Building liveable cities for NC’s future.
News Archives
ltColExample
Our Mission
To promote strategies to advance North Carolina’s urban centers.

CITIES IN OUR COALITION

Posts Tagged ‘Revenue’

Roads to Ruin: Towns Rip Up the Pavement (Wall Street Journal)

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

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

New Political Realities May Sidetrack the Transportation Reauthorization (Innovation News Briefs)

Wednesday, July 21st, 2010

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

Virginia DOT Reduces Payments to Counties for Road Maintenance (AASHTO)

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

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.

Indiana’s bad bridges focus of a new campaign for more transportation spending (News and Tribune)

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

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

Greenville News editorial: S.C. needs to fund road upgrades (S.C. Greenville Online)

Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010

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

New Report Examines Gasoline Tax Proposals in Various States (AASHTO)

Monday, June 7th, 2010

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.

States find road and bridge money hard to come by (Stateline)

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

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

National and State Economies Presentation by Dr. Harry Davis

Tuesday, June 1st, 2010

Mayor Knight forwarded me this presentation by Dr. Harry Davis, an economist at ASU, entitled National and State Economies.

Wake mayors unite behind common wants (The Cary News)

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

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 demolition of dwellings that have been declared unfit for human habitation.

Weinbrecht said his town already has authority to take action against homes that have been vacated or closed for a year. But the mayor said that he and other proponents of the measure want to speed up the process to six months.

“We’re basically just trying to protect property values and the aesthetics of the town,” he said. “There’s nothing worse than having property that is not kept up or maintained or even becomes a danger.”

Weinbrecht acknowledges critics’ argument that a change in the law might come at the expense of low-income families. “Some members of the [Wake County legislative] delegation have problems with it because they say it’s unfair to the poor,” he said.

But he said the main objective, in his mind, remains improving the town. “Blight is like a disease,” Weinbrecht said. “You want to do anything you can to eradicate it.”

Provide Wake County municipalities authority to use debt to pay down past retirement obligations.

Among towns in western Wake, Morrisville is most in need of a new way to pay down its financial obligations to the state’s pension fund, said Town Manager John Whitson. “We’re different because we’re already paying a higher rate because we joined the system late,” he said. “Not many towns face this situation. We’re already paying more, and at the same time our rates will continue to increase by the same percentage as everyone else.”

The state retirement system, which includes local government employees, is supported by three sources: State employees account for 29 percent. The legislature provides the money to cover 11 percent of the fund. Revenue from the fund’s investments accounts for 60 percent.

Provide authority to Wake County municipalities to use electronic notice for public hearings.

Current laws require towns to advertise public hearings and other legal notices in a newspaper of general circulation. But officials say that print advertising is too expensive.

They want the authority to instead publish such notices on municipal Web sites.

Legislators already granted this authority to Cary and Apex in 2007. Now other Wake towns, including Holly Springs, Morrisville and Fuquay-Varina, want it too.

“We don’t want to leave anyone out,” Mayor Jackie Holcombe of Morrisville said. “… But putting it in the newspaper just isn’t a good use of our funds.”

Rep. Paul Stam of Apex unsuccessfully sponsored a bill last year that would have granted all cities and counties in North Carolina the authority to give electronic notice of public hearings. The bill never emerged from a legislative committee.

Eliminate the cap on charter schools.

State education leaders want to loosen the 100-school cap on charter schools to allow local school boards to free struggling schools of regulations. Allowing more would require a change in state law. It’s aimed at beefing up the state’s application for Race to the Top, a federal education competition for billions of dollars in grants.

“Other states have moved expeditiously to remove their cap on charter schools,” Apex Mayor Keith Weatherly said during a recent Town Council meeting. “Hopefully, North Carolina can move soon to do the same.”

But new charters in North Carolina likely would be a different brand, converted from established schools and started by school districts rather than independent groups. The local boards would still need permission to run the schools free of many state and local rules that govern traditional schools.

Perdue has opposed lifting the cap, and the Democratic-controlled legislature has not approved any of the numerous proposals to break the 100-charter barrier.

Allow municipalities to use the design-build concept for capital projects.

Officials in Holly Springs initiated a request to seek authorization from the General Assembly to use the design-build method for construction for any and all infrastructure projects.

The design-build concept is a project delivery method in which design and construction contracts are combined. The method differs from the more common design-bid-build concept in which design and construction contracts are handled separately.

Town leaders in Holly Springs say the design-build method would save tax dollars and cut down on paperwork.

Staff Writers Lynn Bonner, Benjamin Niolet and Mark Johnson contributed to this report.
BY JORDAN COOKE, Staff Writer
jordan.cooke@nando.com or 919-460-2609

Hundreds say now is time to invest in Michigan roads (Detroit Free Press)

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

Hundreds say now is time to invest in Michigan roads (Detroit Free Press)
Rally promotes reforming transportation funding

Hundreds of skilled trades workers, road industry groups and local government officials gathered at the Capitol this morning to rally the Legislature to overhaul transportation funding in Michigan as the state faces a huge drop in funding starting in 2011.

“It’s not going to get any better, folks,” John Niemela, director of the County Road Association of Michigan, said during a news conference at the rotunda in the Capitol, where several hundred people met before heading to speak individually with state lawmakers.

The groups, which presented 5,000 signatures to state House Speaker Pro-Tem Pam Byrnes, D-Lyndon Township, are advocating for major reform of Michigan’s road funding system. It would include raising fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees as well as looking at tolling and government partnerships with the private sector.

They contend the state’s roads and transit systems are woefully underfunded, endangering infrastructure and jobs. Revenues from gas taxes and vehicle registration fees have fallen steadily in recent years, and the Michigan Department of Transportation is warning of an $84-million shortfall in money the state needs as a required match for about $500 million in federal funding in 2011 alone.

If the state doesn’t raise the match, the federal money would go to other states.

“This is not acceptable to me as a taxpayer – it should not be acceptable to you,” said Casey Dutmer of Wyoming in west Michigan, a retiree who uses public transit in the Grand Rapids area and attended the rally.

Supporters came from across the state. They included John Hunt, a road commissioner in the Thumb’s Huron County, who said Michigan needs to raise money to improve its roads, noting that the state has plywood attached to the bottom of freeway overpasses across metro Detroit to prevent crumbling pavement from falling on traffic below.

“It is going south fast,” said Hunt, owner of the J.W. Hunt trucking company in Bad Axe.

Saline Mayor Gretchen Driskell said it’s time to act.

“We don’t have enough money to take care of our transportation system – it’s very simple,” Driskell said. “I’m here as a local mayor because I’m fed up with talking about it. This is an investment in our future.”

Byrnes said many lawmakers are reluctant to consider raising taxes in a dismal economy and an election year. She acknowledged prospects for a major transportation funding increase faces an uphill battle.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop, R-Rochester, said lawmakers are instead focusing on finding savings in the state’s transportation system and applying that money to the shortfall in matching funds.

“We could talk about a tax increase forever,” Bishop said. “There are not sufficient votes in this Legislature for that now.”

BY MATT HELMS
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Contact MATT HELMS: mhelms@freepress.com. Staff writer Chris Christoff contributed to this report.
Posted: 6:08 a.m. May 4, 2010 | Updated: 1 p.m. May 4, 2010

215 north Dawson Street • raleigh, nc 27603 • phone 919.715.7895 •  fax 919.301.1098