Think Regional/Act Local

Periodically, polls are taken trying to get a feel for what the people want in the area of transportation. A recent nationwide poll took a look at the issue of transit and what people think about using it and paying for it. The results are interesting.

Nearly nine in 10 people polled who have access to public transportation take advantage of it, according to a new survey conducted by HNTB Corp. Why do they use public transit? Well, about one in four of those polled think the most valuable feature of transit is that it reduces traffic congestion (28 percent), or saves users money (24 percent), while about one in seven say it’s most valuable feature is the environmental benefit.

But, what about paying for it – putting your money where your mouth is? Well, the survey indicated that a good percentage of the people also are willing to pay a little more for improved service.

Nearly half of those who responded think local, state, and federal governments don’t spend enough money on public transportation in their area. Almost three in 10 think transit should receive a greater share of gas tax to help fund needed improvements.

I believe transit is at a crossroads in Michigan and especially here in Southeast Michigan. There has not been an increase in funding for transit since 1987. Service is more expensive and funding has declined. Several rail transit initiatives are also planned. These efforts, along with efforts to just maintain the current inadequate service will fail if new revenues are not found soon. Let’s hope the poll results are correct.

Even though we are a few weeks away from the official opening of deer hunting season – we have been hunting and killing them with our cars all year long. There were 6,560 vehicle-deer crashes in Southeast Michigan in 2009 – that is up from 6,278 in 2008. That figure represents over five percent of all crashes in 2009. Unlike many other crash statistics that continue to go down, car-deer crashes continue to increase despite the efforts of many.

Deer crashes occur most frequently during October, November, and December on two-lane roads between dusk and dawn. In 2009, there were 10 fatalities involving deer in the state – down from 12 in 2008 – at least that statistic is going down – and all involved motorcycles.

Deer crashes are more prevalent now for a couple of reasons — previously rural areas are now developed. But the biggest reason is that the statewide deer herd is four times larger than in was in 1970 and 10 times larger in Southeast Michigan! This year, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment estimates the deer herd to be 1.8 million!

Oakland County had the most vehicle-deer crashes in the seven-county SEMCOG region with 1,947 and ranks second in Michigan behind only Kent County. In addition to being deadly, deer crashes are costly, costing us at least $130 million per year. The average insurance claim is about $2,100 in damage, usually to the front end.

So be careful! If you encounter a deer in the roadway, do not swerve out of your lane to avoid it. It's generally safer to hit the deer than to run off the road or risk injuring another motorist. Sounds barbaric, but it is true.

The Obama transportation component of the stimulus program is coming to an end. The last projects in Michigan have been sent out for bid and will be under construction soon. There have been many articles written and analysis done to show that the influx of these dollars has either stimulated the economy or not. Or maybe it did at first, but not now. Maybe the funding saved jobs, but didn’t create any new ones. Maybe all of these scenarios are correct – it just depends in which city or state you live!

Well, let’s look at an industry and the impact that fewer transportation dollars have had on its growth over the past 10 years. I recently had the pleasure of having a cup of coffee with leaders in the asphalt industry here in Michigan. They provided me with some very interesting…and depressing information.

Total asphalt plant produced tons in Michigan has decreased by 49 percent from 1999 to 2009 – from 23 million tons down to 11.5 million tons. The number of working asphalt plants has also decreased from 100 down to 77 over this 10-year period.

Almost 3,000 jobs have been lost during this time, including crew workers, asphalt haulers, aggregate production workers, aggregate haulers to asphalt plants, and contractor management to support the added workers.

So much for the stimulus program helping this industry. In fact, now that the stimulus funding is over and transportation funding continues to decrease, it is hard to imagine these numbers going up anytime soon.

Well, the state legislature passed the MDOT budget last week just before the beginning of the new fiscal year. On the plus side, they did agree on a way to fill the $84 million gap in state funding. At least we will not be leaving another $475 million of federal funds on the table in Washington. The bad side is that they only solved this problem for one year – we will be in almost the same situation next year – only it will be a more difficult problem to solve because the amount will be higher. This situation screams for a long-term solution as opposed to a “fix it as you go” approach.

Why is it that it seems that government – especially state and federal government – cannot or will not sit down; analyze the situation; and develop a long-term, strategic approach for addressing our infrastructure needs? Are they afraid of the cost? Has term limits redefined long-term to be 2-4 years instead of 10-20 years? Are they fearful of the ability to address the issue using current funding programs? I am not sure I have the answer to this, but I think that “all of the above and maybe more” is the correct answer to the question.

Solving this problem will not be easy and it will not be done quickly. Perhaps developing a 3-5-year budget would be a potential solution – but if they have trouble developing a one-year budget, how long would it take to develop a longer one? A budget that covers more years would have the advantage of showing trends in revenue generation for the next 3-5 years – so you could do something about it, assuming you wanted to.

What gets done next year to make up a hole in the transportation budget anticipated to be over $100 million? Stay tuned, the new legislature has less than a year to figure it out. It’s not going to pretty.

The Obama Administration announced last week that its TIGER II discretionary grant program has been “overwhelmed” with more projects than money! What a surprise! The first TIGER program received over 1,500 applications that totaled about $60 billion in needed transportation improvements for the $1.5 billion that was made available. Almost $58.5 billion worth of projects were turned down – how do you think that made everyone feel? Communities spent considerable time and money developing these projects, which included extensive documentation and justification.

So what did the administration do this time? They made $600 million available and have received over 1,000 applications totaling over $19 billion worth of projects! This means that $18 billion worth of projects will not be funded in this program. How many of these communities/agencies will think long and hard about submitting another project if there is another phase? Meanwhile, Congress refuses to increase long-term transportation funding to address mainstream transportation issues.

There are other issues associated with this type of program. The feds have established their own criteria to rank projects. These criteria may not be consistent with the priority needs of the state or the region – but are the priority of the administration. So who should be deciding the most important projects to be funded when there are multiple needs and fewer and fewer dollars? The feds? The states? Or the regions?

Stay tuned. This could get real interesting.