A Forum for Public Feedback on Regional Transportation Decisions is Needed

A representative of NOACA recently told me the staff sees its mission as "serving the board (of governors)." This is a misunderstanding of its obligation to public taxpayers whose money it is responsible for dispersing. What is NOACA's obligation to ordinary citizens? Do cyclists, for example, have a right to demand safety accomodations? Why haven't these accomodations materialized?

Posted Sep 21, 2011

For comparison, check out the website of Columbus' MPO, MORPC: www.morpc.org/index.asp

And Akron's website (for its 'AMATS' MPO) is still better: www.amatsplanning.org

Like you, Angie, I find NOACA's website very frustrating. Its online presence does nothing to indicate an obligation to transparancy.

Posted Sep 22, 2011

Why doesn't NOACA Director Howard Maier appear at importance transportation events in the community, such as the Bike Cleveland Summit, STAT's Sustainable Transportation Filmfest or the Sprawlfest discussion hosted by Civic Commons?

Posted Sep 21, 2011

Rev. Thanks for your concern. This is an important equity and public health issue for the region and it is awesome to have community leaders like yourself recognize that.

It is troubling that NOACA didn't respond to the PD like ODOT did, IMO. For starters, NOACA has a obligation to the region's most vunerable citizens who rely on their feet, bikes or transit to get around, but it is one that they have not traditionally taken that very seriously, or at least not nearly as seriously as car travel.

I think it is dissappointing NOACA hasn't expressed its support for Cleveland's forward-thinking legislation. Communities across the country are heading in this direction and Columbus' regional planning agency has its own region-wide complete streets policy.

I know many officials in Cleveland's top concern about passing complete streets wasn't that they didn't support the policy is was that it might make the city of Cleveland less competitive for funds from ODOT and NOACA. But under the federal directives, there is no reason this should be the case. NOACA and ODOT are both under federal obligation to keep all road users safe.

The fact that NOACA failed to show support to the city of Cleveland and furthermore failed to produce its own complete streets policy show a characteristic lack of leadership from this agency, in my opinion.

But perhaps there is another explanation and they are strongly in support. I wish someone from NOACA would respond to our concerns. They are funded entirely through our tax dollars and I think it is outrageous that they would ignore legitimate public concerns like these. NOACA will lose its legitimacy with the public if it operates like a closed-door entity using taxpayer dollars.

Posted Sep 22, 2011

As for the question of what you can do, that's not really clear because NOACA hasn't indicated it welcomes and values public input, even though they use our tax dollars. A group of us that have concerns about this agency are thinking of strategies to try to get them to at least acknowledge our complaints, and hopefully work with us to create a more democratic and inclusive organization.

In the meantime, NOACA is led by a board of 50 public officials from around the region and it has made it clear that it sees its responsiblity as only to be accountable to those public officials, who are in turn accountable only to their electors in their home community and not the health of the region more generally. This is a big problem because ordinary concerned citizens are completely without recourse in cases like this.

I will be sure to include you in any efforts going forward. It would be nice however, if NOACA would just sign onto the commons and say they are supportive of Cleveland's legislation. I guess if they do not, we can assume they don't? Who knows? It is unfortunate that we do not even know.

Posted Sep 22, 2011

Unfortunately, citizens don't really have a clear cut way to influence NOACA, that is my primary complaint. A lot of us who are concerned about NOACA are concerned about that very issue. But we don't really have a clear recourse, unfortunately.

NOACA is an MPO and they aren't directly democratic. Its board members aren't elected by the region and are only accountble to folks in their home municipality. This is at the root of the agency's disfunction. It is governed by a bunch of people whose only incentive is to get as much for their own community as they can. And that is what they do. But that is not an efficient or equitable way to plan a region.

I wrote this article I'll attach below that explains a bit about how MPOs function and how the most democratic ones are the most successful. Thanks for your concern to this important issue!

I just heard, NOACA didn't get any applications from outside the state of Ohio for their director position and only one from outside the region, someone from Columbus.

Nobody worth their salt as a transportation planner is going to spend a year shadowing Howard Maier, a director that had presided over precipitious decline and mediocraty.

That was the plan all along anyway and everyone knew it. It is so disappointing that none of the region's leaders had the nerve to stand up for progress and reform.

If I owned stock in greater Cleveland I would sell and I'd buy in greater Arkon and Columbus. Too bad I own a house in Cleveland. The joke's on me and all the other people tht aren't on the public payroll and are trying to build a future in this region.

Score one for the status quo: self-destruction!

Posted Sep 30, 2011

Communications and Public Involvement

Q. Why does NOACA maintain such an outdated and user-unfriendly website?

Point taken. The site is in bad shape, and it’s a sore spot with me too. That’s why we included a site makeover as part of our work plan for the current fiscal year. We’ll be soliciting bids from website design consultants in the next couple weeks, and I expect to have a much cleaner, more navigable site up by early 2012. For any website design consultants who may read this blog, watch our website for the RFP in the next couple weeks.

Q. Why doesn't NOACA maintain a Twitter account the way ODOT and MORPC and many other government agencies do?

Obviously, many organizations inside and outside of government use social media to get their message out. We take public involvement seriously (see the NOACA Public Interaction Policy in the Documents section of our site), and I agree that we need to step it up in the area of online public involvement.

However, we don’t think Twitter is for us. We’re currently reviewing a couple options for online public participation and comment that we think will allow for thoughtful and detailed public discourse. Stay tuned.

Q. A representative of NOACA recently told me the staff sees its mission as "serving the board (of governors)." This is a misunderstanding of its obligation to public taxpayers whose money it is responsible for dispersing.

I don’t know who told you this or in what context, but I think it’s fair to say that we see our mission as serving the public. However, the vast majority of our board members are locally elected officials who represent the citizens of this region. In a democratic sense, we see serving the board as inseparable from serving the public. Of course, a strong public involvement process is also vitally important, which is why we have an extensive public interaction policy.

Q. Unfortunately, citizens don't really have a clear cut way to influence NOACA, that is my primary complaint.

There are lots of ways for citizens to express their views to NOACA. The first, and perhaps best way, is through the locally elected officials who serve on our board. Our board membership includes mayors, county commissioners, the Cuyahoga County executive, city council members, county council members, county engineers and others. They are your elected representatives, and they are NOACA’s decision-makers. Making your views known to them is a very direct and practical way to influence NOACA.

We also welcome agenda-relevant public comment at board and committee meetings. Nearly all these meetings are public meetings, and the time, place and agenda for these meetings is available on our calendar in the “What’s New” section of our website.

We also solicit public comment through public events, meetings and the internet. The easiest and most obvious way to submit comment is through the “Contact Us” link on our home page.

Another good way to meaningfully communicate with us is through the Project Planning Review section of our site (available from the home page), which includes information on projects being considered for board approval. That page includes a link for public comments, which we always welcome. We are now working with a consultant to create a GIS based online platform for Project Planning Review, which will offer much more detailed project information and opportunity for public comment. That system will be available later this year.

Finally, we are also now working to develop our long-range transportation plan, which will be completed in 2013. As we develop this important, federally required planning document, we will be soliciting public opinion and hosting public meetings. We’ll post notice of those meetings in local newspapers and on our home page. We welcome your participation.

Multimodal Transportation

Q. Why did NOACA and ODOT hold the meeting that would determine the fate of Cleveland West Shoreway project in Akron?

I think you’re talking about the recent Transportation Review Advisory Committee (TRAC) meeting. TRAC is a committee that reviews major new projects to the transportation system for ODOT funding. This wasn’t NOACA’s meeting; it was a statewide TRAC meeting for project sponsors submitting projects for consideration.

The West Shoreway project was on our recommended list, but we attended this meeting to support all the Northeast Ohio projects on our list. The City of Cleveland was also there, and it was at that meeting that city planning director Bob Brown announced changes to the scope of the West Shoreway project due to insufficient funding. We are in discussions with the city now about the future of this project and its bike element in particular, which we think is an essential project component. We may be able to provide funding for the bike element of that project, and we’re working with the city and our committees to try to make that happen.

Q. NOACA employed a bike planner for 2-1/2 decades. What does the public have to show for its investment in that position, exactly?

I wasn’t at NOACA 2 ½ decades ago, but in recent years she developed a protocol for annual bike counts, which became the basis of NOACA’s Regional Bicycle Transportation Plan (available in the Transportation/Bike Planning section of our website). The bike plan outlines our Board-approved policy for a preferred network of bike facilities, which is gradually being added to our transportation system as roads become eligible for reconstruction.

She also developed a series of bike route maps for each of NOACA’s five counties, which are updated regularly and continue to be popular with cyclists. Moreover, she was instrumental in creating and staffing a Bicycle Advisory Council (BAC), which has now become the Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Council (BPAC). These councils have had direct input into the planning and project selection processes at NOACA.

Planning Issues

Q. Why do none of NOACA policy documents mention the word "sprawl," even those that relate directly to air and water quality? How does the agency justify such a blatant omission?

The “omission” doesn’t really exist. I don’t know about the word “sprawl” specifically, but NOACA’s policy documents certainly address the issue of sprawl. In fact, the first 14 pages of our long range transportation plan (there’s a link on our home page) extensively address outmigration from our central city and central county to outlying areas.

Sprawl is an important issue, but it’s one that NOACA has little power to directly affect. Ohio is a home rule state, and each community is free to set its own land use policies. NOACA has no legal authority to control land use in individual communities. Thus, the 200-plus communities in the NOACA region each have their own land use plans.

This is one reason why we’re excited to be involved as an active participant in the Northeast Ohio Sustainability Communities Consortium. NOACA was the lead applicant on the funding application for this consortium and serves as its fiscal agent. NOACA board president, Steve Hambley, chairs the consortium while Howard Maier serves as its treasurer. We’re hopeful that this consortium of 21 public and private sector organizations can help address sprawl-related issues through a cooperative effort. For more information on the NEOSCC, see our home page.

In addition, we do have policies and programs in place to assist urban core communities in a variety of ways. For more information, I refer you to the section on urban core communities in our Regional Transportation Investment Policy, which is also available directly from our home page.

Q. What is NOACA's plan for maintaining the region's existing infrastructure? What percent of the region's roads are in "good" condition? What percent of the regional transportation budget is spent on maintenance? Is that enough to keep our roads in good repair? If not, why do we continue to expand our infrastructure system?

NOACA’s plan for maintaining the region’s existing infrastructure is more extensive than I can describe in a blog posting. I refer you again to our long-range transportation plan, available on our home page. That’s the plan. In it, you’ll also find detailed answers to your questions about roadway condition (page 75 of the PDF).

NOACA spends the vast majority of its funding on preserving the existing transportation system. This includes road and bridge rehabilitation and replacement, but it also includes bus and rapid transit vehicle replacements. For fiscal years 2008-2015, NOACA programmed only about six percent of its funding for capacity adding projects. You’ll find detailed numbers on page 369 of the PDF for our Transportation Improvement Program (available on our home page).

We also provide road and bridge condition data to project sponsors, which helps prioritize preservation projects more effectively. Check out the Transportation System Data link on our home page for more information.

Because of the ongoing costs involved, including construction and maintenance costs – we expand the existing highway system minimally and reluctantly. However, sometimes capacity adding projects are necessary and justified to solve real-world safety and congestion problems.

To answer your last question, we absolutely do not spend enough to keep our roads in good repair. Transportation infrastructure is seriously underfunded at both the state and federal levels. The federal gas tax has not been increased since 1993, and was never indexed for inflation. Could you replace your roof today at 1993 prices? To make matters worse, the Congressional leadership is now talking about a 30 percent cut in federal funding for highways and transit. We have actively advocated in both Columbus and Washington for increased funding for transportation infrastructure, but I’m afraid we’re swimming against the tide on this issue.

Q. How has the fact that Cleveland lost 17 percent of its population over the past decade impacted NOACA's policy going forward? If it hasn't, why?

NOACA’s policies regarding loss of population from urban core communities precede the losses of the last decade. We’ve seen this trend continue since the 1970s. And yes, this trend has affected NOACA policy.

Again, this is a big question to try to answer in a blog posting. I can only once again suggest that you familiarize yourself with the urban core policies in our transportation plan and Regional Transportation Infrastructure Policy. There are links to both documents on our home page.

Q. The fact that NOACA failed to show support to the city of Cleveland (for its complete streets policy) and furthermore failed to produce its own complete streets policy show a characteristic lack of leadership from this agency, in my opinion… But perhaps there is another explanation and they are strongly in support.

NOACA strongly supports Cleveland’s complete streets policy. Before the legislation was passed we sent a letter to the city expressing that support. The policy is consistent with our policies, our transportation plan goals and our planning principles. We didn’t comment in the PD article simply because we weren’t asked to comment.

With regard to our own complete streets policy, I believe that if you read our transportation plan, bike plan and regional transportation investment policy, you’ll see marbled throughout those documents what amounts to a de facto complete streets policy. NOACA strongly promotes multimodal transportation – including transit, bikeways and pedestrian facilities. In fact, one can make a pretty good case that NOACA policy does indeed promote complete streets. We were for complete streets before complete streets were cool.

Policy and Governance

Q. NOACA is an MPO and they aren't directly democratic. Its board members aren't elected by the region and are only accountable to folks in their home municipality. This is at the root of the agency's dysfunction. It is governed by a bunch of people whose only incentive is to get as much for their own community as they can.

Democracy in the United States, and in the NOACA region, is representative. We elect representatives to operate government on our behalf, and that representation begins at the local and county level in Ohio. There are no multi-county elected government officials anywhere in Ohio. If you want to change the system of American government, you’ll need to direct your comments to higher authorities than NOACA.

That said, I’ve heard exurban officials on the NOACA board argue strongly in favor of the Innerbelt and HealthLine projects, and we commonly see elected officials voting for projects that are beyond their jurisdictions. While it would be absurd to argue that there are no parochial interests at the NOACA board table, I think you’d find the regional perspective among these individuals is alive and well.

Q. I just heard, NOACA didn't get any applications from outside the state of Ohio for their director position and only one from outside the region, someone from Columbus.

I’m afraid you heard wrong. NOACA received applications from across the country for that position.

Posted Oct 06, 2011

Jonathan,

Wow...thank you for taking the time to post such a reasonable reply.  One dude, accountable for decades of agency policy; you have broad (and brave!) shoulders. Cleveland cyclists look to a future of safe, year round cycling as a means to travel to work, shop, enact greener life mechanisms, and to seek health and recreation.  Cleveland is a beautiful, terrain diverse location to cycle....and it is not currently safe in many, if not most areas, to be sure, urban, suburban and rurally.  Drivers are distracted and don't know or understand "Same road, same rules", roads are dilapidated and littered, etc., etc.  Thank you for a civilized, response to an emotional and sometimes heated topic.

Susie

Posted Oct 10, 2011

NOACA to me sort of typifies the old-school NE ohio style of governance. Sort of good-old-boy, daddy-knows-best politics. It has always shocked me how little resistence corrupt government agencies have faced in this town. It's as if people don't realize that these agencies belong to the people and it's our right to demand effective and transparent service.

Posted Sep 22, 2011

No I don't go myself and I don't know of anyone that goes. But I would like to. The problem for me at least is that the meetings are in the middle of the day and I'd have to take time off work. That is one of my complaints about NOACA. I think it's more transparent to have important public meetings outside of working hours so members of the public can attend and advance democracy in local government.

If you ever have time to go and report back, I think it would be great. I'll be sure to include you in future efforts to engage with this organization, as well.

Posted Oct 05, 2011

Angie,

I said I wasn't going to engage in a tit-for-tat debate over what amounts to misinformation. I'm also not going to debate you as you denigrate the character and competence of NOACA staff. While you may "love the idea" in your head of who you imagine we are and what you suppose we understand, your snarky attacks do little to move the conversation in a positive direction.

We're very interested in enaging more with the public, but we'd prefer to keep it positive. For now, I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree.

As I mentioned in yesterday's post, we're working to step up our online presence through a website redesign, an online forum, and a new online project development and review portal. I hope that readers of this blog will check out our site in the coming months as we roll out these improvements to our public involvement efforts.

Posted Oct 07, 2011

Jason, you hit the nail on the head regarding federal transportation funding policy. I would only add that people should ask their Member of Congress to not only preserve transportation enhancement (TE) funding, but to increase infrastructure funding overall. This is a problem that's reaching crisis proportions.

My view is that TE is under attack mainly because we're living in a time of scarcity. When TE has to compete with basic highway and transit preservation projects for scarce dollars, enhancements lose. If infrastruture was properly funded overall, TE would be seen as what it is: a small set-aside to make our infrastructure more attractive a user-friendly. This never used to be seen as a problem. 

Posted Oct 11, 2011

Actually, the formal request for support fror ClevelandBikes was from the City of Cleveland, to avoid the point you raise.  At any rate, we did not receive funding.

Posted Oct 12, 2011

Again, federal regulations preclude giving CMAQ funding to non-profits. However, we have given ClevelandBikes a seat at the committee table, where I think they've provided useful input to the NOACA process.

It's worth noting that we routinely use CMAQ to advance bike and transit projects through recognized project sponsors. We've used CMAQ for the Healthline project, the Towpath trail, and dozens of other transit and bike projects. Our current Transportation Improvement Program (available on our home page) contains nearly $25 million in CMAQ for the Towpath Trail alone.

Posted Oct 11, 2011

Angie, NOACA did support ClevelandBikes in some ways. Sally Hanley committed a significant amount of organizational time to Bike Week and Bike to Work events, coordinating an employer Bike to Work challenge.  In addition, ClevelandBikes got some financial support for hosting speaker events and planning/coordinating Bike Week, which I believe was $1000, but that was the only direct financial support.

Posted Oct 12, 2011

That is really interesting. I wonder if that would be a good thing for us to have in Cleveland.

Posted Oct 11, 2011