TO: AC Transit Board of Directors
FROM: Michael A. Hursh, General Manager
SUBJECT: Inter-agency Liaison Committees
BRIEFING ITEM
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Title
Consider receiving the draft parameters for Inter-agency Liaison Committees (ILC) and provide feedback to staff. [Requested by Vice President Ortiz - 10/9/19]
Body
STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE:
Goal - Strong Public and Policymaker Support
Initiative - Service Quality
Implementing the initiatives and achieving the goals of the Strategic Plan require coordination with the District’s partner local jurisdictions and agencies. The ILCs facilitate the coordination with oversight from the committee members.
BUDGETARY/FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no budgetary/fiscal impact associated with this Briefing Item.
BACKGROUND/RATIONALE:
Given the current number of ILCs and the potential for new ones in the future, staff has developed parameters to guide the format of the existing committees, the establishment of new ones, and the process for holding meetings. Attachment 1 of this report outlines the following parameters with respect to ILCs:
• Purpose
• Governance structure and content development
• Meeting composition and logistics
Staff resources for ILCs involves more than just staffing the meetings. Staff spends a significant amount of time with the partner jurisdictions and agencies on:
• Meeting logistics (date, time and location)
• Meeting agenda development
• Staff briefings and presentation materials
• Follow-up action items resulting from ILC meeting discussions
As requested, staff has limited the purview and meeting frequency of the ILCs in the attached parameters to match available staffing levels for the effort detailed above. In addition, while the District should welcome new ILCs, it should also take advantage of existing partnership coordination efforts such as the AC Transit South County Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) with the cities of Fremont and Newark, and the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC), of which AC Transit is member agency along with the local jurisdictions in Contra Costa County that are within AC Transit’s service area.
Next Steps
The attached parameters are in draft form pending feedback from the Board at the December 11, 2019 Board meeting. Following the meeting, staff plans to:
• Present the updated draft parameters document at upcoming ILC meetings to solicit feedback from partner local jurisdictions and agencies.
• Finalize the draft parameters for Board approval in the spring of 2020.
ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES:
The formation of ILCs are positive for the District since partnership coordination is a key component for the District’s success. However, in order for ILCs to be effective, staff must properly manage meeting preparation and provide an adequate amount of resources. At this point, the coordination of the four existing ILCs is manageable and adding one or two more committees should not overextend staff. There are thirteen cities, two counties and numerous partner agencies (such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the AC Transit service area. Having an ILC with a majority or all of these partners is not sustainable unless the District dedicates staff solely for this effort.
One void in the ILC composition is the lack of committees with the City of Oakland and the City of Berkeley where AC Transit operates the highest levels of bus service on the most streets. This void is of particular concern in the City of Oakland since the City does not have a Transportation Commission to oversee and advise on transportation-related issues.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS:
Staff considered eliminating or not expanding the ILC program due to limited resources. However, the value these committees bring to AC Transit is tremendous. Operator restroom access at BART Stations and the Powell Street Bus-only Left Turn are two of many projects borne out of the ILC process.
PRIOR RELEVANT BOARD ACTION/POLICIES:
Staff Report No. 18-331 - Formation of Hayward ILC
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft ILC Parameters
Prepared by:
Robert del Rosario, Director of Service Development and Planning
In Collaboration with:
Michael Eshleman, Service Planning Manager
Jim Cunradi, Long-range Planning Manager
Approved/Reviewed by:
Ramakrishna Pochiraju, Executive Director of Planning & Engineering
Linda A. Nemeroff, District Secretary
Denise C. Standridge, General Counsel