MPO Meeting Minutes
Memorandum for the Record
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting
September 2, 2021, Meeting
10:00 AM–11:10 AM, Zoom Video Conferencing Platform
David Mohler, Chair, representing Jamey Tesler, Secretary of Transportation and Chief Executive Officer of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) agreed to the following:
See attendance on page 6.
D. Mohler announced that the MPO would not meet on September 16, 2021, and would instead meet on September 23, 2021.
T. Teich provided an update on two open positions at CTPS.
There were none.
D. Shooster reported that the UPWP Committee met prior to the MPO board meeting and agreed to recommend that the MPO vote to endorse draft UPWP Amendment One.
L. Diggins reported that the Advisory Council would next meet on September 8, 2021.
A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of July 15, 2021, was made by the MBTA Advisory Board (Brian Kane) and seconded by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) (Eric Bourassa). At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) (Daniel Amstutz) and Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination (Town of Acton) (Austin Cyganiewicz) abstained. The motion carried.
1. Recommended Revisions to Certain 3C Budgets (FFY 2021)
2. Draft FFY 2021 UPWP Amendment One
3. Comment Letter: Conservation Law Foundation
S. Johnston stated that Draft Amendment One to the FFY 2021 UPWP accounts for actual spending in the first three quarters of FFY 2021 and fourth-quarter needs. In addition to the changes proposed to the CTPS budget, the amendment includes a minor change to work conducted by MAPC using UPWP funds. S. Johnston stated that the MPO voted to release this amendment for a 21-day public review period at the meeting on August 5, 2021. MPO staff received one comment on the amendment from the Conservation Law Foundation. The letter expressed disappointment that the amendment reallocates funding from the Transportation Equity Program because staff have not had the opportunity to expend the funds despite the equity needs of the region.
A motion to endorse Amendment One to the FFY 2021 UPWP was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) (Tom Bent). The motion carried.
M. Genova provided an update on and recommendations for the MPO’s Community Connections Program. Community Connections is one of the investment programs established in the MPO’s current Long-Range Transportation Plan. The program funds first- and last-mile connections and other small, non-traditional projects that promote mobility. The MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) includes $2 million annually for Community Connections. The second round of funding was allocated in the most recent TIP. M. Genova stated that during the most recent funding cycle, seven out of the 17 proponents applied for funding for transit operating projects, representing 64 percent of the total funding requested. The MPO funded ten projects, allocating the full $2 million in FFY 2022 and including future year funding for both transit operating projects selected.
M. Genova stated that current challenges for the program fall into two main categories: administrative hurdles and the demands of transit operating projects. The program places a heavy administrative burden on staff in MassDOT’s Office of Transportation Planning to manage contracts with proponents. Transit operating projects require additional analysis to determine net greenhouse gas reductions before they can be eligible for another year of funding. The funding of operating projects across multiple years limits the amount of funding within the program for smaller projects going forward.
M. Genova proposed streamlining the application process, simplifying the administration of capital projects, and changing the approach for transit operating projects. Streamlining the application would involve shortening the application and clarifying eligible project types. Simplifying the administration of capital projects would involve moving to a collective purchasing model, wherein MAPC would conduct a joint procurement for all capital items approved through the program each year. M. Genova described two options relative to funding transit operating projects. The first would require that shuttle and microtransit projects be administered directly by a regional transit authority (RTA). The other option would remove transit operating projects from the list of eligible projects.
M. Genova stated that MPO staff will finalize any adjustments to the program and begin the application process for next year’s round of funding on October 1, 2021, the beginning of FFY 2022. Project proposals will be due in December.
D. Amstutz asked whether limiting the number of transit operating projects funded in a given year would reduce the administrative burden and whether RTAs are open to administrating projects. D. Amstutz also asked for clarification as to how the collective procurement process would work.
S. Johnston replied that MPO staff would reach out to RTAs to explore this option if the MPO expressed interest in it. S. Johnston added that MPO staff have discussed introducing caps on the percentage of funds spent on specific project types in a given year, but that the number does not necessarily reduce the administrative burden for MPO staff. Rather, the issue would be future flexibility for the program and how much program funding the MPO board believes should be taken up by operating projects. S. Johnston stated that MAPC would create a collective procurement agreement for each category of projects, wherein the types of objects a proponent can procure are defined, and MAPC would write a contract for each group. E. Bourassa added that the intent would be to determine demand, write a contract, and then allow proponents to apply for materials that are already accounted for. This would also help account for current supply chain issues.
Tom O’Rourke (Three Rivers Interlocal Council) (Town of Norwood/Neponset River Regional Chamber) expressed concern at the idea of eliminating operating projects given that first- and last-mile connections were the main reason for creating the program. T. O’Rourke noted that it may be too early to judge the ridership of current operating projects due to the impacts of COVID-19. S. Johnston noted that in creating the program, the MPO expressed a desire to fund some transit operating projects while ensuring that they would survive past the period of MPO funding. S. Johnston said that applications have been mixed in terms of how successful proponents have been in ensuring future financial stability. S. Johnston stated that the question is whether the MPO thinks it’s important that there be a funding source in the region for these types of projects.
Jim Fitzgerald also wondered how interested RTAs are in taking on the administrative burden of operating projects and expressed support for a dollar limit on operating projects.
B. Kane agreed that shifting the administrative burden to RTAs may not be welcome. He asked whether any currently funded projects have had an air quality benefit or shown evidence of improving or increasing ridership, not just shifting riders from another mode of public transit. S. Johnston stated that the only currently funded operating project that has actually launched is a micro-transit project in Newton, so there is no currently actionable ridership or air quality data.
K. Miller stated that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is not opposed either to shifting administration to RTAs or to having MAPC craft a purchasing agreement, but he noted that MassDOT does not have a program to certify local public agencies to manage federal contracts. FHWA and MAPC would need to discuss questions as to a subrecipient implementing federal construction funds. K. Miller clarified that the intent of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program (which is the federal program that funds Community Connections) is to make funds available as seed money. Air quality benefit is determined not just via ridership but also by using ridership surveys that indicate prior mode of transportation and other factors.
E. Bourassa stated that if it turns out that MAPC cannot play a role in overseeing procurements, that part of the program may not make sense.
D. Mohler noted that MassDOT oversees similar projects at other MPOs, so working this out with FHWA is not insurmountable.
Susan Barrett (Town of Lexington) expressed support for RTAs administrating or coordinating operating projects in order to reduce gaps in service and make sure services are not duplicative.
L. Diggins asked whether the Transit Working Group (TWG) has been involved in changes to the program. S. Johnston stated that MPO staff would put this topic on the agenda for an upcoming TWG meeting.
D. Mohler stated that discussion seemed to indicate that the MPO is relatively comfortable with proposed changes to the application process and capital project administration. D. Mohler stated that MPO staff should bring the question of administering operating projects via RTAs directly to the RTAs and the TWG before the MPO makes a decision on that recommendation. D. Mohler stated that staff should also explore what a cap on transit operating projects could or should look like before returning to the MPO.
There were none.
A motion to adjourn was made by MAPC (E. Bourassa) and seconded by the MBTA Advisory Board (B. Kane). The motion carried.
|
Members |
Representatives
and
Alternates |
|
At-Large City (City of Everett) |
Jay Monty |
|
At-Large City (City of Newton) |
Jason Sobel |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Arlington) |
Daniel Amstutz |
|
At-Large Town (Town of Brookline) |
Heather Hamilton |
|
City of Boston (Boston Planning &
Development Agency) |
Jim Fitzgerald |
|
City of Boston (Boston Transportation
Department) |
Bill Conroy |
|
Federal Highway Administration |
Ken Miller |
|
Federal Transit Administration |
|
|
Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville) |
Tom Bent |
|
Massachusetts Department of Transportation |
David Mohler John Bechard |
|
MassDOT Highway Division |
John Romano |
|
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
(MBTA) |
Jillian Linnell |
|
Massachusetts Port Authority |
|
|
MBTA Advisory Board |
Brian Kane |
|
Metropolitan Area Planning Council |
Eric Bourassa |
|
MetroWest Regional Collaborative (City of
Framingham) |
Thatcher Kezer III |
|
Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal
Coordination (Town of Acton) |
Austin Cyganiewicz |
|
North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly) |
Darlene Wynne |
|
North Suburban Planning Council (City of
Woburn) |
Tina Cassidy |
|
Regional Transportation Advisory Council |
Lenard Diggins |
|
South Shore Coalition (Town of Rockland) |
Jennifer Constable |
|
South West Advisory Planning Committee
(Town of Medway) |
Peter Pelletier |
|
Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of
Norwood/Neponset Valley Chamber of Commerce) |
Tom O’Rourke Steve Olanoff |
|
Other
Attendees |
Affiliation |
|
Aleida Leza |
Belmont resident |
|
Amira Patterson |
MBTA Advisory Board |
|
Benjamin N.W. Muller |
MassDOT Highway District 6 |
|
Derek Krevat |
MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning |
|
Derek Shooster |
MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning |
|
Gus Norrbom |
MassDOT |
|
Johannes Epke |
Conservation Law Foundation |
|
Jon Seward |
Community Design Partnership |
|
Josh Klingenstein |
MBTA |
|
Joy Glynn |
MWRTA |
|
Michelle Ho |
MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning |
|
Mike Garrity |
MassDOT |
|
Sheila Page |
Town of Lexington |
|
Susan Barrett |
Town of Lexington |
|
Todd Baldwin |
Town of Saugus |
|
Wesley Lickus |
MassDOT |
|
Yahaira Graxirena |
Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission |
|
Zack Blais |
Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission |
|
MPO
Staff/Central Transportation Planning Staff |
|
Tegin Teich, Executive Director |
|
Mark Abbott |
|
Matt Archer |
|
Jonathan Church |
|
Annette Demchur |
|
Róisín Foley |
|
Hiral Gandhi |
|
Matt Genova |
|
Betsy Harvey |
|
Sandy Johnston |
|
Anne McGahan |
|
Marty Milkovits |
|
Ariel Patterson |
|
Gina Perille |
|
Michelle Scott |
|
The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) operates its programs, services, and activities in
compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws including Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the Civil Rights Restoration Act of
1987, and related statutes and regulations. Title VI prohibits discrimination
in federally assisted programs and requires that no person in the United
States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin
(including limited English proficiency), be excluded from participation in,
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any
program or activity that receives federal assistance. Related federal
nondiscrimination laws administered by the Federal Highway Administration,
Federal Transit Administration, or both, prohibit discrimination on the basis
of age, sex, and disability. The Boston Region MPO considers these protected
populations in its Title VI Programs, consistent with federal interpretation
and administration. In addition, the Boston Region MPO provides meaningful
access to its programs, services, and activities to individuals with limited
English proficiency, in compliance with U.S. Department of Transportation
policy and guidance on federal Executive Order 13166. The Boston Region MPO also complies with the
Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, M.G.L. c 272 sections 92a, 98, 98a,
which prohibits making any distinction, discrimination, or restriction in
admission to, or treatment in a place of public accommodation based on race,
color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability,
or ancestry. Likewise, the Boston Region MPO complies with the Governor's
Executive Order 526, section 4, which requires that all programs, activities,
and services provided, performed, licensed, chartered, funded, regulated, or
contracted for by the state shall be conducted without unlawful
discrimination based on race, color, age, gender, ethnicity, sexual
orientation, gender identity or expression, religion, creed, ancestry,
national origin, disability, veteran's status (including Vietnam-era
veterans), or background. A complaint form and additional information
can be obtained by contacting the MPO or at http://www.bostonmpo.org/mpo_non_discrimination. To request this
information in a different language or in an accessible format, please
contact Title VI Specialist By Telephone: For people with hearing or speaking difficulties,
connect through the state MassRelay service: ·
Relay Using
TTY or Hearing Carry-over:
800.439.2370 ·
Relay Using
Voice Carry-over: 866.887.6619 ·
Relay Using
Text to Speech: 866.645.9870 For more information, including numbers for Spanish
speakers, visit https://www.mass.gov/massrelay. |