News and Blog - Page 60 of 78 - Transportation For America

Transportation for America announces new advisory board

Transportation for America announces a new 20-person advisory board representing ambitious communities and organizations from across the country.

For immediate release

WASHINGTON DC — Today, Transportation for America announces the creation of a new advisory board to guide the organization’s strategic direction, bringing powerful local voices to T4America’s work ensuring that states and the federal government step up to invest in smart, locally driven transportation solutions.

The diverse 20-person advisory board represents regions all over the country and a wide range of experience; including mayors, city councilmembers, chambers of commerce officials, the healthcare industry, metropolitan planning officials, and non-profit advocates.

“Our local economies depend on sustained investment in maintaining and improving our roads, bridges and transit networks, so people can get to work and goods can get to market,” said board member Dave Williams, vice president of infrastructure and government affairs with the Metro Atlanta Chamber. “I’m pleased to join with local leaders and Transportation for America in providing a critical voice for local communities at the national level and invaluable on-the-ground assistance to cities, towns and suburbs across the country.”

“We are deeply honored to have these ambitious leaders from all over the country at the table with us,” said Mayor John Robert Smith, co-chair of Transportation for America and chairman of the new advisory board. “They represent the best of what’s happening in places all over the country to ensure that cities, towns and counties are rich with opportunity.”

The full advisory board, also viewable at https://t4america.org/about/advisory-board

The Hon. John Robert Smith, former Mayor, Meridian MS (Chairman)
The Hon. Ben McAdams, Mayor, Salt Lake County (UT)
The Hon. Greg Ballard, Mayor, Indianapolis, IN
The Hon. William Bell, Mayor, Durham, NC
The Hon. Elaine Clegg, Councilmember, Boise, ID
The Hon. Chris Koos, Mayor, Normal, IL
The Hon. Marc Morial, President & CEO, National Urban League, former Mayor, New Orleans, LA
The Hon. Mayor Ken Barr, former Mayor, Fort Worth, TX
Maud Daudon, President & CEO, Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce (WA)
Ralph Schulz, President and CEO, Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce (TN)
Mary Leslie, President, Los Angeles Business Council
Dave Williams, Vice President – Infrastructure and Government Affairs, Metro Atlanta Chamber (GA)
Richard A. Dimino, President & CEO, A Better City (Boston, MA)
Arturo Vargas, Executive Director, National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO)
Leslie Wollack, Program Director, Federal Relations, National League of Cities
Denny Zane, Executive Director, Move LA (Los Angeles, CA)
Renata Soto, Executive Director, Conexión Américas (Nashville, TN)
Peter Skosey, Executive Vice President, Metropolitan Planning Council (Chicago, IL)
Mike McKeever, CEO, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (CA)
Tyler Norris, Vice President, Total Health Partnerships, Kaiser Permanente

Contact: David Goldberg
Communications Director
202-412-7930
david.goldberg@t4america.org

U.S. DOT offers great proposals, but the program needs more money to make them real

The Obama Administration last week unveiled its bid to save the federal transportation program with only months to spare before most states and metro areas lose the majority of their funding to maintain and improve transportation networks – unless Congress acts.

While the Administration foreshadowed its priorities in its March budget request, the proposal – dubbed GROW AMERICA – marks the first time since the mid-2000’s that an Administration has submitted a full reauthorization bill to Congress. [See our summary of the provisions here.] While it stops short in some respects, the Administration bill is an important acknowledgement that we need not only to shore up the funding, but also to update the program goals and structure to support today’s economy.

In one sense, the $302 billion, four-year GROW AMERICA Act was drawn up by the people most intimately familiar with what is working, or not, in the current program – the DOT leaders who must interact with communities every day as they work to implement it.

Reading between the lines, they found that rigid adherence to funding silos for each mode does not work for today’s needs. They learned from the TIGER program that there were countless projects that could solve multiple problems for communities, businesses and freight handlers, but that existing, single-mode programs did not allow them to happen.

The first, critical, change the U.S. DOT suggests is to put all dollars for transportation infrastructure into a unified trust fund and shield it from budget fights such as the recent sequestration. During that budgetary debacle, some transportation programs – such as transit construction – were slashed while others were unhurt. Communities that are investing to preserve and improve the infrastructure our economy depends on deserve to know that all their promised funding is safe, not just some of it.

The GROW AMERICA Act would begin to infuse the federal transportation program with the promising ideas of competition and incentive-based funding. While most funding under MAP-21 is distributed automatically by formula, the GROW AMERICA Act would establish several new competitive and incentive grant programs. One, modeled after the highly successful TIGER program but more than twice as large, would provide $5 billion over four years for competitive grants to fund projects with a mix of modes, including highways, bridges, transit, passenger and freight rail, and ports.

Another program – Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation, or FAST – is modeled after the Department of Education’s Race to the Top. It would allocate $4 billion to support incentive grants to states or metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) that adopt innovative strategies and best practices in transportation, such as creating their own multimodal trust funds or giving local governments more latitude to raise their resources.

The biggest problems with the bill come down to money. The Administration proposes $87 billion to rescue the highway trust fund and provide new resources, but has said only that the money would come from unspecified corporate tax reforms. While that one-time infusion would be welcome, it does not address the ongoing shortfall resulting from declining gas tax revenue. Worse, without the additional increment of funding, very little about the current program would change, because the most exciting proposals are layered on top of the basic structure of MAP-21. Meanwhile, the bill makes no provisions even to study or pilot future revenue sources, such as vehicle miles traveled fees.

These are just a few highlights of the GROW AMERICA bill. Read our summary for more details, and watch this space over the next couple of weeks as we take a closer look at some of the individual proposals in the bill.

We lost a good one: T4America reacts to the passing of former Chairman Jim Oberstar

Last Saturday we lost former U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar of Minnesota, a champion of a strong, smart federal transportation program who served as chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure committee before leaving Congress in 2011. John Robert Smith, chairman of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response:

Jim Oberstar

“ ‘Public servant’, is a title quickly embraced by so many elected officials, yet it is so rarely earned. With the death of Chairman Oberstar, Minnesota and the entire nation have lost a true servant of the people. Although elected from Minnesota, for whom he worked tirelessly, he embodied the meaning of United States congressman, serving the best interests of an entire country’s people.

While he put his stamp on many issues, it was in the arena of transportation that his vision shone. He was a tireless advocate for a sound, multimodal investment strategy for America’s roads, bridges, transit and bicycling infrastructure. When the I-35W bridge collapsed in 2007 he immediately went to work find funds to replace it, and to promote policies to ensure people in other states would not meet the same fate. Even after leaving office he remained a vocal, omnipresent force in championing a forward-looking approach to preserving and improving our nation’s transportation infrastructure.

James Oberstar, congressman and public servant, titles earned by selfless service. Adieu.”

Four senators introduce bill to help finance transit-oriented development

Building structured parking, public amenities and pedestrian-safe streets are part of the public infrastructure needed for successful economic development around transit.

Senators Brian Schatz (D-HI), Ed Markey (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) have introduced an important bill to make it easier for communities to support economic development around transit stations.

For any community with a high-capacity transit line – subway, light rail, bus rapid transit – encouraging walkable development around the stations is a no-brainer. By attracting more potential riders, it makes the best use of the transit investment and helps to build the tax base.

Even more importantly, it helps to meet growing demand for homes and workplaces in neighborhoods with easy access to transit. And who is driving that demand? To a large degree it is the talented young workforce that every area is looking to recruit and retain. [See our poll with the Rockefeller Foundation] At the same time, a significant share of baby boomers is looking for similar things, as an American Planning Association poll showed this week.

Doing transit-oriented development right often means retrofitting streets so that they are safe and inviting for people on foot and provide good traffic flow, and building parking structures rather than surface lots, among other improvements. But it is the rare developer who has resources enough to finance the upfront costs of public infrastructure and utilities before the revenue from the finished development starts rolling in.

The Transit Oriented Development Infrastructure Financing Act would help provide low-cost financing in the form of loans or loan guarantees under the highly successful TIFIA program, which was expanded under MAP-21. Eligible borrowers, whether a state or local government or public-private partnership, would have to demonstrate a reliable, dedicated revenue source to repay the loan needed for public infrastructure.

This bill would help to support communities in creating public-private partnerships that help to spur economic development, build the local tax base, improve neighborhoods and infrastructure and make the most of transit investments. Senators Schatz, Markey, Merkley and Gillibrand are to be commended for their vision in introducing the TOD Infrastructure Financing Act.

Part three: Crucial transportation projects could be halted if Congress fails to rescue transportation funding

Congressional inaction on saving the nation’s transportation fund would have tangible impacts on projects planned for next year and beyond, forcing many long-awaited projects to halt indefinitely as soon as this summer. Illinois’ six-year plan for transportation improvements could be threatened, and one long-awaited enormous project on the border with Iowa could be a casualty.

Our new report we released yesterday chronicles the tangible financial impacts that the expected insolvency of the nation’s transportation trust fund would have on state and local transportation budgets beginning in the upcoming fiscal year. No new projects with a significant federal share will be able to get underway in the new fiscal year, which begins this October, if Congress fails to act.

What would that really mean for projects around the country?

In Illinois, Governor Quinn recently announced a six-year transportation plan to complete dozens of key projects, including the Englewood Flyover freight and passenger rail project, bridge replacements along the Stevenson Expressway, repaving and repair on I-74 in Decatur and reconstruction of Rte. 2 in Rockford. But because the plan anticipates using $6.99 billion in federal funding to match $1.16 billion in state funding and $450 million in local funding, projects may not make it off the drawing board without the certainty of that federal contribution.

Just last week, in the Quad Cities on the border of Iowa and Illinois, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx visited the site of a bridge replacement and accompanying corridor improvement that could face significant delays if new work can’t be started next year.

The I-74 bridges connecting Iowa and Illinois carry nearly half the traffic each day between the cities of this bi-state region where one of five workers crosses the river to go to work. The narrow, obsolete bridges date back to 1935 and were never designed to be part of an interstate highway system. This stretch of road sees more than three times as many crashes as comparable corridors and increased traffic on the bridge has created a critical bottleneck that also affects freight passing through the middle of the country on the national freight network.Replacing the I-74 bridges have been a top priority for regional leaders for the last two decades.

When Illinois and Iowa DOTs released a construction plan for coming years including more than $800 million programmed for the central bridge span, The Quad City Times editorialized that “The Quad-Cities’ biggest public construction project in history seems to suddenly move from planning to action.”

Yet collapsing federal funding would threaten that progress. Illinois’ improvements on adjoining streets have begun and Iowa is scheduled to begin construction next year. Beyond just next year, though, the long-term funding uncertainty created by the insolvent trust fund jeopardizes the progress of the entire corridor project,which will depend on reliable federal contributions.

Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx tours the existing I-74 bridge site with Representatives Cheri Bustos (IL-17) and Dave Loebsack (IA-2) last week. Photo courtesy of Rep. Loebsack’s office.

We’ve heard many stories like this about the important projects that would come to a stop if Congress fails to rescue the nation’s transportation fund. But Congress must do more than just save the transportation fund. The local leaders we’ve been speaking with have made it clear that if Congress wants support for raising more revenue for transportation, they need to give these folks at the local level more reasons to believe that it will be to their benefit.

Last week we released a policy road map showing how we can resuscitate and reinvigorate the program in exciting ways, so that it better suits the needs of people in the communities where they live. It’s a great place to start.

—-

Download the Report Visit the Report Home

States already scaling back planned work for next year in anticipation of funding crisis

Congressional inaction on saving the nation’s transportation fund would have tangible impacts on projects planned for next year and beyond, forcing many long-awaited projects to halt indefinitely as soon as this summer. Numerous states are already beginning to make plans for a year where no federal money is available for new projects by scaling back plans and tentatively canceling projects.

The report we released yesterday makes it clear: Starting this fall, every dollar of gas tax revenues collected will be needed to cover the federal share of projects already promised to states, regions, and transit agencies. That means no new projects with a significant federal share will be able to get underway in the new fiscal year which begins this October.

Some states are doing their due diligence and preparing plans and budgets for next year in light of the possible reality of no new money to invest in transportation projects that require a federal share or matching funds.

Tennessee stops work on new projects

Because of uncertainty about future federal funding, the Tennessee Department of Transportation has already halted engineering on new projects for next year (and beyond).

TDOT Commissioner John Schroer reports that with a loss of federal dollars, the department would need to pare back its plan to work “exclusively on the maintenance of our existing pavement and bridges rather than new projects.” Limited funding could jeopardize projects that many regional leaders have planned to limit congestion and maintain quality of life as population booms.

Arkansas bears up under bad bridges, needed maintenance

Ten bridge replacement, road repair and highway expansion projects set to go forward this summer have already been pulled by the Arkansas State Highway & Transportation Department because of uncertainty about federal reimbursement. Arkansas has nearly 900 structurally deficient bridges that carry a total of more than 1.5 million vehicles a day.

Those are just two of many stories we’ve heard about the real impact in states and local communities if Congress fails to rescue the nation’s transportation fund. But they need to do more than just save the transportation fund. The local leaders we’ve been speaking with have made it clear that if Congress wants support for raising more revenue for transportation, they need to give these folks at the local level more reasons to believe that it will be to their benefit.

We’ve had terrific response already to this new report, but help us spread the word! Links to share are below, and be sure to view the report if you haven’t already.

Download the Report Visit the Report Home

Which highly anticipated transportation projects in your community would go back on the shelf next year?

Which highly anticipated transportation projects in your community would go back on the shelf next year? Will it be a bridge replacement years in the making? New buses to meet growing ridership? A multi-use trail along a key highway that bike commuters are hoping to use? Improvements to make your Main Street safer and more pleasant for people who shop and work there?

If Congress does nothing in the next few months, the nation’s transportation fund will be bankrupt before the end of the summer. The new report we published this morning chronicles the heavy financial toll that states and metro areas will face if federal transportation dollars for any new projects drop to zero starting this fall.

The bottom line if that happens? The feds will be unable to commit to funding any new projects, depriving states and localities of resources critical to maintaining and improving the infrastructure that makes our economy possible. That’s unacceptable. Will you join us and call on your representatives and senators?

Poof.

There goes a long awaited bridge replacement in downtown Boise, ID, to replace a narrow, deficient 1938 bridge with a modern structure that is safe for all modes of transportation; the order of 29 new buses for Columbus, Ohio’s transit agency; and the replacement for the nearly 80-year-old twin I-74 spans in the Quad Cities on the border between Iowa and Illinois — where one in five workers crosses the river each day for work.

The list goes on and includes hundreds if not thousands of new projects for next year that would be delayed without a fix for our country’s transportation fund.

Join us and call on your representatives and senators and tell them you support raising the revenues we need to fix the transportation trust fund and refocus our country’s transportation program on innovative, locally-driven transportation solutions.

Download the Report Visit the Report Home

Crucial transportation projects could be halted if Congress fails to act

Barring congressional action, the nation’s transportation fund will be insolvent later this year and the federal government will be unable to commit to funding any new transportation projects next year. This would have significant impacts on projects that have been planned years in advance across the country.

As the report we released this morning makes abundantly clear, starting this fall, every dollar of gas tax revenues collected will be needed to cover the federal share of projects already promised to states, regions, and transit agencies. That means no new projects with a significant federal share will be able to get underway in the new fiscal year, which begins this October.

What does that really mean for projects around the country? We asked around to a few of the many elected officials and business/civic leaders we’ve been talking to over the last couple of years and found a few specific examples of the types of projects that would stop in their tracks in FY2015 if Congress does nothing to rescue the nation’s transportation fund.

Bridge out ahead – Boise, Idaho

The Broadway Bridge in downtown Boise (pictured below) has the lowest structural rating of any bridge in the state of Idaho. (Deficient bridges are something we know a thing or two about around here.)

On game days at Boise State University right on the south side of the Boise River from downtown, thousands of people crowd the narrow 4-foot sidewalks to cross the critical choke point for traffic in the area on their way to and from the famous blue turf. Given its degraded and deficient condition, the bridge could require weight restrictions or closure at any time — one of the perils of continuing to operate a deficient bridge that’s past its recommended lifespan.

The Broadway Bridge replacement, scheduled for 2015, is one of just a few new construction projects in a state transportation plan dedicated almost entirely to maintaining existing roads.

The Idaho Transportation Department is partnering with the city of Boise on the design to ensure the new bridge serves the needs of city residents and will enhance the neighborhood — as well as the needs for regional connectivity on an important artery through the city. Sidewalks will be expanded to 10 feet and bicycle lanes will be added on the bridge and adjoining sections of Broadway Avenue and there will be new connections to the Greenbelt, a regional recreational trail that passes under the bridge.

Aerial walltexture1

Because the insolvency of the trust fund would mean that no new transportation projects with a federal share could break ground in FY2015, the much-needed Broadway Bridge project would come to a halt.

Columbus, Ohio: Waiting on the bus

CC photo by Derek Rust /photos/drust/181587661

Passengers pack an existing COTA bus line in Columbus, Ohio.

Columbus, Ohio, home to a major university and Ohio’s state government, is a growing region with a projected 22 percent growth in transit ridership this decade.

To accommodate the growing demand, the Central Ohio Transit Authority has been planning to add 29 new buses to its fleet in 2015, replacing some of its dilapidated buses and adding 12 buses to the peak-time fleet. New buses are critical to get residents across the region to work.

Residents in the region support their community’s transit service through a voter-approved local sales tax and the agency is using primarily local funds to rehab a garage to service the new buses. But the agency is counting on the expected federal matching funds to purchase the new buses that they need to meet their needs. In addition to adding service on existing routes, COTA is planning the region’s first bus rapid transit corridor on Cleveland Avenue.

—

Those are just two of the many stories we’ve heard of important projects that would come to a stop if Congress fails to rescue the nation’s transportation fund.

But they need to do more than just save the transportation fund. The local leaders we’ve been speaking with have made it clear that if Congress wants support for raising more revenue for transportation, they need to give these folks at the local level more reasons to believe that it will be to their benefit.

—-

Download the Report Visit the Report Home

When the trust fund goes bust: Report shows how much your states and city will lose

Photo via WSDOT/Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/wsdot/8670279118

Unless Congress adds new revenue to the nation’s transportation trust fund, the federal government will be unable to commit to funding any new transportation projects, depriving states and localities of resources critical to maintaining and improving the infrastructure that makes our economy possible.

The idea of getting any new projects underway in FY 2015 (like this ongoing project in Washington State) could be history without a fix for the trust fund.

America is at a crucial decision point for transportation. The nation’s transportation trust fund is facing a crisis. The gasoline tax that has sustained the federal transportation program since the middle of the last century is no longer keeping up with investment needs.

Transportation for America has released a new report that shows the tangible financial impact that the trust fund’s expected insolvency would have on state and local transportation budgets beginning in the upcoming fiscal year.

But there is a ray of light: The crisis presents an opportunity, because it comes at the same time as Congress must update the federal transportation program, MAP-21. Last week we released a policy road map showing how we can resuscitate and reinvigorate the program in exciting ways, so that it better suits the needs of people in the communities where they live. Absent such action, though, the bottom line is a bleak one: Starting this fall, every dollar of gas tax revenue collected will be needed to cover the federal share of projects already promised to states, regions, and transit agencies, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

That means new transportation projects with a federal share will be shelved — perhaps indefinitely — starting as soon as this summer.

The End of the Road? The looming fiscal disaster for transportation covers the crisis in detail, complete with tables of the exact amounts states and urban areas stand to lose, and the share of state transport budgets that federal funding represents.

While every state raises their own transportation funds through some taxing mechanism and local governments contribute their own funds, federal funds account for the lion’s share of many major projects in the country, from a key bridge replacement or highway rehab to new rail cars and buses. Federal dollars account for half or more of the transportation capital budget in all but 15 states, and for many the share is two-thirds or more. (It’s more than 90 percent in Alaska and Rhode Island, for example.) Metro regions like Miami, Seattle, Atlanta, Denver, Dallas, Philadelphia, Minneapolis-St. Paul – to name just a few – could be out $100 million or more.

We’ll be featuring some of the key projects that could be shelved and states that are scaling back their transportation plans throughout the course of today and tomorrow. There are surely hundreds if not thousands of affected projects all across the country.

Download the Report Visit the Report Home

RELEASE: When the Highway Trust Fund goes bust: Report shows how much states and metros will lose

FOR RELEASE: 12:01 a.m., April 30, 2014
CONTACT: DAVID GOLDBERG, 202-412-7930
david.goldberg@T4America.org

Congress has an opportunity to save the transportation program and recommit to investing in the repairs and improvements our communities and businesses need

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Most states and dozens of metropolitan areas will lose the majority of the money they need to maintain and improve their transportation networks when the Highway Trust Fund goes broke this summer, according to a report released today by Transportation for America.

The report, The End of the Road? The Looming Fiscal Disaster for Transportation, shows the dollar amounts that each state and metro will be forced to forego if Congress does not act to avert the insolvency of the transportation fund, expected to be exhausted in July. The shortfall is a result of lower than expected collections of revenue from a gas tax that has not changed since 1993, despite rapidly rising construction costs.

Unless Congress adds new revenue to the trust fund, the federal government will be unable to commit to funding any new transportation projects, depriving states and localities of resources critical to maintaining and improving the infrastructure that makes our economy possible.

“America is at a crucial decision point for transportation,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “But there is a ray of light: The crisis presents an opportunity, because it comes at the same time as Congress must update the federal transportation program, MAP-21. We believe we have a chance to resuscitate and reinvigorate the program in exciting ways, so that it better suits the needs of people in the communities where they live.”

Absent such action, though, the bottom line is a bleak one: Starting this fall, every dollar of gas tax revenue collected will be needed to cover the federal share of projects already promised to states, regions, and transit agencies, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

While nearly each state raises their own funds through some sort of taxing mechanism and local governments contribute their own funds, federal funds account for the lion’s share of almost any major project in the country, from a key bridge replacement or highway rehab to new rail cars and buses. Federal dollars account for half or more of the capital transportation budget in all but 15 states, and for many the share is two-thirds or more. (It’s more than 90 percent in Alaska and Rhode Island, for example.)

Regions like Miami, Seattle, Atlanta, Denver, Dallas, Philadelphia, Minneapolis-St. Paul — to name just a few — could be out $100 million or more.

Suspension of federal funding will affect communities of all sizes. It would shelve plans for a long awaited bridge replacement in downtown Boise, ID, to replace a narrow, deficient 1938 bridge with a modern structure that is safe for all modes of transportation; the order of 29 new buses for Columbus, Ohio’s transit agency; and the project to replace the nearly 80-year-old twin I-74 spans in the Quad Cities on the border between Iowa and Illinois — where one in five workers crosses the river each day for work.

“Over the last nine months we have met with local leaders in regions all over the country, and they all tell us the same thing: They believe their constituents would be willing to pay more for transportation, if they know those dollars will come back to benefit their communities,” Corless said.

The suggestions and desires of those local leaders have been compiled in a platform for updating the transportation program, available online at https://t4america.org/policies.

T4America statement on the Administration’s proposal for reauthorizing the federal transportation program

WASHINGTON, D.C. – James Corless, director of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response to the release today of the Obama Administration’s proposal for reauthorizing the transportation program, MAP-21, which expires September 30:

“MAP-21 marked the beginning of a much-needed process to reform and improve our transportation system, but it was only a first step. The Administration’s proposal advances the discussion by offering additional reforms that serve as a good starting point for debate in Congress.

One key, needed reform is a turn away from the siloed programs that drive communities to choose one mode or another, and toward a system of multimodal funding that allows local communities to develop the best solution to the transportation challenges they face. The proposal also builds on efforts to develop merit-based grants and offer incentives for innovation, an important role for the federal program to play.

We are disappointed the Administration did not include a specific proposal to fix our nation’s transportation deficit, either in the short or long-term.

The Administration has chosen a critical moment to release its first detailed proposal for the renewal of our beleaguered transportation program. As our forthcoming report, The End of the Road? The Looming Fiscal Disaster for Transportation, makes clear, communities around the country are bracing for a serious blow this fall when the Highway Trust Fund is exhausted and their expected funding evaporates. At the same time, the approaching expiration of MAP-21 offers an opportunity to reinvigorate the program and provide communities the resources their economies need.

We commend the Administration on providing a detailed set of policy proposals.

We look forward to similar detail on a stable, ongoing funding source, both from the Administration and leaders in Congress.”

How much federal transportation money will your region lose this summer?

The Highway Trust Fund—which provides most of the funding for highway projects in the United States—is slated to run bankrupt later this year. If that happens, the program won’t be able to pay for any new projects next year and many federal transportation projects will come to a grinding halt.

What will that mean for state and metro regions? On Wednesday, Transportation for America will release a new, original report looking at what will happen to communities across the country if the trust fund goes bankrupt.

The End of the Road? The Looming Fiscal Disaster for Transportation discusses how we got into this problem, what the impact will be, and what we can do to get out of it.

Join us on Wednesday at 3:30 PM EDT for a webinar kicking off the new research. Hear the results of this research from Transportation for America’s experts and learn about tools to help your community advocate for change.

A funding crisis can be averted, but only if Congress acts to increase funding for transportation aimed at repairing and preserving our aging infrastructure and supporting locally driven projects that spur economic growth. Join us on Wednesday to learn more.

Released today: Key policies to reinvigorate our nation’s transportation program

Building from conversations with business, civic and elected leaders in communities throughout the country, Transportation for America has developed a platform of seven broad policies to reboot the nation’s federal transportation program and put it, and the nation, on a sound footing.

The nation’s trust fund for transportation is teetering on the brink of insolvency, potentially bringing scores of projects planned for the next fiscal year to a grinding halt. Lawmakers in Congress need to pass a new federal transportation bill before it expires in September.

Even more needs to be done. While MAP-21 made important changes to the federal transportation program, the program still needs a reboot in the update due this fall.

Our cities, towns and suburbs across the country — the local centers of commerce that form the backbone of America’s economy—are also facing serious challenges: They know they must have top-notch transportation networks to attract talent, compete on a global scale and preserve their quality of life. They know they need to get workers of all wage levels to their jobs. They also know they need to eliminate crippling bottlenecks in freight delivery. These communities are stretching themselves to raise their own funds and to innovate, but without a strong federal partner the twin demands of maintaining their existing infrastructure and preparing for the future are beyond their means.

View the Platform

These challenges, as difficult as they are, present an opportunity to re-evaluate—and reinvigorate— the federal transportation program in ways that will boost today’s economy and ensure future prosperity.

The local leaders we’ve been speaking with have made it clear that if Congress wants support for raising more revenue for transportation, they need to give these folks at the local level more reasons to believe that it will be to their benefit.

Q: So how do we improve their confidence that more money for transportation will flow down to the level where it’s needed the most?

A: By adopting policies to refocus the federal transportation program on innovative, locally driven transportation solutions. For example, the second group of policies from our platform:

Spur local initiative and innovation through competition and incentives

When communities are given the opportunity to compete for federal funds, they work harder to put forward projects that maximize return on investment, provide creative solutions, and involve a diverse range of stakeholders. The next bill should:

Establish a national program of merit-based grants to help state and local applicants accomplish projects that fix existing infrastructure and improve critical links for moving people and freight;
Within states, give local communities increased access to federal funds, through mechanisms such as state-administered competitive grants or additional sub-allocation of funds, to help them meet pressing local transportation challenges; and
Reward communities that take action to address long-term transportation challenges – such as raising local revenues – with opportunities for additional funding.

Here’s what T4America’s Beth Osborne had to say about using competition and incentives to direct more money down to the local level while also generating better projects in the Atlantic Cities just this week:

At the moment, though, these centers of our economy have access to only a fraction of the money they pay into the nation’s transportation program. What would they do with the money if they had access to more of it? We have had a chance to see over the last five years with the TIGER program, which I helped oversee during my time at U.S. DOT. …Many excellent projects made the cut, and made a big difference. …All solved multiple problems at once, and almost none would have been funded under existing silos. The big lesson: Competition spurs innovation that formula funds never ever will. Competition generates incredible excitement and a desire to outdo your neighbor. As a result, federal dollars are made to go farther, more non-federal funds are brought in from both public and private sources, and every penny is targeted to accomplish multiple goals.

Visit t4america.org/policies to view the rest of the full platform and learn more about the proposals reflecting the needs expressed by local leaders across the country. They are reaching for economic opportunity with forward-looking plans, and going to voters to raise revenue, but they lack the access to enough resources to build the necessary 21st century infrastructure. Our communities need a dependable federal partner.

Incorporating their proposals into MAP-21′s replacement will help their cities, towns and suburbs prosper and flourish as places where businesses can thrive and people of all incomes and ages can live healthy and productive lives.

Survey: To recruit and keep millennials, give them walkable places with good transit and other options

Four in five millennials say they want to live in places where they have a variety of options to get to jobs, school or daily needs, according to a new survey of Americans age 18-34 in 10 major U.S. cities, released today by The Rockefeller Foundation and Transportation for America.

Three in four say it is likely they will live in a place where they do not need a car to get around. But a majority in all but the largest metros rate their own cities “fair” or “poor” in providing public transportation, and they want more options such as car share and bike share.

The survey focused on the “millennial generation” – those born between 1982 and 2003 – because it is the largest generation in history, and it is the age group that any metro area that hopes to be viable in the future has to attract and keep.

Now, one caveat is that the survey respondents are already living in cities, so some self-selection is involved. Interestingly, though, the aspirations hold true even in cities that don’t have great options at the moment. The survey covered three cities with mature transit systems: Chicago, San Francisco and New York; four cities where transit networks are growing: Minneapolis, Denver, Charlotte and Los Angeles; and three cities making plans to grow their systems: Nashville, Indianapolis and Tampa-St. Petersburg.

Millennials like to stay connected when they travel

More than half (54%) of millennials surveyed say they would consider moving to another city if it had more and better options for getting around, and 66 percent say that access to high quality transportation is one of the top three criteria in considering deciding where to live next.

Even in a city like Nashville – a rapidly growing region with limited travel options – a strong majority of current millennial residents agree they “would prefer to live in a place where most people have transportation options so they do not need to rely only on cars” versus “a place where most people rely on cars to get around” – 54 percent “strongly” and 19 percent “somewhat” in agreement. The trick for Nashville and its peers will be hanging onto to those residents while attracting other talented young people. While 64 percent in Nashville say they expect to live in walkable places where they don’t necessarily need a car, only 6 percent say they currently live in such a place.

“These findings confirm what we have heard from the business and elected leaders we work with across the country,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “The talented young workforce that every region is trying to recruit aspires to live in places where they can find walkable neighborhoods with convenient access to services, including public transportation. Providing those travel and living options will be the key to future economic success.”

There are lots of other interesting tibits in the survey. You can read the news release here or see the full, topline results here.

Indiana Governor signs bill allowing Indianapolis to vote on transit ballot measures

In a huge victory for citizens and the local business community, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) Wednesday signed a long-sought bill giving metro Indianapolis counties the right to vote on funding a much-expanded public transportation network, including bus rapid transit.

(We wrote about this same bill passing the legislature earlier this week in a post looking at how states were helping or hurting local efforts to improve their transportation networks.) – Ed.

“Our capital city is a world class destination and needs a world class transit system,” said Governor Mike Pence in his statement shortly after signing the bill allowing the six metro Indy counties to hold referendums to let voters decide whether to build a transit system using mostly income-tax revenue. After at least three attempts by boosters over the last few years to get a bill approved, Governor Pence signed the bill late yesterday afternoon

For three years, Indy leaders asked the state legislature to give them the ability and control to ask their own voters if an improved regional transportation network was something worth a few dollars more each year in additional income taxes — something that Indiana counties cannot do without permission of the state. Local mayors, county executives, citizens and many in the local business community have been clamoring for an improved transit network — including rapid bus corridors — for years to help keep Indy competitive. They just wanted their chance to make the case to the voters and let the citizens of metro Indy make their decision.

Gov. Pence apparently heard the message:

“I am a firm believer in local control and the collective wisdom of the people of Indiana. Decisions on economic development and quality of life are best made at the local level. Whether local business tax reform or mass transit, I trust local leaders and residents to make the right decisions for their communities.”

This was certainly a big victory for the business community, and an issue on which Indy Mayor Greg Ballard had lobbied hard, telling the Indy Star that he’d “been to the Statehouse more on this than any other issue.”

“This marks a significant step forward for the growth of Indy and the rest of Central Indiana,” said Mayor Ballard in his statement yesterday afternoon. In many ways, though, the hard work is really just beginning. While the state has indeed empowered the five metro Indianapolis counties to take the question to the ballot, that might not happen before 2015, and will require a huge effort to coordinate between the different counties and make the case to voters.

“Today is a day for Indy to celebrate but not the day to declare victory. There is still much work to be done,” Mayor Ballard said.

The Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization was delighted by the news as well.

“Our region’s leaders have worked diligently on this bill for years, and it’s a major milestone for transit in Central Indiana,” said Sean Northrup of the Indy MPO. “It’s not the finish line but it takes us one major step closer. The bill requires specific proposals, so we’ll continue to refine the Indy Connect plan and we’re looking forward to our next round of public input meetings this spring.”

Learn more about the Indy Connect plan here, and watch their video below.

Locals encountering help or hindrance from states on their transportation plans

Flickr photo by John Greenfield http://www.flickr.com/photos/24858199@N00/10090187245/

Several places have been in the news lately as they find their ambitious efforts to solve transportation challenges hinging on legislative action this lawmaking season. In some, state legislators are helping out with enabling legislation, but in others they are challenging the concept of local control and threatening needed investment.

The prime case of the latter has been in Nashville, where a handful of Tennessee legislators decided to interfere in a regional Nashville plan to build a first-of-its-kind bus rapid transit system through the region’s core.

An initial measure from a non-Nashville lawmaker would have required a vote of the General Assembly to approve the BRT line, despite the state DOT’s role in planning the line as a member of the Nashville Metropolitan Planning Organization’s board. An amendment to an unrelated bill said flatly: ”No rapid bus project in a metropolitan form of government, such as Nashville, could be built without the permission of the … General Assembly.”

Mayors of Tennessee’s four large cities immediately saw the threat that legislative micromanaging posed to their ability to meet their economic challenges and fired off a letter (pdf) that helped persuade legislators to try a different tack. The House version now simply affirms the status quo that the DOT must approve use of state right-of-way for a transit line and that only the legislature can appropriate state funds.

But new language was added in the Senate’s version that would prohibit any transit system from picking up or dropping off passengers in the middle of state roads as a “safety” measure — exactly what’s planned for The Amp line — regardless of what the Federal Transit Administration or engineers at TDOT have to say about the safety track record of center-running BRT. (Center running BRT is already in use or on the way in Cleveland, OH; Eugene, OR; San Bernardino, CA; Chicago, IL; and a handful of other cities.)

Current conditions on Ashland in Chicago, and rendering of the new planned center-running BRT for the corridor. Does one of these streets look safer for pedestrians than the other?

In Indiana, meanwhile, the legislature finally granted metro Indianapolis the right to vote on funding a much-expanded bus network, including bus rapid transit. What it won’t include is light rail, as dictated by the new law, which would allow six counties to hold referendums to let voters decide whether to build a transit system using mostly income-tax revenue, according to the Indianapolis Star.

Despite the mode-specific directive, it was a big victory for the business community, who pointed out that the state stands to benefit if growth engine Indianapolis continues to succeed economically. The region is a hotbed of healthcare jobs, and once again, providing a better bus system — something Mayor Greg Ballard and region’s other leaders are committed to doing — means that those employers get access to a bigger pool of workers, and workers of all incomes can reach a greater range of jobs.

Four years after their bus service was completely canceled, Clayton County just south of Atlanta proper is catching a helping hand from the Georgia general assembly. Lawmakers just passed a measure that would allow Clayton County voters to vote on approving a penny sales tax to restore local transit operations — something voters, local leaders and citizens alike strongly support.

When Clayton County lost that bus service, they lost something that employers — especially those at Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson Airport — depended on to get employees to work every day. There are thousands of jobs at that enormous airport right at the edge of Clayton County, and a good transit connection was a boost for jobs and residents to benefit from that economic magnet.

Up in Minnesota, the state is moving a huge comprehensive funding package for transportation across the state — one of many states considering ways to raise their own new revenue for transportation. (See our tracker) A House committee voted 9-6 Friday to pass the comprehensive transportation funding bill (HF 2395). Similar legislation didn’t make it through the House committee in 2013.

Supporting and enabling these efforts is exactly what states should be doing as local cities and regions are trying desperately to make these sorts of investments a reality, usually with their own skin in the game; not obstructing them at every turn.

When a city or region wants to raise a tax via public ballot vote to improve their transportation network, shouldn’t the state leaders proudly support those efforts of a city bootstrapping their way up?

Editors note: We’re in the process of updating it with 2014 information, but you can find similar information to the Minnesota plan over on our State Funding Tracker, which focuses largely on state (i.e., not local) plans to fund transportation.

Too weak to be effective: U.S. DOT’s first proposed performance measure needs work

While the 2012 federal transportation law, MAP-21, was not the transformational milestone many of us hoped for, it did put in motion a first-ever framework for accountability and transparency, establishing 12 basic metrics by which to judge agencies’ performance. It was left to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to put flesh on the bones by adopting rules for how to apply those performance measures. The first evidence of how the DOT is handling that job is now out in the form of a proposed set of requirements for judging progress on safety. Unfortunately, the draft out for comment does not bode well.

I-540 Head on collision

There are several reasons the proposed rule falls short – some technical, some less so – but the fundamental problem is that it is too weak to be useful as a standard for accountability.

The rule would require states to set their own targets for reducing, on public roadways, (1) the number of fatalities, (2) the number of serious injuries, (3) the rate of fatalities per vehicle mile traveled (VMT), and (4) the rate of serious injuries per vehicle mile traveled. These four measures were established in MAP-21; the state or MPO can develop additional measures if they choose.

Here are three key weaknesses in the DOT’s draft rule: (Read our full detailed analysis here – pdf)

States only need a 50 percent passing grade, meeting only half of the four measures required in law;
States can pass muster merely by showing little deviation from pre-existing trends; and,
States that miss their safety targets, however unlikely that is under this proposal, would be allowed an additional four years before they are required to implement any changes to improve their roadways’ safety.

There are many other issues around whether the rule adequately considers the safety of people on foot or bicycle – it doesn’t. Or differences among rural areas, small towns and large cities. (This post by the National Complete Streets Coalition examines these points and others in greater detail.)

This rule, if finalized as proposed, would allow the states that fail to meet the targets they set for themselves to avoid taking action to improve their outcomes. Further, the USDOT decision to require states to meet only two requirements gives short shrift to the idea of accountability.

As it stands, the federal incentives linked to performance measures, including achieving the nation’s goal of reducing the number of fatalities and serious injuries, are modest (though we hope they will grow as accountability becomes a more central feature of the federal program). States that cannot meet their own safety targets and cannot escape the exceedingly lenient evaluation would be required to submit an implementation plan that identifies how they will attempt to improve safety. They also will face constraints on their use of funding from the Highway Safety Improvement Program until the DOT secretary determines they have made significant progress.

Several factors in the way the DOT is implementing performance measures would seem to telegraph to states a lack of urgency or seriousness around accountability. States aren’t asked to begin working on setting targets until all the other measures are settled, expected no earlier than 2015. They are considered successful if they fall within 70 percent of predicted estimates, meaning fatalities and injuries could go up considerably and still be considered acceptable. A lag in data means they will be basing success or failure on a snapshot from four years past – enough time for a student to enter high school and graduate. Rather than push themselves and pertinent agencies to provide better data, faster, the DOT seems to consider the status quo acceptable.

There is still time to push for a better first effort at performance measures and show the DOT that the public demands a more serious and exacting approach to accountability. The public comment period ends on June 9, 2014. Final rules for all performance measures will be enacted at the same time, likely no sooner than spring 2015.

We’ll be back in touch right here soon with information on how to comment on this rule, along with our proposed recommendations and a mechanism for sending those in, but until then, you can submit comments directly to Regulations.Gov

Full rule text in the federal register.

As feds OK funding, critical legislators move to block Nashville’s planned transit investment

Opponents in the Tennessee legislature have put forward an amendment designed to stop Nashville’s bus rapid transit line, eliciting howls of protest over legislative intervention in a local project previously approved by the state DOT.

Last updated: 4/12 1:24 p.m. at bottom. You may recall our profile of Nashville and it’s vision to get ahead of rapid growth by investing in bus rapid transit network. Nashville struggles with some of the worst congestion in the Southeast along with some of the longest peak-hour travel times in the nation.

Nashville Amp Map crop

That’s in part because the region’s economy has led the nation in rate of job growth. As population surges, metro leaders have been working to grow in a way that will continue attracting and retaining top-flight talent while avoiding the challenges that have plagued larger peers like Atlanta.

Their first big step toward a more sophisticated transit network is The Amp, an east-west line through the heart of the city that would connect diverse neighborhoods, major employers (including two hospitals and a university), and heavily visited tourist destinations.

Just last week they received the encouraging news that the Federal Transit Administration recommended $27 million in federal funding, the first installment of a potential $75 million match to state and local contributions.

That good news for supporters was overshadowed by an unexpected amendment explicitly crafted to require Nashville get the approval of the state legislature before being able to move ahead.

According to Nashville’s daily, The Tennessean, the amendment to a bill on crosswalk safety “says no rapid bus project in a metropolitan form of government, such as Nashville, could be built without the permission of the … General Assembly.”

In the same article, Nashville Mayor Karl Dean’s office called the move an “overreach” into a project that enjoys public and federal support. A followup piece further explored the issue of legislative intervention with Michael Skipper, executive director of the Nashville Metropolitan Planning Organization:

The Tennessee Department of Transportation is part of the MPO, which approved $4 million in Amp funding in December, and the governor or his designee sits on the agency’s board, Skipper said Friday.

“My position is that the project’s already approved by the state, and the governor’s concurrence is there,” he said. “These are typically executive branch decisions. …

“Giving the state legislature veto authority over projects that are already approved sort of undermines the federal law that requires the state and the locals to make these decisions together.”

The business community seemed to be shocked that the state would attempt to overrule local control on a plan that represents a key pillar of the local economic development strategy for a place so important to the state.

“You’ve got the largest regional economic contributor to this state, and it’s the only target of this limiting legislation,” said [Ralph] Schulz, president and CEO of the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce. “It just doesn’t make sense.”

The amended crosswalk safety bill could move through the Tennessee legislature as early as Wednesday. The Amp coalition is urging supporters to make phone calls to their state representatives and the leadership to ensure that they hear all the voices from Nashville residents (see below.)

We’ll be keeping a close eye on what happens this week, but follow us on twitter @t4america for more regular updates.

Post by Nashville Amp.

UPDATED (4:57 p.m.) The Nashville Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Middle Tennessee Mayors Caucus sent a letter today to the chairs of the Tennessee House and Senate transportation committees letting them know that “mayors and county executives see the legislation as an overreach that reduces our ability to make local decisions,” urging them to reconsider “any legislation that would interfere with TDOT’s ability to work with local communities to plan and select projects, particularly those that advance infrastructure improvements aimed at managing congestion and fostering economic growth in metropolitan areas.”

Read the full letter here, also posted by The Tennessean. (pdf)

UPDATED 4/12 1:24 p.m. Another letter in opposition to the legislation was sent to the same state House and Senate committees from the mayors of the biggest four cities in Tennessee — Chattanooga, Knoxville, Memphis and Nashville — cities that collectively account for 80 percent of the state’s GDP and 91 percent of the state’s job growth over the last year.

This concentration of economic activity, in turn, generates important tax revenue that funds services and infrastructure in all corners of our state. We plan to continue to grow, prosper, and serve as the economic drivers of our great state. And in order to do that, we need the ability to make decisions about infrastructure solutions in our communities, especially in the area of transportation, as mass transit is the only long- term solution to the increasing traffic congestion that accompanies our economic growth.

Read the full letter. (pdf)

Summary of the President’s budget for transportation

The transportation budget proposal President Obama released yesterday went well beyond setting spending levels for fiscal year 2015, outlining a vision for rebooting our nation’s transportation program. While the dollar figures may be considered moot by the two-year bipartisan budget that passed the Congress in December, the principles that he and his Administration put forward are substantially in line with what we’ve been hearing from business, elected and civic leaders across the country.

“The budget clearly recognizes that investment in infrastructure is essential in laying the groundwork for our future prosperity over many years,” said T4America director James Corless in our official statement yesterday. “Many of the priorities expressed in the budget clearly point in the right direction: keeping our system in good repair, supporting local efforts to promote economic development, spurring innovation through competitive grants and eliminating freight bottlenecks.”

For a breakdown of the key changes the Administration is proposing, see our analysis here. (PDF)

Step one, of course, is to figure out how to raise the money for transportation to shore up the transportation fund and make the investments necessary to ensure a prosperous economy.

Just to extend MAP-21 at the same funding levels, the trust fund requires an infusion of $19 billion next year or $100 billion over 6 years. We know that finding that sort of money won’t be an easy task, but having that conversation is the first crucial step. The President and House Ways and Means Chairman Camp both deserve recognition for presenting their preferred approach of using corporate tax reform to plug the funding gap.

The President’s budget proposes a 4-year, $302 billion surface transportation reauthorization, which is an $87 billion increase over the current spending levels.

To ensure the money is invested well, the Administration proposes several key policy moves: The first would be bringing all the programs and modes together in a unified transportation trust fund. The budget sets a priority on “fixing it first” and creates a program dedicated to repairing our most worrisome needs. It would strengthen competitive grant programs that foster innovation, local control and transparency, and create incentives for projects that deliver strong economic benefits. Freight choke points in our busiest economic centers would get special attention, regardless of mode. Acknowledging the tremendous surge in demand, public transportation projects would get a 70 percent boost.

The Administration’s priorities should inform the reauthorization of the federal program as Congress takes up the matter later this year. We at T4America look forward to seeing the details of how the Administration proposes to accomplish these goals in the President’s promised four-year reauthorization proposal.

As for what’s likely to happen next, because the bipartisan budget passed by Congress in December also set top-line budget amounts for the year (FY15) to come, it’s uncertain if the House or Senate will introduce or pass their own budget resolutions this year. Still, whether the ultimate legislative vehicle is the reauthorization of MAP-21 or appropriations bills later this year, it’s essential that Congress and the President come to agreement on a way to continue supporting communities’ efforts to maintain their transportation infrastructure and prepare for the future.

	FY13 USDOT Appropriations (post sequestration)	FY14 USDOT Appropriations	President's FY15 Proposed Budget	Difference between FY14 Approps and President's FY15 budget proposal
Federal-Aid Highways	$39.62B	$40.26B	$47.32B	+$7.06B
Transit Formula Grants	$8.46B	$8.6B	$13.914B	+$5.314B
Transit 'New Starts'	$1.86B	$2.13B	$2.5B	+$370M
TIGER	$475M	$600M	$1.25B	+$650M
High Speed Rail/High Performance Passenger Rail	$0	$0	0*	-
Amtrak Capital	$902M	$1.05B	0*	-
Amtrak Operating	$441M	$340M	0*	-
Current Passenger Rail Service	-	-	$2.45B	+$1.06B**
Rail Service Improvement Program	-	-	$2.325B	+$2.325B
Freight Program	-	-	$1.0B	+$1.0B
Critical Immediate Investments	-	-	$4.85B	+4.85B
Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation (FAST)	-	-	$1.0B	+$1.0B
Rapid Growth Area Transit Program	-	-	$500M	+$500M

*The FY15 Budget consolidates existing rail programs into 2 new programs.
**Compared to FY14 Appropriations for Amtrak Capital and Operations

T4America applauds President and House tax chair for efforts to fix the transportation funding crisis, as local leaders plead for help

Today President Obama and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) introduced separate proposals that would prevent the looming insolvency of the nation’s key infrastructure trust fund.

President Obama today unveiled a proposal for a four-year, $302 billion transportation bill, with a windfall from business tax reform covering the shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund for that period. Chairman Camp proposed tax reform measures that would include staving off insolvency of the transportation fund for eight years. James Corless, director of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response:

“We are encouraged to see the threat to our nation’s transportation network begin to get the attention it deserves. With the bankruptcy of our transportation trust fund just months away, this can’t come soon enough. Just today, local leaders from across the country came to Capitol Hill to tell Congress what a robust federal investment in their transportation networks would mean for their economic development and long term prosperity. (See our blog post on today’s events here.)

These local leaders are putting their money where their mouth is, going to their voters for tax increases to pay for infrastructure they need. But as they said today, and as I reiterated in remarks to members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, their plans count on a dependable federal partner. Today’s actions by the Administration and key House leaders show the message may finally be getting through.

With the current transportation program expiring at the end of September, we look forward to working with Congress and the Administration on a fully funded program that promotes innovation, rewards initiative and gives local communities the latitude to solve their infrastructure challenges.”