Two key Arlington government advisory panels have been asked to focus less on trying to vet individual capital projects and more on a big-picture approach.
Since that request comes from County Manager Mark Schwartz, it may have the force of a directive — albeit one politely delivered.
Schwartz’s request came at a March 12 joint meeting of the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC). Both bodies report to him, rather than to the County Board as is the case with commissions.
At the meeting, committee members voiced concern that they weren’t being consulted by county staff on specific construction projects until it was too late in the process to have an impact.
“Often, we don’t have the information to comment — when we do find out about things, it’s kind of too late,” said BAC chair Cynthia Palmer. “Staff used to come and roll out the maps. That’s no longer the case.”
The result is an “adversarial relationship with the county because we’re disappointed, because sometimes projects either are a waste of money or, more often, just don’t feel safe,” Palmer said. “And yet we’re told the project is done.”
PAC chair Eric Goodman had concerns along the same lines.
“I don’t think very much filters down through your staff to us,” he told Schwartz.
To get information, Goodman said, “a lot of times we’ve had to, sort of, pull weeds.”
Schwartz responded that the county has hundreds of projects in the pipeline at any given time, and he would rather see advisory bodies looking at big-picture issues, like overall policies and standards.
Instead of pushback from the committees, Schwartz heard that’s what they’ve been wanting, too.
“This is something we’ve been asking for,” Palmer said. “Something we have been wanting very much, both for bicycle infrastructure and for pedestrian facilities.”
To a degree, the bodies have been doing that. In January, BAC and PAC members separately pressed county officials to implement “transformative” changes to transportation planning to focus on pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Also at the meeting, Schwartz pushed back on the notion — prevalent among some who serve on advisory panels — that staff is uninterested in community feedback.
“I’m not saying I disagree with you, but I’m not sure I quite agree with you that the input that comes from individuals or groups is somehow not factored into what we do,” he said. “I want you to second-guess us and question us.”
Before that back-and-forth had occurred, Schwartz told members of the two bodies he was mulling whether to combine them into one at some point in the future.
“I am toying with the idea, not right now, of seeing if we want to move to a more multi-modal kind of advisory group,” he said.
