Minutes of a Public Meeting

 

PROFESSIONALLY PREPARED SUMMARY

OF A PUBLIC INPUT MEETING,

HELD IN THE CITY OF TUCSON, FOR THE

GOVERNOR’S TRANSPORTATION VISION 21 TASK FORCE

5:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 25, 1999

Tucson Public Library
Tucson, Arizona

The Governor’s Transportation Vision 21 Task Force met in official session for a Public Meeting at 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 25, 1999, with Co-Chairpersons Martin Shultz and Sharon Megdal presiding. Other members present were: Steve Basila, John Bivens, Priscilla Cornelio, Joe Herrick, John Mawhinney, Diane McCarthy, Dave Olney, Raul Pina, Rene Redondo, Jim Shipman and Frank Thorwald. Also present were Stephanie Bondeson, ADOT Project Manager for the task force; John Carlson, Governor’s Transportation Advisor; and Allen McGuire, The McGuire Company, Consultant.

Welcome, Introductions, Charge of the Task Force

Dr. Megdal called the meeting to order and asked the task force members to introduce themselves. She briefed those present on the formation of the task force. She discussed the charge of the task force by the Executive Order of Governor Hull and the commitment of the task force members to fulfill that charge. Dr. Megdal stressed the importance of public participation in the task force process. She thanked Mr. Tom Swanson and the PAG staff for their help in arranging the meeting and thanked Mr. Herrick for encouraging the level of public participation. Dr. Megdal introduced staff members assisting the task force.

Mr. Shultz assured the representatives of Southern Arizona present that the task force is interested in listening to their testimony and incorporating it into the final decision-making process. He commented on the interim and final report that the task force would be forwarding to Governor Hull. He encouraged those in attendance to submit written comments after the meeting.

Comments from Local Elected Officials and the Public

Ms. Cherie Campbell, representing PAG, discussed the vital need to look comprehensively at needs and develop a rational approach that will guide decision-making. She committed to staying involved in the task force process by attending meetings and sharing information and ideas. She outlined PAG’s long-range metropolitan transportation plan (through 2020), which demonstrated $9.2 billion in needs and a revenue shortfall of $4.3 billion. She explained the impact growth will have on the shortfall and identified additional revenue sources to reduce the shortfall. The regional aviation system plan identified $210 million in aviation needs, which are not included in the long-range plan. In addressing the planning and programming process, Ms Campbell suggested there should be two guiding principles for the development of a long-range map: identifiable goals and priorities in the overall state plan and the role and authority of local governments.

Ms. Sharon Bronson, Pima County Board of Supervisors, agreed with Ms. Campbell’s comments. Additionally, she emphasized the role that the local and regional jurisdictions should play in the planning and programming process. She urged the integration of local and regional transportation plans into a statewide planning process. She encouraged the use of ADOT’s local staff in the coordination of scoping work. She was supportive of the allocation of resources to ADOT to support adequate staffing and project funding at the local level. Ms. Bronson shared her support for multimodal efforts but was very concerned with the unmet needs of Western Pima County, i.e. S.R. 86 to Ajo and S.R. 85 into Mexico. She said that it is critical that the HURF equity remains intact for the success of their $350 million bond program. She was supportive of a full range of alternative funding mechanisms and a search for additional funding opportunities. She expressed concern that Pima County remains ineligible for CMAC funds and asked that the state provide funds to be used in place of CMAC funds to address the air quality congestion management needs. She urged the state to develop mechanisms that will allow public monitoring and fund air quality preservation measures as well as enhance the transportation planning process to further incorporate air quality concerns. Ms. Bronson urged the Governor and legislature to follow through on the consensus that will be reached by the Growing Smarter Commission to effect planned growth within communities to co-exist with the state’s natural beauty and resources, treat taxpayers equally and serve the interests of all residents.

Vice-Mayor Dick Johnson, Oro Valley, aimed his comments at some of the administrative delays and bureaucracy that create problems in local jurisdictions. He cited examples of problems created by the delay in getting needed federal aid to highway projects in local jurisdictions. He urged the task force to identify ways to simplify and expedite the planning and programming process. He urged the exploration of procedures that would establish inter-regional and jurisdictional coordination of transportation projects to accommodate major growth issues that will impact other regions or jurisdictions. He called for some type of freeway along the La Cholla corridor to I-10 to take people into downtown Tucson and to the airport. He suggested that Tangerine Road be looked at to provide a limited access parkway between Oracle Road and I-10. He felt that right-of-way should be looked at immediately and plans made to work with developers at major intersections along the route. He was supportive of Supervisor Bronson’s comments with respect to the local ADOT office. He was hopeful that the legislature would in fact implement the final recommendations of the task force.

Vice-Mayor Janet Marcus, City of Tucson, noted the disproportionate impact growth has had on regional travel and Tucson’s transportation system. She stated that ADOT must address the state’s transportation challenges by funding and implementing improved transportation systems. She suggested that the present system does not recognize the urbanization of the state. She suggested that the state’s urban areas need greater transportation representation to tackle the complex, multi-faceted issues facing them. Although much could be done to change the decision-making structure, this would simply be slicing the pie in a different way. Ms. Marcus suggested that the "pie" needs to be larger. She indicated that the City of Tucson is on the record for supporting an increase in the gas tax as one way to increase revenue.

Mr. Tony Paez, City of Tucson Director of Transportation provided a packet of information to the task force members. He stated that the city essentially provides infrastructure to accommodate a population of 750,000. The city runs the public and para-transit systems for the metropolitan area and is in major need of additional transit funds. He suggested that the state begin to look at some stable and recurring funding sources for alternate transportation modes. He expressed concern with the insufficiency of Tucson’s HURF revenues and with the drastic impact a reduction in the VLT would have. He stated that the state cannot build its way out of congestion; it needs to think its way out. He noted the impact that the lack of transportation funds is having on Tucson’s neighborhood streets. He feels that the urban and rural needs have to be balanced, and the make-up of the State Transportation Board falls short of that need with only two representatives from the urban areas. He requested that the task force look at this issue. He called for decentralization of decision-making at some level in ADOT, believing this would expedite projects.

Mr. Bivens encouraged Mr. Paez, and all of the speakers, to submit specific recommendations for dealing with the issues being raised. Mr. Paez responded with a suggestion that the formula for dispersing funds be based on the state’s urbanization. Further he suggested that a stable funding source, such as indexing the gas tax to inflation plus an initial increase, would go a long way toward addressing unmet needs.

Mr. Richard Nassi, Tucson’s Administrator of Traffic Engineering, addressed the task force with respect to intelligent transportation systems. He made specific recommendations to deal with the state’s transportation problems: 1) identify critical long-term transportation needs, 2) enhance legal and procurement processes to allow and encourage development of public/private partnerships, 3) give a high priority to projects with a significant ITS element, and 4) financially support association of governments and local agencies as they establish and maintain strong, coordinated ITS ties within the regional transportation program. Mr. Nassi emphasized that intelligent transportation systems are applicable to all modes of travel for a seamless transportation system.

At the request of Ms. Redondo, Mr. Nassi explained ITS as it relates to traffic signals, emergency medical and transportation services, para-transit and fixed-route transit operations, and disseminating information to the public. He stated that they have brought the City of Tucson to a point of 100 percent synchronization. In addition, half of Pima County, a large part of Oro Valley and a section of Marana will be coming online within six months. He discussed the air quality benefits of reduced traffic congestion that are realized from the implementation of ITS.

Mr. Lee Burner, representing Sun Tran, stated that the organization is a national, award-winning transportation system. He shared some facts associated with their very efficient and effective transportation system. He shared some of the challenges that they face: funding, increasing the late service currently provided, conversion of their bus fleet from diesel, and the high cost of constantly improving technology. He stated that light rail is a form of transportation that should be a high priority for the City of Tucson.

In response to a question from the task force, Mr. Burner explained that the public acceptance of the transit system in Tucson is evidenced by the growing ridership—currently 15 million people a year—and the fact that 25 percent of the fare box recovery comes from fare box revenue. He believes that a sales tax would be very positive and that it should be a priority with respect to the focus of ADOT. He outlined the life expectancy of their buses. At the request of Dr. Megdal, Mr. Burner explained that the City of Tucson owns the system and contracts with Rider ATE to operate the system. This has been a very effective and efficient system and points to the effectiveness of public/private partnerships.

Mr. DeWayne Tripp, City Engineer for City of Tucson, highlighted the scope of the city’s street system and what is required by Federal Highways to maintain it. He feels that the funding the city receives is inconsistent with the federal maintenance requirement and that this should be addressed. Mr. Tripp provided a packet of information outlining their needs. He requested that the city receive National Highway System funds to address the 87 miles of road that are within the city’s corporate limits. He noted 74 million dollars worth of drainage needs that are unfunded. He indicated that the self-certification program in the city has worked well; however, they have $366 million in identified needs, $234 million that is unfunded.

Mr. Albert Elias, City of Tucson, wished to simply request two things: 1) the opportunity to work with the state and ADOT to secure passenger rail service between Tucson and Phoenix, and 2) the opportunity to provide more information with respect to their alternate transportation modes program. He stated that this is an ethic that his department has embraced, and it is reflected in their work program. He offered to answer any questions the task force members might have on the printed material provided by the city.

Ms. Katie Dusenberry, State Transportation Board Member representing Pima County, stated that board members have the interests of the state as a whole at heart when they make decisions. She reviewed the board’s efforts to address the planning and programming process over the last 18 months. She encouraged the adoption of a realistic 20-year transportation plan that is a culmination of input from all jurisdictions. She commented on the need to incorporate flexibility in the five-year program, citing the fact that the S.R. 95 or Beeline Highway projects could not have been accomplished if the board were restricted to using any type of formula. Ms. Dusenberry addressed the recent criticism of the make-up of the board. She believes that the board is very cognizant of everyone’s needs and issues and that it would not change significantly if the make-up were changed. She felt that the representation as dictated by the new legislation strikes a good balance. She acknowledged the need for additional revenues to meet the needs of the state. She referenced the innovative financing techniques being used but said this doesn’t actually increase funding available. She stressed the importance of meeting public demand as soon as possible. She suggested that the state find some way to bring alternative fuels into the revenue stream.

Mr. Shultz asked if the various levels of responsibility add efficiency. He asked where the balance is between efficiency and local government authority in terms of getting a project from conception to implementation. Ms. Dusenberry stated that there is a lot of streamlining that can be done. She felt it was a great step forward when MAG and PAG put a member of the State Transportation Board on their respective boards. She feels that governance is somewhat hampered by lack of revenues. There is not enough revenue to do good planning, particularly in rural areas, and perhaps they should look at part-time consultants to help with their planning. She felt that opening up lines of communication would help with respect to governance.

Mr. Thorwald asked if an interagency coordination group would benefit the state. Ms. Dusenberry answered that it wouldn’t be harmful but it should occur at the local level.

Mr. Rene Gastelum, City Manager , City of South Tucson, passed along the mayor’s appreciation for the outreach effort and read her prepared comments. She listed the areas of concern that need to be addressed in the state. He discussed issues that plague the City of South Tucson: connectivity with pedestrian and bicycle transit, the need to address transportation deficiencies at the local level, and the redevelopment efforts. She encouraged the placement of more authority and responsibility at the regional and local level, so that cities such as South Tucson can address the needs of their residents and be accountable for decisions made. Mr. Gastelum spoke to the city’s need for mass transit funding.

Mr. Wally Burg, CEO, Tucson International Airport, provided written material for the perusal of the task force members and offered to answer questions as they arise. Mr. Burg noted the significant growth the Tucson area has experienced and the integral part that aviation plays in today’s society and economy. He discussed the history of the Tucson Airport Authority and the growth of the airport itself. Mr. Burg stated that Tucson has a 20-year airport plan as well as a 50-year airport plan. He stated that Tucson could build an airport the size of Los Angeles International and protect its approaches. The growth around the airport complicates the issue of access to the airport, which is of great concern. He discussed the need for additional funding of aviation in Tucson and Arizona as a whole, a problem exacerbated by the legislative action diverting half of the flight property tax to the state’s general fund. He relayed the estimation that the state has a surplus of $250 to $350 million this year alone and was dismayed that the flight property tax was not fully restored by the legislature. He provided statistics evidencing the need for aviation system funding in the future. Mr. Burg stated that the federal tax on airports generates $250 million a year out of Tucson, and Tucson only gets about $2 million back. He suggested that this return needs to be addressed at the federal level. Finally, Mr. Burg emphasized that the growth Phoenix has experienced is directly related to the success of Sky Harbor Airport.

Mr. Shultz asked Mr. Burg about Tucson’s feeling about the proposal for a regional airport between Tucson and Phoenix. Mr. Burg answered that the proposal is not financially feasible, and he believes the airlines and the passengers would back up this opinion. He suggested that the fourth runway at Sky Harbor needs to be built to handle additional traffic. If that were not possible, he would be glad to take the overflow in Tucson.

In response to questions by Mr. Bivens, Mr. Burg said that the Tucson Airport works well with the state system and functions well in the long-range planning process. What he needs is better roads to the airport, and he can take care of the capacity on the airport.

Mr. Burg agreed with Mr. Mahwinney that there are communities in the state that are grossly underserved by aviation, and there are economic incentives that can be used to improve the situation. However, he was cautious about the long-term effectiveness of incentives. He said that all of the airports are cognizant of the needs throughout the state and work together to address those needs.

Mr. Thorwald asked why the major airports in the state are not major intermodal hubs. Mr. Burg explained that all kinds of intermodal forms of transportation are used to move to and from the airport. He explained that New York is currently building a light rail system to serve its airports, but those densities do not exist in Arizona. He acknowledged that they are finding more and more of a need to handle truck traffic in and out of the airports.

Mr. Shultz requested that the two large airport operations and the nonurban airport operations work together to frame a consensus recommendation for consideration by the task force.

Mr. Kin Kinared, representing the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association, Arizonans for Better Roads and the PAG Finance Committee, thanked the task force for their attention and assured them that the groups he represents are very interested in the issue at hand. He commented that a healthy economy is the heart of a community, and the heart needs arteries to extend the health to the entire community. Those arteries are the transportation systems. He conveyed the SAHBA’s support for the construction and maintenance of roads and regional planning to accommodate projected growth. Mr. Kinared asked that the task force coordinate its efforts with the Growing Smarter Commission. Recognizing the need for funding, his association adopted a policy that the most equitable method of funding transportation improvements is a user fee, and for roads this would be a fuel tax. He requested that the task force support a system of user fees for the state’s roads and airports. Mr. Kinared stated his opposition to impact fees, indicating that they are a discriminatory tax.

Mr. Shultz requested that the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association and Central Arizona Home Builders Association work together to fashion a specific recommendation for the task force.

Ms. Diahn Swarts addressed bicycle and pedestrian issues. She was pleased to see the staff members of several jurisdictions also address the issues. She believes that this is an area that is a great opportunity for ADOT, particularly in rural communities. She expressed concern with ADOT’s narrow focus on building roads and the impact of this focus on local jurisdictions. She suggested that Arizona needs to accommodate all modes of transportation to truly serve the state’s best interests. Mr. Shultz assured Ms. Swarts that the task force would not overlook the aspect of their charge from the Governor that relates to multimodal forms of transportation and travel reduction programs.

Mr. Rob Lindley, a resident of Tucson who recently moved from the Valley, spoke on behalf of the Arizona Rail Passenger Association. He urged the task force to include rail passenger service in its recommendations for future passenger transportation. He referred to a 1993 joint legislative study recommending the initiation of rail service between Nogales, Tucson and Phoenix. He referred to the more specific recommendations of another report issued by yet another task force in April of 1998. He suggested that expansion of I-10 is not practical because of the expense. He suggested that the task force recommend funding for a second phase of the high-speed rail study. He felt that a high- speed service between Phoenix and Tucson would in fact lure individuals out of their automobiles if travel time were reduced to between 90 and 100 minutes. Mr. Thorwald noted that there are more recent figures on a mag-lev system that would cost $2.8 billion and provide service at speeds up to 350 miles per hour.

Mr. Chuck Thomas, representing an organization called Fresh Produce of the Americas and the Fresh Produce Association, commented on the suggestion to increase funding by raising the fuel tax. He stated that gas in Nogales is consistently 20 to 25 cents higher per gallon than in Tucson or Phoenix. He stated that at least a third of the 260,000 produce trucks that travel through Nogales buy their fuel in Mexico. With the passage of NAFTA, the area has seen rapidly increasing truck traffic and congestion and deteriorating roads. They have seen very little money to improve the roads. The majority of the projects in Nogales needed to be completed three to five years ago, and will likely wait another five to eight years. He stated that Nogales is a hub of interstate, intrastate and international commerce with 60 percent of the country’s winter vegetables crossing through Nogales. He noted the revenues that are being generated for the federal government, very little of which is coming back to Nogales in the form of infrastructure. He described a local task force that was formed in order to communicate to the state and federal representatives the need to get things done in Nogales. That task force developed a project priority list and presented it to local, state and federal officials. Specific improvements that were recommended included one to two additional interchanges along I-19 or improvements to existing interchanges, improvements to S.R. 99 in Nogales, and another bridge crossing across the Santa Cruz River.

Mr. Rick Snodgrass, a resident of Pima County, stated his opposition to transportation impact fees and his support for additional gas tax. He believes that impact fees could destroy the lifeblood of affordable housing. He suggested that financing public improvements through a 30-year mortgage is fiscally irresponsible.

Ms. Frann Miescher, a member of Pima County Disabilities Commission and Polio Epic, spoke as an advocate for the disabled on the need for taxi service at the same cost as for those who do not need a wheelchair. She suggested that each major city subsidize one minivan that can be used to transport persons with electric wheelchairs in addition to the elderly. Ms. Miescher confirmed that the commission is currently working on formal recommendations. Once completed, she agreed to forward them to the task force.

Mr. Larry Lattomore expressed concern with Tucson’s current traffic flow problem, which he believed would lead to gridlock by 2005. He called for solutions different than those tried in the past. He suggested the diversion of cross-town/Phoenix traffic off the major east/west arterials. He believes the city should build a cross-town parkway southeast to northwest. He believes that the drivers should fund the improvements with a large gas tax and that a parkway toll could be charged for long-term maintenance. He stated his opinion that the most cost effective and practical solution to the Tucson/Phoenix I-10 situation is a third lane from Ina Road to Chandler Boulevard.

Ms. Mary Volpicelli, a citizen activist for good public transportation, spoke about the lack of public transportation in Arizona. She believes it is a disgrace to the state, which is growing by leaps and bounds. She was also appalled by the lack of good public transportation in Tucson. She expressed her support for a passenger rail system between Phoenix and Tucson. She suggested that people who use the public transportation system advise the state’s leaders.

Mr. Robert Detrich, a resident of Tucson, stated that he is an expert on transportation in Tucson because he drives between 25,000 and 35,000 miles each year. He suggested that the general public should not have to fund resort destination-type freeways, i.e. to Las Vegas and Rocky Point, and that a toll system should be implemented to fund these roads. He specifically recommended improvements in the Tucson area: expand Hunt Road from I-10 to state highway service levels to the point of Sunrise Boulevard, build a bridge over Sabino Canyon and build a road like Golf Links Road, expand Sunrise Boulevard to four lanes to Tangerine Road connecting it to I-10 and forming a complete ring around Tucson. He was not opposed to using toll revenues if gas taxes are insufficient. He does not want to see Tucson get to the point of such cities as San Diego and Miami in terms of traffic. Mr. Detrich suggested a grade separated interchange at Ina Road and I-10 to avoid the railroad crossing. He called for more bus pullouts now and especially if the public transportation system is improved. He called for increased right-turn lanes and signaling to allow right turns before pedestrians cross. Mr. Detrich complimented Tucson on its use of the lag left-turn lane. He agreed with the suggestion to build a third lane between Ina Road and Chandler Boulevard on I-10.

Mr. Gene Caywood, a resident of Tucson involved in transportation for 25 years, spoke to the need to improve the city’s transit system and the effectiveness of transit overall. He reviewed the history of transit service in Tucson. He suggested the extension of transit routes in the northwest part of the city. He commended the city for their outstanding commitment to transit and noted that the general support among the citizens is very high. He believes that the state should increase its funding for transit systems throughout the state and provide a workable regional transit authority. Mr. Caywood called for the strengthening of land use regulations to provide for transit-oriented development that would increase transit usage. He suggested that the task force create a vision for the future with respect to transit. He believes that transit use could be increased by 100 or 150 percent in Tucson if it had the resources.

Mr. Mark Lewis, a resident of Oro Valley, indicated that he manages homeowner associations throughout the Tucson area. The homeowners that he has heard from send the message that the state should make sure that the taxes reasonably match what the state is trying to accomplish. He suggested that the fuel tax be increased and the VLT be commensurate with the age, weight and annual fuel consumption of a vehicle. He was opposed to tying the transportation needs to a sales tax or an impact fee, because they are completely disjointed from the problems.

Mr. Anthony Haswell, a resident of Tucson also involved in transportation, urged the task force to recommend the use of a portion of motor fuel tax revenues to fund public transportation in Arizona. He said that it is impossible to provide transit services at fares, which cover operating costs. He listed compelling public policy reasons for making motor fuel tax funds available to support public transit: those who chose to use automobiles in lieu of transit have made it necessary; greater transit usage would benefit auto users by reducing traffic congestion; and finally, the average automobile owner is financially better off than the average person without a car. He distributed a memo explaining why the conventional wisdom that motor fuel tax use to fund public transit is prohibited by the constitution is wrong.

Mr. Dick Shaffer, City of Tucson/Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee, presented recommendations to address bicycle issues: build upon the success of bicycle transportation in other jurisdictions such as Oregon; conduct a study to determine the merits of classifying the bicycle as a vehicle; establish a full-time and well-trained state bicycle coordinator position as well as one in each ADOT district office; maintain strong support for the federal transportation enhancement program; provide paved shoulders on existing roadways where the shoulders do not exist; reevaluate the use and design of rumble strips on roadways with shoulders narrower than eight feet; and design traffic signalization improvements responsible to bicycles and pedestrians. Mr. Shaffer provided additional comments in written form to the task force.

Mr. Dale Calvert, also a citizen active in transportation planning, emphasized the need to go beyond the borders of the individual cities if the urban areas are going to achieve a successful transit system. Some sort of transit authority should be established that includes clear definition of taxing authority. The legislature should define enabling legislation that will allow communities to move forward in this area. He suggested that to achieve a true multimodal transportation system ADOT needs to recognize the goal in its planning process and include those elements in all projects. He suggested that staffing needs to be strengthened to truly support multimodal elements. He stated that funding is a very critical issue, and he suggested either increasing the gas tax or create a baseline tax increase that deals with the state issues and is adjusted for inflation. Mr. Calvert stated that the legislature needs to provide enabling legislation so that communities and counties can themselves take steps to fund transportation improvements, such as Maricopa County’s regional freeway tax.

Mr. John Liosattos, Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, discussed the chamber’s efforts to find solutions to the transportation shortfall in Southern Arizona through its own transportation task force. They have lobbied to raise the fuel tax and have it indexed to inflation. They also opposed the reduction of the VLT. The chamber is also supportive of the Hoover Dam and Nogales port of entry projects. Mr. Liosattos called for more funding for roadway projects, both new construction and maintenance, as well as a rail ramp in Tucson.

Mr. Shultz encouraged all of the state’s chambers of commerce to unite, build a consensus from the business community, and bring forward recommendations that will benefit the state as well as their specific regions.

Mr. Dan Cavanagh, Regional Director of the Arizona Builders Alliance, stated that the alliance views roads largely as an issue of economic development. He suggested that the solution to the problems is adequate funding and in a timely manner. He stated that the best tax is one that someone else pays and suggested that the legislature come up with a tax that out-of-state persons pay. He was opposed to creating a new bureaucratic system to collect a new tax. He suggested that any new tax not be retroactive, i.e. a contract that has been let prior to the effective date should not be impacted.

Closing Comments and Adjournment

Mr. Shultz commented that this was one of the most comprehensive hearings he has attended. He appreciated the input and assured the participants that their comments would be reviewed as the task force moves forward to fashion recommendations for transportation in Arizona.

The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.

MARTIN SHULTZ, Co-Chairperson

SHARON MEGDAL, Co-Chairperson

A complete transcript of this meeting is available for review, upon request