Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

APPENDIX A Information Forum Summaries The following is a summary of the conversations held for each of the Information Forums, eight in total. Panelists who are experts in the relevant fields for each topic were identified through input from the project panel and independent research. Attempts were made to seek out racial diversity in the panelists as well as to be inclusive of specific MPO opinions in both the questions asked (which differed for each Information Forum) and the knowledge of MPO structures and practices by participants where possible. Micromobility Information Forum Summary Panelists Andy Boenau, New Urbanist, is a mobility strategist who produces the podcasts “How We Get Around” and “Urbanism Speakeasy.” His website is www.andyboenau.com Calli Cenizal, Senior Manager, Government & Transit Programs at Lyft Corporation, has spent over 10 years developing innovative programs and policies to create vibrant, equitable streets and communities. Crissy Ditmore, Principal with Spartan Edge Consulting LLC, uses Mobility on Demand and Mobility as a Service strategies to ensure the public good is maximized through the applica­ tion of technology to enable policy. Topline Takeaways The relevancy of micromobility, or Mobility as a Service (MaaS), in the MPO planning pro­ cess, has increased tremendously in recent years and shows no sign of decreasing. Moving forward, policy changes at the federal and regional levels are needed to better accommodate micromobility into the MPO planning process. This will require MPOs to identify the inter­ action and demand between public transportation and mobility on demand (MOD) and work together with these entities to develop an overall MaaS strategy. Key Panelist Points Andy Boenau—The COVID pandemic has accelerated the process of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tremendously. The lingering effect of COVID-19 on TDM remains to be seen. “I find myself living in this Venn diagram of two worlds and both [are] related to public infrastructure. The one is the world of emerging technology. It’s exciting to me: innovation that moves faster than we can predict and changes our day-to-day behavior. I’m a Gen X-er who is A-1   

A-2   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success happy with change. It doesn’t bother me at all, but the other world that I’m in is new urbanism. So that’s walkable streets, bicycle-friendly neighborhoods—that’s timeless design philosophy at a human scale, to use some of our planning jargon. So, these two worlds are often considered to be in conflict. If you go to a conference related to one or the other, you’ll often hear, ‘yeah, we would be able to do this if not for this other.’ I think that that conflict comes because of the basic language barrier between these two. You might say in that sense I’m trying to be a Rosetta stone for these industries.” Andy encouraged MPOs to have an artist’s mindset, which has led to practical inventions. He also said the perception that micromobility is a temporary glitch is one mindset, but that it is rather permanent, although changing technology is making the built environment better. He says, “The original micromobility mode walking must be safe and convenient. And if you start from there, the other things will become clearer about how you handle the conversations with the adjacent local partners.” “You want to persuade funding people . . . that you are the MPO that deserves the funding. So that goes back to storytelling. So, as you’re thinking through these whys and these what-ifs, then put together memorable stories about how you are going to use technology to make your community an amazing place to be.” Calli Cenizal—Partnerships with Lyft have helped transit providers fill the gaps in service interruptions created by the COVID-19 pandemic. One example is the city of Saint Louis, which “went through a massive transit service redesign and [was] able to really establish a clear hierarchy of service by concentrating higher frequency (and reliability) in core networks where they’re able to serve more people. They still were very committed and concerned about ensuring access in more suburban areas that did not have frequent or better service coverage.” There are three general categories of concepts for MPOs to explore related to micromobility. • The first is that MPOs need to be advocates for expanding funding flexibility to include micro­ mobility options for bicyclists. An example would be bringing back the Bicycle Commuter Act that offers tax benefits to users of their own bikes but should also include those offered through bikeshares. • Another strategy would be to expand transit formula funding for micromobility first-mile/ last-mile solutions and fill in gaps to enhance traditional transit forms. • The third strategy is integrating options into MPO planning. “COVID has given us this opportunity to rethink how we use public space and consider how we get people to and from places safely. Thinking about how we prioritize the efficient movement of people, thinking about how we build redundancy in our transit systems, thinking about how we create better connectivity to jobs, transit, pedestrians, and just creating multiple ways for people to travel, maximizing our transportation options. And these are things that can be embedded into your planning, embedded into your priorities.” Crissy Ditmore—There is a difference between Mobility on Demand (MOD) and Mobility as a Service (MaaS). The definition of MOD is the ability to hail a mobility service without a reservation, booked through a central interface (app, web, phone) provided by a public or pri­ vate Mobility Service Provider (MSP). MaaS is a framework for fulfilling public policy goals by combining all public and private transport services in a region through a central interface (web, mobile, phone) to plan, book, and pay for integrated mobility options, that are optimized to equitable outcomes for individual preferences. Therefore, Mobility Service Providers (MSP) offer Mobility on Demand (MOD) combined with public transportation to create a Mobility as a Service (MaaS) framework. MaaS is a framework, not an app. 

Information Forum Summaries   A-3   Pilot projects are useful as a “sandbox” tool, but often there is no plan in place to continue the pilot after its initial run. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) website has information on a lot of example projects and outcomes. To achieve results, MPOs are going to have to move out of comfort zones and measure indi­ vidual outcomes. “Public engagement is one area where you actually can lead and facilitate coordination of conversations so that when you go after that funding, you’re going to score higher because you’ve already brought all of the external potential partners to the table to say, this is what we really want to target.” Ms. Ditmore also noted a recent Texas A&M study conducted on healthcare delivery by drone vehicles. The point is that there is a lot of overlap with healthcare, technology, and transporta­ tion delivery of services. A good amount of visioning is important, as is finding the loopholes that others have already discovered to fund and implement these services. Participant Survey Results What is the biggest challenge for your organization to integrate micromobility, mobility on demand, and other tech-driven mobility solutions into your plans and processes? Concern about the rapid pace of change conflicting with long-term solutions 24% Lack of understanding on the part of staff 14% Few good examples of this are done elsewhere to draw upon 39% Lack of understanding of the subject for elected officials 21% Other 12% Have you integrated micromobility in a long-range plan or similar study (more than one may apply)? Yes, for Metropolitan Transportation Plan 39% Yes, for Active Mode (bike, walk, transit) Plan 30% Yes, for Corridor Study Design, or Plan 21% Yes, for some other Study or Plan 21% No 30% Staff Attraction and Retention Information Forum Summary Panelists Doreen Lang is president of Hang on to Your Stars LLC, a training and consulting company specializing in saving clients a fortune in turnover through employee retention strategies. Ashby Johnson is the Executive Director of the Capital Area (Austin, Texas) Metropolitan Plan­ ning Organization (CAMPO) Topline Takeaways For MPOs to better hire and retain quality staff, MPOs must recognize that the labor force has more options in the workplace and, as a result, employees have more value. As a result, MPOs need to institute practices, such as better onboarding techniques and providing more opportunities and encouragement to their current and future employees. 

A-4   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success Key Panelist Points Doreen Lang—Due to shrinking family sizes and labor force, staff retention has become a serious problem over the past years. As a result, employee turnover is costing organizations trillions of dollars related to production loss, rehiring efforts, knowledge loss, and lessened morale. The main causes for employee turnover are lack of training, unclear expectations, and personal conflicts with other employees. The onboarding process is one of the most critical steps for ensuring employee retention. Surveys indicate over 69% of new employees are more likely to stay for at least 3 years after a great onboarding experience. Because millennials have more choices on the job market, organizations are having to put together great onboarding programs to get them excited about a career with that organization. Other key elements to staff retention include involving your employees and drawing on their expertise, allowing them to use their past experiences, encouraging them to share ideas, and showing appreciation for their actions. A good, gradual onboarding process lasts for roughly 90 days. Afterward, it is important to prepare your organization for a multigenerational workplace. Ashby Johnson—The two key elements to onboarding new staff are posting an opening and the interview process. The job posting needs to have several key components, including 1) a clear description of your ideal candidate; 2) an accurate description of your office culture; 3) a defined salary range; and 4) a description of benefits (pension, high 401k match, and insurance). Collec­ tively presenting these elements does a better job of attracting candidates who are excited about the position and who enter the onboarding process with a clear expectation of the job posting. The interview process should be more personal. It should include activities to get to know your candidate such as introducing them to a few people in the office, maybe taking them for lunch. It is also important to explain the overall organizational chart and growth opportunities to gauge their excitement about the organization. An important role in retaining staff is reinforcing an employee’s value to the team. Key steps for the employer include assigning meaningful projects, explaining why they are important, and encouraging training opportunities—especially cross-training and team dynamics. Another critical step is to provide ongoing feedback throughout the year prior to annual reviews and pro­ vide raises and title changes as merited. Given the importance of collaboration in the workplace, it is also important to avoid hiring lone wolves into an organization. Another key element of staff retention is creating a live-work environment. Actions to foster this environment include supporting flexible work hours and teleworking and providing flexible hours for parenting or caretaking activities. Last, a key role of leadership for retention is to give opportunities and credit to employees for their accomplishments. Sample actions include the recognition of employees in front of the policy board and listing their names in completed documents. Participant Survey Results What is the hardest part about attracting talent to your organization? Small Market/Not Many Candidates Locally 33% Little Understanding of MPOs and Work 17% Competitive Salary/Benefits 33% Not a Path to Advance within the Organization 10% Attracting People to the Area Generally   7% Other?  0% 

Information Forum Summaries   A-5   Do you have an effective onboarding program for new employees? Yes 54% No 48% What would make retaining good staff easier to your organization (Pick two)? Salary Increase 67% Flexible Hours/Telework Support 37% Better Workplace Environment 15% Meaningful/Interesting Work 41% Training and Professional Development Opportunities 19% Something Else?   0% Engagement in the Time of COVID-19 and Beyond Information Forum Summary Panelists Joni Wickham, Co-Founder, Wickham James Strategies Enrique Chaurand, Senior Director of Communications, KIPP Foundation Topline Takeaways The post-COVID world provides an opportunity to rethink and reset how public agencies engage the communities they serve. New digital tools were essential to navigating the pandemic but pose significant challenges in connecting with underserved populations. The digital divide is real. The global pandemic has shone a bright light on inequities. As engagement activities begin to resemble pre-COVID levels, evaluating how to involve more and different voices will be an essential task for MPOs in the months and years ahead. Key Panelist Points Joni Wickham—Communication with stakeholders has been difficult during the pandemic. Even prior to COVID, the fractured media environment makes identifying the channels by which stakeholders hear about projects and choose to get involved increasingly hard. Under­ standing where diverse stakeholders go for information is key to reaching them. Practitioners need to know where their audience gets their information. For some, that is traditional broad­ cast and print media, but increasingly it is digital in nature. A first step in engaging with a community is to understand how best to reach those who need to be involved. Talking with neighborhood leaders and influencers about how they reach one another can help to identify the most effective communication channels. What works for one set of stakeholders may not work for another. Flexibility and adaptability are key. Additionally, knowing who is best positioned to deliver messages to stakeholders will help the reach and acceptance of a message. Do the people asking for input reflect the neighborhood or stakeholder group you are engaging? Take the time to identify trusted champions. Finally, look around the table and ask, “Who isn’t here?” Often critical voices are missing from a community conversation. Work to make sure a diverse array of stakeholders is informing decision-making processes. Enrique Chaurand—The digital divide is a significant barrier to connecting with underserved populations. The KIPP Foundation worked hard at the beginning of the pandemic-related lock­ down to supply students with at-home computers as well as internet hot spots. Technology 

A-6   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success without the means to connect to the internet is meaningless. Understanding stakeholder needs when it comes to connectivity is an essential part of connecting with them. Cell phone use in communities of color is high. Utilizing apps that connect via text or ask for input in a mobile- device-friendly way can expand the reach of outreach efforts into hard-to-reach populations. Make no assumptions and make sure culturally competent elements are part of the outreach plan. Minority communities are not monoliths. What works for some may not work for others. When translating into languages beyond English, it is important to understand what dialect is spoken in the community you are engaging. Practitioners lose credibility when translations or outreach efforts are not reflective of the community. Engaging, listening, and learning from community leaders will help to increase the effectiveness of outreach efforts. Participant Survey Results How high of a priority should your agency place on public engagement? Not a high priority   3% A moderate priority   3% A high priority 44% A very high priority 51% How high a priority does your agency place on public engagement? Not a high priority   3% A moderate priority 28% A high priority 44% A very high priority 28% Does your agency do enough to reach out to communities that are difficult to engage? No, our agency does not do enough 18% Our agency could do better 49% Our agency is doing well and improving 31% Yes, our agency does very well   3% Land-Use Shifts Information Forum Summary Panelists Dr. Richard Fry, Senior Researcher at the Pew Research Center Ashley Hand, Director of Strategic Communications for the Unified Government of Kansas City, Kansas Wyandotte County, Co-founder of Cityfi Topline Takeaways There is no doubt the pandemic has upset the applecart in many ways. From a data stand­ point, it is still unclear just how far-reaching the effects will be on the nation. It is unknown if the changes will be permanent or temporary. Putting the changes in the context of history and emerg­ ing land-use best practices may indicate an inflection point for how land-use planning proceeds. Key Panelist Points Dr. Richard Fry—Humility is required when examining the effect the pandemic has had on housing demand and land use. Researchers do not have enough information to get a full picture 

Information Forum Summaries   A-7   of how the pandemic will change the nation. History does provide some clues as to the gen­ eral direction the country is headed. The last decade has seen the slowest amount of population growth since the 1930s. From 2010 to 2020 the U.S. population has grown less than 7%. Over the last half-century, immigration has been the engine driving population growth. Immigrants, children, and grandchildren of immigrants accounted for more than half of the last 50 years. Part of the reason the U.S. population is down in the last decade is that immigration has slowed. If the U.S. population is going to expand, immigration will be an important factor in the decades ahead. Further complicating the population and housing picture is a reduction in the number of people per household. Older generations are living on their own longer. Prior generations moved in with children as they aged. For over 150 years, the trend has been a reduction in the number of household members per household. However, in the last few years, experts are seeing an increase in the number of people per household again. Immigration has impacted that trend. By 2055, the Pew Research Center projects that 48% of the U.S. population will be non- Hispanic white. For the first time, the U.S. white population will be a minority. The trend line is driven by the Hispanic population, which is projected to grow from 18% of the population in 2018 to almost 25% by midcentury. Over the same time period, the nation’s Asian population is projected to double. Changing ethnic and racial demographics will influence the types of hous­ ing that will be required and desired in the years ahead. Metropolitan areas continue to grow as population centers. The nation has 53 metro areas with over a million residents. Over 65% of the nation’s population lives in these 53 metros. A continuing trend over the 20th century has been growth in the southern and western regions of the country. In 1900, 37% of the nation lived in the south and west, by 2017 over 60% lived in those growing regions. Ashley Hand—The pandemic has shone a spotlight on some of the core concerns facing the nation. Forty-two million Americans are without access to fixed or wireless broadband. American workers are facing the prospect of 44% of jobs being automated in the future. As a planet, we are facing a real threat as we look for ways to mitigate the effects of climate change. In that context, it is perhaps no wonder the United States ranks 19th in the world when it comes to happiness. In order to maximize the potential of the years ahead, a triple bottom line model that balances equity, economy, and environment may be useful in guiding land use and planning decisions. The pandemic has had a global impact exacerbating socioeconomic inequity, disrupting supply chains, and increasing the feeling of uncertainty. It begs the question of what kind of interdepen­ dence should we be having as regions. In some ways, our reliance on a connected world has been tested because of the pandemic. How do communities “future-proof ” their decisions? On top of the pandemic, the last five years witnessed more than ten $1 billion weather events. The trend of intensifying weather events that cause significant disruption and destruction will continue. Uncertainty seems to be the only certainty. The pandemic also demonstrated in real time the nation’s ability to adapt and adjust. People moved to remote working, schools and teachers connected with students in different ways, and public health agencies mobilized in ways not thought possible. Some positive lessons can be gleaned from the trauma of the last year. Repurposing the tools used for planning and creating new tools may produce better results. Thinking in terms of whole systems, being proactive in strategies, letting data inform deci­ sions, providing real-time responses and adaptive learning are all new tools that can be used to better shape the future. Transportation and land use are perfect complements to future-proofing decisions. Recognizing mobility as a right for all is a foundation of a healthy economy and changes how we look at land use. Defining a standard for the quality of life a community seeks can be a powerful tool to provide context for. 

A-8   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success Participant Survey Results How do you see land use potentially changing in the next decade? The population will continue to migrate toward major metropolitan areas 34% After COVID, work-from-home will allow more people to live further from major metros 45% Social equity discussions will renew our focus on affordable housing 18% Technology like autonomous and connected vehicles will reduce the parking and highway footprint   3% How would you rank the need for integrating land-use planning into your transportation planning processes? Not necessary   0% Good to integrate where possible   6% Important to transportation planning 27% Essential to transportation planning 67% How integrated is land-use planning into your regional planning activities? No, our agency does not do enough 30% Our agency could do better 17% Our agency is doing well and improving 47% Yes, our agency does very well   6% Resiliency for Real Information Forum Summary Panelists Jeffrey Raven, FAIA, LEED BD+C, Associate Professor and former Director, Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Design, New York Institute of Technology Kyle Schneweis, Chief Executive Officer of High Street Consulting Group Allison Brooks, Executive Director of the Bay Area Regional Collaborative (BARC) Topline Takeaways Resiliency in planning efforts takes multiple forms and is increasing in relevance as the nation struggles with issues of equity and climate change. Trends in urbanization provide benefits for mobility but increase concerns about carbon emissions. As weather events continue to intensify because of climate change, transportation infrastructure continues to be hit hard. MPOs will be challenged to work with their partners to navigate this uncertain future, harden assets, and plan for a changing climate. Key Panelist Points Jeffrey Raven—Design and planning schools have long taught the importance of dense urban environments to address many of the equity issues facing society. Those same com­ pact settlements that provide for more accessible services, transit, and education amplify the impacts of climate change. To reduce the impact of heat and flooding, cities need to enhance high-quality, low-carbon lifestyles. The challenge to this solution is poorly designed urban “concrete jungles.” Resiliency is part of a two-sided coin balanced with climate mitigation. Urban policy should prioritize climate management activities designed to reduce the green­ house gas effect while also increasing climate resilience to reduce urban heat and flooding. 

Information Forum Summaries   A-9   These should be complementary goals, but often human nature and funding streams put them on opposing ends of the spectrum. As conversations have emerged about a “15-minute city,” resilient transportation that pro­ motes mobility, accessibility, and proximity is critical to achieving urban areas that reduce sprawl and carbon emissions. Understanding how to design cities where the urban function and form mitigate climate effects is a new frontier in comprehensive urban planning. Cities will need to reduce heat and greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency, tran­ sit access, and walkability while modifying the form and layout of buildings and districts in addition to increasing vegetative cover. These thoughtful innovations in planning can help find the balance between efficient, compact cities and a reduction in greenhouse gases. Kyle Schneweis—After a cold winter in 2018/2019 that saw four or five major blizzards and significant rainfall across the plains, Nebraska suffered from massive flooding. Highways, bridges, and dams all fell victim to floodwaters across the state. Of the 10,000 miles of highway in Nebraska, 3,300 were closed; one out of every 3 miles of highway was impassable. Twenty- seven bridges were washed away and hundreds of miles of roadway were carried away with the flood waters. Critical conversations were conducted quickly to determine how to build back and repair the infrastructure lost to the catastrophic flooding. In many cases, whole towns were cut off from the rest of the state because of roadway loss. All totaled, Nebraska suffered $150 million in damage to state highways and another $50 million in local streets, roads, and bridges. Focusing on how resilient a system can remain during an extreme weather event is comple­ mented by planning to build structures to withstand future events. Critical to that planning is engaging with residents in meaningful decision-making discussions. Partnerships are critical and need to be built prior to tragic events so they are in effect when the time comes. Allison Brooks—The Bay Area is confronting resiliency from multiple angles. Addressing wildfires, earthquakes, and flooding due to rising sea levels are all part of the planning work being undertaken on the West Coast. The effort improves ecology, manages risk to infrastruc­ ture, and prioritizes the needs of frontline communities. The Bay Area has already experienced over 8 inches of sea-level rise. By 2050, experts estimate 12 to 32 inches of additional rise. To prepare, the Bay Area Regional Collaborative has under­ taken a 3-year planning process to adapt to rising tides. Partnerships locally and at the state and national levels are essential to tackling the complicated task of addressing the challenges of climate change. The magnitude of addressing the substantial sea-level rise predicted requires an all-agency, whole of government response. Partner agencies and the public are key to prioritiz­ ing resiliency efforts. There are not resources enough to address all needs simultaneously. The Bay Area has worked to identify the most vulnerable assets and prioritize those investments above others. Hydraulic modeling and community engagement provide both a clear indication of the severity of the issue and a path forward for resiliency efforts. Participant Survey Results How would you best describe the level of your agency’s commitment to resiliency in transportation planning? We have not yet planned for resiliency in the context of transportation   0% We are beginning to discuss resiliency as a factor in planning 46% Resiliency is a part of our transportation plans 46% Our agency places a high priority on resiliency in transportation planning   0% I do not know   8% 

A-10   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success How much do you believe resiliency should be part of MPO planning efforts? I do not believe resiliency is vital to our planning efforts   0% Resiliency has a minor impact on our planning efforts   0% Resiliency has an increasing impact on our planning efforts 71% Resiliency should be a primary driver of our planning efforts 29% I do not know   0% Transportation Funding Information Forum Summary Panelists Julie Lorenz, Secretary, Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) Dr. Patricia Hendren, Executive Director, Eastern Transportation Coalition Topline Takeaways Funding our nation’s transportation infrastructure is a challenge. The gas tax has not kept up with either inflation or needs. Transportation officials are addressing the challenge in ways that diversify existing funding sources and think about future revenue models. Learning from the private sector, understanding and testing driver attitudes, and convening a national dialogue about transportation funding solutions are critical. Key Panelist Points Secretary Lorenz—Investments in transportation have long held the promise of bringing eco­ nomic prosperity to communities large and small. In Kansas, the system relies on a balanced revenue model that includes the fuel tax, a portion of the state’s sales tax, and tolls and fees. This model has proven to be relatively stable, but as vehicles change, how new models are fueled will need to be examined. In Kansas, an extensive outreach effort resulted in a 10-year, $10 billion transportation investment program nicknamed “IKE.” Using scenario planning to help under­ stand and plan for future needs, the IKE program is multimodal, invests in broadband, and prioritizes preservation. Ultimately, the transportation system is about people far more than projects. DOTs are wise to focus on people-centered solutions. To address transportation’s funding challenges will take collaboration at all levels of govern­ ment and consultation with the people the system serves. Issues of safety, equity, and health will be at the center of transportation discussions in the near future. DOTs will be challenged to think about transportation networks in ways that are different than we have in the past. How can DOTs reduce the impact on our global environment? As an agricultural state, Kansas’s impact is not only from the fuel we use but also from the crops grown and the livestock that grazes in the state. As DOTs rise to meet the funding challenges, they are asked to place transportation in a larger societal context. Opportunities exist to advance transportation funding. Placing people first will be key to future successes. Dr. Hendren—The Eastern Transportation Coalition is at the forefront of examining the impacts and practicality of replacing or augmenting the fuel tax with a mileage-based user fee (MBUF). The reality is the current fuel tax-based system cannot keep up with the demands of an aging transportation system. Since it was last updated in 1993, the fuel tax has lost buying power and failed to compensate for the advent of electric cars. As electric cars make up a larger portion of America’s fleet, transitioning away from a fuel tax may provide more funding stability. 

Information Forum Summaries   A-11   The fuel tax collection method provides little transparency to drivers. Few connect what they pay at the pump to how transportation systems are funded. The MBUF studies conducted by the Eastern Transportation Coalition have tested methods, like invoicing, to see how drivers respond. A better understanding of how roads and bridges are paid for leads to more support for alternative funding mechanisms like MBUF. Beyond public acceptance, several logistical hurdles exist to implementing an MBUF revenue model. Tracking and reporting vehicle mile­ age, accessing interstate trucking needs, remitting fees to the correct state and local jurisdictions, and accounting for fees paid on toll roads are just a few of the complicated issues the Eastern Transportation Coalition is studying. The Coalition has provided a critical East Coast perspec­ tive to a growing national conversation about alternatives to the fuel tax like MBUF. More study is needed, and like the work in Kansas, the priority is on the needs and motivations of people. Participant Survey Results How would you assess the impact of levels of transportation funding on your organization? Very little impact   1% Some impact, but manageable 29% Considerable impact 44% Significant impact 26% Other  0% How do you see the transportation funding environment in the next 5 years? Worsening significantly   5% Continue to be challenging 60% Slightly improving 24% Improving 10% Significantly improving   1% What do you see as the most promising advancement in transportation funding? Increases in state fuel tax 16% Increase in the federal fuel tax 10% Adoption of Mileage-Based User Fee 63% Increases in vehicle registration fees 10% Forego new construction and focus on preservation or small-scale projects   1% Social Equity Information Forum Summary Panelists Rickey Rogers, Senior Consultant at Point Management Group, identifies and mentors Minority/ Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (MBE/DBE) Nalungo Conley, Administrative Director/Chief of Staff, the Metropolitan Transportation Com­ mission (MTC) of the San Francisco Bay Area Topline Takeaways Highlighting and addressing issues of social equity in America is long overdue, comprised of a complex and often contentious set of problems. Because stakeholders come to any conversation 

A-12   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success about social equity carrying their own experiences, biases, and preconceived ideas, finding a common path forward can be elusive. The challenge of creating a more just and equitable America is different than it was during the civil rights era of the 1960s. Though the movement led by luminaries like Rosa Parks and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is now thought of as heroic, in its time it was unpopular and divisive. Success addressing social equity in America has too often been the exception, not the rule, although much has been learned for those wishing to seek and apply lessons from the past and present. MPOs are on the front lines of these critical conversations about race and a more equi­ table future. Key Panelist Points Rickey Rogers—The march toward racial equality has been a long journey that is far from complete. America has enjoyed some hard-fought success in its uniquely American dilemma, but we are called in this moment to redouble collective efforts to reach a more just political, social, and economic reality for minority members of our communities. Confronting systematic racism requires a system-wide approach. Local, regional, state, and federal governments along­ side neighborhoods, courts, policing, and educational institutions are all required for progress to be real. Many problems plaguing America can be traced back to racial bias, prejudice, intoler­ ance, and hatred. In the past, leaders of the civil rights movement were united in their belief that raising society’s awareness of racial inequality could lead to change. In the decades since, that theory has been tested. Awareness alone is not enough. To make progress, stakeholders need to become comfortable in the uncomfortable. It is a daily conversation that impacts decisions big and small. The way forward relies on those with institu­ tional privilege relinquishing some of their advantages. As a society, we all gain when more voices are heard, when we understand and invest in equity, and when we see each other as equals in our American journey. Nalungo Conley—The San Francisco Bay Area is working to address equity at a regional scale. Discussions around equality had reached a crescendo as public agencies and MPOs grappled with the hard truths that policies and systems intended to solve regional problems have nega­ tively impacted and harmed low-income earners and communities of color. Often as a practice, we have not oriented our conversations around reaching equitable outcomes. The MTC is using what they call the “equity platform” to assist in aligning policies and deci­ sions with just outcomes. The process framework is built on four pillars: define, measure, listen, and grow. Those pillars help to center projects and programs in equity. The platform helps the MTC operationalize equity through specific measurable, relevant, and achievable outcomes. The approach does not guarantee success, but it does provide a foundational starting point for project teams to work collectively toward the same goal. The MTC used this framework when updating their long-range plan called “Plan Bay Area 2050.” The plan took a hard look at the outcomes and impacts of previous plans across four areas: transportation, housing, economics, and environmental strategies. Across all, the out­ comes when viewed through a lens of equality were less than ideal. To address the clear issues raised by the plan review, the MTC Board adopted a series of bold strategies to help make equitable outcomes a reality. The new set of 35 strategies included prioritizing housing in high- resource areas, focusing on improving transit, and creating inclusive communities. Combined with a real commitment to staffing equity initiatives and investing in ways that positively impact systemically marginalized communities, the MTC is modeling what MPOs can do to advance racial justice at a regional level. 

Information Forum Summaries   A-13   Participant Survey Results How would you assess the impact a renewed focus on social equity will have on your organization? Very little impact   3% Some impact, but manageable 48% Considerable impact 28% Significant impact 23% How would you assess your organization’s readiness to deal with issues surrounding social equity in your community? Not ready at all   4% Somewhat prepared 46% Moving in a positive direction 44% Very prepared   6% Technology in Transportation Panelists Keli Kemp, AICP, PTP, Co-founder of Modern Mobility Partners, LLC, an Atlanta-based DBE, full-service transportation planning firm. Julia Billings, AICP, Project Manager at Modern Mobility Partners, LLC Jim Hubble, AICP, Solutions Engineer Manager at StreetLight Data Topline Takeaways Technology advances continually shift how MPOs plan. Some hold great promise, others promised great things but did not deliver. All require understanding, adaptation, and foresight. Technology certainly influences planning processes, but if harnessed, it can be used to improve plans to better meet the future. Seeing traffic flows in real time, understanding data patterns, and finding new trends before they manifest are all examples of how technology, and particularly big data, can transform how MPOs plan. Key Panelist Points Keli Kemp and Julia Billings—The Southern Fulton comprehensive transportation planning (CTP) effort near Atlanta included eight cities as well as a small, unincorporated portion of the county, all within the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) MPO boundary. Typically, a CTP is a master list of prioritized transportation projects across all modes that are fiscally constrained in the short term based on anticipated revenues. Being listed on the CTP is a prerequisite for accessing federal transportation funding. The Southern Fulton effort had a large focus on emerging new technologies from the start of the planning process. The project identified a smart corridor network based on traffic models. The corridor included a requirement for fiber to be laid as part of widening and new construction. The traffic signals on the corridor would communicate with one another and provide for signal preemption for emergency vehicles, buses, and trucks on designated corridors. Mid-block pedestrian crossings would feature smart, flashing beacons. Bikes would have signals and EVs would have charging stations along the corridor. The plan also balanced these recommendations with an analysis of a reduced funding scenario tied to disruptions in fuel tax revenues from the pandemic or electric vehicles. 

A-14   Metropolitan Planning Organizations: Strategies for Future Success Connected vehicles were part of the planning for smart corridors throughout the planning area. They represent an advancement in system efficiency that supports future growth. The tech­ nology in connected vehicles also makes innovative approaches to reducing congestion and increasing travel-time reliability possible. In short, connected vehicles and smart connected infra­ structure investments support mobility options and economic growth. One unique aspect of the CTP was the development of a corridor framework that connected technology, traffic patterns, and land use. Three unique types of corridors were identified as part of the plan—Smart Corridors where technology upgrades were most beneficial and improved safety and operations, Livability Corridors with high bicycle and pedestrian needs because they supported commercial, residential, and mixed-use activity centers; and finally, Economic Freight Corridors that focused on improving freight and economic activity. Each corridor had different needs, but each used technology to improve transportation performance. Jim Hubble—The promise of “Big Data” and its impact on transportation comes from mining vast, mostly anonymized data sets to map current conditions more accurately and predict future behavior based on real work scenarios. The planning world is complicated. MPOs’ plans are subject to the influences of compounding forces and disruptors that make everyday life more challenging. The effects of the pandemic and the changing social forces confound planning further. With a renewed focus on stretching transportation dollars and making investments that are multimodal and multifunctional, Big Data can be a way to maximize dollars by maxi­ mizing the efficiency of each project. Nationally, we are seeing trends that move away from building capacity and toward operating the existing capacity better. Using data to make people-centered rather than vehicle-centered decisions is a positive advancement in planning. Data can be broken down into two sets. Traditional data sets include the U.S. Census Household and Intercept Surveys, aerial photos and videos, Bluetooth and other cell signal-related sensors, and assumption-based modeling data. Traditional data is familiar and typically available. It is understood and has been widely used, in some cases for decades. It has drawbacks, including the expense and time-consuming methods needed to analyze and make use of the data. It has relatively small sample sizes and can be outdated. Big/Passive Data utilized sources like smartphones, connected vehicle data, transit and toll pass readers, and other Big Data modeling sets. These data sets represent massive sample sizes and are empirical and objective in their results. They advance modeling in the level of granularity they can produce and evolve as new data sets come online. But analysis can result in huge file sizes and processing, and clean-up can be time consuming and require expertise. Big Data has a relatively short track record of success and can often be incomplete. Plans are best when a mix of traditional and Big/Passive Data sets are used to understand trans­ portation needs. Focusing on what is in the control of the region and looking for opportunities to collaborate can result in improved models and policies. MPOs should constantly reassess new technology and data sources to improve and evolve their processes. Participant Survey Results How big an impact do you think autonomous and connected vehicles will have in your planning efforts? A game-changing impact to how we plan today 10% A significant impact particularly in the long-term 33% It may impact some demand, or change our models, but more gradually than we expected 38% The effect is over-hyped, and we may not see much change 19% 

Information Forum Summaries   A-15   What do you think is the best practices currently for travel surveys? Nothing is better than traditional surveys! 10% Surveys are so 2019, it’s all about passive data now 10% Traditional + passive make the perfect partnership 48% Undecided 33% Are your agency’s travel demand models evolving? Yes, they are changing to meet new needs 39% They haven’t yet changed significantly, but we recognize the need 52% We are leaving our models as they have been but using other means to adjust to changing metrics   4% No, our agency will continue to model travel demand as we have been   4%