Concord TAC hears Transaction Associates on TMAs and defers decision on using Stantec contract for public-transit study

Transaction Associates consultants briefed the Concord Transportation Advisory Committee on the structure, services and funding models of Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) and recommended a modest seed fund and a committed local champion to restart regional coordination.

Michelle Brooks, Director of Consulting at Transaction Associates, told the committee that TMAs typically operate as member-driven public–private organizations that provide commuter services, marketing and shared shuttles, and that their budgets are usually a mix of member dues and grants. "Most TMA members are paying anywhere from $2,500 to $10,000" annually, with top-tier contributions closer to "$14,000–$15,000" in larger urban programs, Brooks said. She added that re‑starting a regional TMA often requires seed funding to pay for outreach and assessment; she estimated "$20,000–$25,000" as an order of magnitude to assess interest and reengage partners.

The TAC then turned to a separate but related procedural question: whether to ask town staff to use the public‑transit portion of the existing Stantec contract to produce comparative analyses and preliminary recommendations for Concord. Chair Mark Davis said he wanted the consultants to provide "a comprehensive comparative analysis of how public transit is being done in other comparable towns," and he asked members to refine language so the committee would request guidance rather than appear to unilaterally change Stantec’s scope.

Member Nick (last name not specified in the transcript) urged changing the draft from data collection to a document that could read more like a request for proposals (RFP)-style deliverable, saying the committee needed "a proposal for what Concord should do based on information from other communities." Committee members debated four points: (1) whether the planning division or engineering division should lead the work; (2) whether Stantec’s existing contract language already covers a public‑transit study; (3) how specific a deliverable is realistic under the current contract; and (4) whether to request high‑level recommendations (for example, a shuttle serving major employers) or detailed level‑of‑service and cost estimates.

Several members cautioned that detailed operational design (number of vehicles, headways, exact routing) likely exceeds the current contract’s capacity, and that the committee should ask for high‑level recommendations and data collection first. The chair concluded the discussion by postponing a vote to the next TAC meeting so members could circulate revised memo language and competing document versions for consideration.

What happens next: TAC members asked staff to circulate the revised draft so the committee can vote on a clarified request that will either prompt Stantec to provide high‑level options or identify what additional procurement (including a possible new RFP) would be needed to produce a detailed service plan.

Provenance: Transaction Associates presentation and Stantec-discussion appear in the committee transcript beginning with the TMA introduction and slideshow (presentation announced by the chair) and continuing through the Stantec contract and scope debate.