Meeting Minutes of the
Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization
POLICY COMMITTEE

Tuesday, February 18, 2003, 3:00 p.m.
City Council Committee Room
Room 205, Honolulu Hale, 530 South King Street, Honolulu, Hawaii

Staff Present: Gordon Lum, Shevaun Low, Lori Arakaki, Laureen Brennan, Michelle Kurisu, and Pamela Toyooka

Acting Chair Cal Kawamoto called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. A quorum was present.

I. ELECTION OF FY 2003 POLICY COMMITTEE CHAIR

Councilmember Donovan Dela Cruz nominated Councilmember Nestor Garcia for the office of FY 2003 Policy Committee Chair. Councilmember Romy Cachola seconded the nomination. Councilmember Dela Cruz moved that the nomination be closed. The motion was seconded. Councilmember Garcia was unanimously elected Chair.

Councilmember Garcia took the Chair's seat and asked the members to introduce themselves.

II. MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 25, 2002 MEETING

Vice Chair Kawamoto moved and Councilmember Charles Djou seconded that the minutes of the October 25, 2002 meeting be adopted as read. The motion was unanimously approved.

III. FY 2003 OWP AMENDMENT
Handouts:
· Work Element 201.31-03 Regional Traffic Management Center (RTMC)
· RTMC Concept of Operations Request for Qualifications Selection Criteria

Gordon Lum, OMPO Executive Director, went over the proposed OWP amendment - W.E. 201.31-03 RTMC. Mr. Lum noted that: 1) the OMPO Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) had discussed the amendment at their meeting today (their recommendations are highlighted in the revised W.E. document); and 2) one public comment was received from the Ewa Neighborhood Board (NB) #23. The Ewa NB stated that they were opposed to the work element; they felt that the money could be better spent on needed roadways.

After identifying potential components to the RTMC, costs for the study, and RTMC pros and cons, Mr. Lum asked the Policy Committee to approve the W.E. based on the TAC recommendation.

[Representative Joseph Souki arrived at 3:15 p.m.]

Chair Garcia asked if anyone wanted to testify. No one testified.

Vice Chair Kawamoto asked Glenn Yasui, DOT Highways Division Administrator, to provide the Policy Committee with background information about the existing traffic operations and the benefits other areas have experienced because of RTMCs. Mr. Yasui stated that the work element would study the benefits and impacts of a joint system. On Oahu, there are two TMCs. The City Traffic Control Center (TCC) controls the traffic signals on arterial streets; and the State's H-3 TMC controls the incident management system on the freeways. The State's system at H-3 runs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (24/7). The City has plans to upgrade its system to 24/7 in the future. The average driver does not distinguish between City and State jurisdictions. An RTMC would combine the City and State operations; and economies of scale could be realized.

In response to Policy Committee members' questions (in italics), Mr. Yasui had the following responses:

• What are the cons of a centralized system? (Representative Mark Moses)
  From a technological point of view, it does not matter if the traffic operations are centralized (RTMC) or distributed (existing).
  
• How much of a (manpower) savings would an RTMC bring? (Councilmember Cachola)
  Exact figures are not available. For the State, operations would be combined with those at the H-3 TMC.
  
• What are the experiences for jurisdictions outside of Honolulu who have an RTMC? (Councilmember Cachola)
  The experiences of other jurisdictions with RTMCs have been mostly positive.
  
• What would the $15 million be used for? (Councilmember Cachola)
  The estimated cost to build an RTMC (building and equipment) would be approximately $15 million, which would be eligible for federal funding (90% federal/10% local).

Cheryl Soon, City Department of Transportation Services (DTS) Director, stated that the City operates two existing facilities (TCC and Emergency Operations Center). Ms. Soon stated that the proposed RTMC will duplicate the efforts of these two facilities. The communication between the existing City and State facilities could take place electronically. The monies could be used for other projects.

In response to a question from Vice Chair Kawamoto, Mr. Yasui stated that, if the RTMC was constructed, the federal dollars could be from existing federal sources or through discretionary funding sources such as an ITS earmark. He noted that if the RTMC receives earmark money, it would have to be deployable in a certain period of time.

Chair Garcia passed out testimony signed by agency heads from DTS, Honolulu Emergency Services Department, Honolulu Fire Department (HFD), Honolulu Police Department, and Oahu Civil Defense Agency. This testimony requested that action on this work element be deferred for at least 60 days, so that the agencies could have time to review the matter.

Ms. Soon stated that the wording of the work element caused concern because: 1) it is not for a feasibility study, but rather for a concept of operations, with a centralized TMC as a conclusion; 2) the original version had State DOT running the RTMC; and 3) the development of the work element was not done in coordination with those City agencies that signed the testimony. The agencies want to meet and discuss this matter before the Policy Committee acts on the work element. Ms. Soon also stated that other models (e.g., distributed TMCs) have the same level of communication without being an RTMC.

Councilmember Cachola asked the following questions:

• Where will savings be realized?
• Will existing federal funds be used, or will additional federal funds be made available?
• Will existing equipment need to be upgraded?

Representative Moses' asked what effect a 60-day delay of the decision would have. Vice Chair Kawamoto asked Abraham Wong, Hawaii Division Administrator for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to answer that question. Mr. Wong responded that it is important that Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) efforts progress. FHWA promotes ITS efforts moving forward; however, it is not mandating it. If the 60 days can be used to refine or contribute to the matter, then that is good.

In response to Vice Chair Kawamoto's question of whether FHWA supports an RTMC, Mr. Wong stated that different models exist - centralized and distributed. It is not FHWA's role to say what is best for Oahu. Rather, the City and State need to find out what is the best for the region through consideration of details. Mr. Wong said that it was difficult to say whether delaying a decision for 60 days would have an impact on securing federal funding. He noted that ITS funds are highly sought after.

Ms. Soon stated that an RTMC is not equivalent to ITS. To not move forward today on the RTMC does not mean that ITS is stopping. OMPO's ITS consultant is now working on the ITS Regional Architecture (RA). It is due in two years (2005), so OMPO's effort to establish the ITS RA meet the deadline.

Ms. Soon stated that one of the reasons the City is uncomfortable with the RTMC is that the purpose of the Federally-sponsored scanning tour was to look at Freeway Service Patrol operations; however, in addition to observing Freeway Service Patrol operations, the participants looked at centralized TMCs. If the scanning tour was about TMCs, then the participants should have also been exposed to distributed TMCs. The consideration of a distributed TMC and the various methods to communicate (such as digital or fiber optics) were not discussed when the work element was written.

Ms. Soon also pointed out that the agencies that signed the testimony were not a part of the development of the work element and, in her opinion, they had no say in the matter.

Councilmember Djou asked if Oahu was in jeopardy of losing federal funds if action on the W.E. were delayed 60 days. Mr. Wong said that there are several places in the country that have an RA in place. There is no guarantee that the federal dollars will always be there.

Vice Chair Kawamoto asked Eric Adams, HFD Battalion Chief, to give his opinion about an RTMC because he participated on the scanning tour. Mr. Adams stated that HFD Chief Attilio Leonardi was leaning towards not implementing an RTMC because it is redundant to the existing TCC. Mr. Adams stated that, personally, he felt an RTMC would more than serve HFD's purposes. Other areas that were visited as part of the scanning tour also utilized their TMC as an Emergency Operating Center. The Honolulu EOC is sufficient with the recently upgraded communications and technology enhancements. As such, a distributed center would better suit the HFD's needs.

In response to Representative Souki's question regarding federal funding, Mr. Wong stated that, the federal funds that are in question are not highway funds but rather earmark or discretionary funds. In order to get these types of federal funds, a proposal is required. Lacking a specific proposal, a project, such as the proposed OWP work element, is the first step toward a project proposal. Once that is done, the project needs to be designed and ready-to-go. To implement the project that's ready-to-go, the region can choose to use either apportioned funds or discretionary funds. The federal highway funds, or formula funds, can be used for the construction of an RTMC. Discretionary funds can also be used for specific ITS improvements; States must compete for these funds on a national level.

Councilmember Djou moved that action on the OWP amendment be deferred until the April Policy Committee meeting.

Chair Garcia agreed with Representative Moses' statement that, if action on the amendment is deferred, then the 60 days should be used wisely to discuss the matter. In deferring action on this agenda item, Chair Garcia requested the following actions:

• Respond to the following questions from Councilmember Cachola:

  o By establishing an RMTC:

  • Where will savings be realized?
  • Will existing federal funds be used, or will additional federal funds be made available?
  • Will existing equipment need to be upgraded?

  o Determine if the State DOT is willing and able to sit in the City's TCC.

  o Determine whether the State DOT will cover the local share of the proposed RTMC.

Rodney Haraga, State DOT Director, stated that too much time is spent on studying things. He has seen the system work in Los Angeles. He suggested that, if this is important enough, then discussions and revisions to the work element can be done in 15 to 30 days.

Councilmember Cachola stated that the City and State need to determine their priorities. He questioned whether the system needed to be upgraded. If upgrading is not required, then the money should not be spent.

Vice Chair Kawamoto stated that, if discretionary funds are not available, then the RTMC will not be built. He would not use highway funds for this project.

Ms. Soon stated that Oahu already has a TMC; it has incident management and traveler information. ITS is already happening now. This work element is looking at having a new RTMC constructed. Other agencies need to have a hand in writing the work element.

Vice Chair Kawamoto agreed that we have a TMC. However, when there is a traffic accident, there is still a problem with clearing the scene quickly and getting traffic moving. An RTMC would enhance incident management and improve commuter traffic.

Representative Souki asked that, as a compromise, the motion be amended to defer action for one month. Ms. Soon stated that the City is in the middle of their Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget hearings, so 30 days may not provide enough time for the agencies to get together.

Councilmember Djou amended his motion to defer action on the OWP amendment for one month, to give the signatory agencies time to review and discuss the work element. Representative Mark Moses seconded the amended motion. The motion was unanimously approved.

[Representative Kirk Caldwell arrived at 4:15 p.m.]

VI. CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCEDURES
Handouts: OMPO Consultant Selection Procedures

Mr. Lum went over the proposed consultant selection procedures. He noted that the phrase "at least" was inadvertently left out of the second sentence in item number three. The sentence should read "The Screening Committee will provide the Policy Committee with a list of at least three consultants that…." Mr. Lum stated that Policy Committee action would formalize the procedures to be used by the Policy Committee for all future consultant selections.

Representative Moses moved and Councilmember Djou seconded that the OMPO Consultant Selection Procedures be approved as corrected. The motion was unanimously approved.

V. CAC MEMBERSHIP REQUEST

John Sato, OMPO Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Chair, stated that the National Federal of the Blind (NFB) had attended the required number of meetings to qualify for CAC membership. The NFB had submitted a letter to OMPO requesting membership on the CAC.

Landa Phelan of the NFB stated that it was important that the blind community be involved at the early stages of project development. People who are blind would know best about accessibility issues. Dennis Russak of the NFB stated that he concurred with Ms. Phelan that the blind community needs to very involved and proactive.

Vice Chair Kawamoto moved and Councilmember Mike Gabbard seconded that the NFB be appointed to the OMPO CAC. The motion was unanimously approved.

VI. TIP EVALUATION CRITERIA
Handouts:
· Project Evaluation Criteria for Roadway Projects in the Transportation Improvement Program
· Sample of a project evaluation

Mr. Lum went over the Project Evaluation Criteria for Roadway Projects in the Oahu Transportation Improvement Program. Mr. Lum noted that, prior to these Criteria, the Policy Committee was only given the basic information, such as project descriptions and costs. The criteria will provide more technical justification of why a TIP project is being proposed. Mr. Lum asked the Policy Committee if the information provided in the Criteria would be helpful. He also asked if any other information would be helpful to the Policy Committee.

In response to Chair Garcia, Mr. Lum stated that comments should be submitted in the next couple of months. Chair Garcia asked the members to forward any comments on the Criteria to the OMPO staff within the next couple of months.

VII. OTHER BUSINESS

Representative Moses stated that he still had questions about the Kalaeloa Community Association (KCA), and had not received answers to his questions - including when KCA holds its meetings and a list of its membership. Mr. Lum stated that OMPO did receive Representative Moses' request and did speak with the KCA representative at length, but was unable to obtain answer for all of Representative Moses' questions.

Mr. Moses stated that he had also asked Mr. Sato about the KCA. Mr. Sato stated that he knows who the KCA representative is, since she attends the CAC meetings, but does not know if the organization has meetings.

Chair Garcia asked that Representative Moses, Mr. Lum, and Mr. Sato get together and resolve this issue.

There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:38 p.m.