Meeting_Body
2nd REVISED
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
MARCH 16, 2017
Subject/Action
SUBJECT: POLICY ADVISORY COUNCIL
ACTION: RECEIVE AND FILE
Heading
RECOMMENDATION
Title
RECEIVE AND FILE report on the proposed slate and creation of the Measure M Policy Advisory Council.
Issue
ISSUE
At the December 1, 2016 Board Meeting, Chief Executive Officer Phillip Washington presented the proposed staff approach for Measure M implementation. Part of the recommendation included the creation of a Policy Advisory Council (PAC) that would directly advise the Board regarding Measure M guidelines and the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
In a Board Box dated December 20, 2016, an outline of the roles and responsibilities of the PAC and an overview of the composition was distributed. This PAC would be made up of three major constituency categories, each with 9 representatives to reflect a diverse coalition - transportation consumers, transportation providers and jurisdictions (Attachment A). This PAC would not vote on single positions but would provide broad input from all perspectives represented in the PAC. Through outreach to all representatives in this coalition, a proposed slate of representatives and alternates for the PAC has been developed (Attachment B). They will meet for the first time as a group on April 5, 2017 to review the Draft Measure M Master Guidelines (Guidelines).
Discussion
DISCUSSION
Policy Advisory Council
The purposes of the PAC are to review, comment, advise and provide input and insight on the Guidelines and the LRTP to the Metro Board. This PAC seeks to ensure an equal, representative voice for the three key constituencies: transportation consumers - those who use or are impacted by our complex transport system; transportation providers - those who supply or regulate transportation infrastructure and services; and jurisdictions - representatives of elected bodies accountable to the needs of both consumer and provider constituencies. A key criterion for membership on the PAC is that the representatives have access to resources that would allow them to offer quality representation and provide necessary outreach to their represented group. PAC members will be called upon to broadly disseminate information to, and solicit input from, their constituencies.
Forming the PAC required reaching out to each of the core three categories. In most cases, the transportation providers had one or a small number of designees; and representatives and alternates were named among them. In the case of the Federal representative, we reached out to the FTA and the FHWA for nominations. However, their respective counsels reviewed the role and responsibilities of the PAC and determined that in order to ensure no conflicts in FTA and FHWA employee’s roles and responsibilities, it would be prudent to decline the request to provide nominations to the PAC. Therefore, we have reached out to SCAG for a representative and alternate since under federal law, the agency is designated as a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and under state law as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments.
For the jurisdictions, nominating information was sent to representatives of Councils of Governments (COGs), whose collective jurisdictional memberships included all cities. The information was copied directly to mayors and city managers to underscore that the role of the COG seat is to be a direct conduit to city insight and positions, not a seat for the COB Board as a separate body.
For the consumer category, it was necessary to identify groups which represented the individual consumer designations identified in Attachment A. Los Angeles County is fortunate to have a wide-ranging, diverse consumer groups and organizations who are fully engaged in the issues of transportation and how our system impacts their constituencies. We reached out to over 100 consumer groups representing a broad range of interests, many of which were partners with Metro in the successful passage of Measure M. They received information regarding the formation of the PAC along with a request for nominations. An informational meeting was held with this group on February 2, and approximately 40 representatives attended. It was an opportunity for this group to understand the role and responsibilities of the PAC as well as network with fellow representatives from like organizations. Nominations were accepted through February 14. In most instances, when there were multiple nominations which exceeded the number of slots in a particular category, staff facilitated a process of self-selection within the group.
The PAC will be meeting monthly and have its first meeting as a group in April to review the Draft Measure M Master Guidelines. Additionally, the PAC’s chair or designee will provide an oral report directly to the Board, and its Committees as appropriate, on the issues being addressed at their meetings.
Financial_Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Measure M PAC has no impact on the FY17 budget.
Next_Steps
NEXT STEPS
Staff will meet with the PAC in April and begin the review process for the Measure M Master Guidelines.
Attachments
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Measure M Policy Advisory Council Categories
Attachment B - Measure M Metro Policy Advisory Council Members Representatives and Alternates
Prepared_by
Prepared by: Vivian Rescalvo, Senior Director, Countywide Planning & Development, (213) 922-2563
Reviewed_By
Reviewed by: Therese W. McMillan, Chief Planning Officer, (213) 922-7077
