Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization

Memorandum of Understanding Revision Subcommittee

August 15, 2012

4:00 PM Room 278, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center

AGENDA

1. Welcome & Introductions

2. Project Updates Action Requested: FYI Background Updates on the following issues will be provided: a. Iredell County & Lincoln County subcommittee membership b. MUMPO website

3. Review of Major Topics

Action Requested: FYI

Background The list of major topics has been updated to reflect subcommittee members’ comments and TCC/staff input. Attachment Major topics matrix

4. MPO Bylaws Action Requested: Discuss and provide direction to staff on potential Subcommittee input on matters related to changes to the MPO’s bylaws.

Background • The MOU defers to the MPO’s bylaws in several instances (chair and vice-chair terms;

quorums; appointment of alternates). • Some topics that have been identified as potential MOU revisions may be better

addressed by changes to the bylaws; permitting the MPO agenda to include a Consent component is one example.

• When the Subcommittee was formed, the MPO did not specifically mention bylaws changes; however, the bylaws are an adjunct to the MOU.

Attachment MPO bylaws

5. TIP Amendments Action Requested: Direct staff to modify the NC Board of Transportation State TIP Amendment & Modification guidelines to reflect the MPO’s needs and incorporate them into the proper document.

Background • The Federal Highway Administration implemented new requirements in 2012 that has

resulted in the need for the MPO to amend the TIP on a frequent basis. • The NC Board of Transportation adopted State TIP amendment and modification

guidelines in April that can serve as model for an updated MPO process that will help streamline the TIP amendment process.

• This issue had been considered as a potential MOU revision. When the guidelines were presented to a recent staff group meeting, the group recommended modification of the guidelines to reflect the MPO’s needs, but believed they were best suited to incorporation into the bylaws and/or Public Involvement Plan.

Attachment:

NC Board of Transportation STIP Amendment & Modification Guidelines

1

MOU Revision Subcommittee Meeting Minutes

Meeting Date: July 18, 2012 Room 278, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center Subcommittee Members Present David Howard (Charlotte), Sarah McAulay (Huntersville), Lynda Paxton (Stallings), Paul Bailey – alternate for James Taylor (Matthews), Dumont Clarke (Mecklenburg County) Staff Present Loretta Barren (FHWA), Stuart Basham (MUMPO), Neil Burke (Robert Cook (MUMPO), Bill Coxe (TCC Chairman), Bjorn Hansen (Lake Norman RPO), Nicholas Landa (MUMPO), Danny Pleasant (TCC Vice-Chairman), Bill Thunberg (Lake Norman Transportation Commission) Others Brian Carlton, Herald Weekly 1. Welcome & Introductions

Mayor Lynda Paxton chaired the meeting due to Chairman Biggers’ absence due to illness. She welcomed everyone and asked all present to introduce themselves.

2. Purpose of the MOU Subcommittee Robert Cook stated the subcommittee’s purpose was to update and revise the current MOU in response to the upcoming expansion of the MPO. New jurisdictions will be added and the MOU will need to reflect the new members. Also, there will need to be revisions to reflect changing circumstances since the MOU was last updated in 2003.

3. Subcommittee Organization a. Establish meeting dates, times & frequency

It was stated that the process to finalize all work associated with the MPO’s expansion, including updating the MOU, had to be complete by March, 2013. Ms. McAulay made a motion to hold subcommittee meetings on the third Wednesday of every month at 4:00 PM. Mr. Bailey seconded the motion. Upon being put to a vote, the motion passed unanimously. There was discussion of the committee process related to voting on issues to come before it and if the MPO’s weighted voting structure would apply. Mr. Cook stated that it was his experience that weighted voting policies do not usually apply to subcommittees. The subcommittee determined that weighted voting would not be used when votes are required.

b. Role of New Jurisdictions There was considerable discussion of the role of incoming jurisdictions on the subcommittee. All agreed that inviting local officials to attend the meetings was important. David Howard made a motion to expand the subcommittee’s membership to include the following:

• one representative from the Iredell County Board of Commissioners

2

• one representative from the Lincoln County Board of Commissioners • one elected official to jointly represent Mooresville, Troutman and

Statesville Paul Bailey seconded the motion. Upon being put to a vote, the motion passed. Sarah McAulay cast a dissenting vote.

c. TCC Participation/Interaction The subcommittee stated that TCC participation would be important. It instructed staff to ensure that incoming municipalities and counties be invited to attend future meetings. The general consensus was that the TCC and staff should provide the subcommittee with information and recommendations to react to.

4. Issue Identification a. Review staff-generated list of potential issues

Mr. Cook reviewed the list of potential issues that staff had prepared. He indicated that the list was not intended to be an inventory of issues and that others were likely to emerge.

4b, 4c & 5. Discussion of agenda items 4b, 4c and 5 overlapped, and are presented below as a single item. The following issues and concerns were identified during the discussion:

• Transit: a lack of references in the current MOU. • Budget: information on MUMPO’s annual dues was requested, along with an

analysis of the adequacy of overall funding. • Annual dues: how do other MPOs assess dues. • Voting: how do other MPOs structure their voting, and how are communities

currently in the MPO’s planning area, as well as incoming members, affected by the current MOU’s voting privileges threshold.

• Process: clearly present information so that the members know what has been changed in the document.

• New name: add the need for a new MPO name to the list of issues. • Schedule: develop a schedule with milestones to ensure MOU revision is

accomplished on time.

Memorandum of Understanding Revisions Major Issues Revised 8-8-12

1

Topic Issues Tasks New counties and municipalities

• Incorporate new municipalities o MPO representation o TCC representation

• Assemble population data for new jurisdictions (corporate limits, ETJ, sphere of influence or similar)

Vote distribution • Changes to vote distribution

• Current distribution method o Charlotte: 16 votes o Meck & Union: 2 votes each o >20,000 population: 2 votes o <20,000 population: 1 vote

• Assemble population figures for all jurisdictions (corporate limits, ETJ, sphere of influence or similar)

Voting privileges • Current population minimum threshold is 5,000

o Retain? o Raise? o Lower? o Eliminate?

• Assemble population figures for all jurisdictions (corporate limits, ETJ, sphere of influence or similar)

• Research other MPO policies

TIP Amendments • MPO required to approve all TIP amendments

• Possibly modify MOU to eliminate the need for MPO action on minor changes

• Review new NCDOT TIP amendment guidelines

• Will need to define “minor” (as per MOU Subcommittee comments)

Thoroughfare Plan/CTP Amendments

• Current MOU requires all amendments to be approved by MPO

• Possibly modify MOU to expand the TCC’s ability to amend the TP/CTP

• Research other MPO amendment policies

TCC membership • Changes needed to reflect expanded MPO:

o Counties and municipalities o Division 12

• Changes need to reflect Mecklenburg County organization changes (LUESA)

• Does TCC membership need to be

• Research TCC membership in other NC MPOs

• Research TCC membership in peer MPOs

Topic Issues Tasks updated beyond the inclusion of new jurisdictions?

Dues methodology

• Possibly modify current dues methodology

• Consider raising funding cap from current level of $150,000

• Develop alternate scenarios

Miscellaneous text changes

• MOU text includes outdated references, titles, etc.

o Example: replace references to TEA-21 and “NC Highway Action Plan”

• Changes will be limited to those not having a material effect on the MPO’s functioning

• Make appropriate text changes

State statute changes • Changes necessary to reflect state statute modifications

o Example: Comprehensive Transportation Plans

• Anil Panicker to research and report

SAFETEA-LU/MAP-21 • Changes necessary to reflect requirements of SAFETEA-LU and/or MAP-21

• Loretta Barren to research and report

Transit • MPO Subcommittee commented on lack of transit references

• Does the MOU need to incorporate Section 5307 funding allocation procedures?

TBD

New MPO name • New name needed to reflect expanded planning area

TBD

Staff Resources • Current staff levels are not sufficient to meet metropolitan planning requirements

Local Match • Federal funds that support the MPO process require a 20% local match

• City of Charlotte currently pays local

Memorandum of Understanding Revisions Major Issues Revised 8-8-12

3

Topic Issues Tasks match (except for PL funds allocated to other jurisdictions for local transportation planning projects)

• Consider sharing the local match among all member jurisdictions

MPO & TCC Agendas • Streamline agendas • Consider adding consent agenda

procedures

MECKLENBURG-UNION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

BY LAWS

Amended September 2003

ARTICLE I – NAME The name of this organization shall be the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization, hereinafter referred to as the “MPO.”

ARTICLE II – PURPOSE The purpose and goals of the MPO shall be:

1. To develop and direct a continuing, comprehensive transportation planning process carried on cooperatively by the State and local communities in concurrence with Federal guidelines.

2. To advise the policy boards within the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan

Planning Organization on the status of needs identified through the continuing transportation planning process.

3. To facilitate coordination and communication between policy boards and agencies

represented on the MPO and Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC). 4. To facilitate coordination between the policy boards of the Mecklenburg-Union

Metropolitan Planning Organization and the North Carolina Board of Transportation.

5. To assist the general public in understanding decisions and policies of the policy

boards.

6. To act as a forum for cooperative decision-making by elected officials of this metropolitan area in cooperation with the State, thereby serving as the basis for a cooperative planning process.

Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO Bylaws (cont.)

Page 2 of 5

ARTICLE III – RESPONSIBILITIES As specified in the Memorandum of Understanding, the responsibilities of this committee shall include:

1. Establishment of goals and objectives for the transportation planning process; 2. Review and approval of a Prospectus for transportation planning which defines

work tasks and responsibilities for various agencies participating in the transportation planning process;

3. Review and approval of changes to the Urbanized Area Boundary and the

Metropolitan Area Boundary as well as review and recommendations for changes to the National Highway System;

4. Review and approval of the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning

Organization Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP);

5. Review and approval of changes to the adopted Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization Long-Range Comprehensive Transportation Plan (As required by General Statutes Section 136-66.2(d), revisions in the area’s Thoroughfare Plan must be jointly approved by the local governing board having jurisdiction and the North Carolina Department of Transportation); and

6. Review and approval of the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning

Organization Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) for multi-modal capital and operating expenditures to ensure coordination between local and State capital and operating improvement programs.

ARTICLE IV – MEMBERS Section 1 – Number and Qualifications: As specified in the Memorandum of Understanding, the MPO shall consist of voting members that are elected officials from the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Urbanized Area and the North Carolina Board of Transportation. Nonvoting members shall be those from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg and Union County Planning Commissions and any jurisdiction in the Urbanized Area with less than 5,000 population. Section 2 – Terms of Office: Each entity’s chief elected official shall designate that member entity’s representative. Members shall remain in office until a successor has been duly elected or until his/her earlier death, resignation, disqualification, incapacity to serve, or removal in accordance with the law.

Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO Bylaws (cont.)

Page 3 of 5

Section 3 – Alternates: Each member agency may appoint an alternate to its representative provided each alternate also meets the same qualifications of membership. That alternate member may serve as a full voting member during any meeting where that board’s representative is not in attendance. Proxy and absentee voting are not permitted.

ARTICLE IV – OFFICERS Section 1 – Officers Defined: The officers of the MPO shall consist of a Chairman and Vice-Chairman. Section 2 – Elections: The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected annually at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the calendar year. The newly elected Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall take office immediately following the election. The Chair must have served as an MPO member (delegate or alternate) for one year immediately prior. Additional elections may be held if either the Chairman or Vice-Chairman cannot carryout his/her duties and complete the remainder of the appointed term. Section 3 – Terms of Office: The term of office for officers shall be one year. Officers may serve no more than three consecutive one-year terms. This does not prohibit them from being elected to a future term. Time served in officer positions prior to calendar year 2002 shall not be considered in determining eligibility. Section 4 – Duties of Officers: The Chairman shall call and preside at meetings, sub committees and set the order of business for each meeting. In the Chairman’s absence, the Vice-Chairman shall preside and complete all other duties of the Chairman. In the event that the Chairman is unable to carryout his/her duties for the remainder of their term, the Vice-Chairman shall carryout the functions of the Chairman for the remainder of the year. Section 5 – Duties of the Secretary: The Secretary shall provide or otherwise delegate staff service for the MPO, as needed, and will be responsible for taking summary minutes of the Committee’s proceedings.

Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO Bylaws (cont.)

Page 4 of 5

The Secretary will maintain a current copy of these Bylaws as an addendum to the Memorandum of Understanding, to be distributed to the public upon request.

ARTICLE V – MEETINGS Section 1 – Regular Meetings: Meetings will be held on the third Wednesday of each odd numbered month. The Chairman may cancel regular meetings should there be insufficient business on the Committee’s tentative agenda. Section 2 – Special Meetings: Special meetings may be called by the Chairman with three (3) days notice, or at the request of the majority of the eligible voting members. Whenever possible, at least seven (7) days notice shall be given. Section 3 – Quorums: A quorum of the MPO shall be constituted by the presence of at least seven (7) of the eligible voting members at the beginning of the meeting, who together represent a minimum of 51% of the votes. Section 4 – Attendance: Each member shall be expected to attend each regular meeting. When voting members (or their authorized alternates) do not attend three (3) consecutive MPO meetings, the Secretary will send to the chief elected officer of the jurisdiction of the member in question, a letter indicating the number of absences and requesting reaffirmation or re-designation of the jurisdiction’s representative. Section 5 – Agenda: The agenda is a list of considerations for discussion at a meeting. Items on the agenda originate as a carryover from previous MPO meetings, or are placed on the agenda prior to its distribution by any member of the MPO, or by the request of the Chairman of TCC. Additional items may be placed on the regular agenda following discussion of the last item on the regular agenda, as long as a majority concurrence of the present and eligible voting members is received. The MPO and all sub-committees shall conduct their business in compliance with the State of North Carolina’s Open Meetings Law.

Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO Bylaws (cont.)

Page 5 of 5

Section 6 – Voting Procedures: The Chairman and any member may call for a vote on any issue, provided that it is seconded and within the purposes set forth in Article II and provided the issue is on the agenda as outlined in Section 5 of this article. The Chairman and qualified alternates to voting members are permitted to vote. Non-voting members and unauthorized alternates are not permitted to vote. Abstentions shall be considered affirmative votes. By approval of the MPO, a member may withdraw from voting on an issue. In the absence of any direction from these Bylaws or other duly adopted voting procedures pursuant to certain approval actions. Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised will designate procedures governing voting.

ARTICLE VI – PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern the MPO in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Memorandum of Understanding, these bylaws and any special rules of order the MPO may adopt.

ARTICLE VII – AMENDMENTS TO BYLAWS Amendments to these Bylaws of the MPO shall require the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the total MPO’s weighted vote, provided that written notice of the proposed amendment has been received by each member at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting at which the amendment is to be considered and provided that such amendment does not conflict with the letter or fundamental intent of the Memorandum of Understanding governing this document. In the event of any conflict, the Memorandum of Understanding shall carry precedence over these Bylaws.