City of Bloomington, Indiana MPO Policy Committee, 13 Mar 2020

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Bloomington Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Committee, March 13, 2020

Description

meeting agenda: https://bloomington.in.gov/onboard/meetingFiles/download?meetingFile_id=5553

A

March 13th friday, the 13th to order the chair lease rich- is not here today, so I.

A

Will be chairing this meeting, we will meet, we will introduce ourselves and.

A

Please, if you are proxy, would you please indicate for whom you are a proxy? Can we.

A

Start with you, matt 30, a bloomington common council, elseville town council.

B

Terry porter, director of planning and transportation proxy for mary hamilton.

B

Sarah rider being mbo citizens advisory committee, chris mullin indot proxy, for.

C

Toni mcclellan.

A

Thank you. Okay. First order of business is approval of the minutes from february.

A

The 14th 2020 are there any additions or corrections to those minutes? If not do I.

A

Hear a motion to approve the minutes is read so moved.

D

Do I hear a second thank you all, those in favor of approving the minutes from.

A

February the 14th 2020, please indicate by saying aye opposed none since the.

A

Chair isn't here we'll skip the communication from the chair report from.

A

Officers, and/or committees: I will give the report on the citizens advisory.

A

Committee, which did meet in february on the 26th they looked at first, the draft.

A

2045 metropolitan transportation plan, which is our new long-range.

A

Transportation plan in the works and what we're looking at is our dividing up.

A

The work on this into smaller portions and dividing it among the members of the.

A

Cac so that we can give it a more in-depth look and help the staff to.

A

Draft the new, lrt peor mtp. We also looked at the draft of the bylaws and we.

A

Approved it with an amendment that deleted section 3.3 to a 22, a 22 which.

A

Is who you turned up the volume? How exciting.

A

Okay, so to delete the section that says: non-voting next cac member and with.

A

That amendment the past or recommended approval of the bylaws, that's it for the.

A

Cac we also approved the new business, which was the tip amendments, and we.

A

Recommended that the draft have five fiscal year, twenty of twenty one, twenty.

A

Twenty-Two you pwp be recommended to the policy committee. That's it.

E

Maloom a general manager at bloomington transit. I also serve as chair of the.

E

Technical advisory committee for the npo at our last tac meeting the tac voted.

E

Nine to two to recommend approval of to the policy committee of the proposed.

E

Bylaw changes and then also the tac voted unanimously to recommend to the.

E

Policy committee, approval of the 2021 2022, unified planning, work program and.

E

Then, lastly, the tac voted unanimously to recommend to the policy committee.

E

Approval of the three tip amendment for mndot: ok, reports from the mpo staff for.

F

Being here today, under fast moving circumstances, we've.

F

Rolled out three new chapters of the 2045 metropolitan transportation plan.

F

This one, the first one here, chapter 2. This is the guiding principles. This is.

F

The very heart of the metropolitan transportation plan and when we shared.

F

This with the citizens advisory, kinane technical advisory committee, a few weeks.

F

Ago we asked that everybody take this home with them and look at it for at.

F

Least a month month and a half, perhaps two months, because we want you.

F

To truly consider if there are any changes that are needed and if changes.

F

Are needed? What should those changes include now, as a key to you, we have.

F

Several things missing from the vision goals objectives in here that we're not.

F

In the previous 24 previous, the current 2045 metropolitan transportation plan.

F

Things such as sustainability, climate change, micro mobility, freight.

F

And a number of other things, and in the in that same vein, are not in here whole.

F

Vision: zero, that's another one, another big one, so that we we asked you to take.

F

This home, with you, everybody's, going to be home, take this home with you and.

F

Review these closely and come back to us in a month or maybe two months, we want.

F

We want to keep this discussion open and until at least may or june, to make sure.

F

That we're covering all of the areas that there that there's an interest for.

F

From a policy perspective, and also what is technically feasible with that.

F

Introduction I mean that the text here is essentially the same as the 2045.

F

Metropolitan transportation plan, where the exception of we moved safety up to.

F

The top priority going to the next chapter and or appendices transportation.

F

Planning requirements under the current legislation fixing america's surface.

F

Transportation fast act, there are a number of planning requirements. These.

F

Are all these are, I would call these brand new. This is almost a brand new.

F

Chapter in terms of the text, it's written from scratch, where we these are.

F

The the key planning factors are all there and that's maroon by the way, in a.

F

Maroon color and then the bullet points are under those on how we shall address.

F

All of those individual planning factors and again we ask that you take this with.

F

You look at it closely. This has already been reviewed by the tac and the cec, but.

F

We're not asking them for any feedback on it for another month or to the next.

F

Chapter or appendices is performance measures under the fast act again.

F

This is a brand new set of criteria. Congress established performance.

F

Measures and these performance measures are for states and m pos.

F

Each individual state has to adopt what are called targets and that's in the.

F

Legislation, the word targets is in the legislation and then you have to talk.

F

About how you? How you're going to achieve those targets and when you're.

F

Going to achieve those targets now the the performance goals covers safety.

F

Infrastructure congestion system, reliability, freight, which is something.

F

We've never done here in this npo environmental sustainability and reduce.

F

Project delivery delays now the text that follows after this performance.

F

Measures this committee actually adopted nearly two years ago in some areas and.

F

What we did was we plugged it right in and identified things like percents of.

F

Pavements in good condition, bridge conditions, the travel time and.

F

Reliability and all of these performance measures that are in here that are shown.

F

As percentages, these are indiana department of.

F

Transportation z-- goals or targets and then we as the mpo policy committee and.

F

The staff agreed to instead of developing other measures, we agreed to.

F

The targets established by the state now the one that we changed just recently.

F

Was in terms of safety, I'm not going to scroll back up to it.

F

Safety, we just updated that if you made a few meetings ago, all the other.

F

Criteria may change come in april or may the department of transportation is.

F

Alerted us that some of the 2021 goals are going to be moved out to 2023 and.

F

Then we'll also have what I would call a returned feedback on. How did the state.

F

Achieve its goals, did it achieve them or not? If.

F

Didn't achieve them, what measures are they taking to achieve those those goals.

F

In the new ones, right now and that's it one thing in here: the yeah in terms of.

F

Congestion mitigation and air quality- those targets- we don't have to worry.

F

About those are statewide targets, since bloomington is a in attainment area for.

F

Air quality, those we don't have to worry about transit performance measures. These.

F

Are the benchmarks for transit performance we've gotten no additional.

F

Guidance from the department of transportation, public transit division.

F

On these whatsoever, now from the current 2040 transportation plan, the mpo had.

F

Performance measures- and these are the performance measures that are in here.

F

And aggregate statistics- and I would I mean I would characterize these as raw.

F

Somewhat undeveloped, this is what the staff will be working with all the.

F

Committee's and all the citizens on over the course of the next three to four.

F

Months to refine this down so that way, it's it's much more measurable in terms.

F

Of what what do we want to measure? You know? Travel demand, efficiency, economic.

F

Safety and environmental, but how are we going to measure our success or our.

F

Achievements and then there were urban design variables that were also placed.

F

In the 2045 metropolitan transportation plan, I think the origin of those was.

F

Probably 2013, the question is: do we wish to retain those or do we wish to expand.

F

Upon those or refine them or whatever don't know anyway, these are these are.

F

Out here for your consideration, like I said, we'll be coming back and subsequent.

F

Months to refine this entire process I'll be happy to answer any questions.

F

You may have.

B

So these draft chapters are three of the five additional chapters that you're I'm.

B

I'm just wondering I know there was going to be a chapter on equity and one.

B

On environment, environmental sustainability, is that not going to be.

B

Its future transportation needs chapter, but it's in this document that it's that.

B

Those chapters and god what you have before you right now, but it will be yes.

F

Right right that that it's coming it's, we have two additional chapters, as I say,.

F

We're rolling out electronically next week.

F

They're written, but we wanted to be sure on those we'll put those out there in.

F

Draft form and then we'll be asking and the staff isn't isn't giving you.

F

Language and on health and equity and vision, zero or anything like that. We're.

F

Rolling out the chapter and then what we want is we want it to be. What I would.

F

Call an evolutionary process where it comes from the citizens, advisory.

F

Committee, the technical advisory committee and then the policy committee.

F

Over multiple periods of months months and weeks to finally achieve some sort.

F

Of a consensus: well, what our target is is is achieving a consensus on the.

F

Chapters by june by the end of june of this year, so that way in july, when we.

F

Don't meet the staff will be refining the document and then in august we will.

F

Come out with what I would call a 95% complete draft that we will circulate at.

F

Public meetings circulate to all of the committees and then in september, we'll.

F

Be asking the technical and the citizens advisory committee to approve what I.

F

Would call a final draft document and then the target is also for the policy.

F

Committee to adopt a final document in october, the.

F

First, two weeks of october, now we have a fallback month of november. If that's.

F

Necessary and worst case scenario, not knowing how things are evolving right.

F

Now december, but we have until december 31st to complete this 2045 draft plan.

F

The way the chapters have been working out thus far we're on schedule.

F

In fact, we're slightly ahead of schedule and pleased with that, the public.

F

Involvement process, we don't know right now because of the way the situation is.

F

Evolving nationally, so I appreciate the the timeline reminding me of the the.

B

Timeline and so december 31st is the deadline for submission of the document.

B

Well, that would be the the absolute deadline. Yes, but we intend to have it.

F

And by no later than december, 1st, because establish simply because there.

F

Is a review time you have to allow review time by the indiana department of.

F

Transportation federal highway administration, the federal transit administration and submitting a document for review in december of any year is.

F

Somewhat dicey right right and that that's what I'm trying to get at so at.

B

That at that point, with december, being the absolute deadline is that still a.

B

Draft document that goes forward to federal highway, no, it would be a final.

F

Document and we will be submitting what I would call 95 and 99% drafts we'll be.

F

Submitting those to federal, highway administration and n dot as we go in.

F

Fact, they're on the mailing list for all of these chapters, so federal highway.

F

Administration as we roll these out, as we have been for the last three months,.

F

Yeah january started in january and we roll.

F

These out they're reviewing these in real time, so that way it cuts the review.

F

Process now what the humpty-dumpty look like, when we put it.

F

Mall, two back together again, that's that's that's what we're looking for is.

F

Do the parts add up to the whole and they should I mean the way we've written.

F

It it should, but in answer your question: yes, this a rolling review process at.

D

Overview and two questions one do I understand correctly that most.

D

Of the performance measures in appendix b are those measures themselves are that.

D

That bullet bulleted lists come from the indiana department of transportation, z--.

D

Targets that they've established for various things, the on road-mobile source.

D

Emission targets and freight and the rest so we're just taking those measures.

D

Kind of, as handed to us by the state, correct, okay and the follow-up, then is.

D

That it seems like well, the transit measures are specified to come from.

D

Bloomington transit but then the final section below that the bmc mpo.

D

Performance measures it would it be a my understanding, it correctly, that's sort.

D

Of the the bulk of our mpos assignment in in terms of crafting a set of.

D

Performance measures that are in line with our vision and goals- and this is.

D

Kind of really, where a lot of the work needs to be done to released like this needs to be built out quite a lot to establish okay, yes, yes, I call this raw.

F

Yeah I mean that I'll be brutally honest here, and this was this was placed in in.

F

The final hour of the 2040 transportation, metropolitan.

F

Transportation plan adoption two years ago, year and a half ago two years ago,.

F

This was placed in at the final hour because federal highway administration.

F

Oh and there's a typo right there, federal highway administration said you.

F

Must you shall put these in so we did but they're they're just they're. They.

F

They need flushing out dramatically flushing out. All of these bullet points.

D

Will have some sort of quantitative measure, hopefully ethical, okay, hopefully.

F

And then there are some things that may be missing here too.

F

You know such as the health and equity such as vision, zero, such as climate.

F

Change such as such as such as yeah I mean the list is about seven different.

F

Items that are missing right now. Thank you questions when I understand that the.

A

Uncertainty of the times and that we've had to modify public participation are.

A

We looking at ways of creating public participation in this draft early draft.

A

Phase, that is not on-site, so that the public will have a way of interacting.

A

With the documents that are being rolled out, that's one question in a second is.

A

Kind of a comment of an answer to matt- and I just want clarification, masoom.

A

That the only thing we're not while we are looking at performance measures.

A

There's still a lot of work to be done in terms of envisioning future.

A

Transportation needs and possibilities and, as I recall from our cac meeting, the.

A

Languaging within this document, as well as looking at just the bigger pictures.

A

And looking at our guiding principles and what is missing in terms of guiding.

A

Principles that matter to this community in particular, so I don't think it's.

A

Limited to performance measures, no, I mean, will we have a chapter on future.

F

Transportation needs, but in the performance measures here I mean what.

F

The big stuff up at the top I'll call it that that came from the indiana.

F

Department of transportation, we had the option of adopting our own, but we would.

F

Have to mathematically prove that her statistically proved that and that's a.

F

Daunting task for two people, so we elected and and all of the mpos in.

F

Indiana elected to go with the indian department of transportation's targets.

F

Where we have flexibility is in our own performance measures which, down here at.

F

The very end of the chapter, and that's where we can set our own course on.

F

What's important to us, what do we want to achieve and how do we want to achieve.

F

It and then what are the measures of? How do we measure success? Does that answer.

F

Your question and then in terms of into an online.

G

Public commenting forum for the metropolitan transportation plan on on.

G

Our npo website, it's it's open now and it will be open for or until this is a.

G

Past and later in the year as of right now, we don't have any plans to.

G

Reschedule our public meetings that are currently set for april 1st at the.

G

Bloomington transit center from noon to 2 and also from april 1st at the elet's.

G

Ville town hall from 6 o'clock to 8 o'clock and then on april, 2nd at.

G

Switchyard brewing company's boardroom from 5 o'clock to 7 o'clock. As of right.

G

Now those public meetings are are going to be held until further notice, which.

G

May come sooner than later, and we also have public meetings scheduled as as far.

G

In advance, as or as far in the future, rather as in august, hopefully we'll be.

G

Able to have those definitely in person and and september 2, so with regard to.

G

Those upcoming public meetings we'll be sure to keep everybody in the loop on.

G

That that was essentially my question is he had just if you could send a reminder.

D

Actually of all those public meetings, as well as the online forum of perhaps the.

D

Mpi policy committee can help to circulate and highlight those certainly.

D

I can get you know most of the bloomington city council to send that out via their networks, constituent lists, facebook, etc and try to really.

D

Elevate that opportunity for members of the public, the more traction on that the.

G

Better, thank you. We may we're exploring virtual town hall meetings. I mean the.

F

Way we have it right now. There are physically we're looking at nine to.

F

Eleven meetings, public meetings, which is vastly in in excess of what we would.

F

Normally do, but if we hold virtual town meetings, that'll be another another.

F

Avenue to explore okay, thank you and anyone else on the mtp. Okay, moving.

A

On any other report from staff- okay, you know what tell us about road school. I.

G

Did just attend road school from tuesday to wednesday at purdue, and it was a very.

G

Valuable experience and I'd be happy to share more with you in the future. Okay,.

A

Moving on to old business, the bmc npo operational bylaws clarification going.

B

Back to the public hearings, so I'm understanding you saying ryan that the.

B

Public, oh you're, you're, still looking at the public hearings just that the.

B

Technical advisory committee and the cac committee meetings, those have been.

B

Cancelled yeah, that is correct. That's that's what we've done thus far. Okay got.

B

You just funded be clear, and those are the two meetings at the end of this.

F

Month and then we may hold those meetings in virtual, we may hold per chua.

F

Meetings. Thank you. Sorry. Okay, now we'll move on to the operational violence.

G

The dia need for amending the the operational bylaws kind of spawned all.

G

The way back to last spring in may and june, primarily because this document has.

G

Not been updated since 2009, so the mpo committees, as well as the staff agreed.

G

That it was the appropriate time to look into that. So in october, we we formed.

G

What we call the bylaws working group and this working group had five members.

G

From the policy committee each each representing their their lpa, so there.

G

Were not multiple lpa representatives on the working group, there were also one.

G

Member from the tac and one member from the cac, as well as the county attorney.

G

And a city of bloomington attorney, so we had meetings in october and november to.

G

To hatch out what the working group thought was appropriate to update within.

G

This document- and there were several things within the last three months- the.

G

Bylaws have been in probably last four or five months. The bylaws have been in.

G

The packet probably at least four four times so I'm not going to go through.

G

Step-By-Step with the entire bylaws, unless you have questions about certain.

G

Things in in january, the the working group unanimously passed the draft.

G

Bylaws and then subsequently in january, the tac and cac opened up.

G

30-Day public comment period and we were taking comments up until this. This.

G

Morning from the comments that were received, we got five comments from cac.

G

Members mainly about opposing the ca c's voting status on the tac being changed.

G

To non voting, we also received eight other comments, supporting the removal of.

G

Cac voting status due to the non-technical nature of the cac most.

G

Still supported the membership on the tac, though, and those who support.

G

Removing the cac a voting status on the tac still applaud that our cac is the.

G

Only ca c that has membership on a tac or policy committee in the state of.

G

Indiana additionally, comments praised the.

G

Increased focus on public commenting and public comment periods at all npo.

G

Meetings be happy to take any questions.

A

Do I understand you to say that there is no one except for cac members who spoke.

A

Against the non-voting status, this is correct.

A

Are you telling me that julie thomas is supposedly.

A

A member of the citizens advisory committee, because I know that she sent.

A

Me a copy of an email, oh so I was I was. um I guess I was wrong there. There were.

G

Six comments, then,.

H

In but in addition to said, a response by by julie, thomas, she, she was given wrong.

G

Information about cac membership. She was confused that the cac.

G

Representative was going to be removed from the policy committee, so I informed.

G

Her that that was indeed incorrect and that nobody wanted that, and I understand.

D

Correctly then that or did what do? I understand correctly, that the working.

D

Group voted unanimously in favor of the bylaws. This is correct. I know I did not.

A

Vote for it, I'm surprised that it was unanimous. There was an email and a and a.

G

Poll sent out and nobody rejected it from from the working group and everyone.

G

That I did get responses from were for the bylaws, as is been an oversight. I'm.

D

Sorry is it were there abstentions? Essentially, then, if there were non responses, is that how we should interpret that I'm not quite sure how that working group was set up or if it was conducted? You know online. This.

D

Response, or or in person, as as far as I know, there were no abstentions, because I.

G

Didn't hear from a few people, then that may have been interpreted as an.

G

Abstention then, perhaps.

A

Sure lou, I'm sorry kid.

H

In here have fun yeah. I can very fine that minister version.

H

I suppose, chairman in those days, the accolade.

H

Sara as well, one of the arguments I heard was that they're not technical in.

H

Nature, so they shouldn't be on the case.

H

In other day,.

H

H

Rather the best now, okay, yeah and just to know, no one is in.

G

Favor of eliminating the cac and no one is in favor of where everyone is in.

G

Favor of keeping a cac member on the policy committee and the technical.

G

Advisory committee, so, if I understand you correctly, cac should participate in.

A

Technical issues but not vote on them, although it would be only one of 25.

A

Votes, this is what the draft is currently saying. Yes, so I read through.

D

The I'll get to a question here about a little bit background. First, looking at.

D

The bylaws, the responsibilities of the tac and the cac respectively, the tac.

D

Among other things is meant to recommend technical methods, procedures and.

D

Standards to help coordinate the work of operating departments and agencies.

D

Participating in the planning process and then the responsibilities of the cac.

D

Include to keep the policy committee tac and mpo staff apprised of current.

D

Emerging citizen concerns in relation to transportation issues, so just to my.

D

Plain reading of that, I I think the responsibilities of has listed for the.

D

Cac there's a good argument. You made there for cac membership on the tac in.

D

Order to help lie a is essentially between those committees that help keep.

D

Them apprised, as is their responsibility, but I can certainly see the argument for.

D

Non-Voting status simply based on the responsibilities of the tac and how.

D

They're meant to recommend technical methods and procedures and coordinate.

D

The work of operating departments and agencies, neither of which are cac.

D

Capacities really so I guess my question is given that context and and the.

D

Responsibilities is outlined in the bylaws of each committee. Were there.

D

Arguments put forth by cac members in public comment or during the bylaws or.

D

Group discussions where their arguments put forth, to explain why cac.

D

Member on the tac should have voting right or voting privileges for a.

D

Technical body like was there an argument made that that you know.

D

Notwithstanding the lack of technical expertise, they should have a vote for this reason or that the ch d has technical expertise like where the what.

D

Were the arguments in relation to that? I guess is my question. If you can recall.

D

Or if, as a relevance while ago, really one of the main arguments was was that.

G

The tac is so large. What is you know, taking one vote away from from the from.

G

The tac that was that was the largest one see to this point, to I'd, invite.

D

Response from the chair or whomever else was present in those meetings. If there.

D

Was a my question, essentially is: what is the counter-argument to the argument put.

D

Forth by, I think, the working group or many on the working group and the tac.

D

That the cac is not a technical body and therefore should not be voting on a.

D

Technical committee: what is that? What is the counter-argument to that is my.

D

Question and if someone else has specific knowledge, I would welcome that.

D

From I'll defer to the chair to invite.

I

The technical advisory committee- I was actually the appointed representative.

I

For this working group attended all the meetings responded to all the emails. I.

I

Can tell you that part of the argument is that the citizens advisory committee.

I

Has a voting status on the policy committee, so their representation on.

I

These matters is very well heard and very well represented the technical.

I

Advisory committee, as we've stated as a technical committee, we're not saying.

I

That the cac should not be at the table, but the recommendation of this working.

I

Group was that it be a non-voting position. I don't know if that helps.

A

Anyone else, no I'll just share that the position from the members of the cac is.

A

That, when it's regressive to remove voting privileges when they were granted.

A

Probably four: I think that kent is right. It's about 14 years ago. I know it's more.

A

Than 10 and that the citizens position is representing all of the public and.

A

Their technical concerns about projects not just a particular bailiwick each one.

A

Of the representatives, the other representatives represents a particular.

A

Silo of information and or interests and.

A

The experience is that, while all of them may be citizens- and we assume they are.

A

The interests of the citizens are not what is their major position or interest.

A

In that body, so I would say that that's. The major concern is that citizens.

A

Positions even on technical matters, and I was told that citizens can't possibly.

A

Have technical information or knowledge.

A

Is I guess, is considered a bit sad and disappointing because, particularly in.

A

This community, we value the input of citizens and their voices and to remove.

A

A voting membership says to citizens in general that their voice doesn't really.

A

Matter particularly when it's only one of 25 voices, it seems a bit banal.

A

Does that help? Thank you for your perspective, thanks anyone else to speak.

A

To the draft proposal.

B

I just wanted to state that I I do agree with the with the working groups.

B

Position and their proposal that they've submitted that this is an advisory.

B

Council does have a voice, as the citizen advisory council has their own committee.

B

They have a voting member on the policy committee I serve on. The usb board is ex.

B

Officio, I did not have a vote, but I serve on that board. It's not a slight or.

B

An intended slight and I don't question what this working group has worked hard.

B

To put together- and I don't agree with the argument that this is going to give.

B

The public less of a voice and if we're ready to entertain a motion, I would be.

B

Happy to make one there's another thing that I would like to raise, and that is.

A

That one of the considered deficits on the technical advisory committee and.

A

Once again, we can say that they have no technical expertise and shouldn't be.

A

There is a member of the accessibility community and, while our engineers.

A

Address the ad a compliance issues, they are not necessarily looking at.

A

Disability issues and without someone from the disability community playing a.

A

Role at the tac, I think that we have a serious hole.

D

Yeah yeah. I am curious to follow up on that point and curious to hear mpo staff.

D

Perspective on whether or not what the what the process would look like to.

D

Consider adding someone with technical expertise in the context of.

D

Accessibility and and if that's been pursued at all, if it could be pursued in.

D

The future, if not in this, you know we're probably not prepared to to introduce an.

D

Amendment to these bylaws in that capacity today I don't think, but looking.

D

For a little information on background and and what it would look like if something like that were to be introduced in the future any perspective, thank you sure I mean as right now and I mean like we always have we. We.

G

Wholeheartedly trust our technical staff, monroe county highway department.

G

Engineers, city of bloomington engineers, our mapping, experts, are people from city.

G

Of bloomington utilities and and we trust with their decisions, I think that.

G

They come to the table with a vast array of knowledge to to help this board, as as.

G

It relates to specifically transportation and traffic and the the.

G

Citizens advisory committee is, is always open for for new members, and this and.

G

Under these members I mean on the csc I mean, which can, which can be unlimited.

G

And number of members can absolutely have somebody from the accessibility.

G

Community, just like it has current members from the neighborhood.

G

Association and all sorts of of the other roles, as as mentioned this.

G

In the cac I mean this is this is merely just a suggested list of those who can.

G

Be on the cac and we are certainly open to and hoping that more people will will.

G

Get involved- and this is absolutely the the forum for for someone with that.

G

Background and information and knowledge, I hope I answered your question yeah. I.

D

Think you did and I would need honestly learn a lot more and hear more.

D

Perspectives on both sides of that question to know whether I would think.

D

That that someone with technical training and expertise in the.

D

Accessibility community would be an appropriate fit for the tac or not. Thank.

D

You for sharing staffs perspective on it as a technical matter, just for my own.

D

Understanding and possibilities for future amendments, if maybe not a matter.

D

Maybe not a practice which should get into regularly amending the bylaws. But if, if the policy committee decided in the.

D

Future that it wanted to add somebody from the accessibility community with technical expertise to the tac. Are there any restriction? Is that simply a choice.

D

Of the policy committee, are there any restrictions to that process as a.

D

Technical matter, this would have to be something that we would have to talk.

G

With the federal highway association, the federal transit authority, as well as in.

G

Dot, because, as of right now, membership on the tac is is set to the current.

G

Members as listed in the bylaws as there okay, so it's more complicated than the.

D

Policy committee just deciding that wants to add somebody to the state.

J

Correct okay, thank you.

A

About nine ten upwards of about about thirteen fourteen is the most that I've.

G

Seen in a while, it's foat, you may well be seeing more issues with making a.

A

Quorum, the ac has a quorum of nine members. Okay,.

A

I'm if there's anyone else, I'm willing to hear your motion then terry. I move.

B

That the mpo policy committee adopt the bylaws, as recommended by the by logs.

B

Bylaws committee, what point of order- and I I think I wonder if the policy, if we.

D

Should entertain an amendment along the the vein of what the cac recommended and.

D

Vote on an amendment to remove the non-voting status of the cec on the tac.

D

Simply because that's what was the recommendation of the citizens advisory.

D

Committee, so if we shouldn't, if we should hear that motion before we should.

D

Hear any motions, I guess that would amend the bylaws prior to voting on the.

D

Bylaws as a whole, would you like to propose that amendment then I guess we'd.

D

Have to withdraw our table the the motion from from miss porter at this.

D

Point so I move that the bylaws be amended to, and this is in the interest.

D

Of process and and giving it giving a chance to for this body to speak its.

D

Mind and have a vote on what the cac recommended vcv these bylaws. So I moved.

D

To remove the non-voting status of the cac member on the tac within the bylaws.

D

Thank you. Do I hear a second I'll? Second, it.

A

Okay weather is there anyone to speak to the amendment, seeing no one? I assume we.

A

Need to roll call vote. Yes, we do. Okay, sorry yeah, like I said, I wanted to bring.

D

That motion as a matter of process, because I think what the cac had a vote.

D

On and recommended, and to do with these bylaws we we should here and vote on. I.

D

Don't I won't be voting in favor of this motion.

D

I support the bylaws as as recommended by the bylaw working group, bylaws.

D

Working group, and as drafted, I I understand where chair right: iran is.

D

Coming from and her perspective, I don't think that that removing voting.

D

Privileges from csc on the technical advisory committee will reduce the voice.

D

Of citizens or their input, I think the real advantage of having a cac member on.

D

The tac is to do exactly what their responsibilities say: keep keep the tac.

D

Apprised of current and emerging citizen concerns, so I think the membership on.

D

That body is important to bl is on for the cac, but I do think that the.

D

Technical nature of the committee and its recommendations should be limited to two folks with technical expertise. That's not to say that members, the.

D

Public can't have technical expertise, they certainly can, but whereas all the.

D

Other all of the other members of the tac are guaranteed to have technical.

D

Expertise, sort of per their professional positions, that'll that lead to their appointment. It is not guaranteed that the a citizens.

D

Advisory committee appointment would necessarily have a technical expertise.

D

Even though, of course they could so for that reason, I support the bylaws. Those.

D

Drafted but again I wanted to introduce this motion to amend in line with the ca.

D

Sees recommendations I just wanted to explain my reasoning and justified.

D

Justification for my vote. Thank you. If I may.

G

Reiterate that there is more citizen input and commenting in all npo.

G

Committees, so there will be much more opportunities for citizens within or who.

G

Attend tac meetings to comment if they, if they so wish,.

D

Okay, so I'm ready for a rolling roll call vote. I assume, because we get a.

G

Rooster, may we get a repeat of the motion, so I know what a yes and what I.

G

Know means yes, the motion was to amend the bylaws in order to remove the.

D

Non-Voting status of the citizens advisory committee, appointment to the.

D

Technical advisory committee, in other words, to reinstate voting privileges for.

D

The csc on the tse, so a vote in favor of that amendment would reinstate those.

D

Those privileges and remove the words non-voting from the bylaws, a vote in.

D

Favor would do that. Okay. Thank you. I guess I will go through the role.

G

G

Samples, oh no flirty, no vanek, nickel.

G

Wallman no mcdaniel right abandon. Yes,.

G

I have a 1 to 7 okay, so it takes us to the bylaw vote itself. The bylaws as.

D

Drafted it's been moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion seeing none.

A

And no one from the public, all those in favor, please indicate by saying aye aye.

A

A

Okay, moving on to new business, the you pwp.

F

Okay, get the mouse to work. The unified planning work program is our contract.

F

With the indiana department of transportation, the federal highway administration, the federal transit administration, we prepare a two-year.

F

Work program: this is a requirement for the agencies of the unified work program.

F

Specifies what the mpo staff will accomplish with its partner agencies and.

F

Committees over the coming fiscal year, every year, the federal highway.

F

Administration and federal transit administration issue what they call.

F

Planning emphasis areas, the planning emphasis areas- are what I would call the.

F

Core activities that they expect us to produce or achieve in a given coming.

F

Fiscal year under the budget resources that they allow us, this year's planning.

F

Emphasis areas for coming fiscal year: twenty twenty! Twenty-One is it's.

F

Different I'll say that first one is updating the indiana department of.

F

Transportation is planning roles and responsibilities, cooperating operating.

F

Manual, this is called the perc. um I've got 46 years experience and I've never.

F

Heard of this before, but it's a requirement and we advise the department.

F

Of transportation fta in the federal highway administration that we would.

F

Assist in dot in updating this operating manual, second, planning emphasis areas.

F

Traffic incident management federal highways encouraging the mpo to consider.

F

Traffic incident management activities- this is not what I would call a normal.

F

Role for an mpo we've placed in the work program, the.

F

Language under it sets in your work element. 202 we've placed language in.

F

There that we will agree to work with the state, police and other first.

F

Responders about after accident incidents facilitate working groups.

F

Activities in foster relationships and possibly fun intelligent transportation.

F

System projects you know and assist with compiling performance data for measures.

F

Next item is local road safety plans. Federal highway administration is.

F

Considering is asking us to look at look more closely at local roadway safety.

F

Plans particularly those crash types involving roadway departure.

F

Intersections bicycle, pedestrian, etc and road conditions, in other words, unusual.

F

Situations is what they're looking at doing. This is more of what what I would.

F

Call in the realm of what we do on a constant basis and then finally, the.

F

Final planning emphasis areas, public participation, plans, they're asking us to.

F

Update our public participation plan, and that is something we had already.

F

Intended to complete once we finished the adoption of the bylaws, we would.

F

Update the public participation plan that our title six plan, so we look to.

F

Achieve the public participation plan adoption sometime by september of this.

F

Year of this calendar year now the budget, the budget set forth for us this.

F

In this coming, year totals three hundred fifty three thousand six hundred thirty.

F

One dollars 282 905 federal and then seventy thousand seven, twenty six local.

F

The local comes predominantly from the city of bloomington as being the host.

F

For the mpo staff, some of that also comes from would come from contract.

F

Service agreements with city of bloomington and monroe county highway.

F

Department, town of elet's, ville and also bloomington transit, so we're looking at.

F

A total two-year budget of 707 thousand dollars. This is a a modest amount over.

F

Private in previous years, I think it's about three thousand dollars total up.

F

From the current year, and with that, we set forth here in a.

F

Number of tables what tasks we we seek to accomplish with priorities, our.

F

Administration participation under administration of public participation.

F

Staff assembles 30 meeting packets per year, minimum sometimes more data.

F

Collection and analysis, this are crashed out of this traffic volume program. A.

F

Number of other things in similar nature short range planning management. This is.

F

Looking at how the system itself is performing, including including bicycle.

F

Pedestrian and traffic long-range planning is metropolitan transportation.

F

Plan which we previously talked about transit and active transportation, this.

F

Is transit ridership on board survey type of information required for the.

F

Federal transit administration, an active transportation, is the bicycle. Pedestrian.

F

Activity that would be performing and then other planning initiatives in.

F

Special projects, this would be the title six update, also public participation.

F

Plan update so and then the devil is in the details here. If, if any of you have.

F

Proceeded through the 70 some odd pages, we tell exactly what we are to.

F

Accomplish and then we show in bullet point form when we are to accomplishment.

F

What quarter of what fiscal year, or whether it's an ongoing process or.

F

Anything like that, so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions you may.

F

Have are there any questions from the committee.

F

Prior to vote, the one thing that I would ask- and this came up just this morning-.

F

The indiana department of transportation asked that well, what we normally do is.

F

We ask the policy committee citizens advisory committee to train a technical.

F

Advisory committee and the policy committee to allow the staffs submit a.

F

Draft document for review by the department of transportation, the.

F

Department of transportation has given us what I would call a compressed time.

F

Line so they've asked that the committee policy committee grant the staff the.

F

Opportunity to smith, documentation and final form pending comments from the.

F

Indiana department of transportation, what this does is it cuts a month off of.

F

The process this is unusual, but it's because of the external events going on.

F

In the united states in the world, that's the reason for the request.

F

So you'd be asking for approval from the policy committee to submit the final.

A

Form pending any comments, is that correct the dot? Yes, the document do you.

F

Have before you is what I would call a 99.9% draft, there are some name changes.

F

That are in here that I received this morning and then their attachments that.

F

We have to include in here such as our agreements with bloomington transit now.

F

Let me get down here, I'm sorry, yeah agreements with bloomington transit that.

F

We have in here, oh gosh. This is way too long. Our planning emphasis area is.

F

Letter cost allocation plan approval letter, which we've already received from.

F

The department of transportation we received that in february setting forth.

F

Our direct indirect and allocation allocated rates and then planning area.

F

Maps already in their planning emphasis series we need to add, I mean there are a.

F

Few little things that are that are missing from the document at the very.

F

End of the document, like I said it's a 99.9%, pure document.

A

F

Indot will send us review comments monday morning and those comments would.

F

Have to do with typographical errors- maybe I didn't see any, but there are.

F

Name: changes on names of federal highway and federal transit representatives that.

F

Have changed the budget will not change we're using every penny. That was.

F

Allocated to us we're leaving nothing on the table in.

F

Terms of the budget, so I don't know what the comments are going to be, but.

F

Typically, in a review, they don't give you a hundred percent pure document.

F

Anytime, you submit something they have to find. Something knows what I want to.

F

Say yeah: do I hear a motion then to approve the fiscal year? Twenty.

A

Twenty-One twenty twenty to draft as our final draft, pending any comments on the.

A

Final document actually submitted by staff so moved. Second, it's been moved.

A

And seconded, is there any comment? Anyone from the public wish to speak to this.

A

Seeing none we're back to the committee, all those in favor of the approval of.

A

The uup wp4 2021 2022, please indicate by saying aye opposed okay.

A

You're welcome how about our tip amendments? You have three transportation.

F

Improvement program, 2020 2020 for transportation, improvement program.

F

Amendments requested by the department of transportation first one is on.

F

Interstate 69, this is a new project. That's the installation of new cable.

F

Rail safety barriers along interstate 69 from the state road 445 exit, tuesday.

F

Route 37, which is exit 114 all in monroe project cost here, is well as its.

F

Identified as an stp surface transportation block grant funding, but.

F

It uses an interstate interstate facility match which is nine to ten, so.

F

We have nine hundred thousand in federal funding. A hundred thousand in state.

F

Match total of 1 million dollars? Second project is steward 46 signals. That's.

F

Plural modernization at steward 446 in monroe county. This would be accomplished.

F

Can installed in fiscal year 2021 again using surface transportation block.

F

Grants federal funding amount, one point: one: six: zero million matching two.

F

Hundred ninety thousand total of one point: four: five million last project is.

F

A discretionary award to monroe county this is for the replacement of a bridge.

F

Bridge number 308 along rockport road for hundreds of a mile south of bowling.

F

Lane, I didn't even know this bridge existed. In fact, we had to check with the.

F

Department of transportation make sure it was actually within the urbanized.

F

Area- and it is this, one- has a sufficiency rating in forty eight point.

F

Seven, which is poor and then with this discretionary award preliminary.

F

Engineering began in fiscal year, 2021 cost of three hundred ninety thousand.

F

Right-Of-Way acquisition, 2024 total clause, 150 thousand construction.

F

Engineering and construction in 2025 caused to four hundred and twenty.

F

Thousand and one point: six: five: six million respectively total cost two.

F

Point six million now on this well, at the very end, pardon me, while I scroll.

F

Down trying to show you what it looked like.

F

The replacement structure has not been designed, yet the existing structure is.

F

On ask you over the bridge and it's it's experiencing extreme scouring.

F

To the peers, the new new structure would be placed on a on an alignment, a.

F

Different alignment over the stream, so it would have a 90 degree crossing to.

F

The stream and therefore it requires some roadway, roadway relocation, yep. Oh.

F

There we go yeah. Okay, the map gives you an idea of.

F

Where the areas and as you can see it's fairly rural, but it still lies within.

F

The urbanized area boundaries questions. Please any questions from kenny. um I do.

A

Have one and that's um either you can tell me or someone else might know why.

A

Does it take three years from preliminary engineering to get.

A

Right-Of-Way and then the actual engineering and construction. Well, I like.

F

Chris asked because he's the real engineering yeah using federal funds.

C

We've got to get all of our environmental documentation taken here.

C

So we gotta go through the nepa process that, depending on the site, depending on.

C

The resources impacted that can take several months up to a year to get to.

C

Nepa phase and then in the right-of-way phase that there's a lot of regulation.

C

And process we have to follow to make sure that we're following the uniform.

C

Act so that we're acquiring additional right-of-way the right way, so that adds.

C

Up getting the the three big time constraints usually on the development.

C

Side are procuring your consultant. It can take some time the nepa phase and.

C

Then right away so that generally will take about three years: yeah that can.

C

Take that process can take anywhere from three to five years, depending on the.

C

Site and what impacts you have. Thank you.

A

And just from the committee seeing none do I hear a motion to approve the tip.

A

Amendments salute second, it's been moved and seconded. Is there any comment seeing.

A

None all those in favor of the tip amendments, please indicate by saying aye.

D

Opposed okay: are there any communications from committee members on.

A

Non-Agenda items any topics for future agendas: okay, upcoming meetings, policy.

A

Committee may meet on april the 3rd at 1:30, the technical advisory committee.

A

And citizens advisory committee will not be meeting in person on march 25th, but.

A

May be meeting in cyberspace april third meeting is: if, if it happens, it is moved.

G

Up one week due to county and city holiday correct. So, as I said april 3rd.

A

May occur or may not depending on what happens in the health world. Do I hear a.

A

Motion for adjournment so moved second, okay done. Thank you. Thank you.

J