Advocacy Agenda
Submitted 07.29.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Loops, NCDOT, Transportation
NCDOT’s new criteria for loop-building gives East End Connector a 2014 start date (News and Observer)
NCDOT expects to start construction in fiscal year 2014 on Durham’s East End Connector, one of North Carolina’s longest-delayed road projects.
First proposed in the 1970s, the $162 million project on the east side of Durham would create a north-south, stoplight-free drive between Interstate 85 and Research Triangle Park. It would upgrade part of U.S. 70 into a freeway and build a link between it and the Durham Freeway.
The 2014 start date shows up in a new draft schedule (attached below, with separate rating sheet) for DOT urban loop projects across the state. Groundbreaking had been set for fiscal year 2013 in a schedule published two years ago, although DOT officials later said that delays were likely because of limited funds.
Following up on Gov. Bev Perdue’s pledge to remove politics from the state’s decision process for road construction, DOT is publishing a new set of criteria it will use to set priorities for urban loops.
The state Board of Transportation will receive a draft version next week, with the final list to be adopted in 2011 after more than a year of review and public comment across the state.
The East End Connector and other projects are rated (attached below) by factors including how much car and truck traffic they will serve and how much travel time they will save, compared against project costs.
The East End Connector ranked sixth out of 21 loop projects evaluated across the state in the new rating system. But it was one of only seven projects where construction is tentatively scheduled to start in the next 10 years.
That’s all the state can afford to build.
“If we were going to build all the loops today, it would cost us $8 billion,” said Greer Beaty, DOT spokeswoman. “But this year we have only $150 million in loop money to spend, so we don’t even come close to having enough.”
Other start dates are fiscal 2011 (this year) for I-295 in Fayetteville, 2013 for an I-40 and US 17 project in Wilmington, 2014 for an I-485 widening in Charlotte, 2014 and 2017 for the next sections of Greensboro’s loop, and 2020 for Greenville’s Southwest Bypass.
“This is a realistic schedule,” Beaty said.
Another Durham project ranks higher under the new loop criteria – a bypass for U.S. 501 on the north side of the city – but much more environmental and design work is needed before it can be put on the construction schedule, Beaty said.
Two projects to complete Raleigh’s 540 Outer Loop are included on DOT’s evaluation list, but they are not listed on the construction schedule because their fates will be determined separately as toll projects. The Southern Wake Freeway is ranked seventh, and the Eastern Wake Freeway is ranked 13th.
The Triangle Expressway, which includes the western portion of the 540 Loop, is under construction now and will open as the state’s first modern toll road in 2011 and 2012.
Submitted by BruceSiceloff on 07/29/2010 – 14:51
|
|
Submitted 07.29.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Gas Tax, LaHood, Reauthorization, Revenue, SAFETEA-LU, tax, Transportation
LaHood Fends Off Lawmakers On Fuel Taxes (The Journal of Commerce Online)
DOT secretary says there may not be “the courage” in Congress to take on issue
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood came under fire Tuesday from House lawmakers over infrastructure financing, taking heat from those for and against raising taxes to pay for highway and transit projects.
LaHood restated the Obama administration’s opposition to raising federal fuel taxes, and defended his remarks from last week that various other “outside the box” financing ideas could help cover surface transportation needs without a tax hike.
The secretary told a highway builders conference July 23 that “raising the gas tax is not an option.” But senior members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee challenged him on the issue, including ranking Republican Rep. John Mica, who seemed to believe he had turned LaHood against a tax increase at the hearing.
The Florida Republican told LaHood the November election would bring “a conservative wave” that would leave Congress less willing to raise federal fuel taxes.
Although LaHood and other officials have repeatedly said the president and the DOT do not favor raising the gas tax while the economy is weak, Mica asked LaHood if he was “going to continue advocating a gas tax increase” to fund transportation needs.
LaHood said over his 18 months as DOT secretary “I’ve never advocated a gas tax. The president is opposed to raising the gas tax . . . We have almost 10 percent unemployment in America. People can little afford to buy a gallon of gasoline, let alone if we were to raise the tax on it. So I do not advocate, the administration does not advocate, raising the gas tax.”
Mica told LaHood, “I’m glad to hear you join me in declaring it dead.” Mica also said he favors a much larger discretionary infrastructure fund than the $4 billion a year the administration is seeking, and said he would want such a fund to be about 10 times that size.
But Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., who chairs the highways and transit subcommittee, chided LaHood for suggesting the nation’s transportation needs could be met by a combination of current-level Highway Trust Fund taxes, the proposed discretionary spending fund, road or bridge tolls and greater use of partnerships that combine public money with private investments.
“Are we going to toll 150,000 bridges so we can rebuild them or bring them up to snuff?” DeFazio asked, citing the number of those identified as needing repair. “Are we going to toll the entire federal interstate (highway) system?”
LaHood said the administration favors infrastructure investment and agrees with T&I Committee Chairman James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., “on the lion’s share” of what Oberstar proposed in a $450 billion surface transportation reauthorization bill.
“The only thing we need, the only thing, is about $450 billion,” LaHood said. “You know as well as I do, the Highway Trust Fund is deficient. So I don’t know if the courage is around here to do something about that. So the reason I talk about tolling, public-private partnerships, the infrastructure fund, is that we need to think outside the box about how we’re going to do all the things that the president wants to do, that Ray LaHood wants to do, that you all want to do.”
He said “we love doing transportation projects at DOT . . . We need to work together to find the resources to get a bill (through Congress) and to get the job done.”
Contact John Boyd at jboyd@joc.com.
John D. Boyd | Jul 27, 2010 9:21PM GMT
The Journal of Commerce Online – News Story
|
|
Submitted 07.27.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: counties, Revenue, Sales Tax, tax
Counties turning to local sales taxes to raise money (WRAL.com)
A growing number of counties facing tight budgets are seeking voter approval to raise local sales taxes.
Ten counties have already decided to put local-option sales taxes on the November ballot, including Orange, Harnett and Robeson. Durham County commissioners were expected to vote Monday night on whether to add their county to the list.
Durham County officials said the county could raise nearly $8 million a year with a quarter-cent increase in the sales tax.
“I think the counties have gone through this budget theme for a couple of years now, and the citizens are starting to see the impacts hitting them personally,” said Todd McGee, spokesman for the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners. “They’re seeing their libraries being closed earlier. They’re seeing parks being closed. They’re seeing other services being cut, and the citizens are starting to feel it.”
In 2007, state lawmakers gave cash-strapped counties the option of asking voters if they would agree to a land-transfer tax or a higher sales tax to help deal with growth issues like building new schools and roads and extending water and sewer lines.
The land-transfer tax has been defeated every time it’s been put on the ballot, and the quarter-cent sales tax idea has failed 44 times, including twice in Harnett County and once each in Cumberland and Robeson counties.
Still, voters have approved a local-option sales tax 16 times, including eight of 10 referenda since last November. Cumberland County voters even changed their minds and approved a sales tax increase in a second vote. Lee and Duplin counties also have approved the added sales tax.
Reporter: Cullen Browder
Web Editor: Matthew Burns
Posted: 6:12 p.m. yesterday
|
|
Submitted 07.27.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Congestion, Transportation
Cities tackle traffic head-on with commuter options (USA Today)
MINNEAPOLIS — The morning rush-hour traffic on Interstate 35W is crawling. The highway, which connects downtown Minneapolis and its northern and southern suburbs, is the busiest road in the state. When traffic snarls here, backups spread across the region.
A year ago, Peggy Birler, 45, would have been right in the thick of it, spending up to an hour driving alone to work. Today, Birler has a much shorter commute: She drives less than a mile to a Park & Ride lot, boards a bus for a 10-minute trip downtown, zipping along in a bus-only lane, then walks 1½ blocks to her office.
“When I drove in, it was just too much, with the congestion and everything,” says Birler, marketing manager at Dunham, a mechanical and electrical engineering firm in downtown Minneapolis. “I was a little nervous about taking the bus. Now, I wouldn’t go back to driving.”
Getting people such as Birler to choose public transit, carpools, biking, telecommuting or other alternatives to driving to work solo is a major part of a campaign to relieve congestion on I-35W and other roads here. The state is spending $500 million, including $133 million in federal money granted to cities running innovative projects, on a broad effort to ease logjams on I-35W.
Officials here say it’s working. I-35W used to be “a road you wanted to avoid,” says Nick Thompson, who manages congestion-relief efforts for the Minnesota Department of Transportation. “There was congestion any day of the week, any time of the day. Now, this is the next-generation freeway.”
Commuter use of three Park & Ride lots serving the highway has increased by 16%, 19% and 25%; trips on I-35W are an average 10-15 minutes faster, and the agency has achieved free-flowing traffic in express lanes on the highway 98% of the time.
The I-35W project is part of a regional approach that emphasizes creative management of the existing transportation system, rather than expanding it, and seeks to make alternative commuting options widely available. The goal: Provide residents with a reliable, on-time commuting option every day.
Spurred by a bridge collapse on I-35W in 2007 that killed 13 motorists and injured 145, Minnesota also has fundamentally changed its transportation funding system, approving billions for roads, bridges and transit; the state also gave metropolitan governments the power to implement sales taxes for transit improvements.
The congestion-easing efforts have helped make the Twin Cities, along with Seattle, a national leader among cities working to keep traffic moving, says Tim Lomax, a congestion specialist at the Texas Transportation Institute at Texas A&M University.
“Those two are at the forefront of what’s going on,” says Lomax, co-author of the annual Urban Mobility Report, which ranks congestion trends in 90 cities. “The things that stand out in my mind are the use of information, very detailed information that drives their decisions about day-to-day operations and long-term projects. They are not only thought leaders but action leaders.”
The cost of congestion
Snarled traffic is a frustrating reality for the modern driver. It’s also a walloping blow to the nation’s economy. Congestion costs the USA $87.2 billion a year in gasoline and lost productivity, according to Lomax’s most recent report. That’s 2.8 billion gallons of wasted fuel and 4.2 billion hours of wasted time.
Many transportation analysts agree that the USA can’t build its way out of congestion. When a new road is built, usually at great cost, it quickly fills with traffic.
Congestion is a fact of life in large urban areas, Lomax says, but roads don’t have to be congested all day. The best way to deal with congestion is smart traffic management. That involves controlling how many cars are on a highway at a given time through tools such as flexible tolling, in which drivers pay a toll to use special lanes during congested periods, and ramp metering, in which a traffic signal controls the pace of vehicles merging from an entrance ramp.
It also includes quickly clearing wrecks and other incidents; providing transit options and getting drivers to use them, and synchronizing traffic signals, not only on primary roads but also on parallel corridors that drivers use as alternatives.
Most cities use a combination of these methods. Among the steps taken to cut congestion here:
•The Twin Cities try to ensure that transit riders and carpoolers avoid daily traffic tie-ups. The region has 300 miles of bus-only lanes, in which the right shoulder of highways is opened for buses during peak traffic; that’s more than the rest of the USA combined. Minnesota also recently added “priced dynamic shoulder lanes,” in which the left shoulder of highways is restricted to buses, carpools and single-car occupants who pay a toll.
•The state rebuilt some key streets in downtown Minneapolis, widening sidewalks, eliminating on-street parking and adding a second bus lane, which allows buses to pass stopped buses. Since December, those changes have enabled buses on the affected streets to increase operating speeds by 60%, says Bob Gibbons, spokesman for Metro Transit, which provides 90% of local bus service here.
•The region, which has had just one light rail line since 2004, is expanding its network. A central corridor connecting downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul is expected to begin service in 2014; a third line, connecting Minneapolis and suburban Eden Prairie, was approved in May.
•Minneapolis emphasizes alternative forms of commuting. Just 35% of workers downtown drive to work alone, about half the national average; 40% use transit, 20% vanpools or carpools and 5% bike or walk, says Dan MacLaughlin, executive director of the Downtown Minneapolis Transportation Management Organization, a non-profit partnership between the city and the business community.
•MinnDOT is trying to cut congestion by encouraging employers to offer workers flexible schedules that allow them to work from home. The impact is tiny but growing: More than 30 employers in the Twin Cities now offer telework options.
Seattle cuts collisions
Across the USA, about 25% of congestion is caused by collisions. Seattle, which has one of the nation’s most comprehensive traffic management systems, aims to reduce backups by cutting the number of accidents.
Seattle next month becomes one of the first U.S. cities to use a European-style active traffic management system, in which signs above each lane flash variable speed limits, whether a lane is open ahead and up-to-the-minute traffic information.
The signs, installed on the northbound lanes of Interstate 5 — one of the state’s most heavily traveled corridors, where crashes cause up to 70% of congestion — will display speed limits from 40 mph to 60 mph, depending on traffic conditions. This will allow drivers to slow down well before they reach bottlenecks, thus reducing rear-end collisions and keeping traffic moving, although more slowly.
“In Germany, Belgium and England, they’ve seen a 30% reduction in injury crashes with the system,” says Patricia Michaud, a spokeswoman for the Washington State Department of Transportation.
The department installed roadway traffic sensors, data-carrying fiber optics and new traffic cameras on a 9-mile stretch of I-5 in south Seattle. Information on traffic conditions is fed into a traffic-management center and overhead lane signs respond automatically; the process is monitored 24 hours a day by traffic engineers.
The state’s wide-ranging effort includes 230 miles of lanes restricted to vehicles carrying multiple occupants, ramp metering and use of traffic cameras and variable message signs, says Craig Stone, director of the toll division of the state Department of Transportation. Other efforts:
•Travel times have improved on 14 of 18 surveyed commuter routes.
•Thirty-two of 48 high-occupancy vehicle routes running parallel to the most crowded lanes show improved travel times.
•The average time it takes to clear collisions, disabled vehicles and other congestion-causing incidents has been cut from 18 minutes to 12.9 minutes.
•Tow companies hired by the state can receive a $2,500 bonus if they respond to major crashes within 30 minutes and clear them within 90 minutes.
Moved by tragedy
The collapse of the I-35W bridge over the Mississippi River during the evening rush hour on Aug. 1, 2007, prompted the state Legislature in 2008 to authorize a transportation funding package that will generate $6.6 billion over 10 years for roads, bridges and transit projects. It included an 8.5-cent increase in the state gas tax — the first rise in 18 years — and granted seven counties in the Twin Cities metropolitan area the authority to impose a quarter-cent sales tax for transit projects.
The tragedy also boosted efforts to pursue alternative commutes by employers, MacLaughlin says. “The business community came up with a bunch of creative ways to get their people downtown. The catastrophe motivated people to really work on this issue, and that has carried over.”
Merete Wells, 25, a senior associate with the Minneapolis public relations firm Carmichael Lynch, takes advantage of an unusually creative option offered by her company: a “shoe incentive.”
“They will give you $50 toward the purchase of a new pair of shoes a couple of times a year if you walk to work,” Wells says. “It’s a nice little incentive.” She used to drive to work from St. Paul. However, when her old Volvo started to wear down, she decided to move closer to work instead of buying a new car. Now, instead of a 30- to 45-minute commute in summer, which stretched to 60 to 90 minutes in winter, she walks 10 minutes to work.
Many Minneapolis workers now view alternative commute incentives as an employee benefit, says Kirsten Spreck, director of corporate real estate at Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, a faith-based financial services organization.
Almost all of its 1,200 Minneapolis employees participate in the incentive program, which offers $50- to $100-a-month credits in pre-tax dollars, which the employees can use to pay for parking, a transit pass, and carpool, motorcycle, biking or walking costs such as shoes.
David Levinson, a civil engineering professor at the University of Minnesota, cautions that everything being done here is “just pieces to a puzzle. I wouldn’t say they solve the congestion problem by any means. Only a small percentage of the workforce actually works downtown.”
Across the region, only about 2% of all work trips are on transit. “That sounds pretty bad, and it is,” he says. “But nationally, it’s less than 1%.”
While there’s still much room for improvement, the Twin Cities’ efforts are winning national praise.
“The aggressive operations focus that MinnDOT has is reflected in projects like the bus shoulder lanes, which a lot of places aren’t contemplating because it’s out of the ordinary,” Lomax says. “It’s a simple idea that’s pretty complex to get done — but the benefits are significant.”
By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY
|
|
Submitted 07.26.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: ABC system, Perdue, Revenue, video poker
NC governor keeping options open for revenues (Associated Press)
RALEIGH, N.C. A day after Gov. Beverly Perdue signed into law a bill banning video sweepstakes games, she suggested she’d listen to proposals to legalize video poker again in North Carolina.
And after Perdue signed a bill designed to reform the state Alcoholic Beverage Control system, she said she still was interested in privatizing parts of the liquor system, although the idea was panned before this year’s session began. An outside evaluation of the system is moving ahead.
“I am not through with the ABC system yet,” Perdue said.
So why stir the pot for a pair of politically charged issues like alcohol and gambling?
She could believe that heavily regulation of video gaming, which has kept popping up in new forms in North Carolina since a 2006 ban on traditional video poker machines, is the best way to control it. Perhaps she thinks getting the state out of the liquor business is a better way to manage alcohol as views on drinking become more permissive.
But her willingness may be the result of the harsh fiscal realities state government may face for the third year in a row. With a shortfall already projected to exceed more than $3 billion beginning in mid-2011 – half of it from lost federal stimulus dollars – Perdue doesn’t want to close any avenue that could generate new state revenues.
Video poker and ABC privatization could bring in several hundred million dollars.
Perdue told reporters last week she had already started working on next year’s budget proposal three weeks into the new fiscal year.
“We have proven that we know how to invest in our core, which is economic development and education,” Perdue said. “If that requires privatizing a piece of state government, I believe the General Assembly will have the courage – and folks across the state – to do what is needed to do to stand up and be sure that North Carolina’s core missions will be all right.”
Perdue’s suggestion that the video sweepstakes games or video poker might be revived was surprising. She had just agreed with legislative leaders that the computer-based games sprouting up at Internet cafes, business service centers and makeshift “casinos” were bad.
“My primary concern was the fact that they had just morphed into something uncontrollable all over the state,” Perdue said.
Then, she added: “I think if you have video sweepstakes, whether it’s video poker or video machines in general, we really do need to have some kind of concentrated, organized, unified system of regulation where they are under a set of standards or regulations.”
Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson said later while the governor wasn’t actively looking to revive video poker, “she would be open to look at legislation to see what direction to take that. The most important thing will be to regulate it very carefully and make sure it was regulated correctly.”
While Senate leader Marc Basnight, D-Dare, and House Speaker Joe Hackney, D-Orange, strongly oppose video poker, about two dozen House members declined to support the sweepstakes ban when it was approved earlier this month. A huge shortfall could help bring more support for legalizing video poker if sweepstakes games owner find another way to get around a ban.
A report from the North Carolina Education Lottery gave more credence to numbers pushed by the amusement machine owners for the past year about what the state could generate in tax revenues from regulating the industry. It found the state could receive $350 million in net revenues in its first year, reaching $576 million by the fourth year.
Bill Brooks with the North Carolina Family Policy Council is puzzled why Perdue would even consider giving video poker a new foothold in North Carolina. Perdue shouldn’t be lured by the potential short-term jackpot from the games because the cost to families harmed by gambling addictions and to the state through reduced economic activity when consumers’ money goes into games are much greater.
While lieutenant governor, Perdue cast the tie-breaking vote that approved lottery legislation in 2005.
“Every governor wants to make their mark,” Brooks said. “Maybe Gov. Perdue wants to be known for gambling.”
As for the ABC system, selling or leasing a chunk of the ABC system to an outside group seemed dead this spring after dozens of local government officials, substance abuse providers and religious leaders argued the state’s unique “control” system worked well at limiting alcohol abuse while providing more than $250 million in government revenues annually.
“The system has been a good system overall and we would like to keep it that way,” said Al Brown, a Concord city council member who opposes privatization.
Even if video poker and ABC privatization don’t occur, Perdue could benefit by talking like someone willing to consider new ideas, said Gary Pearce, a longtime Democratic consultant who used to work for Gov. Jim Hunt, Perdue’s mentor.
“I’m sure it’s about state finance issues,” Pearce said, but “it’s also a way of talking about shaking things up.”
Published Sun, Jul 25, 2010 09:11 AM
Modified Sun, Jul 25, 2010 09:21 AM
|
|
Submitted 07.26.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Georgia, Regionalism, Revenue, tax, Transportation
Transportation sales tax initiative in development (Albany Herald.com)
If approved by voters, a 2012 referendum would allow a one-percent sales tax to be collected for 10 years
ATLANTA, Ga. — The Georgia Department of Transportation is busy trying to implement the framework of a regional sales tax proposal that would fund transportation projects in 12 different regions statewide.
Approved by the Georgia General Assembly and signed into law by Gov. Sonny Perdue, HB 277 completely overhauls the way GDOT funds local transportation projects, Senior Planner Todd Long said.
The regions comprise the same areas as the existing Regional Development Commissions. Southwest Georgia’s region consists of Baker, Calhoun, Colquitt, Decatur, Dougherty, Early, Grady, Lee, Miller, Mitchell, Seminole, Terrell, Thomas and Worth counties.
According to Long, HB 277 would allow for those counties to levy a one-percent sales tax for 10 years that would fund transportation projects and programs specifically within the region, meaning the money raised in the district stays in the district.
Voters in the majority of the counties within the region will have to approve an August 21, 2012 referendum for it to pass, although individual counties will not be allowed to opt out of the funding.
Long said that the reason for the change in the way GDOT funds projects comes as the push for more fuel efficient vehicles has grown, which reduces the amount of revenues GDOT has been able to generate through the motor fuel surcharge.
“We’re getting to the point where its becoming not feasible to keep up with the maintenance and growth of infrastructure demands using just the motor fuel tax,” Long said.
A new funding mechanism for road and transportation projects is a double-edged sword for local governments that have watched as funding for GDOT’s Local Assistance Road Program, or LARP — the program that helps local government fund vital infrastructure improvements — has been steadily reduced, but who are also hesitant for change.
LARP will be replaced when HB 277 is implemented.
“There are definitely concerns,” Early County Commission Chairman Richard Ward said. “But compared to going year to year with LARP and watching it dwindle to a pittance, I’d be proud to get something down here to use, even if it doesn’t come directly into Early County, so long as it comes to the region.”
“Frankly, we’re tired of watching money flow into Atlanta and getting only unfunded mandates in return,” he said.
One of Ward’s biggest concerns, is one that GDOT is still grappling with — the extent of the Georgia Department of Revenue’s involvement in the whole process.
While Long has said money will have to sent to the Department of Revenue in Atlanta and then be divided back to the counties like current sales taxes are, its unclear whether GDOT would be willing to consider allowing the counties themselves to collect the sales taxes and remit them to Atlanta.
“I have some real issues with the Department of Revenue,” Ward said. “There is no transparency for the money that is being collected and returned now. How are we going to ensure that everyone is treated fairly?”
In Dougherty County, some officials share the same concern, citing an example last year when the DOR both released and withheld sales tax revenues for what they said were mistakes — one involving a manufacturer who apparently mistakenly paid sales taxes on exempt items for years and the other involving an unknown collection of sales taxes that ultimately was dispersed evenly to all counties who were participating in special local option sales tax programs.
The Georgia Open Records Act — the law that supposedly promotes open and transparent government to the public — specifically exempts the Georgia Department of Revenue.
As for the details of the initiative, Long provided The Herald a copy of a powerpoint presentation he’s been making around the state which explains much of the program.
Each region will have a roundtable which will consist of the county commission chairs and one municipal representative, meaning that each county would have two representatives on the roundtable.
These roundtables will ultimately set the projects that are to be funded using the sales taxes but the projects will come from a list developed or approved by the state.
Just like a SPLOST referendum, funding can only be granted to projects approved by the voters such as engineering, property acquisition, construction, maintenance, etc.
A portion of the funding, which is roughly estimated to be between $40 to $50 million per year in the Southwest Georgia Region, will be designated for discretionary use by local governments within the region. Based on the former LARP formula, that discretionary amount will be 25 percent in the SWGA Region.
At the end of the 10-year period, the tax can be reinstated or renewed with another project list through a vote of the majority of the counties in the region and special act of the Georgia General Assembly.
The Georgia State Financing and Investment Commission will serve as the trustee for each district’s funds, while GDOT will manage the budget, schedule, execution and delivery of all projects in the state.
A project’s status and whether it is over or under budget will be published and maintained by the Commissioner of the DOR on a website.
The bill also calls for the creation of several new transit-related government entities.
These include the Local Maintenance and Improvement Grant Program which combines former state-aid and LARP programs to help fund local projects; a Transit Governance Study Commission to prepare a report on the feasibility of linking regional public transit; and the Georgia Coordinating Committee for Rural and Human Services Transportation which will be part of the Governor’s Development Council and will examine how transportation services are provided throughout the state and make recommendation to the Office of Planning and Budget.
Posted: 12:00 AM Jul 25, 2010 July 25, 2010
Reporter: J.D. Sumner, government writer
Email Address: j.d.sumner@albanyherald.com
|
|
Submitted 07.26.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: LaHood, Obama, Reauthorization, SAFETEA-LU, tax, Tolls, Transportation
LaHood Says No Fuel Tax Increase Needed for Transport (The Journal of Commerce Online)
Highway funding to come from tolls, Obama’s proposed infrastructure fund
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said a combination of current-level gas tax receipts, road and bridge tolling and President Obama’s proposed infrastructure fund could offer a way to fund a long-term federal infrastructure program without new taxes.
Appearing before a heavily attended conference in Washington, D.C., of the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, LaHood vowed “raising the gas tax is not an option” to increase money available for federal transport spending.
LaHood said the Highway Trust Fund’s income stream is “insufficient” to meet all the needs, and said “tolling can raise a lot of money” to augment it. The Obama administration has also asked Congress for a new $4 billion ongoing infrastructure fund that DOT would administer much like discretionary stimulus program grants, and LaHood said more use of creative public-private partnerships could help as well.
Adding up all such efforts, he said, raises the possibility of “a path forward without raising taxes.”
LaHood’s statement rejecting a fuel tax hike was the latest reiteration of the administration’s standing policy — to oppose raising federal gasoline and diesel fuel taxes while the economy is still recovering from recession and unemployment remains high.
But his July 23 comment also comes as the Department of Transportation prepares to issue guiding “principles” for how Congress develops its next multi-year surface transportation plan. Federal programs are due to expire at the end of this year unless lawmakers extend them again or pass a broad reauthorization that reshapes policy.
Many ARTBA members want the administration to back away from its fuel tax stance, and after his speech some were grumbling that a gas tax hike remains the simplest and least costly way to beef up transport infrastructure funding.
One ARTBA participant noted that LaHood early last year floated the idea of raising funds through a new tax on vehicle miles traveled, a concept that was soon rejected by the White House. Asked if a VMT plan could come back, LaHood quickly said, “No.”
Another participant asked him if a tax that helps transport programs could emerge from climate or energy legislation, but LaHood deflected the question by saying that is someone else’s portfolio. One bill offered by Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., would have directed billions of dollars into the Highway Trust Fund from sale of carbon emission allowances, but that legislation has failed to gain broad support.
– Contact John D. Boyd at jboyd@joc.com.
John D. Boyd | Jul 23, 2010 4:01PM GMT
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: internet sweepstakes, video poker
Businesses question fees for Internet cafes (Fayetteville Observer)
A lawyer says Fayetteville’s “oppressive” fees on sweepstakes lounges are designed to close them and might be challenged in court.
“You can’t tax something out of existence,” said Lonnie Player Jr., a Fayetteville lawyer representing owners of the lounges.
The city intends to charge each owner a “privilege license” of $2,000 per location and $2,500 per computer terminal. For some locations with dozens of video gambling machines, the bill can run more than $100,000.
The city says the bills will be due Sept. 1, even though the machines will become illegal Dec. 1 under legislation that Gov. Bev Perdue signed into law Tuesday.
Player says courts have ruled on a case-by-case basis that excessive taxes or fees are punitive and unfair. He likened Fayetteville’s fees to zoning adult entertainment out of business – a practice the U.S. Constitution forbids.
Sweepstakes Internet cafes have sprung up all over North Carolina as a loophole to a state ban on gambling in 2007. They’re in bars and lounges and gas stations and strip malls. Customers buy Internet time to use the computer terminals for chances to win sweepstakes that can be redeemed for cash.
Several communities have begun taxing the industry. The fees vary. So do the communities’ intentions for collection.
Hope Mills adopted the same fees as Fayetteville in June. On Monday, town officials decided they would discount those fees by almost 60 percent because of the impending ban. In other words, they would charge for five months starting in July. Bills will go out in August.
Mike Bailey, Hope Mills’ chief building inspector, said the decision was made after a consultation with Town Attorney John Jackson.
“We felt that it was a better way of doing it, since they will no longer be able to operate after Dec. 1,” Bailey said. “It would be unfair to charge them for a whole year when we know they are not going to be in business past Dec. 1.”
Spring Lake’s newly adopted fees are $500 per location and $300 per terminal. Mayor Ethel Clark said officials might not charge the full amount, but a board decision has not been made.
Fayetteville City Attorney Karen McDonald has taken a different stance. She told the City Council last week the city can charge the fees because the businesses have not been banned yet. She said businesses are not refunded privilege license fees after they close.
How much the city intends to collect is not certain, but one city official this month pegged the figure at $1.2 million. The anticipated revenue was not used to balance the new budget, so the council will need to decide what to do with the money.
On Sunday, Mayor Tony Chavonne told the City Council in a weekly e-mail update that he would like to use the extra money to annex Shaw Heights, an impoverished community along Murchison Road next to Fort Bragg.
“As you recall, there were some upfront costs associated with the annexation,” the mayor’s e-mail said. “The area should have been annexed years ago and lies directly on a major new corridor directly between our city and the military base.”
Irked business owners
Owners of the sweepstakes lounges point to Fayetteville’s wide discrepancy in privilege license fees as evidence they are being overcharged.
For “topless entertainment,” the fee is $100 a year and $25 per peep-show machine. At cinemas, the owner pays $200 per movie screen; others pay $5 per electric video game. Fortunetellers have to pay $1,000.
The business owners also complain they were given little notice. Fayetteville officials first publicly discussed them in June.
When Ann Drabek went to City Hall on June 28 to apply for a privilege license, she was unaware of the fees. She wanted to open a second sweepstakes lounge in Fayetteville. Her first one, Lucky Charm Internet Cafe, opened in Hope Mills last fall.
She noted on her Fayetteville application that her business would involve “phone time sales” and “sweepstakes.” She said a city employee in the Finance Department, after a check with the zoning rules, told her to strike out “sweepstakes” from the application and, according to her receipt, she paid $100 for the privilege license.
The City Council adopted the fees, along with a new budget, that same evening of June 28.
On July 9, Drabek opened her Lucky Charm location on Ireland Drive in Fayetteville. Inside, 28 black-paneled machines with blinking screens greet customers. They are offered free snacks and sodas or bottled water. They can play blackjack and variations of poker or watch cherries and diamonds spin around on the screen.
Another 15 machines stored in back rooms are not ready for the public, Drabek said. They have to be programmed and outfitted to meet North Carolina law, she said.
Fayetteville doesn’t care.
Someone from the city stopped by last week to do an inventory and told Drabek that all 43 machines would be counted. She expects to get a bill for $109,500 from the city soon.
“It’s an absurd amount of money they are trying to charge us,” she said.
Drabek, a commercial real estate agent, said she never would have opened a second sweepstakes lounge in Fayetteville had she known about the fees. Drabek knew last month that legislators in Raleigh might ban the machines, but she didn’t want to wait for the state to act, she said.
Chris Marion, who operates Crazy Hank’s in a strip mall on Strickland Bridge Road, said Fayetteville’s fees were designed to drive him and most others out of the business. His bill will be about $50,000 for his business, which he opened in May.
“Once the state passed the law, I thought that was the end of it,” he said. “I never would in a million years think the city would try to extort $50,000 from a business that has to close in five months.”
He said his sweepstakes lounge is turning a profit, but he doesn’t want to pay that kind of bill.
“I think the city thinks these things are cash cows,” he said. “For the new guys like us – we are pretty small – it’s not doing what we thought they would do.”
Player said he got involved this spring on behalf of the industry, talking to town officials in Calabash, Clinton, Laurinburg and other places where the fees were being considered. He said he has persuaded some towns to forgo the fees and others to substantially reduce them.
Player said the fees raise constitutional questions and run afoul with a law giving the federal government exclusive authority to tax the Internet. But his clients want to be practical.
“They welcome regulation,” he said. “They just didn’t welcome oppressive regulation.”
Staff writer Andrew Barksdale can be reached at barksdalea@fayobserver.com or 486-3565.
Published: 12:23 AM, Wed Jul 21, 2010
By Andrew Barksdale
Staff writer
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: ABC
Greensboro ABC manager elected to association post (Greensboro News and Record)
Katie Alley, the general manager of Greensboro’s ABC system, has been tapped as president elect of the North Carolina Association of ABC Boards, a group that represents the more than 160 local liquor boards across the state.
Alley faces scrutiny following a report released by the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission that suggested she may have improperly taken gifts, hotel rooms and other favors from liquor industry representatives.
The Greensboro ABC Board is scheduled to meet Thursday morning to review the report and possible decide what action, if any, to take against Alley.
Alley has been secretary treasurer of the Raleigh-based association, which provides training to local boards and represents their interests before the North Carolina General Assembly. Alley’s lawyer said Wednesday that she had accepted the post of president elect during a banquet Tuesday night. The association’s annual meeting was held in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina.
Local liquor boards are independent units of local government, appointed by either county commissioners or city councils. They operate what amount to monopolies on liquor distribution in the territories that they cover.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
By Mark Binker
Staff Writer
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: video poker
Perdue open to regulated video poker (News and Observer)
Gov. Bev Perdue, who signed into law Tuesday a ban on video sweepstakes games, said Wednesday she is open to regulating and legalizing the games.
Perdue made her comments after a signing ceremony for a different bill Wednesday. She signed the sweepstakes ban in private. On Wednesday, she said one of her concerns about the sweepstakes industry was the unchecked proliferation of parlors that allowed for profiteering.
“I think if you have video sweepstakes, whether it is video poker or video machines in general, we really do need to have some kind of concert organized, unified system of regulation where they are under a standard set of rules and regulations where we can be sure that nobody is profiteering from it,” Perdue said.
A spokeswoman later clarified that Perdue was open to ideas on how to regulate the industry, but was not actively pushing to legalize it.
That’s point of view opens a big gulf between Perdue and the lawmakers who voted for the ban. Many of them, particularly in the Senate, spoke of the industry as an evil that preys on the poor.
The industry says it could raise at least half a billion a year in revenue. Just before Perdue signed the bill, an industry group pleaded with Perdue to veto it.
Submitted by bniolet on 2010-07-21 11:57
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: bridge, Revenue, Transportation
AASHTO Expert Urges “New Strategy” to make America’s Bridges Healthy (AASHTO)
Washington, DC – Built to last 50 years, the bulk of the nation’s 590,000 bridges are 43 years old; and 74,000 bridges (12.4%) are classified as “structurally deficient,” meaning that one or more aspects of a bridge’s structural condition require attention. Meanwhile, truck traffic has nearly doubled in the past 20 years, and the trucking industry is pushing for heavier loads.
“We are facing a perfect storm regarding our bridges,” said Malcolm T. Kerley, P.E., Chief Engineer with the Virginia Department of Transportation. Testifying on behalf of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Kerley told members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Highways and Transit that “current funding levels are not adequate for the job at hand. A huge backlog of bridge needs remains.” (Kerley’s oral and witten testimony is available at http://bridges.transportation.org/Pages/WHAT’SNEW.aspx)
Kerley told lawmakers that states are investing substantially more in state dollars on bridges than is provided under the Federal Highway Bridge Program. For example, in 2004, $10.5 billion was invested in bridge rehabilitation by all levels of government – more than twice the $5.1 billion apportioned through the Federal Bridge Program that year.
In this period of economic downturn, when governments are looking to do more with fewer resources, Kerley urged Congress to focus on how best to preserve the health of all bridges through what he described as “asset management strategies.”
“States need federal funding to reduce the slippage of bridges into the ’structurally deficient’ category,” Kerley said. “And we all get more bang for our taxpayer buck by preserving a bridge early in its life rather than by having to completely replace it later on down the road. In order to accomplish this, states need to be able to fund a wider range of projects than just their lowest-rated bridges,” Kerley said.
“Current law requires states to address the worse deficient bridges first, but this approach doesn’t work” Kerley testified. “If we had all the funding we needed, states could immediately reconstruct or rehabilitate all structurally deficient bridges – fixing the worst first while simultaneously investing to prevent an even larger number of bridges from deteriorating just enough to push them over the edge to structural deficiency. We call these ‘cusp’ bridges – those bridges which we can prevent from becoming structurally deficient.”
Kerley said that ‘cusp’ bridges that are not yet structurally deficient begin to deteriorate before states can address their problems. And since there is not enough money to fix all the deficient bridges before others deteriorate into this category, it becomes a constant game of “catch up.”
For more information on the status of nation’s bridge inventory, download AASHTO’s report Bridging the Gap at http://tiny.cc/9fu4c.
###
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) is the “Voice of Transportation” representing State Departments of Transportation in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. AASHTO is a nonprofit, nonpartisan association serving as a catalyst for excellence in transportation. Follow us on Twitter at http://twitter.com/aashtospeaks
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Pennsylvania, Revenue, Transportation
Rendell calls on lawmakers to act on road maintenance (The Philadelphia Inquirer)
HARRISBURG – Gov. Rendell said Monday “there is no excuse” for lawmakers to put off dealing with how to pay for maintaining Pennsylvania’s roads and bridges, setting the stage for a showdown over the state’s growing transportation funding problem.
Rendell said he wants legislators to return in late August for a special session to map out a solution to closing a $472 million funding gap created when the federal government earlier this year rejected the state’s proposal to put tolls on I-80.
The response from top Republican legislators: Wait till next year. They evince a growing desire to deal with the issue after a new governor is inaugurated in January.
“That’s not acceptable,” Rendell said Monday during a noon news conference in the Capitol. “We would lose $472 million of funding this year, and 100 bridge projects and over 300 road projects would have to be discontinued.”
“We’ve got to act,” he added. “This is the time for political courage.”
Erik Arneson, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi (R., Delaware), said that because there was no consensus on a funding plan, the current focus was on forthcoming Senate Transportation Committee hearings on the issue. One is scheduled for tomorrow, at which Rendell is expected to testify.
Arneson said that if the hearings produce a solution acceptable to all sides, “that would be terrific.”
“It’s not that there’s a desire to wait until next year to resolve this, so much as it is an understanding that this is a difficult issue and a multifaceted issue” and could take time to resolve, Arneson said.
He and other Republicans dispute that there is an absolute deadline for action, while acknowledging there could be delays in road and bridge projects if the debate gets pushed to January.
Rendell had initially called for taxing profits of major oil companies or leasing the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Neither idea gained much support.
On Monday, he said he would sign on to raising all transportation fees – such as for driver’s licenses, inspection stickers, and vehicle registrations – by the rate of inflation since the last time they were increased.
To support his argument, his office put out a fact sheet showing, for example, that the state’s annual $36 car registration fee had not gone up since 1997 and that raising it to $45 would generate more than $70 million for road repairs.
Rendell said raising the various fees, together with a proposed increase in the gasoline tax of about 3 cents per gallon, would bring in the needed money. The gasoline tax currently is 31.2 cents a gallon, state officials said.
Rendell said he would also support “electronic surveillance” on the turnpike to generate an additional $30 million. Asked later to explain this, his spokesman, Gary Tuma, said the idea was to set up cameras that would snap photos of license plates so officials could determine if drivers’ registrations and insurance were up to date – and fine them if they were not.
Most of those fees-and-fines proposals, like the call for an August session, got little traction in the Republican-controlled Senate.
Rendell had initially called for both chambers to convene a special session in Harrisburg on Tuesday to start talks on how to come up with road-repair money. But lawmakers are on summer break and not due to return until September.
Even then, they have only a handful of session dates scheduled before the November election, making it tough to tackle any big-ticket items.
And they already have their hands full. During June negotiations on the state budget, Rendell and top lawmakers agreed to put off until September the debate on several critical policy questions, including how to tax the extraction of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale. That could eat up a large chunk of the legislature’s limited time.
All the more reason, Rendell said Monday, for the legislature to act now. “There is no excuse,” he said.
By Angela Couloumbis
Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Revenue, Transportation
Roads to Ruin: Towns Rip Up the Pavement (Wall Street Journal)
Asphalt Is Replaced By Cheaper Gravel; ‘Back to Stone Age’
SPIRITWOOD, N.D.—A hulking yellow machine inched along Old Highway 10 here recently in a summer scene that seemed as normal as the nearby corn swaying in the breeze. But instead of laying a blanket of steaming blacktop, the machine was grinding the asphalt road into bits.
“When [counties] had lots of money, they paved a lot of the roads and tried to make life easier for the people who lived out here,” said Stutsman County Highway Superintendant Mike Zimmerman, sifting the dusty black rubble through his fingers. “Now, it’s catching up to them.”
Outside this speck of a town, pop. 78, a 10-mile stretch of road had deteriorated to the point that residents reported seeing ducks floating in potholes, Mr. Zimmerman said. As the road wore out, the cost of repaving became too great. Last year, the county spent $400,000 on an RM300 Caterpillar rotary mixer to grind the road up, making it look more like the old homesteader trail it once was.
Paved roads, historical emblems of American achievement, are being torn up across rural America and replaced with gravel or other rough surfaces as counties struggle with tight budgets and dwindling state and federal revenue. State money for local roads was cut in many places amid budget shortfalls.
In Michigan, at least 38 of the 83 counties have converted some asphalt roads to gravel in recent years. Last year, South Dakota turned at least 100 miles of asphalt road surfaces to gravel. Counties in Alabama and Pennsylvania have begun downgrading asphalt roads to cheaper chip-and-seal road, also known as “poor man’s pavement.” Some counties in Ohio are simply letting roads erode to gravel.
The moves have angered some residents because of the choking dust and windshield-cracking stones that gravel roads can kick up, not to mention the jarring “washboard” effect of driving on rutted gravel.
But higher taxes for road maintenance are equally unpopular. In June, Stutsman County residents rejected a measure that would have generated more money for roads by increasing property and sales taxes.
“I’d rather my kids drive on a gravel road than stick them with a big tax bill,” said Bob Baumann, as he sipped a bottle of Coors Light at the Sportsman’s Bar Café and Gas in Spiritwood.
Rebuilding an asphalt road today is particularly expensive because the price of asphalt cement, a petroleum-based material mixed with rocks to make asphalt, has more than doubled over the past 10 years. Gravel becomes a cheaper option once an asphalt road has been neglected for so long that major rehabilitation is necessary.
“A lot of these roads have just deteriorated to the point that they have no other choice than to turn them back to gravel,” says Larry Galehouse, director of the National Center for Pavement Preservation at Michigan State University. Still, “we’re leaving an awful legacy for future generations.”
Some experts caution that gravel roads can be costlier in the long run than consistently maintained asphalt because gravel needs to be graded and smoothed. A gravel road “is not a free road,” says Purdue University’s John Habermann, who organized a recent seminar about the resurgence of gravel roads titled “Back to the Stone Age.”
Paving grew in popularity in the early 20th century as more cars hit streets and spread when the federal government built the Interstate Highway System.
Over the years, many of the two-lane arteries that connect country roads with metro areas have deteriorated under rising traffic and the growing weight of farm combines, logging trucks and other heavy equipment.
Frederick Wachtel, county engineer in Coshocton County, Ohio, says his budget, largely driven by fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, was off 5% last year, the first decline in nearly 20 years. He is now letting some of his roads return to nature.
In Spiritwood one day recently, a soft breeze carried the scents of cow manure and hot asphalt over the tall broom grass. The giant Caterpillar chugged along at a speed of 2.4 feet per minute and pulverized Old Highway 10 into a black dust with chunks of rock and pavement. A piece of equipment following behind rolled the surface flat.
The machines rumbled along a path carved by homesteaders’ covered wagons in the 1800s. Over time, grain elevators and railroad depots sprung up along the route, which became known as the Old Red Trail. Later, the road was paved and renamed Highway 10.
After Interstate 94 was built alongside the road in the 1950s, it became Old Highway 10. Traffic volumes gradually dropped until Old 10 became a lazy backcountry road dotted with abandoned farmsteads. In the 1960s the state gave Old 10 to the counties it ran through, leaving them to pay for upkeep. North Dakota’s Stutsman County got a 30-mile stretch.
The gift became a burden. The Stutsman highway department, which gets the bulk of its funds from local property taxes, state fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees, let the road fall into disrepair as it juggled other projects. Every year without major maintenance, the road became more expensive to fix.
Judy Graves of Ypsilanti, N.D., voted against the measure to raise taxes for roads. But she says she and others nonetheless wrote to Gov. John Hoeven and asked him to stop Old 10 from being ground up because it still carries traffic to a Cargill Inc. malting plant. She says the county has mismanaged its finances and badly neglected roads.
“Our expenses outweigh the income,” says Mr. Zimmerman, who has been with the county highway department for nearly 30 years. He says the county will pay about $2,600 per mile annually for the newly ground-up road, as against about $75,000 per mile to reconstruct it.
Gayne Gasal, who lives along the redone stretch of road, says it has turned out “better than we all thought.” But Sportsman’s Bar owner Hilda Kuntz worries that the classic cars and bikers that roll through town in the summer will stay away.
“It’s going to kill my business,” she said.
Write to Lauren Etter at lauren.etter@wsj.com
By LAUREN ETTER
|
|
Submitted 07.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Congress, LaHood, Revenue, SAFETEA-LU, tax, Transportation, USDOT
New Political Realities May Sidetrack the Transportation Reauthorization (Innovation News Briefs)
________________________________________
Over the past eight months the U.S. Department of Transportation has been conducting a series of “listening sessions” around the country to solicit new ideas from stakeholders and interested citizens for the next multi-year surface transportation bill. The sixth and final session on the national listening tour was held at the U.S. DOT headquarters on July 14. Participating in the latest town hall meeting was the full complement of the department’s senior management team (save Secretary Ray LaHood). Complementing the session with U.S. DOT officials were four panel sessions involving local officials and transportation professionals discussing local transportation issues, program funding, state and local needs and outreach to the public.
A Game Changing Event
The latest listening session took place amid growing speculation by political analysts that the Democrats may lose control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November. This speculation has been reinforced by White House press secretary Robert Gibbs who commented on last Sunday’s “Meet the Press” and again at his regular press briefing the following day, that “there are enough seats in play that could cause Republicans to gain control.” Gibb’s conclusion was not inaccurate, given that about 60 Democratic seats are in jeopardy and Republicans need a net gain of only 39 to re-take the House. But, as Washington Post political observer Dana Milbank pointed out, when the president’s chief spokesman announces that his party is in trouble, it could become a self-fulfilling prophesy.
A Republican takeover of the House would add to the already significant political uncertainties surrounding the future of the multi-year surface transportation legislation. A Republican victory would mean almost certain congressional opposition to raising the gas tax in the next Congress. According to Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, a total of 173 members of the U.S. House and 412 candidates for House seats as well as 33 sitting senators and 70 candidates for the Senate have signed the so-called Taxpayer Protection Pledge. The Pledge commits them to oppose and vote against any and all tax hikes if elected or re-elected, and to focus on spending restraint rather than increasing taxes to pay for new spending. Unlike other similar promises this one is in writing, with a signature and two witnesses.
A Republican victory in the House would also mean an organizational realignment in the House congressional committees. The coveted chairmanship of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee would pass to Rep. John Mica (R-FL) who has already gone on record as saying that “the gas tax is dead” (see our NewsBrief of June 3, “Some Frank and Unscripted Comments from Capitol Hill.”) Nor would Rep. James Oberstar’s (D-MN) ambitious dream of a $500 billion six-year surface transportation bill necessarily remain intact under Republican House leadership, which would be anxious to distance itself from free-spending Democrats and may not fully share current transportation policy priorities of the Obama Administration .
Strengthening Republican resolve to avoid a fuel tax increase in the next Congress would be the projections by the Congressional Budget Office indicating that the surface transportation program is assured of adequate funding (i.e. at the levels authorized for FY 2009) at least through the end of Fiscal Year 2012. With assured funding possibly as long as mid-2013 (if our reading of the CBO projections is correct), a Republican Congress might well decide there is no reason to hurry and postpone consideration of a multi-year bill until after the presidential election of 2012 when a program of infrastructure investment can be considered in an environment less colored by electoral politics.
A Disappointing Session
The DOT Listening session was in some respects disappointing. In a typical “inside the Beltway” fashion, the meeting offered a tribune to a variety of special interests and advocacy groups to advertise their ideas, big and small, and to plead for government attention. For its part, the DOT leadership offered few hints as to its own thinking. However, since the goal of the “listening sessions” was for the DOT officials to, well… listen, they could be excused for revealing little of their intentions.
However, if the purpose of the listening sessions was to offer the DOT leadership exciting fresh ideas on how to reform and refocus the federal transportation program and how to give it new direction and a new sense of purpose, we think the assembled Washington transportation community could have done better.
But then, if White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is indeed correct in his prediction, the U.S. Transportation Department need not worry about having to craft a reuthorization bill any time soon.
July19, 2010
|
|
Submitted 07.15.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Reauthorization, SAFETEA-LU, TIGER, Transportation
Frustration With Stop-Gap Transpo Funding Shows at DOT Town Hall (D.C. Streetsblog)
Agency Expects Congress to Authorize Third Round of TIGER Grants (D.C. Streetsblog)
U.S. DOT’s top leaders (save Secretary Ray LaHood) fielded questions about the next long-term transportation bill this morning as part of a “town hall” session at agency headquarters. The conference, the sixth and final stop on a national listening tour, was billed as a chance to give feedback about how the transportation bill should take shape. While senior department staff adhered to the listening session format, divulging few specifics about their current thinking, they did provide a glimpse of the frustration over the ongoing lack of certainty for transportation funding.
One piece of news to come out of the session concerned the agency’s popular Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program. Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy Polly Trottenberg reported that Congress will likely authorize a third year of the TIGER competitive grant program, which is seen as a model for allocating infrastructure investment based on strategic goals and criteria.
During the Q&A, DOT leadership made two points clear. The department wants and needs a long-term funding authorization, and they want to cut the time it takes to approve and finish projects.
“The series of short term authorizations is frustrating to us,” Deputy Secretary John Porcari said, pointing out that the department has gone through some weekend construction shutdowns caused by reauthorization delays. The most desirable outcome for DOT, Porcari said, is a long-term authorization with predictable funding.
The other frustrating point for DOT is the length of time it takes for a project to move from authorization to construction. “We simply take too long to deliver our projects,” Federal Highway Administrator Victor Mendez said. One of his policy priorities is to cut project times in half.
Beyond those two priorities, officials made few specific comments, returning to themes they’ve sounded previously.
Transit and rail freight issues were the hottest topic of the morning. Responding to a question about the upward creep of gas prices, Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff said that DOT cannot simply allow existing transit systems to “limp along.” Without getting into specifics, he implied that transit systems — many of which have been pummeled by financial shortfalls and service cuts — should be in a position to handle surges in demand. “We saw a considerable spike in ridership when gas hit $4 a gallon,” he said.
The panel also reinforced DOT’s commitment to interagency partnerships, exemplified by the partnership between DOT, HUD, and the EPA that seeks to promote smart growth and sustainability by building housing convenient to transit. “This interagency cooperation is central to where we are heading,” Porcari said.
by Chris McGann on July 14, 2010
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: High Speed Rail Compact
Virginia senator will chair new two-state oversight board for fast trains (News and Observer)
Determined to dodge extra chores that could get in the way of their re-election priorities this year, two North Carolina politicians deftly engineered the election of a Virginia legislator today as the first chairman of the Virginia-North Carolina Interstate High-Speed Rail Compact.
Rep. Nelson Cole, a Reidsville Democrat, nominated Virginia Sen. John C. Watkins to chair the 10-member board, which held its inaugural meeting in Raleigh, reports Bruce Siceloff.
“We’re in an election cycle and you folks aren’t,” Cole explained, smiling across the boardroom table at his Virginia counterparts. “We need to devote more time to it.”
Sen. Clark Jenkins, a Tarboro Democrat, seconded the nomination, and Watkins was elected without opposition.
Cole did not escape the burden of new duties altogether. A few moments later, on Jenkins’ nomination, Cole was voted vice chair.
Watkins, a Republican from Midlothian, Va., said the new two-state board will work to promote what he called “higher-speed” train service.
“It would be so much easier for the consumers who now have to fly through Charlotte or wherever,” Watkins said in an interview. “It makes a lot more sense to be able to get on a train that you can depend on to be on time — and just go.”
North Carolina and Virginia won $620 million in federal stimulus funds this year to make corridor improvements south of Raleigh and north of Richmond. North Carolina received the first $20.3 million of its share from Washington today, and will use the money to refurbish train locomotives and passenger coaches.
The two states plan eight public hearings, starting tonight in Norlina, on a draft environmental impact statement for a proposed $2.3 billion, 162-mile link from Raleigh to Richmond. Part of the planned Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor, it would cut travel times between the state capitals by two hours.
Along with Cole and Jenkins, North Carolina is represented on the compact by Sen. Fletcher Hartsell, a Concord Republican, Rep. John May, a Louisburg Democrat, and Paul Cooke of Charlotte, an executive with HDR Engineering Inc. Virginia’s members are two senators and three House of Delegates members.
Submitted by janestancill on 2010-07-12 15:18
Read more: http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/virginia_senator_will_chair_new_twostate_oversight_board_for_fast_trains#ixzz0tVFYUXdw
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: sweepstakes
Editorial: Fight over video sweepstakes may not have had final round (Greensboro News and Record)
Although a statewide ban on video sweepstakes is on a fast track to take effect Dec. 1, the last word has yet to be heard.
It wouldn’t be the first time that gambling foes thought that they’d finally pulled the plug on video machines only to have them surface in a new disguise. Unresolved court challenges have bought the industry time, allowing it to gain a solid foothold.
Backers aren’t easily deterred. Soon after the House overwhelmingly approved the measure on Wednesday, an industry support group vowed to continue the fight.
William Thevaos, president of the Entertainment Group of North Carolina, said in a statement, “We will look at all options available to us including our legal avenues and the advances of technology … allowing the industry to do business.”
Its lobbyists opposed the ban, instead arguing for regulation and taxation, which they claim would generate millions in tax revenues. Closing the estimated 900 sweepstakes locations, they add, will cost thousands of jobs as well as squelch individual choice.
But no matter how you spin it, the latest incarnation of video poker is a highly addictive form of gambling that hooks too many unsuspecting players.
During the House debate, Minority Leader Paul Stam of Apex noted that money spent by players “comes from somewhere,” suggesting it could be put to better use buying groceries or paying the mortgage.
Admittedly, that line of reasoning would resonate more convincingly if the state itself wasn’t deeply involved in the gambling business. What’s the difference, critics contend, between buying a lottery ticket and clicking a mouse on a game computer screen?
However, law enforcement officials have presented indisputable evidence linking a variety of crimes to video-based games of chance. Besides, two wrongs just don’t make a right.
Friday, July 9, 2010 (Updated 3:00 am)
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Foy, Kleinschmidt, Stultz
Mayors debate town’s charm (The Chapel Hill News)
Letter ignites war of words
BY MARK SCHULTZ, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL – Gastonia Mayor Jennie Stultz was dining not long ago with then Chapel Hill Mayor Kevin Foy.
It was pouring down rain during fall break, but Trilussa La Trattoria, the Italian restaurant on West Franklin Street was jam-packed, she said.
So when Stultz heard another North Carolina mayor had described Chapel Hill’s downtown as “slowly declining” this week, she laughed.
“Whenever I’m in Raleigh I make a point to drive through Chapel Hill – just one of those soul-soothing rides – just to see what a vibrant downtown should really look like,” she said Friday.
That was not Mel Cohen’s experience.
Cohen is the mayor of Morganton, a town of 17,000 in Burke County in the central western part of the state.
Cohen visited Chapel Hill last weekend and had a great time – in Carrboro.
In a letter to The Chapel Hill News, the 1964 UNC graduate said he “was saddened to see the deterioration” of Franklin Street.
“Chapel Hill is slowly declining, and it seems to me there may be an attitude of the Chapel Hill Town Council that downtown is not their priority,” Cohen wrote.
In an interview, Cohen, a former traveling salesman, said he visited his daughter in Chapel Hill and ate breakfast at Ye Ole Waffle House. He said the streets weren’t clean and the empty storefronts were dirty.
“Chapel Hill, in my mind, should stand on its own, should be almost perfect really,” he said.
“Look at Carrboro” next door, whose farmers market Cohen had visited Saturday morning. “It’s full. It’s vibrant. I love it.”
‘The coolest place’
The state of downtown and Chapel Hill in general, perhaps because so many North Carolinians feel a connection to it, comes up a lot.
Last year, Ted Abernathy, executive director of the Southern Growth Policies Board and a former Orange County economic development officer, said Chapel Hill may have lost its edge as Durham and other cities reinvented themselves.
“You used to be the coolest place,” he told the leaders at a breakfast meeting at the Siena Hotel.
Mayor Mark Kleinschmidt shot back this week after The Chapel Hill News e-mailed him Cohen’s letter.
“I’m disappointed that Mayor Cohen had an experience that resulted in that kind of letter,” he said. “I think if he had spent more time in Chapel Hill, maybe he would learn many of his impressions are less than accurate.”
For one, Cohen might have learned Chapel Hill’s downtown has a 4.5 percent vacancy rate downtown, one-third of Morganton’s 13.5 percent rate.
“I think Chapel Hill’s doing a pretty darn good job,” Kleinschmidt said.
“Maybe he can get Southern Culture on the Skids to give a free concert in Morganton,” he added. “They just did in Chapel Hill last week.”
The Chapel Hill Town Council has taken steps to revitalize downtown. The town, university and downtown merchants helped form the Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership, which works on issues such as cleanliness, parking and panhandling.
The first homeowners in the 10-story Greenbridge condominium and retail project in downtown’s West End will move in this summer. Plans are under way for an eight-story condominium and retail project at 140 West Franklin Street.
Cohen predicted downtown towers in Chapel Hill would be “a tremendous eyesore.” Downtown Morganton has a three-story height limit, he said.
“That’s just super for Morganton,” Kleinschmidt said.
Liz Parham is the director of the state’s Office of Urban Development and the N.C. Main Street Center, which works to promote economic development and historic preservation in towns under 50,000 people. She once ran the Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership and said you can’t compare downtowns.
“Every downtown has its focus,” she said. “I think what’s important is every downtown focus its efforts to make it the most economically viable it can be.”
Stultz, the first woman mayor elected in Gastonia, agreed.
The city of 75,000 people in southwestern North Carolina has a six-story building and a seven-story building downtown – “what we call our skyscrapers” – with only one floor of tenants between them. “Every downtown is scrapping for residents and other kind of development downtown,” she said.
Despite Cohen’s letter, Kleinschmidt said, leaders like Stultz tell him all the time they wish they had a downtown like Chapel Hill’s.
“I hope he can come back so I can show him some of the things he missed.”
mark.schultz@nando.com or 932-2003
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Fayetteville, sweepstakes
Gambling ban will deny Fayetteville revenue (Fayetteville Observer)
FAYETTEVILLE A city official estimates that Fayetteville will lose $1.2 million in new revenue because of the state’s ban on sweepstakes gambling businesses.
The City Council recently adopted a budget that included new fees on the owners of gaming parlors. The city planned to charge them $2,000 per location and $2,500 per computer terminal. Hope Mills adopted the same fees in June.
While the fees may seem high, they aren’t unprecedented; the city charges “privilege license” fees on an array of occupations and companies that do business in Fayetteville.
The General Assembly voted Wednesday to outlaw the gambling parlors, often called Internet cafes, starting Dec. 1. Gov. Bev Perdue is expected to sign the legislation.
Police Chief Tom Bergamine applauded the ban and said gambling parlors contribute to crime. He urged the governor to sign the bill.
Bergamine’s statement appeared to catch Assistant City Manager Doug Hewett off guard. He wrote Bergamine an e-mail the same day saying the legislature’s action will cost the city $1.2 million in lost revenue. “Not sure if that story is being told,” Hewett said in the e-mail.
Bergamine said gambling parlors are an attempt to get around the state’s ban on video poker machines.
Fayetteville Mayor Pro Tem D.J. Haire said the city budget included the new fees to begin taxing sweepstakes cafes if the state didn’t ban them.
“That was one way of hoping to slow it down,” he said.
Published Sun, Jul 11, 2010 04:30 AM
Modified Sun, Jul 11, 2010 04:30 AM
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: General Assembly, internet sweepstakes
NC Legislature passes ban on Internet sweepstakes (Associated Press)
RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina Legislature voted Wednesday to attempt to make clear again that a 2006 ban on video poker also applies to computer-based sweepstakes games found at businesses inside strip malls and old storefronts statewide.
In an 86-27 vote that gave final passage to the bill, the House agreed to the Senate’s plan to eliminate by Dec. 1 the games that gambling opponents say seduce players and take their money.
The measure now goes to Gov. Beverly Perdue. Press Secretary Chris Mackey said late Wednesday the governor is expected to sign the bill into law.
The vote followed more than two hours of impassioned debate that crossed party lines.
Sweepstakes centers have proliferated since at least two trial judges blocked state agents and police from seizing the machines. The judges ruled that the video poker ban and an ensuing 2008 law designed to close a loophole don’t necessarily apply to the games. Those cases are pending.
Sweepstakes opponents said the Legislature meant to get rid of these kinds of machines, too. Wednesday’s bill, they said, should leave little doubt of its intention.
“I’m tired of playing whack-a-mole with this industry,” said Rep. Ray Rapp, D-Madison, one of the House’s chief supporters of the ban. “We’re trying to come back to you with a clear directive saying, number one, it’s gambling … and number two, it’s banned.”
The industry has said getting rid of the games could do away with up to 10,000 jobs during the ongoing economic slump. Supporters of the games say they’re not gambling but a form of entertainment and marketing for Internet or phone time or office services. Machine opponents say the games, found at more than 900 places statewide, are designed to get around the 2006 ban.
Neil Hoover of High Point, says the games enable his company’s 10 business service centers in the state to keep their doors open as they compete with places like The UPS Store. His outlets face an uncertain future.
“Without our sweepstakes, we probably won’t be able to compete with those businesses. They’re so much bigger than us,” Hoover said. “There are other states that actually welcome our industry.”
Still, a large majority of lawmakers joined local law enforcement officers and religious leaders in arguing the sweepstakes centers are essentially casinos with dozens of computer screens where customers lose money in only a few clicks of the mouse.
“This is an industry for people who do not have a choice, who are addicted on gambling,” said Rep. Grier Martin, D-Wake.
Lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle questioned whether lawmakers should outlaw something that appeared to be a harmless form of entertainment to some but gambling to others. Rep. Becky Carney, D-Mecklenburg, tried unsuccessfully to get a motion heard that essentially would have delayed the bill until next year and avoided a tough vote.
“I’m tired of being judged on whether I’m moral or not depending on whether I support this bill,” said Rep. Carolyn Justice, R-Pender.
Sixteen of the 18 black Democrats present voted against the ban. Many were among the most vocal opponents and complained the Democratic leadership didn’t give them the option to consider the letting the state regulate the machines and collect revenues that will be sorely needed next year.
Sweepstakes machine operators argue lawmakers should have left the games in place while the General Assembly studies the issue and return next year to pass a law that would generate state revenues by licensing machines and owners. Amusement machine owners also argue it would be better to replace the video poker machine ban that took effect in July 2007 with legislation that would revive the industry and give the state 20 percent of the revenues.
“We’ve not had an opportunity to look at some legislation that some would consider relevant,” said Rep. Alma Adams, D-Guilford. “I’m just really disturbed at what I’ve seen in some ways.”
House Speaker Joe Hackney, D-Orange, voted for the ban and expressed his position to fellow House Democrats this week. Hackney told reporters the ban was the only option that had the support of a majority of members. Waiting until next year would have allowed the industry to expand even more, he said.
“I didn’t intimidate anybody. I jut announced my position, and the majority ruled,” Hackney told reporters after the vote.
The measure now would make it a misdemeanor for anyone to operate a game. Repeat offenders could be found guilty of a low-grade felony punishable by eight months to 2 1/2 years in prison.
The bill’s language would not outlaw arcade games and marketing games by soft-drink companies and other retailers that require the consumer to type in a code at a company’s website.
By GARY D. ROBERTSON (AP) – 4 days ago
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: General Assembly
Lawmakers wrap up marathon (Charlotte Observer)
After N.C. House and Senate finish crammed session at 5:30 a.m. Saturday, both parties claim victories.
RALEIGH — After all the bills, motions and votes of this legislative session, it’s time for N.C. legislators to go home and explain themselves.
Democrats, who were the majority, will talk about saving teacher jobs in the face of a disastrous economic situation. They’ve already started telling voters about tax credits and other programs meant to lure business and spur job growth. They’ll claim the mantle of reform because of an ethics and good-government package that was one of the last items approved.
“We have a good platform to leave on,” said Senate Leader Marc Basnight, a Manteo Democrat.
Republicans have a lot to say about the things that didn’t get done. They say the Democrats had low ambitions and put off important decisions – such as how to deal with an expected $3 billion shortfall next year. As it is, the current $18.9 billion budget delays until January cuts that will be necessary because Congress is unlikely to send to the state $500 million in Medicaid money.
“They were trying to do the least harm they could,” said Rep. Thom Tillis, a Cornelius Republican. “You saw bills that were carefully crafted to do the best they could to help themselves in November.”
Like schoolchildren with a project due, legislators crammed throughout the final week. In the last 24 hours, sessions were stop-and-start affairs that carried on until 5:30 a.m. Saturday. After a marathon week of pushing final bills, committee meetings and debates, the House and Senate wrapped up with a traditional ceremony – hugs and well wishes that looked an awful lot like the end of summer camp.
Republicans cleared out of the chamber. They may have good reason to look toward the fall. Because of a national mood that appears to be tilting against incumbents, especially Democrats, Republicans believe they have the advantage heading into this fall’s elections, when every seat in the legislature will be before voters. Democrats now control both chambers, but it’s not certain who will be in charge after November.
It is unlikely that voters will pick their senators and representatives based on how they voted on a particular amendment or whether they made the best floor speech. Instead, campaigns will focus on, and voters will respond to, big themes or hot-button issues.
“The Democrats, it seems to me, didn’t give Republicans any real ammunition like a tax increase,” said Gary Pearce, a longtime Democratic consultant and strategist.
Given how bad the fiscal situation was, the Democrats did a pretty good job handling the political situation, Pearce said. “It seemed to be a political version of the Hippocratic oath. Do no harm. And they didn’t.”
But Democrats did raise taxes last year to cope with a budget shortfall that was as large as $4.6 billion.
“They’re going to have to defend that,” said Dallas Woodhouse, state director of Americans for Prosperity, a libertarian advocacy group. “It makes it harder to pass things like taxpayer-funded elections.”
Woodhouse was referring to a proposal that was originally attached to the Senate’s ethics reforms. The provision would have included a broad expansion of publicly funded campaigns for statewide elected officials. The provision died almost immediately after Woodhouse’s group had former Charlotte mayor and Republican candidate for governor Pat McCrory record a robocall against it.
Woodhouse can also claim credit for swiftly watering down a bill that dealt with nutrition standards in day cares.
Republicans said the bill was a step toward “a nanny state” because it would have prohibited serving chocolate milk and juice boxes to children. Democrats argued the state already regulates nutrition and the bill followed the guidelines of a legislative task force that had studied the issue. Calls from Americans for Prosperity targeted conservative-leaning Democratic districts, and soon the bill was altered to only a set of suggestions.
Democrats in the Senate can crow about a ban on video sweepstakes parlors. The games rose out of the state’s ban on video poker, and Senate Democrats, led by Basnight, pushed a bill that sought to put the 900 parlors out of business.
“It would have been awful if North Carolina had allowed the growth of that sort of operation,” Basnight said.
The Senate forced the House to act. Democrats in the House, who were divided on video sweepstakes parlors, had previously agreed to not take action this session. When the vote came, several Democrats argued over whether killing the industry’s 10,000 jobs would hurt the state’s already struggling economy.
Speaker of the House Joe Hackney said Democrats can take credit for measures on jobs and ethics. They funded programs and provisions to stop waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid. The budget includes provisions to save teacher jobs with the use of lottery money.
Democrats have already started campaigning on moves they said will save jobs and spur small business. Hackney noted that once the session ends, he intends to start campaigning in his own district, where he faces a Republican challenger.
On Friday, during a break in sessions, he deflected Republican criticisms of how Democrats had handled the session.
“I’ve found that political rhetoric has little or nothing to do with what goes on down here,” said Hackney, an Orange County Democrat.
By Benjamin Niolet
ben.niolet@newsobserver.com
Posted: Sunday, Jul. 11, 2010
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07/11/1555770/lawmakers-wrap-up-marathon.html#ixzz0tTsS8cvI
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: crime, DNA
Legislators pass DNA database expansion bill (WRAL.com)
RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina General Assembly on Saturday approved a bill letting investigators collect DNA samples from suspects when they are charged with certain crimes.
House Bill 1403, sponsored by Rep. Wil Neumann, R-Gaston; Rep. Rick Glazier, D-Cumberland; Sen. Dan Clodfelter, D-Mecklenburg; and Sen. Josh Stein, D-Wake, requires police to take DNA samples from people arrested on certain misdemeanor and felony charges. Current law requires only convicted felons to give samples.
The bill authorizes law enforcement to hold people who refuse to give a sample. If charges are dropped or the suspect is acquitted, the individual’s DNA sample must be removed from the database.
Attorney General Roy Cooper said having the samples in the state DNA database will help solve crimes by locating repeat offenders.
“It’s a win for North Carolina citizens,” Cooper told WRAL News.
However, some lawmakers say requiring the sample upon arrest amounts to unreasonable search and seizure.
Rep. Rosa Gill, D-Wake, voted against the bill. She agrees that DNA is a useful tool in helping law enforcement solve crimes, but argues that obtaining samples from suspects who have not been convicted goes too far.
“I feel like it’s unfair. I think it may be a type of targeting that we don’t intend for it to be,” Gill said.
So far, the state’s DNA database has helped solve more than 1,400 cases. Bill supporters argue that a wider database could solve as many as 100 new cases within the first year.
Kevin Blaine said he hopes one of those cases is his daughter’s slaying outside a Raleigh convenience store. Jenna Nielsen, 22, was found dead in June 2007, behind the AmeriKing Food Mart on Lake Wheeler Road.
Police have interviewed hundreds of people and received thousands of tips about the pregnant Fuquay-Varina mother’s slaying, but detectives still haven’t made an arrest in the case.
“We are one phone call away, one arrest away from solving my daughter’s case,” Blaine said. “If we can utilize a tool, such as the DNA (database), to put this person behind bars, then we should look at all avenues.”
Gov. Bev Perdue pushed for the legislation and said she sees DNA collection as an important tool for law enforcement officers.
“These samples will build a database that law enforcement can use to identify suspects and solve crimes. I know firsthand how effective this technology is. A friend of mine, Kathy Taft, was murdered earlier this year, and the suspect was caught through DNA analysis,” Perdue said in a statement.
Taft, a state Board of Education member, was beaten and sexually assaulted in a Raleigh home in March while recovering from surgery. The 62-year-old died three days later from her injuries.
Investigators became suspicious of Raleigh resident Jason Williford after he refused to provide a DNA sample. Sources say investigators eventually linked him to the Taft case through a discarded cigarette butt. He was charged with first-degree murder, rape and burglary in connection with Taft’s slaying.
The DNA database expansion legislation will take effect Feb. 1. Federal funds will be used to pay for a portion of the DNA testing. Eight additional forensic criminal analysts are expected to be hired to analyze and review samples, distribute swab collection kits to law enforcement and help with training.
Reporter: Beau Minnick
Photographer: Geof Levine
Web Editor: Minnie Bridgers
|
|
Submitted 07.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: CATS, Charlotte, Federal Transit Administration, grant, Streetcar, Transportation
Charlotte wins $25 million to build streetcar line (Charlotte Observer)
Federal grant will help complete planned system’s first leg, from transit center uptown to Presbyterian Hospital
More than 70 years after streetcars last ran in Charlotte, the city learned Thursday it won a $25 million federal grant that will bring them back by 2014.
The Federal Transit Administration grant will help build the planned streetcar line’s first leg, which will connect Presbyterian Hospital with the main transit station near Time Warner Cable Arena.
Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx, who pushed to build the streetcar during the mayoral campaign in 2009, said the project will be a “catalyst” for new development and will provide “sorely needed jobs for Charlotte.”
The total cost of the 1.5-mile line will be $37 million. The city has set aside $12 million to build the first leg, but it hasn’t yet identified a source for the roughly $1.5 million needed to operate it each year.
The city eventually wants to build a 10-mile streetcar line from Beatties Ford Road to the site of the closed Eastland Mall. The entire project could cost $500million and would probably take at least two decades to build, assuming the line is built in small phases.
Construction on the 1.5-mile first leg must begin within 18 months, according to the FTA, or the city will lose the money. Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati and Dallas and Fort Worth also received money for streetcars. A total of 65 cities applied.
A consultant, URS Corp., is doing engineering work on how to build the line. The major question mark is what utilities are under the street and how many of them must be moved.
John Mrzygod, a streetcar project manager for the city, said he hopes the city can begin moving some utilities soon.
He said the construction work will be relatively hassle-free for drivers and businesses.
“This will be more surgical than Elizabeth Avenue,” Mrzygod said.
He was referring to a massive rebuilding of Elizabeth Avenue through Central Piedmont Community College, which included laying a half-mile of streetcar track into the road. Store owners along Elizabeth Avenue say the project crippled business.
The city must build rail tracks that loop around the Time Warner Cable Arena, where they will connect with the Lynx light-rail track. That will allow the streetcars to travel along the light-rail tracks to the Charlotte Area Transit System’s maintenance and storage yard, near the New Bern light-rail station.
From there, the city will probably install track on Trade Street to link with the existing track on Elizabeth Avenue.
To power the streetcar, the city will probably build a catenary – overhead wires that will be a canopy over the street.
The city is planning to use three existing trolley cars now used by Charlotte Trolley on its line from South End to uptown. CATS is eliminating that trolley line because of budget cuts.
The streetcar may eventually use more futuristic cars. But using the replica trolleys saved the city $8 million, said Mrzygod.
Idea still controversial
The idea of building a streetcar in Charlotte has been controversial.
Unlike the Lynx light-rail line, which operates in its own tracks and is often faster than cars, the streetcar will operate in the street. It will stop at traffic lights and will be stopped in congestion, just like a bus.
Though the streetcar is not faster than a bus, streetcar boosters have said it will help areas nearby. Developers will want to build near streetcar stops, supporters say.
Micah Javier, the general manager of the Nothing But Noodles restaurant on Elizabeth Avenue, said the streetcar would help business.
“It would bring good traffic between here and (downtown), which we’ve always looked forward to since we’ve opened,” he said. “Obviously, we’re going to be cautiously optimistic as to when it would finish.”
Myers Park resident Jenny Martella said she always looks for opportunities to walk, bike or take public transportation instead of driving, and would visit businesses along Elizabeth Avenue with a streetcar.
“You bet I’ll be using those cars,” she said. “It’ll be so much fun.”
Republicans on the Charlotte City Council have been wary of spending money on the streetcar. But Foxx and his Democratic colleagues have pushed to spend money on it, even before federal money became available.
Under the Bush administration, streetcars weren’t eligible for federal transit funding. But the Obama administration has changed those rules, and the FTA awarded $130 million in streetcar grants Thursday.
“The city was in a position and ready to go,” Foxx said. “When the FTA looked … Charlotte had prepared itself.”
The City Council must vote to accept the grant in July, but that’s considered a formality.
Operating costs a question
When the streetcar is built, it’s unclear who will pay the estimated $1.5 million in annual operating costs.
CATS chief executive Carolyn Flowers has said the transit system can’t afford it. CATS has had to raise fares three times since 2007 and has had to cut some bus routes and eliminate jobs to balance its budget.
The streetcar line will be so short that it won’t replace any existing bus system. CATS will probably still operate the Gold Rush line along Trade Street, which runs inside Interstate 277.
If the streetcar is built and then extended to Gateway Village on West Trade Street, CATS could in theory stop operating the Gold Rush Red Line.
Republican council member Andy Dulin said he will vote against accepting the grant, in part because of the recurring operating costs.
“That’s $1.5 million we don’t have,” Dulin said. “CATS has said many, many times they don’t have the money to help with design, building it or running it. We could spend that money fixing potholes throughout the city.”
Dulin said he’s also concerned that the city’s marquee intersection – Trade Street and Tryon Street – could become cluttered with overhead wires if the streetcar is extended to the north.
City officials have said it’s possible the streetcar could eventually use overhead wires for part of its journey, then use batteries for other stretches of the line. If that happens, the city wouldn’t need to stretch overhead wires over the entire line.
Charlotte’s streetcar system started in the late 1880s with a horse-drawn system, and the last electric streetcar ran in 1938.
The starter line for the modern streetcar will run on familiar terrain. Around the turn of the century, a streetcar line was extended on Trade Street to Elizabeth College, which became the site of Presbyterian Hospital, said Charlotte historian Dan Morrill.
“That’s repeating history,” Morrill said. Staff writer Lisa Du contributed.
By Steve Harrison
sharrison@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Friday, Jul. 09, 2010
|
|
Submitted 07.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Revenue, Transportation, Virginia
Virginia DOT Reduces Payments to Counties for Road Maintenance (AASHTO)
Virginia officials have eliminated much of the state’s funding for regional secondary-road programs because of a budget crunch. Dozens of road improvements and repairs across the state will grind to a halt by July and August as the new fiscal year begins.
In Northern Virginia, a Washington Post analysis found at least $68 million worth of road projects are slowing down or have been canceled because of the state’s June budget decision to focus on existing primary-road projects that handle more traffic and are eligible to receive federal matching money.
“We are seeing the secondary-road pavements continue to age and deteriorate, and we simply do not have enough resources at this time to address those needs,” said Jeff Caldwell, a Virginia Department of Transportation spokesman.
In 2004, the state’s most-populous county, Fairfax County in the Washington suburbs, received $29 million from VDOT for secondary-road maintenance. Last fiscal year, the county received $238,000. That amount has shrunk to $1,989 for the fiscal year that began Thursday.
|
|
Submitted 07.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Indiana, Reauthorization, Revenue, Transportation
Indiana’s bad bridges focus of a new campaign for more transportation spending (News and Tribune)
Indiana’s bad bridges focus of a new campaign for more transportation spending
There are more than 4,000 deficient or obsolete bridges in the state
INDIANAPOLIS — INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana’s deteriorating bridges and roads are the focus of a new media campaign designed to create political pressure to find a fix for a federal highway program teetering on insolvency.
The campaign, slated for kickoff on Wednesday, is backed by a coalition of labor and industry leaders pushing Congress to spend billions on the nation’s aging infrastructure, creating thousands of jobs along the way.
Dubbed “Build Indiana 2010,” the campaign will feature billboards with an image of one of the 4,111 bridges in Indiana that have been rated “structurally deficient” or “functionally obsolete” by the Federal Highway Administration.
It’s an intentionally unnerving image, said Frank DeGraw, an Indiana officer with the Laborers International Union of North America, which is funding the campaign.
“We don’t need another Minnesota here in Indiana,” said DeGraw, referring to the 2007 collapse of a Minnesota bridge that had been rated “structurally deficient” two years before it fell, killing 13 and injuring 145.
“If it had been up to me, the billboards would say: ‘You made it across this time. You better call somebody to fix this bridge,’” DeGraw said.
The Build Indiana 2010 campaign is part of the Laborers International Union’s Build America 2010 public campaign first launched in Colorado in June. It’s expected to spread to other states soon. Among the union’s allies in the effort are the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and industry associations representing construction companies and suppliers.
The effort is in response to a slowdown in the construction industry brought on by the recession and only temporarily buoyed by federal stimulus spending.
Most of the Laborers International 500,000 members are construction workers, and many remain unemployed, DeGraw said. Union leaders hope the media campaign will mobilize union members to create public support for more federal spending for infrastructure improvement.
There’s a need for it in Indiana, according to a recent report issued by the American Society of Civil Engineers. It says that 29 percent of Indiana’s major roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and 25 percent of its bridges fail to meet federal standards for safety.
The fix isn’t easy, though. It would require Congress find new revenue for the Highway Trust Fund, the pocket of money that pays for infrastructure repair with federal gas taxes.
Since gas tax revenues haven’t kept pace with the amount of money doled out of the fund through a complicated formula that gives some states more money than they’ve paid into the fund, it’s required Congress to come up with a series of short-term bailouts to keep the fund solvent.
One solution would be to raise the gas tax — not a politically palatable option in an election year, said David Miller, a spokesman for the Laborers International.
So the job of the Build Indiana campaign is to make finding a source of revenue, no matter what it is, more palatable.
DeGraw says the message of the campaign will be a simple one: “We need to put people back to work, fixing an infrastructure that’s falling apart. You can’t tell me that we can come up with a way to bail out the banks, but not find the money to put Americans back to work.”
— Maureen Hayden is statehouse bureau chief for CNHI’s Indiana newspapers. She can be reached at maureen.hayden@indianamediagroup.com
July 5, 2010
|
|
Submitted 07.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: biotech, Gephardt, Joines
Gephardt: Medical research can help fuel U.S. economy (Winston Salem Journal) (mentions Metro Mayors)
Medical innovation — fostered with public financing and lighter regulatory burdens — should be “a cornerstone” of the economic recovery, former U.S. Rep. Dick Gephardt told a group North Carolina mayors and biotechnology executives yesterday.
In fact, the health sector is the only major part of the U.S. economy that has grown in the last two years, Gephardt said, adding 700,000 new jobs nationwide.
Gephardt, twice a presidential candidate and a key member of the Democratic Party’s Congressional leadership team for much of his 28 years there, now heads the Council for American Medical Innovation. He’s on a multi-state tour to build support for changes in the way medical research is funded.
Biotechnology programs are expanding across the state, and Winston-Salem has been expanding its downtown Piedmont Triad Research Park in recent years. The Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine, a multi-institute effort led in North Carolina by Dr. Anthony Atala of Wake Forest University, is about to get a $10 million infusion under the state budget that won final passage yesterday.
Mayor Allen Joines of Winston-Salem, a co-chairman of the Metropolitan Mayors Coalition Biotech Committee, said that biotechnology has become “a strong part of our economy.”
Gov. Bev Perdue said that the industry means $46 billion a year to the state’s economy. And between actual industry positions and the ones they help spawn, it means nearly 250,000 jobs, she said.
Gephardt cited a study from the state’s Biotechnology Center that put the total number of jobs at a more modest 182,000 in 2008.
At any rate, Perdue said she wants North Carolina to lead in biotechnology, despite lingering budget problems that have forced state spending cuts in other areas.
The state already has a grant program to help private researchers get their products to market, and it may start a new loan program to help provide more funding. House Bill 530 — which is being debated at the Capitol — would create new state tax credits to help finance loans to medical research groups.
Joines mentioned the bill and said he planned to lobby for it before heading home. And that, in a nutshell, was Gephardt’s call to action for the politicians and business people at Wednesday’s talk: Lobby the state legislature and Congress, make noise for a growing industry.
“It needs to be the new space program, in my view,” Gephardt said.
Specifically, Gephardt’s group is calling for several changes, outlined in a recent report:
• More public-private funding partnerships to cover the enormous costs of medical research.
• Increase a federal tax credit for medical research and make it permanent, rather than something Congress must reauthorize every couple of years. Gephardt said that uncertainty gives private financiers pause, and he called it “ridiculous.”
• More predictability in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s review process.
Gephardt acknowledged that health-care costs have spiraled upward despite the last 50 years of medical breakthroughs, but he said that research and technology remain the surest way to cut health-care costs. He said that delaying the onset of major symptoms for the average Alzheimer’s sufferer by a few years would probably “empty out” half the nursing homes in the United States and save “probably, trillions of dollars.”
“If you don’t have innovation, you’re never going to help health- care costs,” he said.
ctfain@yahoo.com
By Travis Fain
SPECIAL TO THE JOURNAL
Published: July 1, 2010
RALEIGH
|
|
Submitted 06.28.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: Appalachian, Equity Formula, STP-DA, Transportation, Yadkin River Bridge
The House and Senate came to an agreement on the budget over the weekend (see article link below). While the final language has not yet been released, I am hearing that the Mobility Fund was included in the budget, but without the supplemental Powell Bill and Interstate Maintenance money. While just rumor at this point, I will send you the final language when released later today or tomorrow.
The rumored plan is to vote on the bill Tuesday and Wednesday and send to the Governor for her signature before the end of the fiscal year.
Discussions of changing the equity formula became a part of the budget negotiations. Senator Nesbitt of Buncombe County advocated that they include an exemption to the state’s transportation equity formula in the budget for the Appalachian Development Highway System federal monies. (See how the exemption would affect your highway division here.) The monies date back to 1965 when Congress designated the federal funds to be spent on the Appalachian Highway System. But, because the monies are required by state law to flow through the equity formula, they are, in effect, spent across the State. Here is an excerpt from an Asheville Citizen Times article on the issue:
“More than $30 million a year is earmarked for the highway system…but the money is going unused because of the way state and federal legislators hand it out. North Carolina law doesn’t allow spending in a region to tilt the formula for spreading road money equitably across the state. So for every dollar that highways like U.S. 74 receive in Appalachian Development Highway System funds, the far-western region has to give up 96 cents in other road funding. That’s because of how the General Assembly wrote the formula and because Congress doesn’t provide extra money for the mountain highways; it simply sets aside for them a slice of the money North Carolina would normally get to build all state highways.” (Asheville Citizen Times, 9/29/09)
The Appalachian Development Highway System monies, if exempted from the State Transportation Equity Formula, will be spent only in Graham, Cherokee, and Clay counties in highway division 14. The total new monies that will be taken from all the other highway divisions and spent in division 14 over a seven year period represent a 75% increase in federal construction highway dollars for division 14. (according to the table above provided by NCDOT)
Additionally, Rep. Hugh Holliman of Davidson County advocated that the first phase of the Yadkin River Bridge project be exempted from the formula. (Phase I is the actual bridge, while Phase II is to widen I-85 north of the bridge included as the first Mobility Fund project.)
There are rumors that the Appalachian Development Highway System funds were exempted from the equity formula in the budget bill. I am told there was much discussion around the issue, and the argument was successfully made that the urban areas had the loop money exempted, so this was in balance to that. I have not heard at this point whether any other changes were made to the equity formula.
As many of you have pointed out to me, the argument that the Appalachian Development Highway System funds were directed by Congress to be spent on the Appalachian Highway, the Surface Transportation Program/Direct Attributable (STP/STP-DA) federal monies are directed by Congress to be spent by metropolitan planning areas containing urbanized areas over 200,000 population. But, like the Appalachian Development Highway System monies, the STP-DA monies flow through the State’s transportation equity formula, and are therefore spent statewide. The metropolitan planning areas containing urbanized areas over 200,00 include Asheville, Fayetteville, Greensboro, Charlotte, Raleigh, Durham, and Winston-Salem (and their MPO member cities, for example, in Raleigh this includes the Capital Area MPO with cities such as Franklinton and Creedmoor).
Democratic Leaders Reach Tentative Agreement On State Budget
http://www.digtriad.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=144333&catid=57
|
|
Submitted 06.23.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: DOT, EPA, sustainability, TIGER
Federal agencies team up on livability project (The Hill)
Two federal agencies will spend a total of $75 million on a joint project to integrate transportation and housing initiatives.
The Transportation and Housing and Urban Development departments will spend $35 million and $40 million, respectively, as part of the livable, sustainable communities project aiming to provide more affordable housing options closer to public transportation and good jobs, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Tuesday on his blog.
The Livable Communities Project was first announced June 16, 2009, by LaHood, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.
“When we announced the Obama Administration’s interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, this is just the sort of coordinated activity we had in mind. And I am thrilled that DOT is part of it,” LaHood wrote.
Any projects that apply for funding will be streamlined and evaluated in a collaborative effort by both agencies to smooth the process and create a more effective use of federal resources, he said.
Grants for transportation planning portions of successful projects will be funded through the Department of Transportation’s TIGER II discretionary grants program, and grants for housing planning will go through the HUD’s Sustainable Community Challenge program.
“Projects will be considered holistically to better align transportation, housing, economic development, and land use planning,” LaHood said on the blog.
“It’s pretty clear that housing and transportation decisions affect each other, and the best projects build that relationship into their planning. So it only makes sense to build the housing-transportation relationship into how we evaluate those projects for funding awards.”
By Vicki Needham – 06/22/10 01:35 PM ET
|
|
Submitted 06.23.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Revenue, roads, tax, Transportation
Greenville News editorial: S.C. needs to fund road upgrades (S.C. Greenville Online)
At perhaps the worst possible time, improving and maintaining South Carolina’s disproportionately high volume of state-maintained roads is emerging as a top priority for the state. Lawmakers and other state leaders need to work diligently toward finding a solution — our state’s economic strength depends on it.
It’s no secret that South Carolina’s roads are in disrepair. But the magnitude of the problem is startling, particularly as the state budget continues to shrink because of the ongoing recession.
South Carolina will need $29 billion over the next 20 years to take care of its bridges and roads. For next year alone the state estimates it needs $931 million for road maintenance, but just $643 million is available, Greenville News reporter Tim Smith recently wrote.
The state Department of Transportation rates the state’s road system a “D”, meaning roads generally are in poor condition. The needs are exacerbated by the exceedingly high number of state-maintained road miles (more than 41,000) in South Carolina. In addition, South Carolina’s roads are consistently ranked as among the most deadly in the nation because they are poorly maintained and often poorly designed.
Finally, a 2009 report by the transportation research organization TRIP, found that 28 percent of South Carolina’s roads are in poor or mediocre condition.
This should be clear: High quality and well-maintained roads are essential to economic development. Manufacturers demand a reliable transportation system to get goods to and from their plants; and residents are entitled to safe roads to get them to and from work, school and activities.
The numbers demonstrate that maintaining and improving that needed infrastructure can’t be accomplished with current state revenues. There needs to be a serious discussion about where that money will come from, and that discussion shouldn’t be short-circuited by a close-minded aversion to any and all taxes.
Two ideas that have been talked about are public-private partnerships and toll roads. One need only look as far as southern Greenville County — where the Southern Connector toll road has defaulted on its debt — to see the hurdles that need to be
overcome if toll roads were used as a major source of highway funding. The state Legislature has considered — and likely will again — a bill that would expand the use of this mechanism. Though it’s not a statewide solution, if nothing else a bill
should be passed so the Connector can restructure its debt and so toll roads can be tried in other parts of the state where they might be more successful.
That leaves an increase in taxes or fees as the most plausible way to increase available transportation funding.
Transportation Secretary Buck Limehouse has suggested a 10 cents per gallon gasoline tax. A legislatively appointed tax study commission may well suggest that when it releases its report later this year, The News reported. Such a proposal
makes sense. Gasoline taxes are a sensible way to fund road maintenance, and South Carolina — where the gas tax hasn’t been raised in more than two decades — could absorb a modest gas tax hike. Such a tax increase would generate up to $320 million per year.
Yet some legislators say approval of a gas tax hike is unlikely given some lawmakers’ aversion to tax increase of any kind. As Sen. Larry Grooms told this newspaper, many in the General Assembly have signed pledges to not raise taxes.
Such pledges are shortsighted and ignore the reality that, at times, tax increases may be necessary to meet urgent needs. One recent example where a local government rose above the uproar against tax increases to meet pressing needs was Fountain Inn. There, the City Council approved a small 2.4 mill property tax increase to help fund capital projects. Had a majority of City Council members pledged to not raise taxes under any circumstances, such an action would have been impossible.
The disrepair of this state’s roads and the lack of apparent funding from elsewhere represents the sort of critical need that demands bold action from South Carolina lawmakers.
When lawmakers begin to discuss how to address this need, they shouldn’t let politically motivated promises stand in the way of doing what’s right for South Carolina. Every option — including increasing transportation-related taxes — needs to be on the table and seriously discussed.
June 22, 2010
|
|
Submitted 06.23.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Public Safety
Tags: gangs, SB372
The Metro Mayors Executive Committee voted this week to support the North Carolina Street Gang Nuisance Abatement Act included in
SB372. The bill was heard in the House Judiciary III committee this week and is scheduled to be voted on by that committee next week. The committee is likely to be presented with a proposed committee substitute bill which will not include the NC Street Gang Nuisance Abatement Act provisions. I understand the House feels the provision was a late addition to an unrelated bill and requires its own separate bill and discussion. I will attend the committee meeting next week, continue to follow the bill, and update you if anything changes.
The Metro Mayors are planning to host a stakeholder working group this fall to discuss gang prevention strategies and potential legislation and I will include the Act in the list of possible legislation to pursue next session.
|
|
Submitted 06.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Congestion, construction, traffic, Transportation
Construction Companies Losing Billions Stuck in Gridlock, AGC Report Finds (AASHTO)
Traffic delays are costing construction companies billions of dollars in lost time each year, according to a report released last week by the Associated General Contractors of America.
AGC CEO Stephen Sandherr warned that, as long as Congress puts off passing new surface transportation reauthorization legislation, the problem is only going to get worse.
“Traffic tie-ups nationwide are sapping productivity, delaying construction projects, and raising costs for construction firms of all types,” Sandherr said during a June 10 conference call. “Given the hardships they are facing, the last thing contractors need is to burn time, fuel, and money stuck in traffic.”
This report is based on survey results collected from 1,200 construction companies nationwide over the past few months. AGC’s survey results show that 93% of firms reported traffic and congestion were affecting their operations.
The contractors also reported that construction projects are delayed an average of one day per job because of traffic congestion, which increases the total costs of these projects. Overall, the total losses the construction industry faces due to delays caused by traffic is estimated by AGC to be $23 billion annually.
Traffic is just another problem that construction companies are facing as the poor economy reduces the number of transportation construction jobs being ordered by states, the report notes. With no guaranteed funding from the federal government in the near future, states are choosing short-term easy fixes, such as repaving roads, instead of major highway expansion projects, according to AGC.
“As larger projects get put on the back burner, traffic stagnates, construction firms have less work, and equipment plants see orders drop,” Sandherr said. “It is hard to think of a better way to undermine the [recovery act] than failing to pass a surface transportation bill.”
Sandherr noted the lack of a new federal transportation bill is causing states to undertake considerably fewer and smaller transportation projects — 17% fewer bid lettings this year worth 29% less than the year before.
Congress and the Obama administration should act quickly to pass new surface transportation reauthorization legislation this summer to generate more projects that will reduce gridlock, Sandherr said.
AGC’s report and a state-by-state breakdown are available at tinyurl.com/AGC-survey.
|
|
Submitted 06.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Gas Tax, Reauthorization, Tolls, Transportation, VMT
Oberstar points to road problem: a shortage of federal gas-tax revenue (MinnPost.com)
WASHINGTON — The problem is simple, says Rep. Jim Oberstar, who chairs the House Transportation Committee: There simply isn’t enough money coming in through the federal gas tax right now to meet the nation’s current needs for road and bridge repairs.
And as fuel efficiency increases, drivers will invariably take fewer trips to the gas station and the amount of revenues generated by the gas tax will drastically shrink.
It’s as Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood explained earlier this year:
In the past, the Highway Trust Fund has been largely user-supported through fuel-tax revenue. The idea is that drivers who use the roadways will need to buy gas, and generally how much gas they buy corresponds to how many miles they’ve driven or how much they’ve used our roadways.
However, technology and behavior have changed enough that this approach is no longer sufficient. As we move forward with surface transportation reauthorization, we need lawmakers and experts to think creatively about how we’re going to fund our transportation infrastructure in the 21st century.
The good news is that there are several possible solutions that could bridge the funding gap, including raising the gas tax in the short term and implementing congestion or mileage fees sometime in the next decade.
The bad news: Absolutely none of those ideas seem to have even the remotest chance of passing in the current political climate.
More mileage, more problems
Let’s say that in November, when the Chevy Volt rolls off the production line, I scrounged up the cash, traded in my 122,000-mile-old 2000 Subaru Legacy and actually purchased GM’s new plug-in hybrid.
Currently, my car is rated at 19 mpg city/25 mpg highway, which wasn’t too shabby back then. The Department of Energy estimates that an average driver covers 15,000 miles and spend $1,842 a year in fuel costs, which (at their estimate of $2.58 a gallon) translates to almost 714 gallons of gas a year.
Multiply that by 18.4 cents a gallon for the federal gas tax, and I’m on the hook to Uncle Sam for $132 a year, give or take a few cents. Almost all of that money goes to the Highway Trust Fund, which pays for road and bridge repairs, infrastructure and mass transit projects.
oberstar.house.gov
Rep. Jim OberstarNow say I got the Volt, which is powered for its first 40 miles by an electric battery alone and to which the EPA assigned a (somewhat controversial) 230 mpg fuel economy estimate. If I somehow hit that estimate, my contribution to the highway tax fund would shrink to around $12.
And you simply can’t fund a highway system on $12 a year.
That may be a fairly drastic example, but it’s a simple maxim that, all else being equal, better fuel economy means fewer trips to the pump.
Fewer trips to the pump mean less money spent on gas. The less spent on gas, the less paid on the gas tax, currently set at a flat rate of 18.4 cents a gallon (18.3 cents of which goes to the Highway Trust Fund).
And less gas tax money means a reduction in dollars to the Highway Trust Fund, which is used to fund road and bridge repairs to an infrastructure system that has already begun to show its age.
“With more fuel efficient cars or the alternative propellant forces, you need to increase the user fee,” Oberstar said.
Revenues don’t match needs
Gas taxes were originally conceived as a simple substitute for vehicle miles traveled, under the thinking that those who used the roads more would fuel up more and then pay more. By and large, that’s how it has worked so far.
“For 54 years of the interstate highway program, the public has paid its own way,” Oberstar said. “You use the system, you pay for it.”
Because it is not adjusted for inflation, the federal gas tax has experienced a cumulative loss in purchasing power of 33 percent since 1993 — the last time the federal gas tax was increased.
All in all, there remains a $140 billion gap over the next 6 years between expected revenues and what Oberstar said we “actually need” to bring roads and bridges into good repair.
And not only is there not enough money to do all that, there’s not even enough coming in to keep the fund solvent. Because the Highway Trust Fund is designed to be revenue neutral, any shortfall in the fund would just be partially reimbursed for transportation spending until Congress bails out the fund.
Congress has had to bail out the trust fund twice in the past few years.
“People who are buying more fuel efficient cars are fueling up less but still driving and still using the roads,” said Annette Nellen, an expert on taxation and transportation at San Jose State University.
“You would think that because there’s not enough money going in there right now that this would be addressed.”
Minnesota, which received $581 million in federal highway aid in 2009, is equally impacted with all other states here. Say there were $100 billion in requests, but only $50 billion in the fund. States would be reimbursed at 50 cents to the dollar until the fund is bailed out. For states with cash shortages — like Minnesota — that could be a tough wait.
Fuel economy gains speeding crisis
Presently, vehicles are required to average 27.5 miles per gallon. A 2007 law increases that requirement to 35 mpg by 2020, however an April rule by the Obama administration speeds it up to 35.5 mpg by model year 2016.
Much of the gain in fuel economy currently is coming from the rise of gas-electric hybrids and an increasing willingness to by automakers to produce (and drivers to purchase) smaller cars and trucks.
Hybrid vehicles are increasingly more common, boosted by greater fuel efficiency, wider availability and federal tax credits of up to $3,400 per vehicle. Additionally, automakers have begun selling the kind of small, fuel-efficient cars to Americans that were once only available in Europe.
Last year Volkswagen unveiled a North American version of the Golf, the most popular car across the pond (the TDI clean diesel version of which gets 41 highway miles per gallon). Earlier this year, Ford rolled out an American version of the Fiesta, which gets around 38 miles per gallon.
Automakers are also planning to overhaul their fleets to meet the surging demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles — Chrysler for one plans to increase its fleet-wide fuel economy by 2014.
On the horizon: hyper-efficient plug-in hybrid electric vehicles like GM’s Chevrolet Volt and its 230 miles per gallon.
Several suggested solutions, but scant support
Seeing the need to move off the gas tax, Congress commissioned a bipartisan study of future revenue sources during the last surface transportation reauthorization process. That committee reported its findings in early 2009. [PDF]
The headline of the press release accompanying the report was direct. [PDF] “The U.S. Should Shift From the Gas Tax to a Mileage-Based Usage Fee by 2020. The current federal motor fuels tax is unsustainable over the long term.”
“We must start transitioning to a new paradigm now,” said Mike Krusee, a commissioner who also served at the time as a Republican state representative in Texas. “If we don’t start, we will never get there.”
Problem is, none of the possible solutions have anywhere close to the number of votes required to pass in Congress.
That gas tax hike Oberstar is looking for? Scuttled by his own party which doesn’t want to push it without Republicans on board.
A White House spokesman, very succinctly, said that “the White House does not support a gas tax increase.”
Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, a senior House Democrat who heads the DCCC (the organization tasked with electing more House Democrats), said earlier this year that it “certainly won’t fly this year, because we’re going to have to have some kind of bipartisan consensus before you more forward on any kind of funding mechanism like that.”
When Minnesota raised its gas tax in 2008, lawmakers had to override Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s veto to do it, and Republicans who crossed over suffered for it during the campaign.
The conservative Heritage Foundation suggested another idea — scrap the federal gas tax altogether, get the federal government out of road funding and let the states levy the taxes they need. States would then be free to put in whatever system worked best for them.
Republicans would have to have a sizeable majority to have a chance at passing something like that — and even the best projections from the upcoming elections don’t put them anywhere close to a number that big.
At least one Republican on the House Transportation Committee floated the idea of switching the gas tax from a flat fee to a percentage, similar to state sales taxes, so that revenues would go up as prices go up (and down if they go down).
That plan, which Oberstar said he was willing to consider, was ultimately rejected by GOP leaders for looking too much like a tax increase.
Then there’s the idea of counting vehicle miles traveled, either through regular odometer checks or installing a tracking system on cars to see how far they’ve gone. Such systems have been piloted, but haven’t yet gone widespread.
“It’s not viewed as a burning issue yet, and whenever the discussion comes up about tracking vehicle mileage you have to ask how you’re going to measure that,” Nellen said. “First there’s an issue of privacy, and second, is it that dire of a situation yet? And I think it is.”
“You could also have more tollbooths, but that isn’t highly desirable either.”
Oberstar has not specifically endorsed a vehicle mileage tracking solution, rather his surface transportation bill would establish pilot programs to test potential solutions. The best of those would be folded into the 2015 surface transportation reauthorization.
But that bill may not even come up this year, and if it does a lame duck session is the likeliest time for it.
Nellen said solutions (and the unpopular votes needed to pass them) won’t likely be fully realized until lawmakers realize the looming crisis in transportation funding — and that something needs to be done about it.
“And as far as I can tell, no one’s really paying attention to it.”
By Derek Wallbank | Published Thu, Jun 17 2010 8:38 am
|
|
Submitted 06.16.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: biotech
Biotech Venture Capital Bill Back on Legislative Menu (Carolina Journal)
Opponents call measure a corporate bailout
RALEIGH — Lawmakers might soon take up a bill that would put North Carolina into the venture capital business by using taxpayer funds to subsidize private investments in biotechnology startups.
Critics call the move foolish in a shaky economy, comparing it to federal government bailouts of Wall Street and the banking industry. Others are concerned that the proposal would run afoul of the state constitution.
“It’s a giveaway for a certain class of people, and it’s a giveaway that is not needed,” said Rep. George Cleveland, an Onslow County Republican.
The measure, known as the Life Sciences Development Act (House Bill 530), would establish a private limited liability company to make taxpayer-funded loans of up to $30 million each to biotech companies. To underwrite the loans, the Life Sciences Development company would sell equity certificates (similar to shares of ownership) to investors.
The goal: spur economic growth, create jobs in a down economy, and increase the state’s attractiveness to outside industry.
Venture capital typically is used to fund early investments in companies that are too risky to attract financing from formal financial institutions such as commercial banks. Businesses seeking venture capital offer the potential for rapid growth and high returns; investors receive a stake in the company’s ownership while assuming a significant risk that the company will fail and all of their money would be lost. In many instances, venture capital investors provide not only money but also management expertise.
It’s the second time in as many years that Democrats have pushed the measure. An initial attempt failed in the waning hours of the General Assembly’s long session last year, when legislators couldn’t reach a compromise on differing House and Senate versions.
Now, the bill could be on the fast track. The measure was on the House’s concurrence agenda the opening day of the short session May 11, but it was later removed from the calendar.
A joint conference committee was appointed June 9 to reexamine the bill, adjust it if necessary, and send it back to the House and Senate floor, where lawmakers only could vote it up or down.
Supporters of the bill didn’t respond to repeated phone calls and e-mails asking for comment. But during debate on the House floor in August, they trumpeted the bill as an economic boon.
“It’s an important public-private partnership that I think helps us move the whole state forward in the life sciences industry,” said House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman, D-Davidson.
Rep. Pryor Gibson, a Democrat from Anson County, said that the bill blazes new territory and is needed. “It’s time for us to do some bold, innovative things,” he said.
‘Totally ludicrous’
One particular provision has stoked the ire of opponents. It would cover investors’ outlays by giving them taxpayer-funded credits if returns from the startup companies weren’t as much as expected. Foes of the proposal say the credits would have taxpayers assume at least part of the venture capitalists’ risk.
“For the state to get involved with private investment and guaranteeing a return out of the taxpayers’ pocket is totally ludicrous,” Cleveland said. “And for the powers to be to say that this is something we really need to spur development in bio fields, or any field, I think is really outrageous.”
In addition to fiscal concerns, opponents say the measure would be unconstitutional. Jason Kay, a senior staff attorney with the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law, said the bill authorizes the state to lend its taxing authority to a private entity.
“It is a constitutional problem to give a private company the authority to exercise power that is traditionally reserved for the government — the power of taxing or untaxing its citizens,” Kay said. “If voters feel that elected officials have given out too many tax breaks, the voters know where to find them. But when a private company does so, there is no recourse at the ballot box.”
Rep. Rick Glazier, D-Cumberland, a frequent supporter of economic incentives to businesses, said he thinks there will be changes to the bill. Glazier parted company with many of his colleagues in raising concerns about the measure last session.
“I know the constitutional objections are being and have been reviewed at length by a number of stakeholders and supporters of the bill,” he said. “I have not seen another draft yet.”
Biotech risks
Other states have rolled out similar proposals, though North Carolina’s version has a unique twist by using public funds exclusively.
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, unveiled a measure earlier this month that would reward insurance companies with tax credits for investing in venture infrastructure. Florida has had a similar fund for years.
The Tar Heel State already has some experience in biotech funding. The N.C. Biotechnology Center, created in 1984, is a nonprofit organization that’s received more than $200 million from taxpayers to fund biotech projects in the state.
The center claims to have created 55,000 jobs at 500 companies, but Triangle Business Journal reported in 2005 that the center’s biotech investment portfolio had lost 41 percent of its value over the previous two years. The value of its investments had fallen by $11.23 million since 2002, the newspaper reported.
In 2007, the Journal also reported that a $10 million investment by the Biotechnology Center in a venture capital fund was worth only $1.3 million when the fund closed down.
David N. Bass is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.
By David N. Bass
June 16, 2010
|
|
Submitted 06.16.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: internet, sweepstakes, video
Video Poker (NC Insider)
House Majority Leader Hugh Holliman acknowledged that House Democrats are divided over what to do about video sweepstakes games, just over two weeks after sponsors of a bill to prohibit the games said they hoped for quick approval of a ban. Holliman, D-Davidson, said the issue of what to do about the games was discussed extensively in a recent House Democratic caucus meeting. “Some people want to ban it. Some people want to make it legal,” he said. Still, others in caucus prefer to take no action, he said. But Holliman added that legislation affecting video sweepstakes may still be taken up this year.
Supporters of the sweepstakes machines – the latest incarnation of video poker – contradicted Holliman, saying that both House Democrats and Republicans had agreed to delay any legislation until 2011. “We support that decision from the state lawmakers because it allows time to study and review the various proposals on the table that would regulate and tax video gaming in the state,” said William Thevaos, president of the Entertainment Group of North Carolina.(THE INSIDER, 6/16/10).
|
|
Submitted 06.15.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
We are now at the conference committee stage of the budget process. This is when the Chambers negotiate the differences between their two budgets. As you know, the
House included the Mobility Fund in their budget, but the Senate did not. Below is a list of both the Appropriations co chairs and the transportation conferees. If you have a representative on this list please call them and ask them to include the Mobility Fund in the final budget and two add two of the Governor’s provisions to the Fund – supplemental Powell Bill monies and dedicated Interstate Maintenance funds.
We believe that dedicating 6.5 percent of the Mobility Fund to new additional Powell Bill revenues is critical to its overall support and success. Including the Powell Bill supplement ensures that every community across North Carolina receives some of these new transportation dollars.
We are also asking the conferees to dedicate $30 million dollars of the Mobility Fund to interstate maintenance. According to a June 2nd article in Stateline, “Letting a road deteriorate from excellent condition to fair condition makes it three times as costly to fix.” We need to be smart about investing in our roads at a time when bids are at historical lows. Additionally, having Mobility Funds spent on our interstates will free up equity fund dollars traditionally spent on interstate maintenance to be spent elsewhere in a highway division.
Transportation Conferees:
Senate: Goss, Graham, Jenkins, Shaw, Stein
House: Cole, Martin, Coates, Gill, Heagarty, May, Parfitt, Williams, Dockham
Appropriations Chairs:
Senior Chairman Rep. Michaux
Chairman Rep. Adams
Chairman Rep. M. Alexander
Chairman Rep. Crawford
Chairman Rep. Haire
Chairman Rep. Jeffus
Chairman Rep. Tolson
Chairman Rep. Yongue
Co-Chairman Sen. Charles W. Albertson
Co-Chairman Sen. Linda Garrou
Co-Chairman Sen. A. B Swindell
Co-Chairman Sen. Charlie S. Dannelly
|
|
Submitted 06.15.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: I-95, Tolls, Transportation
Toll talk (News and Observer)
Like holiday traffic jams, tolls on North Carolina’s 182-mile stretch of Interstate 95 appear increasingly inevitable.
The north-south route’s traditionally toll-free status is under pressure from heavy traffic, tight funding and new technologies that claim to eliminate some of tolling’s aggravations. Within a year, members of the General Assembly can expect a drive for legislation that would allow tolls on already constructed roadways – a prerequisite for authorizing user fees on I-95.
Much will depend on the specifics of the toll plan. If the proposal is carefully constructed to bring about a needed upgrading of the interstate, if it doesn’t unduly burden those North Carolinians who use the road every day and if the methods of collecting tolls are practical and enforceable, ending I-95’s toll-free era could be worth the price motorists would pay.
The case for taking the toll route on I-95 was reported Sunday by The N&O’s Bruce Siceloff, in an article that carried the sub-headline “Advocates say state’s deadliest interstate sorely needs rebuilding.” Siceloff quoted Marc Basnight, the Senate president pro tem, as saying “You should collect that toll now. There’s not a worse road in North Carolina.”
Not-so-golden oldie
Tar Heel drivers probably could come up with quite a list of contenders in any worst-road competition. But it’s true that I-95 outpaces other interstates in its fatality rate, particularly near the South Carolina border.
The road’s central section in Johnston and Harnett counties is notably antiquated. Drivers taking the upgraded U.S. 64-264 east from Raleigh (toward Basnight’s beloved coast) may well be struck by the contrast between the mostly modern U.S. highway and the 1960s-era interstate it crosses.
In all, the state DOT would like to see $5 billion in improvements on I-95. But the money is nowhere to be found in the existing system of road funding.
It’s not news that there’s a misfire in how the state and the nation fund interstate infrastructure. A key factor is that fuel taxes don’t go as far as they once did. Road-related costs are up but fuel taxes aren’t, while increasingly efficient vehicles don’t use as much gasoline and diesel as they once did.
In that sense, the talk of adding tolls is a substitute for what might be a more sensible option, raising fuel taxes across the board. That route would both boost highway-repair money overall and dampen oil imports – but anti-tax pressure led North Carolina to essentially cap its fuel taxes.
And so, in the historically toll-averse South, officeholders are talking seriously about charging for the privilege of driving on I-95. Virginia’s governor kicked off the most recent round a few weeks back with a proposal to charge tolls at a new plaza just north of the North Carolina line.
Bake until done
That plan has obvious shortcomings. For one thing, the charge would bear no relation to distance actually traveled on the interstate. Plus, economy-minded drivers might simply bypass the sole toll station.
Whatever North Carolina does, it’s vital that officials don’t propose a half-baked tolling plan. For example, word is that there would be no traditional-style toll plazas. That’s good for traffic flow. But what about fair and equitable revenue collection?
Some drivers would pay via electronic payment systems such as E-Z Pass. The rest, however, would have their license plates identified by photo equipment; bills would be sent in the mail. Faith in the honesty of the American consumer is touching, but you have to wonder about that one.
Drivers may come to accept the inevitability of I-95 tolls. But the any such setup must be purposeful and, above all, practical.
Published Tue, Jun 15, 2010 02:00 AM
Modified Tue, Jun 15, 2010 06:52 AM
|
|
Submitted 06.15.10 | Comments (1)
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: air quality
Hello Everyone:
I am pleased to announce that Sheila Holman has agreed to become the new director of the N.C. Division of Air Quality, following the retirement later this month of Keith Overcash. This appointment comes after a nationwide recruitment and the consideration of a number of interested candidates for this important position.
Sheila has worked at DENR since 1993, and has been deputy director of the Division of Air Quality since August 2008. From 2003 to 2008, she served as chief of the division’s Planning section, where she addressed implementation issues of the 1997 8-hour ozone and the fine particulate matter standards in North Carolina. Holman began her tenure at DAQ as chief of the Attainment Planning Branch, where she directed the development of the state implementation plans for the nonattainment areas in North Carolina, and also coordinated the development and implementation of the North Carolina Air Awareness Program. Prior to her time at DENR, Holman worked for the EPA on national policy for ozone and carbon monoxide.
Sheila’s experience and professionalism are assets she will bring to bear in her new position. Her understanding of the department’s new strategic direction will make her a valuable member of DENR’s senior management team. Please join me in congratulating Sheila on this appointment and to welcoming her as the new DAQ Director.
DENR Secretary Dee Freeman
|
|
Submitted 06.11.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Equity Formula, Mobility Fund, Transportation
Assembly Has Roads On Agenda (Charlotte Business Journal)
Click here for link to PDF:
http://ncmetromayors.com/files/2010/06/MobilityFundEditorial6-11-10.pdf
|
|
Submitted 06.11.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget
BUDGET TARGETS (Part of an AP story)
Budget subcommittee leaders have received spending targets they must meet to work out differences between competing House and Senate spending plans. The chief budget-writers for both chambers gave out the marching orders to the subcommittees and told them to report back next week with recommendations. Sen. Linda Garrou, D-Forsyth, co-chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, want the lawmakers to remain on schedule so that a final plan can be voted on and sent to Gov. Beverly Perdue before July 1. The targets essentially split the difference between the House and Senate plans on education spending but is closer to the Senate plan on the categories of health and human services and justice and public safety. Those areas alone comprise nearly 90 percent of spending in state government.
|
|
Submitted 06.10.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: livability, sustainability
Congress looks at making cities more “livable” (Reuters)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Senate moved closer on Wednesday to making the concept of “livable communities” a part of national law that would provide federal grants to help local governments implement comprehensive city planning.
Almost a year after Sen. Chris Dodd, the Banking Committee chairman from Connecticut, introduced a bill, the committee held its first hearing. The bill proposes giving livability grants to metropolitan organizations and creating an interagency office on sustainable communities within the executive branch.
The grant amounts would depend on the size of the city and the use of the money. The bill would authorize $100 million in total each year through 2013 for planning grants and $3.75 billion through 2013 for implementation grants.
A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in February.
Dodd described the bill as combining housing development, public transit, and infrastructure and land-use planning into one comprehensive approach to city development. Currently, many of those decisions are made separately from one another, and Dodd and others said the partitions have led to urban sprawl.
Livability advocates promote public transportation and bike paths and building energy efficient homes. The payoff of combining city planning will be great, according to Dodd.
“Our nation is facing a number of significant problems, including a struggling economy, an explosion in home foreclosures, the looming threat of climate change, an increasingly worrisome dependence on foreign oil, deteriorating infrastructure, and, yes, worsening traffic congestion,” he said.
Other senators said the bill will reduce the rates of asthma in children, draw younger people back to abandoned downtown areas, reduce obesity by promoting walking and bicycling, and get workers to their jobs on time.
Critics say the bill is vague, extends the reach of the federal government too far into the dealings of local governments and costs too much.
Support may also wane, as fiscal conservatives in Congress pledge to cut back on spending programs and have recently fought other measures to send money to state and local governments.
“Livability” has been percolating as a theme within the executive branch.
The Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Transportation have formed a partnership to better coordinate their programs. Their leaders spent most of the winter touting livability at national conferences of city, county and state leaders held in Washington.
“Rural, suburban and urban counties have been pursuing local strategies to create livable communities and implement sustainable development for decades,” Julia Gouge, a county commissioner from Maryland representing the National Association of Counties, told the hearing.
Last month, the Ford Foundation announced a five-year $200 million plan to promote “a new metropolitan approach that interweaves housing, transportation and land-use policy to foster greater economic growth.”
(Editing by Andrea Ricci)
Wed, Jun 9 2010
By Lisa Lambert
|
|
Submitted 06.09.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Loops, Tolls, Transportation
Beltway delay (Winston Salem JOURNAL EDITORIAL)
Aprioritization process for urban-loop projects that state officials are proposing could well put Forsyth County’s long-awaited Northern Beltway near, or at, the bottom of the list of projects competing for funds. Area residents should urge the N.C. Department of Transportation to adjust the process so that it allows projects like the Northern Beltway to be given fair consideration.
A dozen local business leaders, mainly from the Greater Winston-Salem Chamber of Commerce and the Winston-Salem Alliance, as well as community activists, met with Gov. Bev. Perdue Friday and voiced their concerns.
“We are trying to show the state that the process is patently flawed,” Mayor Allen Joines of Winston-Salem told the Journal’s Wesley Young. “It creates points for things like congestion, safety and economic impact, which we score very well on. It takes that score and divides it by the total cost of the project. When you divide that number into our raw scores our points go way, way down.”
The process is unfair to Forsyth County because lawsuits held up construction of any beltway segments for 10 years as road-building costs steadily rose. Thus, the total cost of the segments is larger and could make the beltway score low on the priority scale. The prioritization process should take such delays into account, as well as the fact that some areas have partially built loops while areas such as Forsyth have none.
If Forsyth County had proceeded with the western leg of the Northern Beltway in 1999, as it had been approved to do, it would have obtained the money it needed for the project and be almost done with it by now. But a lawsuit filed in 1999, followed by another in 2008, killed that scenario. Last month, a federal judge dismissed the two suits, which contended that state and federal highway officials had failed to demonstrate that the road was needed, and that the officials had failed to properly gauge the highway’s impact on the environment.
Now the plan is to start with the eastern leg of the beltway, a stretch of about 17 miles from U.S. 52 to U.S. 311, that will cost about $869 million. The project is crucial to ease congestion and enhance safety by getting traffic off heavily traveled Interstate-40 Business and U.S. 52. It’s important for economic development. And landowners in the path of the beltway have been left in limbo for too long.
The DOT is working on a draft of a priority list. Once it comes out, DOT officials say, there will be an extended period of public comment. But local officials are right to worry that even a draft list will start looking permanent to state officials.
The Chamber of Commerce is asking its members to e-mail letters of support for the beltway to state officials. Other residents of Winston-Salem and Forsyth County should also let Perdue and other state officials know how important the beltway is to the growth and security of our region. One way to do that is through a form letter at the chamber website, winstonsalem.com.
We’ve waited long enough for the beltway.
Published: June 9, 2010
|
|
Submitted 06.09.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Liquor law changes approved by NC house panel (Associated Press)
RALEIGH, N.C. — Local ABC boards would have to meet financial and customer service standards in its liquor sales or they could face closure, and all its members would be subject to a gift ban and other ethics rules in legislation approved Tuesday by a state House panel.
The bill that left the House’s Alcoholic Beverage Control Committee went beyond the recommendations of a special study commission completed last month before the session began. The state ABC Commission also would receive more power to monitor the activities of the local, largely independent boards that sell liquor in cities or counties.
The study commission examined the ABC rules following news reports about the high salaries of local board administrators and meals paid for by liquor companies to local ABC leaders. Gov. Beverly Perdue had sought changes, too.
“It puts the ABC Commission in a new role in providing more direct oversight and setting performance standards,” said state commission Chairman Jon Williams. a Perdue appointee. “All told, it looks like that we will emerge with a much stronger, more reliable ABC system and the public will have more assurance these public enterprises are run with the high ethical standards that the public deserves.”
North Carolina is among 18 “control” states where government directly controls wholesale and retail liquor distribution, but it’s the only one where local ABC boards sell the spirits and essentially run their own operations.
The measure went beyond the study commission’s recommendations to require the state’s nearly 170 local ABC boards to create their own ethics codes. It also would prohibit local board members from accepting gifts from contractors doing business with their panel or stores and to avoid conflicts of interest that could financially benefit themselves or family members.
Each local board would be subject to performance standards set by the state ABC Commission, including store operating efficiency, solvency and customer service and enforcement of the alcohol laws. Lawmakers avoided the word “profitability” although some poorly performing stores don’t make money. Other lawmakers and advocates of the current system argue the purpose of the nearly 75-year-old ABC system and its more than 400 stores is to control liquor sales, not to make a profit.
The state ABC Commission could close stores or force a local board to merge with one nearby if standards aren’t met, but the local board could have up to 20 months to fix the problems. An amendment offered by Rep. Pryor Gibson, D-Anson, raised that period of time from 12 months.
“On balance, having more time is a very important part of the proposal,” said Jon Carr, lobbyist for the North Carolina Association of ABC Boards. “We’d ask for time to improve.”
Rep. Edgar Starnes, R-Caldwell, said 12 months was already enough time: “If you don’t meet your performance standards, there needs to be a consequence.”
The measure, which now goes to another House committee, would require local boards to follow the same rules local governments do in carrying out their annual budgets, including making their spending proposals public records. Local boards also would have to hold a public hearing before it can be adopted.
The bill also would:
_ limit the compensation of local ABC general managers to the pay that local Clerks of Superior Court receive, up to $112,607 in the most populous counties. But pay can go higher if a county commission or town council approves it.
_ prohibit an employee from having direct supervision over a family member in a local ABC board.
The two changes are in response to reports that the father-and-son store administrators in New Hanover County received more than $400,000 in combined compensation.
By GARY D. ROBERTSON , 06.09.10, 08:15 AM EDT
|
|
Submitted 06.09.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: collective bargaining, union
A tale of two counties (The Washington Post) (Collective Bargaining story)
MONTGOMERY COUNTY has just completed a nightmarish budget year. Stressed, squabbling and besieged elected officials savaged services and programs and jacked up taxes to eliminate an eye-popping deficit of almost $1 billion in a $4.3 billion spending plan. Meanwhile, across the Potomac River in Fairfax County, all was sweetness and light by comparison. With a budget roughly equal to Montgomery’s, Fairfax officials erased a deficit a quarter as large with relative ease and far less drama.
The picture isn’t likely to change anytime soon. Montgomery, having already pruned the low-, medium- and some high-hanging budgetary fruit, is facing annual deficits in the hundreds of millions of dollars as far as the eye can see. Fairfax, though facing tough choices and further cuts in an economy clouded by recession, has a brighter future.
The region’s two largest jurisdictions — demographic cousins with populations around 1 million, school systems among the nation’s biggest and best, and public spending equal to that of small countries — have parted ways. To put it bluntly, Montgomery is lurching under the weight of irresponsible governance, unsustainable commitments and political spinelessness — particularly in the face of politically powerful public employees unions.
Over the past few months, some readers have asked why we lately have devoted attention to those unions. The diverging paths of Montgomery and Fairfax provide one explanation. We respect the public employees in both counties and their dedication to public service. Clean parks, cheerful classrooms, safe streets, bustling libraries — the work of these employees helps keep these counties such attractive places to live. But when 80 percent of all outlays are related to personnel, labor contracts that get out of whack can endanger the public welfare.
Take a snapshot of one year, 2006, when times were flush. In Fairfax, the county executive, an unelected technocrat, proposed a budget with a relatively robust spending increase of about 6 percent. In Montgomery, County Executive Douglas M. Duncan, a career politician then running in the Democratic primary for governor, pitched a gold-plated, pork-laden grab bag of political largess that drove county spending up by 11 percent.
Mr. Duncan’s budget that year capped a three-year spree in which county spending rose by almost 30 percent. It reflected major multiyear increases in pay and benefits that he had negotiated for police, firefighters and other county workers. At the same time, Jerry D. Weast, Montgomery’s schools superintendent, negotiated a contract that promised pay increases for most teachers of 26 to 29 percent over three years — about twice the raise Fairfax teachers got — plus health benefits virtually unmatched in the region. Montgomery County Council members, most of whom were hoping for union endorsements in the fall elections, rubber-stamped Mr. Duncan’s contracts. The Board of Education, equally beholden to the teachers union, did the same for Mr. Weast.
The primary culprits here, as this account should make clear, are not the unions, which are supposed to represent their workers energetically, but county leaders. These include an inexperienced and now all-Democratic County Council, whose current members’ average tenure, less than six years, is half that of the members of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors; a politically agile schools superintendent who has rallied support by striking generous deals with the teachers union; and successive county executives who signed their own unaffordable contracts with police, firefighters and other public employees unions.
The results have been striking — and strikingly unaffordable — in a county where more than half of all spending goes to public schools. The average teacher salary in Montgomery today is $76,483, the highest in the region. Average pay for teachers is now almost 20 percent higher in Montgomery than in Fairfax and has increased much faster than in most local suburban school systems. Since 2000, salaries for Montgomery teachers, as for many other county employees, have nearly doubled, rising at almost triple the rate of inflation.
Teachers are pillars of any community, and Montgomery’s are highly rated. But their compensation has outstripped the marketplace. Today, Montgomery schools spend about 20 percent more per pupil than Fairfax schools; they consume a greater share of the public spending than in any other locality in the region. The spending gap is not about classroom quality and student achievement; in those terms the two school systems are comparable. Rather, the difference is compensation, which accounts for 90 percent of Montgomery’s education spending.
Virginia law denies public employees collective bargaining rights; that’s helped Fairfax resist budget-busting wage and benefit demands. As revenue dipped two years ago, Fairfax officials froze all salaries for county government and school employees with little ado. By contrast, Montgomery leaders were badly equipped to cope with recession. County Executive Isiah Leggett took office proposing fat budgets and negotiating openhanded union deals after he succeeded Mr. Duncan. Then, as economic storm clouds gathered, he shifted gears and cut spending — while still trying to appease the unions.
Notoriously, one such deal guaranteed almost $300 million in pension benefits over 40 years to thousands of employees based on salary increases they never received. The giveaway became known as “Phantom COLAs,” for the cost-of-living raises that were never paid. And even when Montgomery’s teachers agreed to give up cost-of-living raises last year, about two-thirds of them continued to receive step increases of up to 4 percent.
The cozy ties between elected officials and public employees unions in Montgomery have formed the backdrop for a drumbeat of reports about county employees’ bountiful benefits, perks and abuses. In the past few years we’ve learned about county police officers who helped themselves to hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars to secure cut-rate weapons for personal use. More than half the officers who retired recently from the police force left claiming “severe disabilities,” some of them dubious, entitling them to huge taxpayer-funded benefits for life. Veteran firefighters may retire at age 46 and continue working for three years while simultaneously accruing pension payments that increase at a taxpayer-guaranteed rate of 8.25 percent annually, regardless of market performance. Meanwhile, Montgomery’s teachers union has wielded such outsized electoral clout that politicians who received the teachers’ endorsement in the most recent elections reached into their pockets and wrote checks to the union. As far as we know, this occurs nowhere else in America.
Some of Montgomery’s problem is also structural. It has relied for more than a quarter of its revenue on a local income tax, an option available to localities in Maryland but not in Virginia. The income tax is volatile: In good times it yielded windfalls for Montgomery — and no-holds-barred spending sprees — but in the current downturn it has meant a cruel collapse in revenue. Over the past two years, Montgomery’s take from the income tax has plummeted by $400 million — by itself the equivalent of 10 percent of all county revenue.
The recession has had a bracing effect on Montgomery’s elected officials, some of whom now express contrition about their spendthrift ways and deference to unions. This year council members, along with Mr. Leggett, by necessity turned into cost-cutters. A year ago, just one council member, Phil Andrews (D-Gaithersburg-Rockville), voted against the phantom COLAs; this month Mr. Andrews was able to muster a unanimous vote on the council to overturn them. Even Mr. Leggett, who negotiated the phantom COLAs, endorsed the council’s action to scrap them — a rare instance of government repealing an entitlement.
Contrition is fine as long as it’s accompanied by concrete steps to reform. The county has just about run out of revenue-raising options, having boosted nearly its entire menu of taxes to the legal or practical limit. Montgomery’s higher taxes already put it at a competitive disadvantage with Fairfax, which has a wide lead in attracting business and creating high-wage jobs; now Montgomery risks a downward spiral. To avoid that, a cultural shift must take place. Some helpful measures would include:
– Candidates for council and school board in Montgomery should foreswear all donations to or from public employees unions. This is a minimum necessary step to sever the cozy ties that have indebted officeholders to the employees they are supposed to oversee and whose compensation forms a critical aspect of the county’s fiscal integrity.
– Candidates for public office, who are routinely asked to fill out questionnaires from public employees unions and other special interests in election years, should refuse to answer any question that would commit them to undefined future spending.
– The county should beef up its rainy-day reserve funds as a means to protect against future downturns, provide an incentive to fiscal restraint and safeguard the county’s shaky AAA bond rating.
Nancy Floreen (D-At Large), president of the County Council, has asked the county staff to prepare options for shrinking future deficits. County officials will encounter inevitable pushback from unions and other interests warning that more cost-cutting will have dire consequences. They may find that their best counter-arguments are close at hand, just across the river.
Sunday, May 30, 2010; A16
|
|
Submitted 06.08.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: collective bargaining, Congress, union
The Collective Bargaining Fight (NC Insider)
RALEIGH – Perhaps Harry Reid may think better of the idea.
Or, maybe not.
In late April , the leader of the U.S. Senate re-introduced a bill that would force states to negotiate with unions for police, firefighters and other emergency workers.
The move prompted a flurry of activity from business and municipal government folks back in North Carolina who consider this sort of thing akin to spitting in apple pie and slapping your mama.
North Carolina is one of just two states that specifically bans collective bargaining by state and local government workers. About 32,000 government employees in the state would be affected by the federal legislation.
More importantly, removing the roadblock for union negotiation with one group of public employees would surely lead to calls for lifting the ban for all. The first slip on the slope would have happened.
So these business groups and local governments, which formed something called the Coalition for North Carolina Jobs back in 2006, rolled out a radio ad to try to hold Democratic North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan to her word.
The radio ad actually used Hagan’s words during her 2008 campaign in which she said she would never do anything to undermine the ability of states to determine whether they will allow public employee collective bargaining.
The coalition fears that North Carolina’s ban on public employee collective bargaining is more threatened than ever.
The federal legislation, though, predates Hagan’s time in the U.S. Senate. Similar bills have been filed for nearly a decade without success, with both Democratic and Republican sponsors.
Still, a bill can fail many times. If it succeeds once, it’s law. Local government officials worry that if the legislation becomes law, it would be mean greater payroll costs. That could mean higher taxes.
Business groups simply don’t want to see North Carolina become more union-friendly, not in a state that has had strong right-to-work laws and traditionally been suspicious of unions.
Hagan, in stating her opposition, put her finger on a bigger problem: Why does the federal government have an interest in dictating that states negotiate with their employees? Can a pattern of state and local government dealing unfairly with employees over wages and benefits be demonstrated?
Through executive orders signed by former Gov. Mike Easley and current Gov. Beverly Perdue, groups representing state workers now have the right to at least be consulted as budgets with salaries and benefits are put together. Those rights of consultation stop far short of collective bargaining, and Perdue says she remains opposed.
Business groups and local government may not be happy with the executive orders, but they reflect the times.
North Carolina’s populace, with its influx of transplants more comfortable with unions, is not as hostile toward organized labor as it once was. National control of politics and political parties also has caused Democrats here to increasingly look to labor as an ally, just as they do in other states.
Those trends, though, are quite different than mandates from Washington.
By Scott Mooneyham
June 7, 2010
|
|
Submitted 06.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
As we enter the final state budget negotiations I have created a
chart to outline the different provisions of the Mobility Fund as proposed by the Governor, the Senate, and the House. I have also done a
letter you can send to your delegation encouraging them to include the Powell Bill Supplement, dedicated Interstate Maintenance funds, and an end to the transfer from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund. Lastly, if your city council and/or you MPO has not passed a
resolution in support of the Mobility Fund we have one of those as well.
|
|
Submitted 06.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: Board of Transportation, I-95, Mobility Fund, NCDOT, TIPAG, Transportation, Turnpike Authority
NC Board of Transportation Meeting 6.3.10 (Summary by Jim Humphrey, CDOT)
Secretary’s Remarks- Jim Trogden spoke of Mobility Funds, response to a Amtrak Train derailment in Mebane, expansion of mid-day train service between Raleigh and Charlotte, award of the contract for I-485 and the public event in Charlotte, more work to integrate NCTA into NCDOT (including plans to physically move them to NCDOT offices) and several other topics.
Legislative Update- Johanna Reese discussed the status of the Mobility Fund (same info which Julie White sent). All of NCDOT’s agency bills seem to be progressing nicely. Nina indicated she had heard some concern regarding a bill that would regulate bicycling on highways. She indicated the controversial part of the bill relates to a requirement that bicyclist move to single file “quickly” when a car approaches. It also does not allow bicyclist to ride more than 2 abreast. The bill number was not provided.
Transportation Intergovernmental Advisory Group- Jim Westmoreland provided an update regarding work which I think you are familiar with. Several subgroups have been formed to look at communication and education with local officials, future transportation funding strategy (reauthorization), reduce land use and transportation impacts (schools), census impact on MPO/RPO boundaries and coordination of TIGER II grants.
Art and Aesthetics on State Projects- Don Lee indicated a new policy was being developed. Art is typically free standing or on a structure. A DOT committee has been formed to develop the guidelines. There will likely be a submittal package required and a sponsor in local government or a local entity for any art structure. This will include a maintenance agreement. The draft guidelines will be published in June or July and distributed to an external advisory committee which will likely include local government officials.
Noise Barrier Aesthetics Update- Greg Smith provided an update. It appears that DOT is headed toward developing 3 or 4 types of wall finishes and 3 or 4 colors that can be selected during public involvement. They do plan to treat both sides of walls (which residents and business on the outside of the wall will appreciate) and plan to use more concrete columns/pillars and horizontal coping. Some on the board expressed concern over added cost compared to current practice. Greg assured them that the added cost was relatively small (about 5-10%). They had a good discussion regarding how noise walls affect the image of cities and the topic of gateways. Some on the board said if a city/town wanted something more than the standard wall, they would have to pay the cost. I did have a private discussion with Greg after the presentation and reinforced the need for flexibility particularly on gateway projects. I also suggested an advisory committee including local government be asked to review whatever is ultimately proposed. Another idea is to run the proposal thru the Complete Streets Committee. Greg seemed to appreciate my comments and I feel he will run whatever is proposed thru local folks at some time.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program- Bill Gilmore presented information regarding an interim budget. 84% of funds are geared toward restoration of wetlands..
I-95 Planning and Funding Report- Roberto Gonzales discussed the history and current status. The key aspect is work regarding potential tolling. They have found if tolling were implemented only at state borders, revenues would equal only 10% ($25m) of revenues that would be collected if the road were tolled thru-out the state ($250m). If tolls were implemented only at the borders, they could build about 1 mile of improvements per year. They are looking at tolling options that include all lanes and only new lanes. Another interesting aspect of the study is that they are working with FHWA to answer the question of how far from the toll road itself might money from tolls be spent to mitigate impacts of traffic that will divert from the interstate. The NCDOT continues to work with neighboring states, hold public input and expects to issue further results of their study later this year/early next year.
Work Program including STIP- Jim Trogden asked that this subject be delayed until next meeting. He said they had not been able to discuss loop schedules with affected areas.
Cash Model- Mark Foster presented info on a cash model which NCDOT utilizes to manage/optimize funds. Interestingly, NCDOT is the only state agency allowed to cash flow their business (SB 1005).
Data Integration Model- Victor Barbour provided information on an internal project begun in 2008 and finished in 2010 to integrate data previously contained in separate divisions. Although the info is used in many ways, one use is to allow managers (primarily) and employees to monitor their success in meeting performance targets. He showed a map of the state with counties shown in different colors indicating those above and below goals for crash rates. He also indicated how the same data may be obtained in graphical and tabular forms. You may wish to have your performance monitoring and IT folks call Victor to arrange a demonstration.
Low Impact Bridges- Lacy Love presented info on the NCDOT’s work to accelerate replacement/repair of bridges. They have done a lot of work with partner agencies to develop check lists for environmental screening, developed standard bridge plans and make sure scope creep does not occur to enable them to replace bridges in as little as 1 year. Bridge replacements that qualify are very simple and minimize damage to the environment (for instance, no detour bridge on site).
Next Meeting in Kinston- The board decided to have their next meeting in Kinston. They feel having the meeting in eastern NC will permit them to see important projects in that part of the state and talk to local officials. My impression is that most meetings will continue to be in Raleigh…and that they will occasionally travel east and west.
I hope this info is beneficial. If you have questions feel free to email me or call me at 704-351-5850.
Jim Humphrey
|
|
Submitted 06.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Equity Formula, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Local officials please mobility fund in N.C. budget draft (Durham Herald Sun)
DURHAM — Local officials are pleased that N.C. House members included in their draft of the state’s fiscal 2010-11 budget a version of the “mobility fund” Gov. Beverly Perdue wants to set up to underwrite major road and transit projects.
House members would seed the fund with $160 million over the coming four fiscal years, drawing it in part from an existing and so-far untapped subsidy for toll-road construction.
As Perdue asked, they’ve assigned first dibs on the money to the planned replacement of Interstate 85’s Yadkin River bridge at the border of Rowan and Davidson counties. But the House didn’t go along with Perdue’s request for vehicle-fee increases to help pay for it.
Local officials were happy because the budget bill includes a provision that says that once the N.C. Department of Transportation finishes the Yadkin bridge, major transit projects that would qualify for state construction subsidies should receive preferential consideration for a share of the fund.
Especially with that stipulation, “it’s encouraging it’s back in,” said Mayor Bill Bell, who said he has asked city administrators to pass the word to Durham’s legislative delegation that he’d like to see the mobility fund receive “strong consideration” as the budget moves to a House/Senate conference.
Bell, who chairs the N.C. Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, added that he and other city-government leaders around the state also want legislators to get behind Perdue’s request for mobility-fund earmarks for repairs to interstates and in-town roads.
Lobbying is necessary because the N.C. Senate’s initial draft of the budget didn’t include the mobility fund. Bell’s group and business interests have been helping Perdue and DOT push for the measure.
Triangle Transit General Manager David King joined Bell in praising the House decision.
“It’s a great thing, but not just for transit,” King said, noting that the key feature of Perdue’s initiative is that the new fund would bypass the “equity formula” that has divvied up road money among urban and rural regions since the late 1980s.
Critics of the formula say it has shortchanged congestion-plagued urban areas, while making it all but impossible for DOT to finance major, high-cost initiatives like the Yadkin bridge replacement in rural areas without shutting down other transportation projects in them for several years.
“The equity formula was a very noble attempt to make sure everybody felt they were getting their fair share,” King said. “But there are roads and projects that supercede everything.”
The Yadkin bridge — a key link on the highway that connects Washington, D.C., with Atlanta — had become the poster child for the equity formula’s deficiencies, he said.
It’s “obviously a high-priority project,” King said. “The inability to do that within the equity formula is just jarring in this day and age.”
But the House’s move didn’t come without controversy. Supporters of the mobility fund had to fend off an amendment by state Rep. Ric Killian, R-Mecklenburg, that would have shut it down after completion of the Yadkin bridge or on July 1, 2014, whichever came first.
The Killian amendment fell by a vote of 81-34 against. All but two of the Democrats who voted wanted to keep the fund going post-Yadkin. Republicans were split. Most lined up behind Killian, but House Minority Leader Paul Stam, D-Wake, and 17 other GOP members joined Democrats in voting against establishing a sunset date for the fund.
By Ray Gronberg
gronberg@heraldsun.com; 419-6648
|
|
Submitted 06.07.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Revenue, tax, Transportation
New Report Examines Gasoline Tax Proposals in Various States (AASHTO)
The success or failure of state-level plans to increase gas taxes can be tied to how the media covers those proposals, concludes a recently released report from the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center. The report examines six states — Idaho, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Vermont — where lawmakers debated raising gas taxes between 2006 and 2009 to close infrastructure gaps.
Those proposed increases were approved by the state legislatures in Minnesota in 2008, and Vermont and Oregon in 2009. In Idaho and Massachusetts, governor-proposed increases were rejected by lawmakers. The New Hampshire State Senate voted down a measure to increase the gas tax that had been approved by that state’s House of Representatives.
“Clearly, there are many possible explanations for the success and failure of gasoline tax increases at the state level,” acknowledges the report. “In each state, the details of the policy debate, the relationships between political parties and policy actors, and the overall context differ.”
Nonetheless, the report does draw on news coverage of those proposals in the local media as well as Associated Press wire service reports to find at least some clues to the ultimate policy outcomes. States such as Minnesota and Vermont, as outlined in the report, proved successful in enacting gas tax increases due to the huge emphasis on phrases like “crumbling infrastructure” in news reports. That imagery of aging and crumbling infrastructure, the report notes, proved especially resonant among lawmakers and the public.
Oregon, the report underscores, proved similarly successful in pushing through an increase because of the focus on economic progress. “Policymakers in the legislature and executive branch consistently emphasized the link between gas-tax increases and job creation,” according to the report.
The gas tax increase proposals fared less well in states like Idaho and Massachusetts, the report suggests, because the stress was on long-term transportation budget gaps and financing mechanisms rather than more evocative phrases. “In both states, the debate in the news discourse became about transportation funding, not the deteriorating system,” according to the report. “In Massachusetts, the debate became particularly complicated because of competing revenue raising proposals and legislative and executive branch initiatives to restructure the state transportation agencies.”
These case studies of media coverage and proposed gas tax increases, the report indicates, might also hold valuable lessons with respect to the ongoing debate over the federal surface transportation reauthorization. “The data suggest that in the states where the news discourse emphasized either crumbling infrastructure or economic progress there was a corresponding success in the policy domain for pro-gas-tax policy-makers,” the report concludes.
A copy of this 21-page report, “Gasoline Taxes: An Examination of News Media Discourse Related to Gas Tax Funding in Six States,” is available at http://tinyurl.com/UVTRC-Report.
|
|
Submitted 06.04.10 | No Comments »
Category Post
Tags: Equity Formula, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
House budget would start Perdue’s Mobility Fund with $70M (News and Observer)
The 2011 budget approved by the House this morning provides $70 million to start up the N.C. Mobility Fund that Gov. Bev Perdue wants for some big statewide transportation projects that, with one exception, have not been named.
This will be one of the areas for negotiation with the Senate, which did not include the Mobility Fund in its budget proposal.
It isn’t new money, as Perdue had proposed (she wanted $74.6 million in DMV fee hikes). It’s all diverted from the Highway Trust Fund via two routes:
* a $31 million slice of the yearly transfer from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund. The legislature has been reducing this transfer by chipping away chunks to cover revenue gaps on turnpike projects — the expected shortfall in toll collections needed to cover the full project costs.
The House budget leaves $40 million remaining in this shift to the general fund. In FY 2012 it proposes to reduce that further to $26 million by reserving an additional $14 million a year for the Mobility Fund.
* $39 million in gap funding unspent by the N.C. Turnpike Authority — it had been
earmarked to help pay for two toll projects that weren’t ready to get
started this year.
Why not simply leave this money in the good old Highway Trust Fund? Because it would be subject to the equity formula there, which distributes the cash according to geography and population numbers. The Mobility Fund is not subject to the equity formula, so it’s OK to spend a lot of money in one county without robbing other projects nearby.
Legislators don’t appear ready to change or kill the equity formula, but maybe they’re ready to acknowledge that it has prevented the state from addressing some of its biggest transportation needs.
How will the money be spent? Every time somebody talks about the Mobility Fund, starting with Perdue’s first mention (here’s the official version from her NCDOT) and continuing through variations in the House, there’s a different list of priorities.
Everybody agrees that the first share will go for widening Interstate 85 near the Yadkin River bridge (which has languished because of equity formula dynamics). There have been proposals to earmark some of the loot for interstate maintenance, for city streets and other needs.
The new House budget prefers an open-ended approach. After I-85 is fixed at the Yadkin bridge, it says, there would be lots of local and statewide consulting involved in selecting transportation projects “of statewide and regional significance that relieve congestion and enhance mobility across all modes of transportation.”
In other words, almost anything could qualify for this modest pot of money. It’ll be good to fix that stretch of I-85. After that, it’s hard to get excited.
Submitted by BruceSiceloff on 06/04/2010 – 14:43
|
|
Submitted 06.04.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: sustainability, Transportation
Mass. launches green transportation initiative (Bloomberg Business Week)
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation is stepping up its efforts to go green.
Transportation Secretary Jeffrey Mullan announced Wednesday the “GreenDOT” campaign aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, promoting healthy transportation alternatives and supporting smart growth development.
Under GreenDOT, the transportation department will incorporate sustainability into all of its activities, from strategic planning to project design and construction.
Highway expansion will be balanced with efforts to promote public transit, walking and bicycling. The state will also buy more efficient fleet vehicles and take advantage of renewable power.
Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Ian Bowles says it’s a long-term project “and this marks a transition.”
|
|
Submitted 06.04.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Tolls, Transportation, Turnpike Authority
North Carolina Turnpike Authority merges into N.C. Department of Transportation
Call it the government version of a merger: The staff of the North Carolina Turnpike Authority got new bosses on June 1 as their integration into the North Carolina Department of Transportation kicked into a higher gear.
The turnpike, which is responsible for building toll roads in the state, was created as an independent agency in 2002. But Gov. Beverly Perdue decided to roll the authority into NCDOT last year.
As part of that decision, Executive Director David Joyner already had been reporting to NCDOT Chief Operating Officer Jim Trogdon. But NCDOT announced at its monthly meeting this week that the rest of the authority’s senior staff will now report directly to executive staff within the department instead of having their own separate reporting structure.
“This is just the next step to further integrate them,” says NCDOT spokesman Ted Vaden.
Despite the changes, the authority will continue to have a board, which will act in an advisory capacity and possibly could have other roles as well. Joyner also remains the executive director of the authority, which will operate as a unit of NCDOT.
The authority, which employs 23 people, currently is housed in office space on Glenwood Avenue, but Vaden says it will be moved to the Transportation Building in downtown Raleigh within several months.
Thursday, June 3, 2010, 2:25pm EDT | Modified: Thursday, June 3, 2010, 4:43pm
Triangle Business Journal – by Chris Baysden
|
|
Submitted 06.04.10 | Comments (1)
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: Rucho, towing, Transportation
SB1136: AN ACT TO STRENGTHEN THE REGULATION OF THE TOWING OF VEHICLES FROM PRIVATE LOTS IN CERTAIN COUNTIES AND CITIES, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.
The City of Charlotte has contacted Sen. Rucho, the bill sponsor, with concerns about this bill. See text of letter below. And suggested addition to the bill.
Senator Rucho,
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss SB 1136 earlier this week. As we discussed the City is concerned that the language in section (a2) of SB 1136 would prohibit the City from setting tow rates. The City has set these rates since 2003 in response to incidents where vehicle owners were charged exorbitant rates to get their vehicles back.
Attached you will find language suggested by the Police Department for the City to maintain the privilege to set the two rates. The language also clarifies that provisions of the City ordinance that may in the future be in conflict with the statute can be maintained and modified on a periodic basis.
I will stop by your office on Tuesday to discuss further. If in the meantime, you have any questions please call me at my office at 704.336.2009 or on my cell phone at 704.408.7393.
Thank you and have a good weekend.
Dana Fenton
(d) This section is not intended to preempt the ability of a city or county mentioned above to regulate by ordinance for the removal of unauthorized vehicles from private lots or for the establishment of a reasonable towing fee for services rendered.
|
|
Submitted 06.03.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, intermodal, Loops, Mobility Fund, Transportation
The House Budget Bill
does include the Mobility Fund. Below is a summary of what is in the Mobility Fund, and what is not.
Funds going into the Mobility Fund:
$39 million in GAP funds that are likely to be unspent FY 2009-10
$31 million from Highway Trust Fund transfer to the General Fund in FY2011-12
$45 million from Highway Trust Fund transfer to the General Fund in FY2012-13
$45 million from Highway Trust Fund transfer to the General Fund in FY2013-14 (and for future years)
This leaves $25.5 million to be transferred from the HTF to the GF for future years and $18 million transferred from the Highway Fund to the General Fund for future years. (It is the Governor and NCDOT’s desire to have the remaining funds currently transferred from the HTF and HF to the GF deposited into the Mobility Fund.)
The YRB project will consume all the Mobility Fund dollars until mid FY2013-14. The bill has a stakeholder process to develop the project prioritization process for future Fund projects. The bill also gives preferential consideration to projects qualified to receive state grants from the Congestion Relief and Intermodal Transportation Fund.
The Governor’s provision to allocate 6.5% of the Mobility Fund each year to Powell Bill is not in the House bill. Neither is the dedicated $30 million each year for Interstate Maintenance.
The budget bill next goes to conference committee where the House and Senate negotiate a final compromise bill. The Mobility Fund was not in the Senate Budget, so the issue is in contention and may or may not be in the final compromise budget bill. The Governor, NCDOT, the League, and the Metro Mayors are also working to try to get the Powell Bill and Interstate Maintenance provisions into the budget bill during the conference process.
|
|
Submitted 06.03.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Revenue, Transportation, VMT
States find road and bridge money hard to come by (Stateline)
By Daniel C. Vock, Stateline Staff Writer
This is the third in a series of stories looking at actions taken in state legislatures this year.
South Dakota Transportation Secretary Darin Bergquist delivered grim news to lawmakers last summer: Money to fix and build roads was dwindling, and the situation was getting worse.
The state’s main sources of money for road projects — taxes on gasoline and car sales — were both slipping. Meanwhile, the cost of actually building and maintaining the roads was going up, because prices were increasing on raw materials, from de-icing liquid to asphalt and concrete. What’s worse, delaying fixes only made the repairs more expensive. Letting a road deteriorate from excellent condition to fair condition makes it three times as costly to fix.
Faced with those sobering facts, legislators studying the issue recommended raising $250 million for transportation over five years by increasing the state’s gas tax, hiking vehicle registration fees and increasing the tax on vehicle sales. Republican state Representative Shantel Krebs, who headed the study committee, saw the proposal as a good investment. “I can’t see, as a legislative leader, making my taxpayers pay more because we didn’t have the political will to take care of it in the short term,” she says.
But come spring, the plan fell flat. A Senate panel blocked it, because senators didn’t want to raise taxes in the middle of a recession.
These are frustrating times to try to build roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure, as the episode in South Dakota shows. But skittish state legislators are only a small part of the problem, eclipsed by the larger forces of the economic slowdown and congressional inaction.
The result is that, three years after a fatal bridge collapse in Minneapolis focused the public’s attention on transportation infrastructure, states increasingly are trying just to keep up existing roads and bridges instead of building new ones or rebuilding old ones.
Three years after a fatal bridge collapse in Minneapolis focused the public’s attention on transportation infrastructure, states are increasingly trying just to keep up existing roads and bridges instead of building new ones.
Desperately seeking funds
Only a few states this year came up with new money to spend on transportation projects.
In fact, says Jim Reed, a transportation expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures, no state this year has increased its gasoline tax, a traditional source of transportation money. Even last year, when states were already in the throes of the current budget crisis, just a handful hiked their gas taxes.
One of the most widely discussed ideas to bring in transportation dollars is to erect toll booths along state borders, in an effort to get out-of-state motorists to pay for the upkeep of interstate highways. Connecticut, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania all have considered the concept, but none has gone forward with it.
First-year Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, though, fulfilled a campaign pledge by asking federal officials for permission to collect tolls from vehicles coming into Virginia from North Carolina along I-95, the interstate that runs from Maine to Florida. He says Virginia could bring in between $30 million and $60 million per year, allowing it to issue $1 billion of bonds to improve the highway. Recently, McDonnell said that he had talked to North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue about the proposal, and that her state is considering tolls along the Virginia border, too.
Rhode Island legislators are exploring a different tactic: Charging drivers for the number of miles they log rather than the amount of gasoline they buy. Last week, the Rhode Island Senate called for a study of the so-called “vehicle miles traveled tax,” a concept that the state of Oregon also has explored.
Other states have been pondering a variety of ways to raise more money for transportation. In Georgia, residents in each of 12 regions will vote in two years on a one-cent sales tax hike for transportation. West Virginia legislators, meanwhile, are asking counties to take on a greater role in building roads, a task left largely to state government there since the Great Depression.
Kansas, recently cited for having the best roads in the country, approved an $8.2 billion transportation plan for the next decade, paid for with new bonding, a hike in vehicle fees and a share of a new state sales tax that takes effect in July. This year’s transportation bill in Vermont is the largest in state history, with more than one-sixth of the $595 million package going toward bridge repair. The package uses federal stimulus money and revenues from a gas tax hike approved last year.
Stuck in federal limbo
Casting a pall over almost all transportation decisions in the states is uncertainty from Congress. Since the passage of the stimulus law last year, major transportation legislation has stalled in both chambers, mainly because there’s no agreement on how to pay for it.
The most immediate concern for states is the status of the Highway Trust Fund, the pot of money that states use to carry out the federal government’s road and mass-transit programs. States must put up a share of their own money to get the matching federal dollars.
Three times in the past two years, Congress has had to deposit more money into the trust fund account to keep it solvent. Simply put, the federal gas taxes and other revenue sources that go into the fund are not keeping up with expenses. Every time the trust fund comes close to going dry, state transportation agencies must deal with the prospect of not getting federal help for projects they have already started — no small worry since the federal government often pays 80 percent of the bills. This spring, Missouri delayed starting new projects for two months while a jobs creation bill, which included more money for the trust fund, languished in Washington.
Bergquist, South Dakota’s transportation chief, says the short-term fixes make planning difficult. It’s hard to tell local residents when a major project will be done without knowing when federal funding will arrive, he says. “And when you ultimately get your funding, it comes at the last minute, like it did last year. You haven’t had time to plan. You can’t necessarily use those funds on your highest priority because you’re reacting.”
Funding also is a major hurdle for renewing the federal government’s massive multi-year surface transportation plan, which expired last September. Congress agreed to keep the old plan going temporarily while lawmakers try to strike a deal on a replacement. Initial versions of that next bill suggest Congress may link funding to how well projects meet certain goals. The specifics about what those goals are and how they’re measured could significantly change the types of projects that the federal government approves. Highway advocates worry, for example, that a heavy emphasis on reducing greenhouse gases could stymie highway projects in favor of passenger rail.
Another wild card from Capitol Hill is the cap-and-trade bill to limit carbon dioxide emissions. A recently unveiled plan would tax petroleum products. But many transportation-related industries and advocates argue that not enough of the money would go toward transportation projects. They also worry that once a new tax is placed on oil-related products, it would be harder for Congress to raise the federal gas tax to replenish the Highway Trust Fund.
Making do
When Missouri transportation officials unveiled their five-year plan this spring, it was a marked departure from recent years. Money from road-construction bonds approved five years ago finally ran out, and additional help from the federal stimulus package will expire soon. The state’s average budget for transportation projects will drop from $1.25 billion over the past five years to just $500 million in the next five. So Missouri’s plan included no new construction projects.
The Missouri Department of Transportation is trying to reduce costs and cut its payroll, says Jorma Duran, an agency spokesperson. The cutbacks mean the agency won’t be able to make major safety improvements to roads, or build more of them to relieve traffic congestion.
The situation in Missouri is typical. In fact, the federal stimulus package helped push many states toward focusing on simple maintenance. The influx of cash was designed to be spent quickly, and maintenance projects can be completed more quickly than major upgrades or brand-new construction. “The stimulus helped, but it was a drop in the bucket,” says Sean Slone, a transportation analyst at the Council of State Governments.
Jay Hansen, of the National Asphalt Pavement Association, says state transportation departments have become very conservative in their planning because of uncertainty over congressional action and the end of the recession. Orders for asphalt have declined by 35 percent since the recession began, declining to levels not seen since the late 1980s. Orders have started to level out, but after the bulk of stimulus money is spent this summer, he says, “your guess is as good as mine.”
In South Dakota, the shortage of funds means the Department of Transportation remains in “preservation mode,” Bergquist says. He says the public won’t notice anything immediate or drastic, but services will be scaled back. More ditches along highways will go unmowed and new construction will be put off.
But in the northeast corner of the state, which has been ravaged by floods for the past two years, the lack of funding could pose an even bigger problem for local governments. Hundreds of miles of roads once topped with asphalt are now “muck,” Bergquist says, and the counties don’t have money to rebuild them. The counties are patching the roads, sometimes with gravel, to make sure emergency crews can get through, but it will be years before the roads can be rebuilt.
Bergquist stresses that the pressures his department faces are similar to those confronted in state transportation agencies around the country. “We are trying to juggle a lot of balls that we’re responsible for and keep them all in the air,” he says. “At some point, one or more of those balls is going to have to drop. But we’re not to that point yet.”
— Contact Daniel C. Vock at dvock@stateline.org
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 02, 2010
|
|
Submitted 06.02.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
The House Appropriations Committee debated and voted on the budget today. Next stop, the floor of the House tomorrow morning at 10 AM for debate and first vote. They will vote a second time after midnight. (Each bill needs two floor votes and the budget bill requires those votes to be on two separate days, which is why they will vote again after midnight.)
The Mobility Fund was included in the House budget with enough money to do the I 85 widening at the Yadkin River Bridge. While the leadership was not amenable to including the expansion of Powell Bill funds nor the dedicated money for Interstate maintenance, we were able to add the stakeholder process back in.
If the Mobility Fund remains in the budget after the full House votes tomorrow it will be eligible for debate in the conference committee where the House and Senate resolve their differences.
You can see the amendments to SB897 (the House version of the budget not reflecting amendments made in Appropriations today) by clicking here.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Economy, Revenue
Mayor Knight forwarded me this
presentation by Dr. Harry Davis, an economist at ASU, entitled National and State Economies.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
The House has included a Mobility Fund in their budget at this time. The budget bill (both the money report and the bill) is posted on line at http://www.ncleg.net/sessions/2009/budget/2010/S897-CSLRxf-40.pdf and http://www.ncleg.net/sessions/2009/budget/2010/budgetreport06-01-10.pdf. You can search on the term “Mobility” to find the language.
The House has written a new version of the Fund and it is substantially different from the Governor’s version.
1. The Governor’s proposal included new additional Powell Bill funds for cities; the House version does not.
2. The Governor’s proposal included new dedicated funds for Interstate maintenance; the House version does not.
3. The Governor’s proposal included a stakeholder process for designing the criteria for project selection; the House version does not.
4. The Governor’s proposal (after funding the Yakin River Bridge) included funds for future projects(DMV fee increases and a phase out of the transfers from the Highway Fund and Highway Trust Fund); the House version does not.
What does this mean and where are we?
The good news is that the House is creating a Mobility Fund. The bad news- its sole funded purpose at this time is the Yadkin River Bridge. If all goes as scheduled, the House Finance Committee will be voting on the bill at 4pm today, the House Appropriations Committee will be voting on the bill at 9 am tomorrow, and then to the House floor for votes later this week.
Please keep talking to your legislators about the importance of the Fund and the need to include it in the Budget bill. Ask them to include the Governor’s stakeholder process in the bill so your community can have a voice in the prioritization process.
There were news articles and editorials over the weekend in support of the fund you can read on the Metro Mayors Daily Clips page.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Equity Formula, Perdue, Transportation
Mobility, yes (News and Observer)
One of the biggest problems in North Carolina’s highway system is on the road to a solution. But there’s another big problem right on its doorstep, and an even larger one lurking outside.
The first problem is the grossly inadequate Yadkin River bridge on Interstate 85 in Davidson and Rowan counties. The bridge’s old, narrow roadways have exasperated engineers and Greensboro-to-Charlotte motorists for years. This fall, work gets under way on a $136 million replacement, plus related upgrades in the immediate area.
The other big problem is a stretch of interstate north of the bridge. It needs widening from four lanes to eight. That $100 million-plus project isn’t optional, because it makes zero sense to eliminate the bridge bottleneck but neglect to widen the road. However, as the DOT candidly states, “The department currently does not have the money available to fund phase two.”
That’s largely because of that third problem. North Carolina’s longstanding formula for spreading highway funds around the state, balancing east and west, rural and urban, etc., simply doesn’t allow for a painful but necessary concentration on megaprojects such as the Yadkin bridge – even though it’s key to the statewide road system and even to north-south travel from Virginia to Atlanta.
When it comes to really big projects, there simply has to be a way to git ‘er done.
Here, Gov. Beverly Perdue deserves credit. She saw a problem and tried to fix it.
First, her administration made a serious bid for federal stimulus funds intended for big projects. But the feds split that pie into too many pieces to help the Yadkin bridge much. Then she took a new tack, working out a funding combination that, while it regrettably takes on debt, got the new bridge going.
Second, in her budget for next year Perdue asked the General Assembly to create a Mobility Fund, essentially a pot of money focused on high-priority, hard-to-fund projects such as its first intended target, the lane widening north of the bridge.
However the state Senate, in its version of the budget, did not go along for the Mobility ride. Senators balked at raising money from motorists and taxpayers – the fund would involve some fee hikes – and Perdue stepped on the toes of the N.C. Automobile Dealers Association too, rarely the route to legislative success.
Now the House is working on its budget, and Perdue hasn’t given up. She’s enlisted mayors on behalf of the special fund. Presumably she’s open to compromise on how to fill up the money pot, trying to make the Mobility Fund palatable to both houses. But everyone involved must realize that worthwhile projects are worth raising money for – cutting unspecified “waste” goes only so far.
Here’s hoping Perdue succeeds. Sure, the long-term solution is a more forward-looking distribution of all the highway money (including transit projects), but until that blessed day, a special-duty fund meets a real need in a realistic way.
Published Sun, May 30, 2010 02:00 AM
Modified Sun, May 30, 2010 06:00 AM
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Mobility fund (Winston Salem Journal Editorial)
North Carolinians must pay higher taxes and transportation-related fees if they want highways and mass-transit systems that work effectively in the future.
Put aside all of the generalities about “tax-and-spend,” “fraud and waste,” and “no new taxes,” and look at reality: North Carolina’s roads are in bad shape and getting worse. It’s hard to imagine that we once called ourselves “The Good Roads State.”
Transportation planners foresee a $65-billion difference between what the state will collect in transportation-related revenues over the next several decades and the projected cost of the state’s transportation needs.
Some taxpayers scream at the first mention of a tax increase. They say the DOT has enough money already, if it will just use it efficiently.
Well, expecting the DOT, or any huge organization, public or private, to operate at 100-percent efficiency is simply quixotic. Just look at British Petroleum. Waiting for 100-percent performance means we’ll all be stuck in traffic, bouncing our way to and from work on pothole-pitted streets, for years to come.
Gov. Bev Perdue has a new idea. She wants to create a new N.C. Mobility Fund. It would include new money, raised from higher fees and taxes. It would cost more to register our cars every year and we’d pay a higher tax when we buy a new car. In all, she figures to raise $300 million a year to meet urgent road needs and other transportation projects, The Associated Press reports.
We don’t argue with the need for more funds. Considering the high cost of land, road-building material and maintenance projects, it’s just unreasonable to think that the state can meet its needs without new money.
Our concern with the Perdue plan lies elsewhere, with the process of deciding how this fund operates. Perdue wasn’t absolutely clear regarding who would choose the most deserving projects. She says the Yadkin River Bridge over I-85 is the first priority, and we don’t argue with that. But what is next, and who decides?
Perdue must develop a plan that shows exactly how those decisions would be made on truly need-based criteria and out in the public. We don’t need a repeat of the last administration, which sent a disproportionate share of funds to the DOT secretary’s home county.
Some taxpayers would prefer to deny the need for extra money. They are, in effect, voting for congestion and bumpy roads. The bottom line, however, is that we’ll get what we pay for, and right now we’re falling way behind on our transportation infrastructure.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: TIGER, TIGER II
You wanted another round of TIGER grants, we’ve got another round of TIGER grants (US DOT)
We’re calling it “Tiger II,” and the application period is open!
If you’ve been following DOT news, you know that I’m talking about the next round of our wildly successful Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery discretionary grant program. Funds in this program are available on a competitive basis to support capital investment in surface transportation projects. The projects must have a significant impact on the nation, a region, or a metropolitan area–and they must create jobs.
You know, we received over 1,400 applications from all 50 states, territories, and the District of Columbia for the first round of TIGER. These applicants sought nearly $60 billion in funds, more than 40 times the $1.5 billion available.
That shows we were onto something, and we know from that experience that there’s a real backlog of worthwhile transportation projects in need of funding.
And Congress recognized that, too. That’s why, in December 2009, they authorized another $600 million for TIGER II.
Application information is available on the Federal Register. You can also view a DOT webinar on Competing for a Discretionary Grant.
But the basic criteria are simple: America needs the kinds of projects that help spur lasting economic growth, reduce gridlock, provide safe, affordable and environmentally sustainable transportation choices and create jobs.
Renewed infrastructure, economic activity, sustainability–it’s no wonder I’m looking forward to those applications.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Equity Formula, Mobility Fund, Transportation
Editorial: Fix the current highway fund (Greensboro News and Record)
Gov. Bev Perdue’s administration keeps working on new ideas to meet state transportation needs.
Some are better than others.
The latest proposal calls for creating a Mobility Fund, a pool of money to pay for big maintenance projects — such as replacing the Yadkin River bridges on I-85 — and even city road work. It would tap some of the revenue currently diverted from the state’s Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund and raise some taxes, including the motor vehicle registration fee.
This is a poor economic environment for raising taxes, although even fiscal conservatives must acknowledge the long-term problem with relying so heavily on the motor-fuels tax for transportation needs. People keep driving more fuel-efficient vehicles and paying less tax, while highway construction and maintenance costs are not decreasing.
The bigger question, though, is why create a Mobility Fund when the state already has a Highway Trust Fund? The easy answer is that the Highway Trust Fund isn’t adequately meeting the state’s transportation needs, but that should be addressed by correcting its problems, not coming up with a new entity that supposedly would exist within the Highway Trust Fund but operate separately.
The state can’t deal with its top maintenance priority, the Yadkin River bridges, because of the politically motivated Equity Formula that governs the spending of Highway Trust Fund dollars. Money has to be doled out evenly across the state, no matter where it’s needed most. That doesn’t allow for an allocation of $300 million in one location, even on a major artery like I-85. Perdue has had to think creatively to get started on the Yadkin River project, borrowing against future federal appropriations for the first phase.
It would be better to use the Highway Trust Fund as the state’s major transportation funding mechanism but give the Board of Transportation authority to target funds to the most urgent projects, regardless of location. The legislature should put politics aside to make that happen — an idea travelers could support.
Thursday, May 27, 2010 (Updated 3:00 am)
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Equity Formula, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Editorial: Mobility Fund still has life (Salisbury Post)
Mayors from around the state flanked Gov. Beverly Perdue last week as she urged state House members to help create the Mobility Fund to pay for major road projects, starting with the I-85 bridge over the Yadkin Bridge.
Missing were the mayors of Salisbury and Lexington, the cities closest to the bridge. But don’t read that as a non-endorsement. Salisbury Mayor Susan Kluttz and Lexington Mayor John T. Walser say they’re all for a new fund to tackle highway projects like the Yadkin River bridge that have statewide significance. How to raise the money for the fund is another matter — one they’re happy to leave to the General Assembly to figure out. Neither has taken a stand on the increased vehicle fees the governor proposed for the fund.
They may not need to. The governor and the mayors kept working on House members. Late in the week, a posting on the N.C. Metro Mayors Association website said “word is spreading” that the House budget will include Mobility Fund (the Senate’s did not), but without the DMV fee increases. That improves the fund’s chances of survival. But where will the money come from?
Because of that persistent question, legislators have been cool to the Mobility Fund, but it’s not dead yet. Some have said the Mobility Fund would be unnecessary if the Department of Transportation would stop tapping the road-building Highway Trust Fund to pump money into the General Fund for other purposes. Until a few years ago, the transfer was $172 million a year.
That is indeed part of Perdue’s solution. The legislature voted in 2007 to phase out the transfer by 2013. Perdue wants $22 million of the “phase-out” to go to the Mobility Fund in the coming year. That’s a start, but still far short of the more than $90 million Perdue wanted the fund to start with.
The other weakness in North Carolina transportation funding is the equity formula used to divvy up highway money. Yes, that process needs to change, but projects like the Yadkin River bridge go beyond the regional scope of the equity formula. The bridge is not a local project; it affects a major East Coast traffic corridor — much as Interstate 95 does. Virginia wants to fund I-95 improvements with a toll rather than its existing funding mechanisms. Perdue appears to be turning over every possible funding rock in search of ways to avoid putting a toll on the I-85 bridge.
Keep looking, governor. The mayors and the people they represent are behind your Mobility Fund. They don’t know how on earth you’ll put it together, but they are behind you.
|
|
Submitted 06.01.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Ferry
Ferry tolls likely to rise (News and Observer)
Tolls paid by ferry riders cover less than 6 percent of operating costs for the State Ferry Division, and House budget writers want that figure to rise to 100 percent.
“We agree that the ferries are a crucial part of the state’s transportation system,” said Rep. Grier Martin of Raleigh, co-chairman of the House Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee. “But in an era of declining revenues, we need to take a look at this – given what we know about their operating costs.”
Last week Martin’s subcommittee endorsed a Senate proposal to increase the Ferry Division’s operating budget by $11.3 million, to $43.5 million. Jim Westmoreland, a Department of Transportation deputy secretary, said the money was needed to meet increased costs and maintain service levels.
Along with its budget recommendations, the subcommittee proposed a measure that would have the DOT develop a fee schedule for ferry routes that would cover operating costs.
Exceptions would be made for students and teachers who ride the ferry to school, and consideration would be given to daily ferry commuters.
If approved by the General Assembly, the measure would not change toll rates in the coming year.
But Martin said it would prompt a much-needed study of how the state can cover rising operating costs and meet the looming expense of replacing several aging vessels in its 21-ferry fleet.
Riders now pay tolls only on ferries from Ocracoke to Cedar Island and to Swan Quarter ($15 per car), and between Fort Fisher and Southport ($5).
North Carolina’s other four routes are toll-free – including the state’s busiest, from Hatteras to Ocracoke, with more than 900,000 riders and 300,000 cars each year.
“If there is an interest in tolling our routes at 100 percent cost recovery, that would be a very high mark,” Westmoreland said. “I don’t know of any system that does that.”
“It’s a regional issue,” said Rep. Nelson Cole of Reidsville, the subcommittee’s other co-chairman. “It’s hard to convince people in the mountains that we should be supporting the ferries to that extent, when the toll fees are the most reasonable anywhere.”
A 2009 N.C. State University study commissioned by the DOT found several states charging much higher tolls for comparable ferry services.
Although the Swan Quarter and Cedar Island ferries to Ocracoke charge less than 70 cents a mile for cars, NCSU found tolls of $1.65 to $3.64 a mile for comparable ferries in Arkansas, New York and Massachusetts.
New York, Washington, Delaware and Maine charge $4.13 to $13.60 a mile for service comparable to North Carolina’s three river ferries and the Hatteras ferry, which are all toll-free, the study said.
The proposed $43.5 million budget would be supported with an expected $2.3 million in toll collections. The rest would come from the DOT’s Highway Fund, which is supported by fees and fuel taxes.
The Martin-Cole subcommittee endorsed a transportation budget for inclusion in a House spending plan to be released this week. Along with ferry funding, the House proposal would:
Earmark $39 million to establish Gov. Bev Perdue’s proposed N.C. Mobility Fund to help build urgent road and transportation projects.
Cut Global TransPark Authority funding by 50 percent ($640,000). Cole said the state-owned industrial park in Kinston missed a recent filing deadline for a report on its plan to repay a $37.8 million debt to the state.
Preserve $5.6 million in highway maintenance money cut in the Senate budget.
Save $3.2 million by eliminating 51 vacant DOT jobs.
Published Sun, May 30, 2010 04:49 AM
Modified Sat, May 29, 2010 11:56 PM
bruce.siceloff@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4527
|
|
Submitted 05.26.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Update on NC Mobility Fund 5.26.10
The Governor has been working hard on the Mobility Fund. She kicked off the week Monday by hosting a press conference with mayors to encourage the House to include the Fund in their budget. She had a sit down with key House members yesterday and they were able to reach agreement. Word is spreading that the Mobility Fund will be included in the House budget. It will receive $22 million of the funds currently transferred from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund, GAP funds the NCDOT will not spend this year, and allow NC DOT to start their prioritization process. There will not be any of the proposed DMV fee increases. The first project will be the Yadkin River Bridge. I am hearing there will not be any additional funds or projects until NC DOT has finished their prioritization process and receives the blessing of the General Assembly.
Thank you for your resolutions in support of the Fund, your comments to the House budget website, and your calls to delegation members. Keep them coming!!! As soon as there is ink on a page to create the Fund I will alert you. In the meantime, please call your House delegation and thank them for recognizing the importance of creating the Mobility Fund this year. We want to keep talking to the members about the importance of the Fund to ensure it does not hit any snags between now and the final vote in the House.
After the House vote next week we are only half way there. After the House passes their version of the budget the work of the conference committee begins. The conference committee is charged with ironing out differences between the House and Senate budgets. Since the Senate did not include the Fund in their version of the budget we will have to encourage the Senate to agree with the House on this provision.
Stay tuned for updates.
|
|
Submitted 05.26.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Mayors back governor’s plan for new roads fund (WFAE)
Governor Perdue and members of the NC Metropolitan Mayors Coalition held a rally today in support of a new plan to deal with road problems. The money would come from drivers paying more at the DMV, and that has state lawmakers stepping on the brakes.
Governor Perdue’s proposal is a partial solution to a complaint metropolitan mayors have had for a long time: They say the formula the state uses to dole out transportation money forces cities with major freeways to spend most of their allotment taking care of those roads, rather than building new ones or dealing with smaller projects.
The governor’s new “Mobility Fund” would pay for maintaining and improving major state roads on a regional level and wouldn’t cut into the money cities get through the regular transportation formula.
Concord Mayor Scott Padgett points to repaving that was done recently on sections of I-85 in Cabarrus County.
“If that money had come out of this fund than it would not count against us on the equity formula,” says Padgett.
Governor Perdue estimates the Mobility Fund would raise $95 million next year – mostly by adding $7 to the cost of registering a car at the DMV. The first project on the list to be funded would be the Yadkin River Bridge, which failed to qualify for federal stimulus dollars. After that, the Mobility Fund would be open to any road, rail, port, transit or air project of statewide or regional significance.
But state lawmakers have so far been reluctant to embrace the proposal.
The Senate did not include the Mobility Fund in its draft budget. Metropolitan mayors and Governor Perdue hope the House will change that when it completes the budget.
Representative Bill Current of Gastonia says the idea of raising fees is a problem.
“At this particular time I really question raising taxes on anything,” says Current. “But it may be a great idea, I just don’t know whether the timing is right to be considering it.”
Representative Current is on the subcommittee that would have to approve the Mobility Fund for the House budget. He says any major changes to transportation funding would be a challenge this year, since it’s a short session for the General Assembly.
Julie Rose
Monday May 24, 2010
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Election
Hunter Bacot’s presentation on the
political landscape in North Carolina going into the fall 2010 election season. Presented at the NC Chamber’s Governmental Affairs Conference.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Cooper, DNA
Cooper lends support to collecting DNA at arrest (News and Observer)
Attorney General Roy Cooper says collecting DNA from suspects when they are arrested for felonies would save lives and prevent sexual assaults from ever happening.
“It’s something we must do to protect the public,” Cooper told a House committee Tuesday morning.
The committee is considering a bill that would require law enforcement officers to take DNA from cheek swabs from people arrested for violent crimes as well as felonies and some misdemeanors. Identifying markers from the DNA would be added to a database and kept unless and until the suspect is acquitted or cleared of the charge.
Currently, DNA is collected from anyone convicted of a felony offense or certain assault-related crimes. Appeals courts have upheld similar laws in other states.
Opponents say collecting DNA at arrest amounts to an unconstitutional search of someone who is presumed innocent.
Cooper cited the case of Robert Pratt, who was accused of kidnapping and trying to rape a Cary real estate agent in 1998. After that arrest, authorities were able to connect him to a 1995 case in which three hikers, two men and one woman, were held at gunpoint in Duke Forest. The woman was raped. Cooper said that Pratt had been arrested in 1997 for assault. Had his DNA been taken then, authorities could have connected him to the Duke Forest case sooner, and the 1998 kidnapping might never have occurred.
“DNA collection on arrest will save lives,” said state Rep. Wil Neumann, a Gaston County Republican and one of the bill’s primary sponsors.
Neumann said DNA is the fingerprint of the 21st century. He noted that the bill has broad support from law enforcement authorities and groups.
It has strong opposition from the American Civil Liberties Union.
“It’s really an end-run around constitutional protections,” said Sarah Preston, a lobbyist for the ACLU of North Carolina.
People who are charged with a crime are presumed innocent and taking a biological sample without a warrant is an illegal search, she said.
DNA includes much more information about a person than identity. All manner of family information, predispositions, disease vulnerability and other characteristics are in contained in a sample. And while authorities say that they only plan to use basic identifying information, there’s no guarantee that government won’t decide later to use more of the information it has been collecting.
The bill is scheduled for another committee hearing later this week.
Read more: http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/cooper_lends_support_to_collecting_dna_at_arrest#ixzz0oxsN4LRZ
Submitted by bniolet on 2010-05-25 13:42
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
While the Governor and mayors held a press conference in support of the
NC Mobility Fund just hours before, the House leadership just announced they do not plan include the Fund in their budget.
We are asking that you register your support for the NC Mobility Fund by sending your comments to the NC House via the website they have created to hear from you. Click here to complete the form and note that you support the House including the NC Mobility Fund in their budget.
We need to encourage as many people as possible to register their support of the Fund through the House’s website. Please ask all your council members, staff, family, neighbors, and friends to go to the website and ask the House to include the Mobility Fund in the budget.
Here are the talking points:
Need: North Carolina needs additional transportation resources that focus on mobility projects of statewide significance.
Solution: The Mobility Fund needs to be created this year, even if only with limited funding. Let’s get the Fund started.
Project Selection: The first project should be the Yadkin River Bridge. While the bridge is being built NCDOT can lead a prioritization process much like they have done over the last year for highway projects. We have confidence in NCDOT to partner with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure a data driven process that will target the Mobility Fund resources at projects of statewide significance that affect mobility.
Risk: Don’t just fix the Yadkin River Bridge without creating the Mobility Fund. Create the Fund and designate the Bridge as the first project.
The website is only accepting comments through tomorrow, so register your thoughts quickly.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Perdue, Transportation
Mobility Fund DOA in House? (Progressive Pulse)
Posted at 6:06 PM by Stephen Jackson
Representative Nelson Cole, House Transportation Appropriations Sub-committee Co-chair said in a meeting of that sub-committee today that, ‘Now is not the time to burden our citizens with more taxes.” He intonated that this was a feeling shared by a senior Appropriations chair.
This would appear to strongly suggest that the Governor’s Mobility Fund, one that relies heavily on DMV fee increases (especially a registration fee increase of 25%) and the scrapping of the sales tax net-of-trade exemption for used vehicles, is facing a steep uphill battle to gain traction in the House.
The rebuff at the 4pm meeting followed the Governor’s presser at 2.30 where a line of mayors and DOT Board members stood quietly as Perdue implored the House to take up her Mobility Fund proposal in the name of jobs and economic development.
Perdue admitted that the Fund was a response to the federal government not doing something about the I-85 bridge over the Yadkin River, but stressed that it was also a Fund that could address rural project needs and critical projects.
The notion that the Fund would focus on strategic projects appeared to be at odds with the proposal to direct 6.5% of the Fund to municipalities for use under Powell bill rules. Those rules allow municipalities to spend the dollars on projects as minor as sidewalks. In addition, $30 million would be used for interstate maintenance.
In questions from the press, Secretary Conti acknowledged that the capacity of existing funds that could pay for the Yadkin River Bridge project’s various phases were ‘encumbered by various formulas’. He added that the distribution of dollars around the state was an issue that required a longer conversation. Conti was referring to the equity formula of the Highway Trust Fund.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
Doubt greets Perdue’s ‘mobility fund’ (News and Observer)
Gov. Bev Perdue is pushing legislators to include a new transportation fund in the state budget, but they’re reluctant to go along.
The Senate did not include the new spending in its budget, and its future in the House is uncertain.
Perdue wants to use the fund to replace the antique and narrow Yadkin River Bridge and to pay for other big state transportation projects. On Monday, she invited mayors from around the state to join her at a news conference to lobby for the fund, saying a healthy transportation network is important to economic development.
Perdue proposes to create the so-called N.C. Mobility Fund mostly from increases in car registration fees. She said lawmakers should get over their reluctance to raise fees in an election year.
Businesses don’t base their decisions on where to locate or grow based on DMV fees, Perdue said, but “they will walk away if the infrastructure doesn’t meet their needs.”
Legislators aren’t the only ones objecting. The N.C. Automobile Dealers Association opposes the plan. Under Perdue’s proposal, car buyers would no longer be able to deduct the value of their trade-ins when determining the cost of new cars for tax purposes. The auto dealers association said a buyer trading in a car valued at $10,000 would have to pay an additional $300 in taxes.
After Perdue’s news conference, Rep. Nelson Cole, a Reidsville Democrat, said he doesn’t want the fund.
“I don’t think now is a good time to be adding a tax burden to our citizens,” said Cole, a budget writer in the House.
Cole said the issue was likely to get debated. “It’s just the beginning of the dance,” he said.
The state needs new sources of transportation money, Perdue said, because the Highway Trust Fund cannot meet demands for improvements.
The state Department of Transportation vowed to find money to start work this year on a new Interstate 85 bridge across the Yadkin River near Salisbury after the federal government rejected the state’s $300 million request for stimulus money to replace it.
But the DOT needs about $150 million more to widen six miles of I-85 near the bridge.
The bridge, judged “structurally deficient” by federal inspectors, can give drivers a sense of unease with its narrow lanes, low guard rail, sweeping curve preceding the eastern end and murky brown water below.
Rep. Becky Carney, a Charlotte Democrat and co-chairwoman of the House Transportation Committee, keeps her distance from tractor-trailers so she’s not on the bridge at the same time.
“I let them get across,” she said, “and then I gun it.”
Staff writer Mark Johnson contributed to this report.
Published Tue, May 25, 2010 05:56 AM
Modified Tue, May 25, 2010 01:09 AM
lynn.bonner@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4821
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Priorities Compete for Place in Budget (Greensboro News and Record) (exerpt)
Meanwhile, Gov. Bev Perdue wasn’t going to let her idea to create a new “Mobility Fund” for high-need, high-cost road projects die. From the story:
As proposed, the fund would take in up to $300 million per year by 2013 through a combination of fees on drivers and ending a sales-tax break on new car sales.
But at least some House members are skeptical they would agree to raise fees as residents struggle with an economy that has sent unemployment over 11 percent.
“I don’t think this is the time to enhance revenue,” said Rep. Nelson Cole, a Reidsville Democrat who plays a key role on transportation issues. “There’s no support on (either) side of the aisle to make this happen.”
And as House leaders held a public hearing on the budget Monday, dozens of speakers from across the state pleaded the case for priorities such as schools for deaf children and health care programs for the poor — all of them competitors for scarce tax money.
But Rep. Hugh Holliman, a Lexington Democrat and the House majority leader, said Cole may have overstated the objections. He said the mobility fund was still being discussed.
And Perdue said shying away from fee increases was a “political” calculation, rather than one taking into account the needs of businesses.
“I don’t know of any business, both in North Carolina now and outside North Carolina, who will ever walk away from laying down jobs in this state because of what the cost of a DOT fee is or what the cost of a registration fee is,” Perdue said when asked about objections to the fees. Those businesses, she said, would leave if they couldn’t move goods and workers about the state.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Perdue says new N.C. highway projects fund needed (Associated Press)
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Mayors joined Gov. Beverly Perdue on Monday to urge the Legislature to create this year a dedicated fund to build urgent road and other transportation projects they say are needed to keep the state’s economic engines roaring in the decades ahead.
Perdue wants the General Assembly to create the North Carolina Mobility Fund, which the governor said would generate up to $300 million annually by 2013 through higher driver’s license fees, the end of a trade-in sales tax break on new car sales and shifting around other pots of money.
The governor said the Department of Transportation would use the fund to pay for efforts to ease congestion with projects of statewide significance. The current road-funding formula punishes regions that want to spend money on large projects, making them hard to accomplish.
The fund likely would first be used to widen several miles of Interstate 85 close to the Yadkin River Bridge in Davidson and Rowan counties — a key shipping corridor between Atlanta and points north. Work is about ready to start to replace the aging bridge by issuing bonds.
“North Carolina values the safety of our businesses and the people who call North Carolina home and travel through North Carolina,” Perdue told reporters at a news conference. “It’s our obligation to make our traveling public safe.”
A portion of Mobility Fund money also would go to interstate maintenance, city transportation projects and improving the state’s ports to attract industries that rely on shipping.
“The Mobility Fund is all about job creation,” Morehead City Mayor Jerry Jones said. “We need to find new revenue.”
Perdue inserted the fund in her budget proposal last month, but Senate Democrats declined to put the measure in their $19 billion spending plan last week. Senators didn’t have enough time to consider the idea in the first week of the session but they’re “open to new ways to fund transportation and are studying this issue,” said Schorr Johnson, spokesman for Senate leader Marc Basnight, D-Dare.
The House is now considering its own version of the budget. While some House members back the idea, Sen. Nelson Cole, D-Rockingham, co-chairman of the House budget transportation subcommittee, isn’t sold on it when the state unemployment rate is more than 10 percent.
“I don’t think this is the time to be enhancing revenue,” said Cole, adding that people are “looking for a paycheck, not a way to pay us in taxes.”
The North Carolina Automobile Dealers Association also said it was concerned about what it called a “double taxation” strategy to build up the fund starting in 2012 by eliminating a provision that allows consumers to reduce their sales tax bill on car purchases if they trade in an old car. For example, trading in a car valued at $10,000 reduce the sales tax on the new car by $300. Cole is a retired automobile dealer.
Perdue’s proposal would increase some fees in the coming year, including raising annual state vehicle registrations from $28 to $35 for cars and light trucks.
Perdue said it would be shortsighted of the Legislature to avoid the issue because of what she called election-year worries over fees or taxes.
“I don’t know of any business, both in North Carolina now and outside North Carolina, who will ever walk away from laying down jobs in this state because of what the cost of a DOT fee is or what the cost of a registration fee is,” Perdue said. “They will walk away if the infrastructure doesn’t meet their needs to do business.”
Monday, May 24, 2010 (Updated 7:17 pm)
By Gary D. Robertson
Associated Press
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
The Governor thanked the mayors for coming to the press conference.
Listen here.
Then Q&A from the press conference. Listen here.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
NC governor, mayors lobby for transportation fund (The Associated Press )
Gov. Beverly Perdue and North Carolina mayors aren’t giving up on her effort to set aside extra money to build critical transportation projects that have been slowed down over the years.
Perdue and mayors from Asheville to Newport scheduled a Monday news conference off Interstate 40 in Wake County to talk up the Mobility Fund she inserted in her budget proposal last month.
The governor said the fund would build urgent projects like the Yadkin River Bridge replacement on Interstate 85 and ultimately grow to $300 million. Revenues would come from higher transportation fees like a 25 percent increase in the cost of state vehicle registrations.
The Senate didn’t put the program in its budget approved last week but is still interested in the idea.
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Monday morning memo: House budget, transportation funding, etc… (Greensboro News and Record)
As the week gets going, here’s what’s on tap in Raleigh this Monday
Gov. Bev Perdue apparently noticed that the Senate didn’t include her mobility fund (and an associated increase car registration fees) in the chamber’s version of the budget. She’ll be standing on the side of I-40 this afternoon with several mayors to press for the fund. Initially a $22 million investment, the money would go toward high priority projects such as the I-85 bridge over the Yadkin River in Davidson County. (Background from the N+O’s Bruce Siceloff.)
Posted on Mon, May. 24, 2010
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Mayors push for ‘mobility fund’ (Durham Herald Sun)
DURHAM — A group chaired by Mayor Bill Bell has joined Gov. Beverly Perdue and the N.C. Department of Transportation in pushing for the creation of a new “mobility fund” local officials could draw on to pay for major road and transit projects.
But the idea has so far generated little enthusiasm among legislators, including key members of Durham’s General Assembly delegation.
N.C. Senate budget writers ignored the governor’s request for $94.6 million in seed money for the fund. Members of the N.C. House also appear reluctant to get behind the idea.
“Members are concerned across the board about fees, and the mobility fund is primarily funded by new fees on vehicle registration,” said state Rep. Paul Luebke, senior chairman of the House Finance Committee.
Luebke’s committee would have to review any fee proposal, assuming it first got an endorsement from the appropriations subcommittee that handles transportation.
Perdue floated the mobility fund in part as a way of paying for the replacement of the bridge that carries Interstate 85 over the Yadkin River at the border of Rowan and Davidson counties.
The bridge is a key link for the entire I-85 corridor and will cost hundreds of millions to replace. State officials hoped to land a federal economic-stimulus grant to help pay for it, but the Obama administration said no.
Bell and the N.C. Metropolitan Mayors Coalition have gotten behind the proposal because Perdue has proposed opening the fund to other projects once it’s helped pay for the Yadkin bridge.
And the key selling point, for the mayors, is that Perdue has proposed exempting the new fund from the so-called “equity formula” that governs most DOT spending.
The formula requires DOT to spread money around to all parts of the state. Bell and other mayors from the state’s urban areas argue that thanks to the way the formula’s set up, it shortchanges congestion-plagued regions in favor of spending on rural projects.
Its workings can also force regions to commit almost all their money to big projects like the Yadkin bridge, squeezing out projects targeting secondary roads. That’s a problem Durham went through in recent years as the widenings here of Interstates 40 and 85 unfolded.
The mobility fund, by contrast, “brings a new source of funding to transportation, especially when we’re talking about congested areas,” Bell said.
“I know the downside is that it has a motor-vehicle tax to fund it,” Bell added. “But the alternative is we’re just going to get further congested in some of our critical areas in this state. The equity formula doesn’t do enough for what we’re doing.”
Luebke, however, said he’d prefer to see Perdue take the lead in pushing a compromise rewrite of the equity formula. That “really needs to be addressed as a priority,” he said.
State Sen. Floyd McKissick said budget writers in his chamber opted to focus mostly on what they felt needed to be done for education and jobs.
While there’s a chance the Senate might return to the issue later this spring, particularly if the House added the mobility fund to its draft of the budget, “I’m not sure there’s going to be sufficient momentum or funds available to do much in this session,” McKissick said.
The governor, DOT officials and the mayors, however, are not giving up. Perdue is scheduled to hold a news conference Monday afternoon to push the idea.
DOT’s chief operating officer, Jim Trogdon, made a point Thursday of asking members of the state Board of Transportation to lobby legislators. He labeled the effort “critical” and made it clear that the governor and her people see the mobility fund as the way forward.
“We have heard a lot of discussion about ‘next year’ and what we can do if we wait,” Trogdon told state board members. “I have been with N.C. DOT almost 19 years and three years with the N.C. General Assembly. ‘Next year’ will never come. If we do not as a state have the backbone to support what is obviously a win-win scenario for all who use transportation, and start phasing in the funds, this year, to support this effort, then we will never have the backbone to accomplish these clear and obvious objectives.”
By Ray Gronberg
|
|
Submitted 05.25.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Mobility Fund, Perdue, Transportation
Senate shuns Perdue plea for road fund (News and Observer)
Last week, the state Senate quietly ignored Gov. Bev Perdue’s $94.6 million proposal to establish a fund that would help fix the Yadkin River bridge on Interstate 85 now – and tackle other big statewide transportation problems later.
The $19 billion budget approved by the Senate last week had no mention of Perdue’s proposed N.C. Mobility Fund or of the fee increases and revenue transfers she would use to pay for it.
Advocates for urban needs and for transportation improvements said they would lobby the House to reinstate Perdue’s plan when it adopts its version of the 2011 budget.
She had proposed to divert $22 million this year, and more in future years, from the dwindling yearly transfer from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund. And she wanted to produce another $74.6 million a year in new revenue by raising some motor vehicle fees – mostly by increasing the annual car registration fee from $28 to $35.
Perdue hoped over the next several years to build a yearly appropriation of about $300 million for statewide transportation projects. But it was not clear who would decide how the money was to be spent.
After the federal government turned down North Carolina’s $300 million request for stimulus funds to replace the narrow, outdated Yadkin bridge on I-85 at Salisbury, the state Department of Transportation said it would find other money to start work this year on a wider bridge.
But DOT still needed about $150 million to widen six miles of I-85 near the bridge. Perdue said that would be the first use of her proposed Mobility Fund.
Administration officials later said they also would earmark $30 million a year for interstate highway maintenance across the state and $20 million to augment Powell Bill funds that are distributed to towns and cities for local streets and sidewalks.
Julie White, director of the N.C. Metropolitan Mayors Coalition, urged local leaders last week to drum up support for Perdue’s Mobility Fund in the House.
“Show members of the General Assembly that cities have confidence in NCDOT to build a prioritization process that will ensure the funds are spent on mobility projects of statewide significance,” White said Thursday in an e-mail to city officials.
bruce.siceloff@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4527
Published Sun, May 23, 2010 03:57 AM
Modified Sun, May 23, 2010 01:27 AM
|
|
Submitted 05.24.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
While the Governor and mayors held a press conference in support of the NC Mobility Fund just hours before, the House leadership just announced they do not plan include the Fund in their budget.
We are asking that you register your support for the NC Mobility Fund by sending your comments to the NC House via the website they have created to hear from you. Click here to complete the form and note that you support the House including the NC Mobility Fund in their budget.
We need to encourage as many people as possible to register their support of the Fund through the House’s website. Please ask all your council members, staff, family, neighbors, and friends to go to the website and ask the House to include the Mobility Fund in the budget.
Here are the talking points:
Need: North Carolina needs additional transportation resources that focus on mobility projects of statewide significance.
Solution: The Mobility Fund needs to be created this year, even if only with limited funding. Let’s get the Fund started.
Project Selection: The first project should be the Yadkin River Bridge. While the bridge is being built NCDOT can lead a prioritization process much like they have done over the last year for highway projects. We have confidence in NCDOT to partner with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure a data driven process that will target the Mobility Fund resources at projects of statewide significance that affect mobility.
Risk: Don’t just fix the Yadkin River Bridge without creating the Mobility Fund. Create the Fund and designate the Bridge as the first project.
The website is only accepting comments through tomorrow, so register your thoughts quickly.
|
|
Submitted 05.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Reauthorization, SAFETEA-LU, Transportation
Modifications Sought by Oberstar Added to Tax Extenders Bill (AASHTO)
The House of Representatives could vote as early as Tuesday on a package of tax extensions that will include language altering how nearly $1 billion in federal highway funds is distributed among states.
House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee James Oberstar, D-Minnesota, told the media this week that the tax package will contain two highway formula redistributions he has sought. These changes would redistribute $932 million in federal highway funds among states based upon their share of overall federal highway spending rather than earmarks received under two programs as part of the 2005 federal surface transportation authorization law known as “SAFETEA-LU.”
A bill summary released by the Senate Finance Committee notes the highway funding changes are included in the legislation. The bill, HR 4213, would make two changes to the surface transportation extension title of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act, according to the bill summary:
1. Distribute the Projects of National & Regional Significance and National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement program funding among all states based on each state’s share of Fiscal Year 2009 highway apportioned funds rather than to only 29 states and the District of Columbia that had PNRS and National Corridor projects under SAFETEA-LU.
2. Distribute “additional” highway formula funds (which the bill makes available in lieu of additional congressionally designated projects) among all of the highway formula programs rather than among just six formula programs.
These two changes were agreed to by Oberstar; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California; and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, back in March. (see March 26 AASHTO Journal story) Although the House has voted twice to approve the highway formula modifications, the Senate has so far failed to go along.
Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Illinois, is among those senators who have objected to changing the formulas. Illinois is among four states receiving nearly 60% of the funding under these two programs. The other major beneficiaries of the current formulas are California, Louisiana, and Washington state.
Durbin contends the Oberstar/Pelosi/Reid changes would cost the Prairie State $119 million in highway funds.
“Your proposed changes would drastically reduce funding Illinois is expecting under the current formula and it plans to use on important projects across my state,” Durbin wrote in an April 7 letter to Oberstar. “This would be an unfair rescission of funding and inconsistent with the Obama administration and Congress’ [desire] to invest in transportation/infrastructure and put people back to work.”
Build America Bonds Extension Included in Tax Bill
HR 4213 also includes an expansion of Build America Bonds for two years (through 2012). For direct-pay Build America Bonds issued in 2011, the amount of the direct payment would be reduced from 35% to 32% of the coupon interest, according to the Finance Committee’s bill summary. For such bonds issued in 2012, the amount of the direct payment would be reduced to 30% of the coupon interest. The bill would also allow issuers to refinance Build America Bonds to save money should interest rates fall in the future.
This bonds extension is estimated to cost the federal government $4 billion in interest subsidies over 10 years. For more information about Build America Bonds, see April 9 AASHTO Journal story.
Questions regarding this article may be directed to editor@aashtojournal.org.
|
|
Submitted 05.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Infrastructure Bank, Transportation
House Subcommittee Hearing Focuses on Proposed Infrastructure Bank (AASHTO)
A national infrastructure bank would help address the challenges of how to pay for maintaining and improving the nation’s infrastructure and do so at a relatively low cost to the federal government, according to several speakers at a recent House subcommittee hearing.
The May 13 hearing by the House Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee drew the governor of Pennsylvania, the mayor of Los Angeles, and several other officials to testify on the creation of a federally funded financial institution that would channel public and private money toward infrastructure projects.
“Now would be a good time to lay the groundwork for significant infrastructure improvements,” said subcommittee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts. “With bridges crumbling and cities boiling water, we have received the message that America’s infrastructure is desperately in need of support.”
While other subcommittee members were generally supportive of infrastructure funding, several of those at the hearing expressed reservations about provisions to raise revenue for an infrastructure bank or similar financing mechanisms.
Rep. Paul Tiberi, R-Ohio and ranking minority member of the subcommittee, said “additional spending doesn’t come without a cost.” Other subcommittee members questioned the political will at this time to enact tax increases to fund infrastructure improvements.
House Highways & Transit Subcommittee Chairman Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, testified that an infrastructure bank would have only limited impact on the current challenges facing the nation.
“In these tough economic times, we must look at new and innovative means to improve our nation’s deteriorating transportation system and an infrastructure bank is one small part of the solution,” he said.
DeFazio also stressed the creation of an infrastructure bank right now would not make any sense without a comprehensive multiyear reauthorization of the federal surface transportation programs.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut, testified regarding a bill she is sponsoring that would create an infrastructure bank.
“The bank would objectively review projects and provide financing for those of significance with clear economic, environmental, and social benefits,” she explained. DeLauro also underscored that her legislation, HR 2521, “is not a silver bullet, but rather an important way in which we can supplement other federal programs, which simply cannot make up for this infrastructure investment deficit without additional funds.”
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell also voiced strong support for a national infrastructure bank.
“We need a single entity that can leverage dollars from state and local governments or the private sector, can focus on projects of regional and national significance, will remove politics from the process, subject all requests to a benefit/cost analysis, and do all of this in the brightest of sunlight, openness, and transparency,” he said.
Villaraigosa Explains Effort to Accelerate Transit Construction
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa highlighted his own city’s 30/10 Initiative — which entails securing sufficient funds to speed up a 30-year transit plan so that it can be completed in just a decade –as an example of a project that could benefit from a national infrastructure bank. The 30/10 Initiative is being financed by Measure R, a half-cent sales tax approved by Los Angeles voters in 2008.
“As Congress continues its important focus on stimulating the U.S. economy, we believe an infrastructure bank or investment fund could play an important role in helping sponsors of major public transportation investments capitalize, literally and figuratively, on local revenue streams,” Villaraigosa said. “In this way, Congress could encourage state and local governments to invest in the transportation infrastructure that is essential to maintaining the competitiveness and sustainability of the U.S. in the 21st century and enable the federal government to leverage its resources strategically.”
Other witnesses included Samuel Staley, director of urban and land use policy for the nonprofit think tank Reason Foundation. He conceded that the creation of a national infrastructure bank is “an attractive option,” but also emphasized the need to closely monitor such an effort and keep its mission focused and clear.
Robert Puentes, director of the Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Infrastructure Initiative, told the subcommittee “that while a national infrastructure bank is not a panacea, if appropriately designed and with sufficient political autonomy, it could improve both the efficiency and effectiveness of future federal infrastructure projects of national and regional importance.”
After the hearing, Rendell told reporters that Congress must consider the consequences of not raising revenue for infrastructure and allowing it to deteriorate further.
“The longer we wait, the more expensive it gets,” he said.
Statements from Neal and all of the witnesses, as well as archived videos from the hearing, are available at tinyurl.com/May-13-Hearing.
Questions regarding this article may be directed to editor@aashtojournal.org.
|
|
Submitted 05.21.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Georgia, I-85, Tolls, Transportation
I-85 tolling project draws fire (Atlanta Business Chronicle)
The State Transportation Board voted Thursday to delay the planned conversion of an HOV lane on Interstate 85 to a high occupancy toll lane amid criticism of the proposed tolling technology.
Board members pulled the project from the list of projects due to be let next month after being informed that the electronic transponders that will charge solo drivers using the HOT lane during rush hours are incompatible with transponders already in use on Georgia 400.
The I-85 project is being funded with a $110 million federal grant aimed at testing the viability of “congestion pricing,” which uses electronic tolling technology to vary tolls according to the time of day and the number of occupants in a vehicle.
“It’s a demonstration project,” Gerald Ross, deputy commissioner of the Georgia Department of Transportation, told board members Thursday. “It comes with some unknowns. That’s why USDOT (the federal transportation department) provided the grant.”
But critics on the board questioned the state’s decision to accept the grant if it meant moving forward with incompatible tolling technology that will make it difficult to collect the I-85 toll from Georgia 400 commuters who already have transponders in their cars. The toll would apply to a 15-mile stretch of I-85 from Spaghetti Junction to Old Peachtree Road in Gwinnett County.
“You can call it a demonstration project if you want,” said board member David Doss of Rome. “I call it a waste of money.”
Ross agreed to work with the State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA), the agency with direct jurisdiction over the project, to ensure that compatibility is built into the tolling technology after the initial demonstration phase. He said he would report back to the board next month on the issue.
SRTA awarded two contracts for the I-85 tolling project earlier this year.
The larger of the two contracts went to Texas-based Electronic Transaction Consultants Corp., while a smaller portion went to TransCore Inc. of Harrisburg, Pa.
Atlanta Business Chronicle – by Dave Williams Staff Writer
Read more: I-85 tolling project draws fire – Atlanta Business Chronicle
Thursday, May 20, 2010, 12:59pm EDT
|
|
Submitted 05.20.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: Mobility Fund, Transportation
The Senate did not include the Governor’s proposed Mobility Fund in their budget. It is the Governor and NCDOT’s hope that the House will include it in their budget.
The Governor is holding a press conference on Monday, May 24th and has asked the League and the Metro Mayors to turn their folks out in support. We are asking all local elected officials to come Monday to Exit 290 off I-40 (Exit for Hwy 54, from Eastbound I-40) by 2:15 PM and show your support for the Mobility Fund.
As a refresher, the Governor proposed an NC Mobility Fund in her 2011 Budget which generates $300 million to fund projects of statewide significance. The sources of revenue include DMV related fee increases and the continued phasing out of the transfers from the Highway Fund and Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund. The Governor believes that critical congestion issues impact the entire state, our economy and our ability to maintain and attract jobs. All modes of transportation including highway, rail, aviation, ports, ferry, transit, bike and pedestrian would be eligible for funding. The first project to receive funding would be the Yadkin River Bridge during which time NCDOT would develop a prioritization process for future projects in collaboration with local governments, stakeholders, and the general public. The fund includes $30 million per year in dedicated interstate maintenance funds and $20 million per year for additional municipal Powell Bill funding.
The Metro Mayors have sent a letter to the General Assembly supporting the Fund. The League Board has voted in support of the concept.
What can you do to ensure this very important expansion of transportation funding and Powell Bill funding is enacted?
Call your House delegation members right away. Things are moving very fast in the House. Decisions on this fund will likely be made by Monday night if not sooner. Here are your talking points:
Need: North Carolina needs additional transportation resources that focus on mobility projects of statewide significance.
Solution: The Mobility Fund needs to be created this year, even if only with limited funding. Let’s get the Fund started.
Project Selection: The first project should be the Yadkin River Bridge. While the bridge is being built NCDOT can lead a prioritization process much like they have done over the last year for highway projects. We have confidence in NCDOT to partner with a wide range of stakeholders to ensure a data driven process that will target the Mobility Fund resources at projects of statewide significance that affect mobility.
Risk: Don’t just fix the Yadkin River Bridge without creating the Mobility Fund. Create the Fund and designate the Bridge as the first project.
Show members of the General Assembly that cities have confidence in NCDOT to build a prioritization process that will ensure the funds are spent on mobility projects of statewide significance. If you need to know more about the process NCDOT did over the last year call your Division Engineer and ask them more about it. Ask them about the fund.
The Governor has asked for our help in lobbying for the Mobility Fund. Please let me know if you reach out to your House delegation and what you hear back.
Click here for more on the Mobility Fund, talking points, the bill, etc.
|
|
Submitted 05.20.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: budget, Senate
Senate rolls out $19B spending plan (WRAL.com)
Less than a week after convening for the 2010 legislative session, the state Senate got its first look Tuesday at the nearly $19 billion budget proposal subcommittees have drafted in recent days.
The proposed budget, which is expected to come up for an initial vote on Wednesday, is $150 million less than the spending plan suggested last month by Gov. Beverly Perdue. It also marks the first time in four years that the Senate has come up with a budget below the $19 billion mark.
“This budget is not without pain, believe me,” said Sen. Charlie Albertson, D-Duplin, co-chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “There is pain, but we are living in, as you know, unprecedented times.”
Although both Perdue and lawmakers profess support for education, key differences have emerged in their spending priorities.
Perdue, for example, called for pay raises for teachers and for repaying all state workers for furloughs and pay cuts they were forced to take a year ago to balance the 2008-09 budget. Neither item is in Senate Bill 897.
“The teachers I’ve talked to agree no one should get a pay increase if their colleagues might get laid off to pay for it,” said Sen. A.B. Swindell, D-Nash, co-chairman of the appropriations committee.
“We’ve done everything we can do to protect the classroom and to keep teachers in the classroom,” said Sen. Linda Garrou, D-Forsyth, co-chairwoman of the committee.
The Senate provides an extra $81 million for public schools, the University of North Carolina system and the community college system over Perdue’s proposal. It comes at the expense of deeper cuts to the Department of Health and Human Services and public safety operations, such as the Department of Correction and the state courts system.
“We would have liked to see more money for probation officers (in the Senate budget),” Perdue spokeswoman Chrissy Pearson said. “We believe they need an increase in pay so they can retain and recruit good quality officers.”
Both the Senate and Perdue proposed tax credits for small businesses in their budgets. The Senate’s $47 million in credits would benefit an estimated 275,000 to 300,000 small businesses statewide, while the governor’s incentives are more targeted.
“The key is we not only protect existing jobs but we grow new jobs. That’s what the governor was trying to accomplish,” Pearson said.
Reporter: Bruce Mildwurf
Photographer: Terry Cantrell
Web Editor: Matthew Burns
|
|
Submitted 05.19.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: bonds, Massachusetts, Transportation
Massachusetts Transportation Sells $1.1 Billion as Demand Rises (Business Week)
May 18 (Bloomberg) — Massachusetts’ Department of Transportation, which runs the oldest subway system in the U.S., is selling $1.1 billion in tax-exempt securities in the week’s second-biggest offering as demand for such debt rises amid bond market volatility.
Treasury 10-year notes yielded 3.49 percent yesterday and touched 3.26 percent on May 6, the lowest this year, as concern that the European Union’s $1 trillion rescue plan may fail to contain the region’s sovereign-debt crisis drove investors to the haven of U.S. government bonds. Top-rated, 10-year tax- exempt municipal yields held at 3.14 percent yesterday, the lowest since March, according to Municipal Market Advisors.
MassDOT, created last year in a merger of state agencies, is issuing $894 million in tax-exempt bonds to refinance debt from 1997, according to preliminary offering documents. The remainder, $207.7 million, will be offered as variable-rate demand obligations to match a swap agreement with UBS AG from 2008.
“With the volatility in the Treasuries market, it looks like more new issues are coming as tax-exempt,” said Guy Lebas, chief fixed-income strategist and economist at Janney Montgomery Scott LLC. A high municipal to Treasuries ratio “should stimulate some interest in some of the new deals.”
The ratio of 10-year tax-exempt municipal yields to equivalent-maturity Treasuries touched 88.927 percent last week, just below a five-month high of 93.345 percent reached May 7. The higher the ratio, the cheaper municipal bonds become relative to Treasuries, as they offer a near-comparable yield at a lower price.
Treasury Rally
“With Treasuries rallying in response to the flight to quality, in response to what’s going on in Europe, muni ratios got very, very cheap,” said Christine Todd, a managing director and head of the group that oversees $26 billion in tax-sensitive fixed-income portfolios at Standish Mellon Asset Management Co. in Boston.
MassDOT’s sale will help refinance securities sold more than a decade ago by the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority to help pay for Boston’s $15 billion “Big Dig,” the largest public works project in U.S. history. The subordinated bonds are secured by turnpike tolls and other revenue, such as state aid.
The sale comes after Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick dissolved the Turnpike Authority last year. Before the creation of MassDOT, Fitch Ratings had downgraded senior Big Dig bonds to as low as BBB+ in 2002, the third-lowest investment grade, and subordinate debt to BBB.
‘Incredible Feat’
“It is an incredible feat to come to this point and be able to close out,” said Karol Ostberg, director of capital finance at MassDOT in Boston. “Prior to the legislation, turnpike bonds were low-enough rated that they didn’t have market access.”
The bonds redeem serially from 2011 through 2027 and in 2032 and 2037, with the biggest amount coming due in the longest maturity. The debt is rated A+, the fifth-highest grade, by Fitch, one level lower, A, at Standard & Poor’s and A3, the seventh-highest grade, by Moody’s Investors Service.
The department last sold bonds in March. A tax-exempt security from that sale, maturing in 2035, was priced to yield 4.45 percent at the time of sale and traded with an average yield of 4.15 percent May 12. That’s 26 basis points below top- rated, 25-year tax-exempts, according to a daily survey by Concord, Massachusetts-based MMA.
Following are descriptions of pending sales of municipal bonds in the U.S.:
PENNSYLVANIA, the sixth-largest U.S. state by population, plans to sell $1 billion in general obligations in a competitive sale tomorrow, according to preliminary offering documents. The issue will include $548.9 million in Build America Bonds maturing serially from 2022 through 2030 and $451.1 million in tax-exempts maturing serially from 2011 through 2021. The securities, rated AA by S&P, will be used for construction and renovation projects, environmental preservation and to help improve sewage treatment systems. (Added May 17)
METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON AIRPORT AUTHORITY, which operates Ronald Reagan Washington National and Washington Dulles International airports near the nation’s capital, will offer $650 million in revenue bonds as soon as tomorrow. The sale, originally scheduled for last week, will occur after two delays because of market volatility, the authority said. The securities are part of $2.9 billion of debt the authority plans to issue to help fund an extension of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s rail system, according to S&P. Citigroup will market them to investors. (Updated May 18)
COLUMBUS-FRANKLIN COUNTY FINANCE AUTHORITY, home to Ohio’s capital, plans to sell $158 million in taxable revenue bonds today. The securities will mature semiannually from February 2015 through August 2021. Proceeds from the issue, rated AA- by S&P, will be deposited into a reserve fund and will help finance future capital needs, according to preliminary offering documents. RBC Capital Markets will market the issue to investors. (Updated May 18)
–Editors: Walid el-Gabry, Ted Bunker
To contact the reporter on this story: Catarina Saraiva in New York at asaraiva5@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Tannenbaum at mtannen@bloomberg.net
May 18, 2010, 1:06 AM EDT
|
|
Submitted 05.19.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: tax
Vehicle tax to rise if Raleigh budget is OK’d (News and Observer)
RALEIGH Motorists living in Raleigh could see a $5 jump in their annual vehicle tax for each car, truck or SUV they own if the City Council agrees with the proposed budget for next year presented Tuesday by Raleigh City Manager J. Russell Allen.
Allen’s $620.4 million budget for the 2010 fiscal year beginning July 1 doesn’t include a property tax increase or any layoffs of city staff. It does factor in the elimination of 24 vacant positions, mostly from the city’s solid waste and public works departments, and delays replacing city vehicles, including two fire engines and 46 police cars, according tocity budget documents.
The proposed budget is 11.1 percent less than the city budget this year.
Water rates are also expected to rise about 9 percent this summer. Successful consumer conservation efforts and an increase in debt payments for expanding the city water-and-sewer system have left the system that serves Raleigh and several surrounding communities struggling to stay in the black.
The prolonged recession and a drop in sales and property tax revenues have left Triangle communities, including Raleigh, scrambling to find ways to cover their bottom lines. The city’s general fund was facing a $7.5 million shortfall for the next fiscal year, mostly from a significant drop in sales tax revenue.
To cover that gap, Allen told the council he had to trim in several places, including cutting by 10 percent money earmarked for arts programs and grants that go to human services groups like the Interfaith-Food Shuttle and other nonprofits that provide services to city residents.
“There were a lot of difficult decisions,” Allen told the City Council.
The $5 increase for every vehicle registered to city residents would provide additional revenue to Raleigh’s public transit system, which runs the city’s CAT bus system as well as the Accessible Raleigh Transit program that coordinates and provides transportation for disabled city residents, Allen said. Two weeks ago, the city council allocated $1 million extra to keep the ART program running.
A public hearing on the proposed budget is scheduled for 7 p.m. June 1 at the council chambers in the Avery Upchurch Government Complex, 222 W. Hargett Street.
Published Wed, May 19, 2010 04:45 AM
Modified Wed, May 19, 2010 09:32 AM
sarah.ovaska@newsobser ver.com or 919-829-4622
|
|
Submitted 05.17.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Economy/Budget
Tags: budget, rules, Senate
Senate Appropriations Subcommittees are rolling out their individual budgets as I write. Rumors are the Senate Full Appropriations Committee and Finance Committee will be meeting tomorrow to vote on the budget and it could be to the floor as soon as tomorrow afternoon. Amendments were not allowed in subcommittees but will be allowed in the full committee tomorrow. Here are the
Senate Rules for introducing amendments to the bill which were just released.
Submitted 05.17.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Public Safety
Tags: budget, Courts, crime, JPS, Public Safety
Click below for a link to the Senate Justice and Public Safety subcommittee budget proposal
Senate 2010 JPS subcommittee budget
|
|
Submitted 05.17.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: Rail, Simmons, Transit, Transportation
He keeps safety on track (News and Observer)
RALEIGH — Pat Simmons is a bit of a safety nut.
When he rides his red 1986 BMW Airhead motorcycle downtown to the state Highway Building to work or to the Cary depot to catch a train, he’s all about accident prevention.
He wears a padded-fishbowl safety helmet that must be the fattest one you can buy. He cloaks his suit and tie with a dazzling yellow jacket so car drivers won’t stare through him on the highway.
And when he passes a driver engrossed in telephone chatter, he announces his presence with a toot of his 134-decibel air horn.
“So I watch for that,” Simmons says, grinning as he holds a fist to his ear to imitate a glassy-eyed driver on the phone. “And I’ll just touch the horn, to let people know I’m here.”
Safety is part of Simmons’ success at the state Department of Transportation, where he became the Rail Division’s first director in 1994.
The toll of deadly car-train crashes has been cut in half since then by a North Carolina innovation called the Sealed Corridor Program, a systematic approach to upgrading safety features at dangerous rail crossings – or closing them altogether.
The Federal Railroad Administration adopted the program as the safety standard for a planned national high-speed and intercity passenger rail network. And Simmons helped North Carolina join that initiative this year with a whopping $545 million share of President Barack Obama’s first investment in fast trains.
North Carolina won more rail money than all but six other states nationwide, and even more than the seven states in the train-intensive Northeast combined.
Karen Rae, deputy administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, says North Carolina beat out more urban states because it has built one of the two best state rail programs in the country. (California’s is the other.)
She credits Simmons and calls him “very focused and frugal.”
“A huge part of our decision on choosing which programs went forward was not only how good the projects were but how good the management teams behind those projects were,” Rae said. “One of the tipping points was the proven record of strong management and the team that Pat has assembled in North Carolina.”
Simmons, 58, is a Hickory native who grew up mostly in Wilmington. His father worked for the telephone company then known as Southern Bell. During his early childhood years in rural Tobaccoville, Pat picked up an interest in reading from a bookmobile that stopped at a country store.
Varied interests
After earning double degrees in psychology and marine biology at UNC-Wilmington, he spent a few years in Louisiana. He did marine archaeology work for an offshore drilling firm and learned about politics by writing grant applications for the parish government in Baton Rouge.
He returned to North Carolina and served as the first director for a rural transit agency in Boone before finding bus and train work at DOT.
Asked to explain his approach to railroading, Simmons recalls the first grant proposal he ever wrote. It was not about transportation, but about getting juvenile offenders back on track.
Between exams during his junior year at UNC-W, he applied for and won a research grant to find out whether family counseling for troubled teens and their parents could make a difference in changing their outlook and mending their ways.
The answer was yes.
“You observe human behavior, then you introduce changes and see how they change the behavior,” Simmons said. “It was the same scientific technique we used to establish the sealed corridor.”
That effort started with video cameras at a Charlotte rail crossing. Cars, trucks and even school buses ignored warning signals and drove around the crossing gates, to beat approaching trains.
DOT workers experimented with different devices including longer gates, quadruple gates and median barriers. They documented how effective each approach was in keeping drivers from straying into trouble on the tracks.
Sometimes when Simmons uses the scientific approach to test a pet theory about how to improve North Carolina’s railroads, the answer is no.
He thought there would be a demand for passenger trains from Charlotte to Wilmington, but marketing studies found none. He thought about building a depot between High Point and Greensboro, but passengers wanted to keep the stations downtown.
Expanding service
In 1994 North Carolina forged a pact with Virginia to develop fast train service from Charlotte to Washington, D.C., as part of a Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor that eventually could reach Georgia and Florida.
“Pat was the one that made that a reality,” said Rae. “He framed it up and got the details behind the idea together. He engaged Virginia and continues to try to help South Carolina.”
Virginia cared mainly about faster trains north of Petersburg and Richmond. North Carolina shouldered the big task of rebuilding a rail line, partly abandoned since 1980, that follows U.S. 1 from Raleigh to Petersburg.
Federal agencies last week signed off on DOT’s draft environmental statement for a Raleigh-to-Petersburg route. The action moves Simmons a big step forward in his effort to win more federal money – more than $3 billion for this 168-mi. segment alone – to build this key rail link between Southern states and the Northeast.
Travel time from Raleigh to Washington would drop by 2 hours, to just over 4 hours.
The planned top speed between Charlotte and Raleigh, for now, is 90 mph. That’s not “high-speed rail,” but Simmons says it will be a good investment for the state. The travel time from Raleigh to Charlotte will shrink by an hour to just over two hours – even with seven stops along the way.
“In the mid-90s we looked at speed, and speed costs money,” Simmons explained recently to a class of engineering students at N.C. State University. “The faster you go, the more it costs. We reckoned there is a sweet spot where you can offer frequent, reliable, time-competitive service, and you will have good patronage.”
David King was the deputy transportation secretary who put Simmons in charge of North Carolina’s rail ambitions in 1994. He watched Simmons deal patiently with critics who thought DOT should stick with highways.
“I think Pat’s greatest asset is perseverance,” said King, now general manager of Triangle Transit. “Long-term projects you’re investing in today for benefits tomorrow are sometimes hard to defend, but Pat’s been able to do that.”
Simmons pursues his rail mission with an air of quiet jollity. He says skeptics make him better at his job.
“People ask a lot of questions, because it’s different from what we’ve done for the last 30 or 40 years,” he told the NCSU students. “And that’s cool.
“One thing I find beneficial is for people to ask the critical questions. Because either I’ve got a good answer, or it ain’t worth doing.”
bruce.siceloff@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4527
BY BRUCE SICELOFF – Staff Writer
Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/05/16/484699/he-keeps-safety-on-track.html#ixzz0oCPBmaxH
|
|
Submitted 05.17.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: LaHood, Obama, Reauthorization, SAFETEA-LU, Transportation, White House
Oberstar stymied on transit bill (Politico)
It was supposed to be a career-defining moment for Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.). He finally held the gavel of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, after four decades of waiting and had a like-minded president in office to help enact his sweeping vision for highways and public works.
But Oberstar was cut down before he even got started. Hours after he began circulating his plan last spring for a six-year, $500 billion investment in roads and rail, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood simply called for an extension of the 2005 highway bill — effectively cutting off long-term expansion plans.
“That was the beginning of a less-than-good working relationship,” said John Horsley, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
The relationship soured from there, as a frustrated Oberstar slammed White House economic advisers “who never had a shovel in their hands or a callus on their fingers.”
So, while the nation’s infrastructure continues to age and crumble, Washington is stuck with a neutered transportation chairman, a White House distracted by more pressing issues and congressional leaders who lack the political will to raise gas taxes for a new $500 billion measure. And Oberstar is left without the incredible power that once came with a Transportation chairmanship — picking and choosing where to send billions in highway pork.
“I don’t know why they [the White House] don’t want to move forward” on a new highway bill, Oberstar’s top lieutenant, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), lamented in a recent interview. “Somewhere in the bowels of the White House economic team, they said, ‘Hey, we don’t want to deal with transportation.’”
For the Obama administration, deep-sixing the bill was a political necessity, because raising the gas tax is a nonstarter in an election year. And until Oberstar or another lawmaker can find a viable alternative method to raise the $200 billion plus needed to fully fund his legislation, it is likely to stay stuck in no man’s land.
That leaves the entire transportation industry, from bridge builders to bike boosters, waiting in vain for a breakthrough that might jump-start Oberstar’s efforts. Meanwhile, stimulus infrastructure dollars have not stopped construction unemployment from topping 20 percent, and some insiders are bracing for a funding impasse that lingers indefinitely.
“There has to be some way for all of the disparate interests to get together and try to motivate action on this,” said Janet Kavinoky, chief infrastructure lobbyist of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Because regardless of what you’re looking for, you won’t be able to achieve that until the priority is put on transportation.”
Despite his complaints about the administration’s lack of attention to his main issue, Oberstar remains at a loss for how to pay for his bill without a gas-tax hike.
“Right now, we’re looking at bake sales,” quipped his spokesman, Jim Berard.
Oberstar explained in an interview that his broadsides at the administration were intended “to push them” toward a deal on a long-term bill. He’s gotten nowhere.
“They’ve sat down to talk with us, but they don’t have a plan for financing the future of transportation,” he said.
Some of Oberstar’s biggest K Street allies are also having trouble lining up support for the legislation. Rank-and-file lawmakers still do not know how much transportation money their states would get under Oberstar’s plan, and while the Senate recently has made progress on its version, the upper chamber is no closer than the House to finding new funding.
“We have to get out of the expectation that there’s going to be some magic moment where there’s an epiphany about financing,” said Dave Bauer, senior lobbyist for the American Road & Transportation Builders Association. If the political will to pass a transportation bill depends on finding the funding, Bauer warned that the result could be “a circular, never-ending process.”
Oberstar is hardly the first transportation committee chairman to face stop signs from his own party. The late Rep. Bud Shuster (R-Pa.) mounted a PR campaign to help pass his 1998 highway bill over the objections of House Republican leaders, and GOP Rep. Don Young of Alaska was forced to relent on the size of his 2005 bill after the Bush administration rejected his call to raise gas taxes.
But Oberstar lacks the bare-knuckled political instincts of Shuster and Young, relying instead on his famous policy acumen to get things done.
“He’s not a wheeler-dealer kind of guy,” a veteran transportation advocate said of Oberstar.
For now, Oberstar — and the entire transportation industry — is in limbo wondering whether the $500 billion bill will get a serious look this year.
“Not over the indifference and even opposition of an administration,” said former Sen. Slade Gorton (R-Wash.), co-chairman of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s infrastructure reform project.
The White House, while aligning with Oberstar’s policy reforms, is still looking to put off the new bill until spring 2011. LaHood “shares Chairman Oberstar’s goal,” spokesman Olivia Alair wrote in an e-mail and is working on “a set of principles that we hope will bring us closer” to a new bill.
But with Democrats expected to lose a significant number of seats in the midterm election, Oberstar will have a diminished committee — or may even be forced to hand over the gavel to ranking Republican Rep. John Mica of Florida.
For his part, Mica is sympathetic to the administration’s reluctance to engage on a six-year bill until supporters of a tax increase — whom he described as “smoking the funny weed” — find an alternative.
“They are probably politically correct in not moving forward,” Mica said in an interview. “Probably Mr. Oberstar needs to be a little more flexible.”
By: Elana Schor
May 17, 2010 05:23 AM EDT
|
|
Submitted 05.14.10 | No Comments »
Category Advocacy Agenda, Transportation
Tags: budget, Mobility Fund, Transportation
April 20
The Governor released her proposed adjustments to the state’s 2010-2011 budget on April 20. Joint House and Senate Appropriations met on April 21 to hear the details from her staff. Sen. Garrou, co-chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, outlined the Senate’s timetable for the budget process. Here is a link to more information about the Mobility Fund.
Appropriations sub-committees have already begun meeting and will continue to meet through the opening of session on May 12th. The Senate plans to vote on the budget bill on May 20. It will then go to the House. The House has not announced a specific timetable, but has said they plan to vote on the budget bill around the middle of June. The budget bill will then to go a conference committee made up of both House and Senate members who will negotiate a final budget with the goal of having it in place by July 1.
May 14
The Senate Transportation Committee released their draft budget today for discussion. They plan to meet early next week to vote.
|
|
Submitted 05.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Daily clips, News
Tags: bike, pedestrian
City planners track cyclists, pedestrians to measure trail needs (USA Today)
By Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY
Rain or shine, summer or winter, Hartford, Conn., attorney Ben Bare rides his bike for the 4-mile commute to work.
“It wakes me up in the morning and blows out the stress of workday on the way home,” says Bare, 35. He says the ride is just as fast as driving a car.
Bare is one growing number of people turning to bicycles for transportation. According to the most recent U.S. Census figures, the number of adults who bicycled to work in 2008 was 786,098, up 26% from 2006. That number continues to grow, says Wiley Norvell, spokesman for the New York City-based Transportation Alternatives advocacy group.
“It has just exploded,” Norvell says.
Mindful of that growth, transportation planners in states and municipalities across the USA are increasingly deploying high-tech sensors along bicycle and pedestrian paths to map trail, sidewalk and bike-lane use and assess future needs.
MAP: Participation in 2010 Census
FULL COVERAGE: Census 2010
VIDEO: 10 strange facts about the Census
Planners have long collected data about the number of vehicles on major roads by placing rubber-strip counters across travel lanes, but those counters are generally unable to detect passing cyclists, says David Patton, a bicycle and pedestrian planner for Arlington County, Va.
Some of the new counters, which can cost $500-$8,000, are triggered by the weight of passing trail users, while others rely on heat emitted by their bodies or bounce radar off them, Patton says. He says recent advances in technology have made the counters more affordable, which means more communities are buying them to supplement labor-intensive tallies conducted by human volunteers.
“You build a Walmart and we can tell you how many car trips it will generate, on which roads, and at which times of day,” Norvell says. “We know next to nothing about how and where people bike and walk in this country.”
Transportation Alternatives recently estimated that 201,000 people bike daily in New York City. City-conducted sample counts showed a 26% increase in bike ridership from 2008 to 2009, Norvell says. He says other large cities are seeing — and counting — similar increases.
The increased use of high-tech sensors supplements a push for expanded counts by the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project, which this September is overseeing censuses in about 150 cities, including Kansas City, San Francisco and New York City, Michael Jones says.
Jones, a planner and principal with the Portland, Ore.-based Alta Planning and Design, says he founded the count in 2004 after growing frustrated by the lack of consistently collected pedestrian and bicycle use data. He says about 10 groups conducted counts that first year.
Under the project’s census, trained volunteers record the direction of each passing biker and pedestrian for two hours each on a weekday and weekend day in multiple locations, and then use around-the-clock tallies from automated devices placed on other nearby trails and roads to account for seasonal and daily weather variations, Jones says. He says it’s easy to find volunteers to monitor riders on sunny days, but hard to find people willing to stand in the rain at night, even though cyclists are still out.
“It’s a great relief to have robots out there counting … rain or shine,” Patton says
Betsy Jacobsen, a transportation planner with the Colorado Department of Transportation, says planners believe riders and walkers represent a “significant” number of commuters daily regardless of weather conditions, but need the data to track whether adding bike lanes and paths, for instance, encourages more people to ride.
Colorado has installed two of the high-tech counters and is preparing to buy more, she says, in part because the federal Department of Transportation is requiring the data collection.
In March, federal Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood declared “the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized” and urged state and local planners to better accommodate and track pedestrians and riders.
“Without those numbers, you’re leaning on intuition and assumption, which don’t carry a lot of weight when you’re deciding budgets in a recession,” Norvell says. “The way we change concrete and asphalt is to start counting people.”
Bike commuter Nick Hurtado of Seattle says he struggles to find a route that’s both efficient and safe when riding to his job as a teaching assistant at an elementary school 6 miles from home.
“I really feel like that cars are king on the road,” Hurtado says. “Bike commuters are not given enough voice. We have the same rights as anyone on the road, and I don’t feel like that’s the reality.”
Hughes reports for the Fort CollinsColoradoan
|
|
Submitted 05.12.10 | No Comments »
Category Post
Tags: Revenue, Wake mayors
Wake mayors unite behind common wants (The Cary News)
Officials hope state legislators will grant their towns new powers.
In politics, allies often can be one’s biggest asset. Which is why the mayors of Wake County’s 12 municipalities joined forces in advance of the 2010 short session of the state legislature, which begins today, to lobby for local bills that would grant each of their towns new powers.
Some want the authority, for example, to exempt citizen e-mail addresses from public records law. Others wish to retain the right to expand their borders when necessary.
All of them want the General Assembly to avoid usurping local tax dollars to fill in gaps in the state’s budget.
But accomplishing those and other goals can be difficult in a session in which legislators are focused primarily on balancing the state’s budget, said Mayor Harold Weinbrecht of Cary, president of the Wake County Mayors Association.
So he and other Wake County mayors are hoping to better the odds by speaking in unison; at least on issues where they find common ground.
“We thought that as a group, if we had more mayors asking for something in a session that has to be limited to noncontroversial issues, we’d have a better chance of seeing them address those issues,” Weinbrecht said.
It’s the first time in the Wake County Mayors Association’s history that the chief town officials have signed off on – and unanimously at that – a common legislative wish list. And if it bears positive results, Weinbrecht said, it probably won’t be the last time.
Their agenda this year includes the following eight requests.
Keep all local revenues intact through the upcoming budget session.
Maintaining all sources of local revenues is a perpetual concern for town governments. That’s especially important this year, when many local governments, including Cary, are facing shrinking budgets. “They shouldn’t balance their budget on the backs of municipalities across the state,” said Lana Hygh, assistant to the town manager in Cary.
Western Wake County towns have taken their lumps in recent years as state officials have often withheld large sums of money – from taxes on wine and beer, wireless communications sales and utilities franchises – from municipalities.
In the case of wine and beer taxes, for example, the state levies this tax on alcoholic beverages and a municipality may share in the revenues if beer or wine is sold legally within its jurisdiction. The proceeds are distributed based on the town’s population as recorded by the North Carolina Office of State Planning.
Former Gov. Mike Easley withheld $400,000 of this revenue from Cary alone in fiscal year 2002 to help balance the state budget. Gov. Bev Perdue followed suit last year, also withholding hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential revenue from the town.
Exempt lists of citizen e-mail addresses from disclosure under the Public Records Act.
Towns want legislators to make the change in order to keep residents’ e-mail addresses from advertisers who request them en masse from the town’s virtual Rolodex.
Residents often volunteer their e-mail addresses when they sign up for town e-mail blasts about happenings such as public meetings, activities at the senior centers or concerts at public venues. When they sign up, their addresses become public record under North Carolina law.
In recent months, several advertisers have requested Cary’s 13,000-address list. The town was obligated to hand them over, no questions asked. As a result, town officials say, more than 1,000 subscribers to Cary’s mailing lists unsubscribed between December and March.
Critics of the request say that a change in the law would be unnecessary for a number of reasons, including that the town already notifies all subscribers to its e-mail lists that their e-mail addresses are public records. Opponents of the measure say a change also could create an unfair advantage for incumbent candidates during elections. Sitting council members are considered town employees and, therefore, would retain access to the records. Outsiders wouldn’t.
Retain municipal authority for annexation by supporting the N.C. League of Municipalities’ position.
Supporters of involuntary annexation say the law has allowed cities and towns to manage growth and avoid the urban decay that plagues other cities without the ability to annex. Opponents say that property owners chose to live outside a city and that government should not be able to force them to pay new taxes for services they don’t necessarily want.
The League of Municipalities, a nonpartisan association of municipalities in North Carolina, favors the rights of towns to annex land outside their borders. So do elected officials across Wake, who see the procedure as a cost-effective way to manage growth.
The organization last year opposed a state bill on annexations, in part because it would have allowed for a referendum on forced annexation if 15 percent of voters in the municipality and the area to be annexed signed a petition.
“It almost seems silly, though,” Weinbrecht said. “You’re holding a referendum to ask, ‘Do you want to be involuntarily annexed?’ ”
“In that case, their answer is obviously going to be, ‘No,’” he added.
Councilman Don Frantz of Cary, meanwhile, opposes the League’s stance. He was the lone dissenter in a vote last month in which the Cary Town Council joined other governing bodies in Wake in supporting a change in the law. “I would much rather that we grow voluntarily, 100 percent,” Frantz said.
Allow municipalities to order repairs or demol