Building the wrong kind of infrastructure

You said it so very well here. (0.00 / 0)

I have as a client and an employer the Montana Department of Transportation.  Nothing in this comment is protected by attorney client privilege, and nothing in this violates my fiduciary responsibility to the people of the state as a public servant.  It is my opinion, and it floats or sinks on the merits of the public facts that underlie it.

A big part of the economic stimulus package designed to put the US on a growth path again are "shovel-ready" projects.  We've all heard that term.

And state DoTs have more shovels ready, through federal funding obtained from the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) than any other entity in the US.  Of MT's $800 million in "stimulus money," more than a quarter is going to highway projects.  

Regardless of the stimulus package, MDT always has a big list of future projects on the books, and the process for how highway projects obtain priority on that list is facinating.  Having them "shovel-ready," however, is another thing.  These projects generally move from the nomination stage to dirt work relatively slowly.  

Consider that some projects originate from county commissioner, legislators, or other elected officials, theoretically based on requests/complaints from the public.  Others originate from MDT's annual safety reviews of accident histories, traffic volume, and functioning of the transportation system based on data gathered by MDT personnel.  These all go into the pipeline and what is funded and what is not funded is determined, ultimately, by the Transportation Commission, a.k.a., the governor.

Once they are nominated and accepted by the Commission, the process starts, and this leaves out some of the ways projects get on the books.  For example, MDT has a planning division that looks at "transportation corridors" and comes up with long-term planning for that corridor based on the data gathered and a number of stated (and unstated - we will have oil and personal vehicles operating on fossil fuels forever) assumptions.

Environmental review begins at this stage of the process, because the greatest threat to a prospective project is a successful suit under NEPA or MEPA (National Environmental Policy Act, Montana .....).  Environmental review under NEPA has been a frequent recipient of attacks due to it's propensity to "slow the process down."

MDT is a state agency with a very narrow defining task, and it has, in my experience, accomplished that task well.  As we all know, MT is a low density population state that is presently highly dependent on personal vehicular travel to get from one place to another, and winter travel in MT is often treacherous.

So this comment is not intended to be critical of any individuals within MDT, I have met and worked with many who are extraordinary public servants and good at their jobs.  

But as I said, MDT's task is narrowly defined, and the mechanics of federal funding for highway work rewards those who can spend all their allotted money in a year.  

Those states that save money come in last due in part to so-called federal "grab bag funds."  If a state doesn't spend all of its federal highway appropriations, it goes into a fund that other states who have spent their allotments compete.  Use it or lose it.  MT has been very successful in this interstate competition.  I don't know the stats off-hand, but MT ranks near the top for spending of federal dollars per capita on highway projects due in part to this grab bag funding of projects.

But here comes the stimulus package, and the wrench this has thrown in the works.  The nuts and bolts of having shovel ready highway projects is, you have to "certify right-of-way."  Certification of right-of-way means that all right-of-way has been purchased for a prospective project, all environmental review has been completed, and there is a final design of the project ready to be implemented.  And by implemented, I mean putting out the project for bids by private contractors, because your state actually builds no projects.

Part of the interstate competition for stimulus money was how many projects it had shovel-ready.  

Two points that deserve quite a bit of critical attention at this point:  first, the point Jay makes.  In this willy-nilly fear-based environment of doing anything to make the "economy" grow again, spending money, and spending money, have become the first and last priority.  

That's public funds being spent, and following the money reveals that this is resulting in a further (beyond the bank bailouts) massive transfer of public wealth into private hands.  Sure, some of the dollars spent in Kalispell to pay workers employed by a contractor with a highway project public contract change hands in Kalispell 7 times and boost the local economy, but what percentage?  

And in my direct experience, none of this money was directed to making a rational decision on how we can spend this public money based on future probabilities.  On sustainability?  On an acknowledgment that we are beyond peak for the Earth's capacity to produce fossil fuels, and that the decline over the next two generations will be precipitous?  

Second, how does the process suffer?  Highway projects take a long time from inception to actualization for many reasons, not the least of which is environmental review, in a time when we now officially acknowledge that CO2 is a pollutant and global human-caused climate change a reality, or that the state is exercising its power of eminent domain to purchase property necessary for these projects.  Eminent domain is, in my opinion, high on the list of the most invasive actions government takes in private citizens' lives.  And the Constitution is very clear when the state may exercise this right.  Public necessity.  The Constitution does not list economic growth as a public good, though many constitutional scholars (depending on their political bent) would tell me that this was the very purpose of the it.

So Jay's comment, to me, is so very relevant and timely.  

If I get fired for this comment, get me in touch with a good constitutional free speech lawyer...

---

by: Bob Gentry @ Thu May 07, 2009 at 01:31:47 AM UTC