MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING
OF THE
GOVERNOR’S TRANSPORTATION VISION 21 TASK FORCE AND
MAG REGIONAL COUNCIL
11:00 a.m., Thursday, November 4, 1999
Maricopa Association of Governments Office
302 N. 1st Avenue, 2nd Floor
Phoenix, Arizona
The Governor’s Transportation Vision 21 Task Force met in official session for a Joint Meeting with the MAG Regional Council at 11:00 a.m., Thursday, November 4, 1999, with Mayor Neal Guliano and Co-Chairpersons Martin Shultz and Sharon Megdal presiding. Other Task Force members present were: Cecil Antone, Lisa Atkins, Malcolm Barrett, Steve Basila, John Bivens, Tom Browning, Patrick Carlin, Priscilla Cornelio, Kurt Davis, Joe Herrick, Valerie Manning, John Mawhinney, Diane McCarthy, Dave Olney, Kevin Olson, Mary Peters, Raul Pina, Ingo Radicke, Jim Shipman, Jim Simmons, Lela Steffey, Frank Thorwald, and Steve Wheeler. Other MAG Regional Council members present were: Mayor Neil Giuliano, City of Tempe, Chairman, Mayor Thomas Morales, City of Avondale, Lt. Governor Cecil Antone for Governor Mary Thomas, Gila River Community, Mayor Cynthia Dunham, Town of Gilbert, Mayor Bill Arnold, City of Goodyear, Vice Mayor Max W. Wilson for Mayor Colin Barleycorn, City of Litchfield Park, Supervisor Don Stapley, Maricopa County, Mayor Wayne Brown, City of Mesa, Vice Mayor Joe LaRue for Mayor John Keegan, City of Peoria, Mayor Sam Campana, City of Scottsdale, Mayor John Shafer, City of Surprise, Mayor Eugene Russell, Town of Youngtown, F. Rockne Arnett, ADOT, and Bill Beyer, Citizens Transportation Oversight Committee. Key Vision 21 staff members present were: John Carlson, Executive Assistant – Transportation, Governor Hull’s Office; Alan Maguire, Consultant to the Task Force; Mary Lynn Tischer, Assistant Director, ADOT Planning, Policy and Programming; John McGee, ADOT Chief Financial Officer; and Jennifer Macdonald, ADOT Legislative Liaison. Additional Vision 21 staff present were: Stephanie Bondeson, ADOT Project Manager and Matt Carpenter. MAG Regional Council staff members present were: James M. Bourey, Dennis Smith, Terry Johnson, Eric Anderson, Kelly Taft, Gordon Tyus and Valerie Day.
Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor Guliano called the meeting to order and opened the meeting asking all present to join in the pledge of allegiance. Task Force and MAG Regional Council members introduced themselves. Mayor Guliano reviewed the structure of the meeting and the topics for consideration. He indicated that MAG’s modelers would be available for observation between 1 and 1:30 p.m. He expressed appreciation for the opportunity to participate in a dialogue with the Task Force and provide information for its consideration. He said he was very much looking forward to the recommendations of the Vision 21 Task Force.
Review of the Mission of the Governor’s Transportation Vision 21 Task Force
Mr. Shultz acknowledged the responsibility of the MAG Regional Council members and explained that the Vision 21 Task Force’s responsibility to the state is to develop a 20-year plan. He stressed the importance of the meeting for both organizations in pursuit of a common mission to improve the regional and state transportation system.
Mr. Shultz reviewed the mission of the Task Force, established by Executive Order of Governor Hull, in an effort to address the tremendous unfunded needs today and in the future. An interim report is due to the Governor by December 15, 1999 with a final report due December 31, 2000. Mr. Shultz described the specific roles of the three Task Force committees and noted the chairs and vice chairs of each.
Discussion of Transportation Funding Needs for the MAG Region
Mr. Terry Johnson presented an overview of the present funding needs in the MAG region. He compared the region’s 1998 and 2020 population to the balance of the state and the PAG region. He compared the projected growth of the region to the passenger miles of travel from 1995 to 2025. The region is currently experiencing the fastest growth in the nation, and travel demands are increasing even faster. Indicators of regional need were discussed. They include mobility, economic support, growth, air quality, safety and operations and maintenance.
The technical analysis used to develop MAG’s long-range transportation plan was discussed. Planning takes into consideration three major factors: land use, transportation and air quality. MAG uses state of the art modeling tools in the planning process, and those tools were described in detail. Major data sources are socioeconomic/land use, community input, transportation surveys and studies, and air quality conditions.
MAG’s long range transportation plan is multimodal, considering telecommuting, traffic signals, rail options, bike lanes, car pools/HOV, pedestrians, as well as the typical air travel, transit and street and freeway improvements. Mr. Johnson listed regional highway projects expected to be completed by 2007 and in the time period 2000-2019. Central to improving the existing system is the 20-year HOV plan. He also reviewed the street improvement plan, local bus plan, express bus plan, light rail transit plan and aviation system plan for the same 20-year time period. Other elements of the plan include: bicycle, pedestrian, demand and system management, and special needs.
Mr. Johnson highlighted the system performance indicators, comparing 1995 to 2019 with and without the completion of the plan. He reviewed the funding needs for MAG’s long range plan, committed funding sources and planned funding sources. He commented on the inevitable erosion of HURF revenues and the need for periodic adjustments. He called for extension of the existing ¼ cent regional sales tax to fund transit. By law, the plan is financially constrained by available funding sources. The vision if this were not the case would call for $3 billion for freeway improvements, $3.5 billion for street improvements, $2 billion for transit, $1.5 billion for aviation and $1 billion for other categories such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities, demand management and human service programs.
At the request of Mr. Shultz and Dr. Megdal, Mr. Johnson explained that the constrained plan is based on reasonably available funding sources, and the vision is based on studies that have been performed by MAG. He explained that the current fuel tax is 18 cents per gallon. The plan is based on a projected increase of .01 cent per year. He confirmed that the ¼ cent regional sales tax for transit is another major component.
The mayor of Surprise asked about the impact on HURF by VLT reductions. Mr. Johnson stated that the assumption is that there is no impact. Ms. Peters added that the VLT reductions to date have held ADOT harmless.
Mr. Olson inquired about maintenance of the system. Mr. Johnson explained that when the plan was targeted for completion by 2005, performance indicators were maintained on a per capita basis. As the plan was extended, a tapering off occurred.
Mr. Johnson confirmed for Mr. Thorwald that the plan includes maintenance and operating costs.
Discussion of Potential Funding Sources for the MAG Plan
Mr. Eric Anderson presented an overview of the sources of current transportation funding. The potential funding shortfall in freeways, streets, transit and the other category total $9.4 billion. Funding options include a half-cent sales tax, 16 percent sales tax on fuel, a fuel tax increase of 33 cents per gallon, and a fuel tax increase of 14 cents per gallon indexed. The revenue generation ability of each option was listed. He clarified that the revenues do not incorporate any inflation, because the cost estimates do not consider inflation. Mr. Anderson explained that no analysis has been done on the impact of technology on the economy in the future or on the sales/fuel tax impact of the Internet. From a personal standpoint, he felt that both issues were critical, although the impacts would be difficult to quantify. Mayor Guliano added that the federal moratorium on Internet sales taxation is being looked at in terms of impact on a national basis. Mr. Bourey noted that MAG would be hosting a discussion forum on this issue on December 16.
Mr. Bivens suggested that attaching percentages to the sources for current funding would be helpful information.
Mr. Thorwald asked if the impact of alternate fuel sources on revenues had been considered. Mr. Anderson answered affirmatively, explaining that this is done through the risk analysis process annually. He commented that the incentive to use alternative fuels would be impacted if they were taxed. He emphasized the need to look fundamentally at the structure of transportation funding.
Mr. Thorwald asked if MAG has considered alternate ways of reducing transportation system costs, i.e. a regional transit operation versus the current city-operated transit system. Mr. Anderson answered that many issues have been looked at from a qualitative standpoint but not from a quantitative standpoint. He commented on RPTA’s effort to integrate systems to achieve more efficiencies. Mr. Bourey added that MAG is also looking at telecommuting as well as the Valley’s use of HOV lanes as means to manage travel demand. Mr. Anderson verified that alternate forms of transportation have not been accounted for in fuel revenue projections. They have not assumed any fundamental shifts in travel behaviors over the next 20 years.
Mr. Thorwald suggested that directional lane changes be used to accommodate heavy traffic flow. Mr. Bourey explained that the directional behavior is very difficult to predict in this region. General traffic is very balanced, and he sees it even more so in the future. There would be no way to accommodate the recommended change. Mr. Anderson added that congestion is now an all-day situation. MAG is looking at freeway management systems to increase traffic flow. He described the problems created by ramp metering now and suggested that smart highways may have the single greatest impact in terms of traffic flow.
Discussion of Transportation Governance Issues
Mr. Bourey highlighted transportation planning milestones in terms of governance. MAG was formed in 1967 as a regional forum to address area-wide problems, and in 1970 the Governor created planning districts to organize regional planning on a statewide basis. The regional planning districts were listed as were the members of MAG. The regional responsibilities designated by the Governor were delineated, and Mr. Bourey outlined the MAG policy structure. In 1974, MAG was designed an MPO; there are a total of four MPOs in Arizona at this time: PAG, YMPO, FMPO and MAG. He explained ISTEA/TEA21 planning designations as well as the Transportation Management Area concept and MAG non-attainment areas. Mr. Bourey summarized MAG’s transportation responsibilities under federal and state requirements. He reviewed the modal/technical committee structure within MAG, the new programming process and the federal certification process. Federal planning documents include a long-range plan, a five-year program, and a conformity analysis.
Mr. Bivens inquired as to whether MAG has given any thought to working cooperatively with social programs that fund transportation in terms of distribution. Mr. Bourey answered that MAG now has a plan for specific need populations throughout the county. He offered to share the plan with the Task Force.
Mr. Bourey confirmed for Ms. Cornelio that MAG most definitely considers freight movement in transportation planning. He pointed out that they conducted a daylong forum with the freight transportation industry within the last year. Additionally, federal requirements have stressed an increased focus on freight.
Mr. Shultz commented that the state has been sensitive to local transportation needs through the governance process; however, the state is now faced with the challenge of significant unmet needs. He suggested that the question of governance as the state moves forward is a big issue and that expertise is needed to demonstrate how to achieve a balance between state responsibility and local government needs in the 20-year plan. He stressed the need to create something that allows the state to prioritize, plan, fun and build out an effective statewide transportation system. He asked for MAG’s help and expertise in meeting this challenge. Mr. Bourey commented that as both ISTEA and TEA-21 were put together there was a concerted effort to balance state and local level activity. In turn, MAG emphasized cooperative development of funding estimates and was able to strike a balance. He said it is important to look at direction from a statewide perspective and suggested that the current system seems to be working well.
Mr. Davis wished to second the suggestion of Mr. Shultz, calling for constructive advice about the issue of governance. He stated that planning, funding, implementation and accountability need to all occur at the same place. Mayor Guliano agreed that there is a need to look at bringing all of those functions together.
Mr. Bourey reminded everyone of issues that arose about ten years ago in terms of system implementation. A major audit was done, which demonstrated that the relationship between ADOT and MAG was in fact too close. He disagreed that one entity needs to be responsible for the whole process. He reviewed MAG’s recommendation and stressed the need for a system with checks and balances, contending that this does exist.
Mr. Arnett stated that the working relationship between MAG and ADOT over the last three years should be applauded; however, for the future, he suggested that perhaps the state might benefit from looking at the models created by Atlanta and Clark County. He asked if there has ever been a re-designation in the country, and if so why. He asked if the criteria are relevant to the current system from a national sense.
Mr. Simmons asked if there are states where there is an entity that has final transportation authority. The purpose of such an organization would be to coordinate the actions of all entities. He suggested that, if such an organization exists, that organization be looked at carefully. Mr. Bourey suggested that such an organization could not happen because of federal requirements. Ms. Peters noted that Virginia DOT has responsibility for the state and secondary system. She explained the Atlanta regional and described the differences in responsibilities of MPOs in other states. However, nowhere is there an entity that supercedes the MPO. Mr. Simmons stated that the Task Force needs to draw upon the experiences of other states in terms of governance.
In response to a question by Mr. Thorwald, Mr. Bourey explained that standardization of the processes is a tough issue due to the uniqueness of the regions in Arizona in terms of air quality, transit, and density, for example. He would not underestimate the need to maintain consistency in how data is reported.
Mr. Bivens expressed concern with inconsistent need measurement techniques used by the various COGs. He called for suggestions on streamlining the process. Mr. Bourey noted that this is exactly the reason MAG recommends the future use of the criteria used last year. Ms. Peters cautioned that there are differences in criteria, depending on the capability of the local COG. Also, ADOT routinely follows federal standards, and local governments do not necessarily do this. A single yardstick would put some local governments in a difficult position. She suggested that the system needs to evolve to the point of using consistent standards.
Mr. Shultz expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet with MAG. There will be ongoing discussions on the issue of governance, and he appreciates MAG’s help.
Dr. Megdal wished to underscore the importance of MAG’s public input effort. She encouraged informal input into the Task Force process. She thanked MAG for their hospitality.
Call to the Public
Mr. Blue Crowley, a resident of Phoenix, pointed out discrepancies in the slide presentations. He stated that only nine people attended the early input hearings. He was concerned that the long-range transit plan would not bring the system up to an adequate level. He compared it to the City of Phoenix Transit Plan and said he didn’t see adequate funding. He noted the $1 billion shortfall on the bicycle plan.
Mr. Bill Stevens, representing the Earth Millennium Project, said he was reminded of money and power in the room. He suggested that everyone think of “we and us” rather than “me and I.” He suggested that the issues be addressed through a state association without losing individual power at the local jurisdiction level. He stressed the need to share the money and power. He compared this effort to the CAP effort years ago; the success of that effort achieved billions of dollars in funding.
Adjournment
Mayor Guliano thanked everyone for their participation.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
MARTIN SHULTZ, Co-Chairperson
SHARON MEGDAL, Co-Chairperson
