Skip to main content

 About Steve Davis

Stephen Lee Davis is the AVP for Transportation Strategy at Smart Growth America.

T4America is partnering with Sidewalk Labs to help cities thoughtfully use technology to solve their transportation challenges

With 77 hopeful cities leaving USDOT’s Smart Cities challenge empty-handed after the winner is announced later this month, we’re excited to announce a new partnership with Sidewalk Labs to help those cities and others develop efficient and affordable transportation options for all by thoughtfully and intentionally using emerging technologies. 

t4america sidewalk labs partnership

If you’re not familiar with Sidewalk Labs, they’re a relatively new city-focused company developing technology to solve big urban problems like transportation, housing, energy, and data-driven management. It was formed by an affiliation between Alphabet (Google’s new umbrella company) and Daniel Doctoroff, who has firsthand experience with these challenges as a local official himself, serving in the Bloomberg administration as the former Deputy Mayor of Economic Development and Rebuilding for the City of New York.

At T4America, we’ve been spending the last few years shifting away from a sole focus on federal policy and have expanded into equipping local leaders at all levels to find ways to get more people where they want to go quickly and affordably. And now, over the course of the next year, our two organizations will work with dozens of U.S. cities to better define how technology can help them meet their pressing transportation challenges by harnessing powerful data and the availability of new digital tools.

Here’s what Anand Babu, COO of Sidewalk Labs, had to say about our new partnership in our joint press release:

“Too often there’s a disconnect between tech interventions and transportation outcomes. We’ve seen cities embrace a more holistic approach in our collaboration with the U.S. DOT Smart City Challenge, but it’s important to broaden that discussion to all the other cities looking for better tools to improve mobility. By drawing on Transportation for America’s long experience working within local communities, we can focus the conversation on cities’ goals and break down the divide between technologists and city leaders. And as a result, we’ll build a network where best practices and ideas for solving these problems through emerging technologies can be shared among cities across the country.”

Cities can’t be passive right now as technology and new mobility solutions are combining to change the landscape of cities almost overnight. Cities can either help shape the technology transforming their cities and accomplish their goals, or have themselves be shaped by it. There’s no real third option. It’s crucial for cities to know what kind of city they want to be and set some tangible goals before pursuing technology solutions.

Any dog can be a guide dog if you don’t know where you’re going, right? And if you don’t know where you’re going, any technology will get you there.

“Working with Sidewalk Labs, we can help local leaders learn about the possibilities presented by emerging technologies, but also help first codify what they want to achieve in terms of transportation equity, reliability, and access, so the technology can be put to best use,” said T4America Director James Corless in today’s release.

With the Smart Cities Challenge from USDOT wrapping up in the next month with the selection of a winner, 77 other cities that miss out on the $40 million will be left with only the proposal they crafted and their ambitions. Money or no, many of those cities will be serious about finding ways to move their plans forward. In addition, many cities may be navigating a range of third-party private providers and other companies at their doorstep selling products or offering solutions as a result of the competition.

This partnership will not only allow us to provide guidance to cities to proceed thoughtfully, but even more importantly, help them to learn from each other as they set goals and start to figure out how to intentionally move forward with their ambitious plans.

We’re excited to team up with Sidewalk Labs to find yet another way to support smart, local, homegrown transportation plans that will help move more people more quickly and affordably.

After years of trying to slash funding, the House proposes solid funding for next round of TIGER grants

After several years of consistently trying to cut or outright eliminate the program’s funding entirely, House appropriators last week approved $450 million for competitive TIGER grants within the annual budget bill for all transportation and housing programs.

Perhaps the House got the message delivered back in March?

Over 170 elected officials and local, civic and business leaders from 45 U.S. states today sent a letter to congressional appropriators urging them to provide at least $500 million for another round of TIGER competitive transportation grants as well as the full amount authorized in last year’s FAST Act for new transit construction. As Congress begins to craft the transportation budget for the 2017 fiscal year, the 170-plus local leaders of all stripes, representing an incredible diversity of places, sent a powerful message that opportunities provided by TIGER and FTA’s New Starts program are crucial to their long-term success.

While they fell short of the mark set in this year’s Senate spending bill of $525 million, the House seems to be coming around on TIGER, which is terrific news.

Overall, the House Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) bill would provide $19.2 billion for the discretionary programs that include TIGER grants, New Starts transit construction and Amtrak, which on the whole, represents an increase of $540 million compared to the current year. Though it would provide $75 million less than the Senate’s funding level for TIGER grants, at $450 million, it represents a big change from just three years ago when the proposed House THUD bill contained zero funding for TIGER. And at least once, the House tried to restrict TIGER funding only to highway projects, leaving the huge number of smart multimodal projects that normally apply out in the cold.

The New Starts transit construction program would receive a significant boost at $2.5 billion total, which is $160 million more than what’s called for by the FAST Act and $320 million more than last year.

What’s the TIGER program?

The fiercely competitive TIGER program is one of the few ways that local communities of almost any size can directly receive federal dollars for their priority transportation projects, and represents one of the most fiscally responsible transportation programs administered by USDOT.

Unlike the overwhelming majority of all federal transportation dollars that are awarded via formulas to ensure that all states or metro areas get a share, regardless of how they’re going to spend those dollars, the federal government has found a smart way to use a small amount of money to incentivize the best projects possible through TIGER. Projects vying for funding compete against each other on their merits to ensure that each dollar is spent in the most effective way possible.  It’s a roadmap to a more efficient way to spend transportation dollars that spurs innovation, stretches federal transportation dollars further than in conventional formula programs, and awards funding to projects that provide a high-return on investment.

Why isn’t the funding guaranteed by the FAST Act?

TIGER, in addition to Amtrak funding and the program used for almost all new transit expansion, are not guaranteed funding each year from the highway trust fund. Unlike federal highway and transit formula programs, these programs have to go before appropriators in Congress each year who decide how much to give each program, resulting in this same debate nearly every year. (An attempt to provide dedicated annual funding for TIGER in the FAST Act failed during negotiations over that bill.)

While this House budget is indeed good news, just like the Senate’s version passed several weeks ago, it could face a shaky path forward. President Obama issued a veto threat to the Senate bill due to the potential for “problematic ideological provisions” included in the bill, including a Senate provision to relax hours-of-service rules for truckers that the House also includes similar language on.

Though it’s unlikely that the House and Senate will complete this budget bill before the October 1 deadline, as in past years, the content of the House and Senate transportation funding bills are incredibly important. They form the starting point for the debate and will likely be consolidated at some point early in the upcoming fiscal year.


Read more about a policy provision also included in this House budget, which instructs USDOT to begin measuring how transportation investments will connect all Americans to opportunity and essential daily needs such as jobs, schools, healthcare, food and others.

Feds get out of the way of communities that want to design safer, more complete streets

The Federal Highway Administration made two big moves this last week to clear the way for states, metro areas, and local communities to use federal dollars to design safer, more complete streets.

atlanta highway local street

Good news: old federal street design guidelines that often required local streets to be designed like this have been radically scaled back.

Both of these updates are great news for anyone advocating for streets that better meet the needs of everyone that uses them, as well as better serving the goals of the surrounding community. FHWA deserves a big round of applause for making these changes.

If you are working on a local transportation project and your DOT or some other agency cites vague federal rules when refusing to build a safe and complete street, show them the FHWA memo below. Their guidance makes it extremely clear: there’s wide latitude to design streets to best suit local needs, and old regulations that treat all roads like highways have been rolled back. 

Federal street design guidelines just got a lot simpler

Last week, FHWA finalized new street design guidelines that eliminated most of the criteria that local communities and states must adhere to when building or reconstructing certain roads — especially those with speed limits under 50 mph. Of 13 current design criteria for certain roads under 50 mph, 11 criteria have been scrapped, because, in FHWA’s words, they have “minimal influence on the safety or operation on our urban streets.”

Until now, states or cities would have to go through an arduous process of requesting an exception to do common sense things like line a downtown street with street trees, reduce the width of lanes to add a bike lane, or curve a street slightly to slow traffic and make it safer for people in cars and on foot. (This old post explains the change in more detail.)

Tfhwa design guidlines thank youhe new criteria recognize that successful streets running through a bustling downtown of any size need to be designed far differently than rural highways connecting two towns or cities. They have to meet a far more diverse range of needs than simply moving cars fast, and these smart new guidelines reflect that wisdom.

Thousands our supporters sent in letters to FHWA on this issue, and FHWA listened. From the final rule:

The FHWA received comments from 2,327 individuals and organizations on the proposed changes to the controlling criteria. Of these, 2,167 were individual form-letter comments delivered to the docket by Transportation for America. …The overwhelming support for changes to the controlling criteria indicate that the changes will support agency and community efforts to develop transportation projects that support community goals and are appropriate to the project context. The provisions included here for design documentation will result in more consistent evaluation of exceptions to the adopted design standards when controlling criteria are not met on NHS highways.

Even more encouraging, FHWA responded strongly to the handful of state DOTs that sent in comments noting their desire to keep the old design guidelines intact.

The FHWA finds that removing these controlling criteria from application in low-speed environments is supported by research and provides additional flexibility to better accommodate all modes of transportation. No new controlling criteria are proposed at this time.

In their comments, FHWA affirmed that local communities should have more leeway in how they design streets — after all, they know their local needs best — and that research shows that the old guidelines made it more difficult to accommodate all modes of transportation.

Vehicle speed- and delay-focused “level of service” metric is not a federal requirement

When planning a new street, reconstructing an old street, or conducting traffic studies for new development, most transportation agencies rely on a metric known as level of service or “LOS”. While commonly accepted amongst many traffic engineers, it’s an outdated, narrow metric that assesses how well a road performs only by looking at the number of cars and the amount of delay experienced by vehicles.

If the only goal of your community’s streets is moving cars fast, then level of service is the way to go. If your community also wants to keep people safe, or allow people to walk, bike or take transit, or support a vibrant downtown, then relying only on level of service isn’t going to cut it. It’s like trying to decide if a new pair of pants will fit by measuring the waist and ignoring the inseam.

Similar to the street design requirements that FHWA just scrapped, level of service is often used to halt plans to make streets safer for everyone or boost economic development by narrowing lanes, adding bike lanes, mid-block crosswalks, bulb-outs, or other improvements. It’s even been cited as a federal requirement in some cases. To those agencies, planners and engineers, FHWA made an announcement on May 6: (emphasis added.)

We have received several questions regarding the minimum level of service (LOS) requirements for projects on the National Highway System (NHS).

FHWA does not have regulations or policies that require specific minimum LOS values for projects on the NHS. [National Highway System] The recommended values in the Green Book are regarded by FHWA as guidance only. Traffic forecasts are just one factor to consider when planning and designing projects. Agencies should set expectations for operational performance based on existing and projected traffic conditions, current and proposed land use, context, and agency transportation planning goals, and should also take into account the input of a wide cross section of project stakeholders.

This might seem like a minor clarification, but FHWA just gave the green light to localities that want to implement a complete streets approach. By making clear that there is zero federal requirement to use level of service (and that there never has been), FHWA is implying that transportation agencies should consider more than just traffic speeds when planning street projects.

Changing policy is one thing but changing behavior is another, however. Level of service is an instructive example. It’s never been a federal requirement, but that hasn’t stopped transportation agencies all over from relying on it. And though the design guidelines have been radically pared back for most streets, that doesn’t mean that a state DOT won’t continue to adhere to them as a matter of course.

Engaging with your city, metro planning organization and state DOT will continue to be important for your community to realize its plans for safer, complete streets.

Yet, USDOT is going the opposite direction on measuring congestion

Of course, these encouraging changes from FHWA stand in sharp contrast with USDOT’s narrow, vehicle-focused proposal for how to measure congestion. While FHWA acknowledges that “traffic forecasts are just one factor to consider,” the proposed rule from USDOT would measure congestion in a way that places vehicle speed and delay far above any other factors.

This would penalize places that have made it easier to avoid congestion by making it easier to get around on transit, by foot or bike, or through telecommuting. And it would have the effect of rewarding places with long commutes that move quickly over places with shorter average commutes that move slower.

We need to measure congestion in a way that lines up with these two very encouraging moves from FHWA.

Have you sent a letter yet? Join the nearly 2,000 people who have already told USDOT they can do better.

Nashville street comparison

When it comes to traffic congestion, we need to measure more than just vehicles

UPDATE:

The comment period closes Saturday, August 20th but we are sending in all of your comments to USDOT on Friday, August 19th. If you haven’t sent in a letter yet, you can do that right here.

Last week, USDOT issued a draft rule that will govern how states and metro areas will have to measure and address congestion, along with other metrics like freight movement and emissions. However, the rule as it is currently written would measure success in outdated ways. Old measures leads to old “solutions,” like prioritizing fast driving speeds above all other modes of transportation and their associated benefits.

Congestion We All Count

The comment period is finally open: So tell USDOT to take a wider view of success and change the proposed rule.

The rule as it is currently written fails to consider people taking transit, carpooling, walking, and biking. It would also penalize communities where people live close to work, or travel shorter distances at slower speeds.

This rule makes driving fast the ultimate goal of our transportation system, regardless of what type of road you’re on. Should driving fast be the highest priority on our main streets where people might be shopping or dining at an outdoor café? Should that be the priority in residential neighborhoods where children might be biking or walking.

Photo by NACTO. httpswww.flickr.com/photos/nacto/14442453218Of course not.

Success is about a lot more than moving cars fast. Tell USDOT to improve their proposed rule. Sign an individual letter that we will deliver on your behalf to USDOT.

This rule is particularly disappointing in light of Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx’s unprecedented effort to improve Americans’ access to economic opportunity through better transportation options. Those are worthy goals, and passing the rule as currently written would be a missed opportunity to achieve them.

Deciding what projects we consider “successful” will influence which transportation projects are selected and built for years to come.

Tell USDOT that #WeAllCount and that the new rule should reflect that.

Ten things to know about USDOT’s new proposal for measuring traffic congestion

For the first time, USDOT has released new requirements for how states and metro areas will have to measure traffic congestion. While the new rule marks a continued, necessary shift to assessing what our federal transportation dollars actually accomplish, this proposal as introduced doubles down on outdated measures of congestion that will push local communities to spend billions of dollars in vain attempts to build their way out of it.

For two years, USDOT has been working to establish a new system of performance measures to help govern how federal dollars are spent and hold states and metro areas accountable for making progress on important goals. This proposal for congestion (and several other measures focused on “system performance”) is the last of three sets of new Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) rules that will be finalized in early 2017.

Though this represents an incredibly important and necessary shift toward measuring what our transportation spending actually accomplishes, using the wrong measure for congestion will help advance projects that divide communities, cut people off from opportunity, and cost billions of dollars (we don’t have) in the name of solving “congestion” by trying in vain to keep traffic moving.

As we laid out in our post on congestion last week, how we measure congestion matters.

There’s a direct connection between how we decide to measure it and how we choose to address it. If we focus, as this rule does, on keeping traffic moving at a high rate of speed at all times of day on all types of roads and streets, then the result is easy to predict: our solutions will prioritize the investments that make that possible, regardless of cost vs. benefits or the potential impacts on the communities those roads pass through.

Here are ten things you need to know about this new rule from USDOT and what you can do about it

 

#1 The rule undermines Secretary Foxx’s unprecedented effort to connect communities and use transportation to give people greater opportunities

Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx recently launched a campaign based on the stunning admission that federal policy had long incentivized poorly designed highways that isolated communities and cut people off from jobs and opportunities.

Springing out of powerful personal examples he saw firsthand growing up in Charlotte when new freeways were built “to carry people through my neighborhood, but never to my neighborhood,” he expressed his firm commitment to ensuring that our transportation investments connect more people to opportunity and knit communities together — rather than divide them.

crestdale drive charlotte interstates congestion rule

Where the streets around Secretary Foxx’s childhood neighborhood dead-end into Interstates 77 and 85 in Charlotte, NC

It’s an inspiring effort, but as he said, “These principles sound very easy, but they’re really hard and they’re also very necessary if we’re going to make transportation work for everybody.”  This rule produced by FHWA illustrates the uphill battle against the institutional inertia for the old way of doing things.

This proposal also undercuts the Secretary’s ongoing Mayors’ Challenge for Safer People and Safer Streets intended to “help communities create safer, better connected bicycling and walking networks,” explicit requirements from Congress to design streets safe for all users, and the nearly 900 communities that have passed complete streets policies to do the same.

“We’re trying to be more attuned, but it’s not a situation where the federal government is solely in control. We can’t tell a state what project to do. They have to make those determinations,” Sec. Foxx noted.

Indeed, states and metro areas will still be making the bulk of the decisions. Yet through this rule and other guidance, USDOT can absolutely usher in a new paradigm by steering states and metro areas to a more holistic approach for measuring traffic congestion that counts all people in a community by counting all modes of transportation. And we will need your help to hold USDOT’s feet to the fire to make this change happen.

#2 Focusing on delay is simply the wrong measure for addressing congestion

USDOT plans to measure vehicle speed and delay seven different ways, while ignoring people carpooling, taking transit, walking & biking or skipping the trip entirely.

A host of people and groups from all across the map, including T4America, have already explained in detail how a singular focus on delay for drivers paints an incredibly one-dimensional picture of congestion. Focusing on average delay by simply measuring the difference between rush hour speeds compared to free-flow 3 a.m. traffic fails to count everyone else commuting by other modes, rewards places with fast travel speeds at the expense of places with shorter commutes and less time spent behind the wheel overall, and completely ignores how many people are actually moving through the corridor.

This measure treats a corridor filled with buses or carpoolers the same as a corridor filled with single-occupancy vehicles. It ignores millions of people who opt out of congestion entirely by taking transit, telecommuting, walking or biking, and even penalizes places where people get to take shorter trips. While USDOT’s proposal to measure delay per capita at least begins to recognize that not everyone in a region is stuck in traffic on the highway, it still fails to measure how many people are moving through a corridor.

Shouldn’t the actual impact on real people be the core principle of anything we measure? Any traffic congestion measure should lead us to solutions that increase access to opportunity for everyone — regardless of how they travel each day.

#3 You can’t manage what you don’t measure

In the pointed words of a USDOT official earlier this week, “you can’t manage what you don’t measure.” The really staggering thing is that FHWA knows they’re missing the boat on measuring other crucial things that paint a more accurate picture of delay. From their own words in the 425-page rule:

As with delay metrics, FHWA acknowledges that travel time indices do not capture system attributes in terms of shorter trips or better access to destinations and mode options, which may occur at the expense of greater delay.

True. So let’s find a better way than focusing narrowly on delay.

#4 USDOT should stick with reliability and dump delay

One of the few positives is that (in one of the measures), USDOT recognizes that predictability is incredibly important. The rule includes a people-centric metric of “reliability” — whether a trip on a corridor takes the same amount of time from one day to the next. While completely eliminating rush hour congestion isn’t either possible or affordable, what many travelers are looking for is the basic assurance that their morning commute will take the same amount of time each day, allowing them to plan their trips with predictability.

But reliability for whom? Unfortunately, this rule only considers the reliability of those traveling by car, and will ignore whether or not your transit trip is hit or miss.

Though one of the other measures is labeled “reliability,” it’s just another measure of delay in sheep’s clothing: It defines “reliability” as trips taking the same amount of time at any time of the day – middle of the night or rush hour — an incredibly unlikely scenario.

#5 When it comes to congestion, this treats highways the same as main streets — and could do real harm to our most economically vibrant places

Take a look at these two sets of streets from Nashville and Charlotte. First: US 41/Clarksville Pike in northern Nashville, and then Broadway in downtown Nashville.

US 41 Nashville congestionNashville Broadway NHS congestion

And Brookshire Blvd/NC-16 headed south into Charlotte, and Tryon Street near downtown

NC 16 Charlotte congestionCharlotte Tryon Street NHS congestion

Are the needs of all of these streets the same? Do they all need to accomplish the same thing? Should we expect them to function the same way?

Partially because of a decision made all the way back in 2012 in MAP-21 to expand what’s known as the National Highway System to include nearly every four-lane (or larger) road — regardless of what kind of traffic it carries or where it passes through, this measure proposes to measure congestion roughly the same way on all of them.

Whether in a rural small town or a big city, the needs of our country’s main streets are radically different from the highways and interstates designed to connect disparate places. For a main street to function well, it has to serve everyone who needs to use it.

On a main street, that which looks like “vehicle delay” to a traffic engineer looks like economic activity and success to a local merchant or mayor on a main street.

#6 USDOT ignores the innovative things other states and metro areas are already doing

California has already moved to scrap level of service (LOS) as an evaluation criteria for transportation projects, one that has typically resulted in the same outcomes as this narrow congestion rule. As Angie Schmitt wrote in Streetsblog back in January:

Instead of assessing how a building or road project will affect traffic delay, California will measure how much traffic it generates, period. Car trips, not car delays, will be the thing to avoid. This is likely to have the opposite effect of LOS, leading to more efficient use of land and transportation infrastructure.

At the same time that USDOT is proposing to double down on 1960’s measures for traffic congestion, other metro areas across the country are setting ambitious new goals and accompanying performance measures for improving health, improving access to jobs for more people or expanding transit to connect more people to opportunity.

#7 We can’t wait to develop better measures until we have the “perfect” data

Throughout the rule’s 425 pages, USDOT continues to perpetuate the myth that they lack adequate data to measure other modes of transportation, ignoring sources like (their own!) National Transit Database, the U.S. Census American Community Survey, and cell phone network data among others. USDOT invested millions of taxpayer dollars after the passage of MAP-21 to procure the data necessary to develop these vehicle-only measures. If USDOT is spending our money to collect data then they must find ways to acquire the data needed to better measure the entire system and all of its users.

#8 It puts containers above commuters

By defining congestion on interstates as speeds below 35 mph for commuters but below just 50 mph for freight trucks, this rule strangely prioritizes the needs of freight movement at the expense of people. While the movement of freight is indeed incredibly important, it should be on a level playing field with the people picking up the majority of the tab for the system’s maintenance. (To say nothing of the difficulty of actually implementing different standards for various types of vehicles on the same roadway.)

This rule also sets an impossible standard for freight movement in urban settings. Freight bottlenecks obviously occur far more often in urban areas where demand is far greater. Does anyone think that it’s feasible or affordable to spend enough or build enough capacity so that trucks can travel at 50 mph through the middle of major cities during rush hour?

#9 It undercuts the goal of protecting and enhancing the environment

This rule does include more than just measures for traffic congestion, including a requirement to measure mobile source emissions (i.e. pollution from vehicles). Yet states and metro areas would only have to measure the impact of the few projects funded by the relatively tiny Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, which is akin to not being required to reduce highway deaths on a road because that road was built with highway dollars instead of safety improvement dollars.

Though the rule makes a first-ever move to include language on measuring the contribution of the potential emissions impacts of transportation, it stops far short of actually including any requirements with teeth. As Joe Cortright wrote earlier this week:

Despite some hopes that the White House and environmentalists had prevailed on the USDOT to tackle transportation’s contribution to climate change as part of these performance measures, there’s nothing with any teeth here. Instead—in a 425 page proposed rule—there are just six pages (p. 101-106) addressing greenhouse gas emissions that read like a bad book report and a “dog-ate-my-homework” excuse for doing nothing now. Instead, DOT offers up a broad set of questions asking others for advice on how they might do something, in some future rulemaking, to address climate change.

#10 We still have a chance to improve this rule — but we’ll need your help to do it

The comment period for this rule isn’t open yet — it will open on Friday, April 22 and run for at least 90 days. Though USDOT has gone in the wrong direction on many of these measures, we know from our past experience on similar rules that they are absolutely listening for suggestions for improving this. They’re eager to hear how it can be improved.

There are three things you can do in the next week to help.

Not on our email list already? Sign up here.

Breaking news: USDOT releases draft rule for measuring congestion

A new federal proposal governing how states and metro areas will be required to measure congestion was just released early today. Our brief analysis finds that though there’s potential for improvement with how the rule is worded, it would still push local communities to waste time and money attempting to build their way out of congestion by using a measure of traffic congestion that’s narrow, limited and woefully out of date.

As we alluded to last week, thanks to new requirements in the 2012 transportation law (MAP-21), USDOT was preparing to release the last batch of new performance measures to help ensure federal dollars are spent to make progress on important, measurable goals. Though these new directions on measuring congestion (along with other important measures) won’t be officially released and open for comment until this Friday, this document posted by FHWA today is likely to be the final proposal for new performance measures.

We’re reading through the full 425-page rule now, and will have much more here on the blog soon (and in your email inboxes), including a way for you to send official comments to USDOT urging them to do better.

Do you want to be notified with the latest news on this front? Sign up for email from T4America today. 

In the meantime, if you missed our post last week explaining why it’s important how we choose to measure congestion, catch up with that here.

Will pending federal transportation rule double down on outdated view of congestion?

USDOT is on the cusp of releasing crucial directions for how states and metro areas will have to measure traffic congestion. The new rule could push local communities to try in vain to build their way out of congestion, or mark a shift toward smarter approaches like shortening trip times, rewarding communities that provide more options or better accounting for other travel modes and telecommuting.

Updated: The rule is out — read our more detailed post on ten things you should know about it, and take action by sending a letter to USDOT.

Friday Night Lights

Thanks to new requirements in the 2012 transportation law (MAP-21), USDOT is working to establish a new system of performance measures to help govern how federal dollars are spent and hold states and metro areas accountable for making progress on important goals. For two years, USDOT has been slowly developing, releasing and then refining new metrics for safety and state of good repair for highways and bridges. And any day now, they’re expected to release the final highway rule that will cover traffic congestion, air emissions, freight movement and system performance.

How we measure traffic congestion matters

While all of those specific metrics are important, how USDOT instructs states and metro areas to measure congestion will have huge impacts on communities of all sizes. Why? Because there’s a direct connection between how we decide to measure congestion and the resulting strategies for addressing it. And we need a measure that rewards solutions like aggressively investing in additional travel options, eliminating trips, reducing trip length, creating more places to live close to jobs or more effectively managing travel demand.

One of the most commonly used methods for measuring congestion today (and how proposed transportation projects would improve it or make it worse) is incredibly narrow and generates major criticism: roadway delay.

Every year, the Texas Transportation Institute releases their annual Travel Time Index congestion report that generates tons of news coverage across the country. Our piece from last year explained the limitations of comparing average rush-hour speeds to empty roads in the middle of the night, as TTI uses those middle-of-the-night speeds as their baselines for comparison. And then as a direct result of how congestion gets measured, many agencies attempt, at enormous price tags, to build enough road capacity to keep traffic moving at free-flow speeds during rush hour, usually bringing limited benefits (a few seconds of savings per commuter) at enormous costs.

Roadway delay, typified by TTI, also rewards places with long average commutes that happen at a high rate of speed, dinging places where people spend less time commuting or commuting shorter distances — just because they travel at slower speeds compared to that baseline of average travel speeds at the middle of the night.

Another major shortcoming is that roadway delay focuses only on drivers — not commuters as a whole, ignoring the millions of people opting out of congestion entirely by using various other options like transit, walking or biking or skipping the trip by telecommuting.  Under a roadway delay measure, if a city has made investments like these that allow a large share of its commuters to skip roadway congestion entirely, it can be rated the same as another city where the average delay on the roads is the same, even if 100 percent of that second city’s commuters are stuck in traffic.

Delay is also blind to how many people a corridor is actually moving — it only looks at the number of vehicles. Should two similar corridors, where the first moves three times the amount of people as the second because of a carpool requirement or a lane dedicated to high-capacity transit, have the same scores for delay just because the travel speed is the same?

STEX 9587C deadheading in Mountlake Terrace

With USDOT about to propose this new framework for measuring congestion, it’s worth stating plainly: Roadway delay, similar to what TTI measures, represents a flawed and unrealistic view on measuring congestion.

It also doesn’t mesh with USDOT’s overall priorities, running counter to the stated goals of President Obama’s seven rounds of successful multimodal TIGER investments as well as the priorities of Secretary Foxx’s ambitious Ladders of Opportunity initiative.

A better, properly constructed measure will reward states and regions for investing in projects that make the most cost-effective difference in managing congestion, reducing travel times and improving system performance, regardless of what type of transportation mode is proposed.

What we’re expecting from USDOT

Unfortunately, early indications lead us to believe that the final congestion measure due to be released any day now will incorporate a variation on roadway delay. But that won’t be the end of the line for something better. Just like the past two rules that largely focused on safety and the conditions of roads and bridges, USDOT will be opening a comment period after the rule is released and then refining it one last time.

Though we’ll have an uphill battle, through coordination and agreement on a preferred alternative (more on that in our next post), we stand a strong shot at getting language included that acknowledges the limitation of these conventional congestion measures and invites development of a better, more holistic measure that provides a fuller picture of congestion and who is or isn’t affected.

But we won’t be able to do this alone. We will need cities, MPOs, transit agencies, the business community, state DOTs and advocates just like you to support our effort to ensure that the final congestion measure more fully accounts for all modes of transportation and doesn’t reinforce flawed 1950’s measures of success.

Georgia’s legislature moved last night to enable Atlanta to fund new transit & local projects

After an up-and-down last few years when it comes to transportation funding, the Georgia state legislature successfully passed a pared-back bill last night that will allow voters in the City of Atlanta to decide whether or not to raise new funds for expanded transit service throughout the city, in addition to other transportation investments in the city.

Thanks to state legislation, transit could be finally coming to Atlanta's BeltLine, running alongside the popular trails. Photo via Beltline.org

Thanks to state legislation, transit could be finally coming to Atlanta’s BeltLine, running alongside the popular trails. Photo via Beltline.org

Under a new law passed late night by the Georgia legislature in the dying hours of the session, the city will be able to put a question on the ballot to finally add transit to the one-of-a-kind Beltline around the city, expand existing bus and rail service, or fund other new transit projects. The city will also be able to raise new funds for streets and highways and the remainder of Fulton County (which surrounds and includes part of Atlanta) will be able to raise new local sales taxes for road and transit projects outside the city.

The legislation (SB 369) enables three new local funding sources, each dependent on approval through voter referenda. 1) The City of Atlanta can request voter approval for an additional half-cent sales tax through 2057 explicitly for transit, bringing in an estimated $2.5 billion for MARTA transit. 2) Through a separate ballot question the city could ask for another half-cent for road projects. 3) And in Fulton County outside the city, mayors will need to agree to a package of road and transit projects and ask voters to approve up to a ¾-cent sales tax to fund the projects.

After a bigger regional bill failed a few weeks ago that would have given the transit ballot authority to more counties and municipalities outside of the core city and Fulton county, the Atlanta Journal Constitution reported that last night’s bill “represents a compromise with GOP lawmakers who opposed an earlier plan put forth by Sen. Brandon Beach, R-Alpharetta.”

That effort earlier in the session would have enabled a larger transit measure in Atlanta and both adjoining counties, Fulton and DeKalb. Opposition to new transit measures — especially in Fulton County — sunk that legislation and when that bill died a few weeks ago, it seemed at the time like the end of the line for new transit funding in this legislative session.

Last night’s compromise bill that emerged from the ashes will enable a new, long-term funding stream for transit in the city of Atlanta, where support is the strongest. If approved, the new funding would allow the largest expansion of MARTA in the system’s history and allow more transit to connect and permeate growing in-town neighborhoods.

LOOKING BACK IN ATLANTA

After an up-and-down last few years for transportation funding, this is a big win for the regional economic powerhouse of metro Atlanta.

T4America members like the Metro Atlanta Chamber have been hearing from their members (and potential recruits looking to locate in Atlanta) how important expanded transit is to the city and region’s future. In our widely-cited story from last year, we chronicled how employers in the city are increasingly locating near transit to attract a younger, talented workforce, including State Farm’s plan to build literally right on top of a northside MARTA station.

Dave Williams, VP of Infrastructure & Government Affairs for the Metro Atlanta Chamber and T4A Advisory Board member remarked, “We’re thrilled that MARTA will be back in expansion mode for the first time in more than 15 years.  The measure that passed will give Atlanta the opportunity to generate over $2.5 billion in local funding for transit projects. It’s an extraordinary positive step to create more commuting options and there will be more to come.”

“This success resulted from many partners in our community collaborating, including business interests, civic groups, environmental concerns, labor and trades, and engaged citizens,” he added.

Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed called the failure of 2012’s massive regional transportation ballot measure that included an enormous list of road and transit projects the biggest failure of his political career. Back in the beginning of 2015 in our 15 things to watch in 2015 series of posts, we pointed to Mayor Reed as a person to watch last year, as he was trying to find a way forward on new transportation funding for the city.

[After 2012’s failed referendum, Reed] has often suggested that Atlanta might instead pair up with a few other nearby municipalities on a separate measure to raise funds for transportation. City of Atlanta and Dekalb county voters strongly favored the 2012 measure, so a joint Atlanta-DeKalb plan could be a possibility to watch for discussion of in 2015.

Which is pretty close to what happened this year.

After that 2012 mega-measure failed, they came close to getting new local funding authority for MARTA included in last year’s broad state transportation legislation which raised $900 million, mostly for road projects. But:

At one point during negotiations there was a provision that would have allowed the cities and counties that contribute to MARTA to increase the sales tax dedicated to the system by 0.5 percent via ballot measures, but this provision was removed from the final bill.

With potentially $2.5 billion to invest in new projects, if approved by the voters, MARTA Board Chairman Robbie Ashe told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that the regional transit agency is already working on a list of projects that could be funded through a new local tax in Atlanta.

“My best guess is the lion’s share would go to expanding the transit on the Beltline,” said Ashe, adding that the city might also contemplate building infill rail stations or extending a rail line by a stop or two.

Because of financial constraints, constructing transit lines along the entire 22-mile circle of the Beltline would likely have to be done in phases, rather than all at once, said Ashe.

This is welcome news, but they’re not finished yet. We’ll be watching closely as the city formulates their plan and begins to put together a campaign for a successful ballot measure, possibly as soon as this Fall.

This post was co-written by Dan Levine and Stephen Lee Davis

Though not selected as finalists, other Smart Cities Challenge applicants still hopeful to make their plans a reality

Though 77 cities will leave USDOT’s Smart Cities competition empty-handed later this summer, T4America is looking to help many of those cities advance the great ideas still deserving of help.

Seven cities were selected two weekends ago as semifinalists in the first-ever Smart City Challenge from USDOT, a competition that will eventually award $40 million to just one of those seven cities to help them rethink urban mobility, powered by innovative new technologies. Which means that 77 of the 78 will ultimately walk away empty-handed without any funding. (Save for the $100,000 that the seven semifinalists received to further develop their initial proposals.)

After reaching out over the last few months to all of the cities that applied, T4America held an invite-only conference call earlier this week to offer advice and support for advancing parts of their applications forward; applications with interesting responses to the question of how to rethink the future of transportation within cities of all sizes.

USDOT was a guest on our webinar, offering ideas, suggestions about other possibly little-known federal programs that can be used to advance certain ideas, or more information about grant programs like TIGER or the new freight grant program that can meet the need.

One of the most interesting things that USDOT shared with everyone was this graphic showing a list of 13 challenges facing cities. (There are certainly others, but this is fascinating summary of some of the most pressing.)

USDOT smart cities — challenges for cities

Win or lose the Smart Cities Challenge, these issues above are ones that cities of all size face today or will be facing in the future for years to come as the landscape radically changes due to the impact of new technologies, consumer preferences and new mobility options.

We at Transportation for America are excited to find ways to support these other cities that are eager, engaged and motivated to become smarter cities and ask big questions about the future of mobility in their communities. This week was a small step forward, and we’re hopeful for more chances to help support cities that are ready to rethink the status quo when it comes to transportation.

Are you associated with one of the cities that applied (or chose not to for whatever reason) and missed the invite-only conference call this week? Email us at smartcities@t4america.org

Seven semifinalist cities selected over the weekend in USDOT’s Smart City Challenge

Over the weekend, while appearing at the South by Southwest Interactive festival, USDOT Secretary Anthony Foxx announced the selection of seven cities to continue as semifinalists in the first-ever Smart City Challenge — a competition that will eventually award $40 million to just one city to “use technology to connect transportation assets into an interactive network.”

Through this open competition for a sizable grant award, the USDOT and Secretary Foxx have asked cities to think big on the future of mobility, and what could they do with $40 million to bring that future to fruition.

78 cities from 34 states plus the District of Columbia applied for their chance to win the single $40 million grant. Foxx, speaking at SXSW on Saturday, said, “The level of excitement and energy the Smart City Challenge has created around the country far exceeded our expectations,” said Secretary Foxx. “After an overwhelming response – 78 applications total – we chose to select seven finalists instead of five because of their outstanding potential to transform the future of urban transportation.”

The cities of Austin, TX; Columbus, OH; Denver, CO; Kansas City, MO; Pittsburgh, PA; Portland, OR; and San Francisco, CA will now receive $100,000 each to put more meat on the bones of their proposals and create a detailed roadmap on how they will make their plans a reality. Come June, one of those cities will be selected to receive the full $40 million grant to implement their winning plan over a three-year period.

What about the other 73 cities?

USDOT kicked off an incredibly important discussion and 78 cities responded by asking big questions about the future of transportation within our cities. While we’re celebrating these seven cities today, come this Summer, there will be 77 cities that leave empty-handed, and many of them will have great ideas still deserving of help.

Where can they turn?

For one, we at Transportation for America are kicking off an effort to help support these other cities that are eager, engaged and motivated to become smarter cities and ask big questions about the future of mobility in their communities. Next week, we’re going to be holding an invite-only online discussion soon with the applicants that weren’t selected. (We’re reaching out to most of you directly, but if you’re interested and don’t hear from us, email us at smartcities@t4america.org)

More than 300 private companies — whether popular providers like Uber or Lyft, backend technology companies like Amazon Web Services or Google, or providers of intelligent transportation systems like NXP or Siemens — have expressed their interest to USDOT to work not just with the winning city, but with other smart, forward looking cities that are thinking about the future of urban mobility.

These other cities will certainly need help figuring out how best to proceed, and how best to do it without the aid of a $40 million grant to kickstart their efforts.

T4America will be announcing some exciting partnerships in the coming days and weeks that will help make connections between these cities and the private companies, providers and experts to help support their work, so stay tuned.

Interested in learning more about or applying for this year’s TIGER grants? Join us on 3/24

Though the future of the program is perpetually up in the air, $500 million in competitive federal funding is available for smart, local transportation projects this year in the TIGER program, and Transportation for America is here to help you learn more about the program.

Is your community interested in applying for a TIGER transportation grant? Are you looking for help and support in preparing the best possible grant application?

The fiercely competitive TIGER program is one of the few ways that local communities of almost any size can directly receive federal dollars for their priority transportation projects. Projects vying for funding compete against each other on their merits to ensure that each dollar is spent in the most effective way possible, spurring innovation, stretching federal transportation dollars further than in conventional formula programs, and awarding funding to projects with a high-return on investment.

But the program is, as stated above, fiercely competitive. Over the life of the program, the requests for funding have been 50 times greater than what’s been available. There are far more losers than there are winners in the TIGER program. Being prepared with the best possible project and application is key to winning, and T4America can help.

Join us for a free, public webinar on Thursday March 24 at 4 p.m. EST on the latest round of TIGER funding with some pointers from T4America senior policy advisor and USDOT veteran Beth Osborne, and Smart Growth America director of research Michael Rodriguez on how to win funding for your project.

Register for Webinar

The webinar itself will cover what makes applications competitive, what USDOT has been looking for throughout the program’s seven rounds so far, the role of the benefit-cost analysis, the importance of the non-federal match (i.e., local dollars brought to the table), how shovel-ready a project needs to be, the importance of support from local elected officials, and typical mistakes to avoid, among other helpful areas of interest.

During this discussion, we’ll also have information about T4America’s technical assistance offerings and opportunities for professional consulting on your project. Our technical assistance program can actually help with grant application writing, review, and drafting of the benefit-cost analysis. We can also provide detailed advice and valuable insight into the TIGER process for those that might just want more details than a webinar would provide. 

Benefits for T4America members

T4America members also have the option of receiving limited free technical assistance for TIGER. Logged-in members will see information about that below. Interested in joining as a T4America member? Find out more information here.

[member_content]Transportation for America members interested in applying for TIGER receive the option of an hour with Beth Osborne to walk through your project and talk about strategy for their application. If you’re interested in scheduling this, get in touch with Erika Young at erika.young@t4america.org or 202-955-5543 x239[/member_content]

Massachusetts event highlights the growing trend of states moving to enable more local transportation funding

“Let the voters decide.” It’s a mantra we hear all the time in politics, but not quite as much in transportation. Yet that’s starting to change, as nearly a dozen states have taken steps to empower local communities with new or enhanced taxing authority for transportation over the last few years, putting the question directly in the hands of voters.

Update: (5:23 p.m.) WAMC radio story about the briefing is at the bottom of this post.

Like in Utah, where legislature moved in 2015 to increase the state’s gas tax, tie it to inflation, and then provide individual counties with the ability to go to the ballot to increase sales taxes to raise yet more dollars to invest in their local transportation priorities. Voters approved the 0.25% sales tax increase in ten of the 17 counties where it was on the ballot last November. And in Virginia, state legislators in 2014 created a new regional funding mechanism and boosted sales taxes in the state’s two biggest metro areas (Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads) explicitly and only for transportation projects.

This growing movement of states taking action to empower local communities and put questions in the hands of the voters was the hot topic at a legislative briefing in the Massachusetts state capitol this morning, sponsored by a host of organizations including Transportation for Massachusetts and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council.

MA policy breakfast james corless mayor ballard 2

From left, Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll, MAPC executive director Marc Draisen, Former Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, T4A Director James Corless (speaking), Pioneer Valley Planning Commission executive director Tim Brennan and Kristina Egan from Transportation for Massachusetts at this morning’s breakfast in the MA state capitol.

The briefing was in support of S1474 and H2698, bills in the Massachusetts legislature known as “enabling legislation” that would allow cities, towns or groups of cities new authority to raise one of four different sources of local taxes explicitly for local transportation projects.

tracking state policy funding featuredTracking state policy & funding

We are closely tracking this piece of state legislation and scores of others as part of our new resource on state transportation policy & funding. Visit our refreshed state policy bill tracker to see current information about the states attempting to raise new state or local funding in 2016, states attempting to reform how those dollars are spent, and states taking unfortunate steps in the wrong direction on policy.

T4America Director James Corless kicked off the discussion speaking to his own experience with ballot measures in California. “There is no better way of rebuilding the transportation brand with voters than asking them to tax themselves for projects and then delivering those projects and making good on that promise,” he explained.

In Indiana, the legislature acted in 2014 to change state law and allow metro Indianapolis counties to have a long-awaited vote on raising income taxes to fund an ambitious new public transportation network built around bus rapid transit.

Former Indy Mayor Greg Ballard, who told the Indy Star that he’d “been to the Statehouse more on [Indy’s enabling legislation] than any other issue,” was shared a local perspective this morning on how important it is for local cities to have more of a hand in deciding their own future and staying competitive.

“This is all about attracting talent…the local option transportation tax is a critical tool for mayors because, let’s face it, mayors know best what their most pressing transportation problems are,” Mayor Ballard said.

“When I became mayor we had one transit line on a map. We had no bigger, regional vision. What our local option tax has done is allow us to think big. So we now want to take seven new transit lines to the voters, and the local option tax made it possible to embrace such an ambitious vision. People used to move for a job now they move for a place – that’s why transportation and quality life is critical to make your economy competitive.”

The leaders of Massachusetts’ cities and towns are eager to put the question to voters. Marc Draisen, executive director of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council in the Boston metro area, said, “This bill sets a high bar — you have to let local voters decide on their own future…if they don’t like it, they will reject it.”

And the Mayor of Salem, Kim Driscoll, said that as things stand now without the legislation, it’s an uphill battle for cities like hers to invest in what they most need to stay competitive.

“The ability to connect people to places is critical. But for a place like Salem we simply don’t have the tools to invest in the projects that can make that happen,” she said. “This bill would unlock great ideas in the communities that really want it”

T4America director James Corless reminded everyone that the success of local cities and towns are intrinsic to the state’s economic prosperity.

“The best ideas are coming from cities and towns; empowering communities and promoting innovation is essential to a strong future.”

Updated 5:23 p.m. — WAMC Northeast Public Radio did a story about this morning’s briefing. Read or listen to the story here. An excerpt:

State Senator Ben Downing is sponsoring a bill to enable a community or group of municipalities to enact a tax to finance local transportation projects.

“This is a way to control much more directly how we raise and how we spend money for transportation,” Downing said. “It’s also a way to guarantee that the dollars that are raised will stay in the community where they are raised.”

…Transportation for America Director James Corless says since 2013 10 states have passed similar legislation. “In part they realize Congress is not going to come to their rescue anymore and increasingly even state capitals are broke,” said Corless.

This story is part of the work of T4America’s START Network — State Transportation Advocacy, Research & Training —  for state elected leaders and advocates working on similar state issues.

Find out more and join today.

START logo t4 feature web

Tennessee charting a course to make streets more dangerous & hamstring local authority

A bill moving through the Tennessee legislature would severely curtail local control and authority over transportation spending, result in more dangerous streets, and prevent cities and towns of all sizes from investing in the wide range of transportation options that are key to their economic prosperity.

Sidewalks would be useful here.

Sidewalks would be useful here on Nolensville Rd, a state highway that’s also a local street through Nolensville, TN southeast of Nashville. A new Tennessee law could prevent state gas tax dollars from being used to add them.

Less than a year after passing a statewide complete streets policy, at least two Tennessee state legislators are spearheading a fairly shocking legislative effort to curtail the flexibility that the state, cities and counties have to invest in the diverse types of transportation options that are demanded by their citizens and supported by scores of state and local elected leaders from across the state.

HB 1650 (with a companion in the Senate), as originally introduced and intended, would entirely ban the use of state gas tax revenue for building any sidewalks (even as part of a larger road project), bike lanes and trails, or other similarly cost-effective and popular projects to help make traveling on foot or by bike safer and more convenient.

But this bill goes further than a restriction on the projects that the Tennessee Department of Transportation plans and builds itself, however.

The bill would also narrowly restrict how a city or county could invest their share of gas tax dollars they receive back from the state. This bill would curtail the freedom and control communities of all sizes currently enjoy to invest these dollars however they choose.

Tracking state policy & fundingtracking state policy funding featured

This bill is just one of many pieces of state legislation that we are tracking closely as part of our new resource on state transportation policy & funding.

Visit our refreshed state policy bill tracker to see current information about the states attempting to raise new funding in 2016, states attempting to reform how those dollars are spent, and states (like Tennessee) taking unfortunate steps in the wrong direction on policy.

The bill has been opposed thus far by TDOT, in part because it would have a dramatic impact on safety and could prevent them from meeting decades-old, basic ADA requirements that require crosswalks and curb ramps and other basic safety and accessibility features — which could also jeopardize future federal funds for the state. While there’s potential for the bill to be amended to address the ADA issue and possibly allow sidewalk construction to some degree, the legislators appear to be intent on preserving the outright restriction of state funds for any on-street or off-street bike lanes or trails.

It’s a misguided attempt to save a state money, but considering that only about one percent of the entire state transportation budget goes to projects that make walking or biking safer or more convenient, it’s akin to trying to save money on your power bill by unplugging a single light bulb while running the AC at 60 degrees all summer.

The kicker is that Tennessee is already a national leader on evaluating proposed projects to find savings (or waste) and maximize the benefits of each dollar. We profiled them as a model to emulate in our recent report on smart state policies other states should consider:

In 2012, the Tennessee DOT (TDOT), in partnership with Smart Growth America, found that many transportation projects in its program could be redesigned to achieve 80-90 percent of benefits for as little as one-tenth of the initial proposed cost. After reviewing just the first five projects, TDOT found a cost savings of over $171 million through right-sizing the scope of work. In one project in Jackson County, TDOT was able to reduce the overall cost from an estimated $65 million to just $340,000 while still achieving the same safety and efficiency outcomes. As a result, TDOT has saved billions of dollars and stretched its limited resources even further (the state’s 21.4 cent per gallon gas tax was last raised in 1993, and the state operates its transportation program on a pay-as-you-go basis).

Check that math again: By re-scoping just one project, TDOT saved over $64 million dollars — equivalent to almost four full years of current state funding for safer streets and sidewalks.

There are indeed savings to be found, but curtailing local control and flexibility and making streets less safe for Tennesseans isn’t the solution.

TDOT’s leaders are already on board with awarding a small fraction of their budget — about half a percent of the state’s budget — to build a well-rounded transportation system, and they see how it supports the economic prosperity of the state and the safety of all citizens.

The state created a new Multimodal Access fund in 2013, which has competitively awarded about $10 million annually (out of a $1.8 billion annual budget) to “fund infrastructure projects that support the transportation needs of transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists by addressing gaps along the state highway network,” according to TDOT.

“Our responsibilities as a transportation agency go far beyond building roads and bridges,” TDOT Commissioner John Schroer said in their release for the 2015 grant awards. “Providing safe access for different modes of transportation ultimately creates a more complete and diverse network for our users. These projects are also extremely cost effective, which allows TDOT to make improvements in more areas across the state.”

The sponsors of the bill appear to be unaware of the potential impacts on public safety, the growing public support for these projects, or the sizable economic benefits these projects can bring. HB 1650 would not only end this small multimodal state grant program that’s supported smart, cost-effective projects (chosen on the merits) from across the state, but would also put an incredible burden on local governments by essentially requiring them to self-fund even the most basic sidewalk components of road-related projects.

Amy Benner, a Knoxville-based bike attorney and board member at Bike Walk Tennessee, talked to Streetsblog last week about the bill.

“Our concern is that it prevents localized communities from doing what they want to with their roadways. The way it’s currently written is going to potentially prevent projects that have already been researched and approved and the communities support and mayors have signed off on from happening.”

It’s shocking to contrast this with other forward-looking places that are scrambling to invest in a wide range of transportation options to grow their economies, attract talent, improve mobility and double down on the unique qualities that makes their cities successful.

Scores of cities are enjoying the economic returns of investing in a broader range of transportation options, whether the bus rapid transit systems in medium-sized cities, the massively successful bikesharing systems in cities large and small, the Cultural Trail in Indianapolis or the inspiring Atlanta Beltline in-town trail network that’s been a boost to the local economy.

It’s incredibly discouraging to see Tennessee legislators trying to turn back the clock by making it harder for the state, cities and counties to build safer streets, kneecapping their ability to stay economically competitive in the process.

It’s a “cure” that will only kill the patient.

This story is part of the work of T4America’s START Network — State Transportation Advocacy, Research & Training —  for state elected leaders and advocates working on similar state issues.

Find out more and join.

START logo t4 feature web

Maryland attempting to bring accountability & transparency into process for selecting transportation projects

Maryland is attempting to join the growing movement of states trying to ensure that transportation projects are selected and built on their merits in a more transparent process. T4America testified today in favor of a Maryland bill that would move the needle in that direction.

START logo t4 feature webThe Maryland Open Transportation Investment Decision Act (HB 1013/S 0908) would define state goals and measures to score and choose transportation projects, helping to program scarce transportation dollars more objectively. The bill is similar to a new process approved by Maryland’s neighbors in Virginia several years ago, which we covered recently in detail here: “Virginia launches program to remove politics from transportation investment decisions.”

T4America was invited by several START network members in Maryland to offer a national perspective on the bill, and policy director Joe McAndrew testified in support earlier this afternoon. (Note: START is T4America’s State Transportation Advocacy, Research & Training Network for state elected leaders and advocates working on these issues. Find out more here. -Ed.)

Many Americans find the byzantine nature of their transportation system confusing, reducing their trust and inclination toward increasing investments for a 21st century transportation system. Who can blame them?  …The public wants to know that transportation funds are being invested to provide not just movement but safe, reliable, affordable access to necessities like jobs, education, health care, and groceries. Measuring our limited investments in a way that matters to the public is critical going forward.

One thing was clear in today’s House Appropriations Committee hearing as local & state officials, delegates, and other citizens had a lively back and forth: Few people look at how the Maryland Department of Transportation chooses projects and feels like they have any clarity on how decisions are made.

Maryland Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Rahn, though testifying in opposition to the bill, isn’t opposed to bringing more transparency into that process, but he was reticent about this bill as the right solution.

“We are willing to study this concept to try and find a process that fits Maryland,” Rahn said. “That, I believe, is something that we can certainly agree to. But what’s come out of this process…is not Maryland. Rather than jumping into this to implement this now, should be a study so we can find something that’s more appropriate to Maryland.”

START Network members in Maryland, like Delegate Brooke Lierman (D-Baltimore), are hopeful and eager to work with Secretary Rahn (and other Delegates in the House and Senate) to amend and improve the bill, helping Maryland take this essential step.

Del. Lierman, while responding to MDOT director Pete Rahn’s testimony, questioned the impossibly opaque current system, holding up thousands of pages of project requests from counties where simple binary check marks were the only scores and suggesting that there was no way to know how projects were chosen.

What she and countless other Maryland taxpayers, local leaders or businesses really want to know after the state spends hundreds of millions more in transportation dollars over the coming few years, is: Will my commute get better? Will I end up with more options to get where I need to go each day? Are transportation projects being picked because they have political connections or because they make fiscal sense? 

Projects in Maryland (and elsewhere) are rarely, if ever, justified through tangible, measured answers to these questions. And as a result, taxpayers understandably may have little confidence in handing over any more of their hard-earned money to invest in the system.

Even the Baltimore Sun knows that the current system is far from transparent, though coming down in favor of Maryland’s status quo in this fairly surprising recent editorial where they called politically motivated transportation spending an “unfortunate necessity” and “the grease that lubricates the squeaky political wheel.”

Hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds for transportation are far more important than political or partisan favors to be used to grease the skids. Taxpayers expect and deserve far more.

Maryland legislators should be applauded for this attempt to remove politics from the process of choosing which transportation projects to build — bringing some much needed transparency and accountability to a process that the public feels is murky, mysterious, and wholly political.

Stay up to date on the latest with state transportation policy & funding with our new resource for bill tracking.

tracking state policy funding featured

Carrying the message of Gulf Coast support for passenger rail up to Capitol Hill

After last week’s inspiring rail trip along the Gulf Coast where we witnessed firsthand the massive support for restoring passenger rail service along the coast, a member of the Southern Rail Commission testified before the Senate’s key rail committee earlier this week to deliver the same message Gulf Coast citizens so passionately presented at each stop last week.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, addresses the enormous crowd in Gulfport on the second stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, addresses the enormous crowd in Gulfport on the second stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

Mayor Knox Ross, the mayor of Pelahatchie, Mississippi and one of the state’s representatives appointed to the tri-state Southern Rail Commission (SRC), came to Washington following last week’s trip to deliver testimony to the Senate Commerce Committee for a previously scheduled hearing on America’s passenger rail system. Note: T4America serves as policy advisors for the SRC. -Ed. 

In a refreshingly moving bit of testimony before the eleven committee members present, Mayor Ross shared his experiences from last week and urged the members to build on the groundwork laid by this very committee’s hard work to include smart passenger rail policy in last year’s broader surface transportation bill for the first time in history. (The FAST Act.)

Knox Ross Senate Commerce

“As our commission has visited communities across the gulf South, we have found the transportation options available to our citizens are becoming more limited and costly,” Mayor Ross told the committee. He noted in his written testimony how other options like air service and intercity buses have scaled back in the last decade in many of the rural communities along the coast, and how citizens have responded to this possibility of having a new connection between cities small and large.

“We saw an amazing outpouring of support in every city. …They just want an opportunity. Every city turned out. They’re looking for a hand up and saw Amtrak service as that opportunity,”

Just like the other local officials we spoke to, Mayor Ross sees this passenger rail connection as a powerful economic development tool for these Gulf Coast cities, small and large.

“We’re gearing toward connecting our smaller cities to our larger ones and giving these cities the opportunity to compete. All the cities along this route see the economic development potential of the train,” he said, drawing the same parallel to the interstate system that we did in our second post on the trip. “We invested in the national interstate system years ago and saw tremendous economic development, but now we’re having to put more money than ever into it with diminishing returns as we add lanes. Every modest investment in passenger trains across this country can create large economic development opportunities in all these cities.”

The impact of last week’s trip wasn’t lost on the outgoing Amtrak President and CEO Joseph Boardman, who also testified Tuesday. “I think the excitement you saw last week is dramatic evidence of just how much we can bring to those towns – and how deeply they appreciate it,” he said.

“We all have an interest in ensuring that Amtrak continues to be as effective as possible, and that the American people in all regions of the country receive the passenger service they deserve. …The respective needs wherever you are in this network, for state corridors, long distance services, and the northeast corridor, and unifying those interests here in congress and across the country is critically important,” Mr. Boardman said.

Before the testimony began, the committee showed the short movie about the trip that T4America produced.

Mayor Ross followed up with perhaps the most powerful observation from the trip; the one was that stuck in the heads of many of the people we talked to along the way.

“One thing I hope you saw in that film….you saw black, white, republican, democrat. This is a bipartisan issue that we can all back and all agree on, an issue that can help bring our country together.”

Though the program’s future is uncertain, $500 million in TIGER grants are now available

Though the future of the program could be in doubt, U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx announced yesterday that $500 million is now available for the best local projects in the next round of the TIGER competitive grant program.

Sec. Foxx making the TIGER announcement at the NACO conference. Photo from the USDOT Fast Lane blog.

Sec. Foxx making the TIGER announcement at the NACO conference. Photo from the USDOT Fast Lane blog.

Projects hoping to win TIGER funds compete against each other and are selected on their merits to ensure that each dollar is spent in the most effective way possible. The program has funded an incredible multimodal station in Normal, Illinois, an overhaul of the downtown street network in Dubuque, IA that helped expand the tax base by $77 million and an improvement to the West Memphis port to boost cargo capacity by 2,000 percent, among hundreds of others.

It’s one of the few ways that local communities of almost any size can directly receive federal dollars for their priority transportation project, spurring innovation, leveraging federal funding by matching it with greater local dollars and targeting projects that provide a high return on investment.

The program is open and available, with grant applications due on April 29th.

We’ve got a special members-only webinar coming up on March 3rd with our TIGER grant expert Beth Osborne, T4A’s Senior Policy Advisor. T4America members can find a link to register below.

[member_content]Members: Interested in applying for this round of TIGER grants? Join T4A and TIGER grant expert Beth Osborne, T4A’s Senior Policy Advisor, for an informative session on March 3, 2016 at 4pm EST. Register here. [/member_content]

While this eighth round of TIGER is open for business now, will there be a ninth? Don’t forget that congressional appropriators will soon be deciding TIGER’s future, along with that of other important transportation programs. Do you represent a city, county, metro planning organization, or other group? We’re looking for these sorts of groups to sign a letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee in support of these programs.

Though Congress passed a transportation bill, funding for key programs still up in the air

Though Congress passed a five-year transportation bill back in December, the fate of many important transportation programs will still be decided in Congress’ appropriations process this year. Among them is one of the few ways that local communities can directly receive funding for smart projects.

Tiger Map

The TIGER competitive grant program is one of the few ways that local communities of almost any size can directly receive federal dollars for their priority transportation projects. Unlike the overwhelming majority of all federal transportation dollars that are awarded via formulas to ensure that everyone gets a share, regardless of how they plan to spend it, TIGER projects compete against each other and are selected on their merits to ensure that each dollar is spent in the most effective way possible.

This competition spurs innovation, leverages federal funding by matching it with greater local dollars and awards funding to projects that provide a high return on investment. Choosing projects based on their potential benefits is exactly the direction that transportation spending needs to move in, and we need to ensure that this vital program continues.

Because TIGER was not even authorized in the five-year FAST Act and therefore wholly lacks any certainty of funding, congressional appropriators play an incredibly important role in deciding once again how much funding to provide for TIGER (and other key transportation programs) in the coming year. We want to ensure that the Senate’s key committee begins the process by providing at least the full $500 million they’ve provided in the past.

Members of Congress need to hear from you today. Do you represent a city, county, metro planning organization, or other group? We’re looking for these sorts of groups to sign a letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee in support of these programs. (We are not targeting individual letters at this time.)

But TIGER isn’t the only crucial program that appropriators will decide in the coming weeks of 2016. The federal government’s primary resource for supporting new, locally-planned and supported transit expansion projects is also up in the air. The New and Small Starts programs have facilitated the creation of dozens of new or extended public transportation systems across the country, awarded competitively to the best projects.

Sound Transit's LINK light rail on the Seattle-SeaTac line. LINK is being expanded by a combination of local funds approved by voters and federal New Starts funds.

Sound Transit’s LINK light rail on the Seattle-SeaTac line. LINK is being expanded by a combination of local funds approved by voters and federal New Starts funds.

Under this program, FTA awards grants on a competitive basis for large projects that cannot traditionally be funded from a transit agency’s annual formula funds. Congress already recognized the importance of this program in the FAST Act when they increased its authorization by $400 million for this fiscal year.

But now we need to ensure that the federal appropriators actually provide that level of funding here in the critical moment.

You may have seen the news of President Obama’s budget being released a few weeks ago, which asked for $1.2 billion more for these transit capital grants compared to what was in the FAST Act. While the President makes a request and Congress actually makes the budget, that list of transit projects included in the President’s budget does show which projects would be in front of the queue if Congress comes through with the money this year or next.

That list included Indianapolis’ ambitious plan for a new north-south bus rapid transit line through the city from the suburbs on one side to the other, an expansion of Seattle’s LINK light rail system that will be supported by new local revenues approved on the ballot late last year, and projects to add new capacity to Chicago’s strapped Red Line.

Both of these critical programs — TIGER and transit grants — provide unique, cost-effective, and innovative solutions that also leverage private, state, and local investment to solve complex transportation and spur economic development.

Do you represent a city, county, metro planning organization, or other local/state group? We’re looking for those groups to sign a letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee in support of these programs. Find out more here. (We are not targeting individual letters at this time.)

A look back at the overwhelming support for restoring Gulf Coast passenger rail [VIDEO]

The Gulf Coast inspection train, run by Amtrak in partnership with the Southern Rail Commission (SRC), toured a potential route and examined the CSX tracks last week from February 18-19th. It was the product of years of work by local residents and elected leaders at almost all levels to restore the passenger rail service wiped out by Katrina over ten years ago.

Note: Transportation for America serves in an official capacity as policy advisors for SRC. -Ed.

Transportation for America was along for the ride, interviewing local residents and the local, state and federal elected officials along the two-day route. Read all of our posts on the trip here in order:

And don’t miss this short video below that we produced on the trip, which was shown to the Senate Commerce Committee this morning in a hearing on passenger rail issues.

Gulf Coast leaders intent on boosting their economic prospects with passenger rail

While the local residents who turned out along the Gulf Coast last week to support the return of passenger rail through their communities are perhaps most hopeful for a new way to get where they want to go, their leaders are focused intently on the significant economic development potential for their cities, region and states that will come from the new connection.

Amtrak inspection train bay st. louis wide

The Gulf Coast inspection train, run by Amtrak in partnership with the Southern Rail Commission (SRC), toured a potential route and examined the CSX tracks on February 18-19. It’s the product of years of work by local residents and elected leaders at almost all levels to restore the passenger rail service wiped out by Katrina over ten years ago. Read our first post for the backstory and our second post on the people we saw along the wayNote: Transportation for America serves in an official capacity as policy advisors for SRC. -Ed.

This prospective Gulf Coast passenger rail line would add a brand new connection, which can provide more bang for the buck than the diminishing returns of making improvements to existing connections. The interstate highway system is a powerful example of this. There were amazing economic impacts when new interstates were built between cities that weren’t well connected, allowing goods and people to flow back and forth like they never could before. But 50 years later, when projects are undertaken to add a lane or two to those existing highways, the cost could be greater than the original project in today’s dollars, but the actual fiscal impacts are far less than that of the original connection.

Adding new passenger rail service would create a brand new efficient connection between these Gulf Coast cities. And no matter their party or political philosophy, every single one of the local leaders that we spoke to along the coast was focused on the economic potential of passenger rail for their communities.

Greater New Orleans, Inc. is focused on helping the entire region stay competitive and focuses significant energy on recruiting new businesses to the region. GNOI’s Lacy Strohschein told us that for New Orleans, which has emerged as a tech hub, to compete against peer cities like Austin and Seattle, “You have to be selling them something.” Quality of life is a huge piece of what they’re selling in New Orleans, but what else does that talent want?

“They want access, they want to be in connected, walkable urban downtowns. Many come from places where they’re used to jumping on the train,” she said as we traveled just east of New Orleans on the train Thursday morning. “We have the most beautiful beaches within five hours of New Orleans, but if they don’t want to drive, there’s no easy way to get there. There’s a bottom line return, and [passenger rail service] is a critical piece to the puzzle for the quality of life that we’re offering.”

Gulfport is the second biggest city in the state of Mississippi. It was hit hard by Hurricane Katrina, though the city has bounced back in the intervening decade.

“I believe [passenger rail] is one more link in the chain that helps us recover,” said Gulfport Mayor Billy Hewes while chatting in the one-of-a-kind Ocean View dome car between Bay St. Louis and Gulfport.

Gulfport Mayor Billy Hewes chatting on the ride into Gulfport on February 18, 2016. Photo courtesy of Charles Gomez / Amtrak

Gulfport Mayor Billy Hewes chatting on the ride into Gulfport on February 18, 2016. Photo courtesy of Charles Gomez / Amtrak

Half a billion dollars come into Gulfport’s state port each year and drawing tourists to the beaches of Gulfport is a critical part of their local economy, according to Mayor Hewes. “We’re doing quite well now, but this is adding another piece of that puzzle that we’re offering,” he said.

When the train pulled into Gulfport, where a thousand or more people were packed in between the old depot and a downtown parking garage, Mayor Hewes was beaming as he took to the podium.

“Your enthusiasm today is sending a message to Washington and our friends with Amtrak, how much we would like to have [rail service] back,” Hewes spoke into the microphone. “How much this is a real piece — not the final piece, but another piece of the puzzle — for what we’re offering, for the amenities that we have that make us so rich with so much opportunity here in Gulfport and across the entire Gulf Coast.”

Hundreds of Gulfport residents packed the space next to the depot for the second whistle stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

Hundreds of Gulfport residents packed the space next to the depot for the second whistle stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

One of the biggest champions of this project has been Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant, who took several hours out of his busy day to board the train in Bay St. Louis with his wife for all of the Mississippi stops. It’s hard to overstate the impact of his leadership on this issue, as a conservative Republican governor from a deep South state. Gov. Bryant clearly understands the economic potential.

Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant (right) talks to Gulfport Mayor Billy Hewes (left) and FRA Administrator Sara Feinberg (right of Hewes) on the Gulf Coast Inspection Train on February 18, 2016.

Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant (right) talks to Gulfport Mayor Billy Hewes (left) and Federal Railroad Administrator Sara Feinberg (right of Hewes) on the Gulf Coast Inspection Train on February 18, 2016. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

“I brought convention after convention here [to the Gulf Coast]. Each time…they say to me, ‘We had no idea how beautiful this Gulf Coast was,'” Governor Bryant told the enormous crowd in Gulfport, hammering home the potential of making it easier for visitors to reach the Mississippi coast.

“Now, we’re going to get them here. We’re going to get them on board and we’re going to get them on this train. And this is going to be where they talk to all of their friends, all across the nation, and say, ‘If you want to see the beauty of God’s great creation, come to the Mississippi Gulf Coast,” he said.

“We just need more people to come and see this beautiful city; come see this beautiful Gulf Coast,” Gov. Bryant bellowed one stop further down the tracks in Biloxi. These people need “to come and stay a week or a month or two — and bring their money with ’em!” Gov. Bryant exclaimed, to an explosion of applause from the residents of Biloxi.

Mobile, Alabama is a huge center of commerce and industry for the state of Alabama and the entire Gulf Coast region. The city has the first Airbus factory on U.S. soil, an active shipbuilding industry, a busy port, interstate access and five railroads, according to Mobile District 1 City Councilmember and Council Vice President Fred Richardson.

Mobile City Councilmember Fred Richardson talking to a member of the media in New Orleans before the departure of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

Mobile City Councilmember Fred Richardson talking to a member of the media in New Orleans just before the departure of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

“We all realize the value of passenger rail,” Councilemember Richardson said, offering a specific example.

“We have the busy Carnival cruise ships in the port…but is there another way to get all these tourists to and into our city? We’ve got air, we’ve got water, but we don’t have rail. So we’re trying to send a message today; a message that old people, young people, black and white people in Mobile — they want Amtrak and passenger rail. It’s galvanized people in our region and they want the train to roll. We’re missing this part of the puzzle that can help us bring another one million tourists into our city.”

Mobile, Alabama. Photo by Steve Davis / T4AmericaMobile, Alabama. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America
Mobile, Alabama. Photos by Steve Davis / T4America

Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS), who is responsible for the creation of the new Gulf Coast rail study group through his work to include it in the FAST Act, is working to ensure that new passenger rail service on the coast will also be a good deal.

“We’ve got the top brass, we’ve got the local leaders, and we’re gonna make this work for Mississippi and the taxpayers,” The Senator said in Gulfport.

#YallAboard

Update: Find links to all of our posts and photos from the trip as well as a short video we produced on the trip here in this short recap post.

Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) addresses the enormous crowd in Gulfport on the second stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) addresses the enormous crowd in Gulfport on the second stop of the Gulf Coast Inspection Train. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

A massive show of support in Gulf Coast communities for passenger rail

A massive show of support yesterday from the people of the Gulf Coast welcomed the first passenger rail train east of New Orleans since Katrina, with thousands of residents in scores of communities from New Orleans to Atmore, Alabama turning out to send a clear message to their elected leaders that they want passenger rail service back.

Atmore, Alabama

Atmore, Alabama

This week’s Gulf Coast inspection train, run by Amtrak in partnership with the Southern Rail Commission (SRC), is touring a potential route and examining the CSX tracks. It’s the product of years of work by local residents and elected leaders at almost all levels to restore the passenger rail service wiped out by Katrina over ten years ago. Read our first post for the backstoryNote: Transportation for America serves in an official capacity as policy advisors for SRC. -Ed.

#YallAboard

Although everyone involved with this trip had heard there were festivities planned in each stop along the way, no one seemed to be ready for what awaited us in Bay St. Louis, Mississippi. People in conversation on the train stopped cold as they heard a band playing and a crowd cheering before the doors even opened on the train. Elected officials were clearly overwhelmed by the show of support as they stepped off the train to take a champagne toast to the first passenger train to stop in the city since Katrina.

Administrator Sara Feinberg of the Federal Railroad Administration was clearly taken aback as she stepped off the train, shaking hands with excited residents lining the train platform and pulling out her phone to take pictures of her own. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Secretary Shawn Wilson posed for pictures with smiling and yelling residents like he was a rock star.

Shawn Wilson, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, takes photos of the crowd in Bay St. Louis, MS.

Shawn Wilson, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, takes photos of the crowd in Bay St. Louis, MS.

As John Sharp wrote in AL.com after riding from New Orleans to Mobile, it felt like a cathartic moment for this city that was devastated by Hurricane Katrina and has fought for years to bounce back. Schools were closed yesterday morning, costumes were donned, signs were made, songs were played, and the small community of Bay St. Louis made a powerful, moving display of support for restoring passenger rail to the city, bringing tourists to their beautiful city and giving residents a new option for getting back and forth along the coast to wherever they’d like to go.

Rich people, poor people, black people, white people, young people, old people — all asking their elected leaders for the same thing: We want passenger rail back on the Gulf Coast.

Gulf Coast rail trip gulfport people

This moving scene was repeated again and again at each stop in Gulfport, Biloxi, and Pascagoula, Mississippi, and Mobile and Atmore, Alabama. In Gulfport, the second biggest city in the state, the crowd was so huge squeezed between the depot and a parking garage, you could hardly see a spot without people.

Gulf Coast rail trip gulfport crowd

Giant American flags were hung from fire department ladder trucks in almost every city. And not once did we leave the train without being accompanied by a band — including the historic Excelsior Band in Mobile. There was visible support even in communities along the way without a stop, like Ocean Springs, Mississippi, where children lined the fence by the tracks and waved at every crossing.

It was an incredible sight to see, and it had a palpable, powerful effect on the elected officials and VIPs from Washington on board. None of them will be able to go back to work in their government offices without thinking of the faces of the people they saw on this trip and how excited they were about the prospect of seeing this vital connection restored.

Gulf Coast Rail Trip Pascagoula 2

Pascagoula, Mississippi

We’ll have more later on from some of the mayors and other local leaders we’ve talked to this week. Each one we spoke to zeroed in on the economic potential of having this connection restored. All spoke eloquently about how passenger rail is a piece of the puzzle for staying competitive and helping move their people. And elected leaders from the cities, states and Congress all spoke passionately about how they’re working to make this service happen in a way that’s a good deal for taxpayers. We’ll get to their inspiring speeches too.

But it would be a mistake to start a look back on the trip anywhere other than with the amazing and inspiring people of the Gulf Coast who turned up yesterday — in the middle of a workday no less — to show their support for what their elected leaders are working hard to accomplish for them. They don’t appear to care a lick about the political or philosophical debate over transportation modes or funding that dominates conversations in Washington.

They just want to have another way to get where they want to go.

Y’all aboard.

Continue following along with the trip on Twitter with #YallAboard and @t4america

Update: Find links to all of our posts and photos from the trip as well as a short video we produced on the trip here in this short recap post.

Gulf Coast Rail Trip Atmore tribal girls

Atmore, Alabama

Gulf Coast rail trip Bay St. Louis

Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Gulf Coast rail trip Bay St. Louis 2

Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Gulf Coast Rail Trip Pascagoula

Pascagoula, Mississippi

Gulf Coast Rail Trip Mobile sign man

Mobile, Alabama