[00:00:05]
>> WELCOME, EVERYONE. GOOD AFTERNOON.
[1. Call to Order and Recognition of Quorum]
THIS IS OUR JUNE 23RD MPO TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING.WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AND RECOGNIZE WE DO HAVE QUORUM IN PERSON.
THE NEXT ITEM IS OUR VERBAL ROLL CALL.
[2. Verbal Roll Call]
MAXINE CALLOWAY? ANDREW PINNEY?
>> THANK YOU. TAMMY REED-HOLGUIN? I NEED TO UNMUTE.
>> THANK YOU. [BACKGROUND] CHRISTOPHER MORAN? MAGGIE BARSZEWSKI? TOM GOOD?
>> THANK YOU. MICHAEL RIGHETTI?
>> THANK YOU. CHARLES SCHRAMM?
>> THANK YOU. MAC SERDA? LISA MARIE GLOVER?
>> I ASK YOU TO HAVE YOUR VIDEO, I CAN'T HAVE THE LAPTOP OPEN AND THE JUNCTION BOX GO INTO MY TWO SCREENS.
IT STAYS OUT THERE AND THE VIDEO.
>> THANK YOU. LISA ZELCH? SHAUN LENNY?
>> THANK YOU. MATTHUE GOLDSTEIN? I SEE YOU ON BUT YOU MIGHT BE HAVING MICROPHONE ISSUES.
>> THANK YOU. IGOR COLMENARES?
>> THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE] I BUTCHERED THAT. I APOLOGIZE.
>> THAT'S OKAY. I'M HERE. [LAUGHTER]
>> KARL THOMPSON? EMILY ACETI?
>> THANK YOU. NATALIE YESBECK?
>> THANK YOU. RICHARD TORNESE?
>> THANK YOU. NICK SOFOUL? DAWN TEETSEL?
>> LENNY HEMAN FOR DAWN TEETSEL.
>> THANK YOU. CHRISTINA MISKIS?
>> THANK YOU. WE JUST HAD NICK SOFOUL WALK IN. I'LL MARK THAT.
[00:05:02]
>> WE'RE ALL GOOD. NEXT ITEM IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
[3. Approval of Minutes - May 26, 2021]
IF I COULD HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES BY RAISING YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY? MOTION MADE BY MAQSOOD, SECONDED BY CLARISSA.IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES, RAISE YOUR HAND.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL PASS THIS ITEM ON CONSENT.
IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH DOING IT BY CONSENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND; OTHERWISE, WE WILL PASS THE MOTION.
NEXT ITEM IS THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.
[4. Approval of Agenda]
AGAIN, IF I COULD HAVE A MOTION BY RAISING YOUR VIRTUAL HAND.PETE SCHWARZ MADE THE MOTION, RICHARD TORNESE SECONDED.
ANY COMMENTS ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NONE, WE'LL PASS THIS ITEM BY CONSENT.
IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH THAT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND; OTHERWISE, THE ITEM PASSES.
SEEING NONE. MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, PUBLIC COMMENT.
REBECCA, HAVE WE RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR TODAY?
>> WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PRIOR TO EMAIL AND WE HAVE NONE IN THE OTHER ROOM.
>> IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC THAT HAVE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS TIME, YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND.
SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM,
[6. MOTION TO ELECT OFFICERS to Serve for the Next Year (July 2021 Through June 2022): A. Chair B. Vice Chair]
WHICH IS THE MOTION TO ELECT OFFICERS.>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY CAN HEAR ME.
THIS IS OUR ANNUAL ITEM WHERE WE DO ELECTION OF OFFICERS AND THE OFFICERS POSITIONS TAKE EFFECT JULY OF NEXT MONTH THROUGH JUNE OF 2022.
RIGHT NOW, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE THANK YOU VOLUNTEER INTERESTS FROM KAREN WARFEL AS OUR CHAIR TO CONTINUE AS OUR CHAIR.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO NOMINATE HER.
MAQSOOD NASIR, AS OUR VICE CHAIR, HAS ALSO VOLUNTEERED, KINDLY VOLUNTEER TO DO [OVERLAPPING] THIS FOR ANOTHER YEAR.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE MS. KAREN WARFEL TO SERVE FOR ANOTHER ONE YEAR AS A CHAIR.
>> JUST TO ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER NOMINEES? HEARING NONE, I GUESS WE CAN CLOSE THAT. UNLESS YOU WANT TO VOTE. [LAUGHTER]
>> I GUESS WE'LL OFFICIALLY TAKE THE VOTE ON THIS ONE.
>> SURE. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT MOTION. [NOISE]
>> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE MAQSOOD TO CONTINUE AS THE VICE CHAIR.
WE'LL TAKE A VOTE ON THAT ONE, I GUESS.
>> AGAIN, RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT NOMINATION.
>> ALL RIGHT, ARE WE GOOD? CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU BOTH.
>> WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU FOR ANOTHER YEAR. [APPLAUSE]
>> WE'LL MOVE INTO OUR ACTION ITEMS FOR TODAY.
[1. PUBLIC MEETING AND MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE the Draft Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2026 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)]
OUR FIRST ITEM IS A PUBLIC MEETING REGARDING THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2022-2026: TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.IT WILL BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
OUR FIRST ITEM WILL BE SEEING A PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT TIP.
>> THANK YOU, MS. CHAIR. COMMITTEE MEMBERS, GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M JIHONG CHEN, PROJECT PROGRAMMING MANAGER WITH THE BROWARD MPO.
THE BROWARD MPO HAS ALWAYS PRESENTED THE DRAFT, TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, AND IT IS OUR JUNE TAC/CAC MEETINGS.
NO EXEMPTION NOW, WE'RE PRESENTING THE DRAFT TIP TODAY.
YOU MAY WONDER, WHAT IS THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM? IT IS A FIVE-YEAR PROGRAM INCLUDING PROJECTS THAT REGION EXPECTS TO BUILD OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
THOSE PROJECTS INCLUDE THE TRANSIT, HIGHWAY, HIRE, AND THE SEAPORT AS WELL AS BICYCLE, FINANCE TREE, AND THE FREIGHT-RELATED PROJECT.
[00:10:01]
[NOISE] YOU MAY HAVE HEARD HUNDREDS OF TIMES ABOUT THE BROWARD MPO'S CORE PRODUCTS, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REFRESH [INAUDIBLE] OF THOSE CORE PRODUCTS.JUST LIKE A PIPELINE, PROJECTS IN THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, MOVE TO THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST, AND THEN MOVE TO THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
THE OTHER CORE PRODUCTS ALSO INCLUDE UNIFIED PLANNING WORK PROGRAM, STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN, AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN.
RIGHT NOW, WE ARE AT A STAGE OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS BROWARD MPO'S PLANNING PROCESS.
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN IS UPDATED EVERY FIVE YEARS, AND THE TIP IS UPDATED ANNUALLY.
JUST AS I SAID, PROJECTS MOVE THROUGH THE PIPELINE BY FOLLOWING FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS.
PROJECTS FROM MTP MOVE TO MULTIMODAL PRIORITY LIST, AND THEN MOVE TO THE FDOT DRAFTED TENTATIVE WORK PROGRAM AND THE THEN MOVE TO THE TIP.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE TIP DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
THE MPO STAFF PREPARES THE DRAFT TO TIP USING DATABASE PROVIDED BY FDOT.
STARTS PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMENTS OF [INAUDIBLE] BY RUNNING ADVERTISEMENTS ON NEWSPAPERS AND HOST PUBLIC MEETINGS.
THE TAC/CAC BOARD APPROVES THE TIP AT THEIR JUNE, JULY MEETINGS.
FINAL TIP IS SENT TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, AND THE FDOT ON JULY 15TH.
THE TIP TAKE EFFECTS ON OCTOBER 1ST EACH YEAR.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE TIP FOR THIS YEAR.
THE TIP INCLUDES 452 PROJECTS AND THE TOTAL FUNDING AMOUNT IS ABOUT $5.1 BILLION.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS FUNDING SUMMARY BY SOURCE AND BY TRANSPORTATION MODE.
THE GRAPH ON THE LEFT DISPLAYS FUNDING SUMMARY BY FUNDING SOURCE.
THE TOP FUNDING SOURCES ARE STATE AND FEDERAL, PROVIDING ABOUT $1.7 BILLION EACH, EACH ACCOUNTING FOR ABOUT 32 PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENT.
THE THIRD FUNDING SOURCE IS TOLL/TURNPIKE CONTRIBUTING ABOUT $1.5 BILLION, MAKING UP ABOUT 29 OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS.
THE OTHER TWO FUNDING SOURCES ARE LOCAL AND THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE BRIDGE BONDS.
THE GRAPH ON THE RIGHT PRESENTS FUNDING SUMMARY BY TRANSPORTATION MODE.
HIGHWAY PROJECTS RECEIVE ABOUT $3.7 BILLION, ACCOUNTING FOR ABOUT 72 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL FUNDING AMOUNT.
THE DRAFT TIP INVESTS, ABOUT $391 MILLION ON TRANSIT PROJECTS, ACCOUNTING FOR ABOUT EIGHT PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENT.
REAL PROJECTS RECEIVE ABOUT $526 MILLION, MAKING UP ABOUT 10 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT.
TIP INVEST ABOUT $323 MILLION, SUPPORTING AVIATION PROJECTS ACCOUNTING FOR ABOUT SIX PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENT.
THE DRAFT THE TIP PROGRAMS, $190 MILLION ON BICYCLE AND THE PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS, MAKING UP ABOUT FOUR PERCENT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT.
ABOUT $21 MILLION, MAKE UP ABOUT ONE PERCENT OF THE TOTAL INVESTMENT, SUPPOSE PORT EVERGLADES PROJECTS.
THE BROWARD MPO'S ATTRIBUTE FOR FUNDS IN THE DRAFT TIP.
THE DRAFT TIP INCLUDES ABOUT $154 MILLION OF THE BROWARD MPO'S ATTRIBUTE OF FUNDS, SUPPORTING 56 PROJECTS.
AMONG THE $154 MILLION, ABOUT $112 BILLION IS INVESTED ON 37 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECT.
[00:15:03]
ABOUT $23 MILLION SUPPORTS SIX PLUMBING PROJECTS, AND ABOUT $15 MILLION FUNDS 11 MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS.ABOUT $4 MILLION FUNDS TWO TRANSIT PROJECTS.
THE BROWARD MPO EARLIER RECEIVED ABOUT $12 MILLION CARES FUNDS.
THOSE FUNDS SUPPORT SEVEN PROJECTS.
AMONG THE $12 MILLION, ABOUT $7.8 MILLION IS INVESTED ON THREE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS.
ABOUT $2.4 MILLION SUPPORTS ONE TRAFFIC SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION PROJECT.
ABOUT $1.4 MILLION FUNDS TWO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROJECTS, AND ABOUT $0.4 MILLION FUNDS 150 PROJECTS.
LET'S TAKE A QUICK REVIEW OF MAJOR PROJECTS AND THE PROGRAMS IN THE DRAFT TIP.
THIS SLIDE INCLUDES FINAL PROJECTS FOR IMPROVING MAJOR HIGHWAYS.
FIRST ONE IS A SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY.
THE MAP ON THE LEFT SIDE SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THOSE PROJECTS.
THE TIP REVISE ABOUT $715 MILLION OF SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY WIDENING AND THE CONSTRUCTING FROM NORTHWEST AT 8TH STREET TO POWERLINE ROAD.
SOUTHWEST AT 10TH STREET, ADDING LANES FROM TURNPIKE/SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY TO WEST OF I-95 RECEIVES ABOUT $348 MILLION IN THE TIP TIMEFRAME.
THE TIP PROGRAMMED $500 MILLION TO SUPPORT I-95 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS FROM SOUTH OF SOUTHWEST AT 10TH STREET TO NORTH OF HILLSBORO BOULEVARD.
THE TIP PROVIDES $14 MILLION TO FUND UNIVERSITY DRIVE FROM NORTHWEST 40TH STREET TO SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY.
THE LAST ONE, THE TIP PROVIDES $27 MILLION TO FUND LOXAHATCHEE ROAD FROM ARTHUR MARSHALL LOXAHATCHEE REFUGE TO STATE ROAD-7.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS OVERALL FUNDING FOR BROWARD MPO FUNDING PROGRAM.
THE TIP DIVIDES $55 MILLION ON 23 CSLIP AND THE TAP PROJECTS, $130 MILLION ON 20 COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN PROJECTS, $16 MILLION ON THREE MOBILITY HUBS PROJECTS, $906 MILLION ON 18 ROADWAY PROJECTS, $18 MILLION ON SIX SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY PROJECTS, AND $7.5 MILLION ON ONE TRANSIT PROJECT.
THE BROWARD MPO ALSO MONITORS PROJECTS PROGRESS.
THIS SLIDE INCLUDES PROJECTS THAT JUST GRADUATED FROM THE TIP AND ARE UNDER IMPLEMENTATION.
WHAT IS A PROJECT THAT HAS GRADUATED FROM TIP? IF ALL FUNDS FOR PROJECTS HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED AND ENCUMBERED, THE PROJECT IS GRADUATED FROM TIP.
THEY'RE NO LONGER SHOWING IN THE TIP ANYMORE.
THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 23 PROJECTS THAT JUST GRADUATED FROM THE TIP, WORTH ABOUT $153 MILLION.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE PROJECTS, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE ATTACHMENTS IN THE MEETING PACKAGE.
[NOISE] BY FOLLOWING THE STATE AND THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS, THE BROWARD MPO RELEASED A PUBLIC NOTICE ON JUNE 3RD, 2021 AND PUBLISHED THE DRAFT TIP ON JUNE 2ND, 2021.
BESIDES A WORKSHOP WAS HOSTED ON JUNE 15, THERE ARE THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS HOSTED AT JUNE, JULY, TAC/CAC BOARD MEETINGS.
THE MPO BOARD WILL MAKE FINAL ACTION ON THE DRAFT TIP ON JULY 8TH,
[00:20:02]
2021. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.YOU MAY NOTICE THAT THE DRAFT TIP INCLUDES MORE THAN 400 PAGES, SO YOU MAY HAVE A HARD TIME FINDING THE SECTION YOU WANT TO READ.
NEXT, I WILL SHOW YOU HOW TO QUICKLY ACCESS THE CHAPTER OR SECTION YOU DESIRED.
THIS SCREEN SHOWS THE TABLE OF CONTENTS OF THE DRAFT TIP.
YOU CAN CLICK ON THE SECTION OR CHAPTER NAME, CAN THEN LEAD YOU TO THE SECTION OR CHAPTER.
HERE IT IS, SO IT'S EASY TO ACCESS THE CHAPTER OR SECTION YOU WANT TO READ.
TODAY, THE BROWARD MPO STAFF ARE SEEKING A MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO TO APPROVE THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2022 TO 2026 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
WITH THAT, THE MPO STAFF AND THE FTA STAFF ARE HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH, DR. CHEN.
IT'S A GREAT PRESENTATION, AS ALWAYS.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DRAFT TIP? [NOISE] YOU CAN RAISE YOUR VIRTUAL HAND.
SHE MENTIONED PORT EVERGLADES. DID I HEAR CORRECTLY?
>> YOU HEAR WHAT? CAN YOU SAY IT AGAIN?
>> YOU HAD MENTIONED, DR. CHEN, PORT EVERGLADES.
THERE WERE SOME PROJECTS RELATED TO PORT EVERGLADES?
>> YES. YOU CAN GO TO THE TABLE OF CONTENTS AND THAT THERE HAVE ONE SECTION FOR THE PORT EVERGLADES.
>> IN WHAT YEAR WAS THAT? OKAY, I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE PROJECTS. THANK YOU.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM [OVERLAPPING] THE BOARD OR FROM THE PUBLIC?
>> HOW DO I TALK? WHICH WAY? [BACKGROUND]
>> YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU THOUGH.
SO YOU GOT A [OVERLAPPING] GOOD STRONG VOICE THERE.
>> YEAH [LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING]
I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE DRAFT TIP AND IT'S DATED 2021-'25 AND I KNOW IT'S THE '22-'26.
I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT IT'S 2021 JULY.
>> YOU MENTIONED 2021-2025, THAT IS THE CURRENT TIP.
THE ONE WE JUST PROPOSED, PRESENTED, IS 2022-2026 TIP.
ONCE THIS APPROVES ON OCTOBER 1ST, WE WILL REVOKED THE CURRENT ONE.
>> OKAY. [BACKGROUND] I PULLED UP THE ATTACHMENT THAT'S IN THE AGENDA, 2022-2026 DRAFT GRADUATED PROJECT LIST.
>> IT POPPED UP AND I'M LOOKING AT 2021-2025 ON EACH OF THESE SHEETS, SO I ASK IS THAT CORRECT THEN?
>> YES. THOSE ARE PROJECTS IN THE CURRENT TIP, SO THEY GRADUATED FROM THE CURRENT TIP.
THEY DON'T NEED FUNDING ANYMORE IN THE NEW TIP, SO NOT INCLUDE IN THE PROPOSAL TIP.
>> MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY JUMP IN.
THIS IS PETER GIES, SYSTEMS PLANNING MANAGER FOR THE BROWARD MPO.
TOM, THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE GRADUATED PROJECT LIST IS A WAY FOR US JUST TO SHOW WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AS PART OF THE PREVIOUS TIP.
WE ALWAYS LIKE TO OPEN UP OUR NEW TIP CYCLE BY SHOWING WHICH PROJECTS ACTUALLY GOT FULLY FUNDED IN THE PREVIOUS CYCLE AND NO LONGER NEEDED FUNDING IN THE NEW TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT GRADUATED PROJECT LIST.
IT'S REALLY TO PAT ALL OF OURSELVES ON THE BACK AND SAY, "YEAH.
THE PROJECTS ACTUALLY ARE MAKING THEIR WAY THROUGH AND BEING FULLY FUNDED."
>> I'M TRYING TO FIND THE DOCUMENT THEN THAT WERE APPROVED.
>> THERE IS A LINK IN THE AGENDA ITEM THAT TAKES YOU DIRECTLY TO THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2022-2026 TIP.
>> WHAT'S THE TITLE OF THE LINK?
[00:25:02]
[BACKGROUND] THE [INAUDIBLE] , YOU CAN CLICK ON THE PRESENTATION, THE SECOND FROM THE BOTTOM, THERE IS A LINK. [OVERLAPPING]>> NO, THAT'S THE GRADUATED LIST. THERE, THAT RIGHT THERE.
IF YOU CLICK ON THAT, [NOISE] IT SHOULD TAKE YOU AND GO DOWN [OVERLAPPING]
>> I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THIS? IT'S NOT A PART OF THE ATTACHMENT?
>> IT'S NOT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S PART OF THE ATTACHMENT.
>> YES. BECAUSE THIS DOCUMENT IS TOO BIG, SO WE PROVIDE THE LINK.
JUST I WOULD EXPECT THAT THE LINK WAS JUST DIRECTLY EMBEDDED INTO THE AGENDA ITEM.
BUT AT LEAST IT TOOK YOU TO 2021, '25.
BUT I HAVE SINCE BEEN DIRECTED TO THE CORRECT DOCUMENT, THANK YOU.
[NOISE] I'M GOOD. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
>> GREAT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THE DRAFT TIP? [NOISE] THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING, SO IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE DRAFT TIP THAT'S BEING PROPOSED?
>> NO? GREAT. I DID WANT TO SHARE, WHEN I REVIEW THE TIP, IT IS EXCITING TO SEE THAT A LOT OF THE PLANNING EFFORTS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE STATE ROUTE 7, UNIVERSITY DRIVE, ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE TIP TO IMPLEMENT THOSE GREAT PLANNING PROJECTS THAT WE'VE DONE.
IT'S PRETTY EXCITING SEEING ALL THE NEW 95 INTERCHANGES THAT ARE GOING TO BE REDONE COMING UP IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
SEEING NO MORE COMMENTS, IF I COULD ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR FY '22-'26 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
THERE'S A SECOND? SECOND FROM MYRIAM JACQUES.
IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE MOTION.
NICK, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR ARE YOU MOTIONING? OKAY. SEEING NO COMMENTS, WE'LL PASS THIS MOTION ON CONSENT UNLESS ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENTS OR CONCERNS.
RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAVE ANY [OVERLAPPING]
>> CAN WE DO THIS? WE HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS ONE.
SORRY? WE HAVE TO DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS ONE.
>> WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL ON THIS ONE.
>> AM I CORRECT, PETER AND JIHONG? [NOISE]
>> OKAY. [NOISE] CAN YOU HEAR ME?
>> [NOISE] BROOKE PETERS? PLEASE SAY YES OR NO.
AGAIN, THE MOTION IS [OVERLAPPING] TO APPROVE THE DRAFT TIP.
>> YES, THANK YOU. MAXINE CALLOWAY?
>> THANK YOU. TAMMY REED-HOLGUIN?
>> THANK YOU. [NOISE] CHRISTOPHER MORAN? [NOISE] MAGGIE BARSZEWSKI? TOM GOOD?
YEAH, MICHAEL RIGHETTI? CHARLES SCHRAMM?
>> YES, THANK YOU. KAREN WARFEL?
MATTHUE GOLDSTEIN? PEACH FLORES?
>> YES, THANK YOU. ROBERTA MOORE?
>> YES, THANK YOU. CLARISSA IP?
>> YES, THANK YOU. IGOR COLMENARES?
>> YES, THANK YOU. MATTHEW COYLE?
>> YES, THANK YOU. KARL KENNEDY?
>> YES, THANK YOU. EMILY ACETI?
[00:30:02]
>> YES, THANK YOU, MYRIAM JACQUES.
>> YES, THANK YOU. STEPHEN DAVID? [NOISE].
>> YES, THANK YOU [LAUGHTER]. NATALIE YESBECK?
>> YES, THANK YOU. LISA WIGHT?
>> YES, THANK YOU. KAREN FRIEDMAN?
>> YES. [OVERLAPPING] DID YOU HEAR ME?
>> YES, WE DID HEAR YOU, LISA.
>> YES, THANK YOU. RICHARD TORNESE?
>> YES, THANK YOU. NICK SOFOUL?
>> YES, THANK YOU, NATACHA YACINTHE?
>> I HAVE SOME FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS.
SEPARATELY, WE ARE MEETING WITH STAFF ON FRIDAY BASED ON THIS, BUT RIGHT NOW I'M GOING TO SAY YES.
>> YES, THANK YOU. ANDREW SEBO?
>> YES, THANK YOU. CHRISTINA MISKIS?
>> YES, THANK YOU. THAT'S OUR VOTING MEMBERS. YOU'RE MUTED.
>> I WAS TRYING TO BE GOOD IN MUTE.
YES, BY [LAUGHTER] VOTE, WE WE DID PASS THE DRAFT TIP.
>> ACTION ITEM NUMBER 2 IS THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE BROWARD MPO
[2. MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE Amendments to the Complete Streets and other Localized Initiatives Program (CSLIP) Policies]
APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPLETE STREETS AND OTHER LOCALIZED INITIATIVES PROGRAM.WE HAVE MS. MACNEIL TO PROVIDE US A PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM.
THIS IS KERRIE MACNEIL, CSLIP MANAGER.
COMING TO YOU TODAY TO ASK FOR APPROVAL OR ASK FOR A MOTION ON THE UPDATES TO THE CSLIP POLICIES, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE FIRST SLIDE.
THANK YOU. REFRESHER IS GOOD FOR ANYBODY WHO THIS PROGRAM IS NEW TO.
CSLIP STANDS FOR COMPLETE STREETS AND OTHER LOCALIZED INITIATIVES PROGRAM.
IT PROVIDES FUNDING FOR SMALL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS WHICH IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND MOBILITY FOR ALL TRANSPORTATION USERS IN BROWARD.
IT'S A COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM.
THEY CAN FUND PROJECTS SUCH AS COMPLETE STREETS PROJECTS, TRAFFIC CALMING, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, ADA UPGRADES, MOBILITY HUBS, BIKE RACKS, AND TECHNOLOGY ADVANCEMENTS.
WHY UPDATE THE POLICIES? WE ARE UPDATING THE POLICIES IN PREPARATION FOR CSLIP CYCLE 6.
THERE ARE CHANGES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT, SUCH AS THE LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM.
IT'LL BE THE ONLY DELIVERY MECHANISM MOVING FORWARD FOR PROJECTS ON LOCAL ROADWAYS.
WE ARE INCORPORATING LESSONS LEARNED, FOR EXAMPLE, PROPOSING GREATER DETAIL OF WHAT IT MEANS PER PROJECT TO BE CONSIDERED PROGRAM-READY, AND WE ARE CREATING CONSISTENCY WITH THE 2045 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN OR MTP, AND DOING SO BY REVISING THE CSLIP CRITERIA TO BE IN LINE WITH MTP'S PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE FOLLOWING SLIDES, YOU MIGHT RECOGNIZE THIS FROM THE PAST SUMMERS WHERE UPDATES TO CSLIP POLICIES WOULD COME TO THE COMMITTEES AND THE BOARD.
THE BLACK TEXT REPRESENTS POLICIES THAT HAVE NOT CHANGED.
LIGHT COLOR BLUE REPRESENTS NEW TEXT, AND THEN THE RED TEXT THAT HAS A STRIKETHROUGH MEANS IT'S BEEN STRICKEN FROM THE POLICIES, SO GO AHEAD AND MOVE INTO THE FIRST SLIDE.
THE FIRST SECTION OF THE POLICIES, IT'S NOW CREATED TWO NEW SECTIONS TO ACT AS AN INTRODUCTION, THE PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW.
I GOT INTO THIS EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION, SO I WON'T GO INTO IT TOO MUCH BUT IT GOES THROUGH THE PURPOSE THAT CSLIP TOOK OVER FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM OR TAP, AND PROVIDES FUNDING FOR SMALL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
THE NEXT SECTION IS APPLICATION POLICIES.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THROUGH THIS PRETTY QUICKLY BECAUSE NOTHING HAS CHANGED, $3-MILLION CAP PER APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION AND A $500,000-MINIMUM LIMIT OF TWO APPLICATIONS PER PROJECT SPONSOR, AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL TWO PARTNER APPLICATIONS PER PROJECT SPONSOR ARE ALLOWED, IN ADDITION IF THE FACILITY OR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OWNER DIFFERS FROM THE LOCAL JURISDICTION IN WHICH THE FACILITY IS LOCATED.
[00:35:04]
THANK YOU.THE FIRST POLICY WITH EDITS TO IT IS THIS ONE HERE.
THE FIRST BULLET, APPLICATIONS REQUIRE SUPPORTING RESOLUTIONS FROM APPLICANTS AND FACILITY OR RIGHT-OF-WAY OWNERS, WHICH INCLUDE COMMITMENTS TO FUND CONSTRUCTION COSTS EXCEEDING THE CAP AND APPLICABLE OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS.
SOMETHING NEW THAT'S BEEN ADDED IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN PRACTICED IN THE PAST, BUT WE DIDN'T SEE ANY MENTION OF IT IN THE POLICIES, IN WRITINGS.
WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO ADD IT HERE IN WRITING.
IF SUBMITTING MORE THAN ONE PROJECT IN A CYCLE, LOCAL AGENCIES MAY LIST THEIR PROJECTS IN PRIORITY ORDER.
THEN THE PART THAT'S STRICKEN THROUGH, WE WANTED TO GET RID OF THE PART THAT SAYS IF REQUIRED BECAUSE ANY PROJECTS THAT ARE ON A LOCAL FACILITY WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE DELIVERED THROUGH LAP, SO THAT'S JUST MAKING THAT CLEAR AND THE LOCAL AGENCY CAN SEEK REIMBURSEMENT FOR DESIGN AND CEI.
SECOND BULLET POINT, JUST ADDING SOME CLARIFICATION.
WE SPOKE WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM FDOT AND THEY PROVIDED A LITTLE BIT OF DETAIL ON THE PROPER LANGUAGE FOR WHAT WE CALL THE LETTER OF SUPPORT.
WE'RE NOW REFERRING TO IT AS DOCUMENTATION OF A DETERMINATION FROM FDOT OR A LETTER OF CONSISTENCY FROM FDOT FOR PROJECTS PROPOSED ON STATE FACILITIES, SO JUST MAKING IT MORE CLEAR OF WHAT IS EXPECTED FROM THE LOCAL AGENCIES DURING THE APPLICATION PROCESS.
I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT BEFORE WE GO TO THIS NEXT SLIDE THAT ATTACHMENT NUMBER 1 OF THIS AGENDA ITEM, INCLUDES THE CLEAN VERSION OF ALL THESE CHANGES.
IT'S A THREE-PAGE PDF WHICH HAS THE REVISED POLICY, SO THIS IS JUST BREAKING EVERYTHING DOWN AND GOING THROUGH IT ONE BY ONE.
OKAY, GREAT. NO CHANGES TO THIS FIRST BULLET POINT, BUT THE SECOND, WE ARE ADDING A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON WHAT WE ARE EXPECTING THESE CITIES, THE LOCAL AGENCIES TO SUBMIT TO SHOW PROOF OF PUBLIC SUPPORT OF A PROJECT JUST GIVING EXAMPLES THAT THEY SHOULD PROVIDE PROOF OF PUBLIC SUPPORT THROUGH THINGS LIKE PROVIDING COPIES OF MEETING NOTES, MEETING RECORDINGS, LETTERS OF SUPPORT, AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD ALSO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF OUTREACH TO POTENTIALLY IMPACTED PROPERTIES.
HOW THEY DO THAT EXACTLY IS STILL UP TO THEM, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE GUIDANCE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
AGAIN, SAME HERE, THIS FIRST BULLET POINT.
WE'RE STILL ASKING APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE PROOF OF RIGHT-OF-WAY JUST LIKE IN THE PAST, BUT WE ARE SPECIFYING THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY MAP, SURVEY, OR PLAT.
SECOND BULLET, WE JUST PUT IT INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL AND WHAT IT MEANS TO BE PROGRAM-READY.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, WHICH IS SCOPE OF WORK, COST ESTIMATE, RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT, AND PARTNER COLLABORATION.
THE COST ESTIMATE AS STATED IN THE PAST, THAT IT SHOULD BE PREPARED AND SIGNED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, BUT IT SHOULD ALSO BE IN THE APPROPRIATE FORMAT PROVIDED BY FDOT.
NEXT SLIDE. IN LINE WITH THE CHANGES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND HAVING LAP AS THE ONLY DELIVERY MECHANISM, I MADE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THIS POLICY HERE THAT STRIKES THROUGH THE FOUR MILLION DOLLAR CONSTRUCTION CAP WITH CONTINGENCIES, SO IT'S JUST A THREE MILLION DOLLAR CAP.
LAST SECTION IS PROCESS POLICIES.
FIRST COUPLE OF BULLETS HAVEN'T CHANGED.
IN THE ANNUAL PROCESS, IT'S ANTICIPATED FOR SUBMISSION OF APPLICATIONS AND A MINIMUM SIX-WEEK WINDOW WILL BE PROVIDED FOR THOSE SUBMISSIONS.
BUT THE THIRD BULLET POINT, WE HAVE ADDED SOME MORE DETAIL ON WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THE LEAD STAFF PERSON THAT THE LOCAL AGENCY APPOINTS AS THE MAIN POINT OF CONTACT TO COORDINATE WITH THE MPO AND FDOT, SHOULD BE A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE OF THE LOCAL AGENCY WHO IS ALSO A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL WITH EXPERIENCE IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT, ENGINEERING, AND PLANNING.
YOU CAN REFER TO SECTION 2.4 OF FDOT'S LAP MANUAL FOR THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF WHAT THEY REFER TO AS THE RESPONSIBLE CHARGE.
I STILL REQUIRE TO MEET WITH THE MPO STAFF TO DISCUSS APPLICATIONS, PRIOR TO TO SUBMITTAL AND ALL APPLICATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO COMPLETENESS REVIEWS BASED ON THE APPROVED POLICIES FROM REQUIRED APPLICATION DOCUMENTATION.
THE THIRD BULLET POINT IS SHOWING, AS MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE EARLIER SLIDES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION,
[00:40:01]
THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO CREATE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE 2045 MTP METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND THE CSLIP EVALUATION CRITERIA.IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THAT PROJECT PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA FROM THE 2045 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, WE'RE INCORPORATING IN SO THAT THE FULL EVALUATION CRITERIA, THEMES OR CATEGORIES BEFORE WERE SAFETY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONNECTIVITY AND MOBILITY AND WE'RE PROPOSING, AS MENTIONED AT A PREVIOUS PRESENTATION TO YOU ALL, THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO INCORPORATE, SAFETY, ACCESSIBILITY, EQUITY, MOBILITY, ECONOMIC FATALITY, AND ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, HENCE THOSE SUBCATEGORIES.
THEN THE SAME WITH THE ONETIME POINT DEDUCTION FOR ANY LOCAL AGENCY WHO SUBMIT IN APPLICATION, AND IF THAT LOCAL AGENCY DEFAULTED ON ANY LAP ADMINISTERED PROJECT IN THE PAST THROUGH CSLIP.
THIS'S LAST, THE THIRD BULLET.
WHAT WE ARE CHANGING IS JUST CLARIFYING THE PROCESS, EXPLAINING A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAT AFTER A PROJECT IS RANKED, WHAT THAT PROCESS IS.
IT'S AN ITERATIVE PROCESS WHERE, THE MPO BOARD APPROVES THE RANKED PROJECTS AND THEN THE PROJECTS ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE MPO'S MULTIMODAL PRIORITY LIST AND THEN PROGRAMMED IN THE FDOT WORK PROGRAM AND THE MPO'S TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
THIS IS THE LAST OF THE POLICY CHANGES.
THE TWO NEW ONES IN BLUE AT THE BOTTOM, FINAL PROJECT RANKING WILL REFLECT THE PRIORITY OF THE LOCAL AGENCY THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE VERBIAGE ON SLIDE 7 ABOUT IF A LOCAL AGENCY SUBMITS MORE THAN ONE PROJECT, THEY CAN TELL US THEIR PREFERRED PROJECT.
THEN WHAT WE ADDED HERE IS ANY CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE AFTER SUBMITTAL MAY RESULT IN THE REMOVAL OF THE PROJECT FROM CONSIDERATION FOR FUNDING.
THAT WILL BE EVALUATED ON CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.
IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE A CHANGE THAT IS SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO REALLY CHANGE THE NEED FOR THE PROJECT.
WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. LAST SLIDE.
OBVIOUSLY I OPEN TO QUESTIONS, BUT JUST WANTED TO GO THROUGH FEW NEXT STEPS BEFORE WE GET INTO QUESTIONS.
THE MPO'S INTERNAL PROGRAM EVALUATION TOOL TEAM WILL CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THE RANKING TOOL, THE OBJECTIVE RANKING TOOL, AND BEGIN CONDUCTING TEST RUNS IN THE MONTH OF JULY SO THAT WE CAN FINALIZE THIS GROWING METHODS FOR THE REVISED CSLIP EVALUATION CRITERIA.
THE ONE-ON-ONE MEETINGS THAT ARE TYPICALLY HELD WITH LOCAL AGENCIES BEFORE THE APPLICATION WINDOW OPENS, THEY COULD MAYBE OFFERED AS EARLY AS STARTING IN AUGUST.
IT'S NEVER TOO EARLY TO START PREPARING FOR DEVELOPING YOUR CSLIP PROJECT.
WHEN THE CYCLE SIX WORKSHOP DATE IS SELECTED, WE WILL NOTIFY THE LOCAL AGENCIES, NOTIFY THE COMMITTEES AND THE BOARD, AND OF COURSE POST THAT INFORMATION ON THE CSLIP WEB PAGE.
THEN, ALTHOUGH WE HAVEN'T SELECTED AN EXACT DATE FOR THE CYCLE SIX DEADLINE WE INTEND TO KEEP THE TRADITION OF HAVING THE DEADLINE IN MID NOVEMBER AND OF COURSE, WE'LL DISTRIBUTE THAT INFORMATION TO LOCAL AGENCIES AND THE COMMITTEES AND IT'LL ALSO BE PUT SOME ON CSLIP WEBSITE. THAT'S IT.
>> DID IT AGAIN. [OVERLAPPING] I'VE CUT MYSELF ON MUTE.
AGAIN, IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
>> I THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION KERRIE .
MY QUESTION IS IN REFERENCE TO HOW THE MUNICIPAL RANKING IS GOING TO BE APPLIED PARTICULARLY BECAUSE I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT HOW YOU HAVE AN OBJECTIVE RANKING CRITERIA.
WHAT IF A MUNICIPALITY OR A PROJECT SPONSOR PROVIDES TWO PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT EQUALLY WEIGHTED, ARE NOT EQUAL IN BENEFIT.
NOW IT GOES TO OBJECTIVE CRITERIA.
ONE IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER ONE CLEARLY, BUT THEN LET'S SAY THE CITY RANKS IT OR THE COUNTY WILL RANK IT IN A CERTAIN WAY, DOES THE RANKING OVERRIDE THE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA OR IS THE RANKING ONLY USED WHEN THE PROJECTS ARE SIMILARLY, I GUESS, MEASURED WHEN YOU APPLY THAT AT GREATER CRITERIA.
WOULD LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THIS, HOW THAT IS GOING TO BE FOLDED INTO THE PROCESS.
THIS WOULD RANK FIRST CSLIP CYCLES.
I'M STILL LEARNING ABOUT THE PROGRAM AND EVERYTHING,
[00:45:03]
BUT AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE CITY IS ABLE OR THE LOCAL AGENCY IS ABLE TO ADVISE THE MPO, ADVISE THE CSLIP MANAGER ON THEIR PREFERRED PROJECT PRIOR TO THE RANKING AND PRIOR TO THE APPLICATION OF THE RANKING AND PRIOR TO THE PROJECT BEING PLACED INTO THE OBJECTIVE RANKING TOOL.FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND THE PREFERENCE OF THE LOCAL AGENCY THAT IS INCORPORATED INTO THE OVERALL RANKING PROCESS.
AS I UNDERSTAND THREE PARTS IS THE OBJECTIVE RANKING FROM THE RANKING TOOL.
THEN THERE'S ALSO THE GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OR THE FUNDING ROUNDS WHERE EACH CITY IS AWARDED OR THEY HAVE ONE PROJECT.
THEN YOU GO THROUGH THE SECOND ROUND AND THEN IF THEY SUBMITTED A SECOND AND A THIRD PROJECT, IT SPREADS IT OUT GEOGRAPHICALLY.
THEN THE THIRD PART OF THE EQUATION IS THAT I BELIEVE IS CALLED THE POLICY RANK WHERE THE CITY, THEIR PREFERENCE IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND AND MAYBE I'LL REFERRED TO MIKE FOR THIS, BUT EACH OF THOSE IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
I DON'T WANT TO MISSPEAK, MIKE, IF YOU WANTED TO ADD ANYTHING.
>> SURE. THANK YOU KERRIE GOOD JOB.
I APPRECIATE YOU EXPLAINING THAT.
NICK YOU KNOW THERE WAS A HISTORY WITH IT WHEN WE STARTED CSLIP AND YOU'RE CORRECT WITH THE CITY PROVIDING THEIR CHOICE OF IF THEY PUT TWO PROJECTS, WHICH ONE WOULD THEY PREFER TO GET FUNDED OF THE TWO? THE REASON THAT WAS ADDED AND WAS DISCUSSED AT THE TAC AND IT'S BEEN REQUESTED BY CITIES TO ALLOW THAT.
BECAUSE REMEMBER, THE CSLIP CRITERIA ARE REALLY OBJECTIVE.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS GET THESE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA.
THE ONE THING THAT WAS A CONCERN IS THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS MAYBE HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT PROJECT MIGHT BE NEEDED FOR THEIR LOCAL PRIORITIES AND AS THAT IS NEVER INCORPORATED INTO THIS.
IT'S STRICTLY AN OBJECTIVE CRITERIA THAT WE USE FOR THE CSLIP.
THEY MIGHT HAVE IT BECAUSE THEY FEEL THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEIR COMMUNITIES HAVE WILDLY SUPPORTED.
WHERE WE CAN'T DO THE VARIANCE IT'S THERE'S SUPPORT OR THERE'S NOT EITHER WAY.
BUT THERE MIGHT BE SOME REASON THAT THEY FEEL THAT THIS PROJECT IS MOST IMPORTANT FOR THEIR CITY AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE THE OTHER ONE THAT THEY SUBMITTED.
THIS ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE THAT CHOICE AHEAD OF TIME.
IT'S NOT LATER ON THEY DECIDE TO CHANGE THINGS AROUND DEPENDING ON THE RANKING.
IT'S THEY SAY IF WE WERE TO GET ONE FUNDED, THIS IS THE ONE WE PREFER TO GET FUNDED BECAUSE OF THE TWO IT BEST MEETS THE NEEDS OF OUR COMMUNITIES.
>> I GUESS I'M STILL HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE APPLICATION OF THAT AS IT PERTAINS TO IF THERE'S TWO PROJECTS OR MORE SUBMITTED AND YOU HAVE ONE THAT IS CLEARLY A BETTER PROJECT ON THE OBJECTIVE METRICS ACROSS THE BOARD.
HOW THEN YOU WOULD OVERRIDE ALL OF THAT OBJECTIVITY IN THE WHOLE RANKING TOOL BECAUSE YOU RECEIVE SOME ENDPOINT THAT ONE WAS RANKED HIGHER THAN THE OTHER ONE AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL, I GUESS YOU WENT BACK TO THE ROLE OF THE MPO AND ENSURING THAT WE'RE PRIORITIZING AND FUNDING THE PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE THE MOST AMOUNT OF BENEFIT TO THE RESONANCE AS A WHOLE.
>> THAT'S WHAT WE TRIED TO DO WITH THE OBJECTIVE THAT MIKE HAS SAID, FROM THAT THE LOCALS MAY BE HAVE AN OPINION, BUT IT'S NOT APPLIED IN THE CRITERIA ITSELF.
WHAT HAPPENS IS, IS THEY GET THEIR RANKING OF SUBJECTIVE.
THEN IF, LET'S SAY THEY HAVE ONE AT NUMBER 5 AND ANOTHER ONE AT NUMBER 8, THEN THE TWO WOULD JUST SWAP.
IT WOULD MEAN THAT THE ONE THAT'S EIGHT WOULD BECOME NUMBER 5 AND THE ONE THAT'S FIVE WOULD BECOME NUMBER 8.
IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE RANKING OF ALL THE REST OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THERE.
REMEMBER RIGHT NOW THAT AT THIS POINT IS THEY CAN SUBMIT TO AS A SINGLE APPLICANT.
>> MIKE, CAN I THROW IN SOMETHING, THIS'S JAMES?
>> NICK THE OTHER THING WITH THIS PRACTICE IS, IT'S BEEN GOING ON BASICALLY SINCE THE INCEPTION OF CSLIP, MAYBE NOT THE FIRST YEAR, BUT THE SECOND YEAR ON.
AS WE REVIEW THE POLICIES, WE THOUGHT IT WAS ALREADY IN THE POLICIES AND IT JUST HADN'T BEEN WRITTEN DOWN.
THIS HAS BEEN THERE AT DIRECTION OF OUR BOARD THAT THEY WANT THAT OPPORTUNITY TO, AS MIKE EXPLAINED IT, GIVE PREFERENCE TO A CERTAIN PROJECT.
YES, WE ARE AWARE THAT IT MAY NOT SCORE THE
[00:50:02]
SAME BUT THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED THE POLICY RANKING.IF YOU BACK ANY OF THE PREVIOUS YEARS' IN ANY OF THE REPORTS THAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY, OUR COUNTER ALWAYS HAD A GOOD TIME PREPARING THAT PRESENTATION BECAUSE THEY'D ONE IMAGE OF THE RAIN THEN IN THE NEXT ONE HE HAS THE ROUNDS BASED ON THE GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION AS KERRIE DESCRIBED IT.
THEN THE THIRD IS THE POLICY RANKING.
THAT'S WHEN THEY SWITCH AROUND.
AGAIN, THAT'S BEEN AT THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD.
WE'RE JUST DOCUMENTING THAT YOU THOUGHT IT WAS ALREADY IN THE POLICIES AND WE KINDLY IF IT WASN'T THERE.
>> GOOD POINT JAMES. YEAH BECAUSE I FORGOT THAT THIS WASN'T ACTUALLY SPELLED OUT, BUT YES, IT WAS DIRECTION FROM OUR BOARD.
>> FOR THE EVALUATION CRITERIA, WOULD GUYS HAVE A BREAKDOWN ON HOW MUCH EACH OF THOSE COMPONENT'S WORTH LIKE YOU DID BEFORE?
>> YES. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
WE ARE STILL WORKING ON ALL THOSE DETAILS.
THAT'S GOING HAND IN HAND WITH THE CREATION OF A NEW OBJECTIVE RANKING TOOL.
WE'RE WORKING WITH THE POINT VALUES AND THE WEIGHTING AND WORKING OUT THOSE DETAILS.
>> DO YOU KNOW WHEN WE'LL KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE? ARE THEY COMING UP BEFORE IT GETS APPROVED?
>> YES. THE SCHEDULE FOR THE TOOL AND DOING THE TEST RUNS OF THE TOOL, AND TESTING OUT THE SCORING AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND THE SCORING METHODOLOGIES IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE IN JULY.
WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT IN AUGUST IT SHOULD BE READY SO WE CAN COME BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE AND TO THE BOARD.
IF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL, WE CAN BRING THAT BACK.
I BELIEVE THERE'S A BREAK IN JULY, BUT THEN THERE'S ANOTHER TAC MEETING IN AUGUST.
I THINK WE ARE AIMING TO HAVE IT PREPARED BY THEN.
>> THANK YOU. MR. GOOD, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO SHARE YOUR PRESENTATION AGAIN? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE CHANGES.
>> ABSOLUTELY. REBECCA, IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST SHARING THE SLIDES AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION TO TAKE IN, A LOT OF TEXTS.
>> YES. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, AND KERRIE, FIRST, ALLOW ME TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. YOU DID A VERY WELL JOB.
THE ONLY THING THAT I ASK IN THE FUTURE WHEN YOU ALL GIVE PRESENTATIONS IF YOU COULD JUST LABEL THE SLIDE NUMBER BECAUSE I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK YOU TO GO FORWARD AND BACKWARDS HERE.
I REALIZED TODAY [LAUGHTER] THAT I DIDN'T HAVE ANY SLIDE NUMBER.
>> NO WORRIES. IF YOU CAN GO FORWARD, AGAIN.
THIS ONE HERE. THE LANGUAGE YOU'RE CLARIFYING IS BASICALLY, THE MUNICIPALITIES ARE GOING TO BE DOING A LAP AGREEMENT.
WHAT I QUESTION IS THIS ONE WORD IN THE VERY LAST SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS, THE LOCAL AGENCY PROCESS IN WHICH THE LOCAL AGENCY SEEKS REIMBURSEMENT FOR PROJECT COSTS.
WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS LANGUAGE IN THIS PARAGRAPH CREATE A LOT OF ENERGY IN THE PAST BECAUSE IT PUT THE BURDEN OF UNFUNDED EXPENSE TO THE MUNICIPALITIES, AND IN THAT PROCESS, WE GOT IT CHANGED, AND IT WAS GREAT.
NOW, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE REIMBURSED FOR THE CEI PORTION OF THIS STUFF HERE.
THE LANGUAGE THE WORD SEEKS IS DISCONCERTING TO ME.
IT CURRENTLY IS SUCH THAT WE WILL BE REIMBURSED, SO I WOULD LIKE AT THE PROPER TIME, MADAM CHAIR, TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT OR A MOTION TO AMEND SOME OF THE LANGUAGE, AND ONE OF THAT WOULD BE HERE IN WHICH THE LOCAL AGENCY WILL BE REIMBURSED FOR PROJECT COSTS.
[00:55:04]
IF THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE FUTURE ABOUT BEING REIMBURSED, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO LOGICALLY THEN HAVE TO READ THIS AT THIS POLICY.I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE, BUT THE WAY THAT THE LANGUAGE IS WRITTEN NOW IS IF THE REIMBURSEMENT IS DECIDED TO NOT BE GIVEN, THEN THAT LANGUAGE WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT AS WELL TOO, AND I JUST THINK IT NEEDS TO STAY FIRM THAT REIMBURSEMENTS WILL BE MADE TO THE CITIES.
IF WE GO FORWARD AGAIN, AGAIN, AGAIN, AGAIN.
THIS LANGUAGE HERE, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE TOO WITH THE LEAD STAFF PERSON SHALL BE A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE OF THE LOCAL AGENCY WHO IS ALSO A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL WITH EXPERIENCE IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT, ETC.
I SPEAK OUT OF EXPERIENCE, AND I ALSO SPEAK OUT OF SOME KNOWLEDGE IN WHAT SMALLER CITIES ARE CHALLENGED WITH.
THEY MAY NOT HAVE A STAFF PERSON WHO HAS THE QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT, ENGINEERING, AND PLANNING THAT IS CAPABLE OF DOING THIS, AND SO WHAT THEY WOULD DO IS THEY WOULD OUTSOURCE IT AND HIRING A CONSULTANT.
THE EXPERIENCES I'VE HAD WAS, YOU COULD BE IN A TRANSITION WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE THAT QUALIFIED PERSON, AND SOMETIMES THESE POSITIONS ARE NOT THAT EASILY FILLED, AND IT COULD TAKE ANYWHERE FROM SIX TO EIGHT TO 12 MONTHS TO FILL.
YOU MAY NEED TO HAVE A BRIDGE FOR SUPPORT SERVICES TO GET YOU THROUGH SOME OF THE TIMELINES THAT ARE IN THESE LATTER PROCESSES.
I DON'T AGREE AT ALL TO THIS LANGUAGE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW MY COLLEAGUES FEEL, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE THIS NEEDS TO BE WORDSMITH A LITTLE BIT MORE TO GIVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO CITIES OR THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT MAY HAVE SOME DIFFICULTIES WITH FULFILLING THIS REQUIREMENT.
THEN IF WE COULD GO FORWARD AGAIN. AGAIN. AGAIN.
THIS HERE, THE SECOND LINE WHICH IT SAYS, CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE" AND KERRIE, YOU RIGHTFULLY SPOKE TO THE SUBSTANTIVENESS OF CHANGE.
I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THAT LANGUAGE SHOULD BE INCORPORATED IN HERE THAT SAYS SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE AFTER SUBMITTAL MAY RESULT.
JUST CLARIFYING BECAUSE POLICY SOMETIMES SPECIFIC WORDS HAS SPECIFIC MEANING OR ABSENCE THEREOF TOO.
I THINK MAYBE WE CAN ADD SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE IN THERE AS WELL.
MADAM CHAIR, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS AND I'LL LISTEN TO MY COLLEAGUES AND AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO SOME LANGUAGE HERE.
>> THANK YOU, TOM. NEXT ON THE LIST WITH QUESTIONS IS MAQSOOD.
>> MADAM CHAIR, IF IT'S ALL RIGHT, COULD I RESPOND TO A COUPLE OF MR. GOODS' COMMENTS?
>> OKAY. I WROTE DOWN THE THREE SUGGESTIONS AND IN REQUEST THAT YOU'VE MADE AND I JUST WANTED TO JUST QUICKLY REVISIT THEM.
I MIGHT CALL ON MIKE OR JAMES TO COMMENT ON THIS, BUT AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND, WE CHANGED THIS LANGUAGE, WE PROPOSE THIS NEW LANGUAGE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAP REQUIREMENTS SINCE NOW THAT IS THE DELIVERY MECHANISM THAT THE LOCAL AGENCY WILL HAVE TO USE AND HAVE TO BE CERTIFIED IN LAP AND WHAT NOT.
THE FIRST ONE THAT SEEKS REIMBURSEMENT, AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WE WROTE IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THE CITY OR
[01:00:05]
THE LOCAL AGENCY DOES HAVE TO APPLY AND ASK FOR REIMBURSEMENT.BECAUSE WE WERE ENTIRELY EXIST ON JUST AN AUTOMATIC, THERE'S A PROCESS TO IT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THE INTENTION IS, AS YOU EXPLAINED, IF THERE'S ANY CHANGE WITH FDOT WHERE IN THE FUTURE THEY DECIDE WE'RE NOT GOING TO REIMBURSE ANYMORE, WE'D HAVE TO REVISIT THESE POLICIES AND BRING THEM TO THIS COMMITTEE, ETC.
MAYBE THERE'S SOME WORDING WE COULD DECIDE ON, MAYBE THAT WOULD HELP MEET THAT INTENT, BUT ALSO EXPLAIN THAT THERE IS A PROCESS, THAT MAYBE "SEEKS" ISN'T THE MOST APPROPRIATE WORD.
I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND QUICKLY HIT ON THE SECOND ONE, WHICH ALSO IS A LAP ISSUE, I BELIEVE.
THE POLICY ABOUT THE FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE AND THEY HAVE TO HAVE EXPERIENCE IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND THIS AND THAT.
THAT IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE LAP MANUAL, THAT THEY MUST BE A FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE.
THAT IS WHY WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THE POLICIES IN LINE WITH THE LAP MANUAL WHICH THE LOCAL AGENCIES WILL HAVE TO FOLLOW.
I UNDERSTAND IT MOST LIKELY WILL BE A CONCERN FOR SMALLER CITIES WHO DON'T HAVE ALL THE SAME RESOURCES AS LARGER ONES.
I THINK WE SHOULD MAYBE DISCUSS HOW TO ADDRESS THAT BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH STRIKING FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE FROM THERE SINCE IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S A REQUIREMENT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
AGAIN, MIKE OR JAMES, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON EITHER OF THOSE.
>> KERRIE, IT'S JAMES. I SAT IN A MEETING WITH FDOT AND THEY DID EXPLAIN TO US THAT THIS IS WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE.
IT'S ACCORDING TO THE LAP MANUAL SETUP AT THE STATE LEVEL.
THAT'S, I GUESS A POLICY CHANGE THAT'S BEYOND US IN THIS GROUP.
YEAH, IT'S JUST REFLECTING THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT'S REQUIRED CURRENTLY BY THE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.
>> I'M SURE I'D LIKE TO HAVE A QUICK REBUTTAL ON THIS BEFORE WE MOVE ON.
>> SURE. I DO KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN STATEMENTS OF WANTING TO HAVE SUPPORT OR STATEMENTS OF ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FROM THE MPO.
WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE INITIAL ROUND OF WHAT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE LONG AND COULDN'T BE CHANGED, WHICH COULD GET CHANGED.
THERE WAS SOME REFERENCES ABOUT HOW THE MPO MAY BE ABLE TO BUILD SOME SUPPORT SYSTEM IN ORDER TO PROVIDE LAP ASSISTANCE.
THIS LANGUAGE RIGHT HERE CERTAINLY WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING AT ALL BECAUSE IT JUST NOW CUTS YOUR NOSE TO SPITE YOUR FACE ON THIS ONE HERE.
I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONSIDERATION CONSIDERING SOME OF THE OTHER CORE SERVICES THAT THE MPO IS LOOKING TO ROLL OUT.
I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS NECESSARILY A DEAD ISSUE IN TERMS OF IN THE FUTURE, THE MPO PROVIDING LAP ASSISTANCE IN SOME FORMAT.
I REALLY ASK YOU REALLY CONSIDER THAT.
>> WE DID BRING THAT POINT UP WITH THE FDOT LAP EXPERTS WHEN WE TALKED WITH THEM AND WE MENTIONED THE MTECC PROGRAM.
THE LAP REQUIREMENT STILL REQUIRE SOMEBODY, A FULL-TIME STAFF PERSON, AT THE LOCAL AGENCY.
>> I DON'T QUESTION THE FULL-TIME STAFF PERSON.
I QUESTION THE QUALIFICATIONS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING ON THAT FULL-TIME STAFF PERSON.
>> I'M GOING TO ADD, I KNOW WE HAVE JOHN KRANE AND I KNOW HE HAD HIS HAND UP TO MAYBE ADDRESS THIS FROM FDOT.
I DON'T KNOW IF MADAM CHAIR, YOU WANT TO RECOGNIZE HIM?
MADAM CHAIR, I'M KRANE, I'M THE DISTRICT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATOR FOR DISTRICT 4.
RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF GUIDANCE ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, I THINK WHAT WE COULD DO IS TAKE COMMENTS UNDER ADVISEMENT.
I WOULD RECOMMEND AGAINST SPECIFIC LANGUAGE CHANGES BECAUSE IT DOES REFLECT WHAT'S IN THE LAP MANUAL WHICH ARE CRITERIA THAT WE NEED TO FOLLOW IN ORDER TO LAP CERTIFY AGENCIES.
BUT WE ARE WORKING WITH THE MPO STAFF.
WE'RE AWARE OF THE DIFFICULTY IT IS FOR THE SMALLER AGENCIES TO BECOME LAP CERTIFIED.
[01:05:06]
THIS IS AN ACTIVE DIALOGUE GOING ON BETWEEN THE MPO AND FDOT.WE ARE MEETING WEEKLY WITH STAFF TO TRY AND ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF HOW TO GET THE SMALLER PROJECTS AND THE AGENCIES THAT DON'T HAVE THAT CAPABILITY, GET THESE PROJECTS PRODUCED.
I JUST WANT TO, I GUESS, CAUTION AGAINST ANY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LANGUAGE CHANGES AT THIS MEETING OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT MAYBE WE UNDERSTAND THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO.
SEE IF WE CAN COME UP WITH LANGUAGE JOINTLY THAT WILL MEET THE LAP REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS THE DIRECTION FOR THE CSLIP PROGRAM.
I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR NOW.
I LEAN TOWARDS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE WORDSMITHING OR LANGUAGE AWARENESS IN THIS DOCUMENT TAKE PLACE BEFORE WE EVEN TAKE ACTION ON IT.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT PART OF WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING TO IS THAT WE WOULD BASICALLY TABLE THIS ITEM AND NOT TAKE ACTION UNTIL SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE ISSUE HAS BEEN RESOLVED.
BUT AGAIN, I'M NOT MAKING THAT MOTION AT THIS TIME.
I'M ALLOWING MY COLLEAGUES TO WEIGH IN.
>> I'M GOING TO, IF I MAY, MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS HERE ABOUT.
THANK YOU, TOM. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AS FEEDBACK.
I THINK A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE IS, KERRIE HAD BROUGHT UP ABOUT, I GUESS, THE FIRST ONE IS SEEKS AS OPPOSED TO WILL BE.
I MEAN, THE IDEA IS YES, WE ARE GOING TO GET REIMBURSEMENT, BUT SHE IS CORRECT.
YOU HAVE TO SEEK IT. IT'S NOT GOING TO AUTOMATICALLY HAPPEN.
I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WHEN PEOPLE READ THIS, THEY DON'T THINK THAT IT JUST AUTOMATICALLY HAPPENS THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT. [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE ALL THINK IT'S AUTOMATIC, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.
[LAUGHTER] [OVERLAPPING]. THAT'S THE POINT.
>> YEAH, I SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING.
>> THE OTHER THING WITH, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FLEXIBILITY ABOUT THE LEAD STAFF PERSON, I THINK THAT'S WHY WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO PURSUE THE MTECC OPTION AND WE'VE GIVEN UPDATES HERE AT IT.
RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THE MTECC OPTION FULLY FLESHED OUT, BUT THAT'S THE IDEA THAT CAN HELP WITH SOME OF THESE ISSUES THAT YOU SAID.
SMALLER CITIES DON'T HAVE THE PERSON THAT CAN DEDICATE FULL-TIME OR HAVE THE EXPERIENCE NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT THEIR PROJECTS, AND THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MTECC.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT ALL FLESHED OUT YET, BUT THAT'S THE ANTICIPATION THAT AT SOME POINT THAT WOULD TAKE OVER AND ALLEVIATE THAT ISSUE THAT'S THERE WITH HAVING A LEAD PERSON IN FROM A SMALL CITY THAT PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES AS THE WAY IT'S SET UP NOW.
I THINK THE LAST ONE WAS WITH, WHEN YOU CAME WITH SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES.
I THINK MY CONCERN IS GOING TO BE IS, WHAT I THINK IS SUBSTANTIVE AND WHAT A CITY MIGHT THINK IS, COULD BE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
THERE'S EVEN A DEFINITION IN OUR TIP OF WHAT'S CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIVE AND WHAT REQUIRES AN AMENDMENT AND WHAT DOESN'T.
WE COULD NOT USE THAT AS PART OF OUR CSLIP BECAUSE THAT CRITERIA WOULD SKEW THE RANKING OF THE PROJECT SO MUCH THAT IT JUST COULDN'T APPLY.
SOMETIMES A SMALL CHANGE SUCH AS JUST TAKING OFF MAYBE 100 FEET OF THE PROJECT COULD AFFECT THE RANKING OF THE PROJECT.
SOME MIGHT SAY THAT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, BUT IT COULD BE.
I'D BE A LITTLE CAREFUL ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIVE OF CHANGES.
I THINK THE CHANGES DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS, BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT WHERE, IT MIGHT BE A LANDSCAPING ISSUE, THAT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, BUT TAKING OFF A PORTION OF A SIDEWALK, IT DOES BECOME A BIG DEAL.
IT MIGHT NOT SEEM LIKE A BIG DEAL TO THE CITY, BUT IT IS A BIG DEAL BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE AFFECT THE RANKING BECAUSE REMEMBER WE DO FROM POINT A TO POINT B AND THE LENGTH OF IT AND THE CRITERIA, LOOK AT THE LENGTH OF THE PROJECT.
IF NOW YOU'RE PICKING UP A LENGTH AFTER IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED, THAT SEEMS UNFAIR TO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
I'D BE A LITTLE CAUTIOUS ABOUT IT, BUT AGAIN, ANYTHING WE CAN ENTERTAIN HERE AS PART OF THE TAC, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD.
WHATEVER YOU ALL CHOOSE TO DO, I THINK THAT'S FINE.
>> MADAM CHAIR, I RESERVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS UNTIL AFTER
[01:10:05]
[NOISE] SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SPOKEN.>> THANK YOU. MAQSOOD, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
YOU ALREADY MENTIONED ABOUT THE SCOPE.
KERRIE, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THE SCOPE THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT A SCOPE CANNOT BE CHANGED.
DOES IT MEAN DESIGN LEVEL CHANGES IN THE SCOPE AT THE DESIGN LEVEL OR IN CONSTRUCTION? IN DURING CONSTRUCTION, DUE TO SOME CONFLICT, THERE MIGHT SOME VARIATION IN THE SCOPE.
IT SHOULD BE CLARIFIED THAT WHEN YOU SAY THE SCOPE CANNOT BE NOT CHANGED, THAT SHOULD BE DURING DESIGN PROCESS OR THAT IS DURING CONSTRUCTION.
NUMBER 2, I SEE THE WORST ESTIMATE HAS TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY THE ENGINEER ON DUTY FORMAT.
MY QUESTION IS, IS IT COST ESTIMATE OR IS IT ENGINEER'S OPINION ON COST ESTIMATE? IS IT ENGINEER'S OPINION OR IS IT COST ESTIMATE? ENGINEER CANNOT GIVE YOU THE EXACT COST ESTIMATE, IMPOSSIBLE, THAT SHOULD BE DONE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
AS ENGINEER, WE CAN PROVIDE OUR OPINION OF THE COST, BUT WE CANNOT SAY THIS IS THE DEFINITE COST.
THE CHANGE CAN COME DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU SUBMIT THE PROJECT, DEFINITELY THIS IS BEFORE THE BIDDING PROCESS, SO BASICALLY EVEN BEFORE THE DESIGN PROCESS.
SO WHEN WE ARE DOING THE COST ESTIMATE, IT'S LOT OF ASSUMPTION BECAUSE UNLESS THE DESIGN IS FINAL, WE CANNOT PROVIDE EXACT COST ESTIMATE.
THE COST ESTIMATE, WHATEVER THEY PROVIDE, IT SHOULD BE THE OPINION.
IT SHOULD NOT BE THE EXACT COST ESTIMATOR.
WE SHOULD NOT SAY COST ESTIMATE.
WE SHOULD SAY OPINION OF ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE.
THE HARD ON, WE HAVE TO USE DUTY FORMAT, BUT DOES IT MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO USE THE DUTY UNIT COST OR IT IS UP TO THE ENGINEER? UNIT COST HE'S GOING TO USE.
BECAUSE DUTY DEFINITELY, THEY HAVE THE REPORT, AND THEY HAVE THEIR OWN UNIT COST.
AT MUNICIPAL LEVEL, WE DON'T ALWAYS FOLLOW THAT.
DUTY FOR THE SOMETIMES BIG PROJECTS, THE UNIT COST MAY BE LOW.
BUT IN OUR LEVEL, BECAUSE OF THE PROJECT SIZE, THE UNIT COST MAY BE DIFFERENT.
WHAT IS THE GUIDELINE ON THAT WHEN YOU DO THE COST ESTIMATE? [INAUDIBLE]
>> KERRIE, MADAM CHAIR, THIS IS THE BILL CROSS.
I'D LIKE TO TAKE AN INITIAL CUT AT THIS RESPONSE, IF THAT'S OKAY.
I'M NOT SURE THAT I CAPTURE ALL THREE OF THEM, BUT LET ME BEGIN WITH WHAT I DID HERE.
AS FAR AS THE COST ESTIMATE GOES, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THESE PROJECTS UPFRONT ARE AS WELL THOUGHT THROUGH, WELL-DEVELOPED, WELL SCOPED AS POSSIBLE.
WE'VE HAD ISSUES IN THE PAST WHERE WE GET PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT WELL-SCOPED, THEY DON'T HAVE A GOOD COST ESTIMATE, AND IT CREATES PROBLEMS DOWNSTREAM.
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A COST ESTIMATE DONE BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER.
WE HAVE BEEN TALKING TO DOT ABOUT REVISING THEIR STANDARD FORM.
THAT WOULD PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE FLEXIBILITY TO RECOGNIZE WHAT YOU CORRECTLY POINTED OUT THAT THE MUNICIPAL COST STRUCTURE MAY NOT BE AN EXACT MATCH AS THE FDOT COST STRUCTURE THAT THEY USE AS A STANDARD COURSE OF THEIR BUSINESS.
THERE MAY BE SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE.
THE OTHER POINT THAT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT, AS I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS AS IT CURRENTLY SITS GOING INTO INTO LAP, THERE ARE GOING TO BE TWO AGREEMENTS.
THERE'S GOING TO BE A DESIGN AGREEMENT, AND THEN THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT.
AGAIN, UPFRONT WE NEED THE BEST COST ESTIMATES POSSIBLE FOR WHAT THE DESIGN IS GOING TO COST, AS WELL AS WHAT THE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING TO COST.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT AT THIS POINT, THOSE COSTS BECOME LOCKED IN WHEN YOU SIGN THAT LAP AGREEMENT WITH DOT.
FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU SIGN AN AGREEMENT FOR, LET'S SAY, $50,000 TO DO THE DESIGN FOR A PROJECT, THAT'S IT.
FIFTY THOUSAND IS WHAT'S GOING TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO YOU,
[01:15:03]
AND ANY COST OVERRUNS AT THAT POINT BECOME AT RISK TO THE CITY.THAT'S THE STANDARD DOT LAP AGREEMENT.
AFTER THE DESIGN, IF THERE IS NEW BETTER INFORMATION, WHICH WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU GET DONE WITH DESIGN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROJECT, THEN WHEN YOU INITIALLY APPLY, THEN YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT THAT UPDATED COST ESTIMATE BASED UPON THE WORK OF THE DESIGN ELEMENT BEFORE YOU ENTER A LAP AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION, THEN YOU TIE THOSE NUMBERS DOWN.
AGAIN THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION BETWEEN OURSELVES AND DOT LAST FALL WHEN WE MADE SURE THAT THE DESIGN WAS REIMBURSABLE, AND WE WANTED TO MAKE IT AS FAIR TO THE CITIES AS POSSIBLE.
I HOPE I COVERED MOST OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
BUT IF I MISS SOMETHING, LET ME KNOW.
I'M GLAD TO TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT IT.
>> THE THIRD PART WAS THE CHANGING THE SCOPE DURING CONSTRUCTION DUE TO CONFLICTS.
I'M NOT SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD THE QUESTION, IT RELATES TO THE ACTUAL-
>> THE QUESTION IS, WHEN YOU SAY THAT A SCOPE CANNOT BE CHANGED, IF THE SCOPE IS CHANGED, IT WILL BE DISQUALIFIED? [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU'RE GOING TO ENTER A LAP AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION FUNDING.
THAT'S GOING TO BE BASED UPON A DESIGN THAT YOU'VE COMPLETED.
IF YOU DECIDE TO CHANGE THE SCOPE AND THE DESIGN AFTER YOU'VE COMPLETED YOUR DESIGN BUT BEFORE CONSTRUCTION, AT THAT POINT, THERE'S GOING TO NEED TO BE A CONVERSATION, AND YOU'RE PUTTING THE CITY POTENTIALLY ON THE HOOK FOR THOSE CHANGES, THE COST OF ANY INCREASES AT THAT POINT.
I GUESS THE POINT IS THERE'S A LOT OF HYPOTHETICALS.
THE POINT IS THE BURDEN IS ON THE CITY.
WE WILL SUPPORT YOU HOWEVER WE CAN, BUT THE CITY NEEDS TO DEVELOP THEIR PROJECTS THOUGHTFULLY.
GET A GOOD PROJECT UPFRONT BEFORE YOU SUBMIT FOR CSLIP, THEN YOU REFINE IT THROUGH DESIGN, BUT YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING YOUR PLANNING, AND YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING YOUR DESIGN WHEN YOU'RE DOING CONSTRUCTION.
>> MY QUESTION WAS, LET ME REPEAT IT.
WHEN WE DO THE ESTIMATE, WE DO MENTION THE ELEMENTS, DESIGN ELEMENTS THERE, THE COST IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
DURING CONSTRUCTION, THERE MAYBE SOME CONFLICT AND THAT MAY TRIGGER SOME CHANGES IN CONSTRUCTION.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THAT PORTION, THAT DEVIATION FROM THE ORIGINAL SCOPE DUE TO THE CONFLICT, IT WILL BE COVERED OR NOT? THAT IS MY QUESTION.
>> I THINK I'D BETTER UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
YOU'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND YOUR CONTRACTOR IS IN THE FIELD AND RUNS INTO SOME KIND OF A CONFLICT THAT REQUIRES THAT YOU MAKE SOME BASICALLY ON THE FLY CHANGE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE'RE SAYING CHANGES TO THE SCOPE.
I THINK THE INTENT OF ADDING THAT CLAUSE INTO THE POLICIES REALLY WAS REFERRING TO AFTER THE PROJECTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND RANKED, AND THEN THAT RANKING HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE MPO BOARD.
WE'RE REFERRING TO ENTERTAINING CHANGES IN THE SCOPE AFTER THAT'S HAPPENED, BEFORE THE PROJECT'S BEEN PROGRAMMED.
THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE INTENT IS, EVEN EARLIER IN THE PROCESS THAN DESIGNING CONSTRUCTION.
>> NICK, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? HE'S GETTING THERE. HOLD ON.
I JUST HAD A RECOMMENDATION OR SUGGESTION, I GUESS, FOR STAFF MAY BE IN RELATION TO SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
IF THESE POLICIES ARE REALLY HELD WITH GENERAL LAP POLICIES SET BY FDOT, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY NEED TO BE SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THIS MPO DOCUMENT.
IN THIS DOCUMENT, JUST REFERENCE CONSISTENCY WITH THE LAP POLICY, AND THEN IF FDOT DECIDES TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE POLICY OR A DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION, THEY WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BEING COMPLIANT, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AND THEN CHANGE LANGUAGE AGAIN.
[01:20:02]
>>TOM, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
>> SO ON AS IF I'M THE LAST ONE.
>> YOU ARE NOT THE LAST ONE, SO WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
>> CHARLES SCHRAMM, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS?
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH MR. GOOD'S SECOND COMMENT REGARDING THE SMALLER CITIES BEING ABLE TO USE VENDORS TO COVER SOME OF THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND THE ENGINEERING PORTIONS FOR THE PROJECT.
I REALLY THINK THAT SHOULD BE ADDED IN THERE.
OTHERWISE, IT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BOX OUT THE SMALLER CITIES.
>> THANK YOU. CLARISSA, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTION?
>> I JUST HAVE TWO COMMENTS TO MAKE.
ONE IS RELATED TO MR. GOOD'S THIRD COMMENT ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF A PROJECT.
IT MAY BE BETTER TO USE WORDINGS MAY BE SUCH AS MAY INSTEAD OF WILL BE.
AS A SUGGESTION AND RECOMMENDATION SO THAT THERE'S A FLEXIBILITY.
ALSO SINCE WE DO HAVE THE THIRD RANKING, AS MIKE EXPLAINED THE POLICY RANKING, OR JAMES DID.
EITHER MICHAEL, JAMES HAS EXPLAINED THE POLICY-RANKING, WE DO HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY TO ANALYZE THE PROJECT IN THAT WAY IF THE SCOPE WAS TO BE CHANGED, IF IT CAN BE MODIFIED THE RANKINGS THAT WE'LL BE REMOVING THE PROJECT ONCE A MINOR.
MAYBE IT'S A MINOR SCOPE CHANGE.
JUST AS A SUGGESTION, CONSIDERATION, AND MY SECOND COMMENT IS, I AGREE WITH EXACTLY WHAT, NICK ACTUALLY MADE THE COMMENT BEFORE ME ABOUT THE LAP AGREEMENT WITH FDOT.
I BELIEVE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AT THIS POINT WITH THE CSLIP POLICY THAT WE'RE CHANGING RIGHT NOW, AND IT MAY TIE INTO WHAT MR. GOOD WAS SAYING EARLIER, THAT IT MIGHT BE WISE TO TABLE ALL OF THESE CSLIP POLICY CHANGES UNTIL WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION.
WITH THE MTECC EVOLVING, WE DO HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE FROM KERRIE FOR ANOTHER TAC MEETING IN AUGUST BEFORE ALL OF THIS TOOK PLACE.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. MR. GOOD, YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, AND THANK YOU TO ALL MY COLLEAGUES FOR YOUR VALUABLE INPUT.
I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION.
I THINK THAT THE STAFF SEES THAT THERE IS ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION FOR LANGUAGE.
I LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE NEXT TAC MEETING, SO IT GIVES STAFF AN OPPORTUNITY TO MODIFY SOME OF LANGUAGE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE PROVIDED THEM TODAY.
>> MIKE, DOES THAT CREATE ANY ISSUES WITH YOUR TIMING?
>> I'M GOING TO LOOK TO JAMES AND KERRIE.
IS THAT GOING TO CAUSE A PROBLEM WITH THE TIMING OF ADOPTING THIS? COULD IT DELAY THE EXECUTION NOT THE NEXT ROUND OF CSLIP?
>> IF I COULD JUST ADD BEFORE YOU ANSWER, I DO HAVE A LOT OF HEARTBURN OVER THAT.
THE EVALUATION CRITERIA ISN'T SET UP, AND I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT BEFORE THE FINAL POLICY IS DONE BECAUSE IF WE APPROVE IT TODAY, WE'RE APPROVING IT WITH NO RANKING FOR THE EVALUATION CRITERIA.
I THINK IF WE CAN POSTPONE THIS UNTIL AUGUST, THAT WOULD BE PREFERABLE.
>> THIS IS JAMES. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I JUST NEED A SECOND, MADAM CHAIR.
>> THIS IS JAMES SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF KERRIE AND THE CSLIP PROJECT.
THE COMMENTS, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD, HAD TO DO WITH THE RESPONSIBLE CHARGE THAT WE'RE ADDING TO THE LAP MANUAL AND THEN ALSO MAYBE SOME QUESTION ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE.
I THINK WE TALKED QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE RECEIVING REIMBURSEMENT.
THOSE TWO ITEMS WILL NOT GET IN THE WAY OF THE CSLIP TEAM WITH KERRIE BEING ABLE TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD PREPARING EVERYTHING.
I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A TIME TABLE, TYPICALLY WE DO THE CSLIP APPLICATION DEADLINE IN NOVEMBER, AND WE WILL HAVE THE CSLIP WORKSHOP TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS USUALLY IN AUGUST.
THIS MEANS THOUGH THAT THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE SET UNTIL THE BOARD MEETING IN SEPTEMBER, WHICH GIVES LESS TIME FOR THE CITIES TO PREPARE THEIR APPLICATIONS.
[01:25:04]
THAT'S A POTENTIAL PROBLEM TO BE OVERCOME.WE ALSO THOUGH, ARE LOOKING AT A TIGHTER WINDOW TO GET THE PROJECTS ALREADY GET INTO THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITY LIST.
IT'S A TIGHTER WINDOW ON GETTING EVERYTHING DONE, AND ON BEHALF OF THE MPO, I GUESS THIS IS A REQUEST THAT THE CITIES MAY HAVE TO WORK IN A SHORTER TIME-FRAME TO GET A COMPLETE APPLICATION.
>> CORRECT. I JUST WANT TO ADD, THIS IS GOING TO BE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAKE TO THE BOARD, BUT THIS IS WHAT THE TAC IS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED.
>> RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON TABLING THIS ITEM.
IF EVERYONE CAN PUT THEIR HANDS DOWN FOR NOW, AND THEN WE'LL CLEAR IT.
WE WILL PASS THE MOTION ON CONSENT TO TABLE THIS ITEM UNLESS SOMEONE HAS AN ISSUE.
IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH TABLING THIS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND.
SEEING NONE, THE ITEM IS TABLED UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING IN AUGUST.
>>WHAT'S THE EXACT DATE, MIKE, ON THAT ONE?
>> [OVERLAPPING] IS IT 25TH? YOUR FINGERS ARE BACKWARDS.
>> THAT'S A MEN, MARS, WOMEN, VENUS THING. [LAUGHTER]
>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, JUST SO EVERYBODY, IT'S A MOTION TO THE BOARD TO TABLE IT.
IF THEY CHOOSE TO TAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS IS, WE'LL EXPLAIN WHAT THE TAC HAS, THEN THEY WOULD BE APPROVED AS PER WHAT THE BOARD IS.
WE CAN STILL BRING IT BACK, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE HERE'S WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED AS OPPOSED TO YOU CAN TAKE ACTION ON IT.
JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD TO TABLE IT.
IF THEY AGREE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION, THEN WE BRING IT BACK.
>> THIS IS WHERE OUR ROLE AS THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOUR POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVES IF YOU STRONGLY FEEL THIS WAY SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE.
>> I'M GLAD YOU MADE THAT POINT, CHAIR, BECAUSE WE TRY TO TELL YOU ALL, YES, AS TAC MEMBERS, GO BACK TO YOUR OFFICIAL BOARD MEMBER, TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT, EXPRESS YOUR CONCERNS WITH IT.
THAT'S PART OF YOUR ROLE, NOT JUST BEING HERE, BUT ALSO COMMUNICATING TO THEM.
SO WHEN THIS ITEM DOES COME TO THE BOARD, THEY CAN UNDERSTAND THE DETAILS AND ASK YOU ANY QUESTIONS IF THEY HAVE BEFORE THE MEETING COMES SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DIRECTION WAS AND WHY IT WAS THAT WAY.
GREAT. THANK YOU FOR ADDING THAT.
>> MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY REAL QUICK?
>> WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE PRESENTING IT TO THE MPO WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF TAC AS A TABLE, DOES IT HAVE THE DETAILS ON WHY TAC IS TABLED?
>> WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOME DETAIL IN THE ITEM OF WHAT THE ISSUES WERE.
THAT'S WHAT WE USUALLY DO [OVERLAPPING] WHEN WE HAVE AN ITEM THAT'S CLOSE, LIKE IF IT WAS A CLOSE VOTE, OR IF THERE WERE SOME CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE OR PUT SOME ITEMS IN THERE THAT EXPLAINS WHY THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION, AND IT'S USUALLY IN TWO AREAS THAT WE DO IT.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU. NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ACTION ITEM,
[3. MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE Mobility Hubs Program Policies]
WHICH IS ACTION ITEM NUMBER 3, MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE MOBILITY HUB PROGRAM POLICIES.WE HAVE MR. BLUE TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS OF THE TAC.
MY NAME IS CHADWICK BLUE, I'M THE PROJECT COORDINATION MANAGER HERE AT THE MPO AND AS MADAM CHAIR MENTIONED, I WILL BE GIVING AN OVERVIEW OF THE MOBILITY HUB PROGRAM POLICIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
WHILE WE'RE HERE I JUST MENTIONED THAT WE'RE SEEKING AN APPROVAL OR A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM THE TAC AND CAC.
I WAS PLANNING TO GO OVER FOR THE MPO BOARD IN JULY FOR AN APPROVAL ON THESE POLICIES.
FIRST OF ALL, JUST TO START OFF, WHAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS A MOBILITY HUB? IT'S EXISTING TRANSIT ACCESS POINTS WHICH IS A FANCY WAY OF JUST SAYING A CONCENTRATION OF TRANSIT ACTIVITIES AND THAT CAN INCLUDE SHIP GENERATION OR TRANSFERS IN AN AREA WITH EXISTING HIGH REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OR ALREADY EXISTING HIGH DEVELOPMENT.
AS YOU SEE RIGHT HERE, THIS IS IN DOWNTOWN FORT LAUDERDALE.
WE JUST COMPLETED A VERY EXCITING $3.5 MILLION PROJECT.
THIS IS THE BEFORE PHOTO AND THIS IS THE AFTER.
[01:30:01]
YOU CAN SEE WE DID QUITE A TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE IN THIS AREA.IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO CHECK THIS PROJECT OUT, PLEASE THE NEXT TIME YOU'RE IN DOWNTOWN FORT LAUDERDALE, TAKE A LOOK.
I BELIEVE EVERY SEAT TRACKS ARE THE BOUNDARY TO THE WEST.
ANDREWS TO THE EAST, BROWARD TO THE SOUTH AND NORTH WEST FOURTH STREET TO THE NORTH AND THERE'S A LOT OF TRANSIT AMENITIES THAT WERE PUT IN THIS AREA.
SO PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND THAT'LL GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT POTENTIALLY MOBILITY HUB CAN DO AND YOUR COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE.
SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROGRAM, SIMILAR TO CSLIP, WE WANT TO CONDUCT COMPETITIVE AND DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM TO PROVIDE APPLICANTS WITH MOBILITY, HAVE FUNDINGS FOR PLANNING STUDIES, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION.
THE MPO FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR TRANSIT ENHANCEMENTS, FOR MOBILITY SAFETY AND PLACE-MAKING ELEMENTS.
BUT AGAIN, SP TRANSIT FOCUS, SO KEEP THAT IN THE BACK YOUR MIND ALWAYS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
THEN FUNDING FOR THE MOBILITY HUB PROGRAM WE'RE USING FTA FUNDS.
SO RIGHT HERE TALKS ABOUT THE TRANSIT NEXUS THAT I SORT OF MENTIONED IN A PREVIOUS SLIDE AGAIN, ALWAYS HAS TO BE ABLE TO COME BACK AND BE CONNECTED TO TRANSIT, YOU NEED TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT WHATEVER YOU'RE PROPOSING IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF TRANSIT AND SO WITH THAT, THERE'S A FEW STIPULATIONS IT NEEDS TO BE WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OR JUMP TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IT NEEDS TO CONNECT DIRECTLY TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OR ASSISTING IN THE CONNECTION BETWEEN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, WHETHER IT BE AIRPORT, TRAIN, ETC.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE ELIGIBLE PROJECTS THAT I MENTIONED, THE MUNICIPALITIES CAN APPLY FOR OR EITHER MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN OR MOBILITY HUB DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT FUNDING OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR MUNICIPALITIES.
SO THIS IS THE FIRST ONE I'LL TALK ABOUT IS THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN.
NOW THIS IS NOT EXACTLY HOW THEY HAVE TO BE FOR A MUNICIPALITY, BUT THIS GIVES YOU A BRIEF IDEA IN THE PAST HOW WE'VE DONE THEM.
SO WHEN WE START OUT WITH THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN, THERE'S AN EVALUATION AND THE CONTACTS, WE LOOK AT THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NETWORK WITHIN A STUDY AREA, WE ALSO DO A MARKET ANALYSIS WHICH HELPS US GET A GOOD BASELINE UNDERSTANDING FOR WHAT'S CURRENTLY GOING ON, WHERE THE CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS AND ALSO AS PART OF THAT, THERE'S SUPPORTIVE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COME OUT FOR THE MUNICIPALITIES TO LOOK INTO.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE DESIGN CONCEPTS, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY WHAT WE'RE ALL WORKING TOWARDS, WHERE YOU'RE ACTUALLY GETTING AT THE END OF THE DAY.
SO YOU GET YOUR DESIGN CONCEPTS OUT OF THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN STUDY AND THEN OF COURSE, WE ALSO INCLUDE AN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY WHICH INCLUDES SHORT-TERM AND ALSO LONG-TERM VISIONS FOR THE MUNICIPALITY IF THEY CHOOSE TO FOLLOW THERE'S SOME PATHS FOR THEM.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE LOOK TO DO EXECUTABLE PROJECTS, NO ONE LIKES TO DO A STUDY AND IT JUST GOES AND SITS ON A SHELF AND NO ONE GETS ANYTHING OUT OF IT.
SO WE'RE REALLY, REALLY LOOKING TO, IF YOU DID CHOOSE TO DO A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN AND A STUDY, WE WANT TO FIND SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY BUILD FOR YOU OUT OF THAT.
SO WE'RE LETTING MUNICIPALITIES KNOW STRAIGHT FROM THE GET-GO THAT LEADS TO SOMETHING TO BE BUILT.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, FOR THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLANS, THE MPO WILL LEAVE THAT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.
SO WE'LL BE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY, BUT WE WILL LEAVE THE EFFORT TO OBTAIN THE CONSULTANT THAT WILL THEN GO THROUGH TO THE MANY DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING STUDY THAT I MENTIONED IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
WE HAVE A MAXIMUM, BUT WE DO HAVE A MINIMUM, I'M SORRY, I GOT THAT ONE CONFUSING, WE DO HAVE A MAXIMUM FOR THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN STAYING AT $400,000.
SO ANYWHERE WITHIN THAT RANGE, WE CAN DO A STUDY AS LONG AS YOU RANK HIGH.
NEXT SLIDE, SO THIS TALKS ABOUT THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
SO IF YOU ALREADY HAVE COMPLETED MOBILITY, HAVE MASTER PLAN OR THE EQUIVALENT STUDY THAT YOU CAN GO BACK AND POINT TO IT HAS TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU THINK WOULD BENEFIT YOUR CITY AND YOU CAN MOVE ON TO THIS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION AND WHAT TYPICALLY COMES OUT OF THIS IS WHEN YOU'RE 30 PERCENT DESIGN PLANS, WE DO RIGHT-OF-WAY VERIFICATIONS, ANY IDENTIFICATION OF ANY TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT MAY NEED TO BE DONE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION IS PART OF THIS.
SO FOR MPO STAFF, BECAUSE WE'RE USING FTA FUNDS, WE HAVE TO HAVE THIS APPROVED IN TRANS, WHICH IS THE TRANSIT OR MANAGEMENT SYSTEM THAT FTA STAFF USES.
SO THERE'S A PROCESS AND APPLICATION THAT MPO STAFF WILL DEVELOP AND PUT THROUGH THE FTA IN ORDER TO GET THAT MONEY RELEASED FOR THE CITY TO START CONSTRUCTION AND ONCE CONSTRUCTION IS DONE,
[01:35:01]
IT'S NOT REALLY OVER BECAUSE THE CITIES ARE ON THE HOOK FOR THE USEFUL LIFE OF WHATEVER ASSETS ARE FUNDED WITH THE FTA FUNDS, SO PROJECT MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE, THAT'S ALL KIND OF PART OF THIS AND FOR THIS, WE DO HAVE A MINIMUM, IT'S A $1 MILLION MINIMUM IS WHAT WE ASKED THE CITIES TO, NOTHING UNDERNEATH THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS THAT TAKES PLACE WITH MPO STAFF AND FTA.SO NOTHING UNDER A MILLION DOLLARS WILL WE ENTERTAIN, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A MAXIMUM.
SO THIS NEXT SLIDE, ALONG WITH THE MOBILITY HUBS IN THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE NEED AND YOU, MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE THERE'S PROBABLY SOME NEW FACES ON THE COMMITTEE, BUT WE ASKED FOR THE PROJECT BE PROGRAM READY.
AGAIN, THIS INCLUDES A DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE ALSO ASKED FOR PARTNER COLLABORATION.
SO IF THERE'S PARTS OF THE ROADWAY THAT ARE IMPACTED BY ANOTHER MUNICIPALITY THAT IS OWNERSHIP OR ANOTHER ENTITY.
WE ASKED THAT BY THE TIME YOU COME TO THE MPO TO APPLY FOR YOUR MOBILITY HUB CONSTRUCTION DESIGN FUNDS IF YOU HAVE ALREADY REACHED OUT TO THESE PARTNERS AND THEY'RE ON THE SAME PAGE AS YOU.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE ASKED FOR A RESOLUTION SUPPORT, WHICH MANY OF YOU ARE ALREADY FAMILIAR WITH YOUR PAST PROJECTS WITH THE MPO, NOTHING TOO NEW THERE AND ALSO COST ESTIMATES AS DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING INTO AND WE NEED TO HAVE AS BEST OF AN IDEA OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST AS WE CAN KNOWING THAT NO ONE HAS A CRYSTAL BALL, WE CAN'T SEE EVERYTHING.
BUT WE NEED TO GET AS CLOSE TO THE BALLPARK AS WE CAN. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
IN TERMS OF ELIGIBILITY, ONLY MPO MEMBER GOVERNMENTS ARE ABLE TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, IMPROVEMENTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THERE MAY NEED TO BE SOME TYPE OF TEMPORARY PUBLIC EASEMENT THAT'S GRANTED TO MUNICIPALITY DURING THE COURSE OF THE USEFUL LIFE, AND THAT'S A STIPULATION THAT THE FTA MAKES.
ALONG WITH THAT, OUR FUNDS CAN NOW BE USED TO ACQUIRE OUR RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN YOU'RE FILLING OUT THESE APPLICATIONS IN THE FALL.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AS I MENTIONED, ALL APPLICATIONS REQUIRE A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT BUT HERE IS WHERE WE GET INTO SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE THAT WE DISCUSSED EARLIER ABOUT THE PROFESSIONAL QUALIFIED STAFF PERSON.
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S A FULL-TIME STAFF PERSON FOR THE MUNICIPALITY, YOU CAN USE A CONSULTANT.
AS I WAS LISTENING TO COMMENTS, I WAS GOING THROUGH MY POWERPOINT AS QUICKLY AS I COULD TO SEE HOW CLOSELY MY LANGUAGE WAS WITH CSLIP, BUT YOU CAN SEE MINE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT MY INTENTION OR ANYONE ELSE'S I BELIEVE AT THE MPO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO COME OVER THERE, RIP YOUR DIPLOMA OFF THE WALL, SNATCH IT, TAKE IT SOMEWHERE, MAKE SURE IT'S WHAT YOU SAY, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GETTING QUALIFIED STAFF PERSON.
BECAUSE AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THEM, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING WITH ON A MONTHLY BASIS.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING THE MONITORING REPORTS THAT ARE REQUIRED BY THE FTA, ALSO THE MONTHLY INVOICING.
IF WE ASK FOR A HAMMER, YOU DON'T GIVE US A SCREWDRIVER AND WE'LL PROBABLY BE OKAY.
IN TERMS OF THE PROCEDURE EVALUATION CRITERIA, YOU'LL PROBABLY REMEMBER THAT WE HAD CAME BEFORE YOU LAST MONTH.
WE DISCUSSED EVALUATION CRITERIA A LITTLE BIT MORE DURING THAT TIME, THE TEAM IS CURRENTLY FINALIZING ALL OF THAT.
WE HAVE A SEPARATE MPO INTERNAL TEAM THAT'S WORKING ON THE ONLINE APPLICATION, THEY'LL BE FINALIZING THAT.
THIS WILL BE AN ANNUAL PROCESS VERY SIMILAR TO CSLIP.
WE ASKED THAT ANY MUNICIPALITY THAT'S THINKING ABOUT APPLYING FOR MOBILITY HUB'S FUNDING, WE REQUIRE A MEETING BEFORE YOU SUBMIT YOUR APPLICATION JUST SO THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH ANY OF THE TINY DETAILS OR ANY HICCUPS.
IF WE CAN CATCH THEM EARLY IT'S ALWAYS TO EVERYONE'S BEST BENEFIT.
THEY'LL BE A MINIMUM OF SIX WEEK PERIOD TO PROVIDE SUBMISSIONS PROBABLY 6-8 WEEK AT THIS POINT.
ALL THE DOCUMENTATION OUTLINED IN THE APPLICATION IS REQUIRED.
IF YOU SUBMIT INCOMPLETE APPLICATION, WE'LL THANK YOU FOR IT, BUT WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT SO PLEASE BE GOOD PARTNERS AND FILL OUT ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE ARE REQUESTING AND WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. [NOISE] LET'S SEE.
THE PRIORITIZATION AND THE EVALUATION CRITERIA THAT I MENTIONED.
JUST AS A RECAP, YOU MIGHT REMEMBER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS THE
[01:40:02]
LAST TIME THAT I CAME BEFORE YOU LAST MONTH AND SPOKE, I SPOKE IN MORE DETAIL LAST MONTH, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE DIFFERENT THINGS: MARKET READINESS, WHICH IS INCLUDING INDICATORS FOR ACCESSIBILITY, ECONOMIC VITALITY, EQUITY.WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT THE NETWORK READINESS FACTORS WHICH INCLUDE MOBILITY, ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP, AND SAFETY AND LASTLY, SPONSOR READINESS, WHICH GOES BACK AND LOOKS AT THE MUNICIPALITIES TRACK RECORD WITH DELIVERING PROJECTS.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A GOOD PERFORMING PARTNER AND AS I MENTIONED, THAT WE HAVE ALL OF THAT PROGRAM-READY CRITERIA THAT WE NEED AHEAD OF TIME.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE BROWARD MPO BOARD WILL APPROVE THE RANKINGS FOR THE AWARD.
THE TOP RATING APPLICATION WOULD BE FIRST IN LINE FOR FUNDING.
THE NUMBER DEPENDS ON THE APPROPRIATION ALLOCATIONS AND HOW MANY NUMBER OF AWARDS WE GET.
I'M SURE SOMEBODY'S GOING TO ASK THAT QUESTION.
WE DON'T HAVE A CAP ON HOW MANY APPLICATIONS A MUNICIPALITY CAN SUBMIT, SO YOU DON'T HAVE THE SAME TWO LIMITS, THAT YOU DO WITH CSLIP.
ONCE AWARDED, ALL THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE FTA MASTER AGREEMENT.
SOME OF YOU MAY BE AWARE OF THAT PAIN AND SUFFERING FROM SOME OF YOUR PREVIOUS PROJECTS.
IF YOU'RE NOT, I'LL [LAUGHTER] GLADLY TEACH YOU IF YOU ARE RANKED HIGH.
BUT AGAIN, THERE IS A LOT OF COMPLIANCE ISSUES.
IF YOU THINK YOU DON'T LIKE THE LAP PROCESS, LET ME INTRODUCE YOU INTO THE USE OF FEDERAL FTA FUNDS AND YOU MAY LIKE LAP MORE.
IF AN APPLICATION IS SEEKING MOBILITY HUB FUNDING YOU WILL WORK WITH THE MPO TO DEVELOP THE SCOPE OF WORK AND COORDINATE WITH OUR TEAM THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT.
LASTLY, APPLICANTS SEEKING MOBILITY HUB FUNDING FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING AND ADMINISTERING THAT PROJECT.
AS I MENTIONED, IF YOU'RE COMING TO DO A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN STUDY, MPO STAFF WILL LEAD THAT BUT WHEN IT COMES TIME TO HANDLING CONSTRUCTION, WE LOOK TO THE MUNICIPALITY TO TAKE THE REINS AND LEAD ON THAT.
THERE MIGHT BE SOME DIFFERENT THINGS COMING ON DOWN THE LINE WITH MTECC AND SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR THAT TO BE A DELIVERY MECHANISM POTENTIALLY FOR THE MUNICIPALITIES AND THE CITIES.
BUT IF AT THIS TIME YOU'RE NOT A MEMBER OF MTECC, THE MUNICIPALITY WILL BE DOING THE PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
WE'RE GETTING TO THE END. I HOPE EVERYONE IS STILL AWAKE BECAUSE I KNOW THIS IS PRETTY DRY STUFF.
BUT AT THIS POINT, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE JUST WANTED TO TRY AND GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE TAC IN CAC TODAY.
AS I MENTIONED, I'M GOING BEFORE THE MPO BOARD IN JULY. WE'RE VERY EXCITED.
WE'VE GOT A TIGHT SCHEDULE BUT WE'RE TRYING TO ROLL THIS OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE IN THE FALL.
ALSO KNOWING THAT WE HAVE A CSLIP CYCLE THAT WE NEED TO WORK AROUND SO THAT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY DOUBLE WORKED IN MUNICIPALITIES.
I DON'T WANT THE TWO CYCLES TO OPEN AT THE SAME TIME.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE AS ALWAYS, SO HOPEFULLY, WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE THIS ALONG TODAY.
BUT AT THIS POINT, AS I MENTIONED, IF EVERYTHING GOES ACCORDING TO PLAN, WE WOULD LOOK TO LAUNCH THE APPLICATION SOMETIME IN THE FALL OR EARLY WINTER.
WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE GROUP MIGHT HAVE AT THIS TIME.
>> GREAT. THANK YOU CHADWICK. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR VIRTUAL HAND. NICK, YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
CHADWICK, I GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
I HOPE THE CHAIR WILL LET ME ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. [LAUGHTER]
>> MY FIRST QUESTION IS JUST A CLARIFICATION, YOU MENTIONED THE APPLICANTS BEING MUNICIPALITIES SEVERAL TIMES.
IS THE COUNTY ALSO ALLOWED TO APPLY FOR THIS PROGRAM?
>> MR. CROMAR, I MAY DIRECT THAT QUESTION TO YOU AT THIS POINT.
>> YES AND IN FACT, CHADWICK MAYBE WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT SHOULD SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIS IS MEMBER GOVERNMENTS.
>> YES. THAT INCLUDES THE COUNTY.
>> YEAH, THERE WE GO. BMPO MEMBER GOVERNMENTS.
>> MY NEXT QUESTION IS JUST ABOUT THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLANNING PROCESS.
I KNOW FROM THE COUNTY SIDE, WE'RE CURRENTLY KICKING OFF A TRANSIT SYSTEM BY PLAN.
WE ARE LOOKING AT COUNTYWIDE INVESTMENTS WITH THE SURTAX OF HIGH CAPACITY INVESTMENTS IN LIGHT RAIL AND POSSIBLY BRT AND OTHER MODES.
I'M JUST QUESTIONING, IF A MUNICIPALITY BY MUNICIPALITY APPROACH TO MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLANNING IS REALLY THE BEST APPROACH? IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD CREATE A PIECEMEAL MOBILITY HUB'S PARADIGM AS OPPOSED TO SOMETHING THAT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE COORDINATED.
MUNICIPALITIES OBVIOUSLY HAVE VERY DIFFERENT SIZES IN BROWARD COUNTY.
[01:45:01]
AS SMALL AS 13 HOUSEHOLDS ALL THE WAY UP TO SOMETHING MUCH LARGER.I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE FOR THE SCALE.
IT DOESN'T MAKE THE MOST AMOUNT OF SENSE TO CONDUCT MOBILITY HUB PLANNING AT THAT MUNICIPAL LEVEL.
IT'S A GREAT QUESTION THAT YOU POSED THERE, ESPECIALLY THE LAST ONE.
TO TRY AND ANSWER THAT IN THE BEST WAY I CAN, AT THIS POINT IS THAT, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
THE COUNTY IS LEADING THE CHARGE WITH THEIR SYSTEM-WIDE PLAN, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PASSING OF THE PENNY SALES TAX.
WHAT WE TRY TO DO IS COLLABORATE WITH BOTH THE COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITY DURING MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN.
I KNOW WE'VE MET MANY TIMES WITH TARA CRAWFORD OVER AT BCT.
WE'RE CONSTANTLY KEEPING THE COUNTY AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON, AND THIS IS DURING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN.
IT IS NOT LIKE WHEN WE COMPLETE IT AND THEN WE WOULD GO AND WAVE IT OVER THERE TO THE COUNTY AND SAY, HEY, LOOK WHAT WE DID.
I'LL GIVE YOU A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THAT WE RECENTLY HAD A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN THAT WE WERE WORKING WITH THE CITY OF SUNRISE ON, WHERE WE WERE LOOKING TO DO A TRANSIT CENTER SOMEWHERE IN THE SAWGRASS MILLS MALL AREA.
THROUGH WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH THE CITY, BUT ALSO WITH BCT, WE REALIZED THAT, YOU GUYS HAD SOME MAJOR PLANS FOR THAT AREA OUT THERE.
THE THOUGHT OF WHAT WE WERE PLANNING TO DO AT THE MALL AT THAT TIME, IT WASN'T READY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT BCT, ALONG WITH THEIR LIGHT RAIL PLANS, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER, THEY WERE PICKING A MULTIMODAL [INAUDIBLE].
MAYBE YOU CAN REMIND ME NICK, BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING ON OUT THERE THAT CAUSED US TO PAUSE MOVING FORWARD THAT CONSTRUCTION.
WHEN WE DEVELOP THESE MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLANS, IT'S MY DESIRE TO CONTINUE TO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH BCT AND ACCOUNTING DURING THE CREATION AND INCEPTION OF THESE PLANS SO THAT THEY ARE WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH YOUR SYSTEM-WIDE APPROACH AND THE TRANSIT PLANS THAT YOU GUYS ARE ROLLING OUT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERED IT WELL. [LAUGHTER]
>> CAN I ADD SOMETHING CHADWICK?
>> THAT IS AN INTRIGUING QUESTION, AND I'M GLAD YOU ASKED.
I'M PULLING UP THE POLICIES TO LOOK, AND NOWHERE DOES IT SAY THAT THESE MASTER PLANS NEED TO BE ON A SINGLE LOCATION BASIS.
LET'S SAY, COUNTY WANTS THE SYSTEM-WIDE PLAN IDENTIFIES WHERE A CORRIDOR IS.
WE CAN LOOK AT DOING SOME PLANS ALONG A CORRIDOR.
IT ALSO REQUIRES THE COOPERATION AND RESOLUTION FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND SO THAT BECOMES AN ISSUE TOO OF MAKING SURE THAT THEY ARE PART OF THAT.
IT COULD BE INTRIGUING TO LOOK AT A FEW HUBS IN COMBINATION. THAT'S AN INTERESTING IDEA.
>> ACTUALLY, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU NICK BECAUSE I DO REMEMBER IT NOW.
I'LL PUT YOU ON THE SPOT HERE.
I BELIEVE THE COUNTY WAS LOOKING AT A LOCATION FOR A MULTIMODAL TRANSFER CENTER OUT IN SUNRISE.
I THINK THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE A LOCATION PICKED OUT BY THE END OF JUNE.
YOU'VE GOT A FEW DAYS LEFT UNTIL THE END OF JUNE.
[LAUGHTER] DID THE COUNTY EVER DETERMINE THAT LOCATION? BECAUSE IF YOU HAD, THEN I CAN GO BUILD THE MOBILITY HUB IN SUNRISE NOW.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO COORDINATE ON THAT AND THE REST OF THE MOBILITY HUBS.
>> MY NEXT QUESTION, CAN AN APPLICANT APPLY FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS WITHOUT HAVING A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN OR IS IT A STEP PROCESS WHERE THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MASTER PLAN FIRST BEFORE THEY CAN ACTUALLY APPLY FOR A PROJECT?
>> IF THEY HAVE A PLAN OF SOME TYPE THAT THEY CAN SHOW THAT THEY BELIEVE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN WILL ESSENTIALLY SHOW IN TERMS OF SOMETHING THAT SHOWS WHAT TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEEDED IN THIS AREA, THEN YES.
THEY CAN USE THAT IN LIEU OF HAVING TO GO THROUGH AND DO A MOBILITY HUB MASTER PLAN FIRST WITH US.
>> ALL RIGHT. THEN MY LAST POINT WOULD JUST BE, ANY WAY YOU CAN STRENGTHEN THE LANGUAGE TO EMPHASIZE COORDINATION WITH THE MAJOR TRANSIT OPERATOR? I WOULD VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT.
ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COLLABORATION, AND WHEN YOU'RE CREATING THE GENESIS OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL, A LOT OF PLANNERS, THEY'RE NOT TRANSIT EXPERTS.
[LAUGHTER] THEY MIGHT KNOW WHAT THEY WANT TO SUPPORT TRANSIT, BUT THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS WHEN YOU START TO GET DOWN INTO TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND HOW A CAPITAL PROGRAM ACTUALLY IMPACTS TRANSIT OPERATIONS, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE BCT AT THE TABLE.
I'D WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN PROJECTS ARE BEING SUBMITTED AND GOING THROUGH THE RANKING PROCESS, WE WOULD BE AWARE OF THE PROJECT OR AT LEAST MAYBE HAD SOME CONVERSATION WITH AN APPLICANT ON WHAT IT IS, AS OPPOSED TO ALLOWING A PROJECT TO GO AHEAD AND GET RANKED, STARTED TO GET FUNDED, MOVING ALONG.
[01:50:01]
OPERATOR WILL COME IN [LAUGHTER] AND RAISE SOME CRITICAL ISSUE WITH THE PROJECT.TO WHATEVER EXTENT YOU CAN ADD THAT LANGUAGE OR STRENGTHEN THAT IN THE POLICY, I'D APPRECIATE IT.
>> ABSOLUTELY. IT GOES BACK JUST IN THE PROGRAM-READY NATURE OF HAVING THAT PARTNER COLLABORATION, WHICH I MENTIONED BRIEFLY.
BUT ABSOLUTELY, WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT.
>> CHADWICK, I'M JUST LOOKING AGAIN AT THE LANGUAGE, AND IT DOES TALK ABOUT AN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY.
THE LAST LINE OF IT TALKS ABOUT IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY AND OTHER SPONSORS AND PARTNERS, MAYBE WE CAN CALL OUT AGAIN, IT'S THE TRANSIT PROVIDERS BECAUSE THEY ARE INTEGRAL PARTNERS.
THAT'S ONE OF THE KEY SCORING METRICS IS THERE HAS TO BE TRANSIT SERVICE.
>> AGREED. ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE FLEXING AND DOING FTA FUNDING, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CALL OUT THE TRANSIT PROVIDER.
>> ABSOLUTELY. WE WON'T FORGET OUR LARGEST TRANSIT PROVIDER IN THE COUNTY.
>> THANK YOU, CHADWICK. I APPRECIATE IT.
>> [NOISE] THANK YOU. MR. GOOD, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> YES. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
MEMBER NICK, I GOT TO SAY YOU ALWAYS ASK SOME REALLY GREAT QUESTIONS.
KEEP ME IN MY HEAD GROUP MOVING. WOW, THANK YOU.
I ASKED IF WE COULD JUST HAVE THE PRESENTATION BROUGHT BACK AGAIN.
I JUST NEED TO LOOK AT THE SLIDE WITH, I BELIEVE THE RANKING CRITERIA OR THE REVIEW CRITERIA.
>> I THINK THAT'S SLIDE 14, REBECCA, MAYBE.
NO, KEEP GOING FORWARD. KEEP GOING.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [NOISE] WHEN I LOOK AT THIS HERE, I LIKE THE CRITERIA.
ONE OF THE THINGS I'M NOT CERTAIN OF IF I'M SEEING IN HERE BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT A LOT OF EASTERN CITIES ARE STARTING TO DEAL WITH IS A COMMUTER RAIL.
THERE'S A COMMUTER RAIL THAT'S TARGETED FOR A HUB.
I DON'T SEE ANY CRITERIA OR ANY BENEFIT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO DO THAT?
>> YES, I AM SORRY. MR. GOOD, WERE YOU AT THE LAST TAC MEETING LAST MONTH?
>> OR WAS IT TWO MONTHS AGO? OKAY. IN THE LAST PRESENTATION, I HAVE IT.
FEELS LIKE IT WAS JUST YESTERDAY, BUT WOW, TWO MONTHS.
WE WENT INTO THIS MUCH MORE IN-DEPTH.
WHAT I CAN DO IS I CAN SHARE WITH YOU OR HAVE MAYBE REBECCA SEND OUT TO THE GROUP THAT PRESENTATION WHERE IT SHOWS IN MUCH MORE DETAIL, [NOISE] WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF THE NETWORK.
WE'RE ABSOLUTELY LOOKING AT THE SYSTEM-WIDE PLAN FOR BCT, WHICH INCLUDES ANY OF THEIR TRANSIT THAT'S COMING IN THE NEXT 30 YEARS WITH ANY SALES TAX AND ANY OTHER INITIATIVES THAT ANY OF THE MUNICIPALITIES ARE LOOKING AT.
WE'RE ABSOLUTELY LOOKING AT THE RAIL CONNECTIONS.
>> CHADWICK, IT DOES INCLUDE SFRTA AS A TRANSIT.
>> YES, SIR. SFRTA, EVERYONE THAT WE COULD THINK OF UNDER THE SUN.
>> OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.
[NOISE] WELL DONE, CHAD. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. BLOOM? NO? SEEING NONE, THEN I WOULD CALL FOR A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.
[NOISE] MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE BROWARD MPO APPROVE MOBILITY HUB PROGRAM POLICIES.
CARL SECONDED AND WE WILL PASS THIS MOTION ON CONSENT.
YOU PUT YOUR HANDS DOWN UNLESS YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH PASSING THIS MOTION.
PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN, IF NOT, THE ITEM WILL PASS ON CONSENT.
SEEING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES.
NEXT, WE'LL GO INTO OUR NON-ACTION ITEMS.
[1. Mobility Projects Update]
OUR FIRST PRESENTATION IS ON MOBILITY PROJECTS AND UPDATES.MR. GUTIERREZ WILL BE GIVING US THE PRESENTATION.
MADAM CHAIR THANK YOU, MEMBERS OF THE TAC.
MY NAME IS RICARDO GUTIERREZ, I AM THE MOBILITY PROGRAM MANAGER AT THE MPO.
TODAY WE'RE JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON OUR MOBILITY PROGRAM,
[01:55:04]
WHICH IS OUR IMPLEMENTATION ARM OF THE COMPLETION INITIATIVE MADE POSSIBLE THROUGH A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A MOBILITY PROJECT.
THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE SOME SYSTEM PROJECTS FOR ANY MAJOR CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS, IT'S JUST ABOUT MOBILITY PROJECTS, SO PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN OUR STUDIES, PLANS, OR INITIATIVES.
QUICKLY GO OVER THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS.
I WON'T GO INTO THE PROGRAM-READY PROCESS, YOU'VE HEARD THAT THREE TIMES TODAY, SO I WON'T GO INTO THAT AREA, BUT I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ONE THING IN THIS PROCESS IS OUR THIRD-YEAR CHECK.
SOMETHING THAT WE'RE STARTING TO DO SINCE MAYBE A YEAR AGO, WHERE BEFORE WE HIRE A DESIGN CONSULTANT, WE ACTUALLY MEET WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THE SCOPE THAT WE DEVELOP A COUPLE OF YEARS AHEAD OF TIME IS ACTUALLY STILL GOOD.
THAT GIVES YOU THE COMFORT THAT THE PROJECT WILL MOVE FORWARD ESSENTIALLY HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND ALSO THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE ESTABLISHED DURING COVID AS WE WERE WORKING REMOTELY, WE WANTED TO KEEP THE PUBLIC AND ALSO ELECTED OFFICIALS, MPO BOARD MEMBERS INFORM ABOUT PROJECTS THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN CONSTRUCTION.
WE STARTED THIS EDUCATIONAL MESSAGING PROGRAM THROUGH MANY SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS WHERE WE ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE ACTUALLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT ALSO I WOULD TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE SOME EDUCATION ABOUT WHY WE'RE DOING THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS.
VERY SUCCESSFUL. WE DO THIS ON A QUARTERLY BASIS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. PROGRAMMED PROJECTS.
WE HAVE FOUR PROJECTS THAT HAVE NOT ENTERED INTO THE DESIGN YET.
THESE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THE FOUR OR FIFTH YEAR OF THE CIT.
WE HAVE ABOUT 19 PROJECTS PURELY UNDER DESIGN. THAT'S PRETTY EXCITING.
WE'VE GOT PROJECTS ALL OVER THE COUNTY IN COCONUT CREEK, PEMBROKE PINES, CORAL SPRINGS. NEXT SLIDE.
AS YOU CAN SEE THERE'S LINKING PROJECTS, SO PREVIOUSLY ON THE DESIGN PHASE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT JUST A COUPLE OF PROJECTS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY CURRENTLY ASSIGNED.
THIS IS A PRETTY EXCITING PROJECT.
THIS IS THIS UNIVERSITY DRIVE IN THE CITIES OF PLANTATION AND THE MIRAMAR.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LIKED ABOUT THIS PROJECT IS WHAT WE'VE DONE AND THIS IS A TYPE OF PROJECT THAT WE ARE ACTUALLY BUILDING NOW.
WE WERE ACTUALLY DOING COMPLETE STREETS.
IN THE IMPLANTATION WE'RE DOING ON-STREET BUFFER BIKE LANES, WE'RE DOING A 10-FOOT PATH ON THE WEST SIDE.
THAT'S WHERE THE ACTUAL DESTINATIONS ARE.
WE ADDING TRANSPORT AMENITIES, WE'RE DOING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL LIGHTING TO REALLY BRING A COMPLETE STREET.
ONE OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PROJECTS AT MIRAMAR, WHICH YOU SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE, IS WE'RE ACTUALLY PROVIDING A VERY WIDE PATH IN ADDITION TO THE ELEMENTS THAT I MENTIONED BEFORE.
WE'RE ACTUALLY ADDING AN ADDITIONAL WIDER PATH TO CONNECT TO A REGIONAL PARK THAT'S LOCATED ON THE SIDE THERE AT THE END OF THE PROJECT. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THIS QUARTER.
SOME BUFFER BIKE LANES, AGAIN, SOME TRANSPORT AMENITIES, SHELTERS, AND OF COURSE THAT 10-FOOT SIDEWALK ON THE WEST SIDE AS WELL AND DEFINITELY WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LEVEL LIGHTING, SOMETHING THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WAS MISSING.
IF WE WANT PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY START WALKING AND BIKING, THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS AT NIGHT AS WELL, SO DEFINITELY VERY IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THIS PROJECT. NEXT SLIDE.
I ALSO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS COPANS ROAD OUR FIRST MOBILITY PROJECT THAT ACTUALLY WE'RE GOING TO DO A COMPLETELY SEPARATE FACILITY.
WE'RE EXCITED TO BE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH THE COUNTY ON THIS PROJECT.
THIS WILL BE OUR FIRST MOBILITY PROJECT THAT HAS COMPLETELY OFF-THE-ROAD FACILITIES.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
WE HAVE ABOUT FIVE PROJECTS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
YOU CAN CONTINUE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
SOON AS WE ARE A MARK ON THE CORAL SPRINGS, I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF PROJECTS. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS A PROJECT IN THE CITY OF HOLLYWOOD, 56 AVENUE FROM FABRIC ALL THE WAY TO STERLING ABOUT A THREE-MILE QUARTER HERE.
WE'RE DOING BUFFER BIKE LANES AND ALSO ADDRESSING THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT AND EVEN SOME SIDEWALK GAPS AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE.
JUST WANT TO MENTION ONE THING.
WE'RE SUPER EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE'VE STARTED CONSTRUCTION ON OUR TIGER PROJECTS.
THIS IS A TIGER GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED BACK IN 2016, PARTNERING WITH THE CITIES OF FORT LAUDERDALE, POMPANO BEACH, OAKLAND PARK, LAUDERDALE LAKES, AND BROWARD COUNTY AS WELL.
CONSTRUCTION HAS BEGUN, STARTED BACK IN APRIL 2021 AND WE
[02:00:04]
ARE HOPING TO END CONSTRUCTION IN 2022. NEXT SLIDE.COMPLETED. THIS IS PRETTY EXCITING.
WE COMPLETED 12 PROJECTS SINCE LAST YEAR.
IN THE NEXT SLIDE, I'LL HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF THOSE PROJECTS.
GO AHEAD TO THE NEXT SLIDE AS WELL.
[NOISE] REBECCA. 21ST AVENUE, BROKER BIKE LANES, ALL THE WAY TO COMMERCIAL TO OAKLAND PARK.
IT DOES CONNECT TO ANOTHER PROJECT THAT WE COMPLETED IN THIS INNER COMPARTMENT WHICH IS PROSPECT ROAD, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE. NEXT SLIDE.
ROCK ISLAND ROAD BETWEEN WILES AND SAMPLE, AGAIN, ANOTHER EXCITING PROJECT WHERE WE ADDRESS ALL OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE GREEN STREET.
WE'VE GOT CONVENTIONAL BIKE LANES AND ALSO WE ARE GOING FOR SIDEWALK GAPS, NICE STRIATED PATH ALONG THE ROAD THERE. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS ALMOST COMPLETE.
I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETE THIS WEEK IF I'M NOT MISTAKING.
PROSPECT ROAD WHERE WE HAVE CONTINUOUS BUFFER BIKE LANES THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE QUARTER IN ALL GREEN, THE CITY [INAUDIBLE] INTO GREEN BIKE LANES, SO PRETTY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
IT'S THERMOPLASTIC THAT'S BEING USED FOR THE GREEN BIKE PLANES PRETTY AS OUR FIRST PROJECT THAT IS COMPLETELY GREEN THERMOPLASTIC.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, THERE'S ALSO SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR LANDSCAPING THAT WERE ADDED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE DID ELIMINATE A LANE AND THE MAJORITY OF THIS BORDER TO PROVIDE THAT BUFFER BIKE LANES AND THAT FLATTER AREA.
THE CITY AND THE COUNTY ARE GOING TO BE WORKING TOGETHER TO PROVIDE THE LANDSCAPING WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THIS PROJECT. NEXT SLIDE.
THIS IS JUST A SUMMARY OF OUR IMPLEMENTATION OVER THE LAST YEAR.
IF YOU CLICK ONE MORE TIME, REBECCA.
LAST YEAR WE ADDED 11 MILES TO SIDEWALKS AND ALSO CONSTRUCTED 20 MILES FOR BICYCLE LANES, JUST THIS PAST YEAR.
THAT'S PRETTY EXCITING. WITH THAT, THAT ENDS MY PRESENTATION.
I WILL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NO? I WOULD LOOK TO IT. I'VE DRIVEN THROUGH SOME OF THESE, SOME OF THEM BORDER FORT LAUDERDALE, THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU GAVE 21ST PROSPECT, THEY'RE REALLY SPECTACULAR.
IT'S GREAT TO SEE ALL THIS WORK COMING TO FRUITION, AND THE DIFFERENCE IT'S GOING TO MAKE IN OUR NETWORK FOR FOLKS TO GET AROUND.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT NON-ACTION ITEM,
[2. Metro Transportation Engineering & Construction Cooperative (MTECC) Update]
WHICH IS A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE METRO TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE, MR. CROSS.>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MS. CHAIR. WELL, I KNOW THAT IT'S LATE, SO I WILL TRY TO MOVE THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION FAIRLY RAPIDLY.
BUT AGAIN, MY NAME IS BILL CROSS AM THE DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING FOR THE BROWARD MPO.
I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF TIES WITH THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD TODAY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN UNDER DEVELOPMENT FOR QUITE SOME TIME, YEARS ACTUALLY.
IT'S STARTING TO BECOME TIMELY TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, AND WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO BRING IT TO YOU TODAY TO START SHARING SOME OF WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON.
LET ME START BACK AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS, WHICH WAS BACK IN APRIL OF 2018.
SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER THAT WE HOSTED A MAYORS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS TRANSPORTATION ROUNDTABLE.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THAT WERE SOME OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS WANTED TO HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT TRANSPORTATION AND HOW IT AFFECTED THEIR CITIES AND HOW THEY COULD DELIVER PROJECTS.
THAT WERE MEANINGFUL TO THEIR RESIDENTS.
A STEERING COMMITTEE WAS CREATED OUT OF THAT AND SINCE THAT TIME, THAT STEERING COMMITTEE HAS CONTINUED TO MEET AND DISCUSS ISSUES THAT AFFECT TRANSPORTATION IN SOME OF OUR SMALLER COMMUNITIES.
NEXT. THIS JUST SHOWS SOME OF OUR MEMBERS HERE AND YOU CAN SEE ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM ALL DIFFERENT SIZES OF CITIES, MUNICIPALITIES, AS WELL AS GEOGRAPHICALLY DIVERSE THROUGHOUT THE REGION.
NEXT, PLEASE. SOME OF THE KEY ISSUES AND I THINK ACTUALLY, WE HEARD SOME OF THIS EARLIER TODAY FROM MR. GOOD WAS THAT DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES HAVE DIFFERENT CAPABILITIES, DIFFERENT IN-HOUSE RESOURCES, AND JUST DIFFERENT RESOURCES, PERIOD, AND SO THERE'S AN ISSUE OF EQUITY.
YOU REVIEWED TODAY AS THE ATTACK, NOT ONLY TO CSLIP, BUT THE HUB POLICIES.
ALL OF THESE WHEN WE RANK AND EVALUATE PROJECTS AND WE BRING THEM
[02:05:01]
TO YOU IN A RECOMMENDED PRIORITIZE, THERE'S ALWAYS A CONSIDERATION OF EQUITY THAT GOES INTO THAT.I THINK THAT'S FOUNDATIONAL FOR WHY WE'RE BRINGING MTECC FORWARD IS THAT THERE ARE SOME CITIES THAT JUST DON'T HAVE THE SAME RESOURCES AS OTHERS.
EVEN IF THEY DO RECEIVE AN AWARD OF CSLIP, IT MAY BE INFREQUENTLY ONCE EVERY FEW YEARS.
DO THEY HAVE THE STAFF? IS THERE AN INSTITUTIONAL MEMORY ON HOW TO DELIVER THAT? I THINK YOU'VE GOT A TASTE OF THE LAP PROCESS IS NOT WITHOUT ITS COMPLEXITIES.
THERE'S A LOT OF ROLES, A LOT OF DOCUMENTATION IN ORDER TO GET THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT TECHNICAL RESOURCES AND SOME SPECIALIZED ADMINISTRATIVE KNOWLEDGE THAT'S NECESSARY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
AFTER HAVING THAT ONGOING CONVERSATION WITH OUR MUNICIPALITIES FOR THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, I KNOW ALL OF YOU REMEMBER IN EARLY 2020, FDOT MADE THE DECISION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO MOVE OUR OFF SYSTEM PROJECTS FROM COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN AS WELL AS CSLIP OVER TO LAP PROGRAM.
THIS WAS DONE BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HAD IDENTIFIED A RESOURCE GAP AND THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO PRODUCE THE PROJECTS IN HOUSE FOR US ANY LONGER.
AGAIN, THIS PUT THIS CONVERSATION OF MTECC, PUSHED IT FORWARD BECAUSE NOW THE NEED WAS MORE OBVIOUS THAN EVER.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE SUBCOMMITTEE STARTED EXPLORING SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR A JOINT ORGANIZATION TO HELP DELIVER TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
WE LOOKED AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS. NEXT SLIDE.
I WON'T BORE YOU WITH WHAT WE LOOKED AT, BUT WHAT WE CAME UP WITH IS FLORIDA INTERLOCAL UNDER 163, IS ACTUALLY SUBSECTION 0.01 IS THE FIRST PIECE THAT WAS AMENDED IN THERE, AND IT PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO, I'LL READ THIS TO YOU, MAKE THE MOST EFFICIENT USE OF THEIR POWERS BY ENABLING THEM TO COOPERATE WITH OTHER LOCALITIES ON A BASIS OF MUTUAL ADVANTAGE.
THIS IS DONE ALL THE TIME BY MUNICIPALITIES.
THEY MIGHT BE NEXT DOOR TO EACH OTHER.
LET'S SAY THEY WANTED TO HAVE A JOINT AND SHARED WATER TREATMENT PLANT OR A SEWER PLANT.
THIS ALLOWS THEM TO DO THIS SO THEY CAN PUT TOGETHER A SPECIAL PURPOSE CORPORATION TO DELIVER THAT ON BEHALF OF THE CITIES.
NO DIFFERENT THIS IS THE SAME IDEA. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF PURSUING THIS PATH IS THAT IT'S A KNOWN LEGAL PROCESS.
LIKE I MENTIONED, IT'S USED ROUTINELY THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF FLORIDA BY MUNICIPALITIES TO HELP THEM DELIVER SERVICES AND GOODS TO THEIR RESONANCE.
IT'S A VERY FLEXIBLE STRUCTURE AND SO IT CAN BE EXPANDED, IT CAN CONTRACT, IT CAN BE ADJUSTED TO MEET THE LOCAL NEEDS AS THEY CHANGE OVER TIME.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SOME OF THE BENEFITS THAT WERE IMPORTANT TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE THAT REVIEWED THIS; NUMBER 1 WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE A CENTRALIZED ENGINEERING EXPERTISE THAT UNDERSTOOD HOW TO DESIGN THE PROJECTS, PREPARE THE BID PACKAGES, BID THEM, CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT, INSPECTION, ETC.
BASICALLY, ALL OF THOSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT SOME OF OUR SMALLER CITIES MIGHT NOT HAVE AVAILABLE IN-HOUSE.
CENTRALIZED PROCUREMENT WAS ALSO IMPORTANT BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS PERHAPS ONE OF THE MORE CHALLENGING AREAS OF THE LAP PROJECT DELIVERY.
YOU HAVE TO MEET THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS TO AGAIN, TO BACKUP FOR A MINUTE THE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING AFFECTED BY THE SWITCH TO A LAP DELIVERY IS ARE FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS, SO AT THE CORE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS, SO YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW ALL OF THOSE FEDERAL PROCUREMENT.
IF YOU ALREADY HAVE AN ENGINEER ON CALL AND YOU WANT TO USE THAT CONSULTANT, IT COULD BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE PROCURED THAT ENGINEERING FIRM THROUGH THE FEDERAL PROCESS.
OF COURSE, EFFICIENT, TIMELY PROJECT DELIVERY ALWAYS A GOAL, CENTRALIZED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT TEAM.
AGAIN, THE CITY WOULD ONLY BUY SERVICES NECESSARY
[02:10:01]
WITHOUT THE NEED TO MAINTAIN ANY STAFF. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.WHAT DID WE COME UP WITH? WELL, WE CAME UP WITH THIS REALLY CATCHY NAME.
METRO TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE WILL BASICALLY BE AN ORGANIZATION SEPARATE, STANDALONE FROM THE MPO.
I DO WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT THAT THIS ORGANIZATION IS AN ORGANIZATION UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE 163 THAT IS ENTERED INTO BY CITIES FOR THEIR MUTUAL BENEFIT.
THE MPO WILL NOT BE A MEMBER TO THAT ORGANIZATION.
OF COURSE, THE MPO HAS SUPPORTING THIS BECAUSE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT OUR MEMBER GOVERNMENTS HAVE FACED.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SOME OF THE KEY ELEMENTS OF THIS ORGANIZATION.
FIRST OFF, IT HAS A SELF GOVERNING BOARD.
THE BOARD MEMBERS WILL BE MADE UP OF THE FOUNDING FIVE GOVERNMENTS.
THE FUNDING TO RUN THIS ORGANIZATION WILL BE PRIMARILY THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR FEDERAL REIMBURSEMENT.
AS THEY DESIGN AND BUILD PROJECTS, THERE WILL ALSO BE MUNICIPAL MEMBER ANNUAL DUES FOR THOSE THAT CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE.
AGAIN, LET ME JUST PAUSE HERE AND SAY THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY.
NO CITY HAS ANY REQUIREMENT TO JOIN THIS.
IT IS A VOLUNTARY DECISION TO JOIN.
THE MPO, AT LEAST TO START, WE'LL BE PROVIDING MTECC WITH SOME ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
AGAIN, WE WANT TO TRY TO HELP THEM STAND THIS UP, SET THIS UP, AND WE WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE AND UNDERSTANDING THAT SETUP A NEW ORGANIZATION.
WE CAN DO IT IN A VERY, VERY LOW COST APPROACH, IF WE HELP SUPPORT THROUGH BUYING ANY INSURANCES THROUGH THE MPO, SOME LEGAL SUPPORT, ETC.
THAT WILL BE REALLY THE EXTENT OF THE MPO'S DIRECT INVOLVEMENT.
THIS IS OUR ONE-PAGER AND THIS IS AVAILABLE IF YOU WANT TO BRING SOMETHING BACK TO YOUR GOVERNMENT THAT YOU REPRESENT, TO SHARE WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE DOING.
THIS IS OUR ONE-PAGE FLIER, IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
DOWN AT THE BOTTOM HERE, I'VE JUST NOTED IT DOES LIST OUR FOUNDING MEMBER GOVERNMENTS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
HERE AGAIN, THESE ARE THE FOUNDING PARTNERS, DANIA BEACH, HOLLYWOOD, PLANTATION, POMPANO BEACH, AND TAMARAC.
THEY WERE MEMBERS OF THE MAYORS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS ROUND-TABLE, THEY HAVE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US MOVE THIS ISSUE FORWARD, AND THEY'VE AGREED TO COME UP WITH THE INITIAL FUNDING NECESSARY TO GET THE ORGANIZATION UP AND OFF THE GROUND.
SUPPORT OF THE FOUNDING MEMBERS, THEY'RE GOING TO LEAD THE MTECC ADOPTION OF THE ILA THROUGH THEIR INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONS.
THAT'S ONGOING, RIGHT NOW WE'RE SCHEDULING THOSE DATES, WE'RE WORKING WITH THOSE MUNICIPALITIES, TO SCHEDULE THE DATES.
THEY WILL ALSO BE WORKING TO RESERVE MTECC FUNDS NECESSARY FOR THAT INITIAL START.
THEY'LL ALSO BE SHARING THEIR MTECC INFORMATION BOTH INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY WITH PEER CITIES AS REQUESTED.
PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS INTERESTED TO KNOW HOW THE MONEY WORKS.
INITIALLY, THE FOUNDING MEMBERS ARE BRINGING $100,000 EACH TO THE TABLE, THAT WILL SUPPORT THIS ORGANIZATION FOR A TWO-YEAR PERIOD.
NON-FOUNDING MEMBERS, IF OTHER CITIES BECOME INTERESTED, AS THIS GETS STOOD UP, IN JOINING IN, THAT WOULD BE $50,000 TO JOIN.
I'D LIKE TO JUST POINT OUT HERE THAT, WE DID QUITE A BIT OF RESEARCH ON WHAT IT TYPICALLY COSTS THE CITY TO STAND UP AND TO BRING IN SERVICES, AND TO GET QUALIFIED FOR A LAP PROJECT BY FDOT.
THAT COST GENERALLY APPROACHES ABOUT $100,000.
WE'RE HOPING THAT THERE'S VALUE HERE.
WE THINK THAT THERE IS, BUT YOU'LL HAVE TO DECIDE FOR YOURSELVES.
THERE'S ALSO AN ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEE THAT IS SET AT $25,000 A YEAR, THAT WILL BE ADJUSTED BY THE BOARD ANNUALLY.
DEPENDING UPON HOW WELL THE REIMBURSEMENTS ARE WORKING,
[02:15:01]
THAT FEE MAY BE ADJUSTED DOWN.WE ARE IN THE AGREEMENT REQUIRING A FIVE-YEAR MINIMUM COMMITMENT, AND THAT IS TO ENSURE STABILITY OF THE ORGANIZATION AND STABILITY OF PROJECT DELIVERY.
NEXT SLIDE. IMPLEMENTATION. THE FOUNDING MEMBERS RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, WE'RE GETTING ON THEIR CALENDARS, HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THE SUMMER, WE SHOULD HAVE THOSE AGREEMENTS TO INTER LOCAL IN PLACE.
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, THE INTER LOCAL WAS INCLUDED AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THIS AGENDA ITEM, YOU CAN READ THROUGH THAT FOR YOURSELF.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT WILL BECOMING TO THE MPO BOARD SOMETIME LATE THIS YEAR, AND THAT WOULD BE FOR THE MPO TO PROVIDE SOME SERVICES.
THOSE SERVICES WOULD BE PAID FOR, THERE'S NO FREE RIDE, AND THE MPO IS NOT PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES.
DRAFT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ONE TO POINT OUT HERE.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH FDOT ON THIS, SINCE THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WOULD NO LONGER BE PRODUCING THE OFFICE SYSTEM FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS.
THEY HAD BEEN REALLY HELPFUL IN US UNDERSTANDING HOW WE NEED TO SET MTECC UP, AND HOW TO PUT IT IN A WAY THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THEM.
THERE ARE QUITE A FEW ISSUES THAT WE HAVEN'T RESOLVED YET, BECAUSE THEY REALLY NEED TO BE ADOPTED BY THE NEW MTECC BOARD AS POLICIES OF THE BOARD, SO WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH FDOT.
AGAIN, THEY HAD BEEN VERY HELPFUL IN IDENTIFYING THINGS THAT WE WANT TO INCLUDE IN THOSE.
THAT WILL BE COMING LATER THIS YEAR.
OUR TIME-FRAME FOR ACTUALLY HAVING THIS ORGANIZATION STOOD UP, FUNDED, IS OCTOBER 1ST.
THAT COINCIDES WITH THE CITY'S FISCAL BUDGET YEAR.
WE WILL THEN PURSUE LAP CERTIFICATION FOR THE ORGANIZATION.
THE INTENT HERE IS TO BRING IN THE CONSULTANT RESOURCES NECESSARY TO SUPPORT THIS, AND TO GET THE ORGANIZATION CERTIFIED SO THAT AS OPPOSED TO CITIES THAT HAVE TO GO THROUGH EACH PROJECT INDIVIDUALLY ONE BY ONE TO GET CERTIFIED, WE WOULD LOOK FOR THIS ORGANIZATION TO GET CERTIFIED.
WE WILL WORK ON PROCUREMENT OF THE CONSULTANT RESOURCES.
THIS ORGANIZATION MAY HAVE ONE STAFF MEMBER, MAYBE EVEN A PART-TIME STAFF MEMBER, BEYOND THAT, IT WILL ALL BE DONE THROUGH CONSULTANT RESOURCES.
WITH THE IDEA THAT MTECC, AS FAR AS ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO DELIVER PROJECTS, WE WANT TO BE READY BY JULY 1ST OF NEXT YEAR.
THIS TIME NEXT YEAR, TO THE EXTENT THAT THERE IS BUDGET AND THERE ARE PROJECTS READY TO GO, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS ORGANIZATION PREPARED TO SUPPORT THOSE PROJECTS.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IN PROCESS, I THINK I'VE ALREADY COVERED THIS, SO LET'S JUST GO ONTO THE NEXT SLIDE.
I GUESS THAT'S THE PRESENTATION.
WE'RE VERY EXCITED, AND ON BEHALF OF OUR FIVE FOUNDING MEMBERS, THANK YOU FOR ALL THE GOOD WORK.
I RECOGNIZE FDOT FOR ALL OF THEIR HELP AND SUPPORT IN HELPING TO CLARIFY THE STRUCTURE.
AT THIS POINT, I GUESS I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP, MADAM CHAIR, FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR ANY DISCUSSION.
WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.
RAISE YOUR HAND. CLARISSA, YOU CAN GO AHEAD.
>> HI BILL. I DON'T SEE THIS PRESENTATION ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA PACKAGE.
>> ABSOLUTELY. I'LL TAKE THE BLAME FOR THAT, I WAS A LITTLE LATE GETTING THE PRESENTATION FINISHED.
REBECCA, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HANG OFF OF THIS AGENDA ITEM?
>> [OVERLAPPING] ADDED AFTERWARDS, AFTER THE MEETING.
IT WILL ALSO BE PART OF THE MPO BOARD AGENDA PACKAGE FOR JULY, SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO FIND IT THERE AS WELL.
>> OKAY. SO YOU ADDED TO THE AGENDA PACKAGE, REBECCA? THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANDREW PINNEY, GO AHEAD.
[02:20:03]
>> HI BILL, SO LAST MONTH, I THINK IT WAS DURING PETER'S PRESENTATION ABOUT THE CARES FUNDING.
I HAD ASKED ABOUT, I THINK YOU GUYS HAD LINE-ITEM ABOUT 300,000 AND YOU HINTED ABOUT THIS PROGRAM YOU ARE WORKING ON.
BUT IN THIS PRESENTATION, I THOUGHT YOU SAID THAT THE MPO IS NOT GOING TO BE A MEMBER AND ANYTHING THE MPO DID ADMINISTRATIVELY WOULD BE REIMBURSED.
WHAT'S THE CONNECTION? ARE YOU GUYS PUTTING MONEY INTO THIS PROGRAM OR WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT, CAN YOU EXPLAIN?
>> I HAVE TO FIRST COMPLIMENT YOU ON YOUR GOOD MEMORY.
NOT EVERYBODY REMEMBERS THINGS THAT GET PRESENTED A MONTH BEFORE, SO VERY GOOD.
YOU'RE CORRECT ON ALL ACCOUNTS AND HOPEFULLY I CAN EXPLAIN THERE'S NOT REALLY AN INCONSISTENCY THERE.
THE MPO DID RECOMMEND THAT SOME OF THE CARES ACT FUNDS A 150,000 IN TWO YEARS WOULD BE PROVIDED TO SUPPORT THIS ORGANIZATION, MTECC.
WE DID MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION AND THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PRIORITY LIST THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE BOARD IN JUNE AND IT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE TIP THAT IS COMING, THAT YOUR GROUP APPROVED TODAY AND WE'LL BE GOING TO THE BOARD JULY FOR ADOPTION.
SO THAT MONEY IS THERE AND THAT MONEY IS TO SUPPORT MTECC AND IT IS FROM STIMULUS MONEY BASICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE PANDEMIC.
BUT JUST TO FURTHER CLARIFY, THE MPO IS SEPARATE AND STANDS ALONE AND AWAY FROM THIS MTECC.
THIS MTECC IS A CITY CREATED ORGANIZATION UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE 2063.
THE MPO'S ONLY INVOLVEMENT HAS BEEN TO HELP FACILITATE AND COORDINATE SOME OF THIS INITIAL WORK WITH THE CITIES.
BUT ONCE THIS ORGANIZATION HAS STOOD UP, THE MPO WILL NOT BE PROVIDING FINANCIAL SUPPORT THAT WILL BECOMING FROM THE MEMBER GOVERNMENTS AND IT WILL BE REIMBURSED FOR CERTAIN SERVICES, ELIGIBLE SERVICES UNDER THE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THE PROJECTS THEMSELVES.
>> YES, SO THE FIVE FOUNDING GOVERNMENTS ARE ALL PUTTING UP A $100,000 EACH UPFRONT, I'M KIND OF LOST ON WHAT MPO IS SPENDING 300,000 ON?
>> WELL, ANDREW, I'M NOT REALLY PREPARED TO GO IN DEPTH WITH THE PRESENTATION OR WITH THE BUDGET WITH YOU TODAY.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE PREPARED A CAREFUL MULTI-YEAR BUDGET.
WE BROUGHT IN FINANCIAL EXPERTS TO DO THAT SO IF YOU'RE REALLY INTERESTED, I CAN CATCH YOU OFFLINE AND WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION.
THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE IS THAT, TODAY IT'S REALLY ONLY THE FIRST PRESENTATION ON MTECC.
AS WE STAND THIS UP OVER THE NEXT YEAR, WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU ALL ON A REGULAR BASIS NOW.
NOW THIS IS ACTUALLY MOVING FORWARD, SO TODAY WAS JUST THE OPENING WE WANTED TO KEEP IT HIGH LEVEL, BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE DETAIL TO COME.
JUST DIDN'T WANT TO OVERLOAD EVERYBODY TODAY, DAY ONE.
>> OKAY, I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THE PROGRAM THAT'S WHY I'VE GOT ALL THESE QUESTIONS.
I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THE ILA AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE INITIAL BOARD COMPOSITION, OF COURSE, IT IS THE FIVE FOUNDING AGENCIES, IS IT GOING TO REMAIN A FIVE MEMBER BOARD EVEN AS OTHER MUNICIPALITIES JOIN MTECC?
>> OKAY, SO WE WON'T NECESSARILY HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM ALL CITIES ON THE BOARD AT ANY GIVEN TIME?
THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION OVER ALMOST A YEAR PERIOD WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS AND ATTORNEYS WHO SPECIALIZED IN SETTING THESE ORGANIZATIONS UP.
IN ORDER TO PROMOTE STABILITY, THERE IS A TRANSITION OVER TIME SO IF ANOTHER CITY JOINS, THEY WILL BE ELIGIBLE TO SIT ON THE BOARD OVER TIME SO PEOPLE WILL ROTATE OFF THEIR TERMS, WILL END.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID THAT I THINK IS UNIQUE WAS THE ILA DOES UTILIZE THE MPO REGIONS.
WE'VE GOT SEVERAL, I GUESS FIVE REGIONS AND SO IT USES THAT SAME GEOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY METHOD IN THERE SO IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE MEMBERS WITHIN THAT SAME GEOGRAPHY,
[02:25:01]
BOARD MEMBERSHIP WOULD ROTATE AMONGST THOSE MEMBERS.AGAIN, IT IS ALL CONTAINED INTO DETAILS ON HOW THAT WOULD WORK IN THE ILA.
>> ALSO IN THE ILA WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT BOARD MEMBER ELIGIBILITY, IS THAT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL FROM A GIVEN CITY OR IS THAT STAFF FROM A GIVEN CITY OR IS IT INTERCHANGEABLE?
>> ANDREW, YOU STUMPED ME ON THAT ONE.
I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT BACK AND FORTH QUITE A BIT.
I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND REREAD IT.
I DON'T REMEMBER IS THE HONEST ANSWER.
>> IT'S ON PAGE 5 OF THE ILA ON PARAGRAPH F IF YOU HAVE IT PULLED UP.
>> I DO. LET ME READ IT AGAIN.
I THINK THE FIRST SENTENCE SAYS IT THERE.
IT SAYS BOARD MEMBERS SHALL BE MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE APPOINTING MUNICIPAL MEMBER.
>> SO IS THAT ELECTED OFFICIALS?
>> MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BODY IS ELECTED OFFICIAL. YES, SIR.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, ANDREW?
>> YEAH, SO THE MTECC PROGRAM PROVIDES THE ENGINEERING SERVICES, TO PUT TOGETHER THE BID PACKAGE, IT DOES THE DESIGN WORK, IT DOES THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, THE INSPECTIONS, THEY DO THE PUBLIC OUTREACH IT LOOKS LIKE.
THERE WAS ANOTHER PARAGRAPH IN THERE ABOUT PAYING THE COST OF MPO STAFF OR MTECC CONSULTANTS.
IF IT'S COVERING ALL THOSE SERVICES, WHAT ELSE WOULD AN MTECC CONSULTANT OR AN MPO STAFF STEP IN TO DO?
>> WELL, THE INTENT IS THAT THOSE SERVICES WOULD BE DIRECT EXPENSES OF THE PROJECT SO MTECC WOULD HIRE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING FIRM, AND THEN THE ENGINEERS WOULD BE UTILIZED TO DO THE DESIGN WORK, AND THEY WOULDN'T BE REIMBURSED ON THE PROJECT.
AGAIN, THE INTENT IS THAT THERE'S A CLEAR FIREWALL BETWEEN THE MPO AND MTECC, SO WE'VE GONE TO GREAT LENGTHS TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NOT A FINANCIAL COMMITMENT FROM THE MPO.
WE HAVE OFFERED TO PROVIDE THIS ORGANIZATION SOME SERVICES EARLY ON.
THESE WOULD BE PURCHASED FROM THE MPO AT OUR COSTS AND CONCEIVABLY, IF MTECC TAKES OFF AND IS A HUGE SUCCESS, AND WE GET MOST OF THE MUNICIPALITIES JOINING IN AT SOME POINT THAT ORGANIZATION COULD GROW TO THE POINT WHERE THEY MAY NO LONGER DECIDE TO BUY THOSE SERVICES OFF THE MPO.
IT MAY BE MORE EFFECTIVE FOR THEM TO SIMPLY DO IT DIRECTLY BUT THE MPO IS NOT SUPPORTING MTECC.
THIS IS BEING SUPPORTED BY THE CITIES THAT ARE MEMBERS THROUGH THEIR INITIAL FEES, THROUGH THEIR ANNUAL FEE, AND THROUGH THE PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING DELIVERED BY THIS ORGANIZATION.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY THEN, IF YOU GUYS PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES AND THERE'S BASICALLY A 75,000 ON A BY IN PLUS 25,000 A YEAR.
YOU'RE STILL GOING TO GET BILLED HOURLY FOR THE ENGINEERING SERVICES ON YOUR PROJECT? YES. YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANYTHING FOR FREE.
THE MEMBERSHIP COVERS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD AND YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY THE ENGINEERS AND YOU HAVE TO PAY THE CONTRACTORS.
THE PROJECT'S DELIVERY IS AT COST.
WE HOPE THAT IT WILL BE PROVEN OUT THAT THROUGH MTECC WILL BE ABLE TO DELIVER THESE PROJECTS MORE COST-EFFECTIVELY THAN INDIVIDUAL CITIES WOULD BE BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE WOULD BE AS AN ORGANIZATION LAP APPROVED, WE WOULD BE DOING THIS ON A ROUTINE BASIS.
WE WOULD HAVE MULTIPLE PROJECTS TO COVER EXPENSES ACROSS SO WE DO THINK THAT THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO BE MORE COST EFFICIENT.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE'S STILL COST TO BE COVERED.
[02:30:02]
>> NEXT IS TAMMY REID HOFFMAN.
GO AHEAD AND ASK YOUR QUESTION.
>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION ON THEIR MEMBERSHIPS.
THE NON-FAMILY MEMBERS, WHEN THE CITIES DECIDED TO JOIN WOULD BE 50,000 AND THEN 25,000 A YEAR FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OR THAT TWO SEPARATE THINGS?
>> THEY ARE ACTUALLY TWO SEPARATE THINGS.
THE FIRST YEAR WOULD BE YOU ENJOY IT AND YOU WOULD PAY THAT FEE TO BECOME A MEMBER.
THEN FOR THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, FOR FOUR YEARS TO FOLLOW.
YOU WILL BE EXPECTED TO PAY AN ANNUAL FEE.
WE'VE THROWN OUT THERE AS AN INITIAL DATA POINT BECAUSE EVERYBODY WANTS TO KNOW THE NUMBERS 25,000.
BUT AS I MENTIONED DURING MY PRESENTATION, THE BOARD WILL BE SETTING THAT ANNUAL FEE.
WE THINK THAT THAT'S A CONSERVATIVE NUMBER AND WE HOPE THAT WE WILL COME IN BELOW THAT NUMBER ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, BUT THAT WILL BE SET BY THE BOARD ANNUALLY.
>> SECONDLY, THE NON-FOUNDING MEMBERS, THIS WOULD BE OPEN TO THEM AFTER THE ORGANIZATION HAS STOOD UP?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT AFTER OCTOBER 1ST, OTHER MEMBERS WOULD BE WELCOME TO JOIN.
>> IN MY LAST QUESTION IS, HOW TO WRITE THE ILA? IT SEEMS LIKE THESE SERVICES WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE WHEN A CITY IS GOING OBVIOUSLY TO APPLY OR ALREADY KNOWS IF THEY'RE GETTING ONE OF THESE PROJECTS.
I MEAN, I'M JUST FIGURE OUT THE TINY OF MEMBERSHIP BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE MAKE A DECISION NOT TO GO AFTER FUNDING ONE YEAR OR WE GO AFTER FUNDING IN THE ACTUAL PERMUTATION OF YEARS DOWN THE ROAD SO HOW IS IT SEEN AND DETERMINE WHEN ITS TIME.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION EPISODE.
OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT EXACTLY THIS ISSUE.
DID THEY THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE ORGANIZATION OR HEALTHY TO HAVE BASICALLY CITY STEPPING IN AND OUT AS THEY HAD PROJECTS.
THE OVERALL JUDGMENT OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS THAT WERE WORKING ON THIS WAS THAT IT WOULD NOT BE TO THE BENEFIT OF THIS ORGANIZATION TO ALLOW CITIES TO STEP IN AND STEP OUT.
JUST YET THEY HAVE A PROJECT ONE YEAR, THEY JOIN IN AND THEN THEY STEP AWAY, WHICH IS WHY THERE'S THAT FIVE-YEAR COMMITMENT THAT IS REQUIRED.
AGAIN, THAT GOES TO TRYING TO ENSURE STABILITY.
PLUS FIVE YEARS WAS PICKED BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, BUT BY THE TIME YOU GET A PROJECT FUNDED IN DESIGN, IT'S USUALLY THEN A COUPLE OF YEAR GAP BEFORE YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION.
THE JUDGMENT WAS THAT IN MOST CASES, A CITY THAT WOULD BE USING THIS GROUP WOULD WANT IT TO HANDLE BOTH DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.
YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT 3-4 YEARS FOR THAT TO COMPLETE ANY WAY.
THE SENSE WAS THAT A FIVE-YEAR COMMITMENT WAS, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, MADE SENSE FOR THIS ORGANIZATION.
>> NEXT ON THE LIST IS CLARISSA.
>> HI BILL. I'M GUESSING MY QUESTIONS THERE MIGHT BE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS COMING TO BE AVAILABLE LATER ON WHAT YOU MENTIONED ABOUT REIMBURSEMENT.
I'M ASSUMING THE HELL OR THE CITY IS GOING TO GET REIMBURSED.
THESE MIGHT BE DETAILS THAT WILL BE WORKED OUT AND WHERE IS OUR PROJECT.
I'M ASSUMING FROM LET'S SEE IF THERE'S A CEASE IN THE PROJECT THAT WE ARE USING MTECC FOR, LET'S SAY.
THE FUNDING WILL BE, IF THE CITY IS USING MTECC THROUGH, SATISFYING, THROUGH THE LAP PROCESS THAT OF COURSE, THEY WILL HELP US SATISFY IN GETTING THE PROJECT THROUGH.
I'M ASSUMING THE MONEY WILL BE COMING FROM THE LAP FUNDING THAT THE CITY HAD AWARDED THE PROJECT THROUGH CSLIP AND TECHNICALITIES WILL BE WORKED OUT.
IS THAT HOW I'M SEEING, HOW THAT IT'S WORKING? AM I CORRECT OR ARE YOU GUYS STILL DEVELOPING THE MORE INFORMATION TO COME?
[02:35:02]
>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, CLARISSA.
YEAH. I THINK YOU'VE GOT IT JUST ABOUT RIGHT.
THAT IS THE INTENT IS THAT AS CSLIP IS A GOOD EXAMPLE PROJECT, IT'S CERTAINLY EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE HOPING TO COVER WITH THIS PROCESS.
ONCE A PROJECT WAS AWARDED FUNDING FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION, THEN THERE WOULD BE A LAP AGREEMENT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SIGNED AND IT WOULD BE THOSE FUNDS THAT WOULD BE UTILIZED BUT BY MTECC, SO THEN DELIVER THE PROJECT.
NOW THE EXACT PROCESS AND THE EXACT DETAILS, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, THAT WE'RE WORKING CLOSELY WITH DOT, THOSE CONVERSATIONS ARE ONGOING AND WILL PROBABLY CONTINUE TO BE ONGOING FOR THE NEXT EIGHT MONTHS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK ON SOME OF THESE DETAILS AND WE ALL KNOW THAT THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS.
SOME OF THE PROCESSES THAT DOT HAS, I THINK WE'VE LISTENED AND WE'VE HEARD JUST IN THIS MEETING TODAY, THAT THERE ARE SOME AREAS THAT MAY REQUIRE A LITTLE BIT OF REFINEMENT.
WE'RE HOPING THROUGH THESE CONVERSATIONS AND PUTTING THESE PROCEDURES IN PLACE THAT WERE ABLE TO SMOOTH OUT SOME OF THE ROUGH EDGES A LITTLE BIT.
WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR TO STATE THAT UP FRONT.
WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS YET.
BUT AS YOU STATED IT, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT OUR INTENT IS.
>> THANK YOU. I'M ASSUMING THAT WE'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE UPDATES ON MTECC, LIKE THIS AT OUR MEETINGS.
>> YES, THAT WOULD INTENT US TO BE COMING BACK TO YOU ON A REGULAR BASIS OVER THE NEXT YEAR, SO THAT AS WE'RE MAKING PROGRESS AND WE'RE FACING QUESTIONS THAT YOU'LL BE INFORMED AND HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN AND HELP GUIDE THE PROCESS.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO, I DO NOT SEE ANY MORE. THANK YOU, BILL.
>> THANKS FOR EVERYBODY FOR HANGING IN THERE.
JUST WANT TO SEE WHAT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD IS ON OUR LAST PRESENTATION.
IF FOLKS WANT TO DEFER IT TO OUR AUGUST MEETING OR IF WE WANT TO SEE THE PRESENTATION ON THE EVS.
>> THANK YOU. IF WE CAN DEFER THAT ITEM TO AUGUST, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
TO SEE THAT WE'RE OVER TIME ALREADY.
I JUST WANTED A COUPLE OF THINGS BEFORE WE LEAVE.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS NOT TILL AUGUST 25TH.
DUE TO THE CHANGES IN THE GOVERNOR'S ORDERS, WE WILL NEED TO BE IN-PERSON, ALL OF US AND MEET THOSE.
WE WILL NOT BE DOING THE ZOOM ANYMORE, NO MORE HEADSETS AND RAISING VIRTUAL HANDS.
THAT'LL BE EXCITING FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T BEEN IN THE ROOM.
REMEMBER IT IS A REFRIGERATOR, SO DRESS APPROPRIATELY, I'M FREEZING RIGHT NOW. I THINK THAT WAS IT.
JUST SOME NON-ACTION COMMITTEE REPORTS ARE IN YOUR PACKET, PARTICIPATION RECORD.
ANYBODY WHO HAS COMMENTS BEFORE WE LEAVE, FEEL FREE TO SHARE.
THANK YOU EVERYONE WHO CAME IN PERSON FOR MEETING OUR QUORUM.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.