[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 25, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H2823-H2825]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION COORDINATION AND PLANNING AREA
REFORM REPEAL ACT
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (S. 496) to repeal the rule issued by the Federal Highway
Administration and the Federal Transit Administration entitled
``Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area
Reform''.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
S. 496
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPEAL.
The rule issued by the Federal Highway Administration and
the Federal Transit Administration entitled ``Metropolitan
Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area Reform''
(81 Fed. Reg. 93448 (December 20, 2016)) shall have no force
or effect, and any regulation revised by that rule shall be
applied as if that rule had not been issued.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
General Leave
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous materials on S. 496.
[[Page H2824]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.
{time} 1700
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me begin by thanking my colleague across the aisle,
Representative Lipinski, for his work on the original House version of
this legislation and to Senator Duckworth for introducing the
corresponding language in the Senate. We all understood the unintended
ramifications that this last-minute rule created, and we worked
together to address this issue.
This bill rescinds the Federal Highway Administration and Federal
Transit Administration's Metropolitan Planning Organization
Coordination and Planning Reform rule that was promulgated in December,
2016.
After being sworn in to the House of Representatives, one of the
first pieces of legislation I offered was to repeal this rule. Through
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, we were able to work
in a bipartisan manner to achieve that goal, and I was proud to serve
as the lead Republican in advancing a commonsense policy unanimously
through our committee.
This flawed rule mandates the expansion of boundaries for federally
required Metropolitan Planning Organizations, or MPOs. There are 409
MPOs in the United States, and the Department of Transportation
identified that more than one-third of these MPOs would immediately be
subject to the new requirements of this rule.
By requiring that MPO boundaries encompass the entire urbanized area
and any surrounding areas that may be urbanized within 20 years, the
Department of Transportation has taken away the ability for States and
localities to determine how to plan their transportation networks. In
many cases, this rule pushes an MPO into the boundary of another MPO,
forcing consolidation of areas that are represented by different
governing bodies. These areas are not capped and could become extremely
expansive. There are even instances where MPOs would be mandated to
include cities and counties in neighboring States.
The question is: Why did the DOT feel the need to institute this
rule? States already have the ability to reassess their MPO boundaries.
MPOs have the ability to expand beyond their boundaries by using
memorandums of understanding. Minnesota uses several for transportation
planning. Additionally, every 4 years, MPOs are required to participate
in a review process that identifies areas of concern like the planning
of projects with neighboring areas.
Meanwhile, in the instances of unelected MPOs, like Minnesota's
Metropolitan Council, this rule encourages them to expand without any
participation or control from local citizens. The MPO council
representing the Twin Cities area is entirely appointed by the
Governor. Through State statute, they have the ability to levy taxes,
and, like all MPOs, they determine what transportation projects to
pursue. An expansion of MPO boundaries could mean a new tax for
surrounding counties to fund transportation projects that do not
address their local needs.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this measure and
return current law to what Congress intended when it passed the FAST
Act. This bill ensures that States, cities, and counties retain
decisionmaking ability when it comes to planning their development and
transportation growth.
Our language restores certainty to local officials already in
planning phases for local projects and could save MPOs more than $340
million over the next several years conforming to the regulation. The
essence of this bill is local control. The more government is removed
from the people, the less responsive it becomes. Self-governance works
best when closest to home.
I want to thank Chairman Shuster for his leadership on this matter,
as well as my colleagues, Representative Lipinski and Senator
Duckworth, for their work on this bill, and I encourage all my
colleagues to support our bill.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the National
Association of Regional Councils and the Association of Metropolitan
Planning Organizations, and a letter from the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials.
National Association of Regional Councils and Association
of Metropolitan Planning Organizations,
April 25, 2017.
Dear Member of Congress: On behalf of the members of the
Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO) and
National Association of Regional Councils (NARC), we wish to
express our strong support for a bill expected on the floor
later today: S. 496--``To repeal the rule issued by the
Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit
Administration entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization
Coordination and Planning Area Reform''. This legislation
passed the Senate unanimously on March 8. Identical
legislation from Representatives Daniel Lipinski and Jason
Lewis, H.R. 1346, has the support of 26 bipartisan co-
sponsors and passed the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee by voice vote on March 29.
AMPO and NARC support increased planning coordination at
all levels, but this Final Rule has significant drawbacks
that make its implementation impractical, and would hinder
the regional planning process and delay project
implementation. Our extensive joint comments to the federal
docket explain in significant detail the problems with this
rule and the negative consequences we believe would result.
Ours was one of more than 600 comments to the docket that
asked this rule be withdrawn or substantially modified.
Neither occurred, so legislative action is required.
Repeal of this Final Rule is a key priority for our
organizations and for many of our members. The legislation
you will consider today would immediately restore certainty
to the planning process for hundreds of planning
organizations. Its bipartisan support is an indication that
members from both parties recognize the damage this Final
Rule could inflict on the transportation planning process and
project implementation.
We thank you for your consideration of this matter, and
reaffirm our request that you support passage of S. 496.
Sincerely,
Leslie Wollack,
Executive Director, National Association of Regional
Councils.
DeLania Hardy,
Executive Director, Association of Metropolitan Planning
Organizations.
____
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials,
Washington, DC, March 10, 2017.
Re H.R. 1346 to repeal the rule issued by the FHWA and the
FTA entitled ``Metropolitan Planning Organization and
Coordination and Planning Area Reform''
Dear Members of Congress: The American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) expresses our
full support of H.R. 1346 which will repeal the recently
issued rule by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) entitled
``Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and
Planning Area Reform'' (81 Fed. Reg. 93448) finalized on
December 20, 2016. Representing all 50 states, the District
of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, AASHTO serves as a liaison
between state departments of transportation (state DOTs) and
the federal government.
AASHTO and its members are supportive of voluntary
opportunities to strengthen regional transportation planning
by states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). As
expressed in our comments on the NPRM regarding this rule, we
do not see a basis for making substantial changes to the
planning process as required in the rule.
AASHTO has significant concerns with the specific mandates
that the rule imposes upon states and MPOs. The regulation
will add significant additional legal and administrative
requirements that would serve as barriers to constructive and
flexible approaches to planning and programming being
implemented by states and MPOs today. Imposing these new
requirements goes against the Congressional intent of the
Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act to
streamline project delivery. The rule also epitomizes the
one-size-fits-all approach that does not allow flexibility to
tailor processes and solutions to the diverse needs,
opportunities, and constraints faced by states and MPOs
across the nation.
We appreciate your tremendous leadership in repealing this
specific rule. If you would like to discuss these issues
further, please contact AASHTO's Program Director for
Planning and Performance Management.
Sincerely,
David Bernhardt, P.E.,
President, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials; Commissioner, Maine Department of
Transportation.
[[Page H2825]]
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 496, a straightforward bill to
repeal changes made to the transportation planning process in the
waning days of the Obama administration.
On June 27, 2016, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal
Transit Administration jointly published a proposed rule to make
significant changes to surface transportation planning regulations in
an attempt to promote more effective regional planning by States and
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, MPOs. The proposed rule was well-
intentioned, aiming to strengthen coordination among planning partners
and neighboring communities.
However, the rule was haphazardly put together on an expedited
timeline, with very little input from States and local planning
organizations. It is not surprising, therefore, that the result was
overwhelming opposition to the specific requirements of the rule.
This rule was not mandated by Congress. In fact, Congress made very
few changes to the planning process in the most recent surface
transportation reauthorization, the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation Act, also known as the FAST Act.
Among other changes, the administration sought to require that, in
any urbanized area represented by more than one MPO, the MPOs would be
required to either merge or realign their boundaries or develop unified
planning documents. This requirement for joint planning documents would
apply in urbanized areas that cross State lines. This provision, in
particular, caused substantial concern in the planning community.
The FHWA and the FTA received 299 comments in opposition to the
proposed rule, of which 249 requested that the rulemaking be withdrawn.
Only 16 commenters expressed support for the proposed rule. The
agencies received 156 comments in support of the intent of the rule,
but not the specific requirements and procedures proposed.
The final rule, published in December of 2016, made a few
modifications, including the addition of a waiver process, subject to
approval by the Secretary, from some of the joint planning requirements
if an area can demonstrate suitable coordination. Despite the changes
made by the agencies in the final rule, strong opposition to the rule
continues.
Earlier this month, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed testified before the
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit on implementation of the FAST Act.
His written testimony, submitted on behalf of the U.S. Conference of
Mayors, states: ``The outgoing administration proposed a new rule on
MPO designations that created unreasonable burdens for a number of
regions, and we thank you, Mr. Chairman, and this committee for acting
on legislation to remedy this.''
Repeal of this rule is supported also by the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials, the Association of
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and the National Association of
Regional Councils.
Last month, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed
H.R. 1346, an identical bill to S. 496, by voice vote. H.R. 1346,
introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), is a
bipartisan bill with 29 cosponsors.
S. 496 stops the controversial changes I have described from going
into effect. The bill does not preclude the administration from
pursuing changes in the future, through a new notice and comment
rulemaking, to improve the planning process by strengthening the
coordination of MPOs and States.
Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to
do the same.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me
in supporting this important legislation, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 496, which is the
first and likely only legislation striking an Obama Administration era
rule or regulation outright that I will be supporting this Congress.
From when I first learned of the rule last year, I have had strong
concerns about the United States Department of Transportation's (DOT)
proposal on Metropolitan Planning Organization Coordination and
Planning Area Reform.
Planning was a top priority of one of my predecessors in the United
States House of Representatives, former Public Works Committee Chairman
Bob Roe. In the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
(ISTEA) of 1991, the Congress overhauled the planning process and gave
tremendous authority to local Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPO). The process works well in Northern New Jersey, where the North
Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) plays an important
role advancing regional projects that provides an important opportunity
for local communities to offer meaningful input.
I joined my colleague, Mr. Sires, in a letter last summer expressing
concerns with the draft rule and requesting that the comment period be
extended.
I appreciate the DOTs end goal: to make planning more efficient, more
comprehensible to stakeholders and the public, and more focused on
projects that address critical regional needs. However, in a rush to
judgment and ignoring the concerns of many comments from across the
county, the DOT finalized a well-intended, but misguided rule.
Specifically, I object to the severity of its reconstruction of the
planning processes, practices, and understandings that have been in
effect for MPOs for decades, and the ability for the public to comment.
Most concerning to me is that the rule could require the redrawing of
Metropolitan Planning Areas (MPAs) and require Urbanized Areas (UZAs)
to have a common MPO or common Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP).
For densely populated regions like Northern New Jersey, the proposed
rule would reduce local decision-making by either forcing MPO
consolidation or requiring a burdensome multi-region single long-term
TIP that could weaken local input. The NJTPA region covering my
district already includes 6.7 million people and its TIP is over $2
Billion--adding any more to their plate would be unwieldy. We just need
to witness the dysfunction at the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey to know that mandating New Jersey to undertake transportation
planning with New York City and New York State in this way would be a
recipe for disaster.
I thank my colleagues for advancing this bill, look forward to this
rule being put back on the shelf, and hope DOT can come up with
something less burdensome in their quest to reform transportation
planning processes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Lewis) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, S. 496.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________