairperson Davis called for a motion.
Board Action: A motion to establish Regional Transportation Districts in all urban areas with a central city with a population in excess of one million persons was made by Ms. Cornelio and seconded by Mr. Radicke.
Ms. Cornelio explained the intent of her motion was to exclude Tucson, but mandate a Phoenix district. She clarified Tucson would have the option to apply to become a district at a later time if its population increased sufficiently.
Chairperson Davis said he supports leaving the population requirement at 100,000 because it provides the possibility for future districts in rural areas and because he believes Tucson has many of the same integrated transportation issues as Maricopa County.
Upon a call for the motion, the motion failed with a vote of 3 to 4.
Mr. Maguire proposed inserting language on page 6 to allow for a periodic review of the boundaries. The Committee agreed to a six year timeframe. Mr. Maguire said he would also insert language to strengthen the concept of an integrated transportation area.
In regards to Page 7 of the document, the Committee agreed with the concept of limiting it to incremental funding. Chairperson Davis said his only concern is that responsibilities are being moved to the districts, but districts are not being given the ability to deal with them. Mr. Carlson agreed there may be a need to adjust future funding to address costs associated with the added responsibilities.
Mr. Shipman was concerned about residual effects the plan might have on meeting other issues such as air quality control standards, Welfare-to-Work programs guidelines, and COG and MAG needs. Mr. Maguire noted the districts would only have responsibility for regional transportation activities while local transportation issues would remain the purview of local governments.
Mr. Shipman asked if the regions would have eminent domain. Mr. Maguire said the way the document is currently drafted, regions are granted the authority and may choose to operate through other entities through IGAs and so forth. Chairperson Davis recommended the document be clarified on that point. Mr. Maguire stressed the entity would be subject to all existing federal planning rules and regulations. Chairperson Davis suggested adding language recommending the use of IGAs.
Mr. Radicke pointed out the Public Transit System section on page 3 does not include bicycle and pedestrian paths. Mr. Olney agreed bicycle and pedestrian paths should be included, noting Chandler’s Transportation Plan is currently attempting to address getting bicycles across freeways.
Mr. Olney noted the importance of including aviation in the document, as aviation is evolving rapidly.
Mr. Browning expressed his opinion that neither the committee nor the task force has yet dealt with aviation. Ms. Cornelio replied that she thought it had been decided the state should not address the Phoenix and Tucson airports because they are authorities by themselves, but that the state should address all other airports. Mr. Browning said they need to take a larger view of the issue because excluding the Phoenix and Tucson airports might not be in the best interest of the state. He recommended an objective analysis be done on a statewide basis with a study of air space, land use, passenger needs, and other aviation concerns. In response to Ms. Cornelio’s question, Mr. Brown suggested the state, not ADOT, be responsible for conducting the study.
Mr. Olney wondered if it would be appropriate to recommend that a full task force be formed to deal with aviation issues. Mr. Maguire stated it would, suggesting they specify what the task force would address. Mr. Browning said he would prefer the task force decide what issues it feels are pertinent. Mr. Maguire stated he would incorporate language contained in Mr. Browning’s letter to the Vision 21 Task Force recommending a separate aviation task force.
Action: A motion to forward the proposed changes to the State Governance Structure dated February 9, 2000, with the modifications discussed this morning, to the full task force and to public meetings for public input, was made by Ms. Cornelio and seconded by Mr. Radicke. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Maguire stated he would revise the draft in keeping with the Committee’s recommendations and distribute it to the Committee within a few days.
Chairperson Davis thanked the Committee for their hard work and stated that, on those issues for which the Committee could not reach consensus, he hopes that in their discussions with the full task force they will be able to clearly explain the Committee’s differing positions. He reminded the Committee that they would meet again after the public meetings had taken place, perhaps in late March. He also thanked Mr. Maguire and Mr. Carlson for their input.
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
KURT DAVIS, Chairperson
