# Dover/Kent Case Study

+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **1990 Census       | 51,000                    | ![](m             |
| Population**        |                           | edia/image1.wmf){ |
|                     |                           | width="1.39375in" |
|                     |                           | height="2.221     |
|                     |                           | 5277777777778in"} |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Central City**    | Dover, Delaware           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Air Quality       | Non-attainment            |                   |
| Status (1990)**     |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Governor          | November 2, 1992          |                   |
| Designation Date**  |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Voting Policy     | Governor's designee       |                   |
| Board Members**     |                           |                   |
|                     | Kent County Levy court    |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Mayor of Dover            |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Another Kent County mayor |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | DelDOT                    |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Delaware Transit          |                   |
|                     | Corporation               |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
|                     |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
|                     |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
|                     |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Non Voting Policy | FHWA                      |                   |
| Board Members**     |                           |                   |
|                     | FTA                       |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| ### PL              | \$70,000                  |                   |
| and 5303 Funding (Y |                           |                   |
| ear of Designation) |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Initial Staff     | 1                         |                   |
| Size**              |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Initial Staff     | DelDOT                    |                   |
| Location**          |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Modeling          | DelDOT                    |                   |
| Responsibility**    |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **GIS               | Kent County               |                   |
| Responsibility**    |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **AQ Conformity     | DelDOT                    |                   |
| Responsibility**    |                           |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+
| **Contacts**        | Juanita Wieczoreck, MPO   |                   |
|                     | Director                  |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Anthony DePrima, City of  |                   |
|                     | Dover                     |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Ralph Reeb, DelDOT        |                   |
|                     |                           |                   |
|                     | Larry Klepner, DelDOT     |                   |
+---------------------+---------------------------+-------------------+

The Dover/Kent County Metropolitan Planning Organization was formed in
November 1992. It originally consisted of the urbanized area with the
state capital of Dover as its center and a population of just over
50,000. The MPO region was expanded in 1996 to include all of Kent
County, the New Castle County portion of the Town of Smyrna and the
Sussex County portion of the City of Milford to better address air
quality conformity issues. This decision also increased the MPO's share
of planning funds. Although the number of people living in the urbanized
area as of the 1990 Census was 51,000, the population of the MPO
planning area was 114,523 in 1990, and 134,242 as of the 2000 Census.

There are six members of the MPO's policy board or council:

-   Governor's designee,

-   Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT),

-   Delaware Transit Corporation (DTC),

-   Kent County,

-   City of Dover, and

-   Mayor of another Kent County city elected to represent county
    municipalities

The first five were original members and the additional Kent County
municipality was added when the MPO boundaries were expanded in 1996.
FTA and FHWA are non-voting members of the policy board. DelDOT is the
cabinet level transportation department for the state. DTC is the
statewide transit provider. Since the formation of the MPO, DTC has
become a division of DelDOT after previously being an independent
entity.

In addition to the Policy Board, the MPO has two standing committees:
the technical advisory committee and the public advisory committee.
Membership on the technical committee is determined by MPO agreement or
unanimous vote of the MPO Council and consists mainly of representatives
from member governments or related agencies. Public advisory committee
members are appointed for two-year terms by Kent County local
governments.

The Dover/Kent County MPO is a stand alone MPO that deals only with
transportation issues. At one time it was the only non-Transportation
Management Area (TMA) stand-alone MPO in the country. The MPO's primary
duties are the development of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the
Transportation Improvement Program and the Unified Planning Work
Program.

## 

## Steps Leading to Designation

In 1991, FHWA notified officials at DelDOT that the Dover region would
have to form an MPO. Subsequent to this conversation, the director of
planning at DelDOT began working with the mayor of Dover and the county
executive in Kent County. Both local officials initially raised
questions about the necessity of forming an MPO and the responsibilities
of the new body. Other topics at this initial discussion were the
membership of the policy board and the form that the by-laws would take.
One DelDOT respondent mentioned the Wilmington, Delaware MPO as an
important resource for information for the officials during the
development of bylaws. One resource that was not available but was cited
as something that could have improved early discussions was a three-ring
binder including examples of by-laws from other small MPOs around the
country.

After the two local governments agreed to base policy board membership
on the Intermodal Surface Transportation and Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
guidelines, approval was demonstrated through the policy board members'
signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The package of
documentation forwarded to the governor to request his designation of
the MPO included the MOU, the planning area map, and a resolution
explaining the federal regulations and the need for the MPO's creation.
The DelDOT official said that the time between FHWA notification of
Dover's designation as an urbanized area and the official MPO
designation by the governor was approximately six months. The governor
designated the Dover/Kent County MPO on November 2, 1992. The first
meeting of the MPO Council was held on March 12, 1993.

# Issues and Challenges

## Regional Coordination

The MPO and City of Dover respondents felt strongly that prior to the
creation of the MPO, coordination between stakeholders in the Dover area
was rare as far as transportation planning was concerned. Before the
formation of the MPO, the City of Dover and Kent County did not work
closely together. The MPO helped provide a regional forum for
communication.

The lack of regionalism may have been a function of the state-county
dynamic. In Delaware, the county governments do not own any of the
roads. The state owns 92% of the roadway system, with the remainder
owned by municipal governments. In other states where county ownership
of roads is more common, the county government may provide some level of
"regional" coordination. Without any significant jurisdiction over
transportation facilities, Kent County had not provided that forum.
Decisions and discussions about transportation at the regional level
were the purview of the state government. State officials indicated
that, although there was not a body whose sole mission had been outreach
and advocacy, the state had made efforts at coordination before the MPO
was formed.

## 

## Unique Delaware Challenges

The state's ownership of the vast majority of transportation
infrastructure has been one institutional characteristic that created
challenges for a new MPO. Another distinct feature of Delaware
government is the high level of proportional representation at the state
level. There are more elected representatives to the state legislature
than there are elected members of the county councils. As a result,
Delaware state house districts are smaller in population than county
council districts. Because of this, concerned citizens tend to petition
their state representative if they have a transportation concern,
thereby circumventing of the MPO's public process.

Another challenge faced by Dover/Kent County (as well as the state's
other MPO in Wilmington) is the existence of two statewide organizations
with missions overlapping with those traditionally falling to MPOs. The
state's Council on Transportation (COT) is a citizens-based committee
appointed by the Governor to determine statewide priorities for
transportation projects. COT predates the MPO by twenty years and at
times overshadows the MPO's role in this area.

The Population Consortium is another body that has oversight in the area
of demographic information. The amount of successful coordination with
these organizations has varied. The MPO has worked with the Population
Consortium to refine forecasts and ultimately determines distribution of
population and employment at the traffic analysis zone level. With COT,
DelDOT is still trying to determine how to best have the two groups work
together.

## Administrative and Financial Resources

During the first year and a half a DelDOT planner served as the MPO's
staff. The MPO director was hired in 1994 and was the first full-time
Dover/Kent County MPO staff person. She considered the support provided
by policy board members to be instrumental in the first years. Between
1992 and 1994, DelDOT and the City of Dover assumed the administrative
and financial management responsibilities of the MPO. The state in
particular played a key role by assuming responsibility for MPO
administration. After the executive director was hired, DelDOT continued
to house the MPO in its offices, as well as provide furniture, set up
meetings, keep minutes and records, and provide technical support. She
views the issue of "finding someone to house you" as critical for small
MPOs because there is not a lot of money initially. In the first year of
operations, the Dover/Kent County MPO's allocation of PL and Section
5303 funds was just over \$70,000. Upon her arrival, all information
necessary to fulfill the MPO's duties was already in the office. This
was critical as she the first UPWP was due almost immediately after her
arrival. The MPO is now responsible for its own rent after recently
moving into a new space, although DelDOT still provides financial
assistance in the form of telephone and computer service. DelDOT's
rationale for providing computer service is that the agency, due to its
greater buying power, can quickly and cheaply provide the MPO with
access to its computer network. This frees up the MPO to focus on its
programs because "they don't have to focus on whether or not the
computer works" while also allowing the state to further stretch their
planning dollars.

The City of Dover was also a significant supporter of the MPO. During
the first years, the City performed the function of financial
administrator for the MPO. The City of Dover believed that it made more
sense for one of the partners to handle the organization's finances than
to hire an independent accounting firm. The state was looking for an
area where the city could contribute, and Dover already had a history of
providing financial administration services for several local civic
organizations. The MPO used the city's purchase orders, checks and
accounting system. After the MPO submitted a reimbursement request to
DelDOT, the state would send the money to the MPO, which then turned it
over to the City for deposit. According to the MPO and the city, this
relationship ended after a few years because delays in the reimbursement
of funds at the state and federal level were costing the city too much
money. Since then, the MPO has maintained its own financial system. The
MPO's director cites cash flow as an ongoing concern for a small MPO.

## Technical Resources

In terms of technical support, the state and county have both been
instrumental. DelDOT performs all modeling work for the MPO and conducts
air quality conformity analyses. The Director of Planning says that
there were two principal motivations for doing the MPO's modeling work.
The first is a desire to have a set of consistent numbers. The second is
that the state is concerned about the cost of maintaining more than one
model. Since the MPO has input into demographics and traffic analysis
zone (TAZ) boundary decisions, the state sees no real need for the MPO
to maintain its own separate model.

Kent County has been a significant resource in the area of mapping. The
MPO is working to further develop its skills in these areas. In addition
to assisting the state in modifying TAZ boundaries, the MPO has a staff
person with experience in GIS who is working with the county to
coordinate map work.

Another important source of technical support has been the technical
advisory committee. Members of the committee have been very involved in
the MPO process. The city's planning official suggested that, in order
for the MPO to be effective, agencies and local governments must give
their representatives on the technical committee sufficient time to
devote to the process.

## Staff Resources

The MPO's executive director had previous experience with a large urban
MPO. She believes this experience was critical in the early years of the
Dover/Kent County MPO. Since she had seen what MPOs can do if given
sufficient resources, she was able to push towards that. Her experience
in a larger metropolitan area provided her with a different perspective
on how to guide an MPO's work.

After five years, the staff had grown to include a director, executive
secretary, GIS/planner and public affairs officer. The director places
great importance on the hiring of staff with different skill sets. She
cites the hiring of the MPO's public affairs person over the pressure to
add another planner as one of the best staffing decisions she has made.
One state official would have focused on technical skills, noting that
nothing works better than "a giant map that says here is where the
problems are and here are the conflicts." He believes that some tasks
are better contracted out and does not view the responsibilities of a
small MPO as necessarily requiring a large staff. He emphasized that
small MPOs must be encouraged to focus on coordinating transportation
efforts---"making sure the town is not going to tear up Main Street to
put in a sewer line right after the state has finished repaving it."

## 

## MPO Products

DelDOT officials suggested that the burdens placed on a small MPO in a
non-attainment area are considerable. The expansion of the MPO
boundaries to include all of Kent County and thereby the entire
non-attainment area has helped with conformity modeling somewhat.

The first Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was the same as the
statewide Capital Improvement Program. This has changed over the years
as all projects submitted to the Dover/Kent County TIP are listed in
addition to those programmed by the state. The primary challenge with
early Unified Planning Work Program development was that the MPO would
often identify traffic problems in more rural areas of the county that
the locals did not want fixed due to historic preservation or aesthetic
reasons.

Note: Four officials involved in the early formation of the Dover/Kent
MPO were contacted for this study. These officials were the MPO
Director, a representative of the City of Dover, and two state
officials.

![](media/image2.png){width="4.166666666666667in"
height="5.364583333333333in"}

Source: Dover/Kent website: http://doverkentmpo.org