Alaska Coordinated Transportation Task Force
Conference Call Notes
April 13, 2009
Italics indicate action items.
CTTF members / Ex officios:
Andi Nations, Camille Ferguson, Cheryl Walsh, Glenn Miller, Jeff Ottesen, Jennifer Beckmann, John
Cramer, Pat Branson, Rebecca Hilgendorf, Chris Mandregen, Barb Singleton
Bill Herman, David Levy, Eric Taylor, Debbie Howard, Nancy Webb
Edit for typos
Approve: Andi, Camille, Cheryl, Glenn, Jeff, Jennifer, John, Pat, Rebecca
Operating Guidelines as ratified attached.
Definitions and Parameters
The group discussed at length the meaning of “remote community,” knowing that it is a parameter for
the scope of their work and expressing some sentiment that they would like to support everyone. Eric
reminded the group of the parameters outlined in the Administrative Order, to include:
In this Order,
1. "Alaska public transportation management system" means the principal capital planning document
prepared by the state for public transportation;
2. "community-based transportation services" does not include
a. marine highway transportation or air transportation; or
b. transportation services for diffuse populations in areas within the state that are too remote for cost-
effective centralized community-based transportation;
3. "persons with disabilities" includes persons in this state with the following:
a. physical disabilities;
b. developmental disabilities;
c. mental illness;
d. traumatic brain injury;
f. substance abuse problems;
4. "persons with special needs" means the following persons in this state who require community-based
a. senior citizens;
b. persons with disabilities;
c. preschool children participating in a head start program financed by the United States Department
of Health and Human Services;
d. public school students;
1 | P a g e
e. low-income individuals, including those receiving public assistance or Medicaid;
f. other persons with special needs;
5. "services" means community-based transportation services delivered in this state;
6. "task force" means the Governor's Coordinated Transportation Task Force.
Starting with the DOT definition, the group identified the following as elements or considerations for its
definition of remote community, to include:
• Communities not linked to either the north American highway network directly or indirectly (by
regular car ferry service). Regular car ferry service was clarified to mean scheduled, public
service in response to a question.
• Connectivity by roads to another community or communities was another fundamental element
of the definition; although questions about vans, boats, and snowmobiles prompted a discussion
around limitations on FTA funding vs. what other funding sources could be applied to.
• Whether or not there is sufficient population with which to coordinate was another
consideration for the definition.
• Addressing each on a case‐by‐case basis was considered a realistic way to make the
• It was suggested that the population threshold be set low and that exceptions can be made.
A proposed draft definition for “remote community” from the CTTF’s perspective for CTTF review and
Remote communities are generally considered to be those that are disconnected
by roads and with a population of 100 or less. Exceptions may be made on a case‐
Duty 1 Status: Inventory
Some CTTF members were frustrated by the use of the APTMS tool as opposed to a CTTF specific survey
monkey tool to collect information from entities about their programs, services, vehicles and funding as
planned at the March meeting, regardless of potential duplicative requests. An additional element
respective to interest in the future provision of mobility services respective to Tribal funding was also
presented. Ultimately, Marsha asked to convene a subcommittee to include Jennifer, Jeff, Camille, Eric
and Marsha to generate a proposed process to collect the information the group seeks in an efficient and
Duty 2: Barriers to Coordination
Duty 3: Recommendations to remove barriers
The group took time to further refine and clarify draft problem statements, which have been revised
and are attached as a review copy to this summary. The group confirmed that the problem statements
are ready as a basis upon which to start building a response, with the caveat that they can always be
subject to revision and addition. The group proposed that would like to see how other states responded
to similar issues in their coordination efforts to inform their own discussion about potential ways to
remove the barriers. Barb Singleton offered to take the revised problem statements to her Coordination
Team and provide some information in response to that request.
2 | P a g e
Revised problem statements attached.
Duty 6: Identify available financing
The facilitator asked the group for their understanding of what this duty was seeking and for a proposed
path forward to address it. There was some initial confusion about whether this effort was directed at
state agencies only or at state and other private funding sources. Camille pointed out that she was in
possession of a list of revenue sources and 208 Tribal communities that looks like a similar response to
such an inquiry, although it is Tribal specific. Camille will send that to Marsha for the group’s review.
The conclusion was that the duty was addressing both funding elements. While some of the state
agencies provided funding information in response to the questionnaire Marsha distributed prior to the
March meeting, more agencies and additional programs within responding agencies can be approached
for more complete information. Marsha will work through that process with the assistance of CTTF
state agency members. Regarding private financing, the group will brainstorm those possibilities at the
There was none.
Google List Serve / Website
The group confirmed their satisfaction with the Website and no Google list serve will be developed in
addition. However, Marsha will prepare for the group a notice that they can print and distribute in their
own newsletters and other outlets announcing the availability of the website to others.
Jeff reported on the development of a service called www.gov.delivery coming to Alaska. Individuals
interested in any variety of issues can sign up for that service and receive information and notifications
as it is available. It is likely to not be available in time to support CTTF efforts.
Bethel Meeting Review
David and Andi reported that they will be in Bethel on May 20 participating in stakeholder meetings and
seeking a good understanding of issues associated with mobility for persons with disabilities in that
community. Others were invited to participate if they would like to.
Jennifer encouraged the group if they had the opportunity to take the mail boat ride, as it is a venue
that provided a public transit service in the past.
Marsha will provide logistical details about the tour as they become available.
3 | P a g e