Chart(s) of the day: Maybe we actually do have the money to fix all these potholes (at least in Minnesota)

January 5, 2015 at 1:48 pm

Strongtowns.org has a compelling piece that explains the funding crisis in transportation and why the U.S. transportation system is going broke. This Strongtowns article points to the set of graphics below, which are actually part of a lengthy write-up on Star Tribune that dissects the state of Minnesota’s transportation funding issues.  In all, you get a good understanding of the fundamental disparities when it comes to the state of our unsustainable transportation financing methods and how badly we need a dramatic shift in our approach (H/T Streetsblog for sharing this article via Facebook).

Image Courtesy: Star Tribune. Click on the graphic to be linked to the source story

Image Courtesy: Star Tribune via Strongtowns.org. Click on the graphic to be linked to the source story

Image Courtesy: Star Tribune. Click on the graphic to be linked to the source story

Transportation Ballot Measures – Election Day (Nov 4, 2014) Results

November 5, 2014 at 10:17 am

Now that the mid-term election is over and everybody is debating the performance of candidates, it is time to take a look at how the public reacted to a slew of transportation ballot measures across the country.  Our friends at AASHTO has pulled together a nice summary of articles that explain how these transportation issues played out. One important item that caught my eye was the defeat of Nick Rahall, a top Democrat (from West Virginia) on the transportation committee, lost his seat after 38 years. These midterm election results are plain c

razy! Anyways, check out the list below:

Tallying the toll of transportation privatization

May 6, 2009 at 6:37 pm

(Source: MSNBC)

Image: Indiana Toll Road

Photo: Joe Raymond / AP file. In 2006, the 157-mile-long Indiana Toll Road was leased to a private operator for 75 years for $3.8 billion. Novel approaches to funding offer insights on how the U.S. will fund, build and manage its transportation infrastructure for years to come.

Call it a tale of two airports.

In Missouri, a plan to open the nation’s first privately developed and operated commercial airport will come to fruition when the built-from-scratch Branson Airport opens on May 11.

In Illinois, a plan to lease Chicago’s Midway Airport that was seen as a model for privatization has collapsed in the face of the global credit crunch.

Two airports, two unique approaches and two completely different outcomes. Yet each in its own way may offer insights on how the U.S. funds, builds and manage its transportation infrastructure for years to come.

Crumbling infrastructure, creative financing
According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, the nation’s infrastructure is in such dire shape that it would take $2.2 trillion over the next five years to reverse decades of underfunding and neglect. The shortfall for transportation infrastructure alone is pegged at more than $800 billion.

State and local governments are simply unable (or unwilling) to fill the gap. The proposed solution: sell or lease public assets to private companies that would provide money upfront in return for the right to run the operation and keep most of the revenue.

In aviation, the Midway proposal — a 99-year lease in exchange for an upfront payment of $2.5 billion — would have constituted the first privatization of a public airport in the U.S. under an FAA pilot program announced in 1996. “It was going to be the grand demonstration of the viability of privatization,” says Joseph Schwieterman, a professor at DePaul University and proponent of public-private partnerships (P3). “But the consortium overbid, got cold feet and the thing unraveled.”

Which is not to suggest that airport privatization is dead (although there are currently no active projects in the FAA program). Instead, say proponents, future deals will likely revolve around smaller, lower-profile projects that are structured to ensure that public assets aren’t being sold off for one-time cash payments. “You have to give the public some value for their dollars,” says Steve Steckler, chairman of Infrastructure Management Group, a P3 advisory firm, “and not just take it from future users.”

Meanwhile, Branson Airport is getting ready to receive its first commercial flights next week. As a brand-new project built without government funding, it presents a completely different proposition, yet it also presents an intriguing option as the nation confronts its transportation needs. “Branson is unique,” says Schwieterman, “but the model is one that will surely be tried in other places.”

Turnpikes, tollways and the road ahead

In the interim, most travelers’ experience with privatized transportation systems will continue to come via the tolls charged on various highways and turnpikes. According to a recent report by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG), 15 roads in the U.S. had undergone some form of privatization by the end of 2008, with another 79 projects currently under consideration.

Four years ago, Chicago once again proved to be a leader in the field when it leased the eight-mile Chicago Skyway to a private operator for 99 years in exchange for $1.8 billion. A year later, the 157-mile-long Indiana Toll Road was leased to the same group for 75 years for $3.8 billion. (Conversely, a proposal to lease the Pennsylvania Turnpike for 75 years for $12.8 billion fell apart last fall.)

Whether such deals are good for consumers remains controversial. According to proponents, privatization leads to more efficient operations and better maintenance. It also “provides cover” for local governments unwilling or unable to raise tolls on their own. (Historically, toll increases have lagged the cost of living, one reason most tollway deals allow operators to raise fees in step with inflation or GDP.)

Click here to read the entire article.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is Not Alone in its Financial Struggles

April 28, 2009 at 5:02 pm

(Source:  The Brookings Institute)

Transit agencies across the US are facing service cutbacks and fare increases in order to close their budget gaps. The largest, New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), is no exception. In its 2009 budget, the agency proposes painful service cutbacks and fare increases to help cover a projected deficit of around $1.5 billion. Meanwhile, the state senate failed to unite around a rescue plan last week. And while Washington did provide $8.4 billion in stimulus funds for transit this year (with over $1 billion allocated to the MTA), this money can be spent only on capital improvement projects and not to finance gaps in day-to-day operations.

An op-ed by the Brookings Institution’s Robert Puentes and Emilia Istrate offers recommendations for closing the MTA’s budget gap. They recommend raising state support to national levels and urge the federal government to step aside and empower metropolitan agencies to spend their federal money in ways that best meet their own needs, such as operating expenses. Over the long term, some form of federal competitive funding for operating assistance also might provide the right incentive – or reward – to states and localities to commit to funding transit.

Extract from the op-ed:

Why the disconnect?

The response in Washington is predictably stubborn: Recovery money cannot be used for operating expenses because operating is not a federal role.

You would think that the pressure of this policy would lead to transit agencies that are self-sufficient – where passenger fares pay the full costs of operating the system. 

But large metropolitan transit agencies generally “recover” only about one-third of their costs from subway riders and about one-quarter from bus passengers. The MTA has the highest cost-recovery ratio among all subway operators – its fares pay for two-thirds of operating costs. 

For large bus systems, the MTA’s New York City Transit ranks second only to New Jersey‘s in terms of the share of operating costs paid for by riders. The Long Island Rail Road is the seventh among the 21 commuter rail systems in the country, recovering from fares close to half of its operating costs.

So what should be done to close the MTA’s budget gap?

For one thing, lawmakers in Albany need to recognize that the state contributes a lower proportion of the MTA’s budget from its general revenue than other states provide to their transit agencies from general revenue. In New York, about 4 percent of all the MTA operating costs are covered by the state budget; in other states, transit agencies are getting closer to 6 percent.

Raising state general fund support to national levels would be a good place to start helping the MTA. 

Another idea is to get Washington to help. Not in doling out more money, but in stepping aside and empowering metropolitan agencies to spend their federal money in ways that best meet their own needs.

Click here to read the entire article.

Let’s Stimulate Smart Highways

February 24, 2009 at 1:05 am

(Source: Forbes.com)

California’s HOT expressways are on the rise but need our government’s financial support.

The “stimulus” legislation just signed into law by President Obama includes billions of dollars for transportation and infrastructure, with little regard as to whether the projects meet any serious national or regional need other than supposedly creating or “saving” jobs.

Like other goods and services in a market economy, transportation and infrastructure projects should respond to the public’s willingness to pay, not to politicians’ eagerness to spend. If the Obama administration really wants “change,” as it claims, it should change the way transportation projects are selected and financed, emphasizing market-based approaches. A good place to start would be with the $27.5 billion the stimulus bill proposes spending on highway, bridge and road projects.

If Washington insists on spending more on highways, it should at least spend it intelligently, rather than throwing it willy-nilly at projects politicians have declared “shovel-ready.”

An example of smart spending would be urban networks of “high-occupancy or toll” (HOT) expressways that accomplish specific objectives, such as increasing accessibility and reducing congestion and air pollution.

Click here to read the entire article.