Transcript Slide 1

The Future of Transportation
Fred Abousleman
Executive Director
National Association of Regional Councils
Thank you
•
•
•
•
•
Thanks to Rural Arizona Partners
Rural Transportation Advocacy Council
Yuma MPO
Western Arizona COG
Sponsors/Speakers and Friends
The future?
• Hard to predict next year
– Especially in transportation funding and finance
• We can however assume a few things:
The future?
• Assumptions based on trends
– Double/triple population
– Declining condition of infrastructure
– Less and less gross percentage of economy
spent on infrastructure
– Population densification
– Older population
– More diverse population
– Congestion of roads, rail, ports, airspace because
of:
• massive, complex, new global trade networks
Pacific Trade 2000 2010
The future
• Climate and energy concerns:
– Drastically changed climate
– Less oil – need for alternative fuels
• “fixing” for technology
– Clean engines
– Affordable high speed rail
– Low impact aviation
– Smart cars and highways
The future
• Fixes?
• Multi-modal system
– High speed rail (freight and passenger?)
– Smart highways and smarter cars
– On-demand and smart transit systems
– Aviation congestion technology
– New engines, alloys, fuels
– Acceptance that we have to invest
• And build less, use what we have more efficiently
• Innovative finance
– RIIZs
– Smart parking, smart EMS, smart everything…
Current State of the
Nation
• US economic conditions is hitting everything –
federal, state and local budgets are under
constraints and cuts.
• ASCE has given our nation's public infrastructure a
D, estimating that it will cost $2.5T over the next five
years just to repair current infrastructure
• More than 72,000 miles of municipal water and sewer
pipe are more than 80 years old, threatening the
public health and economies of communities large
and small
• Japan, China, India, and the EU are investing much
more in infrastructure
The Nation
• The U.S. spends less than 1% of GDP on
infrastructure
– China spends 9%
– India spends 3.5%
• Federal infrastructure spending accounted for 10%
or more of the budget from 1959 -1966
• TODAY, federal spending on infrastructure is
approx. 3% of total federal budget
• States and localities account for around 75% of total
infrastructure spending
Authorization
•
•
SAFETEA-LU extended through 3/31/2012
FAA extended through 1/31/12
•
•
•
Chair Mica (R-FL) vowed no more extensions
Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) promised to
move forward with Senate floor action in early
2012
House Leadership open to moving transportation
legislation in 2012
• Some House Members not optimistic
• Can still transfer funds between accounts
• Future funding reductions
• Time to discuss local impacts of funding
shortfalls
• Lessons from ARRA (wasn’t supposed to
supplant a LT reauth)
• State level developments
• Budget
• Authority
• Congress to Cut Discretionary Funding in 2013
– Including transportation
– Increases pressure on states and locals to maintain
assets
• FY 2013 Budget Cycle Begins Again
– How to Project Funding/Financing Beyond Current
Extension?
• Election-year Politics
– Changing Administration Officials Signifies Different
Priorities
– Shortened Calendar
– Greater Marketing of Accomplishments
Presently
60% of Republicans and Democrats believe the federal gas tax
increases annually. — 61% in the Northeast, 58% in the South, 54%
in the Midwest and 67% in the West.
Building America’s Future, 2010
Bottom Line: 67% of Americans do not believe we
are on the right track overall.
• MAP-21; a 2-year bill with policy changes
• Passed out of the Senate EPW Committee on
12/9/11
• Focuses on key outcomes such as
–
–
–
–
reducing fatalities,
improving bridges,
fixing roads, and
reducing congestion
• Several organizations perceive it as an
expansion of state-level authority
Differences Between Urbanized Areas of 50-200K in MAP-21:
MPO Type:
Retained MPOs
Decommissioned MPOs Nonmetropolitan
Regions
Description:
Existing MPOs can
apply to US DOT to
retain MPO status
MPOs that either did not
apply or did not win MPO
status
Regions below 200K
after MAP-21 enactment
US DOT
designation:
DOT considers them a
metropolitan area
DOT considers them a
nonmetropolitan area
DOT considers them a
nonmetropolitan area
Level of
consultation:
Cooperation
Consultation
Consultation
State project
selection:
Cooperation
Consultation
Consultation
Rural Consultation Changes in MAP-21:
NARC Priorities
MAP-21 Changes
Create RPOs where they
do not currently exist
No change in authority for RPOs
The original draft of MAP-21 increased the level of consultation for RPOs,
but that language removed by a committee amendment.
• Transportation Enhancements
* Graph provided by Streetsblog
Senate Commerce,
Science and Transportation Committee
• Passed legislation focusing on
– Overall goals of a surface transportation system
– Stand-alone freight program
• *including MPOs
– NHTSA
– PMSHA
• Contentious Committee action
• Passed without unanimous support (unusual)
Senate Banking,
Housing and Urban Development Committee
• Addressing the federal transit title of the bill
• Yet to Introduce
• Senate EPW and Banking Committees both
share jurisdiction over the transportation
planning titles
– Must be the same language
Senate Finance Committee
• Chaired by Sen. Baucus (D-MT)
• Developing ways to pay for the legislation as a
whole
• Chair Boxer (D-CA) projects the need for $12
billion over 2-years to fund her portion
• Yet to Introduce
House Transportation
& Infrastructure Committee
•
•
•
•
Projected 6-year authorization
Yet to be Introduced
May reorganize key formula programs
Emphasizes performance measures and targets
for all formula programs
–
–
–
–
National Highway System (assets)
Highway Safety Improvement Program (safety)
Surface Transportation (?)
CMAQ (?)
Differences b/t House and Senate
House Outline
Senate – MAP 21
6-yr authorization
2-yr authorization
30% cut
Funded at current levels
Restructuring and Devolution
Restructuring and Devolution
Constrained by House Rules
Spend for Job/Economic
Growth
Role of MPOs and Local Govt’s
• Many MPOs voluntarily adopting PM systems
– More than safety and asset management
– Including quality of life *fuzzy* measures
• What will the role of MPOs be in a formula
based, state DOT system
– MPO policy function
– Need flexibility to address “on the ground” factors
– Politically sensitive topics
Role of MPOs and Local Govt’s
How do talk about transparency and accountability
without talking about MPOs and their local
governments?
• Closest unit of government to the people
• Own majority of infrastructure in U.S.
• Navigate local political barriers to infrastructure
• Where do the RPOs play?
NARC Transportation Priorities
• Showcase your activities and successes
• Completed stimulus projects
• Regional collaboration
• Keep Communication Open
• DC AND District staff for Members of Congress
• Engage your local elected officials
• Case studies/examples
• Contact Erika with more information
H.R. 3780
Regional Infrastructure
Improvement Zones (RIIZs):
An Innovative
Infrastructure Financing & Funding Tool
Introduced by:
U.S. Congressman Geoff Davis (R-KY, 4)
Conceptualized by:
Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI)
RIIZs are…
• A simple change to federal tax code – tax deduction
• A voluntary public-private partnership for investment
in infrastructure – urban & rural
• Infrastructure = surface transportation, water,
wastewater, stormwater
• A part of an approved plan through COG/MPO, local
governments and community stakeholders
• A possible local match contribution
• A way to leverage private, federal, state, local dollars
• A complement to other infrastructure funding
opportunities and mechanisms
RIIZs are NOT…
• Reliant on lengthy federal authorization/appropriation
processes
• A tax credit
• An infringement on or contradictory to local or state
statutes
• A direct liability of the local governments or their
officials
• New mandates or federal requirements
• To supplant other funding/financing mechanisms
• Limited to any one category of public infrastructure
Legislative Update
• House bill (H.R. 3780) introduced by Rep. Davis
(R-KY, 4) on 1/18/12
• Looking for Congressional Co-sponsors
• Building Support
• Educating on Infrastructure Needs