Table of Contents
Letter from the Chair
Executive Summary
Introduction
The Citizen Oversight Panel Mission
The Process Used to Evaluate Sound Transit Performance
General Summary of Sound Transit Performance
Section A Citizen Involvement
Section B Budgets and Finance
Section C Implementation
Dear Councilmember Nickels and Boardmembers:
We are pleased to submit to you this performance report on the first eight months of the RTA's operation. Since the November 1996 election in which the citizens of the central Puget Sound region adopted Sound Move, the ten-year plan for regional transit improvements, much has been accomplished. We, the members of the Citizen Oversight Panel, have been keen observers of the start-up of this new agency and have been following with a great deal of interest the early efforts in meeting the commitments that were made to the public.
We are able to report to you that we believe the RTA's work is off to a good start. How did we arrive at this conclusion? As the attached report lays out in some detail, we have developed a comprehensive evaluation framework that incorporates all of the relevant promises made and we have systematically evaluated the agency's performance against those promises. We did so by using two approaches: (1) we carefully reviewed all of the policies and plans put in place and all of the actions taken by the agency during the period November 1996 through June 1997; and (2) we sought out public views and perceptions by talking to interested stakeholders and members of the general public throughout the region to learn of their initial impressions. We then met as a Panel to compile the results of our reviews and discussions.
As you know, the Citizen Oversight Panel is comprised of 15 individuals who live and work in all geographic areas of the RTA district and who represent a variety of skills and backgrounds, including public and private sector management, small and large business, labor, planning, engineering, law, public service and citizen activism. Even given the diversity of our group, we had little difficulty in reaching consensus on our first report card to you.
It is currently our intent to report to you again at the end of 1997 and at least semi-annually in the future. Panel members are fully engaged and watching the RTA's progress with great interest, our critical faculties alert and mindful of the RTA's responsibilities to the public. We intend to be constantly in touch with a wide network of informants and we welcome all citizen comments that are addressed to us.
Sincerely,
Steve Goldblatt
Chair, Citizen Oversight Panel
Executive Summary
Introduction
In going before the voters of the region in November 1996, the RTA Board promised to be held to the highest standards of accountability to the public. As part of that promise, the Board committed to appointing a Citizen Oversight Panel that would be charged with monitoring performance and reporting regularly on potential areas for improvement. The Citizen Oversight Panel feels its responsibility extends to highlighting the good news and accomplishments as well as the criticisms and areas for improvement at any given time. This is the first report of the Panel, covering the period November 1996 through June 1997.
To remain focused on evaluating the RTA's performance, the Citizen Oversight Panel developed an evaluation framework of key benchmark questions that are based on the commitments made in Sound Move, the ten-year plan that was submitted to voters for approval. The framework consists of four main topic areas: citizen involvement and public process, finance and budgets, general implementation, and modal commitments related to commuter rail, light rail and HOV/express bus.
The complete evaluation process involves ongoing staff briefings, review of agency materials by Panel members, personal contacts by Panel members with a variety of constituencies, and a group evaluation in which Panel members score the RTA on each of the key questions in the evaluation framework. This last step involves group discussion and identification of accomplishments, issues, concerns and areas for improvements for inclusion in the performance report. The body of this report discusses the findings, conclusions and recommendations in each of the topic areas evaluated for this period.
Summary of RTA Performance
The Citizen Oversight Panel found that during the period November 1996 through June 1997, the first eight months of the agency's official existence, the RTA made progress in mobilizing for the challenges that lie ahead. The management and staff of the agency are moving forward to put the systems in place, staff up, begin contracting for services and begin the long process of implementing the myriad individual local projects that comprise the Sound Move plan.
Additionally, the Panel found that the RTA is taking seriously its commitments to meet high standards of quality, to create a dynamic and flexible operating environment, to be lean and efficiently meet schedules and budgets. At the same time, the RTA staff is receiving generally high marks from the public for responsiveness, accessibility and a cooperative manner of working with citizens, stakeholders and local jurisdictions.
The following are examples that illustrate these conclusions:
- On Schedule. Despite some delays in securing office space and moving in, and despite some slippage in the process of hiring key management and core staff, the RTA has substantially met the timeline for its November 1996 to June 1997 action plan.
- First Moves. The agency has moved ahead of schedule four "First Moves" that were ready to go, and is using partnership agreements with local governments for their implementation.
- Innovative Personnel System. The staff developed and the Board approved the use of an innovative performance-based personnel and compensation system that provides for flexibility in assigning and compensating staff based on performance. Performance awards are based on both agency-wide success in meeting goals and individual merit.
- Tunnel Alternative. The RTA met its commitment to have a citizen task force develop an alternative alignment for the Downtown to University District segment. The North Corridor Light Rail Task Force was appointed, began its work and completed its assignment, which was a challenging and controversial one, in five months.
- Responsiveness and Outreach. RTA staff have been actively attending meetings, participating in events and reaching out to a variety of constituencies. Via its Speakers Bureau, the RTA reports it has met with and made presentations to 113 groups and organizations. It solicited feedback on its draft Implementation Guide from 4,000 business and community leaders and interested citizens. Staff responded to approximately 20 recorded 1-800 messages and 15 e-mail messages per week, or close to 1,000 direct interactions with citizens.
- Moving on Commuter Rail. The agency developed its Commuter Rail Action Plan which lays out the sequence of events that will lead to the beginning of commuter rail service by the end of 1999. Key features of the action plan include a "privatization" strategy that will limit the RTA employed staff to 11 to 13 positions. A decentralized contracting approach is planned in which each of the 14 commuter rail stations will be developed separately, with the involvement of a local technical advisory committee.
There were a few areas in which the action plan was not completely met, however, the Panel felt these minor delays are now on the way and will not have any long term implications for system implementation.
Following are suggestions for improvement identified by the Panel:
- Develop more targeted and focused communication strategies, for example through the use of community newspapers.
- Consider the use of RTA sub-regional "field offices" to have more of a grassroots presence.
- Consider the use of paid RTA representatives in each community who would be available to participate broadly as an information resource and as the RTA's eyes and ears. For example retired persons could play this role.
- The RTA's webpage needs to be interactive so citizens can easily provide feedback to items posted on the web; for example, an interactive feedback form could be developed.
- One of the more substantive Panel findings was that the joint processes for coordinating land use and transit, especially around station locations, need to be expedited so that undesirable development does not take hold before agreements on permitted uses and designs are put in place. A sense of urgency needs to be communicated to the participants, including local and regional governments and WSDOT.
