Process Review. Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization Review. July 18-19, Final REPORT. Prepared by: FHWA New Mexico Division

Transcription

1 Process Review Prepared by: FHWA New Mexico Division & New Mexico Department of Transportation Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization Review July 18-19, 2012 Santa Fe MPO staff Saint Francis Dr. Tunnel Final REPORT

2 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 3 Background... 4 Purpose and Objective... 6 Scope and Methodology... 7 Team Members Conclusion and Summary of Actions Observations and Findings Conclusion Appendices... 30

3 Acronyms ADA CFR CMAQ CMP CMS DOT EMS EJ EPA FHWA FTA GIS ISTEA ITS LRP MAP-21 MOA MOU MPA MPO MTP MOVES NCHRP NHS NMDOT O/M PAC REMI SAFETEA-LU SIP STIP STP TDP TEA-21 TIP Title VI TMA U.S.C. American with Disabilities Act Code of Federal Regulations Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program Congestion Management Process Congestion Management System Department of Transportation Emergency Medical Services Environmental Justice Environmental Protection Agency Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration Geographic Information Systems Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Intelligent Transportation Systems Long Range Transportation Plan (also referred to as MTP) Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Memorandum of Agreement Memorandum of Understanding Metropolitan Planning Area Boundary Metropolitan Planning Organization Metropolitan Transportation Plan Motor Vehicle Emission Simulation National Cooperative Highway Research Program National Highway System New Mexico Department of Transportation Operations and Maintenance Policy Advisory Committee Regional Economic Models, Inc. Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act A Legacy for Users State Implementation Plan Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Surface Transportation Program Transit Development Plan Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century Transportation Improvement Program Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act Transportation Management Area United States Code - 1 -

4 UPWP UZA YOE Unified Planning Work Program Urbanized Area Year of Expenditure - 2 -

5 Executive Summary The Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization (SF-MPO) is the designated MPO for the Santa Fe metropolitan area. The SF-MPO self-certifies, in accordance with Federal Regulatory procedures, that they are following the regulations in carrying out the 3C metropolitan transportation planning process. This planning process review has concentrated on documenting the efforts and accomplishments of this process. This review is a joint effort between the FHWA NM Division and the NM Department of Transportation (NMDOT). The Final Report is to be transmitted to SF-MPO Policy Board and Transit Operator in late November or early December, The Final Report documents the review team s observations and findings including specific recommendations for improvement, as well as strengths of the planning process. Corrective actions, recommendations, and commendations were identified as a result of the review. The review is intended to serve as an opportunity to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the SF-MPO planning process. It is intended to identify major issues facing the Santa Fe metropolitan area so all the parties participating in the planning process will address them in a cooperative, consultative, and comprehensive manner and in accordance with federal and state requirements. The review effort consisted of both a desk and an on-site review. The desk review focused on looking at the core MPO documentation as identified in the federal regulations which include MPO agreements, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), the Public Participation Plan, the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), financial documentation, the transit operator triennial review, and other supplemental documents that were requested. The on-site review was conducted on July 18-19, 2012 and focused on a discussion with the MPO staff on the core functions, products, processes and procedures in place for the management of the metropolitan transportation planning process. The on-site work also included a public session scheduled at the Main Public Library from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM on July 18, The Final Report documents the Review Team s observations and findings, including one commendation, three corrective actions, and seven recommendations for improvement to the planning process

6 Background As a condition for the receipt of Federal funds for planning, capital or operating assistance, 23 CFR Part 450 and 49 CFR Part 613 require that each metropolitan area have a continuing, cooperative and comprehensive 3C transportation planning process that results in plans and programs consistent with federal and state requirements. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) metropolitan planning (PL) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5303 urbanized area formula planning funds, are made available yearly to the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) which is responsible, together with the State, for carrying out the transportation planning activities. The Santa Fe MPO is the designated MPO for the Santa Fe metropolitan area. 23 USC 134(k)(5)(a)(i) and 49 USC 5303(k)(5)(a)(i)(e) establishes that The Secretary shall ensure that the metropolitan planning process of a metropolitan planning organization is being carried out in accordance with applicable provisions of Federal Law In general, the reviews consist of three primary activities: a desk review of planning products (in advance of the on-site review), an on-site review, a public hearing opportunity, and a report that summarizes the review and offer findings. The review process is developed to focus on issues of significance to the particular MPO. The review is not just a review of the MPO, but rather, it is a review of the planning process conducted by all member agencies, local agencies, the State, and transit operators charged with cooperatively carrying out the planning process on a daily basis. The review focuses on compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), challenges, successes, and experiences of the cooperative relationship between the MPO, the State, and transit operators as they conduct the metropolitan transportation planning process. The review process is only one of several methods used to assess the quality of a local metropolitan transportation planning process, compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and the level and type of technical assistance needed to enhance the effectiveness of the planning process. Other activities that provide opportunities for this type of review include the revision process of the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP), the metropolitan transportation Improvement program (TIP), the Air-Quality conformity determinations (in nonattainment and maintenance areas), as well as other opportunities to comment on the metropolitan planning process

7 While the review process and this report may not fully document many of these ongoing checkpoints, the findings of the review are, in fact, based upon the cumulative findings of the entire review effort

8 Purpose and Objective The Santa Fe MPO self-certifies, in accordance with Federal Regulations that it is following the regulations in carrying out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3C) metropolitan transportation planning process. This review concentrated on documenting their efforts and accomplishments as they relate to this process. This review was scheduled before MAP 21 went into effect. The last assessment of the Santa Fe Metropolitan Transportation Planning process was done in The final report, entitled Santa Fe MPO Membership & Structure, was produced by Wilbur Smith. The current Bylaws and Operating Procedures approved by the Transportation Policy Board on August 13, 2009 and Amended in June 25, 2012 addressed recommendations identified in the Santa Fe MPO Membership & Structure document. This 2012 review differs from the above process because it is based on a joint effort by the FHWA NM Division and the NMDOT. The review follows FHWA program review and financial review principles. In addition, it is based on the Stewardship & Oversight Agreement between the FHWA NM Division and the NMDOT which was signed in The following objectives were set for the review: Verify that the SF- MPO planning process is in compliance with SAFETEA-LU transportation planning law. Determine if the metropolitan transportation planning process is a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive process that results in the support and development of transportation improvements for the overall Santa Fe metropolitan area. Determine if the metropolitan transportation planning process provides adequate representation and input from all levels of local government and individual interest groups in addressing the transportation needs of the Santa Fe metropolitan area. Identify noteworthy practices, which can be shared with other states, MPOs, and transit operators. Enhance the Santa Fe planning process and improve the quality of its transportation decision making. Determine the administration systems in place for the sound oversight management of federal funds in the operation of the Santa Fe MPO

9 Scope and Methodology The review is intended to serve as an opportunity to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Santa Fe MPO planning process, to help ensure that the major issues facing the metropolitan area are addressed, and to discuss transportation planning issues as they relate to federal regulations. The review was conducted by a team of FHWA New Mexico Division and NM DOT staff. To accomplish the objectives, the team conducted a desk and an on-site review. The following topics were covered at the 2012 desk and on-site reviews: MPO structure Agreements Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Transit Planning Annual Listing of Obligated Projects Public Involvement (Participation Plan, Consultation, and Coordination, Visualization, and Title VI) Finance (accounting system and travel policy) Throughout the review, additional information was requested including travel policy, indirect costs, audited financial statements, organizational chart, the TIP Project Application & Evaluation, and several Policy Board meeting minutes. Several meetings between NMDOT leadership and staff were scheduled to coordinate methodology and logistics associated to the review process and documentation. In addition, a series of phone conversations between the review team coordinator and MPO staff were scheduled regarding documentation, workdays, locations, materials, interviews, agency coordination, the public listening session, and other logistics associated with the review process. Desk Review The desk review consisted of reviewing all the documents requested from the MPO staff. The review team was split in two groups, one focused on planning and the other on finance. Each group member was enlisted according to their area of expertise to better manage the resources. Each group was led by the FHWA Division staff, the Financial Manager or the State Planner. The NMDOT STIP coordinator and the NMDOT Planner worked with the FHWA Planner. The FHWA Financial Manager - 7 -

10 worked with the two NMDOT Office of Inspector General (OIG) auditors and the NMDOT Funding Control staff member. On-site Review The on-site review was an opportunity to discuss transportation issues related to the Santa Fe urban area with the MPO staff, the public, and staff from other agencies. This was an opportunity to gather more information on topics that were assessed during the desk review. A public listening session was scheduled July 18, 2012 from 6:00 PM to 7:00 PM at the City of Santa Fe Main Library. A close-out session was scheduled at the end of the site review on the morning of July 19, The review team briefed the MPO staff on some preliminary findings. No member of the Policy Board attended the close-out session or during the review process. A Report of the review is expected to be delivered by the end of November or early December, The Report will document the regulatory basis, current status, and findings as outlined below: Regulatory Basis refers to where information regarding each planning topic can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Findings Statements of fact associated with the conditions found during the review that provide the primary basis for determining the corrective actions, recommendations, and/or commendations for each planning topic. Based on the outcome of the findings, the planning process could receive one of the following considerations: o Corrective Action indicates a serious situation that fails to meet one or more requirements of the transportation planning statute and regulations, thus seriously impacting the outcome of the overall planning process. A corrective action requires immediate attention from the MPO to bring the metropolitan planning process into compliance with a planning statue or regulation; failure to respond will likely result in a more restrictive finding. o Recommendation addresses technical improvements to processes and procedures, that while somewhat less substantial and not regulatory, are still significant enough that FHWA and FTA are hopeful the State and local officials will take action. The expected outcome is change that would improve the planning process. Failure to respond may not necessarily result in a more restrictive finding. o Commendation indicates that a process or practice demonstrates innovative, highly effective, well-thought-out procedures for implementing the planning requirements. Elements addressing items that have frequently posed problems nationwide could be cited as noteworthy - 8 -

11 practices. Also, significant improvements and/or resolutions of past findings may warrant a commendation

12 Team Members Rodolfo Monge-Oviedo, Planning & Program Management Team Leader, FHWA-NM Division Kim Sanchez, Financial Manager, FHWA-NM Division Rebecca Maes, NMDOT STIP Coordinator Jolene Herrera, NMDOT Planner Kari Ann Blea, NMDOT Office of Inspector General Nicole A. Montoya, NMDOT Office of Inspector General Sean Sandoval, NMDOT Management Analyst-Advanced

13 Conclusion and Summary of actions The Santa Fe MPO metropolitan transportation planning process is in compliance with Federal transportation planning laws and regulations. There are a few areas that require additional attention and action to bring them into compliance with federal and state requirements and those are identified as corrective actions. While corrective actions will not restrict the advancement of projects, they require attention and shall be taken seriously. Failure to address them could result in compromising Federal participation in the future. The following is the list of corrective actions, recommendations, and commendations identified by the review team. The respective observations, regulatory basis and findings associated with each of them can be found in the following section. Corrective Action #1: The Santa Fe MPO, the State, and transit operator must update the current JPA to meet federal requirements in accordance to 23 CFR and the new provision of MAP-21. The revised and updated JPA and corresponding supplemental documents (other agreements or Bylaws) must be submitted to the FHWA and FTA for informational purposes by March 31 st, 2012, with the final document signed by the responsible parties by June, Corrective Action #2: The Santa Fe MPO needs to work with the NMDOT Office of Equal Opportunity Programs on developing and adopting an Environmental Justice/ Title VI plan as soon as possible. The plan needs to be adopted by September, Corrective Action #3: The Santa Fe MPO must identify a remedy for the leave usage finding, resolve it within 90 days of this report, and present it to the FHWA New Mexico Division Office for concurrence. Recommendation #1: The communication between accounting staff (supervisory level) at the City of Santa Fe and the MPO needs improvement for better understanding of the role of the MPO and the accounting and reporting requirements associated with it. The single audit requirement needs to be brought to the attention of the City of Santa Fe s auditor for FY 12 and future years. Recommendation #2: The Santa Fe MPO and the NMDOT Planning Bureau staff should discuss mechanisms that resolve current communications problems. Sound and reliable

14 mechanisms should be identified and implemented so information is provided early and accurately to all parties. The FHWA New Mexico Division Office will actively participate in promoting an environment of cooperation and effective communication between the NMDOT and the MPO through disseminating information early and making resources available aimed at enhancing the metropolitan transportation planning process. Recommendation #3: The Santa Fe MPO needs to update the Public Participation Plan to capture new outreach techniques that have been used in recent planning efforts. The updated document needs to clearly address Title VI Civil Rights requirements. The Plan update needs to be accomplished as it has been identified in the FFY 2013 UPWP. Recommendation #4: The Santa Fe MPO and the NMDOT need to work in cooperation on the development and implementation of the UPWP Policies and Procedures. The NMDOT needs to monitor and verify that all activities performed by subrecipients with FHWA planning and research funds have been managed in a satisfactory manner according to the established schedules and requirements as specified in 23 CFR The Santa Fe MPO and NMDOT need to work on resolving the traffic count concerns and problems. Reliable traffic count information is critical for the development of studies, project development and for meeting federal reporting requirements. Recommendation #5: It is strongly recommended that the Santa Fe MPO work with the NMDOT in researching effective and sound methodologies to meet the Fiscal Constraint requirements. FHWA New Mexico Division Office will work with MPOs and NMDOT on identifying and bringing technical assistance on Fiscal Constraint and cost estimates for best practices. Recommendation #6: The Santa Fe MPO should continue working with NMDOT on the implementation of the STIP Policies and Procedures and in the development of a formal cost estimate process that provides a methodology for project cost estimation that is consistent and that sponsoring agencies have agreed to. The review team acknowledges and praises the Santa FE MPO staff and NMDOT District 5 for their efforts to enhance their communication and coordination

15 Recommendation #7: The Santa Fe MPO, NMDOT and the transit operator(s) collaboratively develop an effective cooperative process by which project information on obligated Federal funds is provided by the recipient grantee agency to the MPO. The information provided should be adequate for the MPO to produce and publish the Annual Listing of Obligated Projects document within 90 days of the close of the MPO program year. This information sharing process needs to be included in the MOU and be disseminated in accordance with the Public Participation Plan techniques and in accordance with 23 CFR Commendation #1: Mrs. Maria Vigil of Santa Fe MPO staff and Mr. Stephen Morales of the City of Santa Fe were very knowledgeable and willing to work with the review team in addressing all the questions and providing the necessary documentation. Their work contributed to a positive outcome of the financial review that otherwise, could had resulted in additional findings that might have been more significant. Commendation #2: The Santa Fe MPO is commended for its efforts in developing ranking and rating criteria to be used in the project selection process and for its integration into the development of the metropolitan transportation plan and the transportation improvement program. This establishes a direct connection between this two core documents

16 Observations and Findings Observation #1 MPO Agreements The current Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) in place between the City of Santa Fe, the County of Santa Fe, the Tesuque Pueblo, and the New Mexico Department of Transportation was signed on 2009 and was approved by the State of New Mexico Department of Finance Administration on December, The agreement has not been updated since. The agreement does not reflect current transportation federal law in effect since October 1, The current JPA as is does not capture the requirements of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Act or the MAP- 21. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR sets forth requirements for the designation of an MPO for each urbanized area with a population of more than 50,000 individuals (as determined by the Bureau of the US Census). The MPO designation is to be made by the Governor and units of general purpose local government in accordance with State or local law and to be established by agreement. In accordance to 23 CFR (j), units of general purpose local government may be defined as elected officials from each unit ( ) located within the Santa Fe metropolitan planning area. Findings The Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization was designated as an MPO in The City of Santa Fe acts as the fiscal agent for the MPO and the MPO is located within the City of Santa Fe s administrative structure. City of Santa Fe provides the local match. The SF-MPO received conditional certifications in 2004 and 2006 for not meeting the federal requirements as established in the 23 CFR. A Special Planning Review conducted by the FHWA and the NMDOT was performed in September 2006 and included the development and completion of a Membership & Structure Study of the SF- MPO. The JPA needs to clearly establish the role and responsibilities of its members, how disagreements are resolved, and the identification of triggers associated with when the

17 document will be updated (i.e. new transportation law, change in membership and structure as a result of census releases and changes in the MPO boundaries, etc.) Corrective Action #1 The Santa Fe MPO, the State, and transit operator must update the current JPA to meet federal requirements as required in 23 CFR and the new provision of MAP-21. A revised and updated JPA and corresponding supplemental documents (other agreements or Bylaws) must be submitted to FHWA and FTA for informational purposes by March 31 st, 2012, with the final draft signed by the responsible parties by June, The agreement shall clearly define the roles and responsibilities of participating parties, fiscal and financial responsibilities of participating parties, representation, decision making structure, a conflict resolution provision, and a process to establish when updates to the agreement will occur. The Bylaws for the SF- MPO should be updated to clearly respond to the new JPA and to clearly define the membership, function, authority, and delegated responsibilities of the Transportation Policy Board as an entity of the SF- MPO with responsibility of overseeing transportation planning for the region as required in 23 CFR Title VI and Civil Rights Observation # 2 The Santa Fe MPO does not have an Environmental Justice-Title VI Plan in place. The MPO is not in compliance with federal requirements and therefore needs to address this immediately. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR (a)(1)(vii) requires that the needs of those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as low-income and minority households that may face challenges accessing employment and other services, be sought out and considered. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. The Planning regulations required FHWA and FTA to certify that the planning process is being conducted in accordance with all applicable requirements of Title VI of the

18 Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Title VI assurance executed by each State under 23 USC 324 and 29 USC 794. Executive Order 12898, issued in 1994 further establishes that each Federal agency shall make achieving Environmental Justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high or adverse human health and environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations Findings The MPO does not have an EJ Title VI plan in place. The MPO staff is aware of this requirement and will be working with NMDOT Office of Equal Opportunity Programs on developing and fulfill this requirement. The Public Participation Plan adopted in April, 2007 includes a section on Environmental Justice and American with Disabilities Act but that is not sufficient to meet Title VI requirements. Corrective Action #2 MPO staff shall work with NMDOT Office of Equal Opportunity Programs on developing and adopting an EJ Title VI plan as soon as possible. This Plan needs to be adopted by September, The MPO must address the following: Analyze regional data to identify minority and low-income population concentrations within the region. Where necessary, provide member agencies with regional data to assist them in identifying minority and low-income populations in their sub-region or service area. Establish appropriate standards, measures, and benchmarks, and analyze the transportation plan, the transportation improvement program, and other MPO actions, plans, and investments, to ensure that they are consistent and do not violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental justice. Ensure that members of low-income and minority communities, including Indian Tribal governments, are provided with full opportunities to engage in the regional transportation planning process. This includes addressing issues to eliminate language, mobility, temporal, and other obstacles to allow these groups to fully participate in the planning process

19 Where appropriate, monitor the activities of members and other transportation agencies in the region with regard to compliance with Title VI and Environmental Justice requirements. Ensure that services, projects and programs are accessible to people with disabilities. Administration of Federal Funds Observation # 3 The current timekeeping system does not allocate time adequately between FTA (5303) and FHWA (Section 112) funding. Federal cost Principles as outlined in 2 CFR 225 App. B.8.d(2) stipulate that leave may be charged to a Federal program as long as it is part of a written leave program and charged equitably across all programs. Regulatory Basis 2 CFR 225 Appendix B Paragraph 8.d(2) establishes The cost of fringe benefits in the form of regular compensation paid to employees during periods of authorized absences from the job, such as for annual leave, sick leave, holidays, court leave, military leave, and other similar benefits, are allowable if: They are provided under established written leave policies; the costs are equitable allocated to all related activities, including Federal awards; and, the accounting basis (cash or accrual) selected for costing each type of leave is consistently followed by the governmental unit. 23 CFR establishes that Funds provided under 23 U.S.C. 104(f), 49 U.S.C. 5305(d), 49 U.S.C. 5307, and 49 U.S.C are available to MPOs to accomplish activities in this subpart. At the State s option, funds provided under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(1) and (b)(3) and 23 U.S.C. 105 may also be provided to MPOs for metropolitan transportation planning. Findings The Finance review team met with the City of Santa Fe Accounting Department staff to discuss the MPO s finances and recordkeeping. The Finance review team was informed that MPO s funds are treated as a Special Revenue Fund and that they are essentially considered a service provider out of Traffic Counts. They also stated that all project funds for transit and highway projects in the City of Santa Fe flow directly to the City and do not go through the MPO

20 The Finance review team reviewed a large sample of timecards/payroll records for MPO staff. The review revealed that staff was attributing time to both the FHWA Section 112 Program and the FTA 5303 Program as is required. However, none of the leave time has been credited to the 5303 Program only to the Section 112 Program. The above problem appears to result on the timekeeping system s inability to track the hours in accordance with Federal requirements as specified in 2 CFR 225 Appendix B Paragraph 8.d(2)). The timekeeping system is currently set up such that all base hours are placed on one timesheet with the breakout for the additional hours on a subsidiary timesheet. Using this system, the employee would be required to prorate the leave against the two programs based on the number of hours worked in each during the pay period thus creating opportunity for human error. Corrective Action # 3 The Santa Fe MPO must identify a remedy for the leave usage finding and resolve it within 90 days of this report and present it to the FHWA New Mexico Division Office for concurrence. Observation # 4 Communication between the City of Santa Fe accounting staff (supervisory) and the MPO staff needs improvement. While the MPO s main accounting contact, Stephen Morales, was very knowledgeable and was able to provide the necessary responses to the review team s questions; his supervisors were unable to do the same during his absence. Findings As indicated previously, The Finance review team met with the City of Santa Fe Accounting Department to discuss the MPO s finances and recordkeeping. The team was informed that MPO s funds are treated as a Special Revenue Fund and are essentially considered a service provider out of Traffic Counts. The City Accounting Department also stated that all project funds for transit and highway projects in the City Flow directly to the City and do not go through the MPO. City of Santa Fe staff related that all of the MPO s documentation is kept in hard copy rather than electronic systems. The review team was also informed that all MPO staff time and benefits were charged to the FHWA Section 112 funds and the payroll records presented supported that. In addition, the review team was told that the only costs that accrue to the MPO are payroll

21 The Review team noted that according to the MPO budget, it had received very close to the single audit threshold in FY11 and had received more than the single audit threshold in FY12. This was discussed with the City of Santa Fe Accounting Department supervisory staff who stated that even if the MPO did receive more than the single audit threshold in a single fiscal year, it would be unlikely that they would be treated differently as an entity in the City s audit. Office of Management and Budget (MB) Circular A-133 establishes the criteria for single audits and how Major programs should be determined within an audit. A Type A program for recipients of federal funds who receive less than $100 million in Federal awards (which is where the City of Santa Fe falls), is any award that expends $300,000 or three percent of the total Federal awards for the that entity in a given accounting year. The City of Santa Fe s total Federal awards for FY11 were just over $10.8 million which would make three percent be $324,000. Based on this criterion, the combination of both Section 112 and 5303 funds for the MPO could place the MPO in the position of being a Major program in any given year. Recommendation # 1 The communication between accounting staff (supervisory level) at the City of Santa Fe and the MPO needs improvement for better understanding of the role of the MPO and the accounting and reporting requirements associated with it. The Single Audit requirement needs to be brought to the attention of the City of Santa Fe s auditor for FY12 and future years. Observation # 5 Maria Vigil of Santa Fe MPO staff and Stephen Morales of City of Santa Fe are each very knowledgeable of the MPO s accounting practices and procedures. Without their assistance, the number of findings might have been more significant. Findings The review team met with the City of Santa Fe Accounting Department supervisory staff to discuss the MPO s finances and record keeping. The discussion generated a lot of questions within the review team based on the information gathered from that discussion. As a result, the review team asked additional questions to MPO staff regarding their salary and the use of MPO funds and learned that the information originally provided by the City of Santa Fe Accounting Department supervisory staff was not accurate due to either lack of knowledge or lack of understanding of the review team questions

22 The review team then met with Mrs. Maria Vigil of the Santa Fe and Mr. Stephen Morales of the City of Santa Fe for further clarification on the proper financial information to support the MPO s salaries and expenses. Information and material was provided to demonstrate that the Santa Fe MPO issues Purchase Orders for a variety of products and services that include office supplies, traffic count software, maps, and personal services in the form of planning assistance. Additionally, the MPO uses its funding to pay for travel to meetings and conferences and was able to provide appropriate supporting documentation to demonstrate that its travel complies with City of Santa Fe travel policies. Commendation #1 Mrs. Maria Vigil of Santa Fe MPO staff and Mr. Stephen Morales of the City of Santa Fe were very knowledgeable and willing to work the review team in addressing all the questions and providing the necessary documentation. Their hard work contributed to a positive outcome of the financial review that otherwise, could had resulted in a number of findings that might have been more significant. MPO and the NMDOT- Planning Bureau staff Coordination & Communication Observation # 6 The communications between the New Mexico Planning Bureau staff and the MPO staff have not been effective and efficient. This is a critical element in carrying out the metropolitan transportation planning process in a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive approach as required by federal and state requirements. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR sets forth requirements for the MPO to work cooperatively with the State and public transportation agencies in carrying out a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive (3C) metropolitan transportation planning process. The MPO, State, and the public transportation agencies need to cooperatively determine in an agreement or memorandums of understanding (MOUs), their mutual responsibilities for carrying out the metropolitan transportation planning activities

23 Findings Communication channels between the FHWA New Mexico Division, NMDOT Planning Bureau Staff and MPO staff are not as effective as is needed. This has resulted in confusion regarding direction and background on planning issues. This has created a lot of confusion and friction between agencies especially on those issues that need to be resolved in a short period of time. The MPO staff is not sure who the current NMDOT Planning Liaison is for the MPO. There have been frequent changes in recent times. The NMDOT Planning Bureau was not present for the review process of the MPO planning process. MPO staff is willing to make necessary changes required for the metropolitan transportation planning process to meet federal and state requirements but needs more direction so they understand why and what those changes are for. NMDOT Planning Bureau staff needs to be more pro-active in carrying out responsibilities outlined in the Stewardship & Oversight Agreement between the NMDOT and the FHWA NM Division. It is important to note that no member from the SF-MPO Policy Board was present during the MPO review. Recommendation # 2 The Santa Fe MPO and the NMDOT Planning Bureau staff should discuss mechanisms that resolve current communication problems. Sound and reliable mechanisms should be identified and implemented so information is provided early and accurately to all parties. The FHWA New Mexico Division will actively participate in promoting an environment of cooperation and effective communication between the NMDOT and the MPO through providing information early, and making resources available aimed at enhancing the metropolitan transportation planning process. Public Participation Plan Observation # 7 The current Public Participation Plan was adopted in 2007 and presents several gaps in the areas of Environmental Justice/Title VI, new outreach methods used by the MPO

24 such as social media, and new approaches used in the development of the current bicycle master plan. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR (a)(1)(2)(3) and (b) establishes the public involvement requirements associated with the transportation planning process. 23 CFR (g)(1)(2)(i) and (j) addresses the Metropolitan Transportation Plan requirement and 23 CFR (b) the Transportation Improvement public consultation requirements. Specific requirements include giving adequate and timely notice of opportunities to participate in or comment on transportation issues and processes, employing visualization techniques to describe MTPs and TIPs, making public information readily available in electronically accessible formats and means such as the world wide web, holding public meetings at convenient and accessible locations and times, demonstrating explicit consideration and response to public input, and periodically reviewing the effectiveness of the Public Participation Plan. Findings The current PPP has not been updated since its adoption in The document does not provide clear guidelines on how Environmental Justice issues will be addressed and how the target population will be reached and its input will be incorporated into the metropolitan planning process. The plan does not clarify some of the recent outreach techniques used by the MPO on the development of the Santa Fe Bicycle Master Plan which included working with community groups, use of booths at bike events, group rides, etc. In addition, the MPO recently is using social media such as Facebook. MPO staff has good ideas about methods that will be used to outreach the community and will be integrated in the PPP update. Public comments submitted to the MPO are kept at the MPO offices and are available for review upon request. Recommendation # 3 The Santa Fe MPO needs to update the Public Participation Plan to capture new outreach techniques that have been used in recent planning efforts. The updated document needs to clearly address Title VI Civil Rights requirements. The Plan update needs to be accomplished as it has been identified in the FF2013 UPWP

25 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Observation # 8 The Santa Fe MPO needs to work with the NMDOT in the development of the UPWP Policies and Procedures and abide by them. The Policies and Procedures will provide structure and consistency to the process based on a risk approach and in accordance with Federal and State regulations. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR and 23 CFR which sets forth requirements for each MPO, in cooperation with the State and public transportation operators, shall develop a Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) that documents: A discussion of the planning priorities facing the metropolitan planning area; A description of metropolitan transportation planning activities proposed by major activity and task for the next one or two year periods; Who will perform the transportation planning activities (e.g., MPO staff, State, public transportation operator, local government, or consultant); The schedule for completion of the work; The intended products, including all activities funded under Title 23 and the Federal Transit Act; The proposed funding by activity/task; and A summary of the total amounts and sources of Federal and matching funds. 23 CFR and 49 CFR 18.40, requires the NMDOT to monitor and verify that all activities performed by sub-recipients with FHWA planning and research funds have been managed in a satisfactory manner according to established schedules and requirements. Findings The UPWP document that was reviewed corresponds to the FY amended in July, 2010 and January 13, 211. In addition, the Performance and Expenditure Annual Report FY 2011 was also reviewed as well as the corresponding Quarterly Reports for the period. The purpose of the work program is to allow FHWA/FTA to determine eligibility of proposed activities and assess whether suitable activities are included to meet legislative and regulatory requirements for metropolitan and statewide planning. The

26 NMDOT and the MPO must decide what eligible planning activities they propose for funding and track them to verify implementation and quality of the deliverable. State transportation agencies sub-grant funds to MPOs and other sub-recipients to carry out the metropolitan planning process and other eligible activities. It is important to develop policies and procedures that enhance the transparency and accountability of the UPWP process. NMDOT and the MPO need to work on the development and implementation of the UPWP Policies and Procedures in order to bring consistency and reduce the risk in the administration of federal funds. There are concerns regarding the statewide traffic count program and the coordination that exist between the NMDOT and the MPO. These concerns relates to location, standards, timing, network, and final reporting. Recommendation # 4 The Santa Fe MPO needs to work in cooperation with NMDOT on the development and implementation of the UPWP Policies and Procedures to be developed in the near future. The NMDOT needs to monitor and verify that all activities performed by sub-recipients with FHWA planning and research funds have been managed in a satisfactory manner according to the established schedules and requirements as specified in 23CFR The MPO and NMDOT need to work on resolving the traffic count concerns and problems. Reliable traffic count information is critical for the development of studies, project development and for meeting federal reporting requirements. Metropolitan Transportation Plan Observation # 9 The Santa Fe Metropolitan Transportation Plan was developed in accordance to 23 CFR 450 requirements and is consistent with current and forecasted transportation/land use conditions and trends. The document appropriately projects transportation demand of persons and goods and provides a financial plan

27 Regulatory Basis 23 CFR sets forth requirements for the development and content of the metropolitan transportation plan (MTP), a key product of the metropolitan transportation planning process. The metropolitan transportation plan shall address at least a 20 year planning horizon; include both long and short-range strategies/actions that lead to the development of an integrated multimodal transportation system to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of people and goods, and address current and future transportation demands. The MPO shall review and update the MTP at least every four years in air quality nonattainment areas to confirm the transportation s validity and consistency with current and forecasted transportation and land use conditions and trends; and the MPO shall base the update on the latest available estimates and assumptions for population, land use, travel, employment, congestion, and economic activity. Findings The current MTP was adopted by the MPO Policy Board in October 2010 and has been amended twice, in September, 2011 and February, The plan identifies the regional transportation goals, objectives, and policies, while identifying future needs and priorities for all modes of transportation as well as consideration for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and its impact on the environment, and the incorporation of the six federal livability principles in the transportation planning process. This collaborative process included the participation of a variety of public and private stakeholders and other interested parties as part of a comprehensive public participation effort. The financial plan documents the estimated costs for identified transportation improvements and estimate available revenue to meet fiscal constraint requirements. The plan also includes a list of illustrative projects that are unconstrained. The Fiscal Constraint requirement is difficult to verify in a comprehensive way according to the MPO staff. Fiscal constraint demonstration is one of the most critical requirements to meet because it has to be realistic and valid in the long range planning. The MPO staff requested technical support in this area. The Plan presents the ranking and rating criteria used for project selection in the development of the plan priorities that are to be carried to the development of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) providing a direct connection between the Plan and the TIP. The Plan includes a section on energy conservation with an emphasis on non-motorized modes combined with signal timing, and land use recommendations. The document

28 does not include public comments made during the public participation process. The public comments can be included as an appendix to the document or into the text in the main body. The MPO staff was not clear about incorporating public comments without compromising privacy issues for the commenters. Recommendation # 5 It is strongly recommended that the Santa Fe MPO work with the State the NMDOT in researching effective and sound methodologies to meet the Fiscal Constraint requirements. FHWA NM Division will work with NMDOT and MPOs on identifying and bringing technical assistance on Fiscal Constraint and cost estimates for best practices. Commendation #2 The review team commends the MPO staff for its efforts in developing ranking and rating criteria to be used in the project selection in response to the metropolitan transportation plan and the transportation improvement program. This establishes a direct connection between the Plan and the TIP. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Observation # 10 The Santa Fe MPO follows the NMDOT STIP Policies and Procedures and has developed a ranking and rating criteria used for project selection in the MTP and by extension into the TIP. MPO staff does not have the means to verify the accuracy of the project cost estimates submitted by the sponsoring agencies. Regulatory Basis 23 CFR sets forth requirements for the MPO to cooperatively develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that is consistent with the MTP and is financially constrained. The TIP must cover at least a four year horizon and be updated at least every four years. Additionally, the TIP must list all projects in sufficient detail outlined in the regulations, reflect public involvement, and identify the criteria for prioritizing projects

29 Findings The Santa Fe MPO TIP follows the NMDOT STIP Policies and Procedures and works closely with the NMDOT STIP coordinator. TIP projects are tracked in an Access database and meet fiscal constraint requirements. The current TIP project form provides information such as project number (State and Federal), project type, project description, project phase, estimated cost, and programmed funds by funding category. The TIP is displayed on the website. MPO staff does not have the means to check the accuracy of the cost estimates for projects submitted by sponsoring agencies. Federal legislation requires that an MPO cooperatively develop a TIP that is financially constrained. The TIP financial plan s revenue and cost estimates must be produced in year of expenditure (YOE) dollars to reflect the time-based value of money. The Santa Fe MPO does have a formalized region-wide local project prioritization process. The TIP follows the decision making process set for the SF-MPO and meets Federal and State public participation requirements. Recommendation # 6 Continue working with the NMDOT in the implementation of the STIP Policies and Procedures. The review team acknowledges and praises the Santa FE MPO staff and NMDOT District 5 for their efforts to enhance their communication and coordination. Santa Fe MPO staff should consider developing a formal cost estimate process that provides a methodology for cost estimate project estimation, that is consistent, and that sponsoring agencies have agreed to. Annual Listing of Projects Observation # 11 A copy of the Obligated Federal Funding List for Federal Fiscal Year 2010 and 2011 was reviewed during the desk review. The information is presented as an appendix of the current TIP and uses a different format than the one used for the TIP projects. In some cases, the project information is not complete and no explanation is provided

30 Regulatory Basis 23 CFR 450 requires the metropolitan planning organization, State, and public transportation operator(s) to cooperate in preparing a list of projects for which Federal funds were obligated for spending during the immediate preceding year. The MPO s Annual Listing of projects shall be published or otherwise made available for public review no later than 90 calendar days after the end of the program year. The project listings should align with categories included in the TIP. This includes project name, location, and other descriptive information included in the TIP. The listing also should include the amount of funds programmed in the TIP, the amount of funds obligated in the preceding program year, and the amount of funds remaining and available for use in subsequent years. The information should be understandable to a broad readership with varying levels of familiarity with transportation planning and programming concepts. Findings The SF- MPO develops an Annual Listing of Projects for which Federal funds were obligated during the preceding year. The review team accessed the Obligated Federal Funding List for Federal Fiscal Year 2010 and 2011 posted on the MPO s website. The project listing includes information regarding project name, termini, and other descriptive information. The listing does not include information detailing the amount of funding programmed in the TIP, the amount of funding obligated in the preceding year and the amount of funding remaining and available for use in subsequent years per project. Recommendation # 7 The SF - MPO and the transit operator(s) collaboratively develop an effective cooperative process by which project information on obligated Federal funds is provided by the recipient grantee agency to the MPO. The information provided should be adequate for the MPO to produce and publish the Annual Listing of Obligated Projects document within 90 days of the close of the MPO program year. This information sharing process needs to be included in the MOU and be disseminated in accordance with the Public Participation Plan techniques and in accordance with 23 CFR

31 Conclusion The transportation planning process review conducted in the Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization is in compliance with Federal transportation planning laws and regulations in most areas. The review team is concluding that the Santa Fe metropolitan planning process adequately meets the federal and state requirements subject to addressing the identified corrective actions. One area of commendation (accounting system) was identified along with seven recommendations that will help to enhance the metropolitan transportation planning process. While the corrective actions will not restrict the advancement of project, they do require attention and shall be taken seriously. Failure to respond could result in compromising Federal participation in the future

32 Appendices

33 - 31 -

34 - 32 -

35 - 33 -