2013-R-07 RESOLUTION#2013-R-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDGEWATER, FLORIDA, SUPPORTING THE
PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT AND
MEMBERSHIP REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN TO
EXPAND THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING AREA
BOUNDARY AND TO REAPPORTION THE VOTING
MEMBERSHIP OF THE VOLUSIA TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING ORGANIZATION; DIRECTING THE CITY
CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION
UPON APPROVAL TO THE VOLUSIA
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION;
REPEALING RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND ESTABLISHING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Edgewater is responsible for community planning that supports
growth and development activities within the City and for pursuing the development of a
transportation system that meets these needs; and
WHEREAS, the United States Census Bureau has designated the Palm Coast - Daytona
Beach - Port Orange Urbanized Area which encompasses the City of Edgewater; and
WHEREAS, federal transportation regulations require the establishment of a
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to conduct coordinated transportation planning
activities for Urbanized Areas and to establish a Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) that defines
the geographical planning area boundary; and
WHEREAS, the Volusia Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) is the duly
designated and constituted body responsible for carrying out the urban transportation planning
and programming process for the currently established Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA)
which includes the Daytona Beach- Port Orange Urbanized Area; and
2013-R-07
1
WHEREAS, the U.S. Census Bureau has redefined the Daytona Beach - Port Orange
Urbanized Area as having a contiguous population that has been expanded beyond the current
Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) to include portions of the cities of Palm Coast and Bunnell
and portions of Flagler County and renamed it the Palm Coast - Daytona Beach - Port Orange
Urbanized Area; and
WHEREAS, Federal Regulations Title 23, Part 450 and Florida Statutes 339.175 require
that the Volusia TPO expand its planning area boundary to include the updated Census
Urbanized Area and reapportion its membership in accordance with the results of the United
States Census; and
WHEREAS, the Volusia TPO, through the efforts of a Reapportionment Subcommittee,
has met to discuss and develop recommendations to the Volusia TPO Board that address the
changes in the TPO planning area boundary and membership to accommodate the expanded
urbanized area; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edgewater has worked with the Volusia TPO, the cities of Palm
Coast and Bunnell and the County of Flagler and with the Florida Department of Transportation
in the development of a reapportionment plan that addresses the requirements identified in state
and federal laws pertaining to the planning area boundary and membership; and
WHEREAS, the Volusia TPO Board has, as a result of these deliberations,
recommended a reapportionment plan (as identified in"Attachment A" to this Resolution) which
includes a planning area boundary and membership encompassing all or portions of the City of
Edgewater;
2013-R-07
2
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Edgewater, Florida as
follows:
Section 1. The City of Edgewater formally supports the recommended "Planning
Area Boundary Adjustment and Membership Reapportionment Plan" which outlines the
expanded metropolitan planning area boundary and membership; and the
Section 2. The City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of this
Resolution of support for the items outlined in the plan (as identified in "Attachment A" to this
resolution) and to forward this Resolution to the Volusia TPO for submission to the Secretary of
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT); and the
Section 3. The City Council directs staff and the City's TPO representative to
continue working with the Reapportionment Subcommittee, Bylaws Subcommittee and other
interested members of the Volusia TPO as required to accomplish the additional activities
needed for the full integration of new members.
Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this
Resolution, or application hereof, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court,
such portion or application shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and
such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions or applications hereof.
Section 5. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith be and the same
are hereby repealed.
Section 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
2013-R-07
3
Section 7. After a motion to approve by( jIlc iJ y with second byeottfrua)prnan
1'QLUer , the vote on this resolution was as follows:
AYE NAY
Mayor Mike Thomas EXCUSED
Councilwoman Christine Power
Councilwoman Gigi Bennington E.XCu3
Councilman Michael Ignasiak
Councilman Gene Emter K
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 2013.
ATTEST: CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY O,F EDG , ATER, LORIDA
4111JEI, . ,A_ By: ,�
Bonnie Wenzel Mike I= asiak
City Clerk Vice-Mayor
CRobin L. Matusick
Paralegal
For the use and reliance only by the City of Approved by the City Council of the City of
Edgewater, Florida. Approved as to form and Edgewater at a meeting held on this 1st day of
legality by: Aaron Wolfe, Esquire April, 2013 under Agenda Item No. 8b .
City Attorney
2013-R-07
4
"ATTACHMENT A"
2013-R-07
5
VOL U5IR
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION TPQ
VISION-PLAN-IMPLEMENT
PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT
and
MEMBERSHIP REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN
A plan to expand the Volusia Transportation Planning Organization's
planning area boundary and to reapportion the voting membership for the
purpose of ensuring fair and equitable representation of the affected
population and complying with applicable federal and state requirements.
Volusia Transportation Planning Organization
2570 W. International Speedway Blvd.,Suite 100
Daytona Beach, FL 32114
(386)226-0422
www.volusiatpo.org
28
Contents
INTRODUCTION 1
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVAL PROCESS 1
Planning Area Boundary 1
Membership 2
CURRENT PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY AND VOTING MEMBERSHIP 3
History 3
Planning Area Boundary 3
Membership 5
PROPOSED PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY AND VOTING MEMBERSHIP 6
Proposed Planning Area Boundary 6
Proposed Membership 9
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS SUMMARY 10
ADDENDUM 12
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 1-2010 Census Urban Areas 2
Figure 2-Current Volusia TPO Planning Area 4
Figure 3-Proposed Volusia TPO Planning Area 7
Figure 4-Proposed VTPO Planning Area (Flagler County Detail) 8
Table 1-Current Voting Membership 6
Table 2-Current and Proposed Planning Area Characteristics 9
Table 3-Proposed Voting Membership Reapportionment 10
30
PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT
and
MEMBERSHIP REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
Federal law requires that every urbanized area with a population of
50,000 or more must be represented by a metropolitan planning On November 2,2012,
organization (MPO) which shall be responsible for carrying out a the Florida Department
comprehensive, coordinated and continuing planning process resulting in of Transportation
plans and priorities for the expenditure of federal transportation funds. officially notified the
The Volusia Transportation Planning Organization (VTPO) is the officially VTPO that it was
recognized MPO for the metropolitan planning area previously required to adjust its
designated as the Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized Area and the planning area boundary
Deltona Urbanized Area. outward to encompass
the Palm Coast—
When the Bureau of the Census designates a new urbanized area that is Daytona Beach—Port
not within an existing MPO planning area boundary, the planning area Orange Urbanized Area.
boundary must be adjusted to encompass the new urban area, and the
voting membership must be reapportioned to maintain fair and equitable representation of the affected
population. The Federal Register Volume 77, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 27, 2012) identified a new
urbanized area contiguous to the Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized Area, but extending beyond
the VTPO's existing planning area boundary. The new Urbanized Area is designated as the Palm Coast—
Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized Area. Figure 1 provides a graphic illustration of this urbanized
area, as well as the Deltona Urbanized Area, which is also included in the current Volusia TPO Planning
Area.
On November 2, 2012,the Florida Department of Transportation officially notified the VTPO that it was
required to adjust its planning area boundary outward to encompass the expanded urban area.
This report documents the activities undertaken to accomplish reapportionment of the Volusia TPO and
proposes changes for review and endorsement by the Governor.
MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Title 23 U.S.C. s.134 and Chapter 339.175, Florida Statutes prescribe the minimum requirements for
delineating the planning area boundary and for apportioning the voting membership of an MPO, as well
as the procedure for the development and approval of such boundary and membership.
Planning Area Boundary
The jurisdictional boundaries of an MPO are determined by agreement between the Governor
and the applicable MPO. They must encompass at least the existing urbanized area and the
contiguous area expected to become urbanized within a 20-year forecast period, and may
encompass the entire metropolitan statistical area or the consolidated metropolitan statistical
area.
32
Figure 1-2010 Census Urban Areas
/z______) M \ Palm Coast--Daytona Beach
.- ;�_ � St.Johys 1\ Port Orange Urbanized Area
■1 Counf
. �J"—_—_—
_ r--� \\ Deltona Urbanized Area
'ii,
_�� ' \ Other Urbanized Areas
Putnam \`\
E County' Elk 11 `
P '.� r_ F er \`\.
County s
N __,.....0- . i Ilk*
e is n, 3\
R 1\I C3*anati, - - . -v.- Cd
"lit vPiat
Manon. I, I��� \`
Y a __ 4.
MA \
i f ,, 6L i ° owl t \
I
I \_ -1 e mi Volusia �` '\lit i :e County !' l \tli 11ir1 r
Lake % ` ti. \\.
County .ti t -, �,. �v
1' a A
ter,, i i i , °}i, `
• — Seminole w; . �
County �. :, � 't
. - i �- l ,, . Brevard
I - - - — +� P 4 .County
1! � r l - Orange �-
1 .41;1' County ) • , I
I `--, ''-' EL A h.
Membership
The voting membership of an MPO shall consist of not fewer than 5 or more than 19 apportioned
members, the exact number to be determined on an equitable geographic-population ratio basis
33
by the Governor, based on an agreement among the affected units of general-purpose local
government as required by federal rules and regulations. The Governor, in accordance with 23
U.S.C. s. 134, may also provide for MPO members who represent municipalities to alternate with
representatives from other municipalities within the metropolitan planning area boundary that do
not have members on the MPO. County commission members shall compose not less than one-
third of the MPO membership, except for an MPO with more than 15 members located in a
county with a five-member county commission or an MPO with 19 members located in a county
with no more than six county commissioners, in which case county commission members may
compose less than one-third percent of the MPO membership, but all county commissioners must
be members. All voting members shall be elected officials of general-purpose local governments,
except that an MPO may include, as part of its apportioned voting members, a member of a
statutorily authorized planning board, an official of an agency that operates or administers a
major mode of transportation, or an official of Space Florida. As used in this section, the term
"elected officials of a general-purpose local government" shall exclude constitutional officers,
including sheriffs,tax collectors, supervisors of elections, property appraisers, clerks of the court,
and similar types of officials.County commissioners shall compose not less than 20 percent of the
MPO membership if an official of an agency that operates or administers a major mode of
transportation has been appointed to an MPO.
In metropolitan areas in which authorities or other agencies have been or may be created by law
to perform transportation functions and are performing transportation functions that are not
under the jurisdiction of a general-purpose local government represented on the MPO, they shall
be provided voting membership on the MPO. In all other MPO's where transportation authorities
or agencies are to be represented by elected officials from general-purpose local governments,
the MPO shall establish a process by which the collective interests of such authorities or other
agencies are expressed and conveyed.
CURRENT PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY AND VOTING MEMBERSHIP
History
The Volusia Transportation Planning Organization was formed and organized on January 18, 1977
as the Daytona Beach Urbanized Area MPO. Originally, it included only the Daytona Beach
(coastal) area of Volusia County. In 1988,the planning area boundary was expanded to include all
of Volusia County recognizing that the Deltona/DeLand/DeBary area would be designated an
urbanized area with the release of the 1990 Census data. In 2004, the VTPO again found it
necessary to expand the planning area boundary, this time to include Flagler Beach and Beverly
Beach in Flagler County which had been designated as part of the Daytona Beach — Port Orange
Urbanized Area.
Planning Area Boundary
The VTPO planning area boundary currently encompasses approximately 1,437 square miles
including all of Volusia County and its 16 cities: Daytona Beach, Daytona Beach Shores, DeBary,
DeLand, Deltona, Edgewater, Holly Hill, Lake Helen, New Smyrna Beach, Oak Hill, Orange City,
34
Ormond Beach, Pierson, Ponce Inlet, Port Orange, and South Daytona, as well as Beverly Beach
Flagler Beach in Flagler County. (See Figure 2, page 4.)
Figure 2-Current Volusia TPO Planning Area
The Atlantic Ocean forms the eastern border of the VTPO's planning area. Brevard County abuts
to the south and is fully included within the Space Coast TPO. Seminole County and Lake County
abut to the west. Seminole County is fully included in the MetroPlan Orlando MPO. Lake County is
35
fully included in the Lake-Sumter MPO. Flagler County and Putnam County abut to the north. As
noted above,a small part of Flagler County(Beverly Beach and Flagler Beach) is currently included
in the VTPO planning area boundary. The remainder of Flagler County and all of Putnam County
are not part of a MPO. Flagler County includes the Palm Coast area which was determined by the
2010 Census to be an urbanized area contiguous to the Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized
Area. This expanded urbanized area is officially recognized as the Palm Coast— Daytona Beach —
Port Orange Urbanized Area.
Membership
The members of the TPO Board consist of elected representatives from all 19 jurisdictions. The
Board itself consists of 19 voting members,capped by state law,with the following distribution:
• Volusia County—six seats and therefore six votes
• Each of the 10 major cities (defined as population >than 10,000) has one seat and one vote.
The major cities consist of Daytona Beach (the identified Central City), Deltona, DeLand,
Ormond Beach, Holly Hill, South Daytona, Port Orange, New Smyrna Beach, Edgewater, and
DeBary.
• The smaller cities are divided into three voting blocks, each with one vote: (1) Flagler Beach
and Beverly Beach; (2) Ponce Inlet, Oak Hill and Daytona Beach Shores; (3) Pierson, Lake
Helen and Orange City.
Non-voting members on the VTPO Board include the FDOT District 5 Secretary (or his/her
designee)(advisory only),a representative from the Volusia County School Board,the Chairman of
the Technical Coordinating Committee, the Chairman of the Citizens' Advisory Committee, and
the Chairman of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
The area transit agency is Votran. Votran is an arm of the Volusia County Government, as is the
Daytona Beach International Airport. Both entities are represented by the six county seats on the
board.
Table 1 on page 6 shows the current voting membership, the weight given to each vote, and the
2010 population represented by each vote.
36
Table 1-Current Voting Membership
County Representation 6 33.33%
Volusia County 6 5.56% 116,7151
Municipal Representation 13 66.67%
Larger City Total 10 61.64%
Deltona 1 14.84% 85,182
Daytona Beach 1 _ 10.63% 61,005
Port Orange 1 9.77% 56,048
Ormond Beach 1 6.64% 38,137
DeLand 1 4.71% 27,031
New Smyrna Beach 1 3.91% 22,464
Edgewater 1 3.62% 20,750
DeBary 1 3.37% 19,320
South Daytona 1 2.13% 12,252
Holly Hill 1 2.03% 11,659
Small Cities Group 1 1 2.61% 14,959
Orange City Shared - 10,599
Lake Helen Shared - 2,624
Pierson Shared - 1,736
Small Cities Group 2 1 1.58% 9,071
Ponce Inlet Shared - 3,032
Daytona Beach Shores Shared - 4,247
Oak Hill Shared - 1,792
Small Cities Group 3 1 0.84% 4,822
Flagler Beach Shared - 4,484
Beverly Beach Shared - 338
TOTAL 19 100.00% 499,415
1 Volusia County unincorporated area population
PROPOSED PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY AND VOTING MEMBERSHIP
Proposed Planning Area Boundary
Figure 4 on page 7 shows the proposed planning area boundary in relation to the Census-
designated urbanized areas and current municipal boundaries. This proposed planning area
boundary adds to the current planning area all areas of Flagler County that are within the Palm
Coast — Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized Area, as well as the contiguous areas that are
expected to become urbanized within the 20-year forecast period. Both the Deltona Urbanized
Area and the Palm Coast — Daytona Beach — Port Orange Urbanized Area are fully contained by
the proposed planning area boundary.
37
WWI" I St.Johns ..`�. + and
��'' i- ------Counry ; - 11 Proposed Volusia TPO Planning Area all
I ; �// 2010 Census Urbanized Area
AtO I
k it I i
IA
-
teach
utna
Cont
\
1► \ II ..Oh
\
iii, ,'CoNry (a
WI a \
\-,t Bunnell
I N, \
a \
AlA
I 11111111116
,\
r`
3 W ,\
\
t
W IQ Shorek
\A
ID C." a -Inlet \
ni
\3••n;tjy h
I ilrliPilL Et En
C4
Lt
-, Lake n
- p Counry
111% \
- I]€il O
'killing
LIP-- (- VIU1L n� t
Viit&:1 :
1 411111111 1
i Alltairalliram 1,1 a A . 1 ...i.,
, ,......-..6,, ,„
i.e....A
i ,..--.......9.p.ami.... 4. '-, 1..
Figure 3-Proposed Volusia TPO Planning Area
38
---
St.Johns /er �' Marin=land
County— a l\—/- Proposed Volusia TPO Planning Area
S
r. �* /7/ 2010 Census Urbanized Area
\_l \
p, . \
NW sit.50 -:]-. .,-', ..„-1:,f,*7',"„00 \
' \\
■
■
\
et
:each \\
,e0,,
■
Flagler \\
County
.- ief-yo r i :
■
ach
: %lin k Ap
f�
Volusia
County
Q
Figure 4-Proposed VTPO Planning Area(Flagler County Detail)
39
Table 2-Current and Proposed Planning Area Characteristics
� - urrent .. .ropose.
Planning Ar Planni
Population (2010) 582,189
Land Area (square miles) _ 1,104.06 1,186.30
Roadway Miles
Interstate Highways 73.6 92.3
Non-Interstate State Highways 311.9 354.9
Federal Aid Eligible Roadways 839.9 977.1
National Highway System 106.1 124.7
Surface Transportation Program 733.8 852.4
Proposed Membership
The proposed voting membership will include the maximum permitted 19 seats. Volusia County
membership will decrease from six seats to five and a Flagler County seat will be added. These six
county seats will represent 33.33% of the total vote. Volusia County's five seats and Flagler
County's one seat will be weighted in proportion to each county's share of the total
unincorporated area population within the planning area. Volusia County's five seats will be
weighted equally at 6.36%and Flagler County's seat will be weighted at 1.51%.
Of the remaining 13 seats, one will be held by each of the 12 cities with the greatest population,
and one will be held collectively by the eight remaining smallest cities. These eight smallest cities
will comprise the Small Cities Alliance, and they will determine among themselves how the seat
will be represented.The 13 seats represent 66.67%of the total vote. Each seat will be weighted in
proportion to the city's or Small Cities Alliance's share of the total incorporated area population
within the planning area.
All voting members shall be elected officials.
There are no authorities or other agencies performing transportation functions within the
proposed planning area boundary that are not under the jurisdiction of a general-purpose local
government represented in this proposed voting membership.
In addition to these voting members,the following are included as non-voting members:
• the FDOT District 5 Secretary or his/her designee (advisory only),
• a representative from the Volusia County School Board,
• the Chairman of the Technical Coordinating Committee,
• the Chairman of the Citizens'Advisory Committee,and
• the Chairman of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
As evidenced by the attached resolutions of support, the cities and counties affected by the
proposed planning area boundary expansion for the general-purpose local governments
representing more than 75% of the affected population] agree that this proposed voting
membership apportionment does reflect an "equitable geographic-population ratio" as required
by law.
40
Table 3-Proposed Voting Membership Reapportionment
2010
Se., J ,.',.hr �lation
County Representation 6 ,`'33.33% 122,2 ,
Volusia County 1 6.36%
Volusia County 1 6.36% 116,655 1
Volusia County 1 6.36%
Volusia County 1 6.36%
Volusia County 1 6.36%
Flagler County 1 1.51% 5,551 1
Municipal Representation 13 66.67% 459,983
Larger City Total _ 12 63.72% 439,629
Deltona 1 12.35% 85,182
Palm Coast 1 10.90% 75,182
Daytona Beach 1 8.84% 61,005
Port Orange 1 8.12% 56,048
Ormond Beach 1 5.53% 38,137
DeLand 1 3.92% 27,031
New Smyrna Beach 1 3.26% 22,464
Edgewater 1 3.01% 20,750
DeBary 1 2.80% 19,320
South Daytona 1 1.78% 12,252
Holly Hill 1 1.69% 11,659
Orange City 1 1.54% 10,599
Small Cities Alliance 1 2.95% 20,354
Flagler Beach Shared - 4,484
Daytona Beach Shores Shared - 4,247
Ponce Inlet Shared - 3,032
Lake Helen Shared - 2,624
Bunnell Shared - 2,101
Oak Hill Shared - 1,792
Pierson Shared - 1,736
Beverly Beach Shared - 338
TOTAL 19 100.00% 582,189
1 Unincorporated area population
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS SUMMARY
The development of the proposed reapportionment plan began in earnest at the annual VTPO Board
retreat held on January 20, 2012. Current board members and elected and appointed officials from
newly urbanized areas in Flagler County reviewed the requirements and other considerations relating to
the anticipated planning area boundary expansion and membership reapportionment.They even carried
out an exercise designed to encourage discussion of alternative reapportionment scenarios.
Formal discussions regarding expansion of the planning area boundary and reapportionment of the
membership began on April 2, 2012 with the first meeting of the Reapportionment Subcommittee. The
subcommittee was comprised of a subset of the VTPO Board. The subcommittee presented a
recommendation for a revised boundary to the VTPO Board on May 22, 2012, and the board approved
41
an expanded planning area boundary that included "the urbanized area and the city limits of Palm Coast
that are east of US 1."
Subsequent meetings and discussions were expanded to include input from Flagler County, Palm Coast
and Bunnell. Additional adjustments to the planning area were necessary to resolve issues and to
accommodate requests from Flagler County, Palm Coast, Bunnell and Flagler Beach. Additional
deliberations occurred in response to preliminary input by the FDOT Office of Policy Planning.
This plan was presented in draft form to the VTPO Board on February 26, 2013 and again for approval on
March 26, 2013. Subsequent to approval, the VTPO requested resolutions of support as required by s.
339.175, F.S.These are attached to this report.
42
ADDENDUM
CHAPTER 339.175, F.S. – state law applicable to the definition of MPO Planning Area and
Voting Membership
339.175 Metropolitan planning organization.—
(1) PURPOSE.—It is the intent of the Legislature to encourage and promote the safe and efficient
management,operation, and development of surface transportation systems that will serve the mobility
needs of people and freight and foster economic growth and development within and through
urbanized areas of this state while minimizing transportation-related fuel consumption, air pollution,
and greenhouse gas emissions through metropolitan transportation planning processes identified in this
section. To accomplish these objectives, metropolitan planning organizations, referred to in this section
as M.P.O.'s, shall develop, in cooperation with the state and public transit operators, transportation
plans and programs for metropolitan areas. The plans and programs for each metropolitan area must
provide for the development and integrated management and operation of transportation systems and
facilities, including pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities that will function as an
intermodal transportation system for the metropolitan area, based upon the prevailing principles
provided in s. 334.046(1). The process for developing such plans and programs shall provide for
consideration of all modes of transportation and shall be continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive,
to the degree appropriate, based on the complexity of the transportation problems to be addressed. To
ensure that the process is integrated with the statewide planning process, M.P.O.'s shall develop plans
and programs that identify transportation facilities that should function as an integrated metropolitan
transportation system, giving emphasis to facilities that serve important national, state, and regional
transportation functions. For the purposes of this section, those facilities include the facilities on the
Strategic Intermodal System designated under s. 339.63 and facilities for which projects have been
identified pursuant to s. 339.2819(4).
(2) DESIGNATION.—
(a)1. An M.P.O. shall be designated for each urbanized area of the state; however, this does not
require that an individual M.P.O. be designated for each such area. Such designation shall be
accomplished by agreement between the Governor and units of general-purpose local government
representing at least 75 percent of the population of the urbanized area; however, the unit of general-
purpose local government that represents the central city or cities within the M.P.O. jurisdiction, as
defined by the United States Bureau of the Census, must be a party to such agreement.
2. To the extent possible, only one M.P.O. shall be designated for each urbanized area or group of
contiguous urbanized areas. More than one M.P.O. may be designated within an existing urbanized area
only if the Governor and the existing M.P.O. determine that the size and complexity of the existing
urbanized area makes the designation of more than one M.P.O.for the area appropriate.
(b) Each M.P.O. designated in a manner prescribed by Title 23 of the United States Code shall be
created and operated under the provisions of this section pursuant to an interlocal agreement entered
into pursuant to s. 163.01. The signatories to the interlocal agreement shall be the department and the
governmental entities designated by the Governor for membership on the M.P.O. Each M.P.O. shall be
considered separate from the state or the governing body of a local government that is represented on
the governing board of the M.P.O. or that is a signatory to the interlocal agreement creating the M.P.O.
and shall have such powers and privileges that are provided under s. 163.01. If there is a conflict
between this section and s. 163.01,this section prevails.
(c) The jurisdictional boundaries of an M.P.O. shall be determined by agreement between the
Governor and the applicable M.P.O. The boundaries must include at least the metropolitan planning
area,which is the existing urbanized area and the contiguous area expected to become urbanized within
43
a 20-year forecast period, and may encompass the entire metropolitan statistical area or the
consolidated metropolitan statistical area.
(d) In the case of an urbanized area designated as a nonattainment area for ozone or carbon monoxide
under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. ss. 7401 et seq., the boundaries of the metropolitan planning area in
existence as of the date of enactment of this paragraph shall be retained, except that the boundaries
may be adjusted by agreement of the Governor and affected metropolitan planning organizations in the
manner described in this section. If more than one M.P.O. has authority within a metropolitan area or
an area that is designated as a nonattainment area, each M.P.O. shall consult with other M.P.O.'s
designated for such area and with the state in the coordination of plans and programs required by this
section.
(e) The governing body of the M.P.O. shall designate, at a minimum, a chair, vice chair, and agency
clerk. The chair and vice chair shall be selected from among the member delegates comprising the
governing board.The agency clerk shall be charged with the responsibility of preparing meeting minutes
and maintaining agency records. The clerk shall be a member of the M.P.O. governing board, an
employee of the M.P.O., or other natural person. Each M.P.O. required under this section must be fully
operative no later than 6 months following its designation.
(3) VOTING MEMBERSHIP.—
(a) The voting membership of an M.P.O. shall consist of not fewer than 5 or more than 19 apportioned
members,the exact number to be determined on an equitable geographic-population ratio basis by the
Governor, based on an agreement among the affected units of general-purpose local government as
required by federal rules and regulations. The Governor, in accordance with 23 U.S.C. s. 134, may also
provide for M.P.O. members who represent municipalities to alternate with representatives from other
municipalities within the metropolitan planning area that do not have members on the M.P.O. County
commission members shall compose not less than one-third of the M.P.O. membership, except for an
M.P.O. with more than 15 members located in a county with a 5-member county commission or an
M.P.O. with 19 members located in a county with no more than 6 county commissioners, in which case
county commission members may compose less than one-third percent of the M.P.O. membership, but
all county commissioners must be members. All voting members shall be elected officials of general-
purpose local governments, except that an M.P.O. may include, as part of its apportioned voting
members, a member of a statutorily authorized planning board, an official of an agency that operates or
administers a major mode of transportation, or an official of Space Florida. As used in this section, the
term "elected officials of a general-purpose local government" shall exclude constitutional officers,
including sheriffs, tax collectors, supervisors of elections, property appraisers, clerks of the court, and
similar types of officials. County commissioners shall compose not less than 20 percent of the M.P.O.
membership if an official of an agency that operates or administers a major mode of transportation has
been appointed to an M.P.O.
(b) In metropolitan areas in which authorities or other agencies have been or may be created by law to
perform transportation functions and are performing transportation functions that are not under the
jurisdiction of a general-purpose local government represented on the M.P.O., they shall be provided
voting membership on the M.P.O. In all other M.P.O.'s where transportation authorities or agencies are
to be represented by elected officials from general-purpose local governments, the M.P.O. shall
establish a process by which the collective interests of such authorities or other agencies are expressed
and conveyed.
(c) Any other provision of this section to the contrary notwithstanding, a chartered county with over 1
million population may elect to reapportion the membership of an M.P.O. whose jurisdiction is wholly
within the county.The charter county may exercise the provisions of this paragraph if:
1. The M.P.O. approves the reapportionment plan by a three-fourths vote of its membership;
44
2. The M.P.O. and the charter county determine that the reapportionment plan is needed to fulfill
specific goals and policies applicable to that metropolitan planning area; and
3. The charter county determines the reapportionment plan otherwise complies with all federal
requirements pertaining to M.P.O. membership. Any charter county that elects to exercise the
provisions of this paragraph shall notify the Governor in writing.
(d) Any other provision of this section to the contrary notwithstanding, any county chartered under s.
6(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution may elect to have its county commission serve as the M.P.O., if
the M.P.O.jurisdiction is wholly contained within the county. Any charter county that elects to exercise
the provisions of this paragraph shall so notify the Governor in writing. Upon receipt of such notification,
the Governor must designate the county commission as the M.P.O. The Governor must appoint four
additional voting members to the M.P.O., one of whom must be an elected official representing a
municipality within the county, one of whom must be an expressway authority member, one of whom
must be a person who does not hold elected public office and who resides in the unincorporated portion
of the county, and one of whom must be a school board member.
(4) APPORTIONMENT.—
(a) The Governor shall, with the agreement of the affected units of general-purpose local government
as required by federal rules and regulations, apportion the membership on the applicable M.P.O. among
the various governmental entities within the area. At the request of a majority of the affected units of
general-purpose local government comprising an M.P.O., the Governor and a majority of units of
general-purpose local government serving on an M.P.O. shall cooperatively agree upon and prescribe
who may serve as an alternate member and a method for appointing alternate members who may vote
at any M.P.O. meeting that an alternate member attends in place of a regular member. The method
shall be set forth as a part of the interlocal agreement describing the M.P.O.'s membership or in the
M.P.O.'s operating procedures and bylaws. The governmental entity so designated shall appoint the
appropriate number of members to the M.P.O. from eligible officials. Representatives of the
department shall serve as nonvoting advisers to the M.P.O. governing board. Additional nonvoting
advisers may be appointed by the M.P.O. as deemed necessary; however, to the maximum extent
feasible, each M.P.O. shall seek to appoint nonvoting representatives of various multimodal forms of
transportation not otherwise represented by voting members of the M.P.O. An M.P.O. shall appoint
nonvoting advisers representing major military installations located within the jurisdictional boundaries
of the M.P.O. upon the request of the aforesaid major military installations and subject to the
agreement of the M.P.O. All nonvoting advisers may attend and participate fully in governing board
meetings but may not vote or be members of the governing board. The Governor shall review the
composition of the M.P.O. membership in conjunction with the decennial census as prepared by the
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, and reapportion it as necessary to
comply with subsection (3).
(b) Except for members who represent municipalities on the basis of alternating with representatives
from other municipalities that do not have members on the M.P.O. as provided in paragraph (3)(a), the
members of an M.P.O. shall serve 4-year terms. Members who represent municipalities on the basis of
alternating with representatives from other municipalities that do not have members on the M.P.O. as
provided in paragraph (3)(a) may serve terms of up to 4 years as further provided in the interlocal
agreement described in paragraph (2)(b). The membership of a member who is a public official
automatically terminates upon the member's leaving his or her elective or appointive office for any
reason, or may be terminated by a majority vote of the total membership of the entity's governing
board represented by the member.A vacancy shall be filled by the original appointing entity. A member
may be reappointed for one or more additional 4-year terms.
(c) If a governmental entity fails to fill an assigned appointment to an M.P.O. within 60 days after
notification by the Governor of its duty to appoint, that appointment shall be made by the Governor
from the eligible representatives of that governmental entity.
45