DRAFT Not for Release

Response toto Montgomery Montgomery County, CountyCounty, Maryland, MMarylandaryland County ExecutiveExecutive Isiah Isiah Leggett's Leggett’sLeggett's Proposal PrProposaloposal for anfor an Independent Transit Transit Authority/Bus Authority/BusAuthority/Bus Rapid Rapid Transit Transit System System

Montgomery County County Civic Civic Federation, Federation, Inc. Inc. Post OfficeOffice Box Box 1123 11231123 Bethesda, MDMDMD 20827-11232082720827-1123-1123

IVIONJVION ENCOUNTv

0/1C,RATIONP ATION

Serving the PublicPublic Interest SinceSince 1925

January 20162016 Executive Summary Summary

The MontgomeryMontgomery County, County, Maryland Maryland government government is considering is considering spending spendingspending at least atat least$2.298least $2.2$2.298 98 Billion on onon part partpart of ofof a aaseparate separate fixed-route fixed-routefixed-route bus bus system system known known as 'Bus as Rapid‘Bus'Bus Rapid Transit' Transit'Transit’ (BRT).1 The The cost cost forfor fo these rthese these four four four routes routes routes alone alonealone is currently isis currentlycurrently estimated estimated by the by County's the County'sCounty’s consultants to to amount amount to toover over $5 $5Billion, Billion,Billion, including includingincluding interest. interestinterest..2 Concomitant Concomitant with withwith the the BRT BRT systemsystem isis County County Executive Executive Isiah Isiah Leggett's Leggett'sLeggett’s introduction introduction of a proposalofof aa proposal to create toto create createan an Independent Transit TransitTransit Authority Authority (ITA) (ITA)(ITA) which which would would have have independent independent powers powers of taxation of taxation and managementmanagement responsibilities responsibilitiesresponsibilities for forfora wide a widewide range rangerange of transportation ofof transportationtransportation infrastructure. infrastructure.infrastructure.

As shownshown in in Appendix Appendix A, A,A, System System Map, Map, Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty currently currentlycurrently has an has extensive an extensive public transportation transportation network netwnetworkork that thatthat includes includeincludes ones oneonestation stationstation for Amtrak forfor AmtrakAmtrak passenger passengerpassenger rail, 12 rail, rail, 12 stations for forfor Metrorail, MetrorailMetrorail, 11, 1111 stations stations for forforthe the theMARC MARCMARC Commuter CommuterCommuter Rail RailBrunswickRail BrunswickBrunswick line, line,line, Metrobus service service on on 17 17 bus busbus routes, routes,routes Maryland, MarylandMaryland Transit TransitTrans Administrationit AdministrationAdministration Commuter Commuter Bus Bus serviceservice onon seven seven routes, routesroutes, 342, 342342 Ride Ride On On buses busesbus esfor forservice sserviceervice at 5,731 atat 5,731 bus busbusstops stops on 78 on 78 routes, 1818 ParkPark and and Ride RideRide lots, lots,lots, and and 51 51 Capital CapitalCapital Bikeshare BikeshareBikeshare stations stationsstations with with775 775775 dockings/bikes.dockings/bikes .

Currently 63% 63%63% of of the the Montgomery Montgomery County County Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation of TransportationTransportation (MCDOT) (MCDOT) (MCDOT) Operating Budget Budget is is utilized utilized for forfor Transit TransitTransit Services, ServiServices,ces so, MCDOT soso MCDOTMCDOT is already isis alreadyalready a transit aa transittransit focused focused agency.agency. WithinWithin Within the thethe Maryland MarylandMaryland Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation's ofof Transportation'sTransportation operating’s operating budget, bbudget,udget 46%of, 46%of46%of resources are are utilized utilized directly directly for for fortransit transittransit services servicesservices for MTAfor for MTA MTAand WMATA. andand WMATA.WMATA.

Despite anan increase increaseincrease in inin population population of overof over 75,000, 775,000,5,000 both, bothboth vehicle vehiclevehicle miles milesmil traveledes traveled in in Montgomery County County and and trips trips on onon Metro, Metro,Metro, Metrobus Metrobus and and andRide Ride On bus On havebus have steadily steadily declined sincesincsincee 2008 200820083 . CurrentlyCurrently less less than than 16% 16% of of ofMontgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty residents residentsresidents utilize utilizeutilize public transportation transportation for for trips trips to work.to workwork..4

As partpart ofof the the development developmendevelopment oft ofthe the BRT BRT scheme, scheme, a study aa studystudy was was done done for the forfor County the County by by TThehe InstituteInstitute for forfor Transportation TransportationTransportation and and and Policy Policy Policy Development Development Development (ITPD, ( ITPD(ITPD, 2012)., 2012).2012). Their TheirTheir conclusion conclusionconclusion is thatthat there is not sufficient ridershipridership for a BRT-levelBRT-level ofof serviceservice onon anyany ofof thethe proposedproposed

1 1 County Executive'sExecutive’sExecutive's Transit Transit TaskTask Task Force, Force, Final Final Report Report and and Recommendations, Recommendations, VHB,VHB, VHB, PFMPFM Group,PFM Group, SageSage PolicySage PolicyGroup,Group, Group, Inc., MontgomeryMontgomery CountyCounty County Government,Governm Government,ent, OctoberOctober October 2015,2015, 2015, AppendixAppendix Appendix 6a6a 6a

2 2Ibid,lbid, AppendixAppendix 6b6 b6b

3 3Appendix B, B, MontgomeryMontgomery Montgomery County County Vehicle Vehicle Miles Miles Traveled, Traveled, AppendixAppendix Appendix CC WMATA C WMATA Ridership,Ridership, Ridership, Appendix Appendix D, National D, National Transit Database, Database,Database, Ride RideRide OnOn On BusBus Bus FYFY FY 2013 2013

4 4 Appendix E, E, TripsTrips Trips toto to WorkWork Work

i Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal routes.routes. For example,example,example ,the the study study found found that thatthat on on onMD MDMD 355 355 (Rockville (Rockville Pike), Pike), there there would would be be only 250250 ridersridersriders per per hour hour in inthe the peak peak direction. direction. This ThisThis study studystudy and othersandand othersothers raised raisedraised questions questionsquestions about thethe purpose purpose of, of, and andand need need for, for, a BRT a BRT system. system. They statestatestate further: further:further :

"The“The extentextent ofof thethe networknetwork proposed,proposed, uniqueunique among BRT projects around the world and in the US, resulted from the belief that they would need to build a network that served many parts of the County very quickly in order to secure the necessary votes in the County Council forfor anyany newnew taxtax measures.measures. As a practical matter of public administration, however,however, Montgomery County has limitedlimited experience with managing projects of this scope, scale, and complexity. Developing even one BRT corridor will be an administrative challenge in Montgomery County,County, let alone an attempt to develop and deliver multiple corridors simultaneously; a task no other municipality has ever attempted.attempted.” "5

In 2012, Mr.Mr. LeggettLeggettLeggett created created a a'Transit ‘Trans'Transit itTask TaskTask Force' Force’Force' (TTF) (TTF)(TTF) to studytoto studystudy BRT. BRT BRT. He. alsoHe also requested that that the the TTF TTF reconvene reconvenereconvene in in2015in 201520 15to tostudyto studystudy his hisproposalhis proposalproposal for an for Independent aann Independent Transit AuthorityAuthority to toto finance, finance,finance, build, build,build, operate operateoperate and aand maintainnd maintainmaintain a Countywide aa Countywide Bus Rapid Bus Rapid Transit system.ssystem.ystem. In In May May 2015, 2015,2015 Mr., Mr.Mr. Leggett LeggettLeggett requested requestedrequested that thatthat the thetheMontgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Civic Civic Federation, Inc. Inc. (MCCF) (MCCF) review reviewreview and andand provide provideprovide an an ananalysis analysisanalysis of the of theTTF TTF proposal proposalproposal and and respond with with alternative alternative ways ways to toaddress address the thethepossible possiblepossible increase increaseincrease in traffic inin traffic trafficcongestion congestioncongestion caused byby continuous continuous approvals approvalsapprovals of ofnewof new new development developmentdevelopment all over allall over overthe County.the the County. County. This Report This RReport eport is thethe responseresponse to to Mr. Mr. Leggett's Leggett'sLeggett’s request. request.

After carefulcarefulcarefu lanalysis, analysis, the the MCCF MCCF identified identifiedidentified a number a numbernumber of much ofof muchmuch less lesscostlyless costly and more and more sustainable alternatives alternatives that that can can be beimplemented implementedimplemented in a ininshort aa shortshort period periodperiod of time of andtime will and willwill greatly benefitbenefit transit transit riders. ridersriders. MCCF. MCCFMCCF proposes proposes proposes the the followingthe following following solutions: solutions:solutions:

• Work with withwith WMATA WMATA WMATA to to toimplement implement implement the the the Q9 Q9 Q9MetroExtra MetroExtra MetroExtra limited limited limited stop stop stopexpress expressexpress bus bus service onon Veirs Veirs Mill Mill Road Road between between Rockville RockvilleRockville and and Silver Silver Spring Spring via Wheaton, via WheatonWheaton, with , withwith an estimatedestimated cost cost of of $1-2 $1$1-2- 2Million. Million.Million.

• ImplementImplemen tthe the MD MD 355 355 Ride Ride On On Plus Plus (ROP) (ROP) Transit Transit Improvements Improvements as as proposed by by the thethe Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation ofof TransportationTransportation (MCDOT) (MCDOT) (MCDOT) on on Route 355355 (Rockville (Rockville(Rockville Pike) Pike)Pike) which whichwhich would wouldwould cost cost $21 $21 Million. Million.Million.

5 5 Demand andand ServiceService PlanningPlanning Planning RepoReport Reportrt to toMontgomery Montgomery County County County DOT, DOT, DOT, ITDP,ITDP, ITDP, 2012 2012

ii Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

• Increase the free-to-the-Countyfree-to-the-County ExpressExpress BusBus Services.Services .WMATA WMATA willwill implementimplement additional expressexpress busbus serviceservicess onon RouteRoute 2929 (Colesville Road) in March 20162016.. This This will will notnot costcost the CountyCounty anyany money.money. WeWe alsoalso recommendrecommend implementation ofof MetroMetroExtraExtra Service along Route 29 similarsimilar to the recently implemented K9 MetroExtra on New HampshireHampshire AvenueAvenue whichwhich has resultedresulted in a 65% increaseincrease inin ridership.ridership.

• Implement realreal timetime computercomputer traffic traffic signalization signalization control control and/or and/or adaptiveadaptive signal technology toto reducereduce congestion andand enhanceenhance bus serviceservice,, as is being done around the United States. The The County's County’s DOTDOT consultants consultants adviseadvise thisthis couldcould reduce traveltravel timestimes byby 15%15% which which willwill improveimprove transittransit traveltravel timestimes onon corridorscorridors such as RouteRoutess 355355 and 29.

• Implement a data driven process to optimize and improve our current system with a flexible,flexible, responsiveresponsive busbus transittransit system.system .This This may may result result inin changing routes and increasing frequency ooff Ride On’sOn's most heavily used routes,routes, in response toto the locationlocation of demand.demand. ThisThis "reimagining“reimagining transittransit service"service” was done recently in Houston, Texas, providingproviding 15 minute frequency at almost no cost to the taxpayers or local businessesbusinesses andand resultedresulted inin 1010 to 2020 minute faster trip timestimes onon 90%90% of routes. ThisThis isis alsoalso being adopted by Omaha, Los Angeles and other communities. EnhancementsEnhancements shouldshould includeinclude better passenger amenities, improvedimproved bus shelters and accessibility, asas well as real time route information updates.updates. As the bus fleet is replaced, wewe recommendrecommend discontinuingdiscontinuing the purchase ofof dieseldiesel busesbuses inin favorfavor ofof hybridhybrid or all electric vehicles.

• Facilitate Implementation ofof MicrotransitMicrotransit ServicesServices such such as as Bridj, Bridj ,which which isis anan affordable, on-demand,on-demand, flexibleflexible network of express shuttles adaptable in real time and currently operatingoperating inin thethe DCDC MetroMetro areaarea..

• Prepare forfor autonomousautonomous vehicles, vehicles which, which are are for for sale sale now now in in MontgomeryMontgomery Mall and in every state in the nation. Self-driving Self-driving vehiclesvehicles willwill radically change our public transit needs,needs, with major implications for planning requirements. Autonomous transportation will impact everything from highway traffic patterns to congestion to parking requiremrequirements.ents. Lane markings will havehave to be improved at locations wherewhere they areare missingmissing oror difficultdifficult toto see,see, as thethe self-drivingself-driving vehicles will needneed these markings to be visible so thethe sensors cancan read them and vehicles can remain in their lanes.

iii Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal InIn analyzing the the suggested suggested need need for for additional additional publicly-fundedpublicly publicly-funded-funded transit, transit, MCCF MCCF recommends that that in in keepingkeeping keeping withwith with 21st-century21 21st-centuryst-century technology,technology, technology, knowledge,knowledge, knowledge, and population and population requirements, any any new new public public transit transit must must keep keep to the to importantthe important principle of flexibility.flexibility. That is,is, aa fixed-routefixedfixed-route-route bus bus systemsystem system isis notisnot not acceptableacceptable acceptable inin thethe in 21stthe21st 21stcentury century given givenchanged changed cultural expectations expectations and and availableavailable available technologiestechnologies. technologies.. FurthermoreFurthermore Furthermore any new any transportationnew transportation projects should should be be prioritized prioritized using using performance performance metrics metrics and measurements and measurements of of effectiveness for for reducing reducing ccongestionongestion congestion and and increasing increasing transit transit ridership. ridership.

In addition,addition, the the studies studies completed completed to date,to date, and and our ourmembership membership comments comments and and testimony indicate indicate that that there there is nois nopublic public support support for either for either a significant a significant tax tax increase oror an an independent independent authority authorityauthority that thatthat does doesdoes not notnotanswer answanswer toer the toto residents. thethe residents.residents. The The Montgomery County County Civic CivicCivic Federation Federation opposes opposes an ITA.an ITA.

iv Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

"In“In thirty yearsyears the transportation system in the United StatesStates will will bebe a a fossil fossil — – aa relicrelic ofof thethe 20th20th century that utterly fails AmericansAmericans inin 2045.”2045."

"For“For too long, our national dialogue about transportation hashas been focused on recreating the past. Instead, Instead, we we need need to to focus focus onon thethe trendstrends thatthat are shapingshaping thethe future."future.”

-Anthony-Anthony Foxx, United States Secretary ofof Transportation,Transportation, February 2,2, 2015

vv Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION ...... 1

2.0 BACKGROUND TOTO THETHE PROPOSALSPROPOSALS ...... 7

2.1 Bus RapidRapid TransitTransit Concept ...... 8

2.1.1 PotentialPotential Impacts Impacts to to Specific Specific RoutesRoutes ...... 9

2.2 Independent TransitTransit Authority ConceptConcept ...... 10

3.0 MONMONTGOMERYTGOMERY COUNTY COUNTY CIVIC CIVIC FEDERATION FEDERATION RESPONSE RESPONSE ...... 13

3.1 Cost Analysis ...... 13

3.1.1. RidershipRidership Forecasts Forecasts ...... 1818

3.2 Alternatives toto thethe Proposed Proposed BRTBRT ...... 20

TABLES

Table 33-1-1. Five-YearFive-Year EmploymentEmployment Forecast Summary,Summary, MontgomeryMontgomery County 20102010-- 2040 ...... 15

Table 33-2.-2. Employment Trends, MontgomeryMontgomery County 202005-201405-2014 ...... 1616

Table 3-3.3-3. Metrorail Average Average Weekday Weekday Passenger Passenger BoardingsBoardings ...... 1919

APPENDICESAPPENDICES

APPENDIX A:A: MontgomeryMontgomery County County Transit Transit SystemSystem Map

APPENDIX B:B: DecreaseDecrease in in Montgomery Montgomery County County VehicleVehicle MilesMiles TraveledTraveled,, 2006 to 2013

APPENDIX C:C: WMATAWMATA Ridership Ridership from from 19921992 toto 2014

APPENDIX D:D: MontgomeryMontgomery County County Ride Ride On On Unlinked Unlinked PassengerPassenger Trips 2000 to 2012

vivi Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIX E:E: PercentPercent of of Montgomery Montgomery County County Residents Residents WhoWho Take Public Transit to Work

APPENDIX F: F: BusBus Rapid Rapid Transit Transit CostsCosts

APPENDIX G:G: LegalLegal - -Regulatory Regulatory IssuesIssues

APPENDIX H:H: MCCFMCCF Statement Statement Regarding Regarding Transit Transit TaskTask ForceForce Recommendations

APPENDIX II:: MCCFMCCF Online Online Questionnaire Questionnaire to to Active Active MembersMembers

List of Preparers

viivii Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 1.0 INTRODUCTION

The MontgomeryMontgomery County, County, Maryland Maryland government government is considering is considering spending spendingspending at least atat lea$2.298leastst $$2.298 2.298 Billion on onon four fourfour of ofof 11 1111 routes routes of ofofa fixed-route aa fixedfixed-route-route bus b bussystemus system known known as 'Bus asas Rapid‘Bus'Bus Rapid Transit' Transit'Transit ’ (BRT) (see(see Appendix AppendixAppendix F). F).F) According .According According to totheto thethe County's County'sCounty’s consultants consultantsconsultants the eventual thethe eventual cost to costcost to taxpayers for forfor four four of of eleven eleven routes routesroutes would wouldwould amount amountamount to over toto over over$5 Billion, $5$5 Billion,Billion including, includingincluding interest. interest.interest . Concomitant with with the the BRT BRT system systemsystem is Countyisis CountyCounty Executive ExecutiveExecutive Isiah IsiahIsiah Leggett's Leggett'sLeggett’s introduction introductionintroduction of a of a proposalproposal for for the the creation creation of ofan anan Independent Independent Transit Transit Authority Authority (ITA) (ITA) (ITA)which which would wouldhave have independent powers powers of of taxation taxation and and management management responsibilities responsibilitiesresponsibilities for a wideforfor aa rangewide rangeof of transportation infrastructure. infrastructureinfrastructure. Both. BothBoth concepts conceptsconcepts are highlyare highlyhighly controversial controversial and the and majority the majority of of residentsresidents have have voiced voiced their their opposition opposition to them toto themthem at three atat three public public hearings hearingshearings before beforebefore the State thethe State Legislature and andand the thethe Transit TransitTransit Task TaskTask Force. Force.Force. The TheThe proposed proposedproposed ITA ITAITAand andandBRT BRT BRTwould wouldw resultould resultresult in in significant increases increasesincreases in in inreal realreal estate estateestate taxes, taxes,taxes, and and excise excise taxes. taxestaxes. The. Thetrue costtruetrue ofcost these of these proposalsproposals should should be bebe disclosed disclosed by bybythe thethe County CountyCounty Executive ExecutiveExecutive in advance inin advanceadvance of any of enabling any enabling legislation introduced introducedintroduced by byby the thethe Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Delegates DelegatesDelegates to the to State thethe StateLegislature Legislature or or in thethe casecase that thatthat county countycounty money money alone alone is proposedis proposed to be to used. be used.

As shownshown in in Appendix Appendix A Aof ofthis this Report, Report,Report, System System Map, Map, Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty currently currentlycurrently has has an extensiveextensive public publicpublic transportation transportation network network that thatincludes includesinclude ones station one station for Amtrak for Amtrak passenger rail, rail, 12 12 stations stationsstations for for Metrorail, Metrorail,Metrorail, 11 1111stations stations for the forfor MARCthethe MARCMARC Commuter CCommuterommuter Rail RailRail Brunswick line, line, Metrobus Metrobus service service on on17 17bus busbus routes, routes,routes Maryland, MarylandMaryland Transit TransitTransit Administration AdministrationAdministration Commuter Bus Bus service service on onon seven sevenseven routes, routesroutes, 342, 342342 Ride Ride On Onbuses busesbus fores servicefor service at 5,731 atat 5,7315,731 bus bus stops ononon 78 7878 routes, routes, 18 18 Park Park and and Ride Ride lots, lots,lots, and and 51 51Capital CapitalCapital Bikeshare BikeshareBikeshare stations stationsstations with 775with 775775 dockings/bikes.dockings/bikes.

Currently 63% 63%63% of of the the Montgomery MontgomeryMontgome ryCounty County Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation of TransportationTransportation (MCDOT) (MCDOT) (MCDOT) Operating Budget Budget is is utilized utilized for forfor Transit TransitTransit Services, Services,Services, so MCDOT soso MCDOTMCDOT is already isis alreadyalready a transit aa transittransit focused focused agency. WithinWithin Within the thethe Maryland MarylandMaryland Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation's ofof Transportation'sTransportation’s operating operating budget, budget, 46%of 46%of46%of resources are are utilized utilized directly directly for for fortransit transittransit services servicesservices for MTAfor for MTA MTAand WMATA. andand WMATA.WMATA.

Despite anan increase increaseincrease in inin population population of overof over 75,000, 75,00075,000, both, bothboth vehicle vehiclevehicle miles milesmil traveledes traveled in in Montgomery County County and and trips trips on onon Metro, Metro,Metro, Metrobus Metrobus and and andRide Ride On bus On havebus have steadily steadily declined sincesincsincee 2008 200820086 . CurrentlyCurrently less less than than 16% 16% of of ofMontgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty residents residentsresidents utilize utilizeutilize public transportation transportation for for trips trips to work.to work.

6 6Appendix B, B, MontgomeryMontgomery Montgomery County County Vehicle Vehicle Miles Miles Traveled, Traveled, AppendixAppendix Appendix CC WMATA C WMATA Ridership,Ridership, Ridership, Appendix Appendix D, National D, National Transit Database,Database,Database, Ride RideRide OnOn On BusBus Bus FYFY FY 2013 2013

11 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal IInn 20152015 CountyCounty Executive Executive Isiah Isiah Leggett Leggett reconvened reconvened a 38-member a 3838-member-member Transit Transit Task Task Force Force (TTF) toto reviewreviewreview the thethe legislation legislationlegislation for for the the County County to create to create a funding a fundingfunding mechanism mechanismmechanism to finance, to finance, build, operateoperate and and maintain maintain a Countywidea Countywide BRT BRT system. system.system .

In MayMay 201520152015 Mr. Mr.Mr. LeggettLeggett Leggett requested requestedrequested that thatthat the thethe Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Civic CivicCivic Federation Federation review andand provide provide an an analysis analysis of ofthe the BRT/ITA BRT/ITA proposal proposalproposal and andandrespond respondrespond with alternativewithwith alternative ways toto addressaddress the thethe possible possiblepossible increase increaseincrease in traffic inin traffictraffic congestion congestion caused caused by continuous byby continuouscontinuous approvals of of new new development develdevelopmentopment all allover over the the County. CountyCounty. This. This Report RReporteport is the is response the response to Mr. to Mr. Leggett'sLeggett’s request. request.

Since Mr.Mr. Leggett'sLeggett’sLeggett's request, request,request, the thethe TTF TTF TTF has hashas released releasedreleased its itFinalitss F Finalinal Report.' R Report.'eport The.7 TheReport ReportReport provides the the latest latest capital capitalcapital cost costcost estimates estimates for fourfor ffour ofour the of eleven the eleven routes: routes:routes : Phase 111 ofofof thethethe Corridor CorridorCorridor Cities Cities Transitway, Transitway,Transitway, Route RouteRoute 355, 355,355, Route Route 29, 29,and and Veirs Veirs Mill Road.Mill Road.

With thethe exceptionexception of of the the estimate estimate for for the the Corridor Corridor Cities CitiesCities Transitway TransitwayTransitway Phase PhasePhase 1, the 1, the estimates are are not notnot based based on onon any anyany detailed detaileddetailed engineering engineeringengineering studies studiesstudies which whichwhich would would reflect reflect even even higher costscosts whenwhen when completed.completed. completed. The The The most most most recent recent recent total total total estimated estimated estimated capital capitalcapital cost for costcost the for the four routes routesroutes is is is$2,297,900,000. $2,297,900,000. $2,297,900,000 The The. The estimates estimates estimates do do not do not includenot include include the thecost the cost costfor land forfor landland acquisition at at stations stations and and intersections, intersections,intersections the, costthe cost of any of undergroundany undergroundundergrou work/utilitiesnd work/utilitieswork/ utilitiesor the or the reconstruction ofof of bridges bridges bridges on on onRoute Route Route 29. 29 29.The. The The estimated estimated estimated annual annual annual operating operating operating cost for costcost 106 forfor 106 buses inin first first year year of of operation operation is $93,000,000is $93,000,000 and and up toup $119,000,000 to $119,000,000 in in subsequent years. years.years.8 When financingfinancingfinancing costs costs are are included, included, the the total total estimated estimated cost costcostfor the for the 9 four routesroutes is isis between betweenbetween $5 $5 and and $6 $6$6 billion. billion.billion. 9

Pre-engineeringPre-engineering estimates estimatesestimates calculated calculatedcalculated in 2013inin 20132013 of the ofof thecapitalthe capital capital cost costcostfor six forfor additional sixsix additional proposed BRT BRT routes routes totaled totaled $1,075,000,000 $1,075,000,000$1,075,000,000 with with with additional additional additional annual annualannual operating operatingoperating costs costs costsof of $30,000,000.$30,000,000.10 This estimateestimate does ddoesoes not not include includeinclude Phase Phase Phase 2 of 22 oftheof thethe CCT. CCT.CCT. The The latest latest TTF TTFTTF Report diddid not not update update estimates estimates for for forthose those routes routes but didbut reduce did reduce the number the number of buses of busesfor for the fourfour subject subject routes routes by byby 43%, 4343%,% which, whichwhich resulted resulted in lower in lower estimates. estimates.

Implementation of of the the proposed proposed ITA ITA and and BRT BRTBRT would wouldwould require requirerequire funding fundingfunding resources resources that that wouldwould likelylikely result resultresult in in insignificant significantsignificant increases increases increases in real in in real estatereal estateestate taxes, taxes,taxes, excise exciseexcise taxes, taxes, or other or other public taxing taxing strategies, strategies,strategies, as as budget budget projections projections for the forfor near thethe nearnearand mid-term and mid-termmid -doterm not do doinclude notnot include

7 7 County Executive'sExecutive’sExecutive's Transit Transit TaskTask Task Force, Force, Final Final ReportReport Report and and Recommendations,Recommendation Recommendations,s, VHB,VHB, VHB, PFMPFM Group,PFM Group, SageSage PolicyPolicySage PolicyGroup,Group, Group, Inc, MontgomeryMontgomery CountyCounty County Government, Government, October October 2015 2015 8 8 Ibid, AppendixAppendix 6a,6a, 6a, 6b 6b

9 9 Ibid, AppendixAppendix 6b 6b

10 1° VHB PlanningPlanning CostCost Cost Estimate Estimate Estimate Memo,Memo, Memo, September September 20, 20, 2013 2013

2 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal thesethese kindkind of of additional additional expenses. expenses.expenses. The TheThe funding funding fundin strategyg strategystrategy is not isis fully notnot defined fullyfully defined or presented or presented in thethe TaskTask Force ForceForce Report, Report,Report, nor nornor are areare projections projections projections of costs ofof costscosts beyond beyond the initial thethe initial initialstage stagedescribed described in thethe Report.Report.Report. The TheThe PFM PFM Group Group in in Appendix Appendix 6b 6b 6bshows showsshows at leastat at least least $5,755,224,000 $5,755,224,000 $5,755,224,000 of needed of needed CountywideCountywide tax tax revenues revenues through throughthrough 2046 20462046 to payto to pay payfor forthe for the coststhe costs c incurredosts incurred incurred to build toto this buildbuild initial thisthis initialinitial part (four(four of of eleven eleveneleven routes) routes) of ofthe thethe BRT BRTBRT System. SySystem.stem.

In thethe interestinterestinterest of of transparency transparency and andand fully fullyfully informing informing the public the public of possible ofof possiblepossible tax and taxtax other andand other financial liabilities, liabilities, the thethe true truetrue cost costcost of theofof the theITA/RTS ITA/RTSITA/RTS implementation implementation should should be clearly be clearly defined byby the the County County Executive Executive prior priorprior to seekingto seeking any anyrelated relatedrelated legislation legislationlegislation from the from the Maryland StateState Legislature LegislatureLegislature in ininthe the 2016 2016 Session SessionSession or building oror buildingbuilding any anyparts partsparts of the of proposed the proposed BRT SystemSystem with withwith county countycounty funds. funds.funds Note. Note Note that that that similar similar similar legislation legislationlegislation was introducedwaswas introducedintroduced by the by the Montgomery County County Delegates Delegates during during the the 2015 2015 Legislative LegislativeLegislative Session Session but was but laterwas later withdrawn at at Mr. Mr. Leggett's Leggett'sLeggett’s request. request.

3 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal The MCCFMCCF Transportation Transportation Committee, Committee,Committee, chaired chairedchaired by byMr.by Mr. Jerry JerryJerry Garson, Garson, carefully carefullycarefully analyzed analyzed available public publicpublic reports reports regarding regarding transportation, transportation,transportation population,, populationpopulation, and ,employment and employment growth growth projections for forfor Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty to determine toto determinedetermine baseline baselinebaseline data datafor evaluating for evaluating the scope the scope and transittransit needs needs now now and and in ininthe the future. future. In addition,In addition,addition a variety, a varietyvariety of alternative ofof alternative public public transportation and andand transit transit solutions, solutions,solutions, both bothboth locally locallylocally and and nationallyand nationallynationally were were investigated.were investigated.investigated. Rather RatherRather than focusingfocusing solely solelysolely on onon a aBRT,a BRT,BRT, system system as asasshown shown in the inin theTTFthe TTF TTFReport, Report, we focused we focused on on identifying the thethe most mostmost comprehensive comprehensivcomprehensive ande and cost-effective cost-effectivecost-effective solutions solutions to Montgomery toto MontgomeryMontgomery County County transportation needs needsneeds now nownow and andand in inthein thethe future. futurefuture. Based. BasedBased on our onon analysis,ourour analysis,analysis, MCCF MCCFMCCF proposes proposes these solutions:solutions:solutions:

• Provide Free FreeFree Ride-on Ride-onRide-on Bus Bus Bus Service Service Service at ata at costa acost cost of approximatelyof of approximately approximately $21 $21- 23 -Million- 2323 MillionMillion per year.year. The The Ride RideRide On OnOn bus bus bus system systemsystem is istheis thethe most mostmost accessible accessibleaccessible transit transittransit service service in the in the County.

• Work with withwith WMATA WMATA WMATA to to toimplement implement implement the the the Q9 Q9 QMetroExtra9 MetroExtra MetroExtra limited limited limited stop stop stopexpress expressexpress bus bus service onon Veirs Veirs Mill Mill Road Road between between Rockville Rockville and and Silver Silver Spring Spring via Wheaton, via Wheaton, with anan estimatedestimated cost cost of of $1-2 $1$1-2 -Million.2 Million.Million .

• Implement the the MD MD 355 355 Ride Ride On On Plus Plus (ROP) (ROP) Transit Transit Improvements Improvements as as proposed by byby the thethe Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Department DepDepartmentartment of Transportation ofof TransportationTransportation (MCDOT) (MCDOT) (MCDOT) on RouteRoute 355355 (Rockville (Rockville(Rockville Pike) Pike)Pike) which whichwhich would wouldwould cost cost $21 $21 Million. Million.Million. The Theproposal proposalproposal includes all allall electric electricelectric buses, buses,buses, 17 1717 additional additional Capital Capital Bikeshare Bikeshare stations, stations,stations, and transit and transit signal prioritypriority at atat 31 31 intersections. intersections.

• Increase thethe free-to-the-County free-to-the-Countyfree-to-the-County Express ExpressExpress Bus BusBus Services. Services.Services. WMATA WMATAWMATA will willwill implement additional additional express expressexpress bus busbus services servicesservices on Routeonon RouteRoute 29 (Colesville 2929 (Colesville Road) Road) in in March 2016.2016.2016 . This ThisThis will willwill not not cost cost the thethe County CountyCounty any anyany money. money.money. We Wealso alsoalso recommend recommendrecommend implementation of ofof MetroExtra MetroExtraMetroExtra Service ServiceService along along Route Route 29 similar29 similarsimilar to the to recently the recentlyrecen tly implemented K9 K9 MetroExtra MetroExtra on on New New Hampshire HampshireHampshire Avenue AvenueAvenue which whichwhich has hasresultedhas resultedresulted in a in a 65% increaseincrease in inin ridership ridershipridership

• Implement real realreal time timetime computer computercomputer traffic traffic traffic signalization signalization signalization control control control and/or and/or and/or adaptive adaptiveadaptive signal technologytechnology to toto reduce reducereduce congestion congestioncongestion and andand enhance enhanceenhance bus service,bus serviceservice, as is, beingas is being done aroundaround the the United United States. States. The TheThe County's County's County’s DOT DOTDOT consultants consultants consultants advise adviseadvise this could thisthis could could reduce traveltravel times times by byby 15% 15%15% which which which will willwill improve improveimprove transit transittransit travel traveltravel times timestimes on corridors onon corridorscorridors such asasas RoutesRouteRoutess 355 355355 and and 29. 29.

• Implement a a data data driven driven process process to tooptimize optimize and and improve improve our currentour current systemsystem with with a a flexible, flexible,flexible, responsive responsiveresponsive bus busbus transit transittransit system. system.system This . This may This resultmay may result resultin inin changing routes routes and and increasing increasing frequency frequency of Ride ooff RideRide On's On’sOn's most most heavily heavily used used routesroutes,, inin response response to toto the the location locationlocation of demand.of demand. This ThisThis "reimagining "reimagining“reimagining transit transittransit service" service"service”

4 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal was donedone recentlyrecently in in Houston, Houston, Texas, Texas, providing providingproviding 15 minute15 minute frequency frequency at almost at almost no costcost toto the the taxpayers taxpayers or or local local businesses businessesbusinesses and andand resulted resulted in 10 inin to 1010 20 to minute 20 minute faster triptrip times timestimes on onon 90% 90%90% of ofof routes. routes.routes. This ThisThis is also isis also being being adopted adopted by Omaha, by Omaha,Omaha, Los Los Angeles andand other other communities. communities. Enhancements EnhancementsEnhancements should shouldshould include includeinclude better better passenger amenities, amenities, improved improvedimproved bus bus shelters shelters and and accessibility, accessibility, as well asas aswell real as real time routeroute information information updates. updates.updates. As As Asthe thethe bus busbus fleet fleetfleet is replaced, isis replaced,replaced, we recommend wewe recommend discontinuing the thethe purchase purchasepurchase of dieselof diesel buses buses in favor in favor of hybrid of hybrid or all electricor all electric vehicles.

• FacilitateFacilitate Implementation Implementation of ofofMicrotransit MicrotransitMicrotransit Services ServicesServices such such suchas Bridj, as as Bridj, Bridjwhich ,which whichis an isis anan affordable, on-demand, on-demand,on-demand, flexible flexibleflexible network network of expressof express shuttles shuttles adaptable adaptableadaptable in real in real time andand currentlycurrently operating operatingoperating in inthein thethe DC DCDC Metro MetroMetro area. area.area.

• Prepare for forfor autonomous autonomousautonomous vehicles, vehicles, vehicles which which, which are are forare salefor for sale salnowe now innow Montgomery in in MontgomeryMontgomery Mall Mall and inin everyevery state state in in the the nation. nation. Self-driving Self-driving Self-driving vehicles vehiclesvehicles will radically willwill radically change change our our public transittransit needs, needs,needs, with with major major implications implications for planning for planning requirements. requirements. Autonomous transportation transportation will will impact impact everything everything from fromhighway highway traffic trafficpatterns pattpatterns to erns to congestion to to parking parking requirements. requirements.requirements. Lane Lane markings markings will havewill havehave to be to improved be improved at at locations where wherewhere they they are are missing missingmissing or difficultoror difficultdifficult to see, toto see, see,as the as self-driving thethe self-drivingself-driving vehicles vehicles will needneedneed these these markings markings to tobe be visible visible so sotheso thethesensors sensors can canreadcan read them them and vehicles and vehicles can remainremainremain in in their their lanes. lanes.

• Implement additional additionaladditional traffic traffictraffic demand demand demand management management management (incentives (incentives (incentives to reduce toto reducereduce congestion).

• Institute a a community community transportation transportationtransportation planning planningplanning process processprocess to engage toto engageengage neighborhood residents residents in indocumenting documenting transportation transportation needs, needs, holistic holisticholistic planning planning for thethe future,future, and and greening greeninggreening our ourour transportation transportationtransportation system. system.

• Work withwith WMATA WMATAWMATA to toto implement implement implement 8-car 8-car 8- cartrains trains trains on onthe on theMetrorail the Metrorail Metrorail Red RedLineRed LinewithLine withwith more trainstrains going going directly directly to totoShady ShadyShady Grove Grove during duringduring rush rush hour. hour.

• Implement legislation legislation so so that that the the Tri-State TriTri-State-Stat Oversighte Oversight Committee Committee for Metro for Metro will have havehave enforcement enforcementenforcement capability capability capability on onsafety on safety safety violations violations violations with withsignificant with significant significant fines for finesfines for violations.

Most important,important, in in analyzing analyzing the the suggested suggestedsuggested need needneed for additional forfor additionaladditional publicly-funded publicly-fundedpublicly-funded transit, transit, transit, MCCF,MCCF, recommendsrecommends that thatthat in in inkeeping keepingkeeping with withwith 21st-century21st-century technology, knowledge, knowledge, and and

5 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal population requirements, any new publicpublic transit must keep to the important principle of flexibility.flexibility. That is, a fixed-routefixed-route systemsystem isis notnot acceptableacceptable inin thethe 21st21st century givengiven changed cultural expectationsexpectations andand availableavailable ttechnologies.echnologies. Furthermore any new transportation projects shouldshould bebe prioritized usingusing performanceperformance metrics and measurements ofof effectivenesseffectiveness forfor reducingreducing congestioncongestion andand increasingincreasing transittransit ridershipridership

In addition, the studies completed to datedate,, and our membersmembershiphip commentscomments,, indicate that there is no public support for either a significant tax increase or an independent authority thatthat doesdoes notnot answeranswer toto thethe residents.residents. TheThe Montgomery County Civic Federation opposes an ITA.

6 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 2.0• I BACKGROUND TOTOTO THE THETHE PROPOSALS PROPOSALSPROPOSALS

As increasingincreasingincreasing density density is isongoing ongoingongoing in Montgomery inin MontgomeryMontgomery County, County,County, there therethere has been hashas beenbeena lag ina lag in construction of ofof new newnew infrastructure, infrastructure,infrastructure, and and and maintenance maintenancemaintenance of existing ofof existingexisting infrastructure. infrastructureinfrastructure. The . The Metropolitan Washington WashingtonWashington Council CouncilCouncil of of Governmentsof Governments Governments (MW-COG) (MW (MW-COG)-COG) in January in January 2015 20152015 'State‘State of thethe Region InfraInfrastructurestructure ReportReport'll’11 stated thatthat the the region region faces faces a $58a $58 Billion BillionBillion funding funding gap gap in thethe nextnext 15 15 years yearsyears for forfor infrastructure infrastructureinfrastructure repair repairrepair due duedue to years toto yearsyears of deferred ofof deferreddeferred maintenance. maintenance.maintenance. TransportationTransportation, including, including roads, roads,roads, bridges, bridges, and and public public transportation, transportation,transportation, is one is iselement oneone elementelement of of infrastructureinfrastructure requirements, requirements,requirements, along alongalong with withwith schools, schools,schools, water waterwater and sewer,andand sewer,sewer, and electric and electric and gas and gas capacity, are are all allall critical criticalcritical sectors sectors of ourof our public public infrastructure infrastructure that have that significanthave significant deferred deferred maintenance, capacity, capacity, and and funding funding gaps. gapsgaps. There. There has has been been no rail nono development railrail developmentdevelopment in the in the last 1515 years,years,years, and andand the thethe Intercounty IntercountyIntercounty Connector Connector (ICC) (ICC)(ICC) has hashas been beenbeen the theonlythe only onlymajor majormajor increase increaseincrease in in transportation connectivity connectivityconnectivity and andand capacity. capacity.capacity. Most Most residents residents use their use privatetheir private vehicles vehicles for for transportation within within the thethe County. CountyCounty. .

Our reportreport focuses focuses on on transportation, transportation, as requestedasas requrequestedested by the by Countythe County Executive. Executive.

Since completioncompletion of of the the ICC, ICC, morning morningmorning congestion congestioncongestion is observed is observed on 1-495 onon 1-495I -westbound495 westbound from from Prince George'sGeorge'sGeorge’s County CountyCounty at at atthe thethe merge mergemerge of of1-95 of 1-95 I- 95southbound, southbound,southbound, including includingincluding in Montgomery in Montgomery County, fromfrom New New Hampshire Hampshire Ave. Ave.Ave. to to1-270.to 1-270.I-270 Congestion. CongestionCongestion also alsoalso occurs occursoc cursalong along the entire the entire length ofof 1-270 I1-270-270 southbound southboundsouthbound in in inthe the the AM. AM. AM. In theInIn the theafternoon afternoonafternoon congestion congestioncongestion appears appears on 1-495 on 1-495I-495 eastbound, with with backups backups beginning beginning at Tysonsat Tysons Corner, Corner, Virginia Virginia and extending and extending to the to the American Legion Legion Bridge Bridge and andand on on to toPrince PrincePrince George's GeorgeGeorge's County.’s County. In addition, InIn addition,additio 1-270n, 1-270 I-270 northbound congestion congestioncongestion occurs occursoccurs at leastatat leastleast from fromfrom Shady ShadyShady Grove GroveGrove Road Road and extends and extends into intointo Frederick County. County. Both Both Both spurs spursspurs of of1-270of 1-270I-270 are are congested congestedcongested when whenwhen high high highoccupancy occupancyoccupancy vehicle vehicle ((HOV)HOV) requirementsrequirements are areare in inin effect effecteffect in ininthe the afternoon. afternoon. Because BecauseBecause of this of of thiscongestionthis congestioncongestion on the on the interstateinterstate routes, routes, motorists motorists then thenthen move movemove to local toto locallocal roadways, roadways,roadways, including iincludingncluding MD 355 MD MD and 355355 Route and Route 29, andand out-of-areaout-of-areaout-of-area traffic traffictraffic is isisintroduced introduced on onto neighborhood to neighborhoodneighborhood streets. streets.streets. Reducing Reducing the hours the hours of HOVHOV operationoperationoperation from from 3:30 3:303:30 pm pm to to 6:30 6:306:30 pm, pm, to to4:00 4:004:00 pm pm to 6:00to 6:006:00 pm, pm, and andadding adding EZ Pass EZEZ Pass high occupancyoccupancy toll tolltoll (HOT) (HOT)(HOT) lane lane costing costing to theto theexisting existing HOV HOVHOV lanes lanes would would reduce reduce congestion.

Last year,year, the thethe County CountyCounty Executive Executive proposed proposed the the creation creation of a ofMontgomery a Montgomery County County Independent Transit Transit Authority Authority (ITA) (ITA)(ITA) to servetoto serveserve as theasas themechanism mechanism to achieve to achieve the staged the staged implementationimplementation of ofof a aaBus BusBus Rapid RapidRapid Transit TransitTransit system systemsystem (BRT). (BRT).(BRT). As part AsAs partofpart his ofof push hishis pushpushto implement to implement the ITAITA andand BRT,BRT, Mr. Mr. Leggett LeggettLeggett also also constituted constitutedconstituted a Transita a Transit Transit Task Task Task Force Force Force (TTF). (TTF). (TTF). The TheTheTTF TTFTTF

11 2015 StateState of ofof the thethe Region:Region: Region: Infrastructure Infrastructure Infrastructure Report,Report, Report, MetropolitanMetropolitan Metropolitan WashingtonWashing Washingtonton CouncilCouncil Council of Governments. of Governments. http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/pF5bXFw20150115102928.pdfhttp://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/pF5bXFw20150115102928.pdf

7 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal met duringduring the thethe early earlyearly part partpart of of of2015. 2015.2015. It wasIt It was was then then then on on hiatuson hiatus hiatus and andandreconstituted reconstitutedreconstituted in summer in summer 2015 inin ananan attempt attemptattempt to toto push push forward forward the thethe ITA ITAITA and and BRT. BRT.

2.1 Bus Rapid Transit Concept

The suggestionsuggestion for for a aBRT BRT system systemsystem or ornetworkor networknetwork was waswas reintroduced reintroducedreintroduced to the to county the county by by Councilmember Marc Marc Elrich, Elrich,Elrich who, whowho proposed proposedproposed a network aa networknetwork of primarily ofof primarilyprimarily north-south north-southnorth- routessouth routes based onon otherother BRT BRT models modelsmodels found foundfound in otherinin otherother more moremore high-density high-densityhigh-density locations locationslocations such assuch Rio asas de Rio de Janiero,Janiero, Brazil.BrazilBrazil. .The TheThe BRT BRTBRT concept concept concept was waswas introduced introducedintroduced in 2000, in 2000, as seen asas seenseen in Montgomery inin MontgomeryMontgomery County PlanningPlanning Department Department documents. documents. The The BRT BRTBRT could could could involve involveinvolve additional additionaladditional bus-only bus-onlybus -only lanes ononon majormajormajor roads roadsroads and and would wouldwould require requirerequire specially-designed specially-designedspecially-desig busesned buses with guidewith guidewheels, wheels, to to be keptkept toto a a specific specific route, route, preferable preferablepreferable the thethe center centercenter of the ofof theroad.the road.road. Large LargeLarge stations stationsstations would would be be constructed along alongalong the the route route in inthe thethe center center of the of theroadway roadroadway waywhich which pedestrians pedestrians would wouldreach reach by crossingcrossing the thethe street. street.street. The TheThe system systemsystem would wouldwould also alsoalso require requirerequire that thatthethat buses thethe busesbuses have havethehave ability thethe abilitytoability to change thethe signalization signalization to to toallow allowallow preference preferencepreference for forthefor themovementthe movementmovement of the ofof buses.the the buses. buses. Plans Plans called forfor road road widening, widening, in insome some cases cases within within the theexistingthe existing rights-of-way rightsrights-of-way-of -(ROW),way (ROW),(ROW), although beyond beyond the thethe existing existiexistingng roadbed, roadbed,roadbed, and andand in some inin somesome cases, cases,cases, beyond beyondbeyond the ROW, thethe ROW,ROW, which whichwhich would requirerequire the the county county to topurchase purchase private private property property along along the routes the routes through through a a condemnation process process called called 'quick ‘quick'quick take.' taketake.' Stations.’ StationsStations would wouldwould be constructed, bebe constructed,constructed, and existing andand existingexisting utilities would wouldwould be bebe moved movedmoved to to toaccommodate accommoaccommodatedate the the thenew newnew roadbed roadbedroadbed and andstations.and stations.stations. Substantial Substantial parking lots lots will will also alsoalso be bebe required, required, as asshown shown in the in currentthe current Maryland Maryland Transportation Transportation Authority (MTA) (MTA)(MTA) plans. plans.

For thethe plannedplanned BRT BRTBRT routes, routes,routes, the thethe County CountyCounty would wouldwould eliminate eliminateeliminate a quantity aa quantity quantity of left ofof turns leftleft turnsintoturns intointo businesses and and side side streets, streets, by by building building dedicated dedicated transitway transitway lanes laneslanes along alongthe middle the middle of of the roadways.roadways. This ThisThis conclusion conclusionconclusion is basedis based on theon thestudies studiesstudies commissioned commissioned by County by County Executive Leggett. Leggett.12 The CountyCounty is isis considering consideringconsidering eliminating eliminatingeliminat ingone one or more or more traffic traffictraf lanesfic lanes along MDMD RouteRoute 355, 355, Veirs VeirsVeirs Mill MillMill Road, Road,Road, and andand U.S. U.S.U.S. 29, 29, 29, which which which would would would increase increaseincrease traffic traffictraffic congestion on on these these routes routes and and all allsurrounding surrounding roads roads and streetsand streets as automobile as automobile drivers drivers drivers seek fasterfaster alternative alternative routes. routes. At AttheAt thethe moment momentmoment there therethere is no isis additional nono additionaladditional capacity, capacity, for for example, ononon Connecticut ConnecticutConnecticut Ave. Ave. or orOld Old Georgetown Georgetown Road Road for traffic forfor traffictraffic relocated relocated from MDfrom MDMD 355. Neighborhood Neighborhood 'cut-through' 'cut-through' ‘cut-through’ traffic traffic traffic would wouldwould increase increaseincrease significantly. significantly.significantly .

12 12 Countywide Transit Transit Corridors Corridors Functional Functional Master Master Plan,Plan, Plan, Montgomery Montgomery CountyCounty County PlanningPlanning Planning Department,Department, Department, M-NCPPC, M-NCPPC, M-NCPPC, December 20132013

8 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 2.1.1 PotentialPotential Impacts Impacts to to Specific Specific RoutesRoutes

MD 355 (Rockville Pike) With the proposals toto changechange anan existing generalgeneral traffictraffic lane lane onon MDMD 355355 to a dedicated BRT-onlyBRT-only lane from Shakespeare Boulevard,Boulevard, near MilestoneMilestone Shopping Center in Germantown, to the Bethesda Metro Station 24/7 toto accommodate the limited BRT service proposed, traffictraffic congestion will increase.

The ITDP estimatedestimated thatthat onlyonly 250250 ridersriders perper hourhour would use the Rockville PikePike BRT system during thethe morningmorning rushrush hour. hour. This is comparedcompared withwith ovoverer 25,00025,000 vehicles that use Route 355 each day in eacheach direction.direction. TheThe newnew BRTBRT routeroute for the MD 355 SouthSouth area, fromfrom RockvilleRockville to Bethesda,Bethesda, wouldwould add onlyonly seven additionaladditional BRT stationsstations along Rockville Pike south ofof RockvilleRockville thatthat areare notnot currentlycurrently WMATA WMATA metrometro stationsstations.. In addition, the new route contradicts thethe existing MasterMaster Plan, on which homeowners rely and reference whenwhen purchasingpurchasing homes.

The BRTBRT stopsstops proposedproposed byby the MontgomeryMontgomery CountyCounty PlanningPlanning Board do not include the TwinbroTwinbrookok Metro station, from whichwhich busesbuses toto PrincePrince George’sGeorge's County andand the eastern part of Montgomery CountyCounty leaveleave (e.g., the C4). MoreoverMoreover itit willwill not stop at the SShadyhady Grove Metro station,station, which connects with 2828 bus routes, including thethe MTAMTA Express Buses, which go to placesplaces suchsuch asas BWIBWI Airport, FortFort Meade,Meade, HagerstownHagerstown,, and the City of Frederick. The routeroute alsoalso doesdoes notnot connectconnect withwith the proposed CorridorCorridor CitiesCities TTransitway.ransitway. ItIt willwill notnot stopstop at thethe LakeLake ForestForest TransitTransit Center,Center, whichwhich isis thousandsthousands of feet away from the proposed stop, and it doesdoes not stopstop atat thethe MilestonMilestonee ParkPark-and-Ride.-and-Ride. Finally it does not go to the new outlet center in Clarksburg at Exit 18 ofof 1-270I-270 whichwhich would be a source of many riders.

U.S.U.S. Route 29 General traveltravel lanes andand leftleft turns could alsoalso bebe eliminated onon RouteRoute 29, causing major disruptions forfor businessesbusinesses andand neighborhood access, significant delays for vehicles accessing 1-495,I-495, and significantsignificant impacts on neighborhoods from cut-throughcut-through traffic as drivers seek alternative routes.

BRT onon thisthis corridorcorridor makes littlelittle sense becausebecause mostmost transittransit tripstrips are throughthrough trips that travel to and from places off the corridor, suchsuch asas Laurel,Laurel, Ashton,Ashton, andand severseveralal Park and Ride lots that are located away from ofof RouteRoute 2929.. As ITDP notes,notes, mostmost of the demand is in the lower part ofof thethe corridorcorridor closestclosest to to the the Metro Metro Station. Station. There areare nono busbus stopsstops along six miles of the corridor andand most ofof thethe busesbuses do not stop aloalongng Route 29 untiluntil they get to the Silver SpringSpring MetroMetro station.station. AsAs noted by the ITDP study,study,

9 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal "Most“Most ofof the the [transit] [[transit]transit trips] tripstrips on on onUS USUS 29 2929are are 'through 'through‘through trips' trips'trips’ from fromfar-flung farfar-flung- flungsuburban suburbansuburban areas, areas,soareas, so a large numbernumbernumber of ofof riders ridersriders are areare passing passingpassing through throughthrough the entirethe entireentire corridor corridorcorridor to the to Silver the SilverSpring Spring metro. Therefore,Therefore, relatively relativelyrelatively few few are areare getting gettinggetting on onandon andand off along offoff alongalong the corridor. thethe corridor.corridor. As such, As such,there there are relativelyrelatively few few concentrations concentrations of boardingof boarding and and alighting alighting delay delaydelay other otherotherthan at thanthan the atSilver the Silver Spring metro.metro. So, So, the the benefits benefits of ofBRT BRT infrastructure infrastructureinfrastructure on the onon USthe 29 US Corridor 29 CorridorCorridor would would not be not be particularly great." great.great." ”"As "As “ Aswas waswas shown shownshown by the byby theboardingthe boardingboarding and alightingandand alightingalighting data, thedata, very thethe limited veryvery limitedlimited number ofof boarding boarding and and alighting alighting passengers passengerspassengers along along Route Route 29 indicates 29 indicatesindicates that most that ofmost the of the trips alongalongalong Route RouteRoute 29 29 are are on onon express expressexpress buses, buses,buses, making makingmaking very veryv fewery fewstopsfew stopsstops until theyuntiluntil reachthey reach downtown Silver Silver Spring Spring or oreven even continuing continuingcontinuing on into on intothe District the District of Colombia. of Colombia. For this For this corridor, the the primary primary problem problem that that BRT BRT solves solvessolves - delays -- delaysdelays due dueto due boarding to to boarding boarding and alighting and and alighting alighting — is — – is largely absentabsent except except at atat the thethe Silver SilverSilver Spring SpringSpring metro metrometro and and adowntownnd downtowndowntown Silver SilverSilver Spring." Spring."Spring.”

"While“While therethere are are pockets pockets of ofprojected projected densification densification along alongalong the US thethe 29 USUS corridor, 29 corridor,corridor, the types the types of delaydedelaylay thatthat BRT BRT is isis designed designed to toreduce reduce are are not not notprominent prominent on the on US the 29 US corridor. 2929 corridor.corridor. Because the thethe land-use land-useland-use pattern patternpatter isn islargelyis largelylargely that thatthat typical typicaltypical of land of lland andadjacent adjacent to a limited to a limited access access highway, such such as as strip strip malls malls and andand set-back setset-back-back single single family family homes, homes,homes, none noneof these of thesetypes oftypes of delay areare typicallytypically observed." observed.observed." 'We” 'We“W doe donotdo not notrecommend recommendrecommend that thatRoutethat RouteRoute 29 should 2929 shouldshould be included bebe includedincluded on aa shortshortshort list list of of future future BRT BRTBRT corridors." corridors."corridors ITDP.” ITDP ITDP recommends recorecommendsmmends additional additional express express services. services.13

2.2 Independent TransitTransit AuthorityAuthority ConceptConcept

In JanuaryJanuary 2015, 2015, County CountyCounty Executive ExecutiveExecutive Leggett LeggettLeggett requested requestedrequested new newnew Maryland MarylandMaryland state statestate legislation legislationlegislation that wouldwould allow allowallow Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty to createtoto create create an ITA.anan ITAITA. The. TheThenew new newstructure structurestructure would wouldwould perform anan end-run endend-run-run around around the the County County Charter Charter and and the theCounty County Charters ChartersCharter's taxing taxingtaxing limits, limits,limits, which hadhadhad been been put put in in place placeplace by byby voters votersvoters in 1990inin 19901990 and and reaffirmed reaffirmed by a by byreferendum aa referendum in 2010. inin 2010. 2010. That referendumreferendum amended amended Section Section 305 305 of oftheof thethe Charter, Charter,Charter, and andand required requiredrequired a unanimous aa unanimousunanimous vote vote of thethe CountyCountyCounty Councilmembers CouncilmembersCouncilmembers to tolevy levy a tax a taxon realonon real realproperty propertyproperty that willthat produce will produce revenue revenue that exceedsexceeds the thethe annual annualannual limit limitlimit on on property property tax taxtaxrevenue revenuerevenue set inset that in section,thatthat section,section, i.e., above i.e.,i.e., above the the rate ofofof inflation. inflation.inflation.

If the ITAITA is isis implemented, implemented,implemented, elected electedelected representatives representativesrepresentatives would wouldwould not benotnot the be authority thethe authorityauthori thatty raises that raises taxes forfor transit transit purposes. purposes.purposes. Instead, Instead,Instead, the the thITAe ITA ITAwould wouldwould have havehave that thatauthority,that authority,authorit withy, the withwith County the County Council having having veto veto authority authority only only for fora particular aa particular increase. increase.

In thethe JanuaryJanuary 2015 2015 legislative legislativelegislative session, session,session the, thethe Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty delegates delegatesdelegates introduced introducedintroduced MC24-15MC24-15 Montgomery CountyCounty — – Transit Authority,Authority, which wouldwould create create a acountywide countywidecountywide

13 13 Demand andand ServiceService Planning PlanningPlanning Report ReportReport to to toMontgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County County DOT, DOT, ITDP, ITDP, 2012 20122012

1010 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal special taxing district andand raiseraise taxestaxes aboveabove thosethose allowedallowed byby thethe CCounty'sounty’s Charter.Charter. The ITA wouldwould be an independentindependent agencyagency runrun byby a five-personfive-person board appointed by one person - the CountyCounty Executive. ThereThere wouldwould bebe nono directdirect oversight of thethe ITA operations, including its own procurement process, the authorityauthority to enter intointo contracts with other governments and private parties, and the authority to take private property through thethe emineeminentnt domaindomain oror ‘quick'quick take’take' process.process. It would be neither answerable to,to, nornor accountable to us –— the the taxpayers taxpayers and and residents. residents. Most important, the ITA would have the authorityauthority to take on significantly moremore debt.debt. This debt and debtdebt serviceservice costscosts would not apappearpear onon ourour County'sCounty’s books,books, butbut would still bebe paid for by the CCountyounty residents.

The principalprincipal reason for this radical change in the County government is to finance the construction andand operationoperation ofof thethe proposedproposed BRTBRT system,system, butbut thethe newnew ITAITA would have far-reachingfar-reaching powers that would extend toto the creationcreation ofof bridges, ports, subways, tunnels, and any other related projects ifif itit soso desired. desired. The extentextent of the County government'sgovernment’s control would bebe limited to thethe approval of ITA projects in the County Capital ImprovementImprovement Program (CIP) budgetbudget andand provisionsprovisions in relevant master plans. ProjectProject descriptions withinwithin thethe CIPCIP are very short, no more than two or three pages, withwith little detail.detail. As a result,result, itit isis difficultdifficult forfor residentsresidents toto knowknow howhow thethe project might affecaffectt them andand theirtheir property.property.

The proposedproposed ITAITA wouldwould overseeoversee allall RideRide OnOn bus bus system system functions; functions; all bus systems, including finance,finance, maintenance,maintenance, planning, and operations;operations; any transittransit funded by the public would bebe run underunder the proposed ITA which would be comcompletelypletely independent from the Montgomery County Government,Government, and hence, from the people who rely on a representative democracy to ensure the people'speople’s business is open and accountable to the public.public.

Below is the synopsis of thethe January 2015 bill,bill, according ttoo the Montgomery County Delegation'sDelegation’s website, bolding forfor emphasisemphasis only.only. TheThe bill,bill, MCMC 2424-15,-15, waswas introducedintroduced on January 2323,, 2015 inin thethe StateState LegislatureLegislature as House Bill 104.

AtAt the time of this writing nono revisedrevised final final bill bill has has been been sent sent to to the the Delegation. Delegation. To respond to Mr. Leggett'sLeggett’s request of the MCCF, wewe decided decided to to work work withwith thethe existingexisting bill.bill.

"For“For the purpose of authorizing the governing body of Montgomery County to create, byby locallocal law,law, aa TransitTransit AuthorityAuthority toto perform county transit functions asas an instrumentalityinstrumentality ofof thethe county and body corporate and politic and governed by a certaincertain board;board; authorizing the governing body, by local law, to create aa specialspecial taxingtaxing districtdistrict to finance the cost of

11 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal county transittransit functions, functions,functions, impose imposeimpose a certain aa certain special special tax, specifytax, specspecify theify the organization of of the the Transit Transit Authority, Authority, specify specify certain certain powers powers of the of the Transit Authority,Authority, establish establishestablish a certain aa certain budget budget process process for the for Transit the Transit Authority, and and specify specify certain certain other other matters matters related related to the to Transit the Transit Authority; providing providingproviding that thatthat provisions provisionsprovisions of the of of t Montgomerythehe MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Charter CharterCharter do notnot applyapply to to the the Transit Transit Authority Authority except except under under certain certain circumstances; circumstances; providing that thatthat a aacertain certain tax tax limitation limitation does doesdoes not notapply apply to certain to certain revenue revenue raised forfor certain certain purposes; purposes; authorizing authorizing the theTransit TransitTransit Authority AuthorityAuthority to provide to provide for thetthehe issuanceissuance of of certain certain revenue revenue bonds bondsbonds for certainforfor certain purposes, purposes, subject subject to certaincertain conditions conditions and and exempt exempt from fromfrom certain certaincertain provisions provisionsprovisions of law." of law."law.”

A hearinghearing was was held held on on the the Bill Bill on onon Friday FridayFriday January JaJanuarynuary 30, 30, 30,2015 20152015 at 6:00 at 6:00 PM PMin the inin Thirdthe Third Floor Floor Hearing Room,Room, Stella Stella Werner Werner Council CouncilCounci Officel Office Bldg., Bldg., 100 100100 Maryland Maryland Ave., Ave., Rockville, Rockville, MD. MDMD..

Based in inin part partpart on onon public publicpublic opposition opposition to the to thethebill, bill,it was itit waswaslater laterlaterwithdrawn withdrawn by Mr. byby Leggett. Mr.Mr. Leggett.

12 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 3.0' n MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNTY CIVIC CIVIC FEDERATION FEDERATION RESPONSE RESPONSE

There areareare significant significantsignificant structural structural problems problemsproblems with with with the the proposedthe proposed proposed ITA andITA ITA BRT.and and BRT. BRT.In this In this section we wewe analyze analyze these these issues, issues, and andand as as asMr. Mr. Leggett Leggett requested requestedrequested of the ofof MCCF,thethe MCCF,MCCF, we we provide viable viable cost-effective costcost-effective-effective alternatives alternatives which which address address the possible the possible need forneed additional forfor additional transit in inin the thethe 21 2121Stst century. We WeWe show show show that that that a afixed-routea fixed-route fixed-rou diesel-buste diesel-busdiesel- bussystem systemsystem is not isis the notnot only thethe onlyonly alternative to to a a possible possible need need for for additional additional transit. transit.transit. In addition, In addition,addition, we show we showthat such that a such a system hashas been been overcome overcomeovercome by byby events, events,events, and andand does doesdoes not notmeetnot meetmeet the realities thethe realities realities of 21st-century ofof 21st-century21st-century expectations for for transportation. transportation.

As U.S,U.S, Secretary SecretarySecretary of of of Transportation Transportation Transportation Foxx FoxxFoxx has hashas said, said,said, "In thirty"In “In thirtythirty years yearsyears the transportation thethe transportationtransportation system in in the the United UnitedUnited States StatesStates will will will be be abe fossil a a fossil fossil — a— –relic a relicrelic of the ofof 20th thethe 20th 20centuryth century that utterly that utterly fails fails Americans in in 2045." 2045.”2045." He He He went went went on on onto to say,to say, say, "For "For “For too too toolong, long,long, our nationalourour nationalnational dialogue dialogue about about transportation has hashas been beenbeen focused focusedfocused on on onrecreating recreatingrecreating the thepast.the past. past. Instead, Instead, we need we needneedto focus toto focusfocuson on the trendstrends that that are are shaping shapingshaping the thethe future." future."future.”

The MCCFMCCF believes believes that that that the the the proposed proposed proposed ITA ITAITA power power power over over over infrastructure infrastructure infrastructure and pocketbooksand pocketbookspocketbooks is, inin ourour opinion, opinion,opinion, too tootoo broad. broad. broad. An An ITA ITA or aoror BRT a BRTBRT should shouldshould not benotnot approved be approvedapproved or implemented. or implemented.

3.1 Cost Analysis

The MCCFMCCF Transportation Transportation Committee CommitteeCommittee has hashas reviewed reviewedreviewed the the theproposals proposalsproposals by the by County the County Executive'sExecutive’s TTF TTFTTF14 for thethe proposedproposed BRT BRTBRT routes routeroutes alongs alongalong MD MDMD 355 355 (Rockville (Rockville(Rockville Pike), PikePike), Route), Route 29,29, VeirsVeirs MillMill Road Road and and Phase Phase 1 11of ofof the thethe CCT. CCT.CCT In. Inaddition In addition addition members members memb ofers the of of Transportation thethe TransportationTransportation Committee attended attended most most of of the thethe meetings meetingsmeetings of theofof the theTTF, TTF,TTF, and andand MCCF MCCF First FirstFirst Vice Vice President President James ZeppZepp servedserved as as a a member member of of the the TTF. TTF.TTF.

Costs willwill include include construction construction costs; costs;costs; debt debt debt service; service;service; and maintenance andand maintenancemaintenance and operations and operations costs, allall to to be be borne borneborn eby by taxpayers. taxpayers.

The pre-engineeringpre-engineering estimated estimatedestimated capital capitalcapital costs costscosts for fourfor four of the ofof total thethe totaltotaleleven eleveneleven BRT routesBRT routes alone amountamount to to almost almost $2.3 $$2.32. 3billion. billion.billion This. ThisThis expense expense will willrequirewill require $147 $147 million millionmillion to $157 toto $157$157 million in inin annual annualannual principal principalprincipal and andand interest interestinterest cost, costcost, known, knownknown as the asas 'debt thethe ‘ 'debtdebtservice,' servservice,' asice the,’ as asmoney the money

14 14 County Executive'sExecutive’sExecutive's Transit Transit Task Task Force Force Public Public Draft Draft Report Report andand andRecommendations,Recommendations, Recommendations, Transit Transit Transit Task Task Force, Force,Task Force, VHBVHB PFM VHB PFM Group, SageSage Policy PolicyPolicy Group, Group, Group, Inc Inc., Inc.,., Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery County County Government, Government, Sept Sept 2015 2015 http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transithttp://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-task-force-2015/report.html-task-force-2015/report.html

13 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal will havehavehave to to be be borrowed borrowed by by the the county county taxpayers, taxpayers,taxpayers, and andthe debtthe debtrepaid repaid over theover the decades. ThisThis This could could could change changechange depending dependingdepending on onthe the term term of the of bondthe bond issuance. issuance.issuance. Normally Normally Montgomery County County issues issues 20-year 2020-year-year or orless less maturity maturity bonds. bonds.bonds. However, However,However, any other any otherterm of term of financing could couldcould affect affectaffect the thethe actual actualactual amount amountamount of the ofof thethedebt debtdebt service service per year. perper year.

Adding to ttoo this this amount amountamount is isisthe thethe annual annualannual operations operations and andandmaintenance maintenance cost forcost the for BRT thethe BRT routes,routes, estimatedestimated to to be be $93 $93$93 million millionmillion in theinin thethe initial initialinitial year year of operation of operation 15 and continuingcontinuingcontinuing to to increaseincrease to to $118.5 $118.5 million. million.million The. The The total total total estimated estimated estimated cost cost cost for thefor for four thethe fourroutesfour routesroutes at this atat time, thisthis withtime, withwith no inflationinflation beyond beyondbeyond the the first first year yearyear of construction,of construction, is $5.7 isis $5.7$5.7Billion Billion - $6.2 - - Billion $6.2 Billion Billionover the over the assumed 30-year30-year30-year life lifelife of ofof the thethe project. project.project.16 These costscostscosts would wouldwould be be in in inaddition additionaddition to theto the cost cost of the of the Ride OnOn BusBusBus system. system.

Maintenance and Operations

The annualannual maintenancemaintenancemaintenance and andand operations operationsoperations costs costs are are estimated estimated at $118.5 at $118.5$118.5 million millionmil forlion these for these four projectsprojects alone. alonealone. Since. SinceSince parts partsparts of this ofof thisthis project projectproject are notare scheduled notnot scheduledscheduled to be tocompletedto be completedcompleted until untiluntil June 2027,2027, it itit is isis very veryvery hard hardhard to to toestimate estimateestimate the thethe cost costcost for formaintenance maintenance and operationsand operations that far that far out, especiallyespecially as as we we do dodo not notnot know knowknow the thethe design designdesign details detailsdetails or inflation oror inflationinflation details details for the for next the next twelve years.years. The The estimated estimatedestimated annual annual cost costcost to theto the Real Real Property Property Taxpayers Taxpayers could could be over be over $200$200 million.million. The TheThe current currentcurrent projected projectedprojected Real Real Property Property Tax TaxTax Revenue Revenue for Fiscal for Fiscal Year Year Year2016 2016 is is $1.6 billion.billion.17 In sum,sum, thisthisthis cost cost alone alone will will result resultresult in aboutinin aboutabout a 13% aa 13%13% increase increase in real in estatereal estate taxes forfor residents residents and and businesses. businesses.

When thethethe CCTCCTCCT Phase PhasePhase 2 2 2is is is added added added to to tothis this this cost, cost,cost, the thethe annual annualannual maintenance maintenancemaintenance and andoperationsand operationsoperations cost isis estimated estimated to to be be increased increased by byan anadditional additional $11.6 $11.6 million. million.million .

Additional SevenSeven BRTBRT RoutesRoutes — – ProjectProject Costs

Real propertyproperty tax tax increases increases of of37% 37% or ormore,or more,more, or aoror mix aa mix mixof other ofof otherother taxes, taxes,taxes, can easily cancan easilyeasily occur occur occurin in the foreseeableforeseeable future, future,future if, ifthe tthehe full full BRT BRTBRT and, andand, the, the full fullCCT, CCTCCT, are, areimplemented. implemented.

15County Executive'sExecutive’sExecutive's Transit Transit TaskTask Task Force, Force, Final Final Report Report and and Recommendations, Recommendations, VHB, VHB, VHB, PFMPFM Group,PFM Group, SageSage PolicySage PolicyGroup,Group, Group, Inc, MontgomeryMontgomery CountyCounty County Government,Government, Government, OctoberOctober October 2015,2015, 2015, AppendixAppendix Appendix 6a6a 6a 16 16 Ibid, AppendixAppendix 6a, 6a, 6b 6b

17 17 Online PublicationPublication of of the the Operating Operating Budget, Budget, Montgomery Montgomery County County Office Office of Management of Management and Budget, and Budget, https://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/reports/BB_FY16_APPR/BO_REVENUEShttps://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/reports/BB FY16 APPR/BO REVENUESREVENUES

14 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal Questions on EmploymentEmployment Forecasts

As partpart ofof the the argument argument for for the the substantial substantial rise rise in taxes inin taxestaxes and implementationand implementation of the ofBRT, thethe BRT,BRT, the MWCOGMWCOG hashas has usedused used specific specific specific forecasting forecastingforecasting models, models,models stating, statingstating there there will be will a belargebe a largeincrease increaseincre ase in employment.employment. MCCF questionsquestions the the numbers numbers stated stated in thein the MWCOG MWCOG forecasts forecastsforecasts that thatthatare usedare usedused to account toto account for thethe largelarge planned planned increase increase in inemployment. employment.employment.18

In reviewingreviewing the thethe Maryland Maryland Department Department of Labor,of Labor, Licensing Licensing and andandRegulation RegulationRegulation data (seeddataata (see Table below)below)below) in in the the last last 10 10 years, years, from from 2005 2005 to to2014, 2014, we we wenote notenote that thatthat employment employmentemployment in in Montgomery County CountyCounty has hashas dropped droppeddropped by by by3,325 3,325 3,325 people; peoplepeople; from; fromfrom a total a a totaltotal of 458,668 of of 458,668 458,668 to 455,343. toto 455,343.455,343. It is difficultdifficult to to to accept accept accept that thatthat employment employment employment will will willjump jump jump by 183,100 by by 183,100 183,100 in the inin next thethe 25nextnext years 2525 yearsby a by a solid 6.1%6.1%6.1% everyevery 5 5 years yearsyears as asas stated statedstated in ininthe the forecast forecast shown shown in Table inin TableTable 3-1. 33-1.-1.

Table 3-1.3-1. Five-YearFive-Year EmploymentEmployment Forecast Forecast Summary, Summary,Summary, Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery County County 2010-2040 20102010-2040-204019

Year Total 5-Year5-Year Percent Households 5-Year5-Year Percent Jobs 5-year5-year Percent Population Increase increase Increase Increase Increase IncreaseIncrease 2010 972,500 - - 361,100 - - 510,300 - - 2015 1,020,200 47,700 4.9% 377,600 16,500 4.6% 532,000 21,700 4.3% 2020 1,067,300 47,100 4.6% 397,100 19,500 5.2% 564,400 32,400 6.1% 2025 1,109,700 42,400 4.0% 414,600 17,500 4.4% 598,800 34,400 6.1% 2030 1,154,200 44,500 4.0% 434,700 20,100 4.8% 635,300 36,500 6.1% 2035 1,184,700 30,500 2.6% 449,800 15,100 3.5% 674,000 38,700 6.1% 2040 1,203,100 18,400 1.6% 460,100 10,300 2.3% 715,100 41,100 6.6.1%1%

In contrast to toto the thethe above aboveabove data, data, the the Office Office Market Assessment Montgomery County, Maryland report whichwhich was waswas prepared ppreparedrepared for for the the Montgomery Montgomery County County Planning PlanningPlanning Department DepartmentDepartment ((JuneJune 18,18, 2015),2015),2015), shows showsshows different differentdifferent data. datadata. According. According According to that toto that report, report, from ffrom rom2004 20042004 to 2013 to 2013 2013 MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty only onlyonly added addedadded 3,027 3,0273,027 new new jobs. jobsjobs. The. TheThe data datadata from fromfrom that thatreportthat reportreport are partly are partlypartly shown below.belowbelow. .The TheThe table tabletable is isisreproduced reproducedreproduced and and contains contains updated updatedupdated data data datafrom from from2005-2014, 20052005-2014,-2014, in in Table 3-2.33-2.-2.

Please notenotenote thatthat in in 2010 2010 there therethere were werewere only onlyonly 441,583 441,583 jobs jobsjobs in Montgomery inin MontgomeryMontgomery County, County,County based, based on on thethe MarylandMaryland Department Department of of Labor, Labor, Licensing Licensing and andand Regulation Regulation reports, reports,reports, not the notnot 510,300 thethe 510,300510,300 stated inin Round RoundRound 8.3 8.38.3 of of the thethe MWCOG MWMWCOGCOG Forecast. Forecast.

We dodo notnotnot seeseesee how howhow it it itis isis probable probable that that Montgomery Montgomery County County will addwill 214,800addadd 214,800214,800 jobs from jobsjobs from 2010 byby thethe yearyear 2040, 2040,2040 ,as asas in inin the thethe 10 1010 years yearsyears from fromfrom 2005 2005 to to2014to 2014 the thethe County CountyCounty actually actually lost lostlost 3,33,32525 jobs.jobs.

18 18 Round 8.38.3 CooperativeCooperative Forecasting, Forecasting, Population Population and and Household Household ForecastsForecasts Forecasts to 2040 to 2040by Traffic by Traffic AnalysisAnalysis Analysis Zone, Zone, DepartmentDepartment of ofof Community CommunityCommunity PlanningPlanning Planning and and Services, Services, MetropolitanMetropolitan Metropolitan WashingtonWashington Washington CouncilCouncil Council of Governments, of Governments, 2014. 2014. https://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pubhttps://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/oV5bX1c20141015131835.pdf-documents/oV5bXlc20141015131835.pdf 19 19 Ibid.

15 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal Change Table 3-2.3-2. EmploymentEmployment Trends, Trends, Montgomery Montgomery County, County, 2005-2014 20052005-2014-2014 Average AnnualAnnual Payroll Payroll 2014

Industry 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 from Government 2005 FederalFederal GovernmentGovernment 39,968 39,785 40,319 41,543 43,158 45,072 46,460 47,080 46,854 46,678 6,710

State Government 1,043 1,068 1,066 1,080 1,029 1,199 1,186 1,232 1,122 1,207 164

Local GovernmentGovernment 36,935 37,397 37,469 37,860 37,834 37,140 38,450 39,669 40,70740,707 41,695 4,760 Total GovernmentGovernment 77,946 78,250 78,854 80,483 82,021 83,411 86,096 87,981 88,683 89,580 11,634 Private-SectorPrivate-Sector Employment Employment Goods-ProducingGoods-Producing Services Services

Natural ResourcesResources and and Mining Mining 709 745 806 873 719 796 620 393 258 304304 (405) Construction 29,444 30,891 30,449 28,503 24,223 22,291 23,425 23,263 23,363 23,662 (5,782) Manufacturing 14,714 14,303 14,563 14,459 13,431 12,356 11,787 11,435 11,219 11,304 (3,410) Total Goods-ProducingGoods-ProducingGoods-Producing 44,867 45,939 45,818 43,835 38,373 35,44335,443 35,832 35,091 34,840 35,270 (9,597) Service-ProducingService-Producing Sectors Sectors Trade, Transportation and and Utilities Utilities 64,990 64,349 62,631 61,075 56,566 57,287 57,440 58,193 57,607 57,824 (7,166) Information 15,105 15,208 14,089 14,335 14,117 12,818 12,6312,6344 12,232 12,359 12,608 (2,497) Financial Activities Activities 36,127 35,797 35,371 34,312 31,908 30,830 30,474 30,586 30,479 30,040 (6,087)

Professional and and Business Business Services Services 101,111 106,477 103,189 102,413 99,577 100,075 101,751 99,317 98,510 98,782 (2,329) EducationEducation and and Health Health Services Services 56,698 58,365 58,983 60,422 61,977 63,188 64,234 65,780 66,767 67,618 10,920 Leisure and and Hospitality Hospitality 39,505 37,878 37,614 38,133 37,133 36,894 37,523 39,115 40,257 41,005 1,500 Other ServicesServices 21,701 21,962 22,125 21,918 21,460 21,637 21,800 22,579 22,307 22,616 915 Total Service-ProducingService-ProducingService-Producing 335,237 340,036 334,002 332,608 322,738 322,729 325,856 327,802 328,286 330,493 (4,744) Unclassified 618 608 672 592 173 0 0 6 0 0 (618) Total PrivatePrivate Employment Employment 380,722 386,583 380,380,492492 377,035 361,284 358,172 361,688 362,899 363,126 365,763 (14,959) Total EmploymentEmployment Total EmploymentEmployment 458,668 464,833 459,346 457,518 443,305 441,583 447,784 450,880 451,809 455,343 (3,325) Loss of of Jobs Jobs 2005 20052005 to toto 2014 2014 (3,325) LossLoss ofof Private Private Sector SectorSector Employment EmploymentEmployment (14,959) Gain In LocalLocal Government Government Employment Employment 4,760 Source: MarylandMaryland Department Department of ofLabor, Labor, Licensing Licensing and andRegulation Regulation

16 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRTITA/BRT Proposal Page 44 ofof the thethe Regional RegionalRegional Employment EmploymentEmployment Trends Trends report report220° states:states:

"Metropolitan“Metropolitan Washington WashingtonWashington and andand Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty weathered weatheredweathered the Great thethe GreatGreat Recession much much better better than than the the rest rest of theof the country. country. The Theregion's region'sregion’s concentration of of federal federal government government functions functions and andandits extensive its extensiveextensive base baseofbase of contractors and and suppliers suppliers positioned positioned it to it benefit toto benefitbenefit from fromfromthe government's thethe government’sgovernment's relativerelative employment employment stability stabilitystability and and stimulus stimulus spending. spending. Employment Employment declined declined only 1.61.61.6 percentpercent (45,000 (45,000(45,000 jobs) jobs) from from 2008 20082008 to to2009 2009 and and then then expanded expanded 1.8 1.8 percent, addingadding 50,000 50,00050,000 jobs jobs to to 2011. 2011.2011.

The region'sregion’s relatively relatively strong strong economic economic performance performance in contrast in contrast with many with many other partsparts of of the the country country made made it a it magnet a magnetmagnet for in-migration,forfor in-migration,in-migration, particularly particularlyparticularly among youngeryounger millennial millennial workers workers leaving leaving college college and andgetting getting started started in their in their careers. SinceSinceSince then, then,then, the thethe expiration expirationexpiration of oftheof thethe stimulus stimulusstimulus programs, programs, drawdown drawdown of of American actions actions in in Iraq Iraq and and Afghanistan, Afghanistan,Afghanistan, budget budget wars wars on Capitol on Capitol Hill, Hill, sequestration and andand the the government government shutdown shutdown have havehave taken takentaken their theirtheir toll. The toll.toll. 2013 TheThe 20132013 sequestration imposed imposed significant significant cuts cuts in government in government contracting. contracting. Failure Failure to to reach aa comprehensivecomprehensivecomprehensive budget budget accord accord for formore moremore than than three three years years created created great overalloverall uncertainty uncertainty regarding regarding existing existing and and andfuture futurefuture Federal FederalFederal government government contracts and and directly directly impacted impactedimpacted contractors' contractors’contractors' employment employmentemployment levels levels and their and their willingness to toto commit commitcommit to totolong-term longlong-term-term leases. leases.leases. With With the Bipartisanthe Bipartisan Budget Budget Act of Act of 2013, thethe uncertainty uncertaintyuncertainty has has been been reduced reducedreduced somewhat, somewhat,somewhat, but butbutthe thebudget budget wars wars continue to to influence influence the the regional regional economy. economy.

The region'sregion’s employment employment growth growth has hashas slowed slowedslowed from fromfrom 1.4 1.4and1.4 andand1.3 percent1.31.3 percent annual annual growth in inin 2011 20112011 and and 2012, 2012, respectively, respectively,respectively, to toto1.0 1.01.0 percent percent in 2013 inin 20132013 and and 0.5 0.5percent percent for thethe 1212 monthsmonths from ffromrom August AugustAugust 2013 20132013 through through July JulyJuly 2014. 2014.2014. Higher-wage HigherHigher-wage-wage jobs jobs traditionally based basedbased in inin office officeoffice space spacespace are areare growing growing more moremore slowly slowly than thanlower-wagethan lowerlower-wage- wage service jobsjobs in in restaurants, restaurants, retailing retailing and andand hospitals. hospitals. Federal FederalFederal government government employment is is down downdown by byby 1.8% 1.8%1.8% since since 2010. 2010. Information InformationInformation employment employmentemployment fell by fell 5.0 by 5.05.0 percent whilewhile professional, professional, scientific scientific and andand technical technicaltechnical services servicesservices grew grewgrew3.9% 3.9%with3.9% with the economiceconomic recovery. recovery. (Annual (Annual employment employment data data are areshown shownshown in Appendix inin Appendix Table A-5A-5A-5 of ofof that thatthat document, document,document and, and in ininthe the previous previous table table of this of thisreport, report,report, Table TableTable 3- 33-- 2.)2.)

Three sectorssectorssectors — —– leisure leisureleisure and andand hospitality, hospitality,hospitality, education educationeducation and and andhealth healthhealth services, services,services, and and trade andand transportation, transportation,transportation, and and utilities utilities — added–— added added 87,200 87,200 87,200 jobs jobsjobs from from from 2010 2010 2010 to 2013 toto 20132013 as comparedcompared with withwith only only 34,200 34,200 in intraditionalin traditionaltraditional office officeoffice using using categories categories of of professional and and business business services, services, information, information,information, and andfinancial financial services. services. Economic performance performance over over the thethe 12 1212 month month from from July JulyJuly 2013 20132013 to July to July2014 20142014 showed anan even even greater greatergreater shift shiftshift to totolower-wage lower-wagelower-wage industries." industries."industries.”21 This This showsshows shows that that employment in in the the County CountyCounty in infactin factfact is notisis not notgrowing. growing.

20 20 PartnersPartners for forfor Economic EconomicEconomic Solutions, Solutions, Office Office Market Market Assessment,Assessment, Assessment, Montgomery Montgomery County,County, County, Maryland.Maryland. Maryland. JuneJune 18, June 2015. 18, 2015. http://vvvvw.montgomeryplanning.orgNiewer.shtmhttp://www.montgomeryplanning.org/viewer.shtm#http://www.montgomeryplanning.org/research/documen#http://vvvvw.montgomeryplanning.org/research/documen ts/MontgomeryCounty0fficeFinalReport061815.pdfts/MontgomeryCountyOfficeFinalReport061815.pdf

17 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 3.1.1. RidershipRidership Forecasts ForecastsForecasts

DespiteDespite rapid rapidrapid growth growth in in the the region region and and in the in theCounty County in the in lastthe 10last years, 10 years, ridership ridershipridership on on Metrorail,Metrorail, Metrobus MetrMetrobusobus and and Ride Ride On On has has continued continuedcontinued to decline, to decline, as shown asas shown below belowbelow in Table inin Table Table3-3 33-3-3 and AppendicesAppendicesAppendices B B and and C. CC. .

Metrorail ridership ridershipridership peaked peaked peaked at at at745,000 745,000 745,000 boardings boardingsboardings per per per day day day in 2008.in in 200 2008. In8. 2015 In 20152015 there there are are 700,000 boardingsboardings per perper day. day.day. Metrorail MetrorailMetrorail ridership ridershipridership has has declined declined 5% in5%5% the in last the 5last years. 5 years. Bus Bus ridership peaked peakedpeaked in inin 2003 2003 2003 at atat 500,000 500,000500,000 boardings boardings per perper day. day.day. In 2015 InIn 20152015 there therethere are areare450,000 450,000450,000 Metrobus boardings. boardings. The TheThe decline decline decline in ridership inin ridershipridership has hashascontributed contributedcontributed to WMATA's to WMATA’sWMATA's financial financialfinancial problems and and they they are are considering considering another anotheranother fare farefare increase, increase, a proposal a proposal we believe we believe would would be counter-productive.counter-productive.

Despite rapidrapid growth growth in in Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County, County,County, total totaltotal vehicle vehiclevehicle miles milesmiles traveled traveled traveled (VMT) (VMT)(VMT) per per 100,000 hashas also alsoalso continued continuedcontinued on on a asteady steadysteady decline. decline. VMT VMTVMT in the inin thetCountyhe CountyCounty has hasdeclinedhas declineddeclined from fromfrom 803,803,598598 milesmiles inin 20062006 to to 729,632 729,632 miles milesmiles in in 2013. 2013.22

Advances in inin technology, technology,technology, teleworking, teleworking, online online shopping, shopping, and flexibleand flexible work scheduleswork schedules have have all contributedcontributed to to changing changingchanging travel traveltravel patterns patternspatterns nationwide nationwidenationwide and inandand Montgomery in Montgomery County. County. TrTransportationansportation technology technology is notis not only only changing changing how howwe get we from get pointfromfrom Apointpoint to point A to B point but it B but it will alsoalso require require altering altering the the underlying underlyingunderlying transportation transportation and communications and communicationscommunications infrastructure infrastructureinfrastructure of thethe County.County. Given GivenGiven the the the amount amount amount of of capitalof capitalcapital investment investmentinvestment that thatwillthat be willwill required be required to toto implement these these technology technology changes, changes,changes, as asaswell well as neededasas needed capital capitalcapital to address to address deferred deferred maintenance of ofof other otherother infrastructure, infrastructure,infrastructure, MCCF does not believe that investing $5 to $10 billion in another fixed-routefixed-route bus system is the best use of scarce resources.

21 21 Ibid.

22 Regional IndicatorIndicator Vehicle VehicleVehicle Miles MilesMiles Traveled TraveledTraveled Data, Data,Data, Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County County https://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/dataset/Regionalhttps://reports.data.montgomervcountvmd.govidataset/Regiona I-I-Indicator nd icator-Vehicator-Veh-Vehicle icle-Mi icle-Mi-Miles les-Traveled-Data/b4zy- les-Traveled-Data/b4zy--Traveled-Data/b4zy- t4it4ih hh

18 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal Table 3-3.3-3. Metrorail Average Weekday Passenger Boardings.

Montgomery County WMATA Ridership Change Change Metrorail Average Average WeekdayWeekday Passenger Passenger BoardingsBoardings 2009 2006 Station 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015 2015 Bethesda MD 355355 10,530 10,738 10,968 10,730 10,605 10,765 10,888 10,608 10,875 10,708 (22) 178 Forest Glen 2,170 2,302 2,409 2,514 2,366 2,365 2,448 2,443 2,442 2,382 (132) 212 Friendship Heights MD 355 9,771 9,713 10,189 9,696 9,804 9,957 9,671 9,703 9,620 9,466 (230) (305) Glenmont 5,944 6,096 6,117 5,966 5,857 5,850 6,190 6,149 6,270 6,185 219 241 Grosvenor MD 355 5,578 5,642 5,817 5,948 5,843 5,876 5,862 5,857 5,795 5,557 (391) (21) Medical Center MD 355 5,100 5,256 5,346 5,627 5,574 5,866 6,010 6,26,22121 5,988 5,663 36 563 Rockville MD 355 4,365 4,572 4,736 4,880 4,927 4,812 4,834 4,900 4,769 4,424 (456) 59 Shady GroveGrove nearnear MDMD 355 13,894 14,439 14,390 14,107 13,945 13,856 13,870 13,444 13,308 12,609 (1,498) (1,285) Silver Spring 14,032 14,777 15,15515,155 14,077 13,421 13,471 13,621 13,057 13,195 13,008 (1,069) (1,024) Takoma 6,362 6,466 6,664 6,811 6,685 6,488 6,143 5,823 5,813 5,774 (1,037) (588) Twinbrook nearnear MD 355 4,763 4,805 4,943 4,628 4,587 4,773 4,632 4,569 4,470 4,443 (185) (320) WheatWheatonon 4,887 4,874 4,754 4,653 4,543 4,472 4,374 4,094 4,227 4,231 (422) (656) White Flint MD 355 3,714 4,010 4,097 4,096 4,210 4,266 4,151 3,951 3,889 3,855 (241) 141 Total Montgomery County 91,110 93,690 95,585 93,733 92,367 92,817 92,694 90,819 90,661 88,305 (5,428) (2,805) Total All Stations Regionwide 713,703 724,667 750,431 746,017 748,929 743,962 744,918 725,770 721,804 712,843 (33,174) (860) Source WMATAWMATA All Daily Passenger Boardings were taken in May unless noted otherwise. http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/public_rr.cfm?

1919 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 3.2 Alternatives toto thethe Proposed Proposed BRTBRT

MCCF hashas identified identifiedidentified alternatives alternativesalternatives that that are are easier easiereasier to implement toto implementimplement and andmuch muchmuch less expensiveless expensive than thethe proposedproposed BRT. BRTBRT. These. TheseThese are areare as as asfollows. follows.follows.

• IImplementmplement free free Ride Ride On On bus busbus services services in Montgomeryin Montgomery County County with witha review a review of, andand changeschanges to, to, the the current current routes routes to maketo make them them more more direct direct and toand to reflect current currentcurrent ridership ridershipridership patterns. patterns. patterns. Free Free FreeRide Ride RideOn Onbus On bus services bus services services would would would provide provideprovide more mobilitymobility at atat less lessless than thanthan 10% 10%10% of ofthe the cost cost of theof theproposed proposed BRT BR BRTlines.T lines. The costThe cost in 20142014 forforfor this thisthis free free service service would would have havehave been been $22 $22 million. million.million. Next Next year year yearit probably itit probablyprobably will bebebe $23$23 million. million.million. This This cost cost is basedis based on onthe theamount amount of fare of farecontribution contributioncontribution made mademadeby by riders. Free Free Ride Ride On OnOn services servicesservices will willwill increase increase the the speed speed of the ofof busesthe busesbuses as both as bothdoorsboth doorsdoors can bebe usedused and and there there is is no no time time needed needed for for fare fare collection. collection. In addition InIn additionaddition free bus free bus service will will attract attract sustained sustained ridership ridershipridership and and substantial substantial new ridership.new ridership.

The MCCF Transportation Committee recommends provide free Ride On bus services for a trial periodperiod to County residents.

The fare revenuerevenue on on Ride RideRide On OnOn buses buses in in inFiscal FiscalFiscal Year Year Year 2014 2014 2014 was waswas $21,655,986. $21,655,986.$21,655,986. Currently seniors seniors can cancan ride rideride free freefree Monday MondayMonday — –Friday— Friday Friday between between between 9:30 9:30 9:30 AM AMandAM andand3:00 3:00 3:00PM. PM.PM. Children with withwith ID IDID can cancan ride rideride free freefree from fromfrom 2:00 2:00 2:00 PM-8:00 PMPM-8:00-8:00 PM PM Monday-Friday. Monday-Friday.Monday-Friday.

The costcost forfor free free Countywide Countywide Ride Ride On On bus bus service, service, would would be less bebe lessthan than10% 10%10%of the of the cost ofof the thethe proposed proposedproposed BRT BRTBRT lines linlineses on onon Route RouteRoute 355 355355 (Rockville (Rockville Pike), PikePike), Route), RouteRoute 29 29 (Colesville Road) Road) and and Veirs VeirsVeirs Mill MillMill Road, Road, and andand would wouldwould benefit benefitbenefit the entirethe entireentire County, County, not not justjust threethree roadway roadwayroadway corridors. corridors.corridors.23 Ride Ride OnOn On isis is thethe the most most most accessible accessibleaccessible transit transittransit mode mode in in the County.County.

Some jurisdictions,jurisdictions,jurisdictions including, includingincluding Vero Vero Vero Beach, Beach, Beach, FL, FL, FL,and andand Commerce, Commerce,Commerce, CA, asCA,CA, well as aswell as numerous European European towns towns that thatthat have havehave done donedone this thisthis have havehave had had hadas much asas muchmuch as a asas60% aa 60%60% increase in inin ridership ridershipridership without without other otherother inducements inducementsinducements or improvements. or improimprovements.vements.24

By eliminatingeliminating fare fare collection, collection, the thethe bus bus rides rides would wouldwould be speeded bebe speeded up and up additional and additionaladditional service could could be be provided providedprovided at atatno no nosignificant significantsignificant cost. cost.cost .

23 23 http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transithttp://www.montgomerycountymd.goy/transit-task-force--task-force- 2015/Resources/Files/Public_Draft_Montgomery_County_Transit_Task_Force_Report_092015/Resources/Files/Public Draft Draft Montgomery Montgomery County County Transit Transit Task Task Force Force Report Report 09-16-15.pdf-16 09-16-15.pdf-15.pdf

24 24 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transporthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free public transport transport

20 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

• Work withwith WMATA WMATAWMATA to toto implement implement implement the the theQ9 Q9 Q9MetroExtra MetroExtra MetroExtra limited limited limited stop stop expressstop expressexpress bus busbus service onon Veirs Veirs Mill Mill Road Road between between Rockville RockvilleRockvi andlle and Silver Silver Spring Spring via Wheaton, via WheatonWheaton, , with anan estimatedestimated cost cost of of $1-2 $1$1-2 -Million.2 Million.Million .

• Implement the the MD MD 355 355 Ride Ride On On Plus Plus (ROP) (ROP) Transit Transit Improvements Improvements as as proposed by by the the Montgomery Montgomery County County Department Department of Transportation. ofof Transportation.Transportation .

According to toto a a aMay MayMay 13, 13, 2015 2015 article articlearticle in in Bethesda Beat,Beat,

"Montgomery“Montgomery County County officials officials think thinkthink they theythey have havehave a good aa good shot shotat getting at getting federal federal funding for for a a "premium" "premium"“premium” bus busbus route routeroute that thatthat would would run withrun all-electricwith allall-electric-electric vehicles vehicles along somesome of of the the most mostmost congested congested portions portionsportions of Rockville of Rockville Pike. Pike.

Gary Erenrich,Erenrich,Erenrich, the thethe county's county'scounty’s Acting ActingActing Deputy DeputyDeputy Director DirectorDirector for Transportation forfor Transportation Policy, Policy, said thethe routeroute would would have have 14 14 buses busesbuses that thatthat would wouldwould provide provideprovide more more frequent frequent service service with fewerfewer stops stops between betweenbetween Lakeforest Lakeforest Mall Mall in Gaithersburg in Gaithersburg and andthe Grosvenor- the GrosvenorGrosvenor-- Strathmore Metro Metro station station in inNorth North Bethesda. Bethesda. The The bus bus busroute routeroute would wouldwould cost acost total a total of $21$21 million." million."million.”25 (Bethesda(Bethesda Beat May 13, 2015)2015) • Increase thethe free-to-the-County free-to-the-Countyfree-to-the-County Express ExpressExpress Bus BusBus Services. Services.Services. WMATA WMATAWMATA will willwill implement additional additional express expressexpress bus busbus services servicesservices on Routeonon RouteRoute 29 (Colesville 2929 (Colesville Road) Road) in in March 2016.2016. This This This will will will not notnot cost costcost the the County County any anyany money. money.money. We WeWalsoe also alsorecommend recommendrecommend implementation of ofof MetroExtra MetroExtraMetroExtra Service Service along along Route Route 29 similar29 similarsimilar to the toto recently the recently implemented K9 K9 MetroExtra MetroExtra on on New New Hampshire HampshireHampshire Avenue AvenueAvenue which whichwhich has hasresultedhas resultedresulted in a in a 65% increaseincrease in inin ridership ridershipridership

• Implement real realreal time timetime computer computercomputer traffic traffic traffic signalization signalization signalization control control control and/or and/or and adaptive/or adaptiveadaptive signal technologytechnology to toto reduce reducereduce congestion congestioncongestion and andand enhance enhanceenhance bus service,bus serviceservice, as is, beingas is being done aroundaround the the United United States. States. The TheThe County's County's County’s DOT DOTDOT consultants consultants consultants advise adviseadvise this could thisthis could could reduce traveltravel times times by byby 15% 15%15% which which which will willwill improve improveimprove transit transittransit travel traveltravel times timestimes on corridors onon corridorscorridors such asasas RoutesRouteRoutess 355 355355 and and 29. 29.

• Implement a a data data driven driven process process to tooptimize optimize and and improve improve our currentour current system with with a a flexible, flexible,flexible, responsive responsiveresponsive bus busbus transit transittransit system. system.system This . This may This resultmay may result resultin inin changing routes routes and and increasing increasing frequency frequency of Ride ooff RideRide On's On’sOn's most most heavily heavily used used routesroutes,, inin response response to toto the thethe location locationlocation of demand.of demand. This ThisThis "reimagining "reimagining“reimagining transit transittransit service" service"service”

25 25 ‘Premium'Premium Bus BusBus Service'Service’ Service' Could Could be be Coming Coming toto Rockvilleto Rockville Pike. Pike. BethesdaBethesda Bethesda Beat,Beat, Beat, AaronAaron Aaron Kraut,Kraut, Kraut, MayMay 13, May 2015 13, 2015

21 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal was donedone recentlyrecently in in Houston, Houston, Texas, Texas, providing providingproviding 15 minute15 minute frequency frequency at almost at almost no costcost toto the the taxpayers taxpayers or or local local businesses businessesbusinesses and andand resulted resulted in 10 inin to 1010 20 to minute 20 minute faster triptrip times timestimes on onon 90% 90%90% of ofof routes. routes.routes. This ThisThis is also isis also being being adopted adopted by Omaha, by Omaha,Omaha, Los Los Angeles andand other other communities. communities. Enhancements EnhancementsEnhancements should shouldshould include includeinclude better better passenger amenities, amenities, improved improvedimproved bus bus shelters shelters and and accessibility, accessibility, as well asas aswell real as real time routeroute information information updates. updates.updates. As As Asthe thethe bus busbus fleet fleetfleet is replaced, isis replaced,replaced, we recommend wewe recommend discontinuing the thethe purchase purchasepurchase of dieselof diesel buses buses in favor in favor of hybrid of hybrid or all electricor all electric vehicles.

• Facilitate Implementation Implementation of ofofMicrotransit MicrotransitMicrotransit Services ServicesServices such such suchas Bridj, as as Bridj, Bridjwhich ,which whichis an isis anan affordable, on-demand, on-demand,on-demand, flexible flexibleflexible network network of expressof express shuttles shuttles adaptable adaptableadaptable in real in real time andand currentlycurrentlycurrently operating operatingoperating in inthein thethe DC DCDC Metro MetroMetro area. area.area.

• Prepare for forfor autonomous autonomousautonomous vehicles, vehicles, vehicles which which, which are are forare salefor for sale salenow now innow Montgomery in in MontgomeryMontgomery Mall Mall and inin everyevery state state in in the the nation. nation. Self-driving Self-driving Self-driving vehicles vehiclesvehicles will radically willwill radically change change our our public transittransit needs, needs,needs, with with major major implications implications for planning for planning requirements. requirements. Autonomous transportation transportation will will impact impact everything everything from fromhighway highway traffic trafficpatterns patterns to to congestion to to parking parkingparking requirements. requirements.requirements. . Lane .. Lane markings markings will havewill havehave to be to improved be improved at at locations where wherewhere they they are are missing missingmissing or difficultoror difficultdifficult to see, toto see, see,as the as self-driving thethe self-drivingself-driving vehicles vehicvehicles les will needneedneed these these markings markings to tobe be visible visible so sotheso thethesensors sensors can canreadcan read them them and vehicles and vehicles can remainremain in in their their lanes. lanes.

• Support mobility-on-demand mobility-on-demandmobility-on-demand services services services with with dynamicwith dynamic dynamic routing, routing, routing, integrated integrated integrated across acrossacross all formsforms of of public public and andand shared shared transit transit with with a single aa single payment payment system system application. application. The intentintent is is to to provide provide riders riders with with a mix a mix of flexible, of flexible, accessible, accessible, cost-effective cost-effectivecost-effective mobility options optionsoptions with with with an an an integrated integrated integrated payment payment payment system. system. system. This Thiscould could be be accomplished with with self-driving self-drivingself-driving vehicles vehicles that that would would pick uppick riders up riders at their at house their house and taketake them themthem directly directlydirectly to to totheir theirtheir destination. destination.

• Implement legislation legislation so so that that the the Tri-State TriTri-State-State Oversight Oversight Committee Committee for Metro foforr Metro will have havehave enforcement enforcementenforcement capability capability capability on onsafety on safety safety violations violations violations with withsignificant with significant significant fines for finesfines for violations.

22 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal InIn analyzing the the suggested suggested need need for for additional additional publiclypublicly-funded publicly-funded-funded transit, transit, MCCF, MCCF, recommends that that in in keepingkeeping keeping withwith with 21st-century21 21st-centuryst-century technology,technology, technology, knowledge,knowledge, knowledge, and populpopulation and ationpopulation requirements, any any new new public public transit transit must must keep keep to the to importantthe important principle of flexibility.flexibility. That is,is, aa fixed-routefixedfixed-route-route system system is isnotnot not acceptableacceptable acceptable inin thethe in the21st21st 21st centurycentury century givengiven given changed changed cultural cultural expectations and and available available technologies.technologies. technologies. Furthermore,Furthermore Furthermore,, anyany anynew newtransportationtrans transportationportation projects projects should be be prioritized prioritized using using performance performance metrics metrics and measurementsand measurements of effectiveness of effectiveness for for reducing congestion congestion and and increasing increasing transit transit ridership. ridership.

In addition,addition, the the studies studies completed completed to date,to date, and and our ourmembership membership comments, comments, indicate that that there there is is no nno publico public support support for eitherfor either a significant a significant tax increase tax increase or an or an independent authority authority that thatthat does doesdoes not notnot answer answeranswer to the toto theresidents.the residents.residents. The Montgomery TheThe Montgomery County CivicCivic Federation Federation opposes opposes an anITA. ITA.

23 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal 4.0 CONCLUSION

In summary,summary ,the the MCCF MCCF Transportation TransportationTransportation Committee Committee recommends recommendsrecommend Montgomerys MontgomeryMontgomery County County look forfor more moremore cost-effective costcost-effective-effective and and more more immediate immediateimmediate methods methodsmethods of reducing ofof reducingreducing traffic traffictrafficcongestion congestioncongestion in thethe county.county.county.

Free RideRide On OnOn bus busbus service, service,service, and andand capacity capacitycapacity increases increasesincreases combined combinedcombined with withthe Houston, the Houston, Texas Texas approach of of redesigning redesigning bus bus routes routes to beto morebe more efficient efficient and effectiveanandd effective in serving in serving their their County'sCounty’s residents, residents, could couldcould substantially substantially increase increase ridership ridershipridership while whileimproving improving the quality the ofquality of local busbus service service provided provided County-wide. CountyCounty-wide.-wide.

Components of of a a Comprehensive Comprehensive County County Transit Transit Improvement Improvement Plan: PlanPlan: : • Through data-driven datadata-driven-driven analyses, analyses,analyses, significantly significantlysignificantly increase increaseincrease Ride RideRide On service On service frequency, reliability, reliability, and andand trip trip speeds speedsspeeds by completeby complete redesign redesign of routes ofof routes for the for the County'sCounty’s current current population population and and job/destination job/destination centers. centers. • Increase overall overalloverall ridership ridership by by eliminating eliminating fares faresfares on Ride onon RideRide On busses. On busses. • Add WMATAWMATA Metro MetroMetro Extra ExtraExtra enhanced enhancedenhanced bus busbus service serviceservice similar similarsimilar to the toto K9the bus K9 routebusbus route which isis already already in in service service on on selected selected segments segments of County of County corridors, corridors,corridors and , and • ExpandExpand MTAMTA express expressexpress bus busbus services servicesservices on on on1-95 1-95I- 95and and 1-270. 1-270.I-270.

Montgomery County County already already has has a multi-faceteda multi-facetedmulti-faceted public public transit transit system systemsystem (Metrorail, (Metrora(Metrorail, MARCil, MARCMARC Rail, WMATAWMATA Bus BusBus and andand Ride-On Ride-OnRide-On Bus), Bus),Bus), some somesome elements elementselements of which ofof whichwhich are areheavilyare heavilyheavily utilized utilizedutilized and and others ofof which which are are seriously seriously under-utilized, underunder-utilized,-utilized, but allbut of all which of wwhich canhich be can improved. be improved. All of our research points to the combination of the above initiatives which can be implementedimplemented relatively quickly and at no significant cost. Acting on on these these initiatives initiativesinitiatives will improveimprove our our transportation transportation system, system,system, increase increase ridership, ridership, reduce reduce auto trips, auto stimulate trips, stimulate our economyeconomy and and improve improve our our quality quality of life of lifewithout withoutwithout creating creatingcreating a separate aa separateseparate independent independindependent ent agency ororor significantly significantlysignificantly increasing increasing taxes. taxes.

The MCCFMCCF also also recommendsrecommends recommends considering considering considering the the thefollowing followingfollowing questions questions when when seeking seeking solutionssolutions to to congestion. congestioncongestion. .

Is aa BRTBRTBRT system systemsystem the thethe best bestbest way wayway to to toaddress addressaddress traffic traffictraffic congestion congestioncongestion and provideandand provideprovide transit transittransit or or is itit aaa solutionsolution in inin search searchsearch of ofofa problem?aa problem? Should ShouldShould it really itit reallyreally be the bebe only thethe solution onlyonly solutionsolution considered? What WhatWhat are are the the total total costs costs and andand related related benefits? benefits? A full AA analysis fullfull analysis of of these proposals'proposals'proposals’ costs costs and and the the benefits benefits has has not notbeen been performed performedperformed or provided oror providedprovided to to residents and and businesses. businesses.

Is anan ITAITA neededneededneeded to toto meet meetmeet the thethe above aboveabove goals goals goals or orisor it isis just itit justjust a way a wayway to borrow toto borrowborrow beyond beyond the the County'sCounty’s means means and andand a aaway wayway to to toprovide provideprovide decision-makers decision-makersdecision-makers with withpoliticalwith politicalpolitical cover? cover?

24 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

How can existingexisting transit riders bebe best served?

Which solutions work best in which areas?areas?

How can increased transittransit ridership bebe achieved?

What cancan thethe CountyCounty affordafford (especially(especially duringduring times of falling revenue)?revenue)?

How can single-occupantsingle-occupant carcar tripstrips and traffic congestion be reduced?

How can thethe CountyCounty taketake advantageadvantage ofof emergingemerging transportationtransportation technologies?technologies?

How can the County take advantage ofof emergingemerging shared vehiclevehicle economies?

Can reducingreducing the hours of HOV operationoperation onon 1-270I-270 reducereduce congestioncongestion on local roads?

25 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

APPENDICES

26 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIX A:A: MontgomeryMontgomeryMontgomery County County County Transit Transit Transit System SystemSystem Map Map

Mullg Emery C.11,1). Pao-JR Senelc

Source: Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County CountyCounty Department DepartmentDepartment of Transportation, ofof Transportation,Transportation , https://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/DOThttps://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/DOT-Transit/Resources/Files/SystemMapJul2011.pdf-Transit/Resources/Files/SystemMapJul2011.pdf

27 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

APPENDIX BB:: DecreaseDecreaseDecrease in in inMontgomery Montgomery Montgomery County County Cou ntyVehicle Vehicle Vehicle Miles Miles Miles Traveled, Traveled,Traveled 2006, 20062 006to 2013 toto 20132013

Regional IndicatorIndicator - Vehicle- Vehicle Miles Miles Traveled Traveled (VMT) (VMT) Based onon An An Effective Effective And And Efficient Efficient Transportation Transportation Network Network Indicator Indicator Summary Summary

Year Montgomery County-Number County-Number

2006 803599

2007 793741

2008 780446

2009 758337

2010 757629

2011 748641

2012 729365

2013 729632

2014

Source::Source: :Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery County County County CountyStat, CountyStat,CountyStat, Performance PerformancePerformance Measurement MeasurementMeasurement and Managementand Management and Maryland andand MarylandMaryland State Highway State Highway Administration, (as (as(as of ofof June JuneJune 2013). 2012013).3). https://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/en/stat/goals/pxi6-z29f/pt3m-2b28/8zm5-6a4xhttps://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/en/stat/goals/pxi6-z29f/pt3m-2b28/8zm5 -6a4x

28 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal

APPENDIX CC: C:: WMATA WMATAWMATA Ridership RRidershipidership From FromFrom 1992 19921992 to toto2014 2014

Metrorail and and Metrobus Metrobus Ridership Ridership metro

800,000

700,000 Ma, Mai

s 600,000 in. inss, • s 500,000 Boar Boar 400,000 a e ea

300,000 Wee Wee e 200,000 a. ase er v , iv 1DO.,000100,000

0 03` 01' 191:361 NO,00,00 NO) 1.e0s* 151.0911 lso 1.04 10) 1500 1..o.o 10.1. Fiscal YearYear 14

Source: WashingtonWashington Washington Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Area AreaArea Transit TransitTransit Authority, Authority, Metro MetroMetro Fundamentals, Fundamentals, Fundamentals, Presentation PresPresentationentation to the National to the National Capital RegionCapital RegionRegion Transportation Planning Planning Planning Board, Board, Board, November November November 18, 18, 18,2015, 2015, 2015, page pagepage 14. 14. http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committeehttp://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/abcfV1xZ20151112142622.pdf-documents/alxfV1xZ20151112142622.pdf

29 Montgomery County County Civic Civic Federation ResponseResponse toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRTITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIX DD:: MontgomeryMontgomeryMontgomery County County County Ride Ride Ride On On OnUnlinked Unlinked Unlinked Passenger Passenger Passenger Trips TripsTrips 2000 20002000 to 2012 toto 2012

s s

ip ip 31,000,000

Tr 29,000,000 er 27,000,000 eng s 25,000,000 23,000,000 d Pas Passeng

ke 2121,000,0001000,000

lin 1919,000,0001000,000

Un 17,000,000 On On 15,000,000 Zi Ny 'r, 0) tg <0 co A cbi c5 C5 'y 11, Ride Y \ Q9 46Z 6) 46Z ,„ticiz C), C: ) , i z , 0\ p%IS Av's' ic\e fl, '1/ 11,0 1, , 11,, r11, o 1le 1,19 ''1, eC)Q1 rt , 1.15,) IIIrl 10 f 119 I Fiscal YearYear

Source: Ride RideRide On OnOn Bus BusBus Fleet FleetFleet Management ManagementManagement Plan, Plan, Plan, Maryland Maryland Maryland Transit TransitTransit Administration, Administration,Administra tion,June JuneJune30, 2014, 30,30, 2014 2014,and National, and National Transit Transit Database Database

30 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIX EE: E:: Percent PercentPercent of of of Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery CountyCounty County ResidentsResidents Residents WhoWho Who TakeTake Take Public PublicPublic Transit TransitTransit tototo WorkWork

National Indicator -- PercentPercent TakingTaking PublicPublic TransitTransit toto WorkWork Based onon AnAn EffectiveEffective And Efficient TransportationTransportation Network Indicator Summary

Montgomery County-PercentCounty-Percent Year

15_3%15.3% 2006

14_6%14.6% 2007

14_6%14.6% 2008

15_2%15.2% 2009

15_1%15.1% 2010

15_8%15.8% 2011

15_8%15.8% 2012

15_6%15.6% 2013

2014

Source:Source: MontgomeryMontgomery Montgomery County County CountyStat,CountyStat, U.S.U.S. CensusCensus Bureau,Bureau, AmericanAmerican Community Survey SurveySurvey (as (as(as ofof June,June, 2013)2013) https://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/en/stat/goals/pxi6https://reports.data.montgomerycountymd.gov/en/stat/goals/pxi6-z29f/pt3m-2b28/nrv6-hb5m-z29f/pt3m-2b28/nrv6-hb5m

31 Montgomery County County Civic Civic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIXkPPENDIX I IF: BBusus RapidRapidRapid Transit Transit Cost CostCost Estimates Estimates for forfor Four FourFour Routes* RRoutes*outes*

PFM FinancialFinancial AnalysisAnalysis Page PagePage 6 6 All $$ areare Millions of Dollars

Corridor Construction Period Period (FY) (FY) Capital Cost Maintenance FacilityFacility Total Operations andand Maintenance

Year of Year of Year of Expenditure Expenditure Expenditure 2015 Cost Allocated Capital CostCost Cost 2015 Cost Initial Year Initial Cost

CCT 2016‐2020 2016-2020 $634.5 $653.5$653.5 $634.5 $653.5 2021 $14.1 Veirs Mill Road 2016‐20222016-2022 $276.3 $284.5 $13.7 $14.6 $290.0 $299.1 2023 $10.3 US 29 2016‐20232016-2023 $200.0 $205.9 $9.9 $10.6 $209.9 $216.5 2024 $19.2 355 North 2017‐20262017-2026 $619.6 $638.2 $30.8 $32.8 $650.4 $670.9$670.9 2027 $25.4 355 South 2016‐20242016-2024 $422.8 $435.5 $21.0 $22.3 $443.8 $457.8 2025 $23.9 $2,153.1 $2,217.7 $75.6 $80.2 $2,228.7 $2,297.9 **Note:Note: These preliminarypreliminary pre-engineering pre-engineeringpre-engineering cost cost estimates estimates do not include estimated land acquisition costcostss at stations and intersections, underground work, underground utilities, or road reconstruction for four bridges along RouteRoute 2929:: over Paint Branch, MDMD 650,650, NorthwestNorthwest Branch,Branch, andand SligoSligo CreekCreek.. Source:Source: http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-task-force-http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-task-force- 2015/Resources/Files/Appendix_6a_PFM_Financial%20Analysis_Summary_9-10-2015_Final.pdf2015/Resources/Files/Appendix_6a_PFM_Financial%20Analysis_Summary_9-10-2015_Final.pdf

Transit Task TaskTask ForceForce Force ReportReport Report Pages PagesPages 63-64 6363-64-64 Mobilization Number Bus Land & Soft Total Corridor of Buses Costs Acquisition Costs Cost CCT $600.0 18 $34.5 $634.5 Veirs Mill Road $164.1 14 $16.8 $16.7 $87.9$87.9 $285.5 US 29 $108.4 26 $31.2 $0.2 $60.0 $199.9 355 North $328.5 30 $36.0 $79.1 $176.0 $619.6 355 South $242.1 18 $21.6 $29.9 $129.2 $422.8 Maint Facility $57.0 $18.6 $75.6 $1,500.1 106 $105.6 $125.9 $506.2$506.2 $2,237.9 **Note:Note: These preliminary pre-engineering pre-engineeringpre-engineering estimates estimates do not include land acquisition costs at stations and intersections, undergrouundergroundnd work/utilities, or road reconstruction for four bridges along Route 29 over: Paint Branch, MD 650, NorthwesNorthwestt Branch, and Sligo Creek. LandLand acquisitionacquisition dependsdepends onon typetype of station constructionconstruction and is probably not this low. With purchasepurchase of only 106 buses there is a limit on short time between headways. Source: http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-task-force-http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/transit-task-force- 2015/Resources/Files/FINAL2015/Resources/Files/FINAL_MC_Transit_Task%20Force_Report_10222015.pdf MC Transit Task%20Force Report 10222015.pdf

3232 Montgomery County County Civic Civic Federation Federation Response toto CountyCounty Executive Executive Leggett’sLeggett's Leggett's ITA/BRT Proposal Appendix G: G:G: Legal ——– Regulatory RegulatoryRegulatory Issues IssuesIssues

Adequate PublicPublic Facilities Facilities and and the the Law Law

"Zoning“Zoning or oror rezoning, rezoning,rezoning, in in inorder orderorder to tobeto bebesupported supported as a asas valid a valid enactment enactment of the of police the police power, power, must bebe inin the the general general public publicpublic interest interest for forthe thepromotion promopromotion tionof the ofof health, thethe health,health, safety, safety,safety, and welfare and welfare of thethe community.community. Since Since local locallocal governments governmentsgovernments act actinact the inin publicthethe publicpublic interest interestinterest to provide to provide necessary public public facilities facilities such suchsuch as asschools,as schools, roads, roads,roads, parks, parks, sewer sewer and water and waterwaterfacilities, facilities,facilities, it is it is equally imperativeimperative and and proper proper that that government, government,governme innt, considering inin considering a zoning, a zoning, special special exception or or subdivision subdivision application, application,application, assess assessassess its probable its probable effect effect on these on thesefacilities, facilities, both both existing and and proposed." proposed."proposed.”

"The“The necessitynecessity for for considering considering the the effect effect of a of land a landland use applicationuseuse applicationapplication upon uponpublicupon publicfacilitiespublic facilitiesfacilities is threefold.threefothreefold.ld. First, First, in in order orderorder to totoassure assureassure protection protection of the ofof health, thethe health,health, safety safetysafety and welfare andand welfare of the of the community, it it is is appropriate appropriateappropriate to todetermineto determinedetermine at the at thetime time of rezoning of rezoning or other or otherland use land action use action whether thethethe existing existingexisting conditions conditionsconditions and and characteristics characteristics of the of public the public facilities facilities which servewhich serve the presentpresent community community and andand which which are areare intended intended to serve to serve the developmentthe development proposed proposed are are reasonable for forfor the the property property under under consideration. consideration. That ThatThat a rezoning a rezoning or other or otherland use land use action willwill ultimately ultimatelyultimately lead lead lead to totoa landa a landland use useuse which whichwhich will willNOT....havewill NOT….have NOT....have a detrimental a detrimentaldetrimental effect effectupon upon roads, sanitarysanitary and and other otherother public publicpublic facilities, facilities, is at is least atat least a material a material indication indicationindication that the that the decision would would be bebe in in the the public public interest. interest.interest. Conversely, Conversely,Conversely, where wherewhere evidence evidence is adduced is adduced that the that the zoning cancan produce produce deleterious deleterious results resultsresults in the in theform form of traffic of traffic congestion congestion and safety aandnd safety problems in in connection connection with with existing existing road road facilities facilitiesfacilities…..thethe publicpublic interest interest would would not not be be served andand the thethe lack lacklack of ofof justification justificationjustification for forgranting grantinggranting the requestthethe requestrequest would wouldwould be apparent. bebe apparent. Secondly, the the introduction introductionintroduction of ofoflarge largelarge quantities quantities of traffic, ofof traffic,traffic, population...may population…maypopulation...may be an indicationbe an indicationindication of thethe lacklack of of compatibility compatibility of ofthe the proposed proposed project project with thewith character the character of the ofsurrounding the surroundingsurrounding community, which which is isa vitala vital consideration consideration in all in "floating" all "floating"“floating” zone zonecases.zone cases.cases. Finally, Finally, not only not only the impactimpact but but the the availability availability of theseof these public public facilities facilitiesfacilities can indicate cacann indicateindicate whether whetherwhether a zoning a zoning or or other requestedrequested land land use use approval approval and and the the intended intended development development is premature is premature or or whether itit may may constitute constituteconstitute "spot" "spot"“spot” zoning. zoning.zoning. Project ProjectProject approval approvalapproval which which causes causescauses large public large public investment and and has has a apossible possiblepossible deleterious deleterious effect effect upon upon proper proper land luselandand and use capital and capital planning and and programming programming by byby requiring requiringrequiring the thethepremature prematurepremature extension extensionextension of roads...to ofof roads…toroads...to serve aserve a particular property property in in ina aremotea remoteremote are are where where these thesethese facilities facilitiesfacilities either either do not do exist not orexist are or are marginal at at best, best, cannot cannot be be said saidsaid to tobeto bean ananexample exampleexample of zoning ofof zoningzoning in the inin public thethe publicp interest."ublic interest."interest.”

"Consequently,“Consequently, these these considerations considerations are are valid valid factors factors in an in application an application to rezone to rezone property or or approve approve development development projects projects which which require require special special exception exception or or subdivision approval. approval.approval. To ToTo be be given given proper proper consideration, consideration, both bothbothexpert expertexpert and lay andand evidence, laylay evevidence,idence, whether inin the the form form of of oral oral testimony, testimony, written written reports reports or analysis or analysisanalysis by public byby public publicagencies, agencies,agencies, are are useful andand often often necessary necessary to tothe the ultimate ultimate determination determination of any of givenany given zoning zoning application. Zoning Zoning authorities authorities need need not not stop stop at the at basicthe basic issues issues of "change-mistake" of "change-mistake"“change-mis ortake” or

33 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal "compatibility",“compatibility”, but but but can can can and and and should shouldshould go go beyondgo beyondbeyond these thesethese essential essentialessential legal requirementslegallegal requirements and and analyze the thethe effect effecteffect of ofof the thethe zoning zoningzoning on on onother otherother aspects aspectsaspects relating relatingrelating to the toto public thethe publicpublic interest." interest."interest.”

"More“More recentlyrecently and and perhaps perhaps more moremore critical, critical,critical, public public facilities facilities issues issuesissues have havebecomehave becbecome importantome important in thethe subdivisionsubdivision review reviewreview process processprocess with withwith the thetheadvent adventadvent of "adequate of "adequate“adequate public publicpublic facility' facility”facility' ordinances ordinances and tests.tests. These These ordinances, ordinances,ordinances, which whichwhich are areare part partpart of theof of thesubdivisionthe subdivision subdivision regulations, regulations,regulations, can still cancan stillstill provide reasonreason for for denying denying development development permitted permitted under under a property's a property'sproperty current’s current zoning zoning category."category.”

Relevant casecase law: law:law: Montgomery County County v. v.v. Greater GreaterGreater Colesville Colesville Citizens CitizensCitizens Association, Association,Association, 70 Md. 70 70 Md. App.Md. App. App.374, 374,521374, A. 521521 A. 2d 770 (1987) Aspen HillHill Venture VentureVenture v. v.v. Montgomery MontgomeryMontgomery County County County Council, Council, Council, 265 265 265Md. Md. Md.303, 303, 303, 314, 314, 314, 287 287 287A.2d A.2dA.2d 303, 303, 308 (1972) Templeton v.v. County County Council CouncilCouncil of of ofPrince PrincePrince George's George’s George's County, County, County, 21 Md.21 21 Md. Md.App. App.App. 636, 636, 636,321 A.321321 2d A. 2d 778 (1974) Plant v.v. BoardBoard of of County County Commissioners CommissionersCommissioners for for forPrince Prince Prince George's George’s George's County, County, County, 262 262Md. 262 120,Md. Md. 120,125,120, 125,125, 127, 277 A. 2d 77,8077,80 (1971)(1971)

34 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIX H:H: MMCCFCCF Statement RegardingRegarding Transit Transit Task Task Force Force Recommendations RecommendationsRecommendations26

iVION 17)(007 RATION

- -rie • • ,..7r9 •

Members ofof the the Montgomery Montgomery County CountyCounty Civic CivicCivic Federation Federation Federation (MCCF) (MCCF) (MCCF) represent representrepresent over over over150,000 150,000150,000 households from fromfrom civic civiccivic and and and homeowners homeowners homeowners associations associations associations across across across Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery County. County. County. MCCF MCCFMCCF appreciates the the work work of of the the Task Task Force ForceForce and andand the the theopportunity opportunityopportunity to express to express our views. our views.

While thethe TaskTaskTask Force ForceForce Report ReportReport discusses discussesdiscusses many manymany important importantimportant issues issuesissues regarding regardingregarding transportation transportationtransportation challenges the the County County is isfacing, facing, MCCF MCCF does doesdoes not not notsupport supportsupport the conclusionsthethe conclusionsconclusions and recommendations and recommendations of thethe TaskTask Force Force Report Report which which was waswas approved approvedapproved by byonlyby only 12 of 12 the ofof 33thethe voting 33 votingvoting members. members.members .

• MCCF doesdoes not notnot recommend recommendrecommend creating creatingcreating an an anIndependent IndependentIndependent Transit TransitTransit Authority AuthorityAuthority (ITA) (ITA)to finance, to finance, build, operateoperate and and maintain maintain a busa bus rapid rapid transit transit (BRT) (BRT)(BRT) system. system.

• MCCF believesbelieves the thethe Task TaskTask Force Force Force Report Report Report presents presents presents a false a a false false choice choice choice for improvingfor for improving improving our transit ourour transittransit systems, betweenbetween establishing establishingestablishing an anan ITA ITAITA for for BRT BRTBRT OR OR no improvements,no improvements, and theand Report the Report focuses narrowly narrowly on on only only the the one one option. option.option.

• MCCF supportssupports improvements improvementsimprovements to toourto ourour transit transit systems systems that thatcan becan done be donedonenow which nownow whichwhichwill willwill increase transit transittransit ridership, ridership, reduce reduce single single occupancy occupancy vehicle vehicle trips, trips,help improve help improve the the environment and andand increase increaseincrease mode modemode share shareshare for for foreconomic economiceconomic development development development goals. goals. goals. These TheseThese improvements include include but but are are not not limited limited to WMATA's to WMATA’sWMATA's proposed proposed limited limited stop stop services on on Veirs Veirs Mill Mill Road Road and and Route Route 29, 29, the the proposed proposed Ride Ride On expressOn express service service on RouteRoute 355,355, andandand fare-free fare-freefare-free Ride Ride On On service. service.

• These cost-effectivecost-effectivecost-effective and and and flexible flexible flexible alternatives alternatives alternatives to to a to proposeda aproposed proposed $6-10 $6 $6-10 -billion10 billion billion investment investmentinvestment for aaa BRT BRTBRT system systemsystem and and and new new new agency agency agency would would would not not circumventnot circumvent circumvent voter voter voter approved approvedapproved annual annual charter limitslimits as asas the the proposal proposal in inthein thethe Task TaskTask Force Force Report Report would would require. require.

MCCF appreciatesappreciates the thethe opportunity opportunityopportunity to totoprovide provideprovide a summary a a summarysummary of our of of our views.our views. views. Based Based Based on data onon datadata analysis, feedback feedback from from our our members members and and public public testimony testimony at three at three public public hearings, hearings, we we will bebe providing providing County County Executive Executive Leggett Leggett with with a separate a separate report report with our with detailed our detdetailed ailed recommendations and andand list listlist of of alternatives.of alternatives. alternatives. We We thank We thank thank the Chairmanthe the Chairman Chairman of the of ofTask the the TaskForceTask Force Forceand all andand all members for for their their work work over over these these last last few few months. months.

26 26 County Executive'sExecutive’sExecutive's Transit Transit Task Task Force Force FinalFinal Final ReportReport Report and andRecommendations, Recommendations, PagePage Page113 113

35 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal APPENDIXAPPENDIX II:: MCCFMCCF OnlineOnline QuestionnaireQuestionnaire toto ActiveActive Members (Responses via Survey Monkey 9/9/15 to 10/9/1510/9/15))

The purpose of this questionnaire is to get feedback from you on the County Executive's proposal to create and finance an Independent TransitTransit AuthorityAuthority (ITA).(ITA). TheThe newnew agencyagency would require new annual property tax increases above the Charter limit and may includeinclude increases in other taxes as well. The County Executive will likely resubmit enabling legislation to the State this fallfall to request authorization for the creation of this new independent agency outside of County government. Under the proposal, the agencyagency would ultimately finance, build, operate, and maintain a new 100 mile County Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) transit system as well as other transit projects.

Q1. Do you support overriding the voter-approvedvoter-approved Charter limits on property taxes without a voter referendumreferendum for the purpose of funding this new independent agency? Yes 8% I| No 92%

Q2. Do you support this model for the creation of a new Independent Transit Authority for Montgomery County? Yes 8% I| No 92%

Q3. Does your neighborhood have access withinwithin a half mile to: (Select all that apply)

Ride On Bus 96% I| Metrobus 66% I| MARC Train 16% I| Metrorail 28% I| No Access within half mile 2%

Q4.Q4. What improvements to our existing bus transit systems, such as Ride On and Metrobus do you support? (Select all thatthat apply)

Increase frequencyfrequency of buses during rushrush hourhour:: 48%48% Increase frequency ofof busesbuses offoff peakpeak andand weekendsweekends:: 42%42% More express or limited stop busbus serviceservice:: 46%46% Add/Modify RoutesRoutes:: 50% None:None: 18%

Q5. If the County were to make the current Ride On transit systemsystem free for all routes, which could increase ridership and decrease boarding and travel time, it would cost the County an additional $21 million annually. Would you support providing Ride On service for free?

Yes: 56% I| No: 44 %

Q6. Montgomery County hashas many needs including addressing school overcrowding. Budget forecasts are constrained and the County Executive has announced that there will likely be a property tax increase beyond the Charter limit for 2016 just to keep current spending levels. In lightlight of these constraints, do youyou think the top transportation priority for the County should be:

To create aa newnew andand inin somesome places,places, redundant,redundant, independentindependent busbus transittransit system, separate from WMATA, thethe regionalregional transittransit authority, and separate from the County government: 8%

36 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response toto County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRTITA/BRT Proposal Work to enhance thethe locallocal Ride OnOn busbus serviceservice withinwithin the current County Department of Transportation and work within the existing WMATAWMATA infrastructureinfrastructure to improve regional service, including MetrobusMetrobus andand MetrorailMetrorail:: 80%80%

No change to current trtransitansit servicesservices:: 12% 12%

37 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal PreparedPrepared By Members of the MCCF Transportation Committee

All Preparers are volunteersvolunteers and are notnot paidpaid byby any organizationorganization or company related to real estate developmentdevelopment oror transportationtransportation in Montgomery County.

Members of the MontgomeryMontgomery County Civic Federation Transportation Committee, 2015-162015-16

Paula Bienenfeld, Ph.D., MCCFMCCF President, President, ExEx Officio Officio Member,Member, TransportationTransportation Committee

Jerry Garson, CPA, Chair, MCCF TransportationTransportation Committee

Nancy Abeles, Member, MWCOGMWCOG Transportation Transportation Planning Planning BoardBoard CitizensCitizens AdvisoryAdvisory Committee

Carole Anne BarthBarth,, MCCF Immediate Past President

Peggy Dennis, MCCF PastPast PresidentPresident

Cary Lamari, MCCF PastPast PresidentPresident

Harriet Quinn, MCCF PlanningPlanning and Land Use Committee

Virginia SheardSheard Chair, MCCF PlanningPlanning and Land UUsese Committee

James Zepp, MCCF FirstFirst Vice-President,Vice-President, Member,Member, Transit Task Force and WMATA Riders Advisory Council

38 Montgomery County County CivicCivic Federation Response to County Executive Leggett’sLeggett's ITA/BRT Proposal