Skip to main content

Tag: state transportation policy

Centering priorities: A new framework on project selection for transportation agencies

From transportation agencies tasked with long-range transportation plans (LRTP) to Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) developing Transportation Improvement Plans (TIP), we constantly see agencies struggle with prioritizing the right projects and measuring their success to truly advance goals. Our new framework can help agencies establish clear priorities and select projects based on transparent, outcome-driven performance measures.

Transportation agencies and MPOs often create ambitious goals around job access, congestion reduction, safety, cost-efficiency, and livability. While all are important priorities, they are often immeasurable, vague, and conflated goals that don’t breed success, leaving staff scratching their heads wondering why residents still face delayed buses, dangerous roads, increased traffic, and few multimodal facilities. Why have a goal if you don’t have a way of measuring its success?

To help agencies better identify and assess their transportation goals, we compiled a framework for the best practices for transportation project selection and performance measurement.

Our recommendations help agencies prioritize goals and get more specific with measuring outcomes. If an agency has too many goals, particularly if they contradict each other, it complicates the process and the public at large will believe that the process is entirely about political influence, not merit.

No transportation agency will ever have the resources to complete every project on their list. But, if you try to prioritize everything, you are prioritizing nothing. To genuinely improve access and connectivity across your region, you need a way to choose projects that generate the greatest benefits.

We urge other agencies to read through our recommendations, along with our previous Guide to Performance Management and Practical Solutions Memo to begin crafting performance measures that align with your community’s needs. Agencies of all sizes in all regions will benefit from our straightforward processes that aim to maximize transportation access for all users.

States that take chances get rewarded, and six other things we learned this year at Capital Ideas 2018

We’re fresh back from Capital Ideas 2018 in Atlanta, and as in years past, this year’s conference was an incredible alchemy of passion, knowledge, inspiration, and amazing people from around the country. For those of you who weren’t able to make it to Atlanta, here are seven things that we learned.

Left photo: Mayor Sly James of Kansas City, MO, right, one of Capital Ideas’ keynote speakers, talks to Toks Omishakin of the Tennessee DOT, and T4America chair John Robert Smith. Right: During a keynote on day two, Rusty Roberts, VP for Government Affairs at Brightline, shared his company’s ambitious plans for private passenger rail currently unfolding in Florida.

1) States that innovate, try new things, and take chances, get rewarded

There’s a common thought when it comes to new mobility or improving transit that it’s really only about cities. While we certainly think cities have a major role to play (see our Smart Cities Collaborative!), the role of the state is still vital.

The City of Gainesville, FL is on the cusp of launching a new automated vehicle shuttle pilot project to connect the University of Florida with downtown Gainesville via an automated driverless shuttle. Dan Hoffman, Gainesville’s city manager, shared their progress to date but made one thing clear: They would never be able to make this happen without the state of Florida’s involvement…and money, with the state contributing over $1 million. But it’s also worth noting that the state isn’t trying to run the pilot project—they’re collaborating to help a city run their own pilot. And the lessons that Dan and his city learn will be shared with the state as they collaborate with other cities. That’s a great recipe for success.

Sometimes states try new things and lose before they taste the eventual reward. But the smart ones learn from the experience. In Georgia, Atlanta bounced back from a painful failure to raise new revenue for transportation at the ballot box in 2012. They dusted themselves off, figured out why they failed, rebuilt trust in the transit agency, and then built vital new relationships with the state (and especially with legislators) that paved the way for a successful ballot measure effort in 2016 that raised money for billions in new transit projects in metro Atlanta.

Suburban Gwinnett County has rejected ballot measures to join the MARTA regional transit system multiple times over the last few decades. However, this March they will vote on a measure to finally join the MARTA system and dramatically expand transit service in a rapidly changing county where 25 percent of the population was born outside of the United States.

While others may have written off their state legislatures, the Metro Atlanta Chamber and the rest of their coalition did the hard work required between 2012 and 2016 to turn skeptical state legislators into outspoken champions for transit. Michael Sullivan from the American Council of Engineering Companies in Georgia so aptly summarized at the end of this panel discussion: never assume that your opponent today has to be your opponent in the future.

As Commissioner Charlotte Nash from Gwinnett County noted on the panel, their work paid off: action by that same legislature is enabling her county to go to the ballot this March to raise new funds for transit. Never write off your opponent or a skeptic.

States that refuse to take chances might avoid some failure, but they are also likely to avoid great success.

Our sincere thanks to Dave Williams from the Metro Atlanta Chamber for his commitment to transportation in the region and to taking selfies whenever he moderates a panel for T4America. From left, Dave Williams, Michael Sullivan, Georgia State Rep. Kevin Tanner, and Gwinnett County Commissioner Charlotte Nash.

2) “Transit access is the #1 factor in upward economic mobility”

Our opening keynote speaker on the first day summed things up when it comes to the “why” for improving access to transit:

As a different speaker would explain later, exactly how we measure access matters a great deal, but is there anything more that needs to be said? If we want to lift up those on the lower socio-economic rungs of our communities, then improving transit service and expanding access to it should always be a primary goal.

3) We are swimming in data, but very little of it has anything to do with the people who use the system.

A few audible cheers went up in the room when Stephanie Pollack, the Secretary of MassDOT, made that statement during an incredible panel moderated by T4America director Beth Osborne about the role of the state in new mobility services. She was joined by Commissioner Polly Trottenberg of the NYC DOT and Lilly Shoup, the Senior Director of Transportation Policy for Lyft. (More on that in a moment.)

On the second day, we took a deep dive into measuring accessibility and how so many of our metrics and data poorly assess what really matters. Nick Donohue, assistant secretary of the Virginia DOT, shared a story about the oft-cited Travel Time Index that measures congestion, and how it’s so far removed from the experience of real people and what really matters to them.

Congestion measures treat every road the same and have an implicit bias: always moving as fast as possible is the preferred goal. But streets are all about creating a place and a framework to create and capture value—not just a place for vehicles to move fast. This difference is often best illustrated with an image:

4) We don’t always agree with one another, but we have to keep working together

The panel discussion on new mobility definitely got “spirited!” Sec. Pollack is a provocative quote machine, but we also had a representative from Lyft sitting a few feet away from the person charged with keeping America’s biggest city moving. And as Commissioner Polly Trottenberg noted, congestion and VMT are both up in NYC while transit ridership is down since TNCs like Uber and Lyft arrived on the scene.

Though there were some (entertaining!) disagreements on this panel, the most important lesson we learned was that at the end of the day, many of these companies do want to try and accomplish the same things that the cities do, and we have to find a way to work together. As an example, Lyft’s long-term goals are to have fleets of vehicles in cities that are shared, electric, and automated, which certainly dovetail with the goals of a city like New York, as described by Commissioner Polly Trottenberg.

Ultimately it’s more productive for state or local officials to find ways to work together with private industry rather than against one another. And as Sec. Pollack noted, we have a lot of work to do to make more of these trips shared, and we won’t be able to make that happen without the private providers at the table.

5) You have to be ready and willing to listen

If you show up to a meeting about a transportation project or issue, you’ll have to talk about more than just the item at had: everything that came before you will be on the table. For example, in the public sector, you might have to address and resolve your agency’s past sins in a community first, even if the project proposed is an attempt to try and rectify the damage. As Sec. Pollack said, state DOTs might have to do something radical: listen to the people that they serve.

Our first panel on the second day was focused on making development around transit more equitable. Carol Wolfe from the City of Tacoma—which is in the midst of a rail extension through their city—noted that all too often planners and officials forget that there’s already a “place” that needs to be kept at the center of the process.

And it’s a little thing, but when an agency or planning firm makes renderings of future development, do they incorporate existing places and people? Does the community see themselves in the picture, or do the renderings include the same generic details as every other rendering?

6) People are hungry to exchange information and learn from one another

As we did in 2014 and 2016, we spent the first afternoon in roundtable discussions. Participants got to choose two of 12 topics, sit down with an expert, and then have a completely open-ended discussion with them and a dozen others interested in the same thing. These roundtables are one of the best features of Capital Ideas, and many of them are just a starting point for a longer exchange of information that will continue for weeks or months to come.

This year, our roundtables covered the Smart Scale project funding process in Virginia, the mileage-based user fee pilot in Washington State, the deployment of automated vehicles, strategies to compete for competitive federal transportation grant funds, the Metropolitan Planning Council’s Transit Means Business Report, and the Partnership for Southern Equity’s “Opportunity Deferred” report, among many others.

7) Atlanta is a wonderful city with lots of momentum (including on the soccer front!)

It may have partially been due to the fact that Atlanta United, the city’s Major League Soccer team, was preparing to host MLS Cup last weekend and beat the Portland Timbers in front of 73,000 screaming crazy fans for the city’s first championship since the Braves in 1995, but the energy in the city was palpable.

The capital of the New South has made tremendous progress. It’s a terrific city loaded with momentum and possibility, within a region that is making huge strides to invest in transportation and capitalize on their numerous walkable downtowns. All of this is occurring inside a state that has done a complete about-face on the importance of transit for their economic future.

We wrapped up the conference with two concurrent tours, one of a selection of TOD sites in the city with representatives from MARTA, and the second of the ongoing BeltLine project of trails and transit around the city with representatives from Atlanta BeltLine and the Rails-To-Trails Conservancy. To close things out, here’s a short thread from the BeltLine tour collected in a Twitter moment:

Participants: Have a story to share? Learn something new? Reach out to us at info@t4america.org. All photos by Stephen Lee Davis, T4America director of communications.

Our sincere thanks to our sponsors and host committee for making Capital Ideas possible. And to our many participants from around the country who came to Atlanta and hopefully took some helpful information—and inspiration—back home with them.

SPONSORS

 

Promotional Partner

What’s the best role for state government in [insert your top transportation issue]?

There’s both a lot of uncertainty and disruption in America’s transportation landscape right now, from pothole-riddled roads and no money to repair them (an age-old issue) to brand new tech-enabled transportation options (electric scooters anyone?). Stuck between shifting national politics on one hand, and cities scrambling to keep up with dramatic changes to urban transportation on the other, are the states. How is the state’s role evolving when it comes to transportation?

That’s where Transportation for America’s Capital Ideas conference comes in.

What should states be doing when it comes to managing new ride-sourcing services or autonomous vehicle testing, and is there a way to generate new transportation revenues while prioritizing safety for everyone who needs to use the right-of-way? What are the state-level policy considerations for intercity rail, especially with private companies inching into the U.S. market? How are states limiting or allowing localities to control their own transportation destiny through local-funding initiatives?

Help shape our agenda

Right now (and until July 13), we’re accepting session proposals to address questions like those—and so much more—at Capital Ideas 2018. This December, your expertise and insights could gain an audience of hundreds in positions of influence, including state policymakers, transportation advocates, and service providers. And a diversity of voices and ideas will help us make Capital Ideas as useful as possible for the widest variety of people and practitioners.

Capital Ideas will cover state-level policy, campaign tactics, and provide ample opportunity for peer-to-peer collaboration. And your session could help participants come away prepared to raise new funding for transportation and ensure those dollars are wisely spent to accomplish tangible goals.

Early-bird registration deadline extended

There is now even more time for you to take advantage of early-bird discounts on Capital Ideas registration. From now until September 7, save up to $100 on your ticket to the two-day conference in Atlanta, GA. (T4America members can save an additional $100 with their special member code!)

Register now to lock down your space for Capital Ideas 2018.

Oregon’s legislature just approved a transportation package that goes big for transit

The Oregon Legislature just passed a transportation package that makes historic investments in transit while also advancing congestion pricing and putting funding toward safe routes to school infrastructure, electric vehicle purchase incentives and fixing roads and bridges.

As local stakeholders, the governor, and legislators worked over the last year and a half to develop legislation to invest in Oregon’s transportation system, a common refrain emerged: “Go big, or go home!” The idea being that if legislators were going to take a tough vote to increase taxes, they might was well make it a significant enough increase to make a substantial difference for the state’s commuters, traveling public and shippers. The Oregon House passed HB 2017 yesterday (Wednesday), and the Senate approved the legislation late today, which the governor is expected to sign. If Governor Kate Brown signs the bill, Oregon will become the sixth state to raise new transportation funds in 2017, and the 30th since 2012.

Oregon puts some skin in the transit operations game

Now virtually at the finish line, the overall package isn’t as big as initially proposed, but it has gone big for transit. The legislation introduces a new statewide transit-dedicated 0.1% employee payroll tax expected to generate $103 million annually. This represents over a 200 percent increase in state funding for transit — truly a game-changer that will increase transit service in rural and urban areas across the state.

Change from 2014 state funding per capita for transit, compared to potential funding with new transit funding. Via bettertransitoregon.org

A committee created by the legislative leadership to develop the initial funding package toured the state last year and heard about the importance of transit from every community they visited, large and small, rural and urban. However, like many other states, Oregon has a very strict constitutional restriction on motor-vehicle user-fees like gas taxes, registration fees and title fees. Funds from these sources can only go to infrastructure within the road right-of-way, and definitely not to transit operations.

This wasn’t Oregon’s first recent attempt to raise new funds for transportation. An employee payroll tax to fund transit had originally been proposed in the failed 2015 “Gang-of-8” package. While there were concerns about the regressiveness of this funding source, and a more progressive income tax was floated as an alternative, ultimately, the payroll tax stuck. To mitigate the regressive payroll tax, transit agencies will be required to submit public transportation improvement plans explaining how they will improve service and/or reduce fares for low-income riders.

As part of the effort to win this component of the package, the Oregon Transit Association compiled stories about the value of transit and how additional funding could effectively be spent to improve the lives of Oregonians. The Better Transit Oregon website outlines, for example, improvements like seven new bus lines and increased service on 20 other transit lines in the Portland region, and enhancing service that Kayak Public Transit provides between Pendleton, Hermiston, La Grande and Walla Walla in eastern Oregon. Overall, the funding could provide a 37 percent increase in service hours statewide.

Many ways to skin a cat

The joint legislative committee tasked with producing the package recognized from the start that this package had to be multimodal. While there was a focus on freeway projects that would address three bottlenecks in the Portland region, many committee members quickly recognized that these freeway projects were certainly not silver bullets and possibly wouldn’t help much at all in the long term.

Senator Brian Boquist from a rural part of the Willamette Valley regularly told his colleagues and the media that, “We cannot build our way out of congestion,” and “We cannot tax our way out of congestion,” to advance tolling and congestion pricing as critical strategies to address Oregon’s congestion challenges. The legislation directs ODOT to study, and, if feasible, implement congestion pricing on the two major north-south freeways in the Portland region, I-5 and I-205.

Ironically, as the size of the package shrank due to pressure from trucking and automotive stakeholders, the funding available for the freeway projects shrank, but congestion pricing stayed in the bill along with smaller investments like $10-15 million annually for safe routes to school infrastructure, a $12 million annual program for electric vehicle purchase incentives and the aforementioned transit funding. Overall the package shrank from $8 billion over 10 years to $5.3 billion.

Recognizing the need for accountability and transparency – but coming up short

Legislators recognized the need for improved transparency and accountability but lacked the political will to fully address the issue in any meaningful way.

While the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is known for its emphasis on state of repair, and certain data-driven programs like All Roads Transportation Safety and Connect Oregon, it has stumbled significantly, particularly with more expensive projects like the failed Columbia River Crossing and the over-budget Pioneer Mountain Eddyville highway project.

A working group was specifically charged with developing policies to address accountability and transparency. T4A had worked with Representative Reardon to put forward HB 2532 modeled on Virginia’s “Smart Scale” concept as way to identify projects that maximize return on investment. It proposed to do this by giving each project a return-on-investment (ROI) score and only selecting for funding those that scored the best. In the end, the workgroup opted for “the Nevada model” which involves cost-benefit analysis of projects, a different tool aimed at the same task of evaluating project ROI.

Unfortunately, the committee didn’t make a strong commitment to this new approach, exempting all the earmarked projects in the bill, and only including modernization projects that cost more than $15 million. To put this in perspective, the draft 2018-22 State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) includes no projects that that clearly would be subject to the new analysis.

This means Oregon won’t be able to use this system to meaningfully compare proposed projects — including nearly $800 million in earmarks in the package — to report on, let alone prioritize, those that maximize return on investment. To make matters worse, the Connect Oregon program — renowned for its data-driven merit-based project selection process similar to the federal TIGER program — is now completely consumed by earmarks for the next two biennia.

The bill does give the governor-appointed and legislatively-confirmed members of the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) greater capacity and authority to oversee ODOT. OTC will be granted independent staff and the power to hire and fire the ODOT director in consultation with the governor. These changes create the some hope for administrative change to improve ODOT’s accountability, transparency and ability to make data-driven decisions that maximize return on investment toward achieving Oregon’s goals.

Will Oregon’s DOT change how they do business?

Buttressed by public opinion, a new oversight effort and legislative action, momentum is building in Oregon for increasing transparency and accountability in how the state’s transportation agency does its business.

I-5 over the Columbia River in Oregon. Flickr photo by Doug Kerr. httpswww.flickr.com/photos/dougtone/7459949082

Governor Kate Brown and the Oregon legislature have been working for well over a year to restart efforts to raise new state revenues for transportation after a failed attempt in 2015. Two separate special committees have toured the state for listening sessions, and have developed or are in the process of developing proposals for a transportation investment package.

These efforts to raise new funding have put a spotlight on the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). A growing number of legislators, local leaders and members of the public are asking whether or not ODOT’s investment choices are maximizing return on investment, and whether those decisions are made with adequate accountability and transparency.

While the agency is respected for innovative programs like ConnectOregon’s competitive grants and a strong commitment to fix-it-first principles, it has stumbled occasionally as well, including the failure to win support for the problematic Columbia River Crossing mega-project, massive cost overruns on a rural highway project in the landslide-prone coastal mountains, and ill-timed miscalculation of carbon emissions estimates related to failed 2015 transportation investment legislation.

In late 2015 members of the legislature demanded, and the governor commissioned, an audit of ODOT to review the agency’s management structure and oversight.

Just this last week, the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC), a body of five volunteers appointed by the governor to oversee ODOT, has jumped into the fray. OTC Chair Tammy Baney took the unusual step of sending a formal letter to Governor Brown requesting dedicated independent staff and participation in the agency director’s performance review — to help the OTC fulfill its oversight duties.

This latest move by the OTC coincides with similar efforts in the legislature.

Representative Jeff Reardon (D) has introduced a bill (HB 2532) directing the “Oregon Transportation Commission to adopt rules establishing quantitative system for scoring and ranking transportation projects that are being considered by commission for inclusion in Statewide Transportation Improvement Program.”

Transportation for America has assisted in developing this bill, which draws on programs in Virginia, Massachusetts, Washington State, and others. The legislative session starts this week, and the bill already enjoys support from five other legislators, including top Senate transportation committee Republican Brian Boquist.

With all these efforts to reform ODOT now in motion, this Thursday’s meeting of the new oversight group should be lively. OTC members and meeting attendees will learn about the draft findings from the ODOT audit for the first time — a topic that will almost certainly touch on the accountability and transparency of ODOT’s business decisions.

How one state is using transportation to boost their economy — a story of success from Massachusetts

Massachusetts’ recent economic development success is attributable in part to the leadership of the past two gubernatorial administrations — one Democratic, one Republican — and their efforts to focus state investments on improving public transit, repairing critical infrastructure and doubling down on supporting and creating the walkable communities that are in high demand.

This short story is adapted from Transportation Innovations That Save States Money and Attract Talent, our new short policy guide for governors. It shows how a fresh approach transportation is fundamental to creating quality jobs and shared prosperity while running an efficient government that gets the greatest benefit from every taxpayer dollar. – Ed.

Flickr photo by Massachusetts Office of Travel. https://www.flickr.com/photos/masstravel/29675157103/

Massachusetts won a major endorsement for their strategy when, in 2016, General Electric announced it would relocate its corporate headquarters from suburban Fairfield, CT, to the Seaport neighborhood in Boston. GE reportedly turned down sizable tax-incentive offers from other states and chose, instead, to locate in a walkable and transit-served location where the company could draw educated younger workers. GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt said that in Boston, GE found “an ecosystem that shares our aspirations.”

GE was just one of dozens of companies that have located to town or city centers in Massachusetts in recent years, as chronicled by Smart Growth America’s Core Values research. Boston and adjacent cities like Cambridge and Somerville are booming and are magnets for educated, young workers.

Over the past two gubernatorial administrations the state has invested in these walkable communities that anchor a talented workforce and foster economic development.

Former Governor Deval Patrick’s (D) administration championed new funding for transportation projects and inked an agreement that combined funding from the state, the federal government, and a private real estate developer to finance a new subway stop at Assembly Square. The station opened in 2014 and anchors a major mixed-use development that has transformed a former industrial site. The Patrick administration also advanced plans for an extension of the Green Line light rail service to more Somerville neighborhoods.

Though Governor Charlie Baker (R) won while running against future automatic increases to the state gas tax, he clearly understands that improving transit and investing in these walkable places was critical to the state’s prosperity.

MassDOT Secretary Stephanie Pollack presenting at T4America’s Transportation Leadership Academy focused on performance measures.

To achieve this vision, he appointed Stephanie Pollack, a transportation expert and transit advocate, to run MassDOT, the state’s department of transportation. While some in the state were surprised by his pick of a notable transit advocate to run MassDOT, Governor Baker and Secretary Pollack have a shared interest in reforming the state’s transportation programs to ensure that transportation investments are connected to economic development goals. They’re intent on measuring the results that are important for voters and taxpayers and holding the agency accountable for meeting them.

“Transportation is not important for what it is, it’s important for what it does,” Pollack frequently says — as she did at the last gathering of our Transportation Leadership Academy.

The Baker administration considered abandoning the Green Line project when faced with escalating costs. But the benefits of the project were too significant for the state to walk away.

As Pollack has said, “The return on investment in transportation, whether it’s the Green Line extension or another [project], is not just measured in how many people physically use it. It’s also measured in improvements to the economy, decreases in people’s commuting time, creation of new jobs and reduction in greenhouse gases.”

Instead, the state’s largest transit agency, the MBTA, found ways to lower the expected costs by redesigning stations and is contracting new management for the project. While focusing intently on reforming MBTA, Baker sought workable plans in order to maintain the commitments that the commonwealth, under previous administrations, had made to communities.

In order to achieve clear outcomes with transportation dollars, MassDOT began to implement a new, performance-based process to help select projects in which to invest. Evaluating the expected outcomes from every possible project helped the agency put together a capital plan that balances repair of critical infrastructure and further improvements to transit.

In addition to funding transit, MassDOT has also targeted funding specifically at making local streets better for walking and biking through an incentive-based complete streets program. A small investment of state funds leverages local funds to plan and build projects to make streets better for people traveling by foot and by bicycle.

Massachusetts is enjoying economic returns from administrations that understood how tailored transportation investments could support walkable communities. The leadership and reform efforts under both Democratic and Republican administrations is paying off with a state that is attracting talented workers, drawing relocating businesses, and creating quality jobs.

Read our full guide for Governors, which covers how state transportation policy too often fails to accomplish these types of goals, and offers recommended, proven solutions with a track record of success in other states.

Helping governors save money and attract talent through a fresh approach to transportation

A new guide released today by Transportation for America shows governors and their administration how a fresh approach to transportation is fundamental to creating quality jobs and shared prosperity while running an efficient government that gets the greatest benefit from every taxpayer dollar.

With new governors set to take office in the new year and scores of incumbents returning and setting their agendas for 2017, it’s crucial that they consider how transportation can be a valuable tool for achieving their policy goals — whether producing savings in the budget, attracting and creating jobs, giving taxpayers greater benefit for each dollar, or building healthy and safe communities.

Transportation failures — whether excessive time that people or freight are stuck in traffic, decreasing air quality, flawed implementation of mega-projects, or the perceived and real inefficiencies of government bureaucracy — are a drag on the economy and quality of life for residents.

Many state departments of transportation just aren’t well calibrated to solve today’s challenges. Planning is isolated from development and other infrastructure decisions, state programs have a narrow focus on building highways to the exclusion of building unified, holistic systems, and the most efficient solutions are often overlooked in favor of overbuilt or ill-conceived mega-projects.

And above all, the recipe for successful local and regional economic development has changed significantly.

In the past, economic development was focused on recruiting and luring large employers and expecting new workers to follow the jobs. But younger workers are choosing where to live and then looking for jobs. Economic development now depends on building great places that draw and anchor talent. Quality of life, vibrant communities, and transportation choices are no longer simply nice add-ons, they are essential to economic growth and prosperity in communities large and small. And employers are making the same shift to stay competitive, seeking communities with these features precisely because they attract talented workers.

Yet the transportation policies and bureaucratic practices in so many states often fail to provide the infrastructure that helps build these kinds of places that businesses are now flocking too. Instead, many state agencies are continuing to offer transportation strategies more suited to solving yesterday’s problems. State policymakers need to change the focus of transportation spending in order to realize the full potential from these investments.

This new guide offers best practices to help state leaders achieve greater benefits and avoid costly pitfalls in their transportation programs, including several examples of states solving problems by instituting reforms within their transportation programs.

  • Virginia developed a new system to pick projects based on benefits and better communicate the benefits of each state investment.
  • Tennessee saved millions of dollars by right-sizing and reconsidering projects that had long been in their pipeline. One $65 million project became a $340,000 project, with nearly the same benefits.
  • Colorado built a new, multimodal corridor with tolled lanes and bus rapid transit to provide commute options.
  • California has launched a new, all-electric car share program in disadvantaged neighborhoods.

As new governors begin their terms and new legislatures are seated, it is a critical time to evaluate state transportation spending and how we can get greater benefits from these programs. The examples in this guide from around the country show how governors, administrations, and state DOTs have solved problems by reforming policies and practices. Download it today.

We can help states achieve these changes through tailored technical assistance and through START network policy support. Find out more and join this network today.

 

State legislative stalemate jeopardizing millions in federal transit funding for Minneapolis rail project

Business leaders and suburban mayors in the Twin Cities are pleading with state legislators, urging them not to throw away dedicated federal funding for a long-planned regional transit expansion by dropping the state’s financial commitment. Updated 9/1 with new information at the bottom of the post.

Opening day on the Green Line. Flickr photo by Michael Hicks. /photos/mulad/14238058898/

Opening day on the Green Line. Flickr photo by Michael Hicks. /photos/mulad/14238058898/

One of the major bills Minnesota legislators have been aiming to hammer out in a special session this fall is a capital bonding and transportation package to raise new state funding for transportation. But so far, Gov. Mark Dayton, the DFL-controlled Senate and the House Republican majority have failed to agree on a much larger package of tax cuts, transportation and infrastructure improvements — a package intended to include promised state funding to extend the existing Green Line light rail southwest into Minneapolis’ suburbs toward Eden Prairie.

Though $900 million in federal New Starts transit funds and $750 million in local tax funding have been pledged and $140 million has already been spent, this political stalemate over the state’s $135 million share is threatening to kill the project and send nearly a billion dollars in federal funds back to Washington (and then off to another project elsewhere in the country.)

Republican legislators in the House majority largely oppose spending state funding on the project whatsoever, even opposing a recent compromise to allow additional local funding to cover the state’s gap. This last-gasp effort at saving $900-plus million in federal funding would cover the state’s inaction by tapping a greater share of local funding on top of the $750 million already committed in local taxes.

As the Star Tribune reported last week:

Under the new proposal, which Dayton said his administration and Met Council staff devised just a day earlier, three entities would raise the $145 million state match: the Met Council would contribute $92 million, Hennepin County would contribute $21 million and the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) would kick in $32 million.

This compromise would allow the project to proceed without state legislative action, though there would still be hurdles to clear: each of these three bodies noted above would have to vote separately to approve their share of the $145 million, and do it quickly. Barring legislative action or successful votes on the compromise plan to increase local funding, the project will run out of funds by the end of September, forcing staff layoffs and the reassignment of private engineering firm employees.

A prominent group of 12 area CEOs that employ more than 100,000 area residents penned a letter to the Star Tribune back in the spring about state funding for transit and the planned regional projects, including the southwest light rail extension.

Wise investments in transit are worth making. Passing a comprehensive transportation bill that includes transit is critical in this session. If the state doesn’t act to provide funding for these projects, these federal dollars will go to a transit project in another state. Failure to act this year also means some of these projects will be in jeopardy. The business community can’t afford to miss out on this investment. Neither can the health of our communities, our region or the state of Minnesota. We hope state lawmakers will take action to ensure the best future for our region.

Minnetonka is one of the southwestern suburban cities the completed light rail line would pass through. Mayor Terry Schneider told the Star Tribune last week in that article above, “We’ve worked on this for five years, and we’ve come to the strong conclusion that it’s the best way for our city, the state and the region to meet the needs of the future. To waste the opportunity now, to squander it for internal bickering, would be a huge disservice to citizens of our state and region.”

9/1 UPDATE: The local jurisdictions reached a deal to cover the state’s unpaid $135 million share for the project to keep it moving ahead — including paying nearly $10 million in delay costs incurred by the state’s inaction during the legislative session. From The Met Council today:

The Southwest LRT Project is officially moving forward, after securing the remaining local funding commitments this week. …These contributions will together fill a $144.5 million funding gap, made up by the remaining necessary state match of $135 million plus $9.5 million in local delay costs caused by the legislature’s inaction in May.

Capital Ideas banner sacramento promoFinding solutions to debates over state funding for transit are the kind of topics we’ll be exploring in depth at Capital Ideas, our conference on state transportation funding and policy.

Check out the agenda, register today and join us in Sacramento this November 16-17. 

Register here

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

Refreshed T4America bill tracker for following state transportation funding and policy progress

While at least 23 states have raised new funding for transportation at the state level since 2012, there’s a renewed focus on the underlying policies to make the most of limited infrastructure dollars. Which states are proposing to change to how those dollars are spent? Which states are working to create more transparency and build more public trust in transportation spending?

For the last few years, we’ve been closely tracking the states attempting to raise new transportation funding. Now, we’ve adding a new resource to keep up with the states that are trying to change the underlying policies for spending those dollars. Are any states following the lead of others outlined in our last report, Twelve Innovations in Transportation Policy that States Should Consider?

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 taking unfortunate steps in the wrong direction on policy.

Also, bookmark our new hub for all state policy and funding related resources. Past and current reports, bill trackers, and other helpful information for getting engaged at the state level with transportation funding and policy.

Want to know more about transportation demand management?

Join a webinar to learn how policies can leverage the private sector to manage transportation demand.

Join us on Friday, February, 26, 2015 at 1:00 PM EST to learn from two national experts on how states can get more out of their existing transportation networks by better managing travel demand. Patrick Sullivan of MassCommute explains how Massachusetts supports local transportation management and Brian Lagerberg of Washington State DOT shows the benefits of that state’s Commute Trip Reduction program (a policy we highlighted in our recent policy guidebook).

Sign Up

 

State update

Many legislatures are already wrapping up; others are just getting started for the year. Here’s a brief roundup of important transportation news coming out of state capitols over the last few weeks.

Maryland legislative leadership releases reform package

Leadership in the Maryland General Assembly called for new accountability in transportation project selection and rolled out a package of transportation reform bills. The Maryland Open Transportation Investment Decision Act (HB 1013/S 0908) defines state goals and measures to score and choose projects, helping to program scarce transportation dollars more objectively. Also included in the package is a bill to create a board of local appointees to oversee the state transit agency, the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA).

New tolls to fund bridge repair in Rhode Island

Rhode Island governor Gina Raimondo (D) signed a bill to raise new revenue for maintaining and repairing bridges across the state by increasing new tolls for big trucks traveling the state’s interstates. The measure will add tolls of up to $20 on trucks crossing the state and is expected to raise $45 million annually to be directed to bridge repair. Rhode Island sits near the bottom of the list for greatest bridge repair needs, so legislators were wise to direct new funding to this growing demand and they may have landed a new, politically palatable revenue source. The trucking industry has voiced opposition, however, and legal challenges may be coming.

Mississippi sees an opportunity to raise state gas taxes

Mississippi legislators are discussing proposals to raise new revenue for transportation. The state’s fuel tax rate has not been changed in twenty-nine years and the state DOT reports that they need $526 million more annually to maintain and expand the state’s roads and bridges. With gas prices down, legislators think this may be an opportunity to hike fuel taxes without facing political consequences.

What’s next in New Jersey?

Legislators in New Jersey continue to look for ways to shore up a near-bankrupt state transportation fund. The state’s gas tax rate is currently the second lowest in the country and the state has heavily relied on bonding for the program. An astonishing 100 percent of gas tax revenues now collected are used to pay down the debt and costs of past projects. Without new money the program will go bankrupt when it hits its debt cap in July. In January the legislature recommended a constitutional amendment that would dedicate all fuel tax revenue to transportation projects. That measure will go to voters for approval this November. Transportation leaders hoped Gov. Chris Christie (R) would be more open to negotiations on this issue since suspending his presidential campaign, but his budget proposal offered no new revenue and he has dismissed that the impending bankruptcy even registers as a crisis.

Holding out for reform in South Carolina

South Carolina Senator Tom Davis (R-Beaufort) is continuing a filibuster to block any new funding for transportation until the legislature passes reforms to the state transportation commission. Sen. Davis wisely notes that opportunities to completely reexamine the ways the state spends money on transportation projects are rare and legislators should not simply keep up existing processes and outdated priorities for another generation.

Local funding

Paying for free parking

Washington’s House transportation committee considered a bill to allow local governments and transportation districts to levy fees on free parking spaces in order to fund transportation. These local governments can already charge a fee on paid parking, so this proposal introduces equity for parking fees and also may serve as a subtle disincentive to the spread of free parking that encourage more trips and greater traffic congestion.

Local funding for transit

Georgia’s senate transportation committee has advanced a bill to allow metro Atlanta counties to raise new money for the MARTA regional transit system through a voter-decided, 0.5% sales tax increase. The bill is expected to be heard by the full Senate soon.

Keep up on these bills and many more on our refreshed bill tracker. If you are working on a bill we haven’t seen that should be added to the chart, let us know!

12 transportation policies states should consider in 2016 to stay economically competitive

To remain economically competitive, states must invest in infrastructure, but state legislatures have a critical choice ahead of them: continue pumping scarce dollars into a complex and opaque system based on outdated policies out of sync with today’s needs, or follow the lead of the states highlighted in Transportation for America’s new report, Twelve Innovations in Transportation Policy States Should Consider in 2016.

State legislatures, as incubators of innovation and more flexible than Congress when it comes to enacting new transportation policies, have a golden opportunity in 2016 to reform their transportation programs to expand transparency and accountability, boost state and local economies, invest in innovation across the state, save the state money and improve safety for the traveling public.

Why this focus on state transportation policy?

Similar to Congress’s action in 2015 with the passage of the FAST Act, most of the 23 states that increased their own transportation funding revenue since 2012 have failed to update the underlying policies governing the spending of those new funds. The distribution formulas for those funds are often relics of decades-old priorities that are out-of-touch with the new needs of increasingly diverse economies and demographics.

T4America’s new report outlines 12 transportation policy solutions recently passed legislatively or instituted through administrative action in states, many of which are being pursued by Transportation for America’s START network members and other key policymakers in 2016.

These dozen policy proposals have shown the ability to:

  • increase accountability and transparency to build taxpayer confidence;
  • make states economically competitive and empower locals to do the same;
  • invest in innovation and reward the smartest projects;
  • maximize savings through better project development; and
  • improve safety through better street design

Considering the fact that the federal program is still largely a block grant given to and controlled by the states, state leadership on transportation issues will be more important than ever in the years to come.

The START Network

T4America supports efforts to produce and pass state legislation to increase transportation funding, advance innovation and policy reform, empower local leaders and ensure accountability and transparency. We do this through our State Transportation Advocacy, Research & Training (START) Network of state and local elected officials, advocates and civic leaders, providing our members easily accessible resources that arm decision makers and advocates with template policies, research and case studies from leaders nationwide. Join the START network today, and share with us any bills in your state legislature that you feel we should be tracking here.

State-level reform will be essential for advancing creative and innovative transportation funding and policy reforms to make the most of limited infrastructure dollars. Get engaged by joining the START Network and get your free copy of the report today.