MPO Meeting Minutes

Draft Memorandum for the Record

Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Meeting

March 17, 2022, Meeting

10:00 AM–12:47 PM, Zoom Video Conferencing Platform

David Mohler, Chair, representing Jamey Tesler, Secretary of Transportation and Chief Executive Officer of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT)


The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) agreed to the following:

Meeting Agenda

1.    Introductions

See attendance beginning on page 16.

2.    Chair’s Report—David Mohler, MassDOT

D. Mohler stated that President Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022, which appropriates federal funding previously authorized as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). This will require amending the federal fiscal year (FFY) 2022 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the Boston Region MPO’s FFY 2022 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to provide the BIL’s funding to the region.

3.    Executive Director’s Report—Tegin Teich, Executive Director, Central Transportation Planning Staff (CTPS)

T. Teich stated that MPO staff have been implementing the first year of the MPO’s five-year Strategic Plan. She stated that MPO staff are refining how MPO board members are oriented to support the board’s desired goals for governance. This includes refining the MPO 101 sessions for future iterations. MPO staff have restructured CTPS’s director positions to separate project delivery work from research and analysis. In addition, an Outreach and Communications group was created to enhance outreach and public engagement.

T. Teich stated that MPO staff continue to identify tools and technologies to support future hybrid work. MPO staff previously adopted Asana to better manage projects and enhance collaboration.

MPO staff began its human resources audit, which includes analyzing the agency’s policies and procedures to ensure best practices in human resources, supporting staff members, providing career growth and advancement opportunities, and retaining staff. In addition, MPO staff are revising its employee evaluation process to improve the accountability of staff and support two-way feedback.

T. Teich stated that she will discuss the last activities of the first year of the Strategic Plan at future MPO meetings, which include tasks related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as marketing and public presentation goals.

T. Teich stated that MPO staff hosted a Transit Working Group (TWG) Coffee Chat regarding Human Services Transportation on March 10, 2022, with guest speakers from the Executive Office of Health and Human Services. A recording of the meeting is available on the MPO’s YouTube channel. She announced an upcoming TWG Coffee Chat regarding the challenge of recruiting and retaining transit operators on April 6, 2022.

T. Teich stated that a journalist from the Engineering News-Record contacted MPO staff to discuss trends in planning and infrastructure, as well as the board’s work to update its TIP criteria and scoring process.

D. Amstutz (Town of Arlington) requested that a future MPO meeting include a full agenda item on MPO staff’s efforts on restructuring.

4.    Public Comments

Jeremy Marsette (Director of Public Works, Town of Natick) expressed support for project #605313 (Route 9/Route 27 Interchange Improvements and Bridge Replacement in Natick). The project’s current design has broad public support and has been identified as a long-standing community priority. He noted that the existing bridge at the interchange is structurally and functionally deficient, and the interchange is a high crash location which does not provide safe bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. He stated that the project is approaching 25 percent design, and the Town anticipates a 25 percent design public hearing later in 2022.

Mayor Katjana Ballantyne (City of Somerville) expressed support for project #607981 (McGrath Boulevard Construction). She noted the regional importance of the project, stating that it will advance the MPO’s goals of safety, equity, and air quality. TIP funding in FFY 2027 will help the City begin coordination with adjacent municipalities on utility work and strengthen the City’s ability to generate funding support through development mitigation.

Senator William Brownsberger expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One). He noted that the project has been in various stages of development and has seen multiple designs since the 1990s. He stated that participation in the planning process by abutters has greatly informed the project design. He noted that the Belmont Town Meeting has repeatedly voted in favor of the project. The project will have both local and regional benefits, providing a link in the regional rail trail network. Senator Brownsberger expressed commitment to moving the project forward and working with the MPO.

Representative David Rogers expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One). He stated that there has been a rigorous process to receive input from abutters and address their concerns. He stated that the project has broad support in the Town, and he echoed Senator Brownsberger’s comments on the project’s importance as a key link in the Commonwealth’s rail trail network. Representative Rogers noted the mode shift opportunities that the project will provide, along with associated air quality and public health benefits.

Joshua Ostroff (Chair, Town of Natick Transportation Advisory Committee) expressed support for project #605313 (Route 9/Route 27 Interchange Improvements and Bridge Replacement in Natick). He stated that the project will facilitate bicycle and pedestrian connectivity to the Cochituate Rail Trail, nearby schools, and other community resources.

Tania Lillak (Open Space and Recreation Plan Committee, Town of Swampscott) expressed support for project #610666 (Swampscott Rail Trail). The project is one of the largest objectives in the Town’s 2020 Open Space and Recreation Plan and has been identified as a top priority by residents in the Town’s Master Plan. The project will provide safe and active transportation to the Town’s three schools and commuter rail station, as well as fill a recognized critical gap in the regional trail network.

Russ Leino (Chair, Belmont Community Path Project Committee) expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One). The project will address bicycle and safety concerns in the Town and address a key gap in the Mass Central Rail Trail. He stated that the elected representatives of the Town of Belmont are committed to bringing the project to fruition. R. Leino expressed appreciation for the work of Matt Genova, MPO staff, in assisting the Town with the TIP process.

Jarrod Goentzel (Chair, Friends of the Belmont Community Path) expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One). He noted that the MPO received 384 comments on the project in 2021, 94 percent of which support Phase One of the Community Path. The Friends of the Belmont Community Path have increased engagement with high school students to explore how the project would enhance access to their campus, which is adject to the project area.

David Coleman (Chair, Belmont Transportation Advisory Committee) expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One). He noted that students of Belmont High School do not have safe bicycle access to the school, which the project would provide. He noted that students consistently ride bicycles to the high school; more than 130 bicycles per day were parked at the school through December 2021. D. Coleman also expressed support for the installation of a sheltered bike rack at Chenery Middle School in Belmont. An application for funding the bike rack was submitted to the MPO’s Community Connections program. He expressed that the project would be a small proof-of-concept for encouraging bicycling to elementary and middle schools.

Aaron Clausen (Planning Director, City of Lynn) expressed support for project #609246 (Reconstruction of Western Avenue in Lynn), noting that it is the highest scoring project among scored Complete Streets projects. He noted the importance of safety improvements, as the corridor includes four top 200 crash locations and nine Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) crash clusters. Public meetings have shown strong support from the public and City Council members for the project. He stated that stakeholders look forward to working with MassDOT and the MPO to advance the project.

Erin Wortman (Director, Stoneham Planning and Community Development) expressed support for the Stoneham Shuttle, which was submitted for evaluation as a Community Connections program project. The project will provide first- and last-mile solutions, which are complementary to existing MBTA bus service. The Town envisions expanding the service to other communities as the service gains capacity.

Sean Fitzgerald (Town Administrator, Swampscott) expressed support for #610666 (Swampscott Rail Trail). This project will address a critical missing link in the rail trail network, connecting the Northern Strand Community Path and the Salem Community Path, and add additional off-road mileage to the East Coast Greenway and the Border to Boston trail. The project will connect to the commuter rail and provide safe travel for students. 

Mark Paolillo (Vice Chair, Belmont Select Board) expressed support for project #609204 (Belmont Community Path, Phase One), and he supported comments made by Senator Brownsberger, Representative Rogers, and other community representatives and advocates. He emphasized that the Belmont Select Board strongly supports the project.

Alexis Runstadler (President, Friends of the Swampscott Rail Trail) expressed support for project #610666 (Swampscott Rail Trail). She noted that Swampscott voters approved the construction of a consolidated elementary school; after its construction is complete in 2024, the project would provide off-road transportation for students from kindergarten through grade four. 

5.    Committee Chairs’ Reports—Brian Kane, Chair, Administration and Finance (A&F) Committee

B. Kane (MBTA Advisory Council) stated that the March 17, 2022, A&F Committee meeting included a discussion on spending and the CTPS budget for fiscal year 2022, as well as office space needs for MPO staff. The next committee meeting will likely occur in April 2022.

6.    Regional Transportation Advisory Council Report—Lenard Diggins, Chair, Regional Transportation Advisory Council

L. Diggins stated that the March 9, 2022, Advisory Council meeting included a presentation from Sandy Johnston, MPO staff, to discuss his role as the new freight manager. Matt Genova, MPO staff, discussed the TIP Universe. The 3C Documents Committee meeting will meet on March 23, 2022, to further discuss the upcoming TIP.

7.    Action Item: Approval of February 3, 2022, MPO Meeting Minutes—Anne McGahan, MPO Staff


A motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of February 3, 2022, was made by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) (Eric Bourassa) and seconded by the Inner Core Committee (Tom Bent). The motion carried.

8.    Action Item: Work Scope, Addressing Equity and Access in the Blue Hills—Sean Rourke, MPO Staff, Manager, Outreach and Communications

Documents posted to the MPO meeting calendar

Work Program, Addressing Equity and Access in the Blue Hills

S. Rourke presented the work program for Addressing Equity and Access in the Blue Hills, which will cost $40,000 and have a scheduled completion date in September 2022. A coalition of groups, including the Urban Outdoors Association, Friends of the Blue Hills, and the Mattapan Food and Fitness Coalition, approached MPO staff and the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) Committee in early 2021 with a request to study public transit access to the Blue Hills. This study will examine equity of access to the Blue Hills Reservation, and address both the Transportation Equity and Capacity Management and Mobility goals established in the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).

Despite being less than four miles from Mattapan and seven miles from Roxbury, the Blue Hills are difficult to reach and navigate by public transit, presenting an issue of unequal access for low-income Boston area residents and those without access to cars. In the process of this study, MPO staff will assemble an advisory group of community and advocacy leaders to identify barriers to accessing Blue Hills and the effects of those barriers on the populations they serve. Staff will then review and analyze the existing limited public transit options to access the Blue Hills from Boston neighborhoods with high concentrations of transit equity populations and identify potential solutions to improve public transit access. The final product will be a report which documents MPO staff’s collaboration with the advisory group and the findings of the study, including the possible solutions identified to improve transit access.


D. Amstutz asked if the study will include a focus on bicycle access to the Blue Hills. S. Rourke stated that the study is specifically studying transit access and noted that MAPC is conducting a study on bicycle and pedestrian access to the area.

Jim Fitzgerald (Boston Planning and Development Agency [BPDA]) requested that MPO staff coordinate with BPDA as the study progresses, noting the City’s efforts regarding Mattapan and Blue Hill Avenue. S. Rourke stated that BPDA and the City’s transit equity staff are included on MPO staff’s outreach list for the study.

L. Diggins asked for clarification of how MPO staff define “needs” in this study. S. Rourke stated that staff are defining “needs” as a community’s need for access to outdoor recreation space and green space. L. Diggins expressed support for the study but recommended that MPO staff make efforts to reach out but also use caution to avoid unintentionally implying that residents should want to go to the Blue Hills, as some resident may not have a desire to do so. S. Rourke stated that MPO staff want to approach this issue sensitively, and the advisory group will provide an appropriate perspective for discussions.

S. Olanoff stated that there is much demand for access to the Blue Hills, noting the various recreation opportunities in the area.


A motion to approve the work program was made by the Three Rivers Interlocal Council (TRIC) (Tom O’Rourke) and seconded by the Regional Transportation Advisory Council (L. Diggins). The motion carried.

9.    Action Item: Proposed State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2022 Transit Asset Management (TAM) Targets for the Boston Region—Michelle Scott, MPO Staff, and Jillian Linnell, MBTA Staff

Documents posted to the MPO meeting calendar

SFY TAM Targets Memorandum

M. Scott stated that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requires transit agencies and MPOs to set targets for TAM performance measures to meet federal rules. The purpose of this action item is to update existing MPO TAM targets to reflect SFY 2022 targets submitted by transit agencies. As part of this discussion, the MPO board can consider including transit asset performance as part of capital programming included in the TIP.

The March 31, 2022, MPO meeting will include discussion with transit agencies regarding transit safety performance targets. More information on the MPO’s performance-based planning and programming is available on the MPO website.

M. Scott provided an overview of TAM requirements and performance measures. FTA has established a TAM Rule with the goal of improving transit assets state of good repair to improve service delivery for transit customers. Transit agencies and state-sponsors of transit agencies must develop TAM plans that outline how transit asset conditions will be improved over time. These agencies are required to report asset inventories and condition information to the National Transit Database, as well as set performance targets for established measures each year. MPOs are required to work with transit agencies to set targets for their specific region. MPO’s also consider transit capital programming in the context of TAM performance and incorporate targets into their planning documents, including the LRTP and TIP.

M. Scott provided an overview of four performance measures which apply to four TAM asset categories: rolling stock past its useful life, equipment past its useful life, facilities in poor condition, and infrastructure with poor performance. These performance measures are detailed in a memorandum available on the MPO website. M. Scott stated the MPO’s goal is to minimize the percentage of assets that fall within each category.

J. Linnell stated that the MBTA is required to report performance measures on the state of its asset classes at the close of each SFY, as well as set performance targets which reflect the projected state of each asset class for the coming SFY. J. Linnell noted that the MBTA’s asset inventory is more comprehensive than the required categories to meet the TAM Rule.

J. Linnell provided an overview of the FY 2022 Capital Programs driving Asset Performance. These programs include the recently completed and ongoing fleet procurements that are driving the performance and asset condition of the MBTA’s rolling stock:

J. Linnell stated that the MBTA’s procurement for non-revenue vehicles has largely concluded, and the MBTA currently anticipates the procurement of a small number of vehicles to support South Coast Rail and the replacement of some aging vehicles in the Transit Police fleet.

Regarding facilities, J. Linnell stated that the Green Line Extension (GLX) will provide a number of new facilities and stations, as well as the recently completed Green Line B Branch consolidation project. The Braintree and Quincy Adams garage rehabilitation project is approaching conclusion, and commuter rail station improvement projects in Natick and Winchester are underway.

Regarding infrastructure, J. Linnell stated that the MBTA continues to improve commuter rail tracks on the Haverhill, Newburyport/Rockport, and Worcester lines. There is also the addition of new track for GLX and the Green Line D branch, as well as track replacement in problem areas as part of the Red Line/Orange Line transformation program. Track condition is expected to improve in SFY 2022 on heavy rail, light rail, and commuter rail due to ongoing track work and the removal of speed restrictions. J. Linnell noted that GLX adds 4.3 revenue service miles to the light rail system.

M. Scott presented the Cape Ann Transportation Authority’s (CATA) and MetroWest Regional Transit Authority’s (MWRTA) SFY 2022 targets for rolling stock, equipment vehicles, and facilities. She noted that CATA’s vehicles are expected to remain consistent from the end of SFY 2021 to the end of SFY 2022. MWRTA is removing automobiles from its passenger-carrying fleet and expects a slight increase in cutaway vehicles. The equipment vehicles for both CATA and MWRTA are expected to remain consistent from the end of SFY 2021 to the end of SFY 2022. Each regional transit authority (RTA) has one administrative and maintenance facility, and these are expected to remain in a state of good repair.

M. Scott stated that upcoming MPO meetings will include presentations from the MBTA and the RTAs regarding their upcoming investments to be included in the MassDOT Capital Investment Program. The scoring systems used by these agencies for selecting projects for funding consider asset condition and opportunities for improvement. MPO staff continue to coordinate with transit agencies in the region on the development of the MPO’s Transit Modernization program.

M. Scott stated that if the MPO votes to support the staff-recommended set of SFY 2022 TAM targets, MPO staff will then incorporate this information into the FFYs 2023-27 TIP, along with information about how the MPO’s investments throughout the region are expected to improve progress on TAM performance measures.


B. Kane stated that the MBTA has made significant progress in tracking, grading, and publicly reporting its inventory. He expressed support for approving the SFY 2022 TAM targets.


A motion to approve the SFY 2022 TAM targets was made by the MBTA Advisory Council (B. Kane) and seconded by the Regional Transportation Advisory Council (L. Diggins). The motion carried.

10. Discussion: FFYs 202327 2022 Transportation Improvement Program Preliminary Programming Scenarios—Matt Genova, MPO Staff, TIP Manager

Documents posted to the MPO meeting calendar

1.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Programming Scenario #1 (Readiness)

2.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Programming Scenario #2 (Scoring Criteria)

3.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Programming Scenario #3 (Cost Effectiveness)

4.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Project Descriptions and Scoring Results

5.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Project Scoring Summary

6.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Readiness and Cost Updates for Selected Projects

7.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Public Comments Received as of March 15, 2022

8.    FFYs 2023–27 TIP Comment from the Belmont Community Path Project Committee

M. Genova stated that the primary objective of his presentation is to generate feedback, which will inform a final TIP programming scenario or multiple scenarios for the FFY 2023-27 TIP at the March 31, 2022, MPO meeting. The draft FFYs 2023-27 TIP is anticipated to be released for public comment in late April and endorsed by the MPO board in late May.

M. Genova provided a summary of written public comments submitted to the MPO since the previous board meeting. These comments were for five projects: the Chenery Middle School Bicycle Parking project in Belmont, the Belmont Community Path project in Belmont, the BlueBikes Station Replacement and System Expansion project in Cambridge, the Swampscott Rail Trail project in Swampscott, and the Route 20 and Wellesley Street project in Weston.

M. Genova noted that 25 projects were scored for funding in this TIP cyclenine new projects and 16 returning projects. These projects spanned five MPO investment programs as follows: 11 Community Connections projects, eight complete Streets projects, two Intersection Improvement projects, two Bicycle and Network and Pedestrian Connections projects, and two Major Infrastructure projects. A majority of the new funding the MPO board can allocate to new projects will be available in FFY 2027. Unlike in most years, however, there is new funding available in each fiscal year of the TIP beginning in FFY 2023 due to the passage of the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) in November 2021.

M. Genova provided an update on the current status of Community Connections program projects that MPO board members had questions about at the previous meeting. Last fall, the MPO board had a number of conversations as to how to approach the Community Connections projects for this year. These conversations were prompted by the fact that there are staffing limitations at the MPO, MAPC, and the MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning, and the latter has limited capacity for taking on the role of contract administrator for Community Connections projects. M. Genova stated that the MPO board expressed a desire to pursue a collective purchasing model for the capital projects funded through the Community Connections program, while allowing RTAs and municipalities to apply for funding for transit operating projects, including microtransit and fixed-route shuttles. Eleven applications were submitted for consideration in the FFYs 2023-27 TIP:

After discussions between MassDOT, MAPC, and MPO staff, it was determined that there is sufficient staff capacity to fund a selection of these applications in the upcoming TIP cycle. M. Genova noted that a goal for this presentation and discussion is for the MPO board to provide MPO staff with guidance on the board’s preferences for funding new projects through the Community Connections program, including the number of projects and the project types, so that staff can confirm administrative capacity before a final scenario is agreed upon by the MPO.

M. Genova noted that the passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) will provide approximately $20 million of additional TIP funding in each TIP element beginning in FFY 2023. He noted that the $132 million available in FFY 2027 is currently unallocated at this point.

M. Genova highlighted the takeaways from TIP Readiness Days.  He noted that three projects were flagged as high risk: the Route 2A and Willow Road project in Littleton in Ayer (programmed in FFY 2022), the Central Street project in Peabody (programmed in FFY 2023), and the Mount Auburn Street project in Watertown (programmed in FFY 2023). Additionally, two projects were recommended for delay: the Boylston Street project in Boston (delay from FFY 2023 to FFY 2024) and the Rutherford Avenue project in Boston (delay from FFY 2023 to FFY 2024). Finally, three projects exceeded the MPO’s new 25 percent cost-change threshold: the Bridge Street project in Beverly (programmed in FFY 2023 with an increase of $5 million or 65 percent), the Lowell Street and Woburn Street project in Wilmington (programmed in FFY 2023 with an increase of $1.9 million or 42 percent), and the Independence Greenway Extension project in Peabody (programmed in FFY 2024 with an increase of $763,000 or 25 percent). MPO staff has heard from many of these proponents and MPO members may ask further questions during the scenario discussions.

M. Genova stated that the goal of providing the MPO board with multiple programming scenarios is to allow the board to view project selection in multiple ways and assess the trade-offs between the different approaches. Scenario #1 is the baseline scenario that was presented to the MPO on February 17, 2022, and it was reposted for this meeting for reference purposes. The focus of this meeting was on the other two scenarios: Scenario #2 applies the TIP project scoring criteria as its central lens by prioritizing the projects with the highest evaluation scores in each investment program, and Scenario #3 applies a cost-effectiveness lens to project selection by prioritizing funding for projects that could be considered the most efficient use of MPO funds. He noted that these scenarios are not a formal recommendation by MPO staff, but rather a starting point for discussion. Each scenario reflects the most current project information available to MPO staff, including information on project design status, cost, and readiness. In addition, each scenario assumes that the MPO board will continue full funding of the Community Connections and Transit Modernization programs. The three scenarios also assume that the MPO board will opt to fund the three cost increases that exceed the 25 percent cost threshold.

M. Genova provided an overview of the three programming scenarios, which are available on the MPO website.

M. Genova posed four questions for discussion:


E. Bourassa expressed support for Scenario #2 and asked if there are projects in the TIP Universe of Projects or MBTA priority projects that could potentially be programmed FFYs 2023 and 2024. He asked if the MPO could elect to fund all projects submitted to the Community Connections program. M. Genova stated that $2 million is allocated toward the Community Connections program. If the MPO board expresses a desire to increase the funding amount, MPO staff can analyze the administrative capacity for funding additional projects.

D. Amstutz expressed support for Scenario #2. He supported the allocation of funds toward the McGrath Boulevard project, noting that the project is included in the LRTP and that providing funding in the outer years of the TIP will provide a sufficient timeline for development. He asked if the MPO must allocate all funding in FFYs 2023 and 2024, or if funds could be pushed into later TIP years if there are an insufficient number of projects to use all funds.

D. Amstutz asked if municipal projects that have not been submitted to the Project Review Committee, but are in the advanced stages of design, could undergo an accelerated review process to allow for programming in the earlier years of the TIP.

B. Kane expressed support for Scenario #2 and supported E. Bourassa’s proposal of funding MBTA priority projects. He expressed support for prioritizing capital projects over transit projects for the Community Connections program, as capital projects generally provide greater “bang for their buck.”

Dennis Giombetti (MetroWest Regional Council, City of Framingham) requested clarification on the proposed funding of project #605313 (Route 27/Route 9 Interchange Improvements and Bridge Replacement in Natick). D. Mohler stated the project will be funded with state-controlled federal dollars rather than TIP target funds.

D. Giombetti asked if any projects programmed in FFYs 2023 and 2024 are at high risk for increased cost, adding that reserving funds in the earlier years of the TIP could prevent reprogramming projects in later TIP years.

Jay Monty (City of Everett) expressed support for Scenario #2 and for the inclusion of the McGrath Boulevard project. He noted that the MPO voted to not include projects in the TIP which were not at the 25 percent design phase; some projects in the outer years in Scenario #2 have not met this threshold. He requested clarification from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on how unused funds in the earlier TIP years, resulting from the BIL funding, will be accounted for, and he asked if the MPO would be able to weigh in on the use of unused funds. Ken Miller (FHWA) stated that federal highway funds become unavailable if not used within a given federal fiscal year; from a federal perspective, obligation authority cannot be transferred between years.

T. Bent expressed support for prior comments regarding Scenario #2, particularly the inclusion of project #607981 (McGrath Boulevard) and project #609204 (Belmont Community Path).

K. Miller expressed appreciation that M. Genova analyzed cost per mile for proposed projects. He stated that additional metrics may be beneficial for certain project types, such as intersection improvements projects; as an example, he stated that the number of intersections improved by a project could be a potential metric. He suggested including a unit cost for Community Connections projects, as the data required is included in the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) analysis sheets.

L. Diggins asked how the thresholds for cost effectiveness are determined. M. Genova stated that the dividing lines are set by the median values for each measure within each sample; that is, cost per point and overall score for both samples of projects, respectively.

L. Diggins asked K. Miller if he had thoughts on additional metrics for cost effectiveness. K. Miller stated that there is a distinction between unit cost and cost effectiveness. Unit cost data can be used to gauge why a project requires a given amount of funds, while cost effectiveness examines the relationship of a project’s benefits to its cost. Cost per point awarded during TIP scoring is a measure of cost effectiveness; however, as the TIP scoring system does not scale based on project size, larger projects will appear to have higher cost effectiveness than smaller projects.

L. Diggins suggested funding additional Community Connections projects and increasing the funding for the Transit Modernization program.

J. Fitzgerald expressed support for the McGrath Boulevard project and asked if McGrath and Rutherford Avenue could be properly sequenced given Rutherford Avenue’s delayed timing.

11. Members Items

D. Mohler stated that the March 31, 2022, MPO meeting will include discussion of a possible amendment to the FFY 2022 element of the TIP to account for the $19.5 million increased funding from the BIL. In addition, there may be a recommendation to remove the last CMAQ contribution to the Green Line Extension project from regional target funding due to federal COVID response funds received and utilized in the place of regional target funds. That change would mean that approximately $46.5 million would be unprogrammed in FFY 2022 and addressed by the possible amendment.

Brad Rawson (City of Somerville) expressed appreciation to the MPO Board and MPO staff for their support of the Green Line Extension. He announced the ribbon cutting ceremony for the GLX will be on March 21, 2022.

12. Adjourn

A motion to adjourn was made by the Inner Core Committee (T. Bent) and seconded by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (E. Bourassa). The motion carried.




and Alternates

At-Large City (City of Everett)

Jay Monty

At-Large City (City of Newton)

David Koses

At-Large Town (Town of Arlington)

Daniel Amstutz

At-Large Town (Town of Brookline)

Heather Hamilton

City of Boston (Boston Planning & Development Agency)

Jim Fitzgerald

City of Boston (Boston Transportation Department)

Bill Conroy

Federal Highway Administration

Kenneth Miller

Inner Core Committee (City of Somerville)

Tom Bent

Brad Rawson

Massachusetts Department of Transportation

David Mohler

John Bechard

MassDOT Highway Division

John Romano

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Jillian Linnell

Massachusetts Port Authority

Sarah Lee

MBTA Advisory Board

Brian Kane

Metropolitan Area Planning Council

Eric Bourassa

MetroWest Regional Collaborative (City of Framingham)

Dennis Giombetti

Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination (Town of Acton)

Austin Cyganiewicz

North Shore Task Force (City of Beverly)

Darlene Wynne

North Suburban Planning Council (Town of Burlington)

Melissa Tintocalis

Regional Transportation Advisory Council

Lenard Diggins

South Shore Coalition (Town of Rockland)

Jennifer Constable

South West Advisory Planning Committee (Town of Medway)

Peter Pelletier

Three Rivers Interlocal Council (Town of Norwood/Neponset Valley Chamber of Commerce)

Tom O’Rourke

Steven Olanoff



Other Attendees


William Brownsberger

State Senator

Dave Rogers

State Representative

Katjana Ballantyne

Mayor, City of Somerville

Sean Fitzgerald

Town of Swapscott

Richard Benevento

WorldTech Engineering

Joy Glynn

MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA)

Tyler Terrasi


Aaron Clausen

City of Lynn

Timothy Paris

MassDOT District 4

Sarah Bradbury

MassDOT District 3

Cassandra Ostrander


Paul Cobuzzi


Jeremy Marsette

Town of Natick

Erin Wortman

Town of Stoneham

Sophia Galimore

TransAction Associates

Felicia Webb

Cape Ann Transportation Authority (CATA)

Mark Paolillo

Town of Belmont

Jarrod Goentzel

Friends of the Belmont Community Path

Valerie Gingrich

Town of Wilmington

Jonathan Leamon


Shona Norman


Derek Krevat

MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning

Bonnie Friedman


Todd Kirrane

Town of Brookline

Derek Shooster

MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning

Ali Kleyman

City of Somerville

Josh Klingenstein


Derek Krevat

MassDOT Office of Transportation Planning

David Kucharsky

City of Salem

Aleida Leza


Allison Burson

Solomon Foundation

Benjamin Muller

MassDOT District 6

Tania Lillak

Town of Swampscott

Tim Bethke


Russ Leino

Belmont Community Path Community

Joshua Ostroff

Transportation for Massachusetts

Jon Seward

Mass Moves / Regional Transportation Advisory Council

Adi Nochur


David Coleman

Belmont Transportation Advisory Committee

John Alessi


David Read


Jeremy Thompson


Alexis Runstadler

Friends of the Swampscott Rail Trail

Angela Servello


Aneesh Sahni


Cheryll-Ann Senior

MassDOT District 5

Frank Tramontozzi


Catherine Bowen


Laura Castelli


Mike Lavin


Laura VanderHart


Michael Garrity


Angela Ippolito


Jeffrey Roth


Casey Auch


Laura Wiener

City of Watertown

Michelle Ho


Eric Sofen


Owen MacDonald

Town of Weymouth

Vincent Stanton


Michael Mcleish

Office of Representative Rogers

David Kucharsky

City of Salem

Jon Rockwell

TEC Inc.

Frank Suszynski


Jack Moran



MPO Staff/Central Transportation Planning Staff

Tegin Teich, Executive Director

Gina Perille

Annette Demchur

Hiral Gandhi

Matt Genova

Sandy Johnston

Anne McGahan

Sean Rourke

Michelle Scott

Stella Jordan

Betsy Harvey

Matt Archer

Rebecca Morgan

Marty Milkovits

Heyne Kim



The Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) operates its programs, services, and activities in compliance with federal nondiscrimination laws including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, and related statutes and regulations. Title VI prohibits discrimination in federally assisted programs and requires that no person in the United States of America shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin (including limited English proficiency), be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that receives federal assistance. Related federal nondiscrimination laws administered by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, or both, prohibit discrimination on the basis of age, sex, and disability. The Boston Region MPO considers these protected populations in its Title VI Programs, consistent with federal interpretation and administration. In addition, the Boston Region MPO provides meaningful access to its programs, services, and activities to individuals with limited English proficiency, in compliance with U.S. Department of Transportation policy and guidance on federal Executive Order 13166.

The Boston Region MPO also complies with the Massachusetts Public Accommodation Law, M.G.L. c 272 sections 92a, 98, 98a, which prohibits making any distinction, discrimination, or restriction in admission to, or treatment in a place of public accommodation based on race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, disability, or ancestry. Likewise, the Boston Region MPO complies with the Governor's Executive Order 526, section 4, which requires that all programs, activities, and services provided, performed, licensed, chartered, funded, regulated, or contracted for by the state shall be conducted without unlawful discrimination based on race, color, age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, religion, creed, ancestry, national origin, disability, veteran's status (including Vietnam-era veterans), or background.

A complaint form and additional information can be obtained by contacting the MPO or at To request this information in a different language or in an accessible format, please contact

Title VI Specialist
Boston Region MPO
10 Park Plaza, Suite 2150
Boston, MA 02116

By Telephone:
857.702.3702 (voice)

For people with hearing or speaking difficulties, connect through the state MassRelay service:

·         Relay Using TTY or Hearing Carry-over: 800.439.2370

·         Relay Using Voice Carry-over: 866.887.6619

·         Relay Using Text to Speech: 866.645.9870

For more information, including numbers for Spanish speakers, visit