We have an excellent relationship with the CO Dept of Local Affairs, State Demographer's Office and participate in many of their Census-related conferences, seminars, etc. They provide each of the state's MPOs with short-term estimates and long-term forecasts (currently to 2035) of population, housing, and employment control totals for travel demand modeling. The latter forecast consistency ensures that the fundamental inputs for adjacent MPOs are the same and paves the way for integration (or at least comparability) of two or more travel models to look at common inter-regional corridor issues, adjacent growth of housing and employment centers, and the like. The forecasts also support special studies of common environmental features (such as watersheds, bio-species ranges, etc.) that cross geo-political-jurisdictional boundaries. Bill Moore, M.ITE, MPO Administrator PACOG MPO/TPR CITY OF PUEBLO - Urban Transportation Planning Division 223 N Santa Fe Avenue, Pueblo, CO 81003 719-553-2945 (dir) FAX 719-553-2950 www.PACOG.net <http://www.PACOG.net> or e-mail bmoore(a)pueblo.us <mailto:bmoore(a)pueblo.us> -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net]On Behalf Of Dunbar Brooks Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 7:34 AM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] Please help your data community re: PUMAs Elaine: I can categorically state that the Baltimore MPO has an excellent relationship with our State Data Center housed in the Maryland Department of Planning. The SDC reached out to MPOs in Maryland and the DC region (the Baltimore and Washington MPOs model the edge counties of each other's region. The SDC after the 2000 census set up a meeting with MPOs, county planning offices, libraries and other interested entities to discuss optimum configurations of PUMAs using aggregations of locally defined areas. In the case of our Baltimore MPO we used aggregations of our MPO developed Regional Planning Districts. We expect similar collaboration this time. We do a lot of work with PUMAs because we do very specialized tabulations using the PUMS files. We create special tabulations to help update and fine tune our travel demand model and we answer a number of special requests from outside agencies using the PUMS files. I am sure that there are additional examples of positive interactions between MPOs and SDCs. Dunbar Brooks Manager, Data Development Baltimore Metropolitan Council Offices @ McHenry Row 1500 Whetsone Way, Suite 300 Baltimore, Maryland 21230 Phone: 410-732-9574 Fax: 410-732-8248 ________________________________ Confidentiality Statement This message may contain legally privileged and confidential information that is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not an intended recipient, taking any action based on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. Please immediately notify the sender if you have received this message in error. -----Original Message----- From: Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov [mailto:Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:17 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] Please help your data community re: PUMAs I am getting anecdotal remarks about whether or not SDCs have been open to working with the transportation data community, e.g. State DOTs and MPOs, about PUMA delineation. I think that if a few of you could provide some EXAMPLES of GOOD working relationships, maybe we can reduce the problems in the next round. Some questions to consider: After 2000, how did the SDC do outreach with the data community to get input into PUMA delineation? What are the SDCs' plans for outreach for the next round? Has the MPO or the State DOT participated in the SDC program as an affiliate? Did the transportation data community participate in the 2010 Census tract delineation? State's Data Center contact list: http://www.census.gov/sdc/network.html You don't have to write a book, just a couple of paragraphs would still be helpful! Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460 _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news This e-mail transmission (including any attachments) contains information that is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the use of the addressee only. If you received this e-mail in error, we request that you contact us immediately by telephone or return e-mail, and that you delete this message from your computer. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.

In the Central New Mexico Region the MPO and SDC work closely in partnership and have an excellent working relationship. I cannot speak to the PUMA delineation, however we worked hand-in-hand on the PSAP program redefining Block Group, Tract, and CDP geography. Other examples of our collaboration include: We are an affiliate of the SDC and are invited to an annual "Affiliates Day" of training on Census Products We are often asked to present what'snew with transportation & land use at the annual Data Users Conference We have assisted the SDC with the annual BAS in accessing our contacts for responses We refer questions and data requests from the public between organizations when appropriate We have a clear understanding of the products available from each organization and we share information freely We often confer when there is a difficult data related question We share data collection of building permits for new construction We truly value this relationship and feel that it is mutually beneficial; the collaboration contributes to stronger products and the ability to best assist our members. Kendra Kendra Watkins Senior Data Analyst Mid-Region Council of Governments 809 Copper Ave. NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 Phone: (505)724-3601 Fax: (505)247-1753 Email: kwatkins(a)mrcog-nm.gov This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. -----Original Message----- From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 5:17 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] Please help your data community re: PUMAs I am getting anecdotal remarks about whether or not SDCs have been open to working with the transportation data community, e.g. State DOTs and MPOs, about PUMA delineation. I think that if a few of you could provide some EXAMPLES of GOOD working relationships, maybe we can reduce the problems in the next round. Some questions to consider: After 2000, how did the SDC do outreach with the data community to get input into PUMA delineation? What are the SDCs' plans for outreach for the next round? Has the MPO or the State DOT participated in the SDC program as an affiliate? Did the transportation data community participate in the 2010 Census tract delineation? State's Data Center contact list: http://www.census.gov/sdc/network.html You don't have to write a book, just a couple of paragraphs would still be helpful! Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460 _______________________________________________ ctpp-news mailing list ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net http://www.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/ctpp-news

Hi all-- Yesterday I read through the Proposed PUMA Criteria and Guidelines. Census Bureau is taking comments, now thru Feb 28, on the rules for drawing new PUMA boundaries. http://www.census.gov/geo/puma/2010_puma_guidelines.pdf Highlights: * PUMAs must have at least 100,000 population per Census 2010 enumeration. * The basic building blocks of vintage 2010 PUMAs will be counties and contiguous groupings of tracts. * Cities are no longer building blocks -- you have to build up from groupings of tracts. My take: The new rules are all reasonable. The 3rd point above may be controversial, but it seems justified. (It's discussed in the Bureau's document.) That being the case, Metropolitan Council is not going to submit any formal comments to the Bureau. If any of YOU are going to comment -- comments due Feb 28 -- I encourage your support of section IV B of the document, which allows "grandfathering" of vintage 2000 PUMAs with non-contiguous pieces. That's a reasonable and considerate allowance by the Bureau. Elaine-- You asked about the quality of MPO relationships with Census State Liaisons (usually the State Demographer). Metropolitan Council is a regional government, MPO, and SDC network member. And I think we have a great relationship with the Minnesota State Demographer. No complaints. Hope your year is off to a good start. Cheers. ________________________ Todd Graham Principal Forecaster Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North Saint Paul, MN 55101 ph: 651/602-1322 email: todd.graham(a)metc.state.mn.us in: www.linkedin.com/in/toddgraham web: www.metrocouncil.org ________________________ ________________________________________ From: ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net [ctpp-news-bounces(a)chrispy.net] On Behalf Of Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov [Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 6:17 PM To: ctpp-news(a)chrispy.net Subject: RE: [CTPP] Please help your data community re: PUMAs I am getting anecdotal remarks about whether or not SDCs have been open to working with the transportation data community, e.g. State DOTs and MPOs, about PUMA delineation. I think that if a few of you could provide some EXAMPLES of GOOD working relationships, maybe we can reduce the problems in the next round. Some questions to consider: After 2000, how did the SDC do outreach with the data community to get input into PUMA delineation? What are the SDCs' plans for outreach for the next round? Has the MPO or the State DOT participated in the SDC program as an affiliate? Did the transportation data community participate in the 2010 Census tract delineation? State's Data Center contact list: http://www.census.gov/sdc/network.html You don't have to write a book, just a couple of paragraphs would still be helpful! Elaine Murakami FHWA Office of Planning 206-220-4460

Hello all: Just thought I'd chime in my thoughts on PUMA delineation. I was with the San Francisco Bay Area MPO up until 2009, and we had a very good, collaborative relationship with our State Data Center and our Regional Data Center (the COG for the region), and various parties interested in this subject. We basically assembled our 2000 PUMAs as simple aggregations of census tracts. We convened a small group of interested county and city planners, and even had a UC Berkeley planning professor attend (and provide excellent comments). We did the GIS work, provided options, and decided as a group how to define our Census 2000 PUMAs. This was accepted by our SDC and the Census Bureau. I believe the SDC in California worked with all of the Regional Data Centers (RDCs) and Affiliate Data Centers (ADCs) to define the PUMAs for all of California. It worked well here in the Bay Area; can't comment on elsewhere in the state. Some thoughts on the 2010 PUMAs: 1. The rules to define PUMAs as aggregations of census tracts makes it easy to get started now (or April 1st, when the final sets of PL 94-171 data become available). 2. MPOs should be a part of the regional data center / affiliate data center program in their state(s). 3. The role is to provide options on PUMA delineation (keep the 2000 PUMAs with minor adjustments to be consistent with 2010 tracts; re-split fast growing counties; etc.) 4. The role is to be open, inclusive, and serve as a "convener" of interested parties. 5. These PUMAs need to serve the broad regional interest for improved socio-economic analyses. 6. PUMAs are not just for Public Microdata Data Sample (PUMS) analyses; they are now "standard" summary levels included in the Census Bureau's reporting of data from the ACS. So, more folks will take an interest in their delineation. By the way, retirement is GREAT! It really beats the alternative! Chuck Purvis (formerly with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the SF Bay Area) On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:17 PM, <Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> <Elaine.Murakami(a)dot.gov> wrote: