6/16/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M M Besides its voting member recommendation, the TPC also recommended that two non-voting members be appointed to the MPO board. These would be the School Board and the Town of Orchid. According to State regulations, the MPO may appoint non-voting members to the MPO board. This could be done as part of the apportionment plan or subsequent to'MPO creation. Either way, both the School Board and the Town could be non-voting members. According to FDOT representatives, the nine member, TPC recommended MPO apportionment plan does not meet state requirements because voting representation is not proportional to population. It is FDOT's position that the nine member option, as proposed, would not be approved by the Governor. Regardless of FDOT's position, the local governments within the MPO area may submit an MPO apportionment plan of their choice. Even though FDOT will advise the Governor's office on apportionment plan approval, the nine member plan may be approved despite FDOT's objections. If the Governor determines that the proposed apportionment plan is unacceptable, he may take one of two options. The first option would be to structure an apportionment plan for the Vero Beach MPO without further local input. The second alternative would be to direct the local governments within the MPO area to revise their proposed plan; with this option MPO creation and funding would be delayed past July 1, 1992. Based upon the TPC's action at its June 10, 1992, meeting, staff has drafted an MPO apportionment plan resolution for a nine voting member MPO board with two non-voting members. A copy of this resolution is attached to this staff report. Besides the apportionment plan, interlocal agreements will need to be signed by the local governments within the MPO area prior to formal creation of the MPO. Since FDOT has not finalized the updated interlocal agreement forms, agreements cannot be executed at this time. However, the Board may formally indicate its intention to sign an MPO interlocal agreement. Prior to submittal of the apportionment plan to the Governor, each local government within the MPO area should, by resolution, accept or reject the proposed apportionment plan. According to local staff, the City of Vero Beach is scheduled to consider this issue on June 16, 1992, and the City of Sebastian is to consider it on June 17, 1992. Attached to this staff report is a proposed resolution which would indicate the Board's agreement with the proposed MPO apportionment plan and indicate the Board's intent to execute an interlocal agreement to create the Vero Beach MPO.. The resolution would also serve as the means for the Board to appoint its four MPO members. RECONNENDATION:. The staff recommends that the Board approve the attached resolution and direct staff to transmit the resolution and resolutions passed by other local governments within the MPO area to the Office of the Governor. 17 JUN 1992 � J