Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Report Roadmap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Transit task force reviews draft roadmap, members press for clearer vision and funding analysis
Summary
Task force members reviewed a staff outline for the final Transit Transformation report and urged a clear, measurable vision and funding/accounting analysis ahead of the legislature-facing deliverable due this fall. Staff will return with fleshed‑out sections and a schedule for review.
Mark Tolleson, chairing the ninth meeting of the Transit Transformation Task Force, opened the session and turned the agenda to staff’s proposed 2025 roadmap and report process for the group’s final product to the legislature.
Hunter Owens, staff lead, walked members through a proposed table of contents and appendices that include an executive summary, background and recent trends, four guiding principles (better service, better outcomes; transit-land‑use alignment; safety; operational sustainability), and a set of topic‑based sections with implementation considerations. Secretary Omishakin, speaking on Zoom, reinforced the timetable for the task force, saying the report will be due to the legislature in the fall and urging members to “run through the tape” to ready recommendations for an October delivery window.
Members responded with detailed edits and requests. Several urged the task force to front‑load a short, aspirational “why” that ties the report’s recommendations to measurable outcomes. “I don’t see where we’ve defined the why we’re doing this,” Task Force member Komei said, urging a clear problem statement and policy goals to guide later choices. Others pressed staff to link recommendations to concrete time horizons and funding implications—asking for a 10‑year accounting of operating and maintenance needs to show “the size of the hole we’re projecting” and where proposed fixes would fit.
Staff said the plan is to present the report in sections over the summer (June–August) and to return with revised language and a template table that will show responsible entities, approximate complexity, and suggested time horizons. Members asked for the team to include examples of successful local programs and to make tradeoffs among near‑term, medium‑term and transformational proposals explicit.
Next steps: staff will circulate the sectional schedule and revised outline, incorporate the suggested vision/problem statement and funding/accounting framing, and present detailed drafts at upcoming meetings. Members were asked to submit written feedback to the task force mailbox by March 21 so staff can prepare sectioned drafts for review ahead of the April 25 meeting at MTC.
