While the word "merger" was mentioned in each of their six intense meetings, participants in the ABAG/MTC Ad Hoc Task Force, set up to consider a tighter bond between the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), had agreed in their initial meeting that a merger of the two agencies was not their primary goal. Instead they attempted to find a structure for better regional governance, with a merger as a potential strategy. Some might have been disappointed, but few were surprised to find that by the Task Force's final meeting in December, the merger concept remained in view but not in play.
What Task Force members took back to January meetings of the MTC and ABAG's Executive Board was a recommendation to perpetuate the Task Force, or some equivalent body, as a "joint policy committee" (JPC). Some MTC representatives suggested using the Regional Agency Coordinating Committee (RACC) to fill the role of joint policy committee. RACC consists of representatives of MTC, ABAG and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and includes representatives of other agencies and interests for discussions on implementing the regional smart growth strategies (see April/May 2003 issue ). However, many Task Force participants were not familiar with RACC, and RACC members in the group were split on the merits of the proposal, leading to the recommendation to form the JPC as a separate body.
Initially, this group is to be charged with overseeing the integration of the planning staffs of the two agencies. To facilitate this, an independent staff person, responsible to the joint committee, will be hired by the Executive Directors of both agencies.
Once the boards of the two agencies have approved this approach, the new group will need to begin by developing a work program and budget. For a start, the group inherits some issues left unresolved by the Task Force, including action items to stimulate involvement and participation by local governments in implementing regional smart growth strategies. The committee could consider developing a "toolkit" of best management practices, incentives, model codes, and financial strategies and incentives. It might also work on a regional investment strategy and on incentives to reinforce the Smart Growth Strategy developed by ABAG, MTC and other regional agencies.
One proposal to be considered is the use of the JPC as a policy review body for plans related to housing, jobs, the economy, the environment, transportation or social equity issues in the region, whether they are produced by ABAG, MTC, or other agencies or jurisdictions. For example, Dave Cortese, Councilmember from San Jose, described San Jose's economic plan, recently presented to the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Board and potentially a model for a countywide economic plan. Under the current structure, the plan would not be brought to the regional agencies at all, but could come to the JPC for review and comments under this proposal.
The draft legislative agenda, which was discussed briefly by the Task Force and was passed along to the joint committee, could include securing statutory authority for Bay Area comprehensive regional planning with the JPC as the lead, along with finding adequate funding for the committee and its work program. The JPC would need to ask the boards of both ABAG and MTC to support and push for this legislation, which could open the door to a renewed discussion of the roles of the two agencies.
For the moment, adequate funding depends on MTC, which already provides a sizeable percentage of ABAG's planning budget to perform various planning functions in support of MTC's operations. MTC commissioners on the Task Force agreed that MTC would support the first two years of the new staff position. Long-term stable funding is one of the incentives which had attracted ABAG members to the concept of an agency merger. If such stable funding is available from other sources such as legislative earmarking or participation in the JPC by other agencies, as suggested by one commissioner, the merger might seem less attractive.
While the Task Force may not have met the expectations of some participants, its impact could be either substantial or negligible, depending on ABAG and MTC commitment to its recommendations. In the short term, a joint policy committee may succeed in integrating and strengthening the agencies' planning work. The committee could also work toward the security and stability of unified programs and strategies supported by long-term funding.
However, compared to some visions of what a unified agency might be and what a totally integrated regional plan could achieve, the committee proposal falls short. In fact, it could fall completely flat—if agency staff is overloaded by JPC responsibilities or reluctant to change for other reasons, if the new lead staff person is ineffectual, or if political considerations lead to divided or inattentive leadership from the agency board members.
Task Force members are aware of these concerns, and it will be up to them, and their successors, to ensure that the JPC is a step forward on the road to better regional governance, and not a step to the side. Otherwise, the issue of agency coordination may return to the legislative agenda in Sacramento.
Leslie Stewart
For more information:
Task Force materials for all meetings are online at http://www.abag.ca.gov/taskforce/meetings.html
Articles on ABAG/MTC integration appeared in previous issues of the Monitor: August/September 2003, August/September 2002