Laserfiche WebLink
RELATIONSHIP TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND OPERATING AGENCIES <br /> •As indicated in the Introduction, monitoring and oversight of the Metropolitan <br /> Council and regional operating agencies was the original focus of the <br /> Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. Yet in recent years, involvement <br /> with the Council and agencies has suffered appreciably as the AMM staff has had <br /> to spend more and more time supporting the work of its own committees and <br /> lobbying on statewide issues. In fact, the staff indicated that it now has <br /> almost no time for any involvement with the Metropolitan Council during the <br /> legislative session. <br /> The AMM currently nominates to the Metropolitan Council eight names for appoint- <br /> ment to the Transportation Advisory Board. The Association actually appoints <br /> ten to the Transportation Advisory Committee. That system seems to be working <br /> well . In contrast, the AMM, along with several other metropolitan area asso- <br /> ciations, was recently given legislative responsibility for suggesting appoin- <br /> tees to the Regional Transit Board. That process did not go well . The Board of <br /> Directors did not limit the number of people recommended for appointment to the <br /> vacant seats, and the Metropolitan Council heeded very few of its recommen- <br /> dations in making their selections. <br /> During its background work, the Task Force discussed the Metropolitan Council at <br /> some length with several legislators, as well as the current Chair of the <br /> Metropolitan Council and a former executive director of the Citizens League. <br /> There was a general feeling among the legislators that the Council has notbeen <br /> effective in performing its functions well . At the same time, it was suggested <br /> that the. Councilmembers are frustrated due to their lack of a "real clout" and <br /> constant legislative undercutting of their authority to accomplish the work for <br /> Wwhich they are responsible. <br /> ft-th no consensus in the legislature or in the metropolitan area as to the <br /> appropriate amount of authority that should be vested in the Council , many <br /> metropolitan regional issues get resolved vis-a-vis the political process of the <br /> legislature. The shortcoming of this approach is that the metropolitan area is <br /> giving up some of the authority to set its own agenda. There is also some con- <br /> fusion and ambiguity over the relationship of the Council to the Governor, who <br /> is responsible by law for appointing its members. It was suggested that the AMM <br /> could very definitely be of help in defining the proper role for the Council and <br /> the operating agencies, and in mustering legislative support to enact needed <br /> changes. <br /> RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> 1. The AMM should become more proactive in helping set the metropolitan agenda. <br /> Historically we have placed ourselves in somewhat of a watchdog or adver- <br /> sarial role with the Council and operating agencies, merely reacting to the <br /> proposals put forward. We should become more positive in identifying areas <br /> of legitimate regional involvement, and help to set the goals and objec- <br /> tives to be pursued by regional government, as well as the parameters <br /> • within which that work will be carried out. <br /> 2. We need to "be there". It is estimated that an AMM staff member should be <br /> at the Metropolitan Council and agencies from eight to sixteen hours per <br /> - 10 - <br />