POLICY BOARD MEETING HIGHLIGHTS

November 9, 2000

SUMMARY of the
JOINT MEETING of the
TRANSPORTATION and GROWTH MANAGEMENT POLICY BOARDS

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:20 a.m. by Councilmember Dave Earling, Vice Chair of the Transportation Policy Board. Councilmember Charlotte Garrido, Chair of the Growth Management Policy Board, joined him to co-chair.

REPORT OF THE CHAIRS
Councilmember Earling reminded the Transportation Policy Board that, at its last meeting, there was a query about least-cost planning analysis. King Cushman introduced Rod Brown, Attorney with Martin and Brown, who responded to some of the comments that were made.

Mr. Brown noted research he has done on the statute that calls for least-cost planning. The statute itself does not lay out how least cost planning is to be done. The regulation that DOT adopted defines least-cost planning as a method to identify a "mix" of least-cost options. Within the legislative archives, there is a statement from the floor of the senate by Senator Drew, one of the advocates for the bill. Mr. Brown read the following excerpts: . . . least-cost planning methodologies for transportation are just being developed, will need to be assessed, and will take some time to validate. My intent with this amendment is for regional transportation planning organizations to incrementally implement these methodologies as they are developed." . . . "Since regional transportation plans are to be reviewed at least every two years, there will be opportunity for least-cost planning methodologies to be implemented for future plan updates. It is my intent that the Department of Transportation should recognize this intent in implementing the bill."

Mr. Brown believes this provision is to be implemented over time, and that the particular methodologies for doing so would also have to be developed over time. Mr. Brown added that considerable discretion was given to the DOT and to the Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPO's) in implementing this provision. Mr. Brown said that in his reading, there is no particular legal requirement for how to apply least-cost planning, other than that discretion must be exercised responsibly.

Councilmember Earling reminded the policy boards that, every two years, the Regional Council is required to prepare a short-range action strategy as input to the WSDOT and legislature to highlight the region's top priority transportation projects and programs needing funding. The Transportation Action Strategy this year will be merged with the activities of the update of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) — Destination 2030. This year's Action Strategy will be put together as the first ten years of priority projects, programs and strategies that begin implementation of Destination 2030.

Councilmember Earling reported that staff have just completed assembling a list of projects and programs, working with input from local agencies and WSDOT. He noted that the magnitude of these priorities for the first ten years equates to over $20 billion of unfunded needs. At the November 30 workshop the actual components of this Action Strategy will be reviewed and refined for consideration at the December 14 meeting. In January, the results of how this final Action Strategy will work to improve a transportation system will be looked at for further adjustments, then moved on to the Executive Board, WSDOT, and legislature in February.

COMMUNICATION AND CITIZEN COMMENTS
Paul W. Locke, citizen, commented on Agenda Item 5:"Financial Strategy." Mr. Locke remarked that transit agencies should cover their own operating costs. He stated that enough taxpayer money has been given for transit services. He stated that transit agencies do not pay for maintenance on streets and highways and he is concerned about badly deteriorating conditions on the streets and highways created by transit.

John Niles, president of Global Telematics, recommended that the policy boards give more consideration to the least cost planning methodology — analyze and compare the various individual components of the policy and spending actions that can be taken. He stated that the clear legislative intent of the state law mandating least-cost planning is to analyze each potential spending component of the alternatives. He urged that the Regional Council move toward using least-cost planning to compare the cost-effectiveness of the various different capital and non-capital components that could make up the MTP alternatives.

Tim Hesterberg, citizen, urged the policy boards to remove the Cross Base Highway project from its list of projects. Mr. Hesterberg stated that the project takes money away from maintaining existing roads and higher priority demands that will require future maintenance. He stated that this project would induce sprawl, promote long distance commuting, increase traffic, and increase travel through existing neighborhoods. He also stated that this project has some negative impact on threatened species and would increase air pollution.

CONSENT AGENDA

ACTION: It was moved and seconded to approve the consent agenda. The motion carried unanimously.

DISCUSSION ON DEVELOPMENT OF PREFERRED DRAFT DESTINATION 2030 PLAN
Councilmember Dave Earling introduced Sumner Sharpe, who facilitated the discussion related to the preferred Destination 2030 plan. Mr. Sharpe explained the facilitation guidelines and the goals of the meeting, defined as bringing all the pieces together to develop the Destination 2030 plan. He further explained that Destination 2030 will likely be a plan developed from combinations of several alternatives. In response to a question concerning the limits of these decisions and the impact of decisions to be made, it was offered that it is appropriate for a plan to address key issues and offer direction, but local jurisdictions would continue to be primarily responsible for implementation.

Norman Abbott, Regional Council staff, reported on the public comments collected on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Individually, there were over 1,200 comments contained in 286 signed letters received and 185 unsigned comment cards from public meetings. A matrix and chart of the types of comments was provided. Next, staff and the Regional Council's consultant will begin preparation of responses to the comments. These responses will be available on January 4, 2001. Upon seeing a large number of comments related to data concerns regarding the MTP update, Councilmember Fimia suggested an ad hoc subcommittee be established to work with staff to review these comments. They will report back at the next meeting as to whether the comments raised significant enough concerns to potentially impact the plan's credibility. Several members agreed to work with Councilmember Fimia on this subcommittee and will report back on November 30.

King Cushman referred to a technical document prepared in response to the least-cost planning requirement. He noted that the public review period for this document was extended to November 27 to allow time for public review and comment. Preliminary analysis indicates that, when adding in full public and private costs, the actual costs of trips are more truly reflected. He noted that "doing-nothing" costs more than a couple of the alternatives that call for more investments in facilities and services. It was found that the alternatives that did the most to reduce dependency on autos were the "least-cost" alternatives, with MTP Plus B being the lowest.

Additional information was provided on the difference between "travel time," which is uncongested travel time at roughly the designed speed, and "congestion," which is travel time under crowded conditions. People value their time differently based on congestion. Trips are constant throughout the alternatives; different households make different numbers of trips, based on income levels and some other factors. The more people drive, the more costs are associated. (The MTP Plus "A" shows more driving than MTP Plus "B," which accounts for its higher cost.) It was suggested by a member that an analysis, with specific groupings of alternatives, such as combining light rail and monorail, be included.

Commissioner Aubrey Davis remarked that two projects are being studied using the full cost/benefit method. They are the TransLake and I-405 studies. Commissioner Davis then provided the Transportation Pricing Task Force (TPTF) recommendations regarding long-term financing (Copies of the overheads are attached to these summary notes.). He noted that the recommendations were carefully crafted to respond to three major changes: 1) raising money to pay for the investments, 2) traffic management and congestion reduction, and 3) environmental protection. Board members were asked to consider these challenges as they develop the Destination 2030 financial strategy. Pricing should be part of the strategy, although the TPTF is not recommending that specific laws be passed to initiate pricing in the near future. Adding pricing to the region's financial strategy will be a gradual process, one that takes time for educating the public and ourselves. It will take a regional approach to continue to move forward in investigating and deliberating implementation of pricing mechanisms. The specific recommendations include the following:

  1. Transportation financing based on use should be part of the preferred Destination 2030 Plan alternative, with phased implementation.
  2. The Regional Council should continue to explore and adopt transportation demand modeling improvements and other analytical tools that better assess traffic management strategies.
  3. The Regional Council should work with communities, WSDOT, and local authorities, to plan, design and implement a demonstration program.
  4. The Regional Council should develop and fund a detailed outreach effort which seeks to inform, engage and build regional consensus around implementation of transportation pricing alternatives.
Mr. Sharpe walked the participants through a series of short- and long-term financing options, evaluated against previously endorsed principles. One member suggested spelling out the fact that we are done planning and are now going to "do it" and should package the best of each alternative to make the financial strategy analysis more real. On the question of using bonding to address the backlog of projects, it was explained that the assumption was to bond based on gas tax related to maintenance and preservation needs. The Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation (BRCT) is talking about maintenance and preservation as part of the gas tax support. It was suggested that we may need to leave all the current strategies on the table at this point for consideration. In response to a question on the fairness of the sales tax for transi,; the issue of sustainability was raised. It was stated that cities and counties have been financing more transportation from general funds and there is a need to address whether they would be willing to continue to do so. There was a request from a member to add a column to the matrix that shows political impacts and realities. The general sense from the group was to move all the financial principles forward for further discussion, though it was understood that several, such as dependency on general taxes and property taxes are certainly less desirable than a user-type revenue such as the gas tax.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES
Commissioner Garrido provided a brief introduction to the preliminary growth strategies recommendations. The recommendations summarize and condense over a year's worth of extensive growth strategies work conducted by the Growth Management Policy Board and the Regional Staff Committee. The summary states the problems, identifies the metropolitan transportation plan issues relating to growth strategies, and presents the findings. It then provides four recommendations and includes a summary of the benefits of adopting the growth strategies worked into the preferred Destination 2030 plan. Commissioner Garrido suggested adding a fifth recommendation – to work diligently to help the public to understand the importance of growth and transportation issues. These recommendations will be discussed more fully at the joint Policy Board workshop on November 30.

INFORMATION ITEMS
The following items were included in members' packets as information:

NEXT MEETINGS

ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned by Councilmember Earling and Commissioner Garrido at approximately 12:00 noon.