MPO weighs setting its own safety targets but will await statewide data summit
Loading...
Summary
Mesilla Valley MPO staff outlined federal safety target requirements and options including supporting state targets or setting independent targets; staff cautioned independent targets could create extra federally required reporting and recommended awaiting an NMDOT/UNM safety data summit before deciding.
Mesilla Valley MPO staff presented Feb. 11 on federal safety performance targets and options for the MPO's approach, stressing statutory reporting requirements and the trade-offs between supporting state targets and setting an independent target.
"We have to set a specific number that we are looking at for monitoring and tracking going forward," said Andrew Ray, MPO staff, summarizing federal obligations under MAP‑21 and implementing rules (cited as 23 CFR 490). Ray explained the five federally required safety measures (number of fatalities, rate of fatalities, number of serious injuries, rate of serious injuries, and number of non‑motorized fatalities and serious injuries) and said MPOs must adopt numerical targets within 180 days after the state sets its targets.
Ray reviewed how other MPOs handle targets: many support their state targets (Boston Region MPO), Minneapolis–Saint Paul sets independent but aspirational year‑over‑year reductions aiming toward 2050, and Sarasota reported setting a zero target recently (though Florida DOT has also been moving targets to zero). Ray said NMDOT has become more open to the Mesilla Valley MPO setting an independent target but asked the MPO to wait until a safety data summit hosted by NMDOT and UNM this spring so that reporting requirements and data expectations are clearer.
Board members asked whether adopting an independent target would expose the MPO to fiscal penalties or simply to extra reporting. Ray and counsel explained that an independent target itself does not automatically create fiscal penalties, but it could shift the federal reporting burden to the MPO; historically the state has undertaken the required federal reporting when the MPO supports state targets. Ray said the principal risk is a failure to produce the federally required reporting on time, which could create nonconformity with federal regulations.
No formal action was taken at the meeting. MPO staff said they will attend the safety data summit, continue conversations with NMDOT and FHWA, and return to the board with recommended next steps before the annual target‑setting deadline later in the year.
Why it matters: Federal performance‑target decisions determine who prepares and submits federally required reports and can affect compliance status with FHWA rules. The board's decision has implications for local accountability, reporting workload and the MPO's strategic goal‑setting on road safety.
