Broward County Commission Regular Meeting

MOTION TO DISCUSS and to provide direction to the Office of the County Attorney regarding membership on the Broward County Metropolitan Planning Organization ("MPO"). (Mayor Furr)

ACTION:  (T-5:42 PM)  Following Board discussion, the Board directed the County Attorney to explore the possibility of adding four Board members as At-Large/Alternate appointees to the Broward County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).  (Refer to minutes for full discussion.)

Board discussion and direction might facilitate a permanent resolution of the disputed membership issue.

Enables the above-referenced discussion.

At its meeting on January 9, 2018, the Board discussed the continuing disagreement regarding the size and composition (including the County's membership on) the MPO (Item No. 44). An August 17, 2017, Memorandum from the Office of the County Attorney was included as part of the agenda package for that item (See Exhibit 1). The purpose of this item is to discuss a proposal for a permanent resolution to this disagreement. 
 
Membership on the MPO is governed by an Interlocal Agreement for Creation of the Broward County MPO (the "ILA"). The ILA was originally entered in 1999. Before a February 10, 2016, purported Third Amendment to the ILA, which the County has not formally approved, the County Commissioner members constituted four of the nineteen voting members of the MPO. Of the four County Commissioner members, one is a South Florida Regional Transportation Authority ("SFRTA") member who is also a County Commissioner. The purported Third Amendment to the ILA expanded the voting membership of the MPO from 19 to 25 and increased County Commission membership from four to five members, including the SFRTA member who is also a County Commissioner. 

At the Board’s January 9, 2018, meeting, as an interim solution and with a full reservation of rights, the Board appointed Mayor Furr to serve as the additional County Commission member on the MPO.
 
Currently, the municipal members of the MPO are assigned by municipal district (see Exhibit 2); but, the County Commission members are not. To ensure adequate County participation in the MPO process, this item proposes, for discussion, that the County Commission MPO membership be comprised of five members (including the SFRTA member) with each member assigned to an MPO municipal district (see Exhibit 3). Additionally, this item proposes that the remaining four County Commissioners each serve as at-large alternate members (as reflected on Exhibit 3).
 
A reconfiguration of the membership as outlined above would allow the County's participation in the MPO to be more meaningful and would ensure that each region of the County participate in decisions made by the MPO. It would also ensure that each member of the Board receives minutes and incentive to participate in MPO decisions.