January 28, 2010

In December 2009, the U.S. House passed a “Jobs for Main Street,” bill that would provide additional funding for infrastructure and jobs investment similar to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). Indications are that the Senate could pick this up for consideration in February, with full passage in March 2010. President Obama discussed this and urged swift action by the Senate in his recent State of the Union address.

Total funding is proposed at the same level as last years’ program. For Michigan, this means about $847 million for road and transit improvements and for us in Southeast Michigan, it means about an additional $460 million above and beyond our normal formula allocation. A significant change in the legislation states that 50 percent of the dollars must be under contract within 90 days of Congress saying “GO!” Getting projects under contract in this time frame will present a significant challenge.

We will need to move fast to meet the requirements. Although “Jobs for Main Street” is not yet law, and there is no guarantee it will be, what I can guarantee is we will never meet these requirements should they survive in the Senate version of this bill if we don’t start now. So we have.

We have great need for additional transportation funding in our region and an additional $460 million is nothing to sneeze at. But I have a number of concerns as well. In Stimulus I, MDOT and the local agencies did a great job and spent every dime of the money, but can we do it again with even tighter time constraints? The emphasis of the program is to create jobs – and do it fast – not necessarily to pick the most important projects! I bet this program could be done in a way to get Congress the jobs they were looking for while at the same time allowing transportation agencies the time they need to develop more priority projects and spend these dollars in a more thoughtful manner! Wish someone had asked. What do you think?

January 21, 2010 

Last week, the Farmington Hills City Council voted 6-1 to continue to be part of the Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation or SMART.  This is a huge win for both SMART and regional transit in general, but I don’t think SMART is out of danger just yet.  Transit is facing some important challenges in 2010, the results of which may go a long way in determining how effective transit is and how attractive it will be to local governments. A number of transit initiatives and events are scheduled for 2010. These include:

• Start of construction of the M-1 rapid transit project on Woodward
• Beginning of commuter rail service in the Ann Arbor-Detroit Corridor
• Extension of rapid transit planning north of the current project on Woodward into Oakland County
• Pursuit of federal funding for rapid transit on Gratiot from Detroit to M-59 in Macomb County
• Formation of a Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
• Renewal of the existing 0.59 mill to continue SMART service.

The last two bullets are particularly important for the future of transit in Southeast Michigan. The formation of an RTA is essential if transit is to grow and prosper. It puts someone in charge and gives the authority the necessary tools, including the ability to ask the citizens for additional funding to build and operate the adopted transit plan. It can work with both DDOT and SMART to improve existing bus service. It can also oversee the construction and operation of all forms of transit including light rail, bus rapid transit, and commuter rail.

This is especially important because if all we do is renew the SMART millage later this year at the existing level, transit service will decrease – not increase or improve. Funding transit at the existing levels will not be enough to keep existing service in place, let alone pay for higher levels of transit service that are currently being planned.

Finally, this region must decide together if transit is part of our future. If it is, then there should be no opt -out communities. This is the only way to run an efficient and effective transit system. So, it’s going to be a big year for transit. Let’s hope we have lots of dialogue in the coming months and make the right decisions. The future of our region depends on it! Do you agree?

January 14, 2010

The recent failed Christmas Day airline bombing has reopened the discussion about heightened security to improve public safety versus the increased invasion of personal privacy. Technology has the ability to improve public safety – but at what cost? It is a discussion that I think will not go away and, in fact, needs to be developed and debated from all sides.

The use of full body scanners can provide increased safety for the flying public. As it relates to ground transportation, technology can also improve our safety on the roads. Technology such as red-light running cameras allow us to identify vehicles that go through intersections when the light is red and ticket them. Alcohol ignition interlock devices are also currently in use, making it impossible to start the car if the driver’s breath registers a certain amount of alcohol. Certain vehicles also have autonomous cruise control that will automatically slow down your vehicle if you are following too close. There are many other examples of technology helping to improve our traveling safety at the expense of losing some amount of privacy.

Some people will argue that the potential loss of our personal privacy outweighs the potential benefits that could be had and should not be used. Others will see the opportunity to use these techniques to make the roads safer for all of us and think the resulting safety is worth the potential loss of privacy. After all, driving is a privilege – not a right. What really matters is saving lives and changing dangerous driver behavior.

For me, I have some concerns over the potential loss of privacy, but I think the benefits of a safer system and even some of the other efficiencies that technology can provide offset the potential loss of privacy. How do you see it?

January 8, 2010

Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later – we got our first significant snowfall of 2010! I left work about 4:30 yesterday and didn’t get to my home in Livonia until 6:18 p.m. Along the way, I did not come across one traffic crash – just everyone driving very slowly. Several horns blew as some impatient drivers grew frustrated waiting for drivers to clear the intersections, but my experience was that for the most part everyone slowed down and took their time. The first thing you need to pack for a ride like that is a lot of patience. You are not going anywhere fast, so just slow down, put on a good CD or listen to the road condition report on the radio. You will eventually get to wherever it is you are going – the trick is to get there safely! SEMCOG suggests several driving tips for winter driving. They are available on our Web site at www.semcog.org under the Members tab. The most important tip is to stay home and don’t go out in bad weather unless you absolutely have to. Other tips include:

• Know the current road conditions. Check latest weather information.
• Clear snow and ice from all windows and lights –including the hood and roof – before driving.
• Remember the posted speed limits are for dry pavement.
• Leave plenty of room for stopping. Drive carefully and defensively.
• Leave room for maintenance vehicles and plows.
• Avoid making an abrupt lane change. The passing lane may be in worse shape than the driving lane.
• If approaching a snowplow, stay back at least 200 feet (it's the law!), and don't pass on the right.
• Use brakes carefully. Brake early. Brake correctly. It takes more time and distance to stop in adverse conditions.
• Watch for slippery bridge decks, even when the rest of the pavement is in good condition. Bridge decks will ice up sooner than adjacent pavement.
• Look farther ahead in traffic than you normally do. Actions by cars and trucks will alert you quicker to problems and give you a split-second extra time to react safely.
• Go slow! Don’t worry about arriving on time.

How was your drive?

December 18, 2009

At this time of year, I like to reflect on the activities of the past year and look forward to the challenges that are lurking in the coming months. Probably the biggest news of 2009 and the program that has had us working on all year long was the Stimulus Program – also known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. This program brought in needed transportation dollars to address many of ongoing needs. We will give you a full accounting of spending in early 2010, but as of this writing, it looks like we pulled it off and will obligate all the dollars made available to Southeast Michigan.

Several trends also continued in 2009. Traffic crashes went down for yet another year. Unfortunately, traffic volumes and more importantly, transportation funding, also decreased. The state legislature turned a deaf ear to the efforts to raise the fuel tax to provide dollars badly needed to improve the transportation system in Michigan.

Planning continued on several transit projects – the Ann Arbor- Detroit Commuter Rail project and the Woodward Light Rail project, including the private-sector funded piece known as the M-1 Rail. There is great hope that next year at this time I will be writing about their initial success.

This year – 2009 – was also the last year of SAFETEA-LU – the federal transportation bill. Sadly, Congress has yet to reauthorize the bill, choosing instead to extend it weeks or months at a time. This will never work as a long-term strategy.

Many of these important issues will carry over into 2010 – so much of that agenda has already been set. So, what do I want for Christmas? Well, as long as you are asking:

1. A six-year federal transportation bill that provides twice the money that Michigan currently receives.
2. An increase in state fuel tax and other fees that will allow us to match all the federal dollars to be made available by the new bill.
3. A new Regional Transportation Authority for Southeast Michigan
4. A new Ambassador Bridge to replace the old one and a brand new DRIC bridge.
5. Commuter rail from Ann Arbor-Detroit that connects to the new Woodward Light Rail.

Hey, it’s not like I asked for something impossible like a winning record for the Lions or anything that hard! Hope Santa can deliver!

Merry Christmas and hopes for a wonderful 2010 to all! See you in 2010!

December 9, 2009

There has been a lot written in the papers recently about the alleged dueling bridge proposals. The bridges are not mutually exclusive – at least that is my position. Let’s examine the situation. The Detroit International Bridge Company (DIBC) has proposed to construct a new bridge adjacent to the existing Ambassador Bridge and then take the existing bridge out of public service – essentially providing a replacement bridge. Given that the current bridge is over 70 years old, this makes some sense. DIBC has completed drafts of required environmental documents and transmitted them to the U.S. Coast Guard, the federal agency of record and we should be working towards the construction of the replacement span.

While this has been going on, the Michigan Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, the Province of Ontario, and Transport Canada have been involved in an exhaustive study to identify the best location for an additional crossing between the two countries. The location of the proposed crossing, called the DRIC (Detroit River International Crossing) has been identified, the required planning and environmental analysis has been completed and approved by the required agencies on both sides of the border, and it should be time to move forward on construction.

But – wait a minute – neither bridge is moving forward. Why? This is where it gets complicated. Let’s take one at a time. First, the DIBC replacement bridge. In a letter to the DIBC, the U.S. Coast Guard identifies several issues that they feel have not been adequately addressed. They have asked DIBC to go back and address the issues before they can move forward with the permit process. But, that is only one part of the problem. The other? Well, the Canadian officials are not real keen on the proposed location because it will continue to funnel large trucks through downtown Windsor on Huron Church Road. This contributes to backups on Huron Church that sometimes go for miles! They have concerns and have not issued a permit to DIBC at this time.

The DRIC also has its hurdles to overcome. There are many in the state legislature that question the need for an additional crossing at a time when crossing volumes have declined. Many in the legislature also do not seem to understand that the DRIC and the DIBC replacement bridge are not competing projects – but complementary projects. Instead, many believe that the DRIC bridge should not go forward and we should just wait for DIBC to build its bridge – despite the fact that the Canadians don’t want it on Huron Church, the Coast Guard has problems with the proposal, the DRIC study identified a location that both countries agree is the best place to build a new bridge ,and despite the fact that both bridges will be built and paid for exactly the same way – bonds repayed from tolls collected at each facility!

The SEMCOG elected leadership supports both proposals in Direction2035, the region’s long- range transportation plan. It is time for the legislature to do so as well. The reason for an additional crossing should not just be based on volumes, but on security and safety and local and international impacts as well. A recent SEMCOG report identifies that U.S. trade with Canada averages $1.5 billion a day! Trade between Michigan and Canada exceeded $67 billion in 2008! Shouldn’t we be protecting and growing this trade over time, trying to guarantee that it stays right here in our state and region? Why are we fighting between bridge options when we should be supporting both proposals? Wouldn’t the jobs created to build both spans put people to work and add a boost to our slumping economy?

Both bridges are needed if our region and state are going to continue to be a player in the global freight world. It is not an either /or – it should be both!

December 2, 2009

My favorite season is finally here. Actually, I sort of lump Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years into a holiday month like I suspect most people do. I want all of us to enjoy the holidays, but party smart and know the facts – especially when it comes to alcohol use. Alcohol is a significant factor in holiday deaths. Impaired driving is the most frequently committed violent crime, randomly killing someone in the U.S. every 45 minutes. Here are some other facts you should consider as you develop your holiday calendar:

• Crashes involving drinking tend to be more serious than nondrinking crashes. In Southeast Michigan, a fatality in a crash is 15 times more likely when alcohol is involved.
• In Southeast Michigan, alcohol was a factor in 117 traffic deaths – 34 percent of all traffic deaths in 2008.
• In Michigan, alcohol was a factor in 317 traffic deaths – 33 percent of all fatal crashes in 2008.

I encourage everyone to visit the Web sites of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or Mothers Against Drunk Driving for holiday safety tips and additional "sobering" drunk driving facts. MADD's 2009 Tie One On For Safety message calls for a commitment to buckle up. Wearing a seat belt is the best defense against a drunk driver.

So enjoy the season, but enjoy responsibly. You know the drill – don’t drink and drive! Call a cab or have someone else drive you home if you have had too much to drink. Fly the Red Ribbon to let everyone know you are a responsible driver and remind them that they should be, too. Need red ribbons? Contact me here at SEMCOG and I will see that you get some.

November 19, 2009

Last year, the Regional Transportation Coordinating Council (RTCC) adopted a regional transit plan for Southeast Michigan -- historic. The chief elected officials of Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties and the City of Detroit had never adopted a transit plan while acting as the RTCC. In adopting a plan, they also agreed that the next steps included developing a regional transit authority (RTA) and identifying long-term local funding needed to implement the plan. It is important that an RTA be formed for several reasons. First of all, it is important to have a single agency speaking on behalf of transit in Southeast Michigan. If we are to successfully obtain federal transit dollars, it will be important for the region to speak with one voice. An RTA could be that effective voice.

Second, it will be important for a single entity to manage and plan for expanding transit in Southeast Michigan. Light rail on Woodward, commuter rail from Ann Arbor to Detroit must work as a single system. The expansion of rail in Southeast Michigan, along with the other components of the adopted regional transit plan, must also be implemented in an organized fashion, consistent with anticipated dollars.

Finally, the public will need to know who is in charge, who is responsible for building and operating the system if they are to feel comfortable providing additional funding for the needed transit improvements. The RTA can provide the confidence and oversight the public needs in order to be convinced to provide additional funding.

The time is right – the time is now – to pass legislation that will establish an RTA to oversee the operation and construction of public transit in Southeast Michigan. SEMCOG supports establishing an RTA as the next step in moving mass transit forward in Southeast Michigan.

November 12, 2009 

Several weeks ago, I wrote a blog on vehicle-deer crashes. I reported that last year, there were 316,057 crashes in Michigan and that 61,010 involved a deer. That is 19% – almost one of every five crashes in the state involved a motor vehicle and a deer! I wrote that it was time for Michigan to start taking this seriously. Well, I am pleased to report that at least one community, the City of Rochester Hills, is doing just that!

Rochester Hills experienced the most deer crashes of any other individual community in Southeast Michigan in2008. There were 165 reported car-deer crashes out of a total of 2,101 total reported crashes – or just about 8% that involved a deer. This is not the first year that Rochester Hills has been singled out for having a high number of crashes involving deer. However, the community is trying to do something to lower these numbers.

Rochester Hills has developed a Deer Management Implementation Plan. The plan identifies six recommendations for the community that they hope will result in fewer vehicle-deer crashes in the coming year. Recommendations range from educating the public on deer habits through print and the city’s Web site, to designating October as “Deer Awareness Month,” to putting up portable signs at locations of known increased deer activity to notify drivers to be more alert.

I applaud the city for taking this initiative. I wish more communities would do the same. By following the plan, the city hopes to maintain the attractiveness of their community – and that includes having close encounters with deer that do not result in costly crashes.

The plan is available on the city’s Web site (by clicking the link above) and is linked from the SEMCOG Web site, at www.semcog.org/DeerCrashes.aspx 

November 6, 2009

I don’t know about you, but once the first of November gets here, I start thinking about the inevitable –winter. When will it get here? How bad will it be? How much snow will we get and when is the first big snow storm going to hit? This year, getting around during the winter could be a bit more challenging than in past years. Last week, SEMCOG hosted a forum on Winter Maintenance with local road agencies and cities discussing their revised procedures for dealing with winter storms in light of decreasing revenues. All agencies agreed that clearing snow from our roads and streets is going to take longer this year. There are several reasons we are in this situation.

MDOT has said that their budget for winter maintenance has remained constant over the past few years – but the price of salt and gas has increased dramatically. The result is that those dollars won’t clear as many miles of snow as quickly as they once did. In addition, we have experienced higher than normal levels of snowfall over the past couple of years, causing agencies to exceed their budgets to move the snow removal.

This is not just an issue at the state level, but at the local level as well. Decreases in funding has also resulted in some county road commissions and cities having to cut back on the number of employees they have to go out to move the snow and ice and salt the roads. Oakland County, for one, indicates that while they once had 190 employees available to move snow – they only have 150 today. This means that it will take longer to clear and salt streets than we have become used to.

So what do we do? Well, SEMCOG will be developing some winter driving tips for you to consider during this winter season – it’s not rocket science though. Consider the following:

• Stock up on groceries in good weather so you don’t have to travel in storm conditions
• Ask your employer if you have an option to telecommute on snowy, icy days
• Start out earlier and drive slower – you will get there – but get there safely
• Only make trips you have to make and
• Pray that we get less snow

We can all get through winter if we prepare now – not just by getting our snow blowers ready, but by retraining ourselves on the level of services to expect for the dollars we are willing to spend.

October 30, 2009

I have written several blogs about the need for additional funding to improve our region’s transportation system. But, what do we do while we continue to make the case for additional funds – just wait around and measure how bad things are getting – NO! We do the best we can with the dollars we have to make our transportation system as safe and functional as possible. One of the tools for doing just that is supporting, promoting, and implementing the results of Access Management studies in various corridors throughout the region.

Access management involves maximizing the existing road capacity and reducing the potential for crashes by limiting the number of access points and making sure that existing driveways and median crossovers are located in the best possible locations. SEMCOG, working with Macomb County officials, recently completed such a study on the Gratiot Avenue corridor. The vision for access management along the Gratiot corridor is to restore and preserve road capacity, improve safety conditions, and support the long-term vision for expanded regional transit, walking and biking systems, and community sustainability. The report is being finalized and, when completed, will serve as a blueprint for making improvements along Gratiot. What kinds of improvements? Things like relatively small intersection improvements, consolidating driveways, more and better signage, increased transit service, etc. These types of improvements can smooth out traffic flow, reduce delays, keep traffic moving, and enhance safety of the roadway by reducing the number of potential conflicts – all for relatively small capital costs.

We can’t afford to sit around and do nothing while we make the case for additional funding. Access management is one thing we can do to improve traffic conditions on some of the more crowded roadways in our region. Shortly, a study will begin on Ford Road in Canton Township and Westland to see what can be done to improve the flow of traffic on this stretch of roadway.

If you would like to see a study done on a particular roadway in your community, drop me a line at palombo@semcog.org and let’s discuss it.

October 23, 2009

Several weeks ago, I presented the results of the 2008 pavement survey of the federal aid eligible roads – the major roads – in Southeast Michigan. For the fifth straight year, the survey showed the overall condition of pavement is declining. When we started rating pavements in 2004, about 10 percent of the pavements on major roads were in poor condition; the survey results in 2008 indicate that almost 30 percent of the pavement on our major roads is now poor! We are currently almost finished collecting 2009 data. Want to bet that the results of the 2009 rating will be even worse? There is no doubt that without additional funding, pavement conditions will continue to deteriorate.

There is also a cost associated with delaying the investment in fixing our roads. It is the old pay-me-now or pay-me-a-lot-more-later argument. If we would have fixed all the pavement that needed fixing in 2004, we would have needed another $1 billion. To do the same in 2008 now would cost us an additional $2.4 billion – two-and-half-times more in just 5 years - the equivalent of an additional $0.50 increase in the gas tax! How likely is that to happen anytime soon?

It is clear that something has to be done. But what?  It appears that additional revenues are not going to come anytime soon. Meanwhile, the condition of our roads is deteriorating – that is also painfully obvious. Some elected officials believe the solution lies not in finding additional dollars, but in decreasing the size of the public road system or spending the existing dollars only on the most important roads. This is definitely an option in my opinion - an option that should be fully discussed and debated. It brings up several questions that need to be asked and answered. Who decides what are the most important roads? What happens to the roads deemed not important and to the businesses and homes located on these roads? How about the other utilities that service these homes and businesses – if we are no longer funding the roads, should the other utilities still be in place? Are the issues associated with trying to resolve these questions any easier to address than the issues associated with looking for increased funding for needed highway and transit improvements?

I believe everything should be on the table and public discussion should ensue, but I think that increasing funding is still the best way to go. One thing is for sure – without additional funding, don’t look for pavements to get better any time soon!

October 16, 2009

There has been a great deal of discussion in the past few days on the subject of distracted driving. I want to put my two cents into this discussion. Driving is a privilege – not a right – as we all should know. When I am driving, I believe I have an obligation to all the other road users to operate my vehicle in a safe manner – and I expect the same from everyone else. Obviously, sometimes things happen – sometimes outside of our control – and the result is a crash. But sometimes, the crash – or even a near miss – is the result of what I consider a blatant disregard for my or your safety and I find this behavior unacceptable.

I have been in several minor incidents and lots of near misses in my life and I thank God that no one has ever been injured. I travel to Lansing once a week, on average, and am often shocked by the behavior of some drivers that I see. I have seen people drive while reading the newspaper, getting dressed, shaving, combing their hair, putting on make-up, or having their pets run wild in the car. I am particularly concerned with these types of behavior because it tells me that these individuals do not consider either their – or my – safety very important. In my mind, they have broken the bond that all road users should have with each other. Driving requires our undivided attention to safely fulfill this unspoken bond. I do not like people treating their driving so casually and showing so little regard for my safety!

Much of the discussion this past week has been regarding cell phone use and texting. I have to say that I have not seen a lot of people texting, but have seen many people on their cell phones. Now, I also have to confess to answering my cell phone and occasionally texting a quick response while driving on business. However, several months ago, I made a change in my own personal conduct. I vowed only to take a cell call if it’s an emergency – telling people that I will call them back once I get back to the office or am safely off the freeway. No more grabbing a burger and eating on the way to or from the next meeting either – better to take an extra 15 minutes and be safe.

Let me know what you are doing to respect the safety of others on the road and if you have done anything to enhance your chances of sitting down to dinner with your family each night.

October 9, 2009 

SEMCOG and other transportation groups have been advocating for additional transportation dollars at both the state and federal levels for some time now.  We have advocated for additional funding based on the impact it would have on improving pavements and bridges, decreasing congestion, putting people to work, improving the safety of our system, etc.  I don’t think any of these arguments is working – in fact I know they are not.

Last week, both the federal and state governments had the chance to increase transportation funding to address needed deficiencies in our road and transit systems.  Not only did they not increase funding – they actually decreased transportation funding!

At the federal level, Congress did not reauthorize SAFETEA-LU, the federal transportation legislation.  Instead, they chose to pass a Continuing Resolution (CR) which funds all government agencies for one month, from October 1 through October 31, at pro-rated fiscal year 2009 levels until the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills can be completed. They also did not agree on the appropriate mechanism to address the rescission, which I have previously written about.  As a result, the rescission went into effect and Michigan lost approximately $260 million in federal funds.

At the state level, the legislature cut over $9 million out of the Comprehensive Transportation Fund (CTF) and $12 million from the Transportation Economic Development Fund (TEDF).  The dollars went into the general fund.

We have been asking for more – and getting less.  This tells me that we need to seriously consider reviewing and revising our approach.  It tells me that we are a long way from seeing increased funding for needed transportation improvements.  So what do we do now?

Well, we keep making the case for additional funding – that doesn’t change.  Direction2035 indicates that we are only going to have half the funding we need to fix all our deficiencies.   We also need to continue to prioritize the dollars we have so they are spent on the most important projects and continue to do all the small things that we can to keep the system safe and operational.  But at the same time, we can’t sugarcoat the outcomes any more. We have to manage expectations – expectations that keep some people believing that things will get better with no additional dollars – they won’t.  Roads won’t get fixed, busses will come later and later, grass won’t get cut and snow may not get plowed until it gets higher and higher.  Get used to it – it’s going to happen!

September 30, 2009

We begin the annual rite of firearms deer hunting season in our state in mid November, but we have really been killing deer all year long – with our cars.  This past year, over 61,000 deer were killed in Michigan in collisions with motor vehicles.  While this is down a bit from previous years, the percentage of car-deer crashes to total crashes in our state has remained remarkably consistent over the past years.  Now, many of you may be chuckling over this topic, but I can assure you that it is a significant issue even if you have not had a personal experience with a deer while driving your car.

Last year, there were 316,057 crashes in Michigan – 61,010 involved a deer.  That is 19% - almost 1 of every 5 crashes in the state involved a motor vehicle and a deer!  In some individual communities almost 40% - 4 out of every 10 crashes involve a deer! Twelve people were killed in these crashes – 8 were riding motorcycles.  And yes – there is a cost to these crashes.  The average insurance claim was about $2,100 in damage, usually to the front end.  These 61,000 crashes cost us almost $130 million in claims alone.  And of course this does not include the loss of life and pain felt by those involved.  Still think this is trivial?

Michigan needs to start taking this seriously.  It is all fine and good to educate the public and tell them to be careful.  But transportation professionals need to put their heads together and find a way to reduce these crashes, save precious lives and dollars and make our roads that much safer. For more information on this subject, go to www.semcog.org/DeerCrashes.aspx

September 23, 2009 

How many of you know what a rescission is – be honest now! Well, in this case it means that the federal government, specifically the Federal Highway Administration, is going to cut federal highway dollars from our needed highway programs. This was a planned cut. It was planned back when the current SAFETEA-LU transportation funding legislation was passed. We all knew this was going to happen and no one has done anything about it over the past four years. Earlier this year, President Obama and Congress handed out almost $900 million in transportation stimulus dollars to Michigan – dollars aimed at jump starting the economy – and there is evidence that the investment is having a positive effect. Now, in a few days, the same government that gave us the stimulus dollars will be taking away over $260 million from Michigan for badly needed projects. Make sense to you? Me neither.

Congress must repeal this cut by September 30 or risk slowing down the economy it has tried so desperately to revive. Call your representative and your senator and tell them to stop this cut.

September 17, 2009 

The SEMCOG General Assembly will soon be asked to approve Direction2035 – our region’s new long-range transportation plan. This plan will serve to direct the expenditure of scarce federal transportation funds through 2035. This is always an interesting process to go through – allocating not enough dollars to an ever expanding list of competing needs – and will be particularly difficult over the next several years until our economy begins to rebound. Consider your own budgeting process at home – there are always more things to do than dollars available to do them. How do you decide to allocate your limited resources? You wish that you could do everything on your list, but you can’t. Sometimes there are also disagreements between people living in the house as to what needs to be done first among several good projects.

Well, we experience all of the above while working with the many local units of governments, the Michigan Department of Transportation, transit agencies, and county road commissions. In addition, we have the public weighing in with their opinions and wants also. In the end, we came to an agreement on how to spend these dollars in a way that addresses the most critical needs in Southeast Michigan and maximizes benefits. We invite you to view the plan at www.semcog.org/Long-RangeTransportationPlan.aspx and send us your comments. Much more needs to be done – but investing the dollars we have in this way will make a significant improvement in our existing highway and transit systems.

September 11, 2009

Detroit Mayor Dave Bing is considering cutting Detroit Department of Transportation (or, DDOT) service as part of a plan to balance the city’s budget. SMART is considering raising fares - which they haven't done in many years - in order to raise revenue so they do not have to cut service. The Michigan Department of Transportation (or, MDOT) and county road commissions have already cut back on capital projects and road operations to stay within their current budgets. Citizens and interest groups are upset. They do not want to see services cut or fares increased – especially in these hard economic times. Well, something has to be done because existing funds are not enough to maintain even the current inadequate state of our transit and road systems.

Rather than direct your anger at Mayor Bing, MDOT, or local road agencies, you should consider asking the state legislature why they have not raised revenues in the past 12 years for roads and in the past 22 years for public transit. Let me know what they tell you and then work with your local elected leaders to do the very difficult job that they now have to do – choose between very difficult options that no one will be satisfied with.