Streetsblog Capitol Hill

The federal government has long taken heat for giving short shrift to cities, and the Obama administration -- which recently lost its urban affairs chief after months of lackluster progress -- is no exception.

But two projects getting underway in the U.S. capital provide evidence that, slowly but surely, federal funding is making its way to the type of dense urban developments that are becoming more in-demand as the suburbs languish.

The Washington City Paper's Lydia DePillis first flagged the two housing efforts on Friday afternoon:

Last October, the Obama administration announced that it would be helping out state housing finance agencies with their liquidity problems ... Last month, D.C. became the first housing finance agency in the country to close a multi-deal transaction using the federal dollars, patching together $55.8 million in construction costs for three rental buildings in the district.

The 52-unit Webster Gardens, which was built in 1921 as the first garden-style apartment building in the city, will now be the first building in the city — and therefore the country! — to move forward using money that started with legislation all the way back in 2008.

DePillis also highlighted the Sheridan Station housing development, where D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty was slated to participate in a groundbreaking ceremony this morning.

The Sheridan project received $5.8 million in stimulus money from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last year, which will go towards constructing an energy-efficient replacement for torn-down public housing units in the city's economically struggling Ward 8. More than one-third of residents in the ward are living below the poverty line, according to the most recent available Census data.

In the first year of the Obama administration's economic stimulus law, 59 percent of its $27 billion in transportation formula funds went to projects that preserve existing roads, while 33 percent was used to build new pavement, according to an analysis by the advocacy group Smart Growth America (SGA).

The new data, unveiled today by SGA state policy director Will Schroeer at a green jobs conference in Washington, brings a measure of good news to clean transport advocates who had viewed the stimulus as somewhat of a disappointment for its failure to fund roads and transit on a more equal footing.

The SGA analysis does not include the law's $8.4 billion in transit aid, looking solely at the formula funding that is often depicted as dedicated to highways and bridges.

In fact, states were allowed to redirect some of that larger pot to transit, though not all took advantage of that flexibility. "Some states were really, I have to say, dishonest with the public about what the money could be spent on," Schroeer said today.

Here's how SGA's one-year analysis of the $27 billion in stimulus money shook out:

Read more...

Two of the most popular transportation programs in the Obama administration's stimulus law, the $1.5 billion in competitive grants known as TIGER and the $8 billion high-speed rail initiative, had an added feature that made them even more attractive to cities and states: the federal funding awards would not require a local match.

But that arrangement is about to change, as the stimulus era runs its course and the next rounds of high-speed rail and TIGER-style competitive grants are given out by the U.S. DOT.

In Wisconsin, where an advertising war already has started between conservative critics and industry supporters of the state's $822 million bullet-train grant, local media reports that finding a local match for future rail grants could prove a significant stumbling block:

Unlike the first high-speed rail grants Wisconsin received, future federal payouts will require the state put up its own money.

But the state already has problems maintaining its roads and should not shell out money from the transportation budget to get federal rail grants, said Wisconsin state Rep. Mark Gottlieb, the Wisconsin Assembly’s appointee to the Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission.

“Irrespective of the amount of federal money that is on the table right now,” Gottlieb said, “moving forward even faster with intercity rail is something I just don’t think we can afford right now.”

It remains to be seen whether Wisconsin's resistance to budgeting for a state contribution to high-speed rail -- which is not affecting its enthusiasm for other federal road and transit programs that require a local match -- will become a trend in the coming months. The $600 million in competitive TIGER-style grants that Congress approved last fall will require localities to find matching funds, but the U.S. DOT has yet to formally solicit applications for that funding.

Still, as a growing number of states face budget crises in the wake of the global financial crisis, available funding for all modes of transportation is evaporating. The latest state to feel the pinch is Maryland, where officials have announced plans to delay for two years a $28 million capital contribution to the D.C. area's Metro transit system.

As of the end of February, nearly $5.4 billion of transit stimulus money, or 74 percent, was under contract for projects in the 50 states and D.C., according to a Streetsblog Capitol Hill analysis of data released today by the House transportation committee.

The success rate of transit stimulus spending was slightly topped by that of road projects funded by the economic recovery law. About $20.3 billion of highway stimulus funding, or 77 percent, was under contract in the 50 states and D.C.

Today's data release breaks down transportation stimulus spending by state, allowing a closer look at which areas are making more progress on getting road projects out to bid than transit, and vice versa.

For instance, Georgia -- where Atlanta's MARTA transit system, the ninth-largest in the nation, is confronting a deficit that could force massive service cuts -- has put less than one-half of its $127 million in transit stimulus funding under contract. Georgia has moved nearly 90 percent of its highway stimulus money into the contracting stage.

California, by contrast, has put 69 percent of its $860 million in transit stimulus funds under contract. Of its $2.5 billion highway stimulus allocation, 59 percent was associated with signed contracts last month.

Not all of the road stimulus funding sent to states was restricted entirely to highway projects. States were permitted in some cases to "flex" money from their road pots to transit, and 10 percent of highway formula allocations is historically set aside for bicycling, pedestrian, and safety work under the Transportation Enhancements program.

Nonetheless, today's House report continues a trend that emerged during the committee's early stimulus hearings: concerns that transit projects would not be as "shovel-ready" as roads, aired by some in the Obama administration during the stimulus debate, have proven unfounded.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood sought to commiserate with the cash-strapped transit industry today, declaring the Obama administration an ally of local rail and bus agencies even as the "lousy economy" clouds prospects for passage of a new long-term federal transportation bill.

In an address to the American Public Transportation Association's (APTA) annual conference, LaHood highlighted the $787 billion stimulus law's contribution to transit and high-speed rail and extended a hand to local officials who have been forced to pursue service cuts and fare increases.

"If we didn't have a lousy economy, a lot of these issues would bubble up more quickly," LaHood told transit planners who lamented the lack of progress on new federal legislation and the tough budget choices brought on by the recession.

"Part of the solution," LaHood added, "will be when the economy comes back" and the White House is more open to discussing tax increases as part of the financing mix for long-term transport funding.

But in the meantime, LaHood's remarks served as a friendly warning to the transit industry that, given the capital's current political reality, its $8.4 billion haul from the stimulus should be considered a victory.

One exchange in particular epitomized the state of play between the administration and transit agencies: When an APTA conference attendee from Grand Rapids, Michigan, asked the packed audience of local officials to raise their hands if they had raised fares or cut service during the past year, a sizable number of hands rose into the air. Minutes later, Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff leapt up to ask how many officials would be cutting more or laying off more workers if not for the stimulus.

Even more hands went up in response to Rogoff's query.

Read more...

The push to add a bike-ped lane to Cleveland's planned new Cuyahoga River bridge, a replacement for the crumbling Innerbelt span, is picking up new political support this week after a local advocacy campaign.

The Plain Dealer newspaper reported earlier this week that Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (D) has asked the state DOT to reevaluate its decision against adding a bike-ped lane to the new bridge. State transport officials had previously contended that the new bridge could lose $85 million in already-allocated federal stimulus money if the planning process were reopened to consider bike-ped access.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who represents Cleveland, had previously come out in favor of the new lane, but Strickland's move came following a letter he received from the state's junior senator, Sherrod Brown (D). Yesterday the governor edged closer to an endorsement of bike-ped access to the new bridge, as his spokeswoman told the Cleveland Scene: "It is the governor’s preference that a lane be included if possible."

A copy of the letter from Brown that appears to be driving the new momentum is available after the jump.

Read more...

Senators began searching today for new strategies to connect local planners with an ever-dwindling pot of federal infrastructure dollars, even as a senior U.S. DOT aide declined to say whether the White House's upcoming principles for the next long-term transportation bill would include funding specifics.

The star witness at the Senate environment committee's hearing was Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who sought congressional support for federal loans to expedite his city's ambitious 30/10 transit expansion project.

Environment panel chief Barbara Boxer (D-CA) threw her weight behind the 30/10 plan as the mayor pitched his approach -- reliant on voters' approval of higher sales taxes to pay for new infrastructure -- as a model for the rest of the nation.

"This is the third time the Los Angeles electorate has voted to tax itself for a better tomorrow," Villaraigosa said. "As a result, Los Angeles has been been able to make massive investments in public transit and our highway system."

But Villaraigosa's secondary message exposed the ongoing lack of Hill consensus on the way to pay for new investments that both Democrats and Republicans support. "Making sure that large metro areas get the majority of [federal transport] money makes a lot of sense," the mayor said, lamenting language in last year's stimulus law that routed most transportation aid through state capitals.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) echoed Villaraigosa, remarking that he could not "see a governmental apparatus" in place to effectively divert transportation funding to pressing local needs.

Whitehouse asked the Angeleno, who currently serves as vice president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, to work with his colleagues on "a truly transparent local mechanism to say, 'these are the projects we really need,' to get around the concern that this is earmarking, special dealing, but also get around the bureaucracy."

Before the mayor's testimony, U.S. DOT undersecretary Roy Kienitz admitted to senators that he is "not sure" if the Obama administration's planned list of principles for a new long-term transportation bill will include ideas for filling the  nation's massive funding gap. Congress envisions new legislation with a price tag of at least $450 billion over six years, but the federal gas tax is estimated to fall short of that mark by upwards of $200 billion.

Read more...

The House has just begun voting on the Senate jobs bill, which includes a $20 billion reprieve for the nation's highway trust fund and an highway expansion of Build America Bonds -- but though the legislation is expected to pass, it won't be headed to the president's desk yet.

Bowing to concerns from two blocs of Democrats, House leaders made two minor changes to the jobs bill. The first modification assuages fiscal hawks by fully offsetting the cost of the bill, The Hill reports, while the House's second tweak answers concerns from the Congressional Black Caucus by requiring that at least 10 percent of the legislation's transportation spending goes to minority-owned or disadvantaged businesses.

House leaders did not fix the provision contested by the House transport committee that would award nearly 60 percent of $932 million in grants to four states while excluding 22 other states. The transport panel's chairman, Jim Oberstar (D-MN), has secured written support from Senate leaders to unwind that language in a future bill.

Practically speaking, the House's changes mean that the Senate would need to hold another vote before the jobs bill can become law.

Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-OR), Oberstar's top lieutenant, made the case for the bill on the House floor. In addition to extending the 2005 transportation law until the end of the year, DeFazio observed, the jobs bill would allow the highway trust fund to begin collecting interest payments after 10 years of forgoing them to the Treasury.

"We're now going to reclaim that money ... it's going to be a billion dollars a month," he said.

Republicans, led by Rep. Steven LaTourette (OH), countered that the jobs bill's $13 billion in tax credits for new hires would be better used to pay for more infrastructure investment.

Late Update: The House cleared the bill on a 217-201 vote.

Credit-rating agencies -- particularly Moody's and S&P, the nation's two premier shops -- wield significant influence over the financial health of private companies. But state and local officials are often equally dependent on good credit ratings to borrow money for transportation and infrastructure improvements.

Even the federal government monitors its credit outlook to a degree that might surprise the average voter. When Moody's suggested last month that the mounting deficit might imperil America's AAA rating (the highest available), Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner leapt to the defense of Washington's fiscal health.

So which states do credit raters believe are weathering the recession, and which will continue to struggle with yawning deficits that jeopardize their ability to invest in transportation and infrastructure? Bob Kurtter, manager of Moody's state ratings team, addressed the question last month during a speech at New York University's Institute of Public Knowledge.

Only two states, California and Illinois, have seen their credit downgraded in recent months, Kurtter said. Negative credit outlooks have been issued for 15 more states, and two are benefiting from positive credit outlooks: West Virginia and Louisiana.

Why are things looking rosy for those two governments?

Read more...

As more media outlets note the phenomenon of GOP lawmakers who voted against the Obama administration's economic stimulus law before seeking -- and taking credit for winning -- a share of its infrastructure money, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is seizing an opening to tag its opponents as two-faced.

The DNC launched a "Highway Hypocrites" website today that asks voters to research whether their local representative is among those who blasted the stimulus in Washington before touting its value outside the Beltway.

But the system is flawed: those who provide address information to the DNC are only told whether their member of Congress voted for or against the stimulus, not whether they opposed it before returning home and stumping for transportation recovery money.

The names of the Republicans who played both ends of the stimulus debate are available in a research report released last month by bloggers at Think Progress, an affiliate of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.