Download Adobe© Reader™.

Peer Exchanges, Planning for a Better Tomorrow, Transportation Planning Capacity Building

Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program

— Peer Exchange Report —

Experience of Tribal Data Managers and Tribal Planners

Location: Cabazon, CA
Date: November 15, 2006
Roundtable Host Agency: FHWA
Roundtable Participants: Amber Marlow — Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College Hayward, WI
Esther Corbett — Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
Lewis Yellowrobe — Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in Montana
Bo Mazzetti — the Reservation Transportation Authority, Temecula, CA
Cynthia Gomez — the CALTRANS Division of Transportation Planning

I. Summary

The following report summarizes the results of a Peer Roundtable held through the Transportation Planning Capacity Building (TPCB) Program, which is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

The roundtable was sponsored by the FHWA and was held as a session during the 9th National Tribal Transportation Conference on November 15, 2006. Tim Penney from the FHWA facilitated the session and there were five roundtable participants:

  • Amber Marlow from Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College in Hayward, Wisconsin
  • Esther Corbett from the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.
  • Lewis Yellowrobe from the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation in Montana
  • Bo Mazzetti from the Reservation Transportation Authority in Temecula, California
  • Cynthia Gomez from the CALTRANS Division of Transportation Planning

The focus of the roundtable was tribes' experiences in establishing, collecting, sharing, analyzing, and reporting safety and relevant transportation data for decision-making in tribal transportation planning process. The session included presentations from the roundtable panelists and facilitated discussion.

back to top

II. Background

This half-day peer roundtable focused on Tribes' experience in establishing, collecting, sharing, analyzing, and reporting safety and relevant transportation data for decision-making in Tribal transportation planning process. The roundtable's goal was to help answer questions including: "What highway and transit data should be collected to effectively identify needs and to improve Tribes' ability to fund safety improvements?"; "What entities collect the data?"; "What data are currently available?"; and "How are data stored, managed, analyzed, reported, and shared?".

Four tribes and one state participated in a roundtable panel. The session was a combination of presentations and facilitated discussions. The panelists used examples from their own experience to address the issues raised at the roundtable. Audience members also asked questions and participated in the discussions.

back to top

III. Roundtable Summary

  1. Introduction — Tim Penney — Tribal Transportation Program Coordinator, FHWA Office of Policy and Governmental Affairs

    Tim Penney served as the facilitator of the Roundtable and gave a brief introduction to the session. Mr. Penney spoke of the importance of safety on the road and the work that tribes need to do to improve safety. Safety improvements are facilitated by the data the tribes have. Accurate and reliable data are very important and useful for planning, safety, and construction projects.

    Mr. Penney described the Roundtable format and introduced the five panelists.

  2. Importance of Transportation Data — Esther Corbett — Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.

    Esther Corbett gave a presentation titled "Building Tribal Traffic Safety Capacity." It focused on the efforts of the Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. (ITCA) to assist three tribal governments in Arizona to build tribal capacity to effectively address traffic safety issues, and reduce motor vehicle crash injuries and fatalities. Prior to the demonstration project, ITCA had developed a Tribal Highway Safety Improvement Program (THSIP) model and guide for tribal governments to explain how to establish THSIPs. THSIPs are important because they are comprehensive programs to identify and prioritize traffic safety issues, and to plan, implement and evaluate countermeasures. In Arizona, motor vehicle crash fatality rates are higher for American Indians than the general population or any other ethnic group. Between 1998 and 2004, 791 tribal members were lost to highway crashes. This results in public health, social, and financial losses for the tribal governments.

    The demonstration project to improve tribal traffic safety capacity provided technical assistance to three tribal governments. The ITCA assistance focused on helping the tribal governments gain the capacity to reduce the number of fatalities and injuries related to on-reservation motor vehicle crashes; address unsafe roads and other safety issues; and access traffic safety resources. The demonstration project guided the tribal governments through a four-step process:
    • Assess and prioritize tribal traffic safety issues
    • Plan a tribal traffic safety project
    • Implement a tribal traffic safety project
    • Evaluate the tribal traffic safety project
    ITCA used a combination of crash, emergency medical services (EMS), and roadway data, to perform an extensive crash analysis to assist the each government to identify and prioritize safety issues. More than ten years of data were examined. ITCA requested data from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), which is responsible for compiling the crash reports filed by tribal governments, law enforcement agencies and the state Department of Public Safety. Crash reports were supplemented with police incident reports, and data from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).

    ITCA provided each tribal government with three types of crash analysis: crash location, numbers and types of injuries and fatalities, and system-wide issues. Access routes to tribal lands are heavily traveled and were identified in the analysis. Fatalities most often occurred when no seatbelt was worn and passengers generally suffered more injuries and fatalities than drivers. Running off the road accounted for 42.7% of injury crashes and 65% of fatal crashes. System wide issues that were identified were excessive speed, seatbelt use, drug and alcohol use, fatigue, and the time of day and year affecting driving conditions.

    Tribal management of traffic records is important because it promotes self-determination and allows tribal governments to play an active role in safety analysis and activities.

  3. Roundtable Discussion

    A roundtable discussion followed Ms. Corbett's presentation. Following is a summary of the questions and answers.

    Q: What data should be collected?

    Lewis Yellowrobe (LY): I am the sole planner. We contract out the construction and maintenance. I do planning and pre-design. We hand the project off to someone else in our department for design. I need to have data available to justify the specific designs. I use geometric traffic and population data. Everyone wants a road, but we cannot build it without justification. We collect geometric data by driving every road. We have 5,000 miles of road. We obtain accident data from the state of Montana and traffic data from the county. I use for population data or I obtain them from other jurisdictions.

    Cynthia Gomez (CG): We have a complex system in California. California Highway Patrol (CHP) collects and maintains the safety data that Caltrans uses to analyze safety problems. Most Tribes in California do not have tribal law enforcement. If an accident happens on a tribal reservation, it will likely not be reported unless CHP responds to the incident and reports it. In rural areas CHP may require up to an hour to drive to some locations. We have a problem obtaining reports on some state routes. We are encouraging Tribes to meet with CHP to discuss the need for safety reporting. We use our system data to justify safety projects and we do not have very much data on reservations to justify projects.

    Bo Mazzetti (BM): Unless there is a fatality, an accident may not be reported. Also, if there is an accident on Interstate 10 (I-10) for example, the Morongo tribe will be referenced for the accident even if the tribe has nothing to do with the accident. (Note: This example was given because the conference took place on Morongo tribal lands just adjacent to I-10.)

    CG: When tribes build a development, they must complete a traffic analysis. Sometimes tribes complain that they are blamed for added safety problems when the development is built, which is one of the important factors for the traffic analysis.

    Amber Marlow (AM): In Wisconsin, tribes have access to Wisconsin DOT (WisDOT) data. We review alcohol involvement, seatbelt usage, age and gender. We also consider population and demographic data. We have been promoting transit for the elderly population.

    Q: Who collects data in your location? How are data shared to create one data set?

    AM: If tribes are reporting into the state system, then they are able to extract it. Some tribes are not reporting, so they have no means of analyzing it.

    Q from audience: If tribes do not have the capacity to analyze data, what will the state do to help?

    AM: It is something we can do and have thought about it. However, the state cannot analyze data if tribes do not want to report them.

    Q from audience: Is there a standard reporting format?

    AM: We use the same format as the state for reporting (the MV4000 form). We also worked with the Nation Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and want to be compatible with their reporting format.

    CG: We have analyzed data for tribes along various routes if the data is available. However, a lot of data that is available is outside the tribal area. A lot of accidents are not being reported for various reasons. We are working on a project that focuses on a seven state routes that service Indian reservations, to evaluate safety awareness.

    EC: Tribal police departments in Arizona collect standardized crash data. However, much of the data are filed manually. Crash history may also be on file with the BIA law enforcement. During the demonstration, ITCA approached the police departments to obtain/review manual data. Larger tribes sometimes have electronic data storage; however, many important crash data elements are not included. ITCA is encouraging the tribes to manage electronic traffic safety data. Then the tribe or an outside party, such as the Indian Health Service (HIS) or ITCA, could easily access and analyze the data. States have a uniform methodology for analyzing data. ITCA is promoting (along with the federal and state governments) that tribes and the BIA have sufficient resources and the opportunity to develop a uniform methodology.

    Tim Penney (TP): ITCA completed a FHWA funded research project to develop a model Tribal Highway Safety Improvement Program. The second phase of the project was to identify tribal governments to implement the model program. ITCA had difficulty identifying tribes that had the personnel or the expertise to implement the program. This has been an impediment for many tribes — having the capacity to implement the safety programs.

    EC: Most tribes are eligible to receive U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) or National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) funds, but the funding is not sufficient to establish, maintain and/or analyze traffic safety data. Tribal police records staff and traffic safety officers are limited in number. Staff investigating crashes or enforcing traffic safety may be required to work on competing activities. In one instance, the tribal police chief wanted to perform the data analysis, but realized that he did not have staff or resources to complete it.

    CG: Two data areas are normally evaluated: driver behavior and road design. A study performed by the University of California Los Angeles on California Public Law (P.L.) 280, found that non-tribal police officers were interested in crimes of a higher level than crashes. Tribal communities did not receive the law enforcement they thought they needed on community issues; they primarily received law enforcement for the major crimes. This spills over into transportation and also the use of alcohol and drugs and safety seats for children. Tribes are concerned with the design of the road. We are funding the Reservation Transportation Authority (RTA) to perform a study along State Route 76 that will illustrate the Tribes' concerns from their own perspective. Our District offices report and recommend safety projects.

    TP: How can data improve tribes' ability to fund safety improvements?

    CG: One example was the Yurok Reservation. The tribe did their own data reporting and our District implemented many minor safety enhancements like guardrails. The District and Tribe worked together to complete a long-term comprehensive plan and found the only remedy was several billions of dollars of improvements. We then had to consider all options. The Tribe is working with the district right now to look at other ways to solve the issue. We also funded the Yurok's transportation plan. We funded another tribe to conduct a pedestrian safety study in their downtown area and this was featured by the American Planning Association (APA).

    BM: We had one project on a reservation that we had planned with San Diego County. The local government believes that tribes are wealthy because of the gaming facilities. We need to think before using tribal money for non-tribal roads. We spent a lot of money on a county road.

    CG: We have the intergovernmental review (IGR) program — federal and state case law that requires the Department to look at all projects along the state highway, and recommend mitigation measures when a development will affect the state highway system. It also helps the Tribes negotiate with the local governments. In one example, the county wanted $12 million for road improvements because of a tribal development. We provide training to Tribes regarding the planning and programming process, which includes information and guidance for a Tribe to evaluate what the mitigation amount should be for their project mitigation. We found that in this particular example, by using the information, the tribe was able to negotiate the $12 million down to $5 million.

    LY: The issue is a political response versus what actual data show. When an accident occurs, political pressure could be to expand a two-lane facility to a four-lane facility, lower speed or add a stop light. It might not be necessary to do any of these things. I might examine the data and see that there was only one accident in five years at a location. I try to focus politicians on high-priority accident areas.

    TP: Lewis brings up a good point. We need to use data to properly direct limited funding.

    BM: Emotional and family issues create a lot of pressure whenever there is an accident.

    TP: What are some of the tools being used to collect data?

    EC: One source of funding for tribal data comes from NHTSA. NHTSA provides funds to the Bureau of Indian Affairs Highway Safety Office (BIAHSO) for tribal grants. Additionally, the state Governors' Offices of Highway Safety receive the same funding and are also potential sources of data funding. The previous transportation bill, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), authorized funding for which tribes were eligible to apply. The BIAHSO received $25,000 to help 561 tribal governments. This funding was insufficient, but it was a start. A data assessment was a prerequisite to receiving these NHTSA funds. ITCA assisted three tribal governments in Arizona to complete data assessments with the NHTSA-sponsored assessment teams. Each of these Tribes applied for funding to automate their crash data. The Polaris system was purchased by two of the Tribes. Spillman is another data system in use by some tribal police departments. In anticipation of the new Safe Affordable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) data requirements, the state of Arizona requested a data assessment. This provided an update after 10 years to examine the state of data management and to position Arizona to be eligible to apply for the NHTSA data improvement funding. Arizona has developed its data plan and is working on its implementation. As States work to improve their data systems, they need to consult with tribes on a government-to-government basis to identify the tribal data issues and to jointly plan implementation strategies for these issues. Tribes and local jurisdictions have utilized scarce resources to invest in software and states should take this into consideration. As state and BIA data standards are established, Tribes need to be consulted about how their data procedures will be affected. ITCA is concerned about the development of data standards and including Tribes in the processes. ITCA is apprising tribes of this issue.

    AM: We have a database and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) system through our college. This is a very useful thing for the tribes to have. We provide data and equipment for the tribes. We use GIS software at a reduced cost. Tribes can be at a higher level of data collection than local or county governments. However, they have the data but do not analyze the data yet.

    TP: Are you working with just one tribe or with many tribes?

    AM: We met many tribal leaders at a recent conference. We are in the process of setting them up on our system as well.

    Q from audience: Was there a pilot program with St. Croix?

    AM: Martha Florey, Assistant Director, Bureau of Transportation Safety, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, has worked with many of the tribes. Each tribe receives a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit.

    TP: FHWA funded a study with Wisconsin DOT on traffic records assessments and data collection with tribal governments in Wisconsin. Martha Florey was the lead on this project.

    Q from Audience: The Federal Government funded a project in Michigan with the Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP). It implemented software for data collection on roadway data and conditions. Now they use Roadsoft GIS, which is being promoted in developing countries. Are you all aware of this?

    LY: We did the GPS and GIS. We drove all the roads and took all the info that we could. We share data with law enforcement and with EMS.

    CG: We are funding a consultant to perform more inventories on the reservations in California. A few years ago, the Department funded a senior transportation planner that worked directly with the RTA and completed 30 traffic circulation reports for reservations. We reviewed proposed roads and existing traffic design. The more we did, the more we discovered that we did not have enough information. We purchased and loan out traffic counters to tribes. Our California BIA has very little money. We are trying to obtain collection tools so that the tribes can collect uniform data. We are behind in that respect but we are trying to find ways to partner and share resources.

    Q from audience: Are tribal police cross-deputized?

    CG: The only cross-deputized officers that I am aware of are from the Hoopa Tribe. Cross-deputization is a big issue now. However, many tribes do not have a police force. Many have contracts with local police forces. In California P.L. 280 is a big issue because the law gives the States criminal and some civil jurisdiction over the Tribes-as a result the BIA did not provide any funding to Tribes in California for law enforcement. The California Attorney General's office and tribes have to educate law enforcement officers as to what their responsibilities are to the tribes.

    BM: We all lack in our traffic counts. We need to concentrate on that so we know what we have. We need to also update our construction costs to make sure they are current and to know what our costs to construct are.

    Q from the audience: Have you had any success in collection of transit data?

    CG: We have only begun to help tribes realize that collecting data on transit operations is important. Rural areas are looking at ridership versus trip generation. Most transit lines receive government funds. Urban areas usually receive a higher level of funding because there is more ridership. Greyhound stopped service to the Owens Valley area where several tribes are located because it is difficult to make the service cost effective. We have one origin and destination and no stops in between to increase revenue. My Tribe connects the tribal system to the county transit system. Without a county system, the connection can be difficult. Transit is a huge challenge because of the cost.

    Q from Audience: Didn't the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) just provide some funding?

    CG: The funding level is minimal compared to the number of tribes and the land area. It is challenging for tribes to leverage money for effective systems.

    LY: Fixed route transit does not exist on the reservation where I work. We have a patchwork of vanpools. Sometimes it is for medical services. Sometimes three vans from three agencies will provide service to a hospital at the same time. The agencies cannot share a van because there is competition between tribal agencies. The college has a vanpool that is exclusive to students. We have been trying to coordinate these services. One tribe had a typical fixed route service, but people were not used to waiting at a specific time. Most service is on demand. We are trying to figure out how to make transit work in a rural area. We have had more misses than hits.

    CG: We conducted a Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) study a few years ago. We included three reservations in that study. We found that the JARC concept worked well on Indian reservations because the reservations had developments like casinos that provided jobs for non-Indian people from the urban areas. This is an effective way to move people on transit. The regional transportation planning agency for Tulare County consulted with the Tule River Tribe and as a result created turn-outs for safer roads. The Tribe also provided transit services for employees, which became part of the benefit package for employees.

    Q from audience: Because of insurance issues, we cannot transport people off the reservation. Is that an issue?

    CG: This was a big issue. The Tule River Tribe had to shop around for insurance coverage. Some companies believed the tribes have a lot of money and try to charge a higher premium. However, the Tribe was able to find reasonable rates. There are many considerations in terms of transit liability. It is important to consider who owns the transit vehicle, and who has jurisdiction over the transit system.

    AM: We have collaborated with the local county for transit service since 2002. We have 11 vans. Fixed routes operate from 6:00 am to 2:30 pm and then the service becomes on-demand service. Ridership data is there, but they have not been analyzed in a year.

  4. Presentation: Motor Vehicle Crash Investigation on the Lac Courte Oreilles Reservation — Utilizing GPS/GIS Technologies — Amber Marlow

    Amber Marlow gave a presentation on motor vehicle crash (MVC) investigations on the Lac Courte Oreilles Reservation in Wisconsin. Located in Northwestern Wisconsin the Lac Courte Oreille Reservation has about 70,000 acres of land and 318 miles of roadway.

    Motor vehicle crash investigation is important because MVCs are a leading cause of death among Native Americans. The Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College Hayward preformed a study investigating MVCs on the Lac Courte Oreilles reservation. The study was performed to reduce crashes and save lives but also to obtain data and use them to find clusters on MVCs, cross reference seat belt use surveys, and fulfill eligibility requirements for certain grants.

    The project began in 2002 with the investigation of 80 MVCs. By the 2004, the investigation method of each MVC was developed into a series of steps:
    1. Crash definition
    2. Data format — develop electronic data entry interface
    3. Collect MVC Records
    4. Locate and investigate the physical location of MVC's using GPS Coordinates
    5. Enter data into a computer
    6. Generate maps using Arcview
    7. Written summary of findings

    Crashes were defined as any MVC that occurred within the Lac Courte Oreille reservation between 2000 and 2003. A data form was developed based on the state of Wisconsin's MV4000 form. WisDOT provided an electronic crash database from which to gather crash data. Handheld GPS units were used for the investigation of the crash sites. By using the police accident reports, the study team attempted to determine the location of the crash and record the latitude and longitude. The study team has not yet examined traffic counts.

    Accident data were entered into a Microsoft Access database, then exported to Microsoft Excel and finally used in an ArcView GIS program. The study identified 776 crashes, 153 of which were on the reservation. Approximately, 56% of crashes were with a fixed object.

    The 153 MVCs on the reservation were the focus of the study. Of these crashes, 25% involved alcohol — which is a rate 3 times higher than for crashes off the reservation. Of the alcohol related crashes, 45% involved males under 21 years old and occurred more often on weekend nights. Speeding was another significant factor.

    Seat belt usage was difficult to accurately determine because a $10 fine encourages vehicle occupants to say they were wearing a seat belt even if they were not. The study found that 21% of crashes occupants were not wearing a seat belt, 48% were wearing a seatbelt and 31% are unknown. However the majority of crashes in which no seatbelt was worn resulted in an injury or fatality.

    The study team faced challenges including locating exact crash site based on vague police reports. Access to local data was difficult because of turnover in municipal staff. Street signs were also absent at times.

    Suggested improvements to the study process are to enter the GPS coordinates at the scene of the crash and to encourage local police to complete accident forms.

  5. Presentation: Choosing Data Sets — Lewis Yellowrobe

    Lewis Yellowrobe gave a presentation on choosing data sets. Mr. Yellowrobe explained that he works as a transportation planner for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes in the western part of Montana. He is responsible for 1.6 million acres of land with state, county, and local roads as well as driveways. He is the only transportation planner on staff.

    Mr. Yellowrobe gave an example of data sets aiding the parking lot design for a government building. Traffic count data showed how multiple entrances and exits could optimize the parking lot usage for different purposes and avoid the bottlenecks of a single entrance and exit. Deliveries and court traffic were separated, for example. Traffic counters are useful but dogs and children can cause problems with count accuracy by interfering with the device operation.

    Mr. Yellowrobe shares accident reports with the state and uses accident codes to identify what happened at a crash site. The data codes make it easier to determine what happened at a site and identify useful solutions.

    The Census Bureau is useful for gathering statistics on how people travel. Generally in western Montana, 90% of people travel by car and 70% travel in single occupant vehicles.

    Mr. Yellowrobe showed the session participants one chapter of his transportation plan to demonstrate how data are used in transportation planning. Census data are used to give background on the population and how and why people make trips. Times and mileages for commuting are given as well as expenditures on transportation. Additionally, accident data are presented along with traffic counts on the busier roads. Mr. Yellowrobe also uses the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation manual for forecasting trips for certain land uses.

  6. Presentation: Tribal — State Relationships to Improve Safety

    Cynthia Gomez and Bo Mazzetti

    Cynthia Gomez and Bo Mazzetti gave a summary of the Tribal — State relationship in California. Ms. Gomez spoke first.

    States that have tribal liaisons in their cabinet departments create a good forum for partnerships with tribes. The FHWA has been very supportive of this effort nationwide. California's tribal liaison program started in 1999. Ms. Gomez serves as California's tribal liaison for Transportation Planning. Building the program proved more difficult than she anticipated because there was little outreach, consultation or coordination with tribes. Ms. Gomez quickly launched an informational website for tribes. She then developed a handbook for tribes about planning and implementation projects in California. California Environmental Justice laws require consultation with tribes when the state and counties amend their general plans. The tribal liaison program offers training to all parties on the required consultation. The state and MPOs do not always consult with tribes as they should and so the tribal liaison program reviews all transportation plans to make sure consultation with tribes has been addressed. Ms. Gomez has seen improvement in consultation as a result of the efforts made in the past seven years.

    Mr. Mazzetti discussed the past confrontational relationship between tribes and the State of California. The relationship has improved with the arrival of Ms. Gomez and the tribal liaison program. A major issue that arises is sovereignty. States often want tribes to waive their sovereignty when negotiating contracts. However, tribes should not do this. There are other ways to work successfully with states without giving up sovereignty. Mr. Mazzetti suggested a limited waiver of immunity for the duration of the contract. Additionally, partnerships can be effective. Currently, Mr. Mazzetti is working in partnership with the state of California to study state route 76 for safety improvements. Working partnerships can help build trust between tribal and state governments. Additionally, tribes are sometimes sensitive about allowing certain data to be in studies. However, tribes are more willing if they have some control over the product of the study.

  7. Open Discussion

    Q from audience: Last year at another conference in Washington State, there was a woman who discussed good relationships with the tribes. Is there a list of best practices and examples for states working with tribes from the federal level?

    A: FHWA is starting this. We are looking to do a 2-3 page informal document and a Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) document. Look for it on the safety conscious planning website.

    Comment: I believe the question was referring to Colleen Jollie from Washington. Washington State now has a Tribal Transportation Planning Organization funded through WashDOT and allows tribes to participate in the tribal transportation planning process.

    Q: Is there something that the FHWA could do to recognize states (like an award) for working with their tribes? This could add incentive for states to work with tribes.

    A: Internally, the Federal Government has discussed this and is at least letting people know what is occurring in the various states.

    CG: We convened with many of the state DOTs and were able to discuss what we are doing well and not so well. I established an email list so I can send out questions when I have a problem. Wisconsin has used our handbook as a guide to develop their own. Arizona called about air quality.

    LY: I would be interested in knowing about that. I would like to know what is happening. I just receive pre-designs and review them. I rarely work with anyone at state level in the district. I make requests and some are denied with good explanation.

    CG: Education about tribes is important. Understanding that tribes are governments and not big landowners is important because it makes a difference in whether connectivity to the Tribal community will be effectively considered. A lot of a tribal liaison's job is educating state and local governments about tribal governments.

    Comment: Montana held a safety conscious planning forum. FHWA helped pay for travel costs for all seven tribes to attend this forum. The Governor said tribes would be engaged in the planning process. Montana will be used as an example of effective practices.

    CG: Some TTAPs are excellent resources.

  8. Update from FHWA

    Leslie Wright and Chimai Ngo of the Federal Highway Administration gave a short update and conclusion to the session.

    Funding and data sources are the major issues for tribal transportation planning. Tribes should contact the FHWA division office in their state to ask questions about funding and data resources at the Federal level.

    The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) has certain requirements and opportunities for tribes. One new core program is the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) which has $5.1 billion authorized for it over the next four years. Of this funding $90 million is for the high-risk rural roads program (HRRRP). The purpose of this is construction projects to help reduce injuries and fatalities.

    FHWA will be working with the Confederated Colville Reservation in Washington State on its safety management system (SMS). The Office of Federal Lands within FHWA is developing a video for Tribal school children on safe walking to school. The video will educate Tribal school aged children on safe walking behaviors. There will also be a portion of the video that will bring awareness and share tips with Tribal leaders and adults on how to create a safer walking environment. The video should be completed February or March of 2007.
back to top

IV. Key Contacts

Key Contact(s): Chimai Ngo, Office of Federal Lands
Phone: 202.366.1231

back to top

V. Attachments


Data Resources: Experiences of Data Managers and Planners
Peer Roundtable

November 15, 8 am – 12 pm
Cabazon, CA (at NTTC)
10 mins. Introduction Tim Penney
15 mins. The Importance of Transportation Data Esther Corbett
60 mins. Roundtable
  • What data should be collected to effectively identify needs?
  • How do these data improve the Tribes' ability to fund safety improvements?
  • What entities collect data?
  • What data are currently available?
  • Who uses the data?
  • What tools are used to collect data?
All 5 participants
80 mins.
Presentation: Motor Vehicle Crash Investigation on the Lac Courte Oreilles Reservation — Utilizing GPS/GIS Technologies
(How data are stored, managed, analyzed, and reported; and how they are shared with other entities)
Amber Marlow
Presentation: Choosing Data Sets
(How data are being used in the transportation planning process to improve an existing transportation facility or plan/design a proposed transportation project)
Lewis Yellowrobe
Presentation: Tribal--State Relationships To Improve Safety
(Working relationship between Caltrans and Tribes in solving safety problems)
Cynthia Gomez and Bo Mazzetti
60 mins. Open discussion All (participants and audience)
10 mins. Update from FHWA Chimai NgoLeslie Wright
5 mins. Closing remarks Tim Penney

back to top


Participant Organization/Location Phone Email
Amber Marlow Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College, WI (715) 634-4790 ext 156
Esther Corbett Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., AZ (623) 307-1564
Lewis Yellowrobe Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, MT (406) 676-2600
Bo Mazzetti Reservation Transportation Authority, CA (951) 308-1443 ext. 103
Cynthia Gomez CALTRANS, Native American Liaison Branch, CA (916) 654-2389
Tim Penney (Facilitator) FHWA, Office of Policy, Washington, DC (202)-366-2698

back to top

FHWA Home   |  FTA Home   |  Privacy Statement   |  Website Feedback
US DOT Logo  United States Department of Transportation