t3 U.S. Department of Transportation TO

RICA

rtation for Century

Report on the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Outreach on Reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act How To Keep America Moving Report on the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Outreach on Reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)

Report Prepared under the direction of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs by Donald H. Camph, Sarah Siwek and Francesca Forestieri; Edited by Alexander Elles-Boyle, Office of Pubic Affairs Design by Tomara Arrington,TASC, Information Services Contact John Horsley, Office of Governmental Affairs at (202) 366-4563

January 20, I997 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Letter from Secretary Federico Pena ...... i

Introduction...... I

How This Report Is Organized...... 5

The First Cornerstone of ISTEA: Economic Development, Competitiveness in International Markets The “I” in ISTEA ...... 7

. Metropolitan Economies are the Engines of National Competitiveness ...... 8

. Access to Rural Areas Needs Improvement ...... 8

. Connections to Global Markets Are Key to Economic Prosperity ...... 9

. lntermodalism Needs More Emphasis ...... II

The Second Cornerstone of ISTEA: Maximizing Return on Investment and System Performance...... I3

. Resources Continue to be Needed ...... I4

. Fairness of Funding Distribution is at Issue...... I5

. Innovative Financing Strategies Should be Encouraged ...... I6

. Deployment of New Technologies Should be Accelerated...... I7

The Third Cornerstone of ISTEA: Partnerships and Flexibility in Making Transportation Choices...... I9

. Enhanced Planning and Public Participation Means Better Decisions ...... 20

. State and Local Officials Have Been Empowered ...... 21

. ISTEA’s Funding Flexibility Should be Increased...... 22

. Additional Streamlining is Needed ...... 23

. Improved Public Transportation Means Less Congestion and Better Access ...... 24

The Fourth Cornerstone of ISTEA: Focusing on Outcomes for People and Communities ...... 27

. Improving Safety is Essential ...... 27

. Environmental Protection Continues as a Priority ...... 29

. Set-Asides for Enhancements, Scenic By-ways, and Congestion Programs ...... 30

. Emphasis on Quality-of-Life Should Continue ...... 31

Secretary’s Objectives for ISTEA Reauthorization ...... 33 *The National Interest in Transportation ...... 33

. Federal Role in Transportation ...... 34

. Principle’s for ISTEA Reauthorization...... 35

. DOT’s Objectives for ISTEA Reauthorization ...... 36

. Conclusion ...... 37

Nationwide ISTEA Reauthorization Focus Groups Conducted by FHWA, FRA, FTA, MARAD, and NHTSA During I996 ...... 39

. Economic Development, Competitiveness in International Markets ...... 39

. Maximize Return on Investment and System Performance ...... 42

. Partnerships and Flexibility in Making Transportation Choices...... 43

. Focus on Outcomes for People and Communities...... 47

Appendix A: U.S. DOT Regional Forums on ISTEA Reauthorization...... 5 I LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY

Dear Friends:

The most important statement the Clinton Administration will make on the future of the Nation’s transportation system will be our proposal for the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA).

DOT intends to submit legislation to the Congress in early 1997. To help us prepare that proposal, the U.S. Department of Transportation conducted a national outreach program to gather citizen input at the State and local levels. We held regional Forums in every section of the country and convened over one hundred focus groups in 40 States. This Administration believes that we are here to serve our customers and listen carefully to their views.

In that process we heard from the stakeholders in the Nation’s transportation system: Members of Congress and elected leaders at the State and local levels; transportation operators; freight and transit interests; business and labor leaders; safety advocates and environmentalists; and a broad range of public-minded citizens. We heard how important ISTEA’s programs have been to communities and their quality of life. We heard what is working and what is not. We heard what programs are succeeding and how Federal transportation programs could be improved in some respects. And through it all, we heard one clear and consistent message: ISTEA is working and making America a better place to live.

This report provides a summary of the major themes highlighted by participants during this outreach and is intended to serve as a resource during consideration of ISTEA’s reauthorization. I want to thank the hundreds of citizens who took the time to participate in this effort and share their ideas. Their input has helped enormously to shape a proposal I believe will be responsive to meeting the country’s needs.

ISTEA was visionary legislation. After listening to our customers, I am convinced that its central elements-strategic infrastructure investment, intermodalism, flexibility, intergovernmental partnership, a strong commitment to safety, the environment and an inclusive decisionmaking process-should be preserved. I am also convinced of the need for continuing strong Federal leadership. The case for both is laid out in the report which follows.

Again, my thanks to all of those who participated and helped make this report possible.

Sincerely,

Federico Pena lNTRODUCTION Listening To America

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of I99 I broke new ground in how America’s States and metropolitan regions approach transportation planning and investment decision-making, ISTEA’s hallmarks may be found in its “Declaration of Policy,” the very first paragraph of which states:

“It is the policy of the United States to develop a National intermodal Transportation System that is economically efficient, environmentally sound, provides the foundation for the Nation to compete in the global economy, and will move people and goods in an energy efficient manner.”

As we prepare to take up the issue of ISTEA’s reauthorization, we need to reflect on five years of experience in implementing its provisions. Discussions about ISTEA have focused attention on issues that are critical to America’s transportation future, and are helping to articulate the principles which will carry the Nation’s transportation system into the next century.

“ISTEA is a sound framework for the next surface transportation reauthorization effort.”

William Burnett, Executive Director, Texas (DOT). and President, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, I99596, New Orleans Forum

To help in articulating these principles, the US Department of Transportation sponsored a series of 13 Regional Forums during I996 with the goal of hearing how ISTEA’s promise has translated into reality.

“In much of the This was an opportunity to benefit from the insights of the stakeholders in the Nation’s discussion about transportation system: Members of Congress; ISTEA, a point that is State, city, county, and other elected officials; transportation practitioners at all levels; business sometimes overlooked people and organized labor; community activists is that ISTEA works. and environmentalists; shippers and transporters of freight; and our ultimate customers - the American people. With ail of its apparent complexities, We heard about the importance of transportation to economic development and job creation, and to America’s during its short five- competitiveness in international markets. We heard about the year duration, ISTEA reality of fiscal constraints, and about investing our transportation dollars to get the greatest return. We heard has helped improve the about a new spirit of partnership, and the need for transportation continued flexibility in making transportation choices. And we heard how ISTEA has caused infrastructure.” people to focus on the outcomes of those choices Howard Maier, Executive Director on the economy, on safety, on the environment, Northeast Ohro Areawide and on our quality of life. Coordinating Agency, St Louis Forum. Through it all, we heard one clear and consistent message: ISTEA works. It isn’t perfect, nor has its implementation always been easy. But it has compelled us to reexamine how our transportation system works, and to consider how it can focus on results: on improved mobility, economic prosperity, greater safety and a healthier environment.

“My first recommendation, therefore, would be that we should not turn the clock back on ISTEA. Reauthorization should build on the momentum that now exists.”

Gil Carmichael, Vice-Chairman, MK Rail Corporation, New York Forum.

From governors and State departments of transportation (DOTS), from mayors and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), from business and community leaders, from environmentalists, and from ordinary citizens, one message rang clear above all others - ISTEA is making America a better place to live. We heard Americans say that they want to improve ISTEA, and to build on its foundation. However, few want to turn back the clock, or to lose sight of what ISTEA is doing- and can do in the future - for America.

“During the past months, countless groups and individuals have provided input to the U.S. DOT I ask you not to lose sight of the many areas of agreement. Most wish to see increased transportation expenditures, the continuation of the direction and partnerships established and flexibility in the administration of ISTEA programs.”

‘We take seriously the Iowa DOT Director, Darrel Rensink, President, American Association of State Hlghway and Transportation Officials, I996-97, St. Louis Forum. concept stressed by both This report provides a summary of the principal themes the President and Vice raised in the Regional Forums, and is intended to serve as a President that we are here resource as ISTEA’s reauthorization begins the legislative process. The ideas offered by Americans of every stripe can to serve our customers, - and should - offer us insights into how reauthorization can that we should regularly help us to create and sustain a transportation system for the 21 st century. ask them what they want, and listen carefully to In addition to the Regional Forums, each surface modal agency participated in the most extensive program of their views. Based on continuous outreach in Department history. In I996, The what we heard, I am Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National convinced, more than ever, Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Maritime of the need for strong Administration, and Bureau of Transportation Statistics together held over IO0 focus groups in over 40 States to Federal leadership in gather detailed opinions and information on particular transportation.” ISTEA topics.These focus groups helped to assess and identify aspects of ISTEA that should be retained in Secretory of Transportatlon, Federico Pena reauthorization legislation and those that should be changed.

In addition, Federal Highway Administrator Rodney E. Slater participated in several road tours, in which he talked with officials and citizens from virtually all parts of America, from the Canadian to the Mexican border. He brought back real stories about our transportation system and its success in meeting people’s needs.

2 How to Keep America Moving Federal Transit Administrator Gordon J. Linton heId 17 town meetings and community outreach Forums across the country as part of the Livable Communities through Transportation Initiative to gather citizen and . local views on how transit investments positively impact people, their neighborhoods and their lives. The success of the Livable Communities Initiative builds on the principles of ISTEA, which incorporates coordination, participatory community-based planning and people-oriented design.

Another initiative was the first-ever nationwide open house, to celebrate signing of the National Highway System Designation Act. On Jan. 23, 1996, more than 3,000 visitors were welcomed to about 60 offices throughout the country to talk with agency employees. Finally, the Department has sponsored several surveys to assess how our customers can best be served. HOW THIS REPORT IS ORGANIZED

ISTEA was built on four policy cornerstones: n Economic Development and Competitiveness in Global Markets: From its statement of National policy, to its targeting of funds to the National Highway System, to its advancement of American leadership in transportation technology, to its emphases on fiscal responsibility and better, more cost- effective investment decisions, ISTEA was designed to support and enhance America’s economic leadership and prosperity. Competitiveness, prosperity, jobs: these comprise ISTEA’s first cornerstone. - Maximizing Return on Investment and System Performance: The “E” in ISTEA is efficiency - through better decisions and investments, through innovative financing, through deployment of new technologies that improve effectiveness, and through a new emphasis on performance: efficiency is ISTEA’s second cornerstone. - Partnerships and Flexibility in Making Transportation Choices: ISTEA empowered State and local governments by shifting decision-making authority and flexibility to them, and enabling them to make sound investment choices. ISTEA "We held forums in also promoted partnerships through means as diverse as a every region of the more inclusive planning process that brought in new country. The input we players and innovative financing strategies which attracted private sector resources. Partnerships, flexibility, and received definitely better investment choices: this is ISTEA’s third improved our proposal cornerstone. for ISTEA q Focusing on Outcomes for People and Communities: reauthorization.” ISTEA focused on transportation’s bottom line: making America a better place to live. It emphasized Deputy Secretary Mortimer Downey consideration of how transportation investment and policy choices affect safety, community quality of life and the environment. This focus on outcomes is ISTEA’s fourth cornerstone. The four cornerstones provide the organizing framework for this Report. Within each are the themes and policy issues raised by the participants in the Regional Forums.

It would be impossible for this Report to include every issue raised and every opinion offered during these forums. Some issues were unique to a particular area, while others were beyond ISTEA’s purview. And while we listened carefully to every witness, only those views which were shared by a significant number of people are reflected in this Report. This Report, then, is a concise but comprehensive overview of what we heard America say about ISTEA and about the many specific issues to be considered during the reauthorization process. THE FlRST CORNERSTONE OF ISTEA: Economic Deuelopment, Competitiveness in International markets. The “I” in ISTEA.

In the 21st century Americans will compete in America’s economic leadership and prosperity. a truly global marketplace. It will be, and in fact already is, a The “I” in ISTEA is “Intermodal,” and ISTEA marketplace with placed goods movement and intermodal and "In today’s post-Cold fierce multi-modal connections to global markets at War global competition the very center of America’s transportation marketplace, the which demands agenda. American business and jobs depend on the safe, reliable competition is the Nation’s transportation systems for the and cost-effective efficient movement of people and goods, and so economic. America’s movement of ISTEA emphasized sound planning and place in the world will people, goods, investment decision-making to ensure that those be determined largely and information. systems could meet the challenges of the next by our ability to century. From its produce and market statement of Seamless connections, infrastructure at border goods and services and National policy, crossings, and ground access to airports and deliver them efficiently to its targeting of ports are all necessary to a high-performing, into that global funds to the efficient, intermodal national transportation National Highway marketplace.” system. ISTEA both encourages and directs System, to its transportation investments at every level - U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, advancement of California, San Diego Forum. State, regional and local - to these crucial American elements of the National system. leadership in transportation technology, to its emphases on America’s prosperity is driven by the fiscal responsibility and better, more cost- economic engines in its metropolitan and rural effective areas. ISTEA provides the tools for both, in investment partnership with the States, to ensure their transportation future.

Competitiveness, prosperity, jobs: these comprise the first cornerstone of ISTEA.

“Those who see the Interstate as merely highways, and ISTEA with its broad transportation vision as a diversion of highway money to other purposes, must raise their sights. As the Interstate was transportation, meeting the emerging needs of the I960-9Os, so today an Intermodal system, tying the nation’s ports, airports, rail heads and highways together, providing flexibility and local choice, best meets the transportationneeds of the 2 1st Century.”

ongressman James Oberstar, 8th District, Minnesota, Minneapolis Forum. Metropolitan Economies are the We heard over and over again about how congestion both for passenger and cargo Engines of national Competitiveness movements in urban and suburban areas hurts America. We heard how it causes frustration “The national interest in transportation and aggressive driving behavior, lost productivity extends beyond the Interstate and NHS. It and wages, absenteeism, and shipments that includes the effective functioning of arrive late or not at all. And we heard how it metropolitan transportation systems in results in a competitive disadvantage for regional economies, which are the building American businesses and in impacts on families, blocks of the nation’s global competitiveness.” communities, and the environment. We heard that a commitment of resources for highways, John Poorman, Executive Director, Capital District Transportation Committee, Albany, New York Forum. transit and passenger rail is needed in the reauthorized ISTEA to make congestion Although ours was still a predominantly rural, reduction a National priority. agrarian society when most transportation agencies were founded around the turn of the Many people thought that ISTEA’s funding twentieth century, Americans soon began sub-allocations to metropolitan areas are moving to our metropolitan important to ensuring a match between areas. By the time ISTEA was resources and needs and to focusing investment enacted in I991, nearly 200 where it will have the greatest economic return. million Americans lived in those Others believed that States rather than local metropolitan areas. officials, through Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), should retain greater Today our urbanized areas latitude in the allocation of funds because States account for roughly 80% of have a better perspective in balancing America’s economic output. We metropolitan against statewide needs. were told that our metropolitan areas are vital building blocks of Many speakers felt that priority should be put the National economy and for on maximizing the effective use of existing them to perform at their best highway and transit systems before seeking to they need safe, efficient and expand them. System capacity enhancements reliable transportation were seen as desirable where cost-effective, systems. especially in areas experiencing rapid growth.

interests to make "Congestion annually Access to Rural Areas Needs Improvement sure that costs more than $45 billion in wasted time metropolitan “In the rural West, the future of our and fuel in fifty regions, which are metropolitan areas. economy, the welfare of our citizens and supporting overall Transit’s greatest their quality of life is linked to the national economic economic contribution is mobility and access provided by our its ability to move many growth, are highways.” people efficiently, bolstered through providing access to jobs, U.S. Senator Max Baucus Montana. Missoula Forum. further and reducing the transportation economic costs imposed by congestion.” The needs of rural areas, while different from investment.” metropolitan areas, are also important. In rural James J, Florio, National Chairman, Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell, States the National Highway System transports Transit Now, New York Forum. Miami Forum. the necessary raw materials for manufactured

8 How to Keep America Moving goods and agricultural products which boost the economies, increasing jobs and income. National economy. We heard that tourism is Participants in the Regional Forums felt that critical to many rural States’ economies, with rural transportation needs would not be met seventy-seven percent of American adults driving without a strong Federal role. for pleasure to view mountains, lakes, streams and historic sites and over 45 million foreign "As recently as the early 1950s, West Virginia tourists spending $77 billion in America in 1995. had fewer than 50 miles of four-lane road. Today it is served by nearly 550 miles of Rural States emphasized in the Regional highways. As a result, West Virginians enjoy a Forums that they cannot be forgotten in reauthorization if the nation is to succeed in mobility undreamed of by their parents and fulfilling its objectives for a National, intermodal jobs. It happened because a highly effective transportation system that provides mobility for Federal-State partnership was forged. Now, as people and efficient travel for goods. we debate ISTEA’s reauthorization, that partnership must be strengthened, not “Countless people living in small towns would weakened.” either have to accept a lower quality of life, James Casto, Transportation Chairman, Huntington Regional or migrate to larger urban areas in the Chamber of Commerce, Huntington Forum. absence of Federal funding for rural transit.” . Tom Ashby, Connections to Global Markets Executive Director, South Are a Key to Economic Prosperity Central lllinois Mass Transit “U.S. exports and imports doubled in the past District, decade. The two key factors now in doing Centralia, Illinois, Chrcago business successfully are speed and global Forum. reach. Production facilities with immediate access to air, highway, rail and sea Transit systems in these areas also play a transportation and state-of-the-art critical role since many of their riders are transit communications will be best equipped to dependent. In these cases, transit provides compete.” crucial links to employment, education, health care, and social opportunities. Although the low Mark Cramer, North Carolino Global Transpark Authority, Miami Forum. densities in rural areas make operating transit expensive, it is often the only option available to ISTEA recognized how critical many rural residents, especially the elderly. transportation is to linking American business Several participants emphasized the importance to the global marketplace, and that National of providing additional aid for rural transit transportation agencies, including lowering the local match for policy must be capital purchases and operating expenses. geared towards making America Many speakers emphasized the need for more increased transportation funds dedicated to competitive. rural area needs. Participants asserted that Prior to ISTEA, additional funds are necessary for both roads goods movement and for transit, especially as rural railroads are and intermodal abandoned. They highlighted the critical role connections often that rural road investments play in ensuring were low among efficient freight transport, which benefits the government National economy. Furthermore, these priorities Deputy Maritime Administrator Joan Yim and Deputy Federal investments dramatically improve local Railroad Administrator Don Itzkoff. Chicago Forum.

The First Cornerstone 9 because, as one observer commented, freight planning decision-making. The successes that doesn’t vote. were cited as examples of what DOT should encourage came about when MPOs, such as We heard how the passage of NAFTA has those in the Seattle and San Francisco areas, had increased economic opportunities for American formed public-private freight advisory groups. business, but how cross-border transport We were urged to encourage more of these. systems need to be greatly improved if these We were also requested to encourage States to opportunities-and the jobs that go with them actively develop freight mobility planning are to be realized. elements in their required transportation infrastructure plans. Specifically, the current system for allocating resources isn’t meeting the need. Local and “Left out are the transportation gateways State governments do not have the resources to build highway linkages to handle growing of National significance, with their volumes of international truck traffic which often enormous impact on jobs, wages and benefit national rather than local or State interests. salaries, and economic benefits along with regional and global Because of this and competing demands, border crossing facilities also rarely receive competitiveness.”

priority for Federal funds. We heard in San Cruz Russell, Director, Diego from Senator Barbara Boxer and Corporate Policy and Congressmen Bob Filner, Brian Bilbray and Jay Planning, Port Authority Kim that bipartisan support is emerging for of New York and New targeted Federal funding. jersey, New York forum.

“States and local jurisdictions simply have too In Philadelphia, many competing needs to bear sole New York, Chicago, responsibility for funding border San Diego, and infrastructure.” Miami, we heard Rick Otis, President of the Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce, that even in areas San Diego, Forum. heavily involved in trade, providing “The Border Trade Alliance believes that ISTEA access to needs to earmark projects of national priority international which link ports of entry to the Federal markets still had highway system.” difficulty competing for priority with other State and local needs. Because of this, we heard a Dr. Donald Michie, Border Trade Alliance El Paso, Texas, demand for a strong Federal role in this arena, as Miami Forum. witnesses cited the nationwide importance: of We heard testimony about the need for assuring that goods and services produced in shippers to have better access to airports and America reach global markets as efficiently as seaports. We were urged to think about freight possible; of minimizing the price that American in terms of both weight and value, and to consumers pay for the transport of imported improve our transportation investment goods; and of making America’s tourist strategies to account for each. And we also destinations easily accessible to visitors. One heard about the importance of international idea put forward is that State and MPO plans be tourism to America’s economy, with an annual required to spell out how they provide for trade surplus of $21 billion creating hundreds of improved access to international markets. thousands of jobs. Finally, we heard in several forums from Freight interests asserted that goods advocacy groups urging that priority be given in movement, especially access to ports, rarely reauthorization to multi-state trade corridors received the priority needed in funding or such as the proposed Interstate-69.

10 How to Keep America Moving lntermodalism Needs More Emphasis linkages and connections between modes are often as significant a barrier as inadequate facilities. "ISTEA’s emphasis on intermodal connections and efficiency has resulted in better The importance of intermodal connections connections between our ports, highways, and for the movement of people was another transit; it has allowed us to add bicycles and consistent theme. The interface between the pedestrian facilities to our regional rail and Nation’s airports and its surface transport transit system; and it has led to a great system needs substantial improvement, as do increase in cooperative planning and action convenient transit-highway and rail-bus on the part of all modes of transportation connections. concerned with the movement of freight.” "We strongly favor improved connections Happy Fernandez, Philadelphia City Councilmember, Philadelphla between different modes of transportation.” Forum. Terence Moakley, Associate Executive The “I” in ISTEA is “Intermodal,” and it DIrector, Eastern "Intercity buses are an indicates the significance of safe and efficient Paralyzed Veterans essential part of the connections between transportation modes. Association, New York The importance of good intermodal connections Forum. intermodal passenger to our competitiveness, and the need to place transportation network There was not, even more emphasis on improving the Nation’s however, universal ISTEA was intended to intermodal network, was a point heard over and agreement on the foster; the new ISTEA must over. answer for contain stronger incentives intermodalism- “Since the amount of international cargo specifically, for their moving through U.S. ports has been projected whether there inclusion.” should be special to triple by the year 2020, the need for Craig Lentzsch, efficient land side access to the interstate categories or set- President of highway system and railroads must be planned asides of funding Greyhound Lines, Inc., New York for today.” for intermodal projects. Some Forum Paul DeMariano, President, Port of Philadelphia and Camden, people observed Philadelphia Forum. that some intermodal projects are We were told that the problem is multi- neither “fish nor fowl” and have modal: rail, highway, bus, and air transport difficulty competing for highway or transit funding. Others believed facilities all need to be upgraded, and in some that a special intermodal category cases new ones need to be built. And we were would be a step backward from told that the problem is intermodal: poor ISTEA’s empowerment of State and local decision-making. There was also concern about the wisdom of government support for investments on privately owned facilities, such as rail lines, unless a clear public benefit could be demonstrated.

The importance of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) to an efficient National intermodal transportation network was also noted. Advanced systems for global tracking of vehicles

The First Cornerstone I I and shipments, traffic There was general agreement that the Federal management and traveler role in intermodalism should be continued and information, commercial strengthened. The interstate nature of the vehicle operations, and intermodal transportation system and the electronic toll collection development and deployment of cost-effective were all cited as examples and compatible ITS technologies were but two of how ITS technologies can play a role in improving examples cited of the need for strong leadership transportation. at the Federal level.

I2 How to Keep America Moving THE SECOND CORNERSTONE OF ISTEA: Maximizing Return on Investment and System Performance.

The “E” in ISTEA is “efficiency’‘-through most out of the dollars that are available, and to maximizing return on investment and improving expand the resource envelope through productivity, through innovative financing, innovative fiscal strategies. And so ISTEA and through deployment of new technologies that the initiatives taken by the Administration improve effectiveness, and through a new encouraged State and local governments to emphasis on performance: efficiency is ISTEA’s work together to stretch their transportation second cornerstone. investment dollars, and to learn from one another in identifying where the biggest payoffs Although the Interstate Highway System was lie. the key to connecting America and unleashing the Nation’s economic might, the era of the A big part of the return on transportation Interstate System was drawing to a close when investment is in the competitiveness of American ISTEA was enacted. However, the work was not business and productivity finished, and better and more efficient of American workers. transportation systems were needed at all levels. And so ISTEA attacks That is why ISTEA created the National Highway congestion and poor System, and funded programs for critical needs intermodal connections, in both rural and metropolitan areas. inefficiencies in the transportation system Budgetary which could cost billions in lost wages and profits. “The concept of pressures and the innovative financing entire results- With the advent of the oriented approach has led to a climate of information to government superhighway, the role doing more with less dictate fiscal which technology could discipline and and involving the play in improving the accountability for efficiency of America’s private sector as a results. And so transportation systems ISTEA features a partner in financing became clear, and so new approach to Federal Highway Administrator Rodney Sloter projects. Rather than ISTEA strongly encouraged planning and the development and requiring new Federal decision-making deployment of these technologies. which asked money, this innovative States and regions Finally, the importance of fairness in deciding financing initiative has to live within their how scarce fiscal resources would be distributed means, and which allowed us to make also became clear. And so ISTEA attempted to placed a premium balance the National interest with an equitable progress on several on investments return of resources to States, and also important projects by which would yield encouraged new and more flexible arrangements improved system between State and local governments for sharing making more efficient performance. those resources. use of the Federal New and Efficiency. Through better decisions and dollars we already creative investments, through innovative financing, had.” approaches and through deployment of new technologies, and through a new emphasis on performance: David Winstead, Secretary partnerships were efficiency is ISTEA’s second cornerstone. Maryland DOT Philadelphia needed to get the Forum. Resources Continue to be Needed made better use of "Any retreat by the resources by giving States and MPOs Federal government ISTEA increased authorized funding for the ability to target from fully funding transportation, and the Clinton Administration, them to their most working with transportation will cost-effective uses. Congress, has only magnify the made good on “Reauthorization’s ISTEAS promise consequences of primary focus by supporting the Loma Prieta should be on larger budget and Northridge commitments. capital Federal reinvestment in earthquakes and existing transportation deny us the investment infrastructure - revenues we were levels are now our bridges, 25% higher than roadways and counting on to prior to ISTEA. transit.” Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs reverse 30 years of Its programs’havehelped Louise E Stall, San Diego Forum Elliot Sander, New York City neglect for our States to keep pace with Commissioner of ever-increasing demands on highway and transit Transportation New York transportation systems. ISTEA did this by funding significant Forum. systems.” programs such as the National Highway System, allowing States and MPOs the flexibility to target Many participants Richard Katz, Democratic Leader, California Assembly, resources to their most cost-effective uses, and explained that more San Diego Forum. setting the stage for innovative ways of money is needed to leveraging additional nonfederal funds from both maintain and operate existing highway and transit systems, and the public and private sectors. that common sense dictated that higher priority be given to maintenance so that existing We heard that the size of the resource base transportation assets do not deteriorate. must be sustained or increased in reauthorization. Although there was no call for an increased Local officials argued that, when people leave Federal gas tax, speakers did endorse a number of home to go to work, and when goods leave the ideas: having appropriations closer to the levels factory to go to market, they start their journey authorized by ISTEA; moving the 4.3c per gallon on a local street or arterial. In their view, that gas tax, now going to deficit reduction, into the underscored the need for assuring that local Highway Trust Fund; and taking the Highway Trust facilities be given a chance to compete for Fund off budget. funding on a more equal footing with State facilities. “Scaling back the federal level of investment at this time will eventually cripple the Nation’s “The entire system must be improved, mobility and economy. At a minimum, the preserved, and maintained in a coordinated Federal government should continue user manner. If any link in the multi-jurisdictional taxes at the current level and deposit into the network of interstate, principal, and Highway Trust Fund the 4.3 cents per gallon secondary highways, roads, and streets breaks now sent to the General Fund.” down due to inadequate funding, the entire Fred VanKirk, Secretary/Commissioner of Highways, West Virginia system will suffer and the national interest DOT, Huntington Forum. will be damaged.”

There was widespread endorsement of Eric Berger, Director, Washington State County Road Administration ISTEA’s flexibility, with the belief that ISTEA had Board. Portland Forum.

14 How to Keep America Moving "When California has an earthquake, Florida Fairness of Funding Distribution is at Issue has a hurricane or the Mississippi River floods,

“18 States get back less than 90 cents on the the entire Nation addresses these needs dollar because ISTEA’s guarantee doesn’t without regard to whether the taxes used were apply to all highway funding returned to raised in the affected states.” States. Fairer funding is especially needed for John Daly, Commissioner, New States with growing populations.” York State DOT, Ben Watts, Secretary, Florida DOT, Miami Forum. New York Forum.

Like every authorization bill before it, ISTEA “STEP 21 eliminates involved compromises on how Federal funds CMAQ, a program vital would be distributed. As a result, some States to cities.” annually pay more into the Highway Trust Fund Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell, than they receive. Others believe they have been Miami Forum. short-changed historically and need rebalancing. How States allocate funds to metropolitan areas Another important was another point of contention. topic was the idea of devolution, the use of As the Regional Forums made clear, all of block grants to give these questions are still hotly debated. Speakers States greater control of endorsed or decried provisions of ISTEA which, transportation programs from their perspective, supported or unfairly by granting them more disadvantaged their priorities. flexible use of those funds. Many witnesses “Indiana only sees 82 cents returned to our argued strongly against highways for every dollar we send to block grants because non-traditional transportation investments and Washington. The Simplified Surface National priorities, such as border crossings and Transportation Program our STEP 21 intermodal corridors of National significance, Coalition has developed guarantees that each would not be funded without Federal State receive a 95 cent return." involvement.

Dennis Faulkenberg, Deputy Commissioner, lndiana D0T, Chicago Forum. “Based on our experience, block grant funding would never get to Michigan’s local Much of the discussion at the forums government road agencies.” centered around a State’s return on payments Edward McNamara, County Executive, Wayne County, Michigan, made to the Highway Trust Fund. Many Chicago Forum. participants, especially those representing so- called “donor” States, supported programs in A variation on devolution was the proposal to which States were guaranteed at least a 95 link block grants to States with a reduction in percent return on their contribution. Others, the Federal gas tax, leaving only a very limited especially from “donee” States, argued in favor of Federal role. States would have even greater maintaining a system based on need and latitude on how to invest the funds, although National priorities, and expressed concern over they would have to increase their own gas taxes the programs that would have to be sacrificed to to make up the difference. Proponents argued make the 95 percent return possible. that this would match accountability with responsibility. But opponents said that this "Without continued levels of Federal funding, would place too much authority in the hands of Nevada will not be able to adequately the States to the detriment of metropolitan maintain our Interstate Highways.” regions, and noted that 33 State constitutions

Tom Stephens, Director, Nevada DOS; San Diego Forum. forbid spending gas tax monies on transit.

The Second Cornerstone I5 “We feel that a combination of tax devolution ISTEA introduced important changes in how and consolidated block grants will best ensure transportation projects are funded, allowing that tax dollars are used most effectively at greater flexibility, encouraging private sector the State and local level.” involvement, and providing State and local authorities with new tools for leveraging Dean Dunphy, Secretary, California, Business, Transportation and additional dollars and for accessing capital Housing Agency, San Diego Forum. markets. Even as issues of “Since the establishment of “devolution” and “turnback” Forum participants praised ISTEA-inspired innovations in financing, asserting that these new the Interstate Highway were being debated in Congress, we heard methods are highly effective at “getting more for System, it has been in the overwhelming support for the dollar” and at reducing project delays. Several participants discussed their optimism national interest to ISTEA in the forums. “Turnback” and “devolution” about using Federal aid to leverage private construct roads which were seldom mentioned. dollars, and wide support was voiced for transcend the needs of a However, we heard that, if promoting more innovation in financing. budget caps were to reduce single State. This system is highway and transit programs Participants mentioned specific innovative now threatened by a well below the level which financing methods which they found to be useful, Trust Fund revenues can especially State Infrastructure Banks. proposal for "turnback” support, then “turnback” which would eliminate the would become a more Many people felt that public-private appealing alternative, despite partnerships offered great potential for bringing Federal interest in our its flaws and risks. private sector expertise and resources to bear highway system.” to solve public problems. Some suggested that A final issue was the private participation could be increased if the Congressman Nick Rahall, 3rd District, division of funding-and the high “front-end” risk of the environmental and West Virginia, Huntington Forum. responsibility for decision- making-between States and project approval processes could be assumed by MPOs. We heard testimony the public sector. that many States and MPOs, after some awkward first steps, had formed useful and Of particular interest were “market-based” productive relationships. In these cases, there strategies which use a variety of pricing was general satisfaction regarding the respective mechanisms to link supply and demand. There roles they played by in the allocation of Federal was substantial support for such strategies to funds. Some States observed that local decision- fund new facilities, but their use for congestion makers lacked the perspective to understand and air pollution reduction appeared more what was truly good for the entire State, and controversial. One idea was for “selling” excess that more decisions should, therefore, be made capacity on underutilized high-occupancy vehicle at the State level. Likewise some MPOs urged lanes to commercial vehicles, and another was continued Federal oversight to assure that their to extend this idea metropolitan areas receive a fair share of the to single-occupant John Horsley, Deputy AssIstant Secretary for Governmental Affalrs, Jane Garvey, Federal resources allocated to their States. automobiles. Deputy Administrator Federal Highway Administration, San Diego Forum. Innovative Financing Strategies Should be Encouraged

“A continued Federal commitment to innovative financing initiatives is critical. The program fosters private/public partnerships that effectively leverage limited public funds.”

Jess Deventer, Chairman, San Diego Unified Port District, San Diego Forum.

I6 How to Keep America Moving Receiving strong general support were multiple fronts. Advanced vehicle safety systems, innovative financing techniques such as Federal commercial vehicle operations, traveler lines of credit, credit enhancements, loan information and traffic management guarantees, and revolving loan funds. These were technologies, and emergency management seen as excellent mechanisms for the Federal systems are but a few areas where public and government to leverage maximum State, local, private entities have partnered to bring and private investment without increasing the technological expertise to bear on the problems deficit. of safety and security, congestion, and efficient and reliable transportation. “We will continue using innovative financing techniques, but we offer a caution. Innovative During the Regional Forums we heard financing doesn’t necessarily mean more widespread support for the continued development of ITS, and we heard even stronger money. For concepts, like infrastructure views on the need for deployment of those banks, new sources or increased levels of the technologies. traditional sources are needed to retire debt.” Sid Morrison, Secretary, Washington DOT, Portland Forum. “Legislators think that ITS is high-tech, space age technology, but that is not the case.” Despite enthusiasm for innovative financing, several participants underscored the importance Charles Thompson, Secretary, Wisconsin DOT Minneapolis Forum. of realizing the limitations of such methods. We heard State and local officials say that, far They asserted that, while these techniques play a from being futuristic, Buck Rogers fantasies, ITS critical role, areas eventually will reach a limit on can and should make important contributions to what they can accomplish without additional solving transportation problems now. From the funds. Atlanta Olympic Games to Yosemite National Park, we heard how traveler-information and Deployment of traffic-management systems can spell the New Technologies difference between gridlock and a smoothly- functioning, multi-modal transportation system. Should be Accelerated We heard how driver fatigue and collision- avoidance systems can save lives and billions of ISTEA dollars in accident costs. We heard how established a commercial applications, such as fleet strong Federal role management, hazardous-materials incident in the development response, and automated on-board and roadside of Intelligent safety monitoring systems can enhance the Transportation safety and reliability of the goods movement ITS is visionary. It can Systems (ITS) industry, and give a competitive edge to technologies, American manufacturers who depend on just- provide additional and set the in-time deliveries to minimize their costs and capacity at one- stage for ITS keep consumer prices down. quarter the cost, and public-private partnerships Some spoke about barriers to ITS generate jobs. For throughout deployment. State and local officials alike every $1 in Federal government. commented on the need for more and better During the trained personnel to operate these systems, and funds, ITS generates $4 ensuing years, about their operating and maintenance costs. in private investment.” impressive They suggested that restrictions on the use of

U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg, progress has Federally-funded systems for revenue generation New jersey, New York Forum. been made on be relaxed.

The Second Cornerstone I7 We also heard how important advances in development and deployment of new areas other than ITS research and technology transportation technologies. Reasons cited are being made. include assuring uniformity and consistency From among systems, enhancing American leadership development of in global technology markets, and facilitating new and more technology transfer and enhancing the skills and durable abilities of the transportation community. construction materials to “ISTEA is helping us demonstrate new seismic retrofit applications of advanced technology. Our and bridge design Positive Train Separation project will speed innovations, we the operations of rail freight and passenger heard that we service while simultaneously improving safety. need to pursue And our project Green Light will speed an aggressive and diversified transportation commercial truck traffic while reducing the research agenda. operating costs for commercial carriers and

There was widespread agreement as to the the State.” need for a continued strong Federal role in both Grace Crunican, Director, Oregon DOT, Portland Forum. THE THIRD CORNERSTONE OF ISTEA: Partnerships and Flexibility in making Transportation Choices.

ISTEA empowered State and local development, and the link between governments by giving them greater flexibility transportation and other local, regional or State and decision-making authority. It brought new policy objectives. ISTEA encouraged special players to the table through a more inclusive efforts to increase participation by businesses, planning process and gave State and local officials the elderly, people with disabilities, low-income the ability to target funds to projects that best residents, minorities, and others who may have address their priorities. been underserved previously.

“Clearly, efficient freight movement is critical ISTEA also offered unprecedented flexibility to our local and National economic survival. to State and local officials to make decisions on We must continue the momentum that has how they invest funds. It reduced the overall been initiated under ISTEA and allow these number of funding programs, equalized local partnerships to blossom, developing effective match requirements for different modes, and and efficient solutions to mobility in the 2 1st allowed funding to be “flexed” from one program to another. Century.”

jenny Oropeza, Chair, Goods Movement Advisory Committee, People who depend on public transit have Southern California Association of Governments, San Diego Forum. benefited from new funding flexibilities. By giving Transportation partnerships have been formed State and local decision-makers discretion in all across America, involving both traditional how to invest funds, ISTEA enabled intercity rail transportation players and other groups and in some areas to continue operations, improved individuals who are relative newcomers. These access to ports and airports, and opened the partnerships door to nontraditional projects and innovative have discovered approaches to problem-solving. new and innovative ways We also heard from States such as those to address involved in the STEP 21 Coalition (Streamlined diverse issues, Transportation Efficiency Program for the 2 I st ranging from Century). In their view, ISTEA didn’t go far freight enough in providing flexibility. But they use that movement to term in a different sense than simply expanding bicycle and the range of eligible uses for Federal funds.They pedestrian urged that ISTEA reauthorization should provide mobility. And States greater flexibility by reducing this has requirements, consolidating programs and broadened the eliminating earmarks. base of support for “The partnership concept was reinforced by a transportation formula to allocate ISTEA’s Surface programs. Federal Transit Administrator Gordon Linton. Transportation Program funds to metropolitan areas and by the requirement for joint The partners bring both new perspectives and new energy to State/local approval of the Transportation the planning and decision-making process, and Improvement Program. As a result, States and have organized to address a variety of issues, MPOs have engaged in extensive collaborative such as environmental quality, economic decision-making. Strong State/MPO partnerships are evolving that serve needs at coordinated and that their efforts hold great all four levels National, State, metropolitan potential for reducing sprawl and vehicle miles and local. We strongly believe these traveled. partnerships should be strengthened.” “ISTEA and Washington State’s Growth Jean McCowen, City Councilmember, Palo Alto. Califirnio and Management Act gave us the opportunity to Commissioner, Metropolitan Tronsportation Commission, San Dlego Forum. turn rhetoric about “linking transportation and land use ”into real action.” Since its enactment, ISTEA’s flexibilities have, Bob Drewel, County Executive, for the most part, been hailed as one of its Snohomish County, Washmgton, “Sprawl is a terribly positive elements. Adapting to the new flexibility Portland Forum. has sometimes proven difficult because it inefficient way for a brought new players into long established We heard how State region to grow. The processes, and has caused traditional players to and local agencies have reexamine their relationships. But, we heard linkage of been rethinking and that in the end, better solutions have resulted. revising how they plan transportation and in response to ISTEA, land use is our best Partnerships, flexibility, and better investment and how investment choices: this is ISTEA’s third cornerstone. defense against it.” decisions are resulting that will better serve all Chuck Armstrong, CEO, Bank of America, Oregon, Portland Enhanced Planning and Public Participation customers of the Forum. Mean Better Decisions transportation system.

“It is very important that the Administration ‘We have demonstrated our commitment to stay the course with the ISTEA innovation, the involvement of all interested citizens - especially in the areas of planning, public whether a mother concerned about getting involvement and moving toward a balanced her kids to school safely, a business owner transportation system.” needing good customer access, or a railroad or trucker needing to move more goods faster Hank Dittmar, Executive Director, Surface Transportatron Policy Project, St. Louis Forum. and cheaper. And they all know that we will be developing a transportation plan that will The challenges of global competition and truly reflect all our needs.” surging travel demand are testing the nation’s capacity to move people and goods safely and Nettie Seabrooks, Deputy Mayor, City of Detroit, St. Louis Forum. efficiently. During the forums we We heard about the progress that has been were told how made in adopting new approaches to planning ISTEA’s planning and public participation. Both States and MPOs framework is are facilitating participatory decision-making, but leading to more we also heard that there is a need for even efficient and safer greater involvement by the private sector, transportation. especially the goods movement industry. Transportation systems connect Participants asserted the need to increase Americans to consideration of rural communities needs in the jobs and America planning process. A number of different to global markets, but at the same time are now suggestions were offered, including more extensive more environmentally friendly and sensitive to incorporation of rural constituencies in the State communities. We learned about how planning process and the encouragement of more transportation and land use planning are being urban-rural partnerships.

20 How to Keep America Moving While most participants supported ISTEA’s State and Local Officials Have Been planning provisions, suggestions were offered on how to improve the process. Much discussion Enpowered revolved around “Changes need to be the role of the ISTEA brought about MPOs, with profound changes in the made regarding representation transportation planning and representation. First, raised as one funding process by providing concern. State officials new decision- MPOs should include making authority while Transit Agencies as States and changing their relationship MPOs alike are with metropolitan areas. voting members; Second, challenged by By drawing local State veto power over the need to communities and officials evaluate existing MPO actions should be into transportation systems and decision-making removed; and Third, services to through the MPO "There is no ensure that central cities, like process, ISTEA gave substitute for local limited them more Philadelphia, should resources are responsibility - and planning and directed and have representation a greater stake - in coordination.” managed more the outcome of which reflects their efficiently, all the U.S. Senator Mark Hatfield, transportation while Oregon, Portland Forum. share of the region’s decisions. recognizing the population.” unique “It is an axiom that power attracts leaders. Congressman Robert Borski, 3rd problems of ISTEA gave ownership to local officials District Pennsylvania, their geographic Philadlephia Forum. areas. Under through the MPO’s. As a result, there are ISTEA, enhanced more local officials today who are willing to planning, more speak plainly about the need for additional public input, and new partnerships are leading to transportation investment, including both new a new bottom line: more cost-effective and projects and the preservation of the existing fiscally-responsible decisions which are more infrastructure.” closely focused on the most urgent needs. Scott Parne,Tampa City Counolmember, Hillsborough, Florida, MPO “There is a natural and inherent conflict Chairman, Miami Forum. between National objectives and metropolitan We heard a great deal about these and urban needs. The Federal interest in relationships in the Regional Forums, and were movement of goods and the local interest in told that shared decision-making has often been moving people can be resolved only by difficult. Participants believe that ISTEA shifted planning within an MPO region.” the decision-making process closer to States and communities, and that this has improved the Buddy Wines, Chairman,Associatron of Metropolitan Planning effectiveness of planning and decisions. Local Organizations, Little Rock,Arkansas, St. Louis Forum. officials asked for Federal assistance in assuring Witnesses supported the fiscal constraint that they would receive more complete and provisions of ISTEA and commented that timely information from their States on the developing plans which are fiscally realistic has Federal funds available annually for distribution, resulted in greater budget discipline and and the decisionmaking process involved. accountability. That is leading to more cost- effective solutions, maximizing the performance While many speakers talked about the benefit of existing facilities as a complement to, or of State empowerment and involvement by local instead of building additional capacity. officials, most people emphasized the importance

The Third Cornerstone 21 of maintaining a strong Federal role in ISTEA’s Funding Flexibility Should Be transportation planning to ensure that National priorities are met. But we also heard that there Increased is less agreement among State and local officials about the best way to share responsibility "ISTEA works because it allows flexibility and between States and MPOs. rewards innovation.”

Philadelphia Mayor Ed Rendell, Philadelphia Forum. “I can think of no better example of the strength of ISTEA than our most recent A vital component of ISTEA is the experience in unprecedented flexibility provided to State and local officials to decide how Federal funds can be Michigan. invested most effectively. This increased ISTEA flexibility has prompted State DOTS and MPOs prohibited our to adopt new ways of coordinating their Governor’s planning and has been a catalyst for changing plan to how Federal funds are used. We were told that unilaterally flexing of funds has proven a success, especially for urban areas shifting funding to transit, and reprogram should be maintained. Federal dollars and forced “The transportation enhancements and CMAQ the state back programs have been very effective in to the protecting environmental and historic negotiating resources; promoting a greater degree of table. Because ISTEA made us co-equals in intermodalism; and encouraging greater local this process, we were decision-making through flexible funding ultimately able to find a provisions. These programs should be “I am concerned that position that was a win-win maintained and, where possible, expanded.” some MPOs will push for both.” Louis Gambaccini, Executive Director, Southeast Pennsylvania Transit for greater control over Anita Ashford, Vice-Chair, Southeast Authority, Philadelphia Forum. Michigan Council of Governments, Chicago funding presently Forum. While flexing of funds for transit projects has allocated to State been widespread, ports and rail interests, both On the whole, States and intercity passenger and freight, have argued that DOTS, even advocating MPOs support the new ISTEA’s flexibility should be further expanded to direct block grants to authority and responsibility explicitly include as eligible expenditures projects that improve intermodal connections MPOs. Reducing the they have been granted through and intercity rail passenger services. ISTEA, and want to see it State’s role would increased. We heard testimony "We endorse a National Highway System that Balkanize this program. from States and MPOs asking to minimize Federal oversight encompasses our nation’s seaports, airports, I urge FHWA to look in the future, and expressing rail-truck interchange points and river closely before bypassing their willingness to be held terminals. Direct investment to intermodal the States.” accountable in return. facilities should be made eligible in the new

Jom Stephens, Director, Nevada DOTI San Diego Forum.

22 How to Keep America Moving ISTEA, where the public interest is served. It Guidance and regulations were developed for should also make funding separate rail grade- ISTEA’s new programs and provisions. We heard crossings on the NHS a priority to improve comments on the difficulties State and local agencies have had with these requirements, and safety and speed delivery.” received many suggestions about how the T: Martin Florentino, Vice President, Corporate Communications & Federal government can streamline them. Public Affairs CSX Transportation, Miami Forum. Much testimony discussed the need for “ISTEA’s intercity transportation objectives streamlining the regulatory process, reducing the cannot be fully achieved until flexibility is number of federal approvals, and removing provided to allow States to invest in intercity unnecessary sanctions and mandates. Speakers rail service.” suggested that, while the National Highway System Designation Act of I995 made some Frank Wilson, Commissioner, New Jersey D0T; New York Forum. progress in these areas, the Federal government On the other hand, highway interests have should set safety, design, and planning guidelines argued that unmet highway needs are so or standards that further national objectives, and substantial that we cannot afford to shift scarce allow State and local officials to find the best ways to meet them. resources from highways to transit and other transportation uses. This position was widely “Simplify and reduce the number of Federal held by State DOTS, which are struggling to keep up with ongoing highway and bridge maintenance regulations and clearances needed for needs. Speakers representing all transportation transportation program delivery. Overly modes asserted that appropriations levels have prescriptive interpretations by Federal been insufficient to meet needs and that funding agencies have led to overly restrictive or at the ISTEA - authorized levels would reduce unworkable regulations. These matters are some of the tensions between modes resulting further complicated by multi-agency approval from flexible funding. requirements.”

Sandra Straehl, Montana D0T; on behalf of the Standing “The flexibility provisions of ISTEA should be Committee on Planning, American Association of State Highway and broadened to permit States to shift funds Transportation Officials, St. Louis Forum. freely among highway program categories so We also heard that Federal planning and long as national needs within their States are project approval processes are needlessly time- met.” consuming. Broad support was given to the idea Bob BurIeson, Florida Transportation Builders Association, of a “one-stop” consolidated FHWA and FTA Miami Forum. plan and project approval process that would eliminate overlap and duplication. Additional Streamlining is needed Protection of workers’ rights was one “The emphasis of the reauthorization of ISTEA area where we were urged in several should include minimizing regulatory burdens and forums to retain the approach adopted by ISTEA legislation in I99 I. constraints. This will reduce costs and reduce the time needed to implement "Laws like Section 13(c) of the Federal transportation projects. ISTEA Transit Act and the Davis-Bacon Act, II should focus on simplifying which were retained in ISTEA, have the project programming and been instrumental in allowing workers implementation to earn a living wage. I cannot requirements.” underscore how important these Carol Roberts, President, Florida Association protections are.” of Counties, Miami Forum. Ed Talley, President Transport Workers Union, Local 29 I, Miamr Forum.

The Third Cornerstone 23 Some participants felt that the Federal government should be more of a partner and less of a policeman in the delivery process and that State and local officials can determine the best solutions to transportation problems in their areas, in partnership with Federal agencies. In sum, we were told that the challenge facing the Federal government is to redefine the Federal role so it is appropriate to the new flexibilities and empowerment of State and local officials while also ensuring achievement of “For our cities, the need national objectives. multi-modal for continued mass transportation has transit funding is clear. Participants also urged the DOT to work with been a catalyst for Without transit, traffic other Federal agencies to streamline regulations changing the related to ISTEA, such as those of the Clean Air on our expressways overall mix of Act. would increase by transportation roughly a third - options. “The ISTEA and NEPA environmental processes damaging our economy should be integrated to eliminate duplication Representatives and the Interstate at the planning and project levels. State from AMTRAK commerce that flows environmental programs should be evaluated emphasized the through it. These importance of and, where applicable, States should be systems must be intercity rail authorized to self-certify compliance. ISTEA considered national - services, not just local legislation should be modified to simplify the particularly on - assets. Maintaining planning process and avoid redundant densely-populated them should be a activities. Federal agencies should eliminate corridors. The overlapping regulations and requirements.” importance of priority of Federal AMTRAK services transportation policy.” John Trent, President, National Association of County Engineers, Portland Forum. to congestion Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, relief in these Chicogo Forum. lmproved Public Transportation areas was echoed by many speakers Means less Congestion and Better Access and the critical role it plays in serving both commuter and intercity travel in these areas was “Transit serves suburban commuters, city highlighted. Speakers argued that States should residents and rural families. It allows riders to have the option to use some of their apportionments to fund AMTRAK services. choose the best way to commute to work, while providing access to schools, medical Another message we heard was that transit is facilities and economic advancement. People vital to Americans’ well-being because it must have physical access to the location of provides access to jobs, education, health care, jobs if they are to move from welfare to work and other vital services. Speakers emphasized successfully.” the vital role ISTEA plays in funding transit capital investments such as bus replacements and Congressman John Fox, Philadelphia, Co-Chairman, House Commuter Caucus, Philadelphia forum. light rail. The importance of operating assistance was stressed, especially for smaller urban and ISTEA recognized the key role transit plays in rural transit systems. Several made the point reducing congestion and providing mobility. We that as we move forward to reform welfare, heard that it is vital to metropolitan areas and to transit will play a vital role in providing access to the national economy, and ISTEA’s emphasis on jobs, especially transporting low-income, central

24 How to Keep America Moving city residents the budgets of transit agencies. Tax credits for who cannot people who use transit or employers who afford cars, to promote transit was suggested as a way to make jobs in the transit more attractive. suburbs. Changing demographics and the “graying of America” were discussed as emerging concerns, “Transit helps particularly in suburban and rural areas where move millions of public transit services are limited. Participants people to jobs, noted that, while there is a clear need for such the elderly to services, they may have to health care and be curtailed or eliminated children to in the absence of funding. school. Keeping it alive will also "The elderly, who are help drivers particularly dependent “State and local because it will on public transit, are the prevent the fastest growing authorities should gridlock that we component of the U.S. be able to buy face in the next population. Meeting the what they want, century.” mobility needs of this including intercity Congressman Thomas M. population will be a Foglreta, I st District, significant social, trains.” PennsylvanIa, Philadelphia economic, and health Amtrak President Thomas Forum Downs, New York Forum. concern as ISTEA is Several speakers reauthorized.” noted that the John 6. Daly, Commissioner, New York programmatic and financial requirements of such Deputy Federal Transit Admlnlstrator unfunded mandates as the Americans with Stare D0T, New York Forum. Janette Sadik-Khan. New York Forum. Disabilities Act and the Clean Air Act strained

The Third Cornerstone 25 THE FOURTH CORNERSTONE OF ISTEA: Focusing on Outcomes for People and Communities.

ISTEA has caused people to think harder governments, but ISTEA promoted new about the outcomes of transportation partnerships to convert this tension into better investment and policy choices on the economy, and more balanced investments. on the environment, and on the quality of life. ISTEA requires States and MPOs to forge a Transportation’s bottom line is to make vision of the role that transportation will play in America a better place to live. So ISTEA shaping the future, and to develop plans that placed unprecedented emphasis on how reflect that vision. This has presented difficulties transportation can contribute to a better in reaching consensus about investment choices quality of life for every American. This among an expanded constituency, but these focus on outcomes is ISTEA’s fourth difficulties are being overcome. cornerstone.

“One overriding goal There has improwing Safety is Essential that should be been an increased emphasis on incorporated into the “Safety is at the very core of ISTEA. The safety under next surface Federal government is the only entity that can ISTEA, with transportation bill is resources effectively develop and manage partnership improvement to the focused on both among the health care industry, business, and economic health of the conventional States that will reduce traffic accidents and Nation in a way that measures and their accompanying cost to every American improves the quality of new technologies taxpayer.” to make life of its citizens.” Martm Orinski, America’s Kirk Brown, Secretary, Illinois DOT, University of Memphis, transportation Chicago Forum. on behalf of the Institute systems even of Trafic Engineers, safer. Under Vienna Forum. Federal leadership, States and MPOs, commercial vehicle operators, safety advocates, insurance Throughout the companies, and health professionals have joined Regional Forums there was solid together to find new ways to reduce transportation-related deaths and injuries. support among participants for the need to Federal Railroad Administrator Jolene M. Molitoris, Assistant Secretory Steven Concerns about transportation’s impact on Palmer, and Deputy Assistant Secretary John Lieber, New York Forum. natural and built environments are reflected in improve ISTEA. Thus, ISTEA forged a stronger link transportation safety and for a strong Federal between transportation and air quality planning. role in doing so. Some speakers recommended Although there are differing opinions about the that Federal standards be performance-based, best way to reduce air pollution, ISTEA has with States given the flexibility to attain encouraged the transportation community to predetermined goals. Speakers disagreed over address this problem. whether there should be sanctions for not achieving those goals. By targeting funds for National priorities of safety and environmental enhancement, ISTEA “Despite budget limitations much progress has leveled the playing field for such projects to been made. We should not fool ourselves, compete with more traditional investments. This however, into thinking that we can continue has caused some tension for State and local to get by with insufficient resources and still hope to increase, or even maintain, our programs. The cost effectiveness of safety current level of highway safety.” programs was hailed as one of the Federal government’s significant accomplishments, with Jane Roemer, Executive Director of Public Policy, National Safety Council,Vienna Forum. estimates that the direct economic benefits of . . highway safety programs exceeding their costs

We were told that by 9 to 1. ISTEA funding is an essential element in State “One of the mast successful and local efforts to government/industry partnerships has been increase highway and the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program. transit safety. Several It is the best deterrent available to keep suggestions were made motor carriers from operating a defective how to assure a vehicle and for getting a few bad truck drivers continuing commitment of off the road.” sufficient resources for john Collins, Senior Vice President, Government Afiirs, American safety programs. We Truckrng Associatlon,Vrenna Forum. were also told that those funds would be more Highway-rail grade-crossing safety was also effectively spent if Federal raised as a concern, and the new Federal safety program categories education campaign to address this problem was were consolidated, highlighted as a necessary role for DOT In Notional Highway Transportation Safety simplified, and Administrator Ricardo Martmez,Vienna Forum. addition, we heard strong support for more streamlined. funding to eliminate or improve grade crossings. Other comments included: opposition to Four specific areas of weakening safety standards through exemptions "If, in fact, safety is the on-going safety concern for commercial motor vehicles; increasing first and primary were raised: the border inspections of freight; and prohibiting concern of public increasing number of exemptions on hours of service. older drivers and the officials, then funding impact that this will have "We oppose further efforts to weaken safety to enhance life saving on safety: the impacts of standards, as was done last year, exempting eliminating the national should be taken off the commercial motor vehicles between 10,000 speed limit and and 26,000 pounds.“ top of the next ISTEA motorcycle helmet requirements in the Harry Lombardo, PresidencTronsport Workers Union #234, bill so that the Philadelphia Forum. National Highway System resources are secured.” Designation Act and their We heard conflicting advice on truck size and Katherine Prescott, National long-term effects on weight, with many recommending a freeze and President of Mothers Against Drunk safety; aggressive driving; truckers in both Missoula and Portland speaking Driving (MADD), Vienna Forum. and, alcohol-related safety of the potential benefits if their regions were incidents. allowed to permit larger trucks.

Participants agreed that more needs to be We were told that new technologies could done to increase commercial vehicle safety. help to make transportation not only more Although specific suggestions differed, efficient but also safer. Deployment of ITS participants voiced their support for technologies such as crash-avoidance systems performance-related trucking safety practices, and systems to enhance driver vision at night the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, and during poor weather were cited as being and the use of dedicated funds for safety promising.

28 How to Keep America Moving Environmental Protection Continues as a “Oregon’s Benchmarks sought to reduce per capita VMT in metropolitan areas by 20 Priority percent. We have learned that while VMT can be reduced, achieving the 20 percent objective “We can’t have Big League quality of life with will be extremely difficult and require Little League transportation . . . Protect the substantial pricing increases.” environment, manage growth and be sensitive Susan Brady, Vice-Charr Oregon Transportation Commission, to economics all at the same time.” Portland Forum. U. S. Senotor Ron Wyden, Oregon, Portland forum. Over the last four years the most extensive ISTEA established environmental protection environmental effort under ISTEA has gone into as a national priority. Its planning provisions reducing air pollution and achieving conformity require consistency between transportation and between Clean Air Act planning and regional air quality planning, and that attention in the transportation investment plans. planning process be focused on such concerns as wetlands, energy conservation, and land use. Based on what we heard, there remains We heard in the Regional Forums that these strong support for provisions have made transportation planning continuing the effort to more outcome-oriented: transportation achieve clean air, but we agencies focus on both the immediate physical also heard frustration elements of investments, such as design with some of the characteristics, and the broader impacts on their prescriptive approaches communities and regions. Some speakers being required. We indicated that the linking of transportation, land were urged to translate use, and environmental issues in planning may ISTEA’s planning factors lead to more informed, or even different, and the Clean Air Act’s investment choices. conformity provisions into performance “The public understands that travel distances objectives, and then to allow regions greater are getting longer, travel times between the “I hope ISTEA does not same two points are growing, travel delays are latitude in how they attain those objectives. abandon or diminish its getting longer and more frequent, and driver EPA was urged to be frustration with congestion is rising." commitment to clean flexible and creative in supporting Robert Yuhnke, Counsel, Task Force on Transportation and the alternative ways of cutting pollution, air goals. It is Environment, Portland Forum. especially innovative market-based disheartening to find programs. We heard that many Americans now that in many State understand that meeting their demands for mobility may require a change in approach to “Market-based programs are not capitals, the phrase transportation. We were told that achieving command and control programs clean air has become a National goals for global warming, energy and should not be treated as such dirty word...lSTEA’s conservation, and air quality may require in EPA’s enforcement process.” reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) Mark Pisano, Executive Director, Southern commitment to clean because traffic is growing faster than the roads california Association of Governments, Portland air should be needed to carry it. Forum. enhanced...not Oregon has made reduction in the rate of We also heard considerable abandoned.” VMT growth a priority by encouraging support, especially from local Bob Janiszewski County Executive, development patterns which are less dependent governments, for the Congestion Hudson County, New Jersey, on automobiles and which can be served by Mitigation and Air Quality New York Forum. transit.

The Fourth Cornerstone 29 Improvement (CMAQ) Program. Overall, Set-Asides for Enhancements, speakers urged the Federal government to stay the course and continue to Scenic By-ways, and Congestion Programs make the achievement of cleaner air a priority. “The transportation enhancements and scenic by-ways programs have widespread support in The interaction between cities, counties, and local communities. transportation and land use Through local sponsorship, these programs was raised in several have leveraged millions of dollars creating Regional Forums, and tremendous public support for the ISTEA participants commented on program. These projects reflect local needs the difficulties of fully and priorities, improve quality of life, and are integrating planning a catalyst for increased tourism and economic processes to account for development.” these interactions. Many Charles W. Dean, Chairman Mississippi River Parkway Commission, voiced their enthusiasm for St. Louis Forum. ISTEA's approaches, and some pointed out that these Citizens groups and local governments policies have helped them to warmly endorsed innovative, community- make their communities oriented programs like transportation Federal Highway Deputy Administrator more livable and to manage enhancements, scenic byways, recreational trails Jane F. Garvey, St. LOUIS Forum. growth more effectively. We and CMAQ. heard from the States of Oregon and They commented “Through enhancements Washington which had adopted statewide that, without such as historic growth management, and they shared success ISTEAS set-asides preservation, a little bit stories with us about the possibilities and for them, these challenges in integrating land use and projects could of Federal funding has transportation planning. not successfully gone a long way to compete for preserve and return to We were encouraged to work toward better funding against community life old coordination of Federal environmental reviews more traditional railroad stations and such as the National Environmental Policy Act projects. (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, and Section historic bridges. It has 404 of the Clean Water Act dealing with While States been a catalyst for the wetlands protection. One presentation outlined also embraced preservation of the objectives of the need to take a more comprehensive and Connecticut’s beloved these programs, cost-effective approach to wetlands preservation Merritt Parkway and the and mitigation. many asked for the flexibility to creation of numerous “By merely meeting Federal wetland mitigation decide whether corridors along old and at what levels requirements on a project by project basis, railroad beds and to fund them. States are wasting transportation dollars. canals. These projects They noted the Giving them the flexibility to pursue administrative have preserved watershed planning before project design is a burdens the important parts of more cost effective approach and the way of programs have America's heritage.” the future.” imposed, and Wendy Nicholas, Northeast Connie Niva, Chair, Washington Stote Transportation Commission, tended to oppose Regional Director, NationalTrust fir Portland Forum. the set-asides and Historic Preservation, Providence Forum.

30 How to Keep America Moving to support greater State flexibility in how funds and public participation improves the chances would be expended. that concerns about historic preservation, environmental justice, livable communities, and “The set-asides for the Enhancements and transportation access are heard. CMAQ programs have been very beneficial and should be retained.”

Suzie Stephens, Executive Director, Northwest Bike Federation, Seattle, Portland Forum.

The Regional Forums included much discussion of the CMAQ Program.We heard mixed opinions about whether the types of projects funded under these programs would indeed be funded under alternative funding allocations, such as a consolidated block grant approach, or even whether they should be problems in several funded at all. Nevertheless, to date, CMAQ has positive ways- Assistant Secretory for Transportatron Pobcy, Frank Kruesl, New Orleans Forum been the primary source of highway funds flexed through community- to transit and to intermodal freight projects, and based planning, has been enormously helpful to cities in fighting alternative design standards and the funding congestion. of transportation enhancements.”

Edwurd Sanderson, Executive Director, Rhode Hand Historic “Mayors call upon Congress to extend the Preservation Commission, Providence Forum. CMAQ Program and to make CMAQ available for both non-attainment areas as well as At several Forums, we heard how community maintenance areas striving to stay in groups are using transportation improvements compliance.” to bring about positive change.The State of Rhode Island, as an example, uses enhancement Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell, Miami Forum. dollars to fund a statewide greenway system of bike paths and trails which they said will Emphasis on Quality-of-life Should Continue “improve the character of the communities they connect.” Advocates for “walking” told us that "We must continue to ISTEA pedestrian improvements should be considered recognized that an important component of the overall system look at transportation transportation and eligible for funding. in the context of the investments are communities it serves. not ends in "Walking is much more than just Transportation policies themselves, but transportation. Walking is about neighborhood a way to serve livability, public health and wellness and about and programs should broader the opportunity for spontaneous exchange that seek to enhance community is at the heart of our communities.” communities, protect purposes, and Ellen Vanderslice, Co-Chair America Walks, Portland Forum. and improve the that transportation’s environment, safeguard We were urged on several occasions to impacts must be continue, and, if possible, expand the national historic considered in Department’s “Livable Communities Initiative.” heritage and preserve making Livable Communities is an effort to bring back our scenic resources.” investment downtowns, both in the suburbs and the central choices. The city, and to revitalize neighborhoods as lively, safe U.S. Senatorjohn Choke, Act’s emphasis and appealing centers, where people want to be, Chairman, Environment and Public Works Committee, on community- through improvements to streets and public Providence Forum. based planning transportation.

The Fourth Cornerstone 3 I Speakers from communities which have including the flexibility to transfer capital funds benefitted from ISTEA-funded investments such to operations. as HuntingtonWestVirginia or the Los Angeles Neighborhood Initiative told us how helpful “Public transportation helps disabled these improvements had been. individuals access medical, social, recreational We heard that livable and employment services. These individuals communities projects work because they bring a sense of would not be able to lead lives of dignity and place, a sense of pride and a independence without accessible public sense of purpose to transit.”

neighborhoods. Erlene Roth, Commissioner, RegIonal Transit Authorrty, New Orleans Forum. We heard from groups such as New England’s Conservation Law We heard that people are paying increased Foundation, which has worked attention to quality-of-life issues in deciding with communities to pursue where they live and work. Testimony supported traffic design alternatives which the theory that communities which have make it possible to preserve maintained their attractiveness and livability have neighborhood character while taken steps to ensure that transportation plans still improving safety. What we heard neighborhoods desire are: are integrated into their local planning process. Associate Deputy Secretory Michael Huerto safety from speeding traffic and Providence Forum crime; green space; less traffic Finally, we heard that although it is difficult to noise; freedom to walk or bike integrate land use and transportation planning, to the store or library; and revitalized the pay-off is high. In discussing a recent study commercial districts. What they asked for were on urban sprawl, a private sector official told us ISTEA programs which continued to put people that, contrary and neighborhoods first and vehicle traffic to popular “The Federal Government second. opinion, business will should continue We heard that ISTEA can foster economic work with programs that support development in inner-city communities, to public agencies growth management preserve cultural diversity and that to develop environmental justice in transportation commercial policies that enhance investments is central to promoting and retail transportation equity for those without access the environment and facilities that to automobiles. The empowerment of local foster a business climate complement communities was highlighted as a major benefit transit, and that that builds livable, of ISTEA and we heard that public participation requirements should be maintained and the economically strengthened. attractiveness of private prosperous, and stable We also heard how important ongoing development is communities. ISTEA is a investment in transit will be to the successful heavily program that lets implementation of the Americans with influenced by Disabilities Act. We were urged to give local diverse regions be the best they agencies the widest possible latitude in the use transportation can be.” of ISTEA funds to meet ADA requirements, options. Charles Armstrong, Chairman and CEO, Bank of Americo Oregon, Portland Forum.

32 How to Keep America Moving RETARY'S OBJECTIVES FOR ISTEA REAUTHORIZ

ISTEA set the stage for the 1990’s. Its passage was a revolutionary effort to redefine the Federal, State and local roles in surface transportation. As we reauthorize ISTEA, we must develop similarly forward-looking legislation for the demands of the 2 I st Century. In preparing the Department’s proposal for reauthorization we believe there are four factors which need to be addressed: the National interest in transportation, the Federal role in transportation, U.S. DOT’s policy principles for ISTEA and finally and economic our objectives for reauthorization. competitive edge, Federal leadership in transportation must continue. Secretary Pena’s statement at the September To stay competitive, nations around the world I I, I996 hearing on Reauthorization of ISTEA are making huge commitments to transportation before the Senate Environment and Public Works infrastructure. Fast-growing Asian economies Committee are planning to invest over $500 billion in Subcommittee on transportation alone over the next decade, and Transportation and the Europeans and Japanese are making similar Infrastructure gave commitments.These countries are pursuing him the opportunity national transportation investment strategies to to address the first position themselves to be competitive in the two: the National Interest and the next century. We must do likewise. Federal Role in Transportation. These DOT’s latest report on America’s surface are summarized transportation infrastructure concludes that we below. The have an annual investment shortfall of at least Department’s policy $ 17 billion - just to maintain current highway principles for ISTEA and bridge conditions and over $7 billion for were set forth in a transit. We must address these needs. As a first concise publication step we can begin to close the gap by investing entitled, “ISTEA Reauthorization Policy in intelligent transportation systems (ITS) Statement and Principles,” which was printed technologies and by using innovative financing and widely distributed in May, 1996 and published and encouraging private sector involvement. in the Federal Register for comment June 14, 1996. Its key points are summarized below. The Administration has kept faith with ISTEA’s Further detail will be forthcoming when the efforts to increase infrastructure investment. President’s ISTEA reauthorization proposal is Working with Congress, we have increased formally communicated to Congress next year. However, what we can do at this point, with the surface transportation investment to the highest input received during this year’s extensive national levels ever - averaging 25% higher than outreach effort, is outline the broad objectives for investment prior to the passage of ISTEA.The reauthorization which the Secretary intends for challenge now is whether Federal leadership will that proposal to address.They conclude this continue to assure that the nation’s surface section. transportation needs are met.

* Summarized from the “Statement of the Honorable Federico Peiia, Secretary OfTransportation before the Senate and Environment and Public Works Committee, Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, September 11, 1996.” Our Federal government cannot abdicate our through strong Federal programs and leadership. leadership role in transportation with the At the Federal level, our major areas of assumption that our partners at the State and emphasis are to support economic growth, local levels can, on their own, assume the burden improve safety, protect the environment, develop of meeting national needs. Just like the Federal new technologies and ensure mobility within our government, State and local governments face great metropolitan centers and throughout the severe budget constraints and pressure to meet country. competing demands. And it is by no means clear that the fifty states, operating separately, would Ensuring the safety of the traveling public is a meet our need for a truly National system. fundamental duty - one we take very seriously. Instead, the Federal government, in partnership Any waning in the Federal commitment could with States and localities and the private sector, erode important safety gains. Our highway must ensure that we have a well-maintained safety program is a textbook example of how a system, capable in capacity and performance to small amount of Federal funding can leverage support National economic productivity and outcomes, in this case save many lives. From connect us to global markets. I975 to 1994, the strategies we encouraged - the use of safety belts, motorcycle helmets, child Linking Americans to jobs, health care and safety seats, and the minimum drinking age laws education are national priorities we cannot have contributed to saving an estimated 90,000 achieve without efficient and accessible lives - and an estimated economic benefit of about $70 billion. transportation. And the critical challenges we face in the areas Protecting the environment is a responsibility of safety and the for all levels of government. Environmental environment do concerns, however, transcend local, state and even regional boundaries. Only with a Federal perspective can we assure that future generations will have a safe and healthy environment in every community.

Although research and technology activities are undertaken at all levels of government and a national interest by the private sector, there are some areas , , where only benefits to the Nation as a whole make it cost effective. For example, with system that works better and costs less. That Intelligent Transportation Systems, as with other means assuring system maintenance so facilities new and improved technology, we are working last for the future. It means a transportation to close the gap between what we can do and workforce with up-to-date skills to increase what we know is ultimately possible. productivity. And it means cutting red tape so our Federal/state/local partnership can achieve We recognize that surface transportation common objectives and protect the public needs are great, and will continue to seek interest, without unnecessary costs, delays and appropriate funding levels. We have been duplication of effort. successful in securing substantial funding for transportation investment in these times of tight budgets. Our primary concern in ISTEA The Federal Role in Transportation* reauthorization will be to maximize investment, consistent with the President’s objective to America’s economic progress and the well- achieve a balanced Federal budget, recognizing being of its people have been closely linked to that transportation s role in creating a thriving advances in transportation. Some of the most national economy is also essential to the dramatic advances in transportation occurred achievement of that objective.

* Summarized from the “Statement of the Honorable Federico Pena, Secretary of Transportation before the Senate and Environment and Public Works Committee, Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, September 11, 1996.”

34 How to Keep America Moving Principle’s for ISTEA Reauthorization* we had approved more than 74 new projects - at least $4.5 billion worth that would have been delayed or never built. The new pilot program We believe that the reauthorization of our for State Infrastructure Banks (SIBS) builds upon surface transportation programs must be based this progress. We believe still more innovation, on several key principles that have made ISTEA a leveraging even more capital for transportation success. is possible.

Promote Intermodalism. Encourage new technologies. To benefit all users, each mode must Advanced technology is vital to improving complement and connect to the others. ISTEA safety, system capacity, efficiency, longevity and brought us closer to that goal. A key travel times. We have expanded investment in component of the National Highway System, its research and development through increased intermodal connectors, will greatly enhance funding and new private sector partnerships. intermodal connectivity by linking this I60,000- And with a deployment-oriented strategy, we mile system of the Nation’s most strategic have focused on closing the gap between state- highways with ports, airports, rail-truck terminals of-the-art and state-of-the-practice. We must and transit stations. continue our commitment to develop and deploy Improve planning and public participation. technologies ISTEA brought new players to the table. And that benefit a more inclusive process does yield results in Americans in the form of better, more feasible and publicly acceptable plans. The fiscal constraints ISTEA their daily lives applied to transportation plans means that hard and position choices must be made based on realistically American available funding. industry to be world leaders Embower State and local officials. in ISTEA created flexible programs, such as STP transportation and CMAQ, and increased state and local technology. officials ability to target funds to projects that make sense for their communities. They National responded enthusiastically to increased Perspective. flexibility; more than $2.8 billion has been Efficient national cargo movement is key to transferred from highway programs to transit our ability to benefit from expanding trade programs. And by their own actions, these opportunities. Truckers and other freight officials have demonstrated a commitment to operators need access to a well-connected even greater flexibility. national transportation system and national uniformity in regulatory standards to prevent Promote innovative financing. artificial barriers to commerce. We also need We began our Partnership for Transportation national consistency if we are to move forward Investment program to jump-start the innovative with deployment of new technology. A strong financing effort suggested by ISTEA. The Federal presence in partnership with State and response was overwhelming. Barely a year later local governments is essential in these key areas.

* Summarized from the U.S. Department of Transportation publication, ISTEA Reauthorization, Policy Statement and Principles, May, 1996.

Secretary’s Objectives for ISTEA Reauthorization 35 DOT’s Objectives for ISTEA We have listened to those views and have developed objectives for ISTEA reauthorization Reauthorization. which address all four. While we may propose that many of the core programs remain the To prepare for the development of the same, we may also propose additional program Department’s proposal for ISTEA flexibility, significant program restructuring and reauthorization and assure that it reflects the streamlining, and the creation of selected new views of our customers, the Department programs targeted toward emerging needs. conducted the national outreach described in

this report, including regional forums, numerous l Economic Development and Global modal focus groups, as well as seeking public Competitiveness. comments. All these efforts helped us understand the strengths and shortcomings of The Nation’s infrastructure is critical for a the current program and to make adjustments healthy economy. Transportation infrastructure to better serve the Nation. The near unanimous affects the cost of moving people and goods and, message has been: Build therefore, the price of our goods in this country on the strengths of and our competitiveness abroad. For ISTEA. metropolitan regions our objectives will be to reduce congestion and increase system ISTEA outreach performance through the use of intelligent highlighted the need to transportation system technologies, better ensure that the economy management to increase efficiency, better is well served by our connections between modes of transportation, surface transportation and, where needed, improvements to capacity. system, improve safety, enhance the For rural areas our objectives will be to improve environment, promote access to regional and national markets. And for innovative finance, and all parts of the nation, our objective will be to encourage the adoption improve access to global markets, improving of new technologies. It capacity along international trade corridors, also focused attention on eliminating bottlenecks and working with the importance of more industry to make our system of moving people efficient connections and goods efficient and competitive. between modes of transportation, the benefits

of flexible programs and of ISTEA’s enhanced l Maximize System Performance and planning and public participation requirements. Return on Investments.

The four major themes we heard were: President Clinton emphasized the need to l support domestic economic development and maximize performance of existing infrastructure strengthen our ability to compete effectively in and the return on investment with new projects. international markets; Part of our effort to achieve this goal has been to invest in technology that will improve the l maximize system performance and return on performance of the transportation system investments; nationwide.We have also moved forward aggressively to maximize the generation of l foster partnerships at all levels of government and with the private sector, and provide capital from both public and private sectors, sufficient flexibility to allow decisionmakers to through our promotion of innovative finance make the best choices; and techniques and the establishment of State Infrastructure Banks.

l focus on outcomes for people and communities, particularly improved safety, For the future our objectives are to: access to jobs, enhanced environment and a Encourage deployment of Intelligent better quality of life. Transportation Systems technologies to improve

36 How to Keep America Moving transportation system performance and Our objectives are to: Continue the emphasis strengthen broader transportation research and on safety in all modes of transportation; improve development efforts, with increased emphasis on the effectiveness of safety grant programs; and technology deployment; expand our innovative encourage a focus on results, in terms of finance program; to assure an appropriate reducing injuries and deaths. And continue distribution of Federal transportation assistance efforts to improve the environment, community quality of life and through public transportation, to States and their communities by assisting access to jobs, health care, education and other Congress in the development of a better key services for all Americans. approach; and sustain ISTEA program funding at the highest level consistent with the President’s overall deficit reduction objectives. Conclusion.

l Foster Partnerships and Provide ISTEA is visionary legislation. Its central Flexibility for Decisionmakers. elements - strategic infrastructure investments, intermodalism, flexibility, intergovernmental To ensure best use of resources, we need to partnership, a strong commitment to safety, give State and local officials the flexibility they enhanced planning and the environment - should need to make the best investment and policy be preserved. choices and continue an inclusive planning process which involves the public. To do so our The forces objectives are to: Improve and strengthen MPOs; shaping the strengthen the involvement of rural communities debate over the in decisionmaking concerning Federal role of transportation funds; streamline the State and government in our society will local planning process; and continue the effective influence deployment of advanced technologies. reauthorization. What should l Focus on Outcomes for People and Communities - improved safety, the Federal role in surface enhanced environment and better transportation quality of life. be? What has worked under Good transportation is critical in ensuring ISTEA and what has not? How can we assure an access to jobs, health care, education and other appropriate distribution of funds amongst the services. It can play a key role in economic States? What level of resources can the Federal development and creating attractive and livable government commit to transportation at this communities.Transportation makes it possible to time? How can we benefit more from the enjoy recreational opportunities and the nation’s resources we have? Should flexibility be scenic beauty. Taking a drive, walking and riding expanded or not? a bike are prized as recreational outlets in themselves. There is also growing recognition of Most of these questions will require further the need to deal with the impacts of study, discussion and debate. But we are transportation on the environment - including confident that in one case - the Federal role - air and water quality, wetlands, noise and other the answer is clear. We need strong Federal factors. leadership. As President Clinton recently stated, “the Interstate Highway System brought Transportation safety improvements are Americans closer together, connecting region to critical to the health of our people and to region, city to city, and family to family in ways achieve substantial savings in Medicare, Medicaid that were undreamed of a half-century ago.” and health care costs and taxes for every Clearly, we can all agree that investment in our household in America. Transportation crashes Nation’s transportation infrastructure is vital to result in costly injuries, productivity losses, lost preserving our competitive advantage travel time, and increased congestion, placing a throughout the world and maintaining the well- huge burden on the economy. being of our citizens. Secretary’s Objectives for ISTEA Reauthorization 37 NATIONWIDE ISTEA REAUTHORIZATlON FOCUS GROUPS CONDUCTED BY FHWA, FRA, FTA, MARAD, & NHTSA DURlNG 1996.

In addition to the I3 Regional Forums, FHWA, FRA, FTA, MARAD, and NHTSA held over 100 focus groups throughout the country to gain input on ISTEA in preparation for reauthorization. These focus groups were held from February to October, 1996, and took place in approximately 40 States. The purpose of this outreach program was to take stock of where we are with respect to ISTEA by gathering information from a diverse group regarding High-Tech Employees recommendations for changes in ISTEA II. A transportation system that can move Each meeting focused on a specific topic area, people and goods efficiently and effectively is the such as safety, motor carrier issues, National key to the quality of life that attracts and retains Highway System,Transportation Enhancements, the highly skilled employees necessary to the environmental concerns, and freight, and resulted high-tech industry, focus group participants in a detailed level of discussion. Focus groups agreed. The major themes of this focus group included a small number of invite participants discussion included funding, specifically the from diverse groups who are practitioners in the retention and expansion of flexible funding field -those who are directly affected by provisions: public/private funding of legislative language, such as members of transportation projects; the availability of user- associations, industry partners, representatives fee revenues for use for all transportation from metropolitan planning organizations, States projects; and funding for bicycle facilities, and local governments, citizen activist groups recreational trails and enhancement projects and environmental groups. Meetings were that are related to transportation projects. framed by three issues: what’s working, what’s not working, and what changes should be made Group members also stressed the need to in ISTEA II. These sessions were not intended continue to fund ground access to airports and reinforce their importance to economic as forums to resolve issues or draft legislation development. They emphasized the importance but as venues for practical discussions of of economic development as a priority in long- particularly difficult or complex issues. range regional and statewide planning, as well as the importance of public involvement in major The following pages present a summary of projects. what we heard in these focus groups. Because of the number of sessions held and the vast Federal Government Must Help Border Communities amount of feedback we obtained, it was necessary to distill the information. Therefore, Focus group participants from border we have extracted the major themes and ideas communities noted that international trade from the meetings; however, it is important to benefits the whole country, but the problems of remember that all the feedback is being increased congestion at border crossings affect considered as we develop and shape the only their communities. They said the Federal reauthorization proposal. Government has a responsibility, either by itself or in partnership with State and local may currently be ineligible. They also favored governments, to provide adequate infrastructure improved access to the transportation to support cross-border trade. But they said a development process and a mechanism to greater problem may be continued operational ensure that freight projects are given a higher and staffing difficulties, and these can be best priority in the competition for limited funds. addressed by a combination of additional staff and the enhanced use of technology. Freight interests who were focus group participants also expressed frustration with Border community representatives called for Surface Transportation Program (STP) a discretionary set-aside of Federal aid and/or enhancements and other projects that they administrative provisions to ensure that perceived as unrelated to transportation. They adequate Federal and State assistance is available favored either an administrative approach or a to address community concerns. They called for legislated set-aside that would help ensure that apportionment factors to be developed to freight’s needs are met. They also said DOT measure the contributions of border should establish senior-level positions in the communities to the regional and national largest port of entry to act as contacts for all economies. And they called for the Federal interactions between the freight communities Government to and government agencies, a variation on the “one-stop shopping” theme.

MARAD’s outreach meetings, which included national and regional organizations, such as the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission of Oakland, California, specifically commented on the critical importance of waterside and landside access to U.S. ports. In general, several representatives recommended that the Department in its reauthorization crossings and process, in addition to landside access, “Stress development and connect with international that transportation planning at the State and trade transportation corridors. local level should consider waterside access as an integral portion of the system to be "Efficient Freight Mobility Supports Better connected.” AAPA was further quoted as saying International Transportation and Competitiveness.” that, “Like a pipeline, our Nation’s transportation system is only as efficient as its Focus group participants identified several narrowest, most congested point, which is often freight projects that are in line to be funded by the landside access from the port to the closest MPO’s throughout the United States. However, Interstate Highway or rail yard. No matter how they recognize that the number of projects falls productive ports make their marine terminal short of addressing some of the critical freight facilities, our Nation’s intermodal transportation infrastructure requirements needed to maintain system cannot operate to maximum efficiency or improve U.S. global competitiveness. Several unless ports are accessible by ship on the believe that operational freight concerns are waterside and cargo can move quickly and easily local and day-to-day, while transportation policy in or out of ports from the landside.” and programs are developed in a long-range time horizon that may or may not coincide with Participants in the Maritime Administration’s the needs of shippers. “Freight doesn’t vote” focus groups stressed that the U.S. waterborne and “ISTEA is intermodal in name only” were transportation system plays a vital role in not among their comments. They favored expanded only freight transportation, but the U.S. eligibility and flexibility for Federal-aid highway transportation network as a whole. It facilitates funds, allowing their use on freight-improvement the Nation’s intrastate, interstate, and projects such as rail freight and port access that international trade, economic and defense needs,

40 How to Keep America Moving as well as provides an essential link to the land focus group participants agreed, funding transportation modes, interconnecting the limitations and the omission of railroadeligibility origin-to-destination movement of freight and from the legislation passengers. Therefore, they believe that it is vital had frustrated to a community’s transportation system and for ISTEA’s purpose of international competitiveness that State and encouraging rational local governments include comprehensive decisions on planning and funding for freight requirements in infrastructure their transportation infrastructure plans. One investments. As one member indicated that without a strong marine railroad official said, freight infrastructure system, the U.S. “ISTEA spoke competitive position would suffer and intermodally but did manufacturing companies would choose to not fund operate oversees. intermodally.”

Mobilization Plan Depends on Timely, Accurate There was strong Information support among focus group participants Department of Defense (DOD) participants from the rail freight in the focus groups noted that following a community for increased funding and flexibility in logistics analysis of the Gulf War, stateside ISTEA’s STP and National Highway System redeployment of units previously deployed (NHS) programs for rail-related projects. There was also support for giving rail projects access abroad, and efforts under the Base Closure to innovative financing sources. The Section I30 Program, DOD has adopted a just-in-time grade-crossing program was hailed as a success, mobilization and deployment system. This and participants from the rail freight and system relies on timely and accurate information passenger communities agreed more funds are on the condition, load-bearing capacity, and needed, including ITS funds, to improve and current operational capabilities of STRAHNET, consolidate grade crossings. STRACHNET and connector systems, particularly those used as direct base links to Focus group members said that with port for embarkation. Discussion centered increased use of just-in-time delivery, the around FHWA’s current efforts to map all opening of global markets, and increased urban highway sections and structures on these critical congestion, freight movements must be efficient routes and develop a system for tracking and good connections between highways, ports, conditions and measuring improvements to and rail systems and for intermodal terminals support DOD’s just-in-time mobilization are needed. Some railroad representatives requirements. suggested “empowerment zones” for intermodal activities as well as increased MPO and State DOD participants also expressed concern cooperation with the freight industry. about the continuation of military roads programs and their administration by the Federal Although generally unable to benefit from Lands Program. And DOD representatives ISTEA’s provisions because of funding-category favored size and weight exemptions for large restrictions, short lines believe they can provide military vehicles, notably heavy-equipment competitive service, improve air quality, keep haulers, to enable field commanders to obtain trucks off local roads, and contribute to “livable permits more efficiently for training purposes. communities.” And, as one short-line operator remarked, “short lines invested their own dollars Rail Projects Need Access to Funding into small rail lines shed by the major railroads” and these smaller railroads “have the Although ISTEA acknowledged the connections to work with local areas on importance of considering all transportation projects, such as transloading facilities to take modes when making investment decisions, rail trucks off the highways” and to “encourage

Modal Focus Group Summaries 4 I economic development - those positive The Federal-aid Highway Program, participants contributions that short lines, in particular, said, should be simplified by reducing categories foster.” and providing more flexible use of the funds. Other candidates for simplification are Federal While short-line operators who participated apportionment formulas, since this can help the in the focus groups cited successful examples of States anticipate future Federal funding. The partnering with MPOs, they were concerned group participants also agreed that the Federal that smaller MPOs are not required to consider Government should assure an equitable freight transportation in their plans. An MPO distribution of funds to urban and rural areas official from a large Northeastern state and that innovative finance techniques are suggested that the ISTEA reauthorization needed to attract private funds and enhance legislation include both a clear definition of credit, although these techniques should remain intermodal transportation to reflect the short- optional. line railroads specific niche in the transportation system. FHWA Should Take Lead in Closing Technology Gap

Maximize Return on Investment and System The focus group discussions of research and Performance technology centered around the theme of “closing the gap” between the state of the art Give Priority to the National Highway System and the state of the practice. Participants agreed the gap exists in all areas of technology, “Overall funding levels for transportation are including pavements, structures, safety and ITS. inadequate to meet the Nation’s “needs,” focus The gap is growing because of the loss of group participants said. expertise through the retirement of Interstate- Considering the era experts, the downsizing of transportation limited funds available, entities, and the need for new skills and they said, the Federal expertise in areas such as telecommunications, Government should new materials, and people-machine interface. give priority to The problem is compounded by institutional programs that improve barriers and a risk-averse culture. FHWA the Nation’s economy should take the lead in closing the innovation and enhance its gap within the transportation community, competitiveness most participants said. notably, the National Highway System. Examples of needed innovations include Other programs that longer-lasting yet economical road-building participants said should materials, ways to build roads that minimize receive a higher traffic disruption during construction, and priority for Federal improvements in visibility and driving conditions funding included during inclement weather. Participants generally emergency relief, research and supported the existing ISTEA framework for development, and advancing R&T but there was considerable intelligent support for increasing the resources. Some transportation participants said the Federal Government should systems. There was “push the envelope” by focusing on high-risk, also general support high-potential-payoff research, while continuing for continued funding for transportation to work with the transportation community to enhancements. Focus group members agreed put advanced technology into practice. US DOT the money in the Highway Trust Fund, along with needs to help improve the skills of other fuel-tax revenues, should be used for transportation practitioners and provide transportation improvements. incentives for the use of advanced technology.

42 How to Keep America Moving Continuing Need for Strong Federal Role in staff to maintain the system and the high costs Intelligent Transportation Systems of operating and maintaining Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure and ITS The consensus of focus group participants technologies. Without adequate personnel and was that there is a continuing need for a strong funding support, the full benefits of advanced Federal role in ITS and a separate emphasis on technologies will not be realized, they said. ITS is necessary in ISTEA reauthorization Maintenance activities don’t qualify for Federal legislation. Standards-development leadership, aid, and while system operation is eligible, it can’t high-risk research, and training were frequently successfully compete for funds with such high- mentioned as activities that should have a high profile projects as roads and bridges. Focus priority. Long-range defined as five-plus years group participants stressed that system ITS deployment goals should be explicitly stated operations and maintenance must be emphasized in the reauthorization legislation, and the overall and that State and local transportation managers level of funding for the ITS program should be and decision makers must be made aware of the increased. need to invest in these areas. Participants said State and local officials should be given more There was strong support for a new program flexibility in allocating Federal funds for of incentive funding for deployment projects to maintenance and system operations, since these focus on system-integration issues and the issues are most effectively addressed at the local removal of institutional barriers to ITS level. deployment. But there was general opposition to a major categorical Federal-aid set-aside for ITS Program Should Be Extended to Railroads ITS projects. Local officials in particular stressed the importance of having the option to Participants in rail passenger focus groups said implement ITS programs with 100 percent ITS is a showcase of public/private partnership in Federal funds because of the difficulty of raising technology development and should be matching funds at the local level. State and local extended to railroad projects such as positive officials in the focus groups also stressed the train control and public communications and importance of extending the eligibility of information systems for rail stations. Short-line Federal-aid funding for the operation and railroad operators, the major Class I railroads, maintenance of ITS projects. They said failure to and participants in rail-safety focus groups also expand this eligibility will hinder ITS deployment cited the opportunity to use ITS funds for efforts. grade-crossing and other advanced rail-related technology. There was general agreement that the development and distribution of ITS deployment Partnerships and Flexibility in Making design guidelines should be continued. State transportation department officials in particular Transportation Choices felt that the compatibility of systems should be required when necessary. Focus group Coordination Is Key for Counties, Localities participants consistently favored the continuation of innovative financing, Focus group participants said improved nontraditional procurement methods and public- coordination is needed among federal agencies. private partnerships. One suggestion was that a lead Federal agency be empowered to resolve conflicts whenever Localities Lack Technical Expertise on Advanced Federal agencies are required to issue a joint Traffic Control Systems decision or approval. Among members suggestions was that more funding should be Focus group participants on traffic operations provided to maintain the existing county-level expressed concern about the operations and infrastructure and to repair the deteriorating maintenance of advanced traffic control systems. infrastructure in central cities. They said that They cited a lack of technical expertise by local more input should be required from local

Modal Focus Group Summaries 43 governments on project selection; and the role eligibility of such projects to almost all major of States in sending Federal funds to counties Federal transportation funding programs and should be limited. Others said problems could legitimized their inclusion in State and arise if the Federal program were administered metropolitan planning processes, focus group by the numerous entities below the state level. participants agreed. But they noted that set- There was general agreement that local aside programs like Transportation governments should have more opportunities to Enhancements, Congestion Mitigation and Air receive Federal funds for planning, mobility, Quality Improvement (CMAQ) and Scenic transit, and intelligent transportation systems Byways have provided the majority of funds for (ITS). bicycle-pedestrian projects under ISTEA, although other sources have been available. In the area of funding, participants agreed that Participants expressed concern that this set- flexibility should be maintained along with aside funding may become an excuse for not financial-reasonableness requirements. In a using other available funds such as NHS and discussion of ISTEA policy, group participants Bridge. If set-aside projects are not agreed that Federal involvement in bridges, reauthorized, the future of bicycle-pedestrian urban congestion, and rural roads is desirable projects could be in jeopardy, group members and should be continued, and that these said. They recommended that reauthorization programs should not be rolled into larger legislation be more explicit about the eligibility programs and funding categories, where they of these projects. might disappear. Regarding enhancements, some participants said the program should be The group participants also noted that most expanded with more funds, more flexibility, and bicycle and pedestrian projects to date have less Federal red tape, while others argued that been stand-alone projects. The reauthorization the program should be discontinued, since it should require that all transportation projects diverts limited transportation funds. be planned, designed and constructed to accommodate all users, including bicyclists and In a discussion of metropolitan planning, group pedestrians where they are allowed. There was members agreed that the results of local clear support among the participants for planning should be a key consideration in State continuing the National Recreational Trails and metropolitan planning and that existing plans Funding Program. Combining this program with and policies should be a major consideration. other set-asides was considered, but the There was also consensus that requirements for differences among the programs argued for public involvement should be maintained. Some maintaining this as a separate program. participants went so far as to say that evidence of adequate local planning should be a condition Incorporate Decision-making into the MIS process of Federal funding. Members of metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) liked the In a discussion of major investment studies, requirements linking transportation and land participants urged the Federal Government to use, explaining that they were using MPO funds clarify the relationships between the Major to pay for county activities, including transfer of Investment Study (MIS) process and the National development rights, subdivision regulations, and Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), so that updated transportation plans. In contrast, local plans, policies, studies and public involvement at government representatives expressed a dislike the local level can be credited as partially of many Federal requirements, which they said satisfying Federal and State requirements. They undermined local land-use planning. also asked the Federal Government to incorporate decision-making into the MIS Set-Aside Programs Have Been Crucial for Bicycle, process. Pedestrian Programs Focus group participants called for closer Many bicycle-pedestrian projects have been coordination and partnerships between business implemented because ISTEA broadened the and Federal, State and local governments, as well

44 How to Keep America Moving as cooperation between the transportation and intermodal opportunities and facilitating political economic development communities. balancing among Governors, big-city mayors, and Government should expedite the decision leaders of other jurisdictions, including rural and making process in order to retain and attract small urban areas. Changes in Federal business, group participants said, and should interpretation of ISTEA’s provisions are more provide coordination between local planning and important than changes in the law, but there is a economic development activities. need to clarify the intent and understanding of project selection to emphasize further the ISTEA Has forced Parties to Ask the Right Questions importance of cooperative TIP development.

Representatives of metropolitan planning Focus group participants from the railroad organizations said the quality of MPO-State community agreed that ISTEA planning relations varies. In some States, relationships requirements brought rail passenger and freight were already in place well before ISTEA, and the issues into appropriate focus. But participants legislation provided further opportunities to said the regulations are too prescriptive, and, as strengthen these partnerships. In other cases, one railroad executive indicated, the State ISTEA has forced an open discussion of roles government paperwork requirement is and relationships, resulting in an improved mountainous. There was also the sentiment planning process. MPOs are now more involved that dollars for planning assistance might be in decisionmaking, focus group members said, more appropriately directed at investment. As with a role in sorting out projects and identifying one participant said, We have done our priorities. In a few cases, there is a tension planning. Now we need capital. related to representation on the MPO body and Federal lands Highway Program Should Be recognition of the authority of the various Continued participants in the planning process. ISTEA has forced all parties to ask the right questions Focus group participants, including State and about financing, land use, air quality and the local officials. environment, and public involvement. Federal land management On funding, an MPO representative stated, agency “fiscal constraint has forced a financial planning representatives, element and discipline in the process.” A State Indian tribal official said,“fiscal constraint in the STIP [State representatives Transportation Improvement Plan] and TIP and industry [Transportation Improvement Plan] is a members, cornerstone of the whole decisionmaking reached process, but there is a need for more flexibility consensus on in the application of the concept.” In light of the the proposition fact that there is as yet little evidence of a that the Federal multimodal approach to the flexibility of funds, Lands Highway an MPO official said the key is to ask, What is Program (FLHP) should be continued. Without the best use of the funds to move people and the FLHP and the involvement of Federal lands goods? Although most States and MPOs highway and Federal land management agencies, support the public-involvement provisions of State transportation officials said, transportation ISTEA, group participants emphasized that the infrastructure improvements to Federal lands statute is fine but the subsequent regulations would not receive funding priority. and guidance should not have been issued. Participants recommended retaining separate Participants agreed that there is an important funding categories for Indian reservation roads Federal role in transportation within (IRR), park roads and parkways (PRP), forest metropolitan areas, focused on encouraging all highways (FH), and public lands highways (PLH). planning process participants to look at

Modal Focus Group Summaries 45 Overall FLHP funding should be increased. The There were two schools of thought regarding administration of the IRR, PRP and FH categories NHS transferability and eligibility. The majority should remain unchanged, participants said, but of participants indicated that NHS fund transfers the PLH category should be converted from a should be limited in order to reflect the discretionary program to a program that funds importance of the system, while others roads not supported continued flexibility in both transferability and eligibility. Some participants said the NHS program should do more to encourage intermodalism, favoring expanded eligibilities to both freight rail and intermodal highways serving facilities. Bureau of Land Management Surface Transportation Program Should Be Part of lands, military ISTEA’s Successor installation roads, wildlife refuge Focus groups on the Surface Transportation roads, Corps of Program agreed that it should be included in the Engineers recreation roads, and orphan roads successor to ISTEA. It has afforded local and bridges. The PLH funds would be governments, MPOs and the public a greater distributed on the basis of an administratively role in identifying and prioritizing projects determined formula. through the metropolitan and/or Statewide planning process. The program has also helped Focus group members also recommended form new partnerships and created cooperative that provisions be included to allow FLHP and working relationships. The group members Federal land management agency funds to be strongly endorsed the flexibility allowed in the used for the non-Federal share of Scenic Byway use and application of STP funds, and some said funds and funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. this feature has built public support for the IO4 and 144, providing increased opportunities program and Federal funding of transportation in to leverage funds. Also, the transportation general. The question of STP set-asides evoked planning procedures should be revised to differing responses. Western group members improve the development and coordination of favored eliminating the set-asides as a hindrance transportation improvement programs for to flexibility, while the Eastern group favored programs funded under FLHP retaining set-asides but recommended Current Level of NHS Funding Fails to Reflect consolidating the various safety- and population- System’s Importance based suballocations.

The major concern about STP voiced by the A strong federal role in the National Highway participants was the fact that low-cost local System is essential, focus group participants said, projects take too long to implement once they and the current level of funding fails to reflect are placed in the metropolitan or StateTIP the system’s importance. One group of There was general agreement that the project participants indicated the NHS should receive 30 delivery process could be simplified; some to 40 percent of ISTEA funding, although participants suggested that local projects be innovative financing techniques can help fill the funded as grants rather than through the funding gap. FHWA customers and partners reimbursement method, and some said the agreed that links to other systems, with a focus States add costs and requirements to local on intermodal connectors, should be an NHS projects. Though members favored a reduced priority. Participants also agreed that national Federal role in project oversight, there was performance standards are difficult to establish, sentiment that FHWA should take a more active so performance criteria should be set at the role as a facilitator or mediator between local State and local levels. government and the States. Western

46 How to Keep America Moving participants proposed a “one-stop” Federal solution to congestion and the inability to build surface transportation presence in each State new highways and airports, but with some that could be achieved by adding Federal Transit exceptions, very-high-speed systems on exclusive Administration personnel to FHWA division rights-of-way are not part of current or longer- offices. term plans.

Highway and Bridge R&D Should Be fully funded, There was overwhelming support among Stafid railroad participants for making rail passenger investment, including high speed ground The major theme that emerged from the transportation (HSGT), eligible for STP funding engineering focus groups was the continued and, when it involves services parallel to NHS need for highway and bridge research and highways, NHS funding as well. Extending that development, technology transfer and technical eligibility for at least some operating expenses, expertise. Several State transportation such as maintenance or startup costs, also department officials said this should be one of received support, particularly from State the FHWA’s main functions and that the sponsors. Focus group members said other department needs to be fully staffed and funded surface transportation programs, such as State in order to provide the States, local infrastructure banks and ITS, need to extend governments, and industry with technology and eligibility to rail projects. A number of assistance in the most vital areas of highway participants said there should be a way of engineering. This includes strengthening the assisting a limited number of projects of National Highway Institute by increasing its national significance, which could include high- capacity to conduct technical training. speed rail. Liability for passenger-related accidents is an important obstacle to HSGT Focus group participants also favored retaining development on existing railroads. the bridge rehabilitation and replacement and Participants strongly supported maintenance Interstate maintenance programs. The Common Rule (49 CFR 18) should be allowed to of a national rail passenger system, well connected to local and intercity transportation streamline procedures for small purchases. systems. This is not something States can do on Quality principles and innovative contracting their own, group participants said. Amtrak must principles also received support. build partnerships with other transportation providers. Local officials who participated in the focus groups expressed concern over the perception While many group participants believed it left by ISTEA s elimination of the Secondary would be possible to eliminate Amtrak’s Roads Program that local roads are not operating subsidy, they also said rail passenger important. Counties feel left out of both funding service will need significant continued public- and access to technical information and sector financial assistance for capital investment, assistance. Local officials also said their contact just as other modes now enjoy, if it is to with FHWA engineers has diminished, and this prosper. The set-aside of part of the fuel tax to has limited their access to technical information support rail passenger investment was especially and assistance. They supported retention of the popular, though some State officials wanted a Local Technical Assistance Program. role in spending this resource rather than giving High-Speed Rail Part of Solution to Congestion Amtrak carte blanche.

Amtrak service should be considered the Focus on Outcomes for People and foundation on which high-speed rail will be built, railroad focus group participants said. While Communities individual States should be the initiators and sponsors of high-speed service in corridors, Good Data Crucial for Safety Planning there is a continuing need for a Federal role in facilitating corridor development. High-speed FHWA focus group participants on safety rail was seen by many participants as part of the issues were unanimous in citing the need for

Modal Focus Group Summaries 47 improved data, including more accurate and 4 IO program got strong support, and complete crash and roadway information. They participants said more money is needed for the noted that good data is integral to the planning program. Some opposition was expressed to process and must be in place before valid using .02 blood alcohol content as a basic performance measures can be established. A criterion. Group participants were in agreement focus group participant from a citizens’ lobby that a percentage of trust fund money should be group went so far as to say,“Decisionmaking is used for behavioral safety programs. It was also sometimes based on pooled ignorance.“ said that States should have the flexibility to focus safety resources on their greatest safety The overall level of safety funding needs to needs, and a fair share of funds should continue increase, participants said, agreeing with a to go to the local areas. representative of an association of government officials who asserted, “Dollar amounts are Section I30 Program Should Be Continued currently too small, hampering planning, and are not allocated properly.” If more money were Focus group participants expressed available, States could plan better and, in the enthusiasm for the Section I30 program and words of the representative of a national safety supported continuing it as a source of dedicated organization, “less of a hit-and-miss approach funds for grade separations and rail-related would result.” projects. There was concern that the reauthorized ISTEA be fully funded for this Overall, little interest in block grants was safety activity and not be capped at the expense shown. Earmarked funds were generally favored, of increased flexibility in other ISTEA programs. accompanied by increased flexibility that is still One State transportation department official not so flexible that programs lose their identity, said that although the State has been successful as a rail industry executive put it. While with highway rail crossing closures, it would take government association executives backed some 100 years for completion and thus the flexible funding without earmarks or set-asides, State is strongly in favor of earmarking funds for industry participants said they feared that crossing safety rather than for block grants. without set- asides, funding for their specific Focus group participants also favored programs would disappear. Participants agreed competitive bidding and project completion that problems exist in fund distribution and guidelines; the establishment of either a separate transferability. Sanctions work if they have public research and development fund or the use of support, but overall, they “poison the well.” In ITS funds for this purpose; and directing Section general, incentives are a better way to target I30 funds for nonengineering solutions to problem areas. Focus group participants also improve highway rail crossing safety. said comprehensive, integrated Statewide safety planning should be encouraged and the Federal- While rail focus group members consistently State partnership should be strengthened. expressed approval of using the program to address the grade crossing safety issue, they Participants in National Highway Traffic Safety expressed frustration about the difficulty of Administration focus groups emphasized the addressing this issue on a systemwide basis. need for good data to identify key safety Some participants said incentive payments to programs at the State and local levels, to find communities for consolidating grade crossings solutions, and to track progress. One suggestion might be more cost-effective than other was a data grant program for the States. There mitigation measures. Others recommended was strong support for Section 402 and the new Federal standards for highway rail crossing performance-based management approach, and consolidations and more Federal coordination. for increasing the funding available. Some There was consensus that the selection process participants proposed that speed be made a for funding grade-crossing improvements must priority. Suggestions included applying ITS include area effects of one improvement on the technology to the issue and making speed limits entire community. commensurate with highway design. The Section

48 How to Keep America Moving Motor Carrier Program Should Be Performance stricter than, NEPA as meeting NEPA Based requirements.

Focus group participants generally agreed that There was general agreement that CMAQ and the motor carrier program should be more STP-E are good programs that have brought results oriented and should move toward a new, performance-based system. States should have nontraditional flexibility in deciding how best to address their partners into particular safety problems. The Federal role the should be to facilitate setting national safety and transportation efficiency measures and to continue to establish process and effective partnerships with all stakeholders. The should be program should be data driven and continued. comprehensive. Participants agreed that an CMAQs integrated safety information system at both the funding Federal and State levels is crucial in supporting a flexibility and data-driven program. Commercial Vehicle emphasis on Operations and other technologies should be innovative used to replace paperwork requirements. projects came in for special praise. But the current administrative requirements of these set-aside programs, particularly interagency Some concern was expressed about the lack consultation, can delay projects and should be of uniformity in State enforcement of the streamlined. STP-E projects should be narrowed Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, in scope to be more transportation-related, including roadside inspections, fines, and focus group participants said, and the success of penalties. A number of recommendations were the CMAQ program in making significant made to improve driver safety, including driver improvements in air quality is questionable. training, State driver’s licensing systems, Participants agreed overwhelmingly that if set- commercial driver’s license testing, and aside funds for these two programs are development of a graduated license. Participants eliminated, the number of projects of this type agreed that efforts to eliminate duplicative, would be significantly reduced. They also said burdensome requirements through regulatory States are not, to any significant degree, using reform and zero-based review should continue. their normal Federal-aid highway funds for There should continue to be dedicated funding environmental enhancements beyond those for North American Free Trade Agreement required for mitigation and the STP-E program. (NAFTA) enforcement activities.

Civil Rights Compliance Should Have Higher Priority, Complexity of Reviews, Lack of Trust Hurt More Resources Environmental Process Civil rights practitioners who were focus The environmental process is compromised group participants wanted FHWA to take a by the complexities of multiagency and stronger compliance stance and to urge State multiparty reviews and the general lack of trust officials and contractors to give compliance with among all the organizations and individuals civil rights laws a higher priority and more involved in the process, focus group participants resources. Many participants said top-level agreed. Another detriment to the environmental support, at both the State and Federal level, is process, they said, was inadequate personnel absolutely critical to success in civil rights resources on the part of Federal resource program areas. The need for strong and expert agencies and their resulting inability to technical assistance from FHWA in all program participate effectively in agency coordination areas was also stressed, with many participants meetings. One suggestion was that FHWA advocating more of a hands-on approach by accept compliance with State laws in States that the agency, especially in Title VI / have environmental laws that are as strict as, or

Modal Focus Group Summaries 49 Nondiscrimination and Supportive Services improved mobility through a reduction in program areas. congestion and travel times, enhanced safety through a reduction in accident rates and Many participants saw coordination and fatalities, environmental preservation through communication initiating partnership efforts, fewer spare the air days, and infrastructure encouraging pilot programs, recognizing improvements through sufficient bridges and an innovative initiatives, and sharing information absence of potholes. through training and contacts with the electronic and print media as FHWA s most productive Group members agreed on measures for each civil rights role. The agency needs to do a of the four cornerstones of ISTEA. They agreed better job of getting information to program FHWA should help ensure competitiveness in participants, particularly by making use of the foreign markets by developing financial or information superhighway. investment goals that can be accepted by the transportation community. While the optimal State partners, community-based use of funds is the objective of all agencies, organizations and contractors all asked FHWA participants noted, it is not specifically identified to identify its goals clearly, then allow flexibility as a strategic goal and is not directly measured. and reward successful innovation. Many stated Tools that would ensure the best use of agency that a one size fits all approach is outdated, and funds are management-system use, economic goals must be narrowly tailored to the specific planning based on the knowledge of needs, and needs of local areas. costs of alternate plans.

Supportive services for both on-the-job Participants made the following proposals to training and disadvantaged business enterprise maximize return on investment and system programs provoked particularly lively discussion. performance: preserve the infrastructure by Representatives of community-based improving pavement condition and the health of organizations were particularly vocal in urging the bridge inventory; develop new, longer-lasting FHWA to place greater emphasis on materials that will extend service lives of encouraging States to use the 0.5% optional transportation system components; enhance funding currently available under safety by eliminating problem areas; and enhance ISTEA for on-the-job training the transfer of technology in areas which supportive services. contribute to the health of the network.

Performance Measures Must Be FHWA should develop and exploit Customer-Based partnerships that improve the efficiency of the highway system through the optimal use of high- Focus group members agreed occupancy vehicles and the reduction of travel that performance measures are times along priority corridors, focus group the key to directing agency participants said. The partnership approach can efforts. An important point is also maintain and improve air quality. that the customer must relate directly to the performance Well-defined performance measures, group measure and be able to see members said, cause a focus on products improvements based on outcomes rather than process. Processes must commonly accepted criteria. be developed, and existing processes refined, to For example, customers judge produce measurable products.

50 How to Keep America Moving U.S. DOT REGIONAL FORUMS ON ISTEA REAUTHORIZATlON:

Forums on ISTEA Reauthorization were held in every region of the country, including a special meeting on safety. Generally, during the morning of these day-long sessions, speakers representing State and local governments and other transportation interests would address the ISTEA program in general. In the afternoon, panels of speakers with more specialized expertise discussed an important facet of ISTEA, so these subjects could be covered in greater depth. Below is the list of sites, themes, dates and forum chairs:

Philadelphia: Urban Needs, May 13, Chaired by FTA Administrator Gordon Linton and FHWA Administrator Rodney Slater.

Chicago: Intermodal Freight, May 21, Chaired by FRA Deputy Administrator Donald M. Itzkoff, MARAD Deputy Administrator Joan Yim and FHWA Administrator Rodney Slater.

New York: Intercity Passenger Needs, June 7, Chaired by Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey.

Vienna,Virginia: Safety, June 12, Chaired by Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey.

San Diego : Innovative Finance, June 21, Chaired by Secretary Federico Pena.

Portland, Oregon: Environment, July 2, Chaired by Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey.

New Orleans: Special Community Needs, July 30, Chaired by Assistant Secretary Frank Kruesi and FHWA Administrator Rodney Slater.

Huntington,WestVirginia: Economic Development, August 5, Chaired by FHWA Administrator Rodney Slater.

Missoula, Montana: Rural Needs, August 20, Chaired by Secretary Federico Pena.

Minneapolis: Intelligent Transportation Systems, August 23, Chaired by Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey.

Providence: Community Quality of Life, September 9, Chaired by Associate Deputy Secretary Michael Huerta and FTA Administrator Gordon Linton.

St. Louis: Planning, September 18, Chaired by Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey.

Miami : Global Economy, September 25, Chaired by Secretary Federico Pena Forum Agendas

Philadelphia: May 13, 1996, Urban Needs , Speakers: Congressman Thomas Foglietta Congressman Robert Borski Congressman Chaka Fattah Congressman Jon D. Fox Philadelphia Mayor, Edward Rendell Pennsylvania DOT Secretary, Brad Mallory Delaware DOT Secretary,Anne Canby Maryland DOT Secretary, David L. Winstead Pennsylvania State Representative, Dwight Evans Philadelphia City Councilmember, Happy Fernandez Port of Philadelphia and Camden, Inc., President, Paul DeMariano Alleghany County, Pennsylvania, Board of Commissioners, Chairman Lawrence Dunn Washington Council of Governments, Chairman, Steve Del Giudice Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority, General Manager, Louis Gambaccini Philadelphia Clean Air Council, Deputy Director,Andrew Altman Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). National Vice President for Public Policy, Karolyn Nunnallee Transport Workers Union #234, President, Harry Lombardo

US DOT Principals: Federal Transit Administrator Gordon Linton, Federal Highway Administrator Rodney Slater Deputy National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator Phillip R. Recht Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley

Chicago, May 2 I, 1996, Intermodal Freight, Speakers: Chicago Mayor, Richard Daley Illinois DOT Secretary, Kirk Brown Wayne County, Michigan, County Executive, Ed McNamara Southeast Michigan COG,Vice Chair, Anita Ashford, City Councilmember, Port Huron, Michigan Chicago Transit Authority, Chair, Valerie Jarrett Chicago DOT Commissioner, Thomas R.Walker Indiana DOT Deputy Commissioner, Dennis Faulkenberg Infrastructure Technology Institute, Northwestern University, Director, David Schulz Center for Neighborhood Technology, President, Scott Bernstein l-69 Mid-Continent Highway Coalition, Chairman, John Caruthers South Central Illinois Mass Transit District, Executive Director,Tom Ashby Chicago Area Transportation Study, Deputy for Operations, David Zavattero Illinois DOT, Bureau Chief of Railroads, Merrill Travis Illinois Transportation Association, Executive Director, Fred Serpe Alameda Corridor Association, Program Manager, John Rinard UPS, Chicago Area Manager, Mike Johl Chicago Department of Aviation, Chief Administrative Officer, John Kallianis Norfolk Southern, Director of Strategic Planning, Bill Schafer National Intermodal Commission, Representative, Ken Bird Cl? Rail ,AssistantVice President Government Affairs, Larry Long Port of Seattle, Deputy Executive Director,Andrea Riniker Intermodal Association of North America, President, John A. McQuaid Chrysler Corporation, Manager of Supply Systems, Bill Lamott CATS Intermodal Advisory Task Force, ChairpersonTom Zapler DRI-McGraw Hill, Executive Consultant, Mike Sclar Greenbrier Intermodal, President, David DeBoer

US DOT Principals: Federal Highway Administrator Rodney Slater Federal Railroad Deputy Administrator Don ltzkoff Federal Maritime Administrator JoanYim Director of Congressional Affairs Peter Halpin

52 How to Keep America Moving New York, June 7, 1996, Intercity Passenger Rail , Speakers: U. S. Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, New Jersey State Director for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan,Alex Washburn NewYork State DOT, Commissioner, John B. Daly NewYork City, Commissioner OfTransportation, Elliot G. Sander Transport Workers Union of America International, President, Sonny Hall Transit Now, National Chairman, Former Governor James Florio NewYork Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Executive Director, Marc Shaw New Jersey State DOT, Commissioner, Frank J.Wilson Hudson County, New Jersey, County Executive, Robert Janiszewski Tri-State Transportation Campaign, Executive Director, Janine Bauer Albany Capitol DistrictTransportation Committee, Executive Director, John Poorman Eastern ParalyzedVeterans Association, Associate Executive Director,Terry Moakley Amtrak, President,Thomas M. Downs Greyhound Bus, President, Craig Lentzsch High Speed Rail Maglev Association,Vice President, William Nevel Empire State Passengers Association, Legislative Affairs Director, Frank Barry National Association of Railroad Passengers, Executive Director, Ross Capon Virginia Railway Express, Director of Operations, Steve Roberts Regional Plan Association, Senior Fellow-Transportation, Jeffrey M. Zupan Port Authority of NewYorklNew Jersey, Deputy Executive Director, John J. Haley, Jr. New Jersey Transit Corporation, Executive Director, Shirley DeLibero Metro North Railroad, President, Donald Nelson Public Strategies-Impact, Representative, Carol R. Katz, New Jersey Motor Bus Association

US DOT Principals: Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs, Steven Palmer Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy John N. Lieber Federal Railroad Administrator Jolene Molitoris Federal Transit Deputy Administrator Janette Sadik-Khan Deputy Federal Railroad Deputy Administrator Don ltzkoff Federal Maritime Deputy Administrator Joan Yim

Vienna, Virginia , June 12, 1996, Safety , Speakers: Advocates for Highway &Auto Safety, President, Judith Lee Stone American College for Emergency Physicians, B.Tilman Jolly, M.D. Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways, Co-Chair, Gerald A. Donaldson, Ph.D. Mothers Against Drunk Driving, National President, Katherine l? Prescott National Association of GovernorsHighway Safety Representatives, Chair, John Conger National Safety Council, Executive Director of Public Policy, Jane Roemer American Coalition for Traffic Safety, President, Phil Haseltine American Insurance Association, Assistant General Counsel, David F Snyder American Trucking Associations, SeniorVice President for Governmental Affairs, John J. Collins Bicycle Federation and Pedestrian Foundation, Executive Director,William CWilkinson, Ill Roadway Safety Foundation, Executive Director, Kathleen F. Hoffman Union Pacific Railroad, Cliff Shoemaker, Director of Public Policy

DOT Principals: Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator Ricardo Martinez, M.D. Deputy Federal Highway Administrator Jane Garvey Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy John N. Lieber Deputy National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator Phillip R. Recht

Appendix A: U.S. DOT Regional Forums on ISTEA Reauthorization 53 San Diego, California, June 21, 1996, Innovative Financing, Speakers: U. S. Senator Barbara Boxer Congressman Bob Filner Congressman Brian Bilbray Congressman Jay Kim California Assembly, Democratic Floor Leader, Richard Katz City of San Diego, Councilmember, Barbara Warden California Business,Transportation and Housing Agency, Secretary, Dean Dunphy San Diego Association of Governments, Chairman, Imperial Beach Mayor Mike Bixler Otay Mesa Chamber of Commerce, President, H. Rick Otis Metropolitan Transit Development Board, Chairman, Leon Williams Nevada DOT, Director,Thomas Stephens Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Palo Alto City Councilmember Jean McCown CALSTART, President, Michael Gage Southern California Association of Governments, Jenny Oropeza, Long Beach City Councilmember San Diego Unified Port District, Commissioner, JessVan Deventer Port of Los Angeles (WORLDPORTLA), Chief Financial Officer, James P Preusch Port of San Francisco Waterfront Development, Projects Manager, Paul Osmundsen Public Financial Management, Managing Director, Keith Curry CS First Boston,Associate, Bruce Hurd Texas Turnpike Authority, Executive Director, James Griffin Ohio DOT Chief of Staff, John R. Platt California Business,Transportation and Housing Agency, Deputy Secretary, Carl Williams Transportation Corridor Agencies, ExecutiveVice President,Walter Kreutzen

U.S. DOT Principals: Secretary Federico Peiia Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs Louise Stall Deputy Federal Highway Administrator Jane Garvey Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley

Portland, Oregon, July 12, 1996, Environment, Speakers: U. S. Senator Mark Hatfield U. S. Senator Ron Wyden Congresswoman Elizabeth Furse Congressman Earl Blumenauer Metro, Executive Officer, Mike Burton Washington State, LegislativeTransportatio n Committee Chair, State Representative Karen Schmidt City of Portland, Commissioner, Charlie Hales Clackamas County, Commissioner, Ed Lindquist Norris, Beggs and Simpson, President, Clayton Hering Port of Portland, Executive Director, Mike Thorne Bank of America Oregon, Chairman and CEO, Charles Armstrong Oregon DOT, Director, Grace Crunican Washington DOT Secretary, Sid Morrison Idaho DOT, Director, Dwight Bower Intertribal Transportation Association, Executive Director, Kenneth W.Webster Task Force OnTransportation and the Environment, Counsel, RobertYuhnke Southern California Association of Governments, Executive Director, Mark Pisano Oregon Transportation Commission,Vice Chair, Susan Brody IO00 Friends of Oregon, LUTRAQ Project Director, Keith Bartholomew Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation Policy Board, Chair, Bob Drewel, Snohomish County Washington, County Executive Washington StateTransportation Commission, Chair, Connie Niva National Association of County Engineers, President, John Trent, Public Works Director, Pierce County, Washington Northwest Bike Federation, Executive Director, Suzie Stephens Jones and Jones Architects, Principal, Grant Jones American Trucking Association, Representative, Don Lemmons, President, Interstate Wood Products, Kelso, Washington

54 How to Keep America Moving U.S. DOT Principals: Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy John N. Lieber Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Deputy Administrator Fred Hansen

New Orleans, Louisiana, July 30, 1996, Needs of Special Communities, Speakers: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, President, Bill Burnett, Executive Director,Texas Department of Transportation American PublicTransit Association ISTEA Reauthorization Task Force, Chair, John Bartosiewicz, General Manager,TransitAuthority , Fort Worth,Texas City of New Orleans, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer, Cedric Grant Louisiana Department of Transportation Secretary, Frank Denton Port of New Orleans Planning and Engineering Department, Director, Pat Gallwey Louisiana Associated General Contractors, Representative, Ken Naquin Extension of l-49, Dr. Kam K. Movassaghi, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southwestern Louisiana New Orleans Regional Planning Commission, Director of Planning, Jim Harvey Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department, Director, Dan Flowers “l-69 Coalition” Greater Housing Partnership,Vice President, Roger Hord Mississippi DOT Director, Dr. Robert Robinson Meridian, Mississippi, Mayor, John Robert Smith PODER,Austin,Texas, Empowerment Campaign Coordinator, Raul Alvarez Thurgood Marshall School of Law,Texas Southern University, Grover Hankins NewYork City Environmental Justice Alliance, Executive Director, Michelle DePass Alliance for Transportation Research,Vice President for Public Policy, Judith Espinoza AustinTexas, Office of Client Transportation Services, Project Director,Tina Janek Community Action Agency, Brazos Valley,Texas, Chief Administrator, Dale Marisco Shreveport, Louisiana, Mayor, Robert Bo Williams New Orleans Trinity Counseling and Training Center, Director ofTraining, Orissa Arend New Orleans Regional Transit Authority, Commissioner, Earlene Roth San Antonio,Texas,VIA Metropolitan Transit,Assistant General Manager, Ray De Arriguanaga Jefferson Parish DOT, Director, Pat Johnson

U.S. DOT Principals: Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy Frank Kruesi Federal Highway Administrator Rodney Slater Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Barbara Leach

Huntington, West Virginia, August 5, 1996, Economic Development, Speakers: Congressman Nick Rahall City of Huntington, Mayor, Jean Dean WestVirginia DOT, Secretary, Fred VanKirk Tri-State Transit Authority, General Manager,Vickie Shaffer Appalachian Regional Commission States,Washington Representative, Mike Wenger WestVirginia Labor Federation,AFL-Cl0 President, Joe Powell Huntington Regional Chamber of Commerce,Transportation Chairman, James Casto Summit County, Ohio, County Executive,Tim Davis Marshall University Business SchooLAssociate Professor of Marketing and Coordinator for Transportation Logistics, Dr. Craig A. Hollingshead Contractors Association of West Virginia, Executive Director, Mike Clowser Louisville Area Chamber of Commerce, Regional Economic Development Strategy Executive Director, Steven Spalding, Louisville, Kentucky South Branch Valley Railroad, Chairman, Leo Howard

U.S. DOT Principals: Federal Highway Administrator Rodney Slater Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs Steven Palmer

Appendix A: U.S. DOT Regional Forums on ISTEA Reauthorization 55 Missoula, Montana, August 20, 1996, Rural Needs, Speakers: U. S. Senator Max Baucus Montana DOT, Director, Marvin Dye Montana Association of Counties, President,Vern Peterson, Fergus County Commissioner Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribe,Vice Chair, Mickey Pablo Montana Logging Association, Executive Director, Keith Olson MontanaTransit Association, President, Philip Pumphrey Montana Motor Carriers Association, Board Chairman,Alan Williams Montana Contractors Association, President, Dewey Skelton Montana District Council of Laborers, President, Eugene Fenderson Montana Farmers Union, President, Norman Sullivan Glacier WatertonVisitors Association, Director, Don Jermunson Montana Chamber of Commerce, Board Member,Tom Pew MontanaTransportation Project, Director, Paul Reichert Central Montana Railroad, General Manager, Carla Allen, representing American Shortline Railroad Association and Regional Railroads of America Western Transportation Institute, Director, Steve Albert Montana Innkeepers Association, Executive Director, Stuart Doggett Colorado DOT, Director of Office Policy, Carla Perez Colorado DOTTransportation Commissioner, Bernie Beuscher North Dakota DOT, Director, Marshall Moore North Dakota Motor Carriers Association, President, Robert Lewis, Jr. South Dakota DOT, Director of Intergovernmental Relations, Richard L. Howard Associated General Contractors of South Dakota, ExecutiveVice President, James R. Keyes Utah DOT, Executive Director,Thomas Warne Box Elder County, County Commissioner, Lee Allen Wyoming Statewide Long-RangeTransportation Steering Committee, Chairman, Bob Wyatt Coastal Chemical Inc., Executive, Peter llloway

US DOT Principals: Secretary Federico Pefia Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs, John Horsley

Minneapolis, Minnesota, August 23, 1996, Intelligent Transportation Systems, Speakers: Congressman James Oberstar Minnesota State SenateTransportation and PublicTransit, Chair, Carol Flynn Minnesota DOT, Commissioner, James Denn Blaine, Minnesota, Mayor, Elwyn Tinklenberg Arrowhead Regional Development Commission,Transportation Planning Division Director, Gary Tokin Duluth Transit Authority, General Manager, Dennis Jensen Metropolitan Council (Minneapolis),Transportation Director, Natalio (Nacho) Diaz Wisconsin DOT, Secretary, CharlesThompson Transportation Development Association of Wisconsin, Executive Director, Philip J. Scherer Minnesota AFL-CIO, President, Bernard Brommer Minnesota DOT Scenic Byways Program, Dennis Adams Hennepin County, Minnesota, Commissioner, Mark Andrew Intertribal Transportation Association, Executive Director, Ken Webster University of Minnesota, ITS Institute Director, Dennis Foderberg Minnesota DOT, IntelligentTransportation Systems Program Director, James Wright Bechtel Corporation,Washington, DC., Infrastructure and Transportation Manager, Edith Page Orbital Sciences Corporation, Germantown, Maryland, Business DevelopmentVice President, Lawrence Schulman Maryland DOT, former State Highway Administrator, Hal Kassoff Minnesota Guidestar, Executive Committee Co-Chairman, Richard Braun University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies, Director Designate, Gerard McCollough Hubert Humphrey Institute, Director of State and Local Programs, Lee Munnich Transportation Research Board,Washington, D.C., Executive Director, Robert E. Skinner, Jr. 3M, St. Paul, Minnesota, Intelligent Transportation Systems Director, Charles G. Sprado

56 How to Keep America Moving U.S. DOT Principals: Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey Research and Special Programs Administrator Dharmendra Sharma ITS Joint Program Director Christine Johnson Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley Bureau OfTransportation Statistics Deputy Director Robert Knisely

Providence, Rhode Island, September 9, 1996, Livable Communities, Speakers: U. S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Chairman, Senator John H. Chafee Rhode Island, Governor, Lincoln Almond City of Providence, Mayor,Vincent Cianci AAA South Central New England,Vice President for Corporate Affairs, Robert Murray Rhode Island PublicTransit Authority, Chair,Anna Prager National Corridors Initiative, President and CEO, James Repass Rhode Island Historic Preservation and Heritage Commission, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer,Ted Sanderson Metropolitan Area Planning Council, President,William (Buzz) Constable, Boston, Massachusetts International Association of Chiefs of Police, Highway Safety Chairman, Earl Sweeney, Concord, New Hampshire New England Passenger Transportation Association, President, David Lee, General Manager, Connecticut Transit Connecticut DOT, Policy and Planning Bureau Chief, Richard Martinez Boston Public Works, Division Engineer, Gordon Barnes Ministerial Road Preservation Association,Vice President, Kate 0 Malley,Wakefield, Rhode Island Town of Washington, Connecticut, First Selectman, Alan Chapin Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, Board Member,Ann Hershfang, Founder Walk Boston East Hartford, Connecticut, Mayor, Robert DeCrescenzo Rhode Island School of Design, School of Architecture and Design, Dean, Michael Everett Stull & Lee, Inc.,Vice President and Architect, David Lee, Boston, Massachusetts Greater Portland Transit District, General Manager, Sarah deDoes Conservation Law Foundation, Senior Attorney, Steve Burrington, Boston, Massachusetts Vermont Agency OfTransportation, Chief Policy Analyst, Barry Driscoll

U.S. DOT Principals: Associate Deputy Secretary Michael Huerta Federal Transit Administrator Gordon Linton Deputy Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy John N. Lieber Federal Railroad Associate Administrator for Policy Sally Hill Cooper Deputy Director of Congressional Affairs Nadine Hamilton U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Mobile Air Sources Director Margo Oge

St. Louis, Missouri, September 18, 1996, Planning Process, Speakers: City of St. Louis, Mayor, Freeman Bosley, Jr. Missouri Highway and Transportation Department, Chief Engineer, Joe Mickes East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, St. Louis, Executive Director, Les Sterman, St. Louis Regional Commerce and Growth Association, President, Richard Fleming The Livable Communities Campaign, St. Louis,Treasurer,Tom Purcell American Consulting Engineers Council, Sverdrup Corporation Vice President, James K.Van Buren, Maryland Heights, Missouri Iowa DOT Director, Darrel Rensink, President-elect,American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Mississippi River Parkway Commission, National Chairman, Charles Dean, Cleveland, Ohio Detroit, Michigan, Deputy Mayor, Nettie Seabrooks Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission, Executive Director, Bill Habig, Columbus, Ohio Transportation Trades Department,AFL-ClO,Amalgamate d Transit Union, Associate Counsel, Chris Tully Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Chairman, Buddy Villines, Pulaski County Judge, Little Rock, Arkansas Amtrak President,Thomas Downs American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Sandra Straehl, Chief of Program and Policy Analysis, Montana Department of Transportation Surface Transportation Policy Project, Executive Director, Hank Dittmar,Washington, DC.

Appendix A: U.S. DOT Regional Forums on ISTEA Reauthorization 57 Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, Kentucky, Executive Director, J. Barry Barker American Planning Association,T. Joseph Marking,AICR SeniorTransportation Planner, Booker Associates, Inc. Texas DOT, Deputy Executive Director for Transportation Planning and Development, Robert Cuellar ArkansasTransit Association, Executive Director,Ann Henderson Gilbert National Association of Development Organizations,Vice President, Richard Cavender, Executive Director, Meramec Regional Planning Commission, Rolla, Missouri Institute of Transportation Engineers, Steven B. Gayle, Binghamton Metropolitan Transportation Study, Binghamton, New York Missouri Motor Carriers Association, Director of Public Affairs, Chris Buruss

DOT Principals: Deputy Secretary Mortimer L. Downey Federal Transit Administrator Gordon Linton Deputy Federal Highway Administrator Jane Garvey Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley Director of Bureau OfTransportation Statistics Dr.T.R. Lakshmanan

Miami, Florida, September 25, 1996, Global Economy, Speakers: Metro Dade County Commission, Katie Sorenson Florida Department of Transportation Secretary, Ben Watts Florida MPO,Advisory Council Chairman, Scott Paine, Councilmember City ofTampa Transportation Workers Union of America, Local 29 I President, Ed Talley City of Atlanta, Georgia, Mayor, Bill Campbell, Chair, U.S. Conference of Mayors Transportation Committee Palm Beach County, Florida, Commissioner, Carol Roberts, Chair, National Association of Counties Transportation Committee Georgia DOT, Director of Planning and Programming, George Boulineau Dade County Expressway Authority, Executive Director, Servando Parapar HARTline,Tampa, Florida, General Manager, Sharon Dent FloridaTransportation Builders, Chapter President, Bob Burleson Former Florida Secretary of Commerce, Charles Dusseau,Americas Group Border Trade Alliance, Co-Chair, Dr. Donald Michie, El Paso,Texas NC Global Transpark Authority, Representative, Mark C. Cramer Greater Miami Convention &Visitors Bureau, Chief Operating Officer,William D.Talbert Metro Dade County Transit Agency, Director, Chester E. Colby Port of Miami, Director, Carmen Lunetta Miami International Airport, Director, Gary Dellapa Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Miami Urbanized Area, Director, Jose Luis Mesa

U.S. DOT Principals: Secretary Federico Pefia Deputy Federal Maritime Administrator JoanYim Deputy Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs John Horsley

58 How to Keep America Moving