Obama Administration Proposes Major Public Transportation Policy Shift

[CS Foltz]

Gentlemen..........this is past due for sure! Now maybe the Administration, as well as JTA, would be receptive to alternate modes of "Mass Transit"...........maybe!

[tufsu1]

There is something to be said for the power of ideas, Ock.  And I think that we are all discovering that there is a real need for people who are not trying to push a development or consulting based agenda to be present at these public forums.

And that is why us "consultants" are constantly trying to find ways to engage the public...whether it be public workshops, open houses, etc.....the frustrating thing is it seems like many of the regular posters on MJ never come off the website!

[Lunican]

From Ray LaHood's blog:

Walking the walk; New transit action puts livability criteria squarely into the mix

Folks, here's some big news on the transit and livability front.

With support from President Obama, we’re taking a major step forward to free our New Starts and Small Starts programs from their current narrow requirements.

As Michael Cooper reports, since 2005, these requirements have excluded many good projects--popular projects like light-rail and streetcars. Measuring only cost and how fast a project can move the most people the greatest distance simply misses the boat, and, as reported in Streetsblog, has slowed down transit expansion. In 2010, a policy that has that effect is ridiculous.

Look, everywhere I go, people tell me they want better transportation in their communities. They want the opportunity to leave their cars behind. To live near work and schools and good hospitals. And to enjoy clean, green neighborhoods. The old way of doing things just doesn't value what people want.

Now, the Recovery Act discretionary TIGER grants we announce soon will help some communities achieve these broader goals.

But if we’re serious--really serious--about creating livable communities built around good transportation, then our Federal Transit Administration needs to consider key livability factors when evaluating non-Recovery Act transit proposals.

Factors like enivronmental benefits and economic development opportunities.

Unfortunately, FTA's flagship programs use cost and performance requirements that are too narrow to allow for weighing these livability factors.

So we are opening them up to a broader set of six performance criteria:

    * Economic development
    * Mobility improvements
    * Environmental benefits
    * Operating efficiencies
    * Cost effectiveness
    * Land use

These criteria--that our old way of doing business simply didn't account for--add up to a much fuller picture of how proposed projects will serve their communities. And these are the kinds of criteria we pledged last spring to support alongside our Sustainable Communities partners HUD and EPA.

Obviously, we still must evaluate a project's ability to move people from one place to another. But, as Publicola notes, now we can add to the mix how new transit ideas can help communities reduce their carbon footprints, spur economic activity, and relieve congestion.

It's what people want, and it just makes sense.

http://fastlane.dot.gov/2010/01/walking-the-walk-new-transit-action-puts-livability-criteria-squarely-into-the-mix.html

[FayeforCure]

Yeah, well stick this in your pipe and smoke it... About 6 months ago when MJ's own Stephendare and I attended the National High Speed Rail Conference in Orlando, we both had an opportunity at the microphone to unload on a who's who of national, state and local officials.

While I tackled rail details and pushed the FACT that without Jacksonville in the plan, High Speed or any other speed rail is going to fail in Florida. Stephendare, jumped on the big shots with "Why in the hell doesn't the government at all levels score these projects by livability, sustainability and development potential? We both got our share of oohs and ahh's.  Stephen ended up in a table where he could talk with several DOT secretary's and rail operators including an Amtrak VP. I got put in charge of a group-table that included DOCTOR DOC (FL HSR) DOCKERY, CSX, NS, and most of the West Florida delegation.

Suddenly there is an announcement from DOT that in the future we will score mass transit projects by "livability, sustainability, and development potential..."  Yeah, maybe that is just a coincidence, but if it is it's a REALLY strange one. I'd like to think after 30+ years of pushing Florida and Jacksonville, I just watched a friend win one for the team!

Stephendare will be available for autographs at stage door 15, 10 minutes after the show![/color][/b]

Ock, this is your typical case of grandiose thinking.......though I applaud you for traveling to Orlando to participate in the HSR meeting,.........you're a bit late to the (Democratic) party on the idea of livable communities, which has been a cornerstone of the Democratic Party for a VERY long time:

Even LaHood made a statement way before the Orlando meeting to express this administration's support for livable communities and its transportation needs:

October 19, 2009
New Task Force on Livable Communities in the US Congress
Posted by Lauren Hilliard under GHG/VMT reduction, climate change, news, sustainable development, walkable communities
Leave a Comment
ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE FORMATION OF THE TASK FORCE ON LIVABLE COMMUNITIES

~news from Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Chair of the new Task Force~

“Implementing strategies that incorporate the principles of livability will result in improved quality of life for all Americans and create a more efficient and more accessible transportation network that services the needs of individual communities”.  â€" Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Testimony to the House Appropriations Committee, March 18, 2009


“HUD’s central mission â€" ensuring that every American has access to decent, affordable housing â€" can be achieved only in context of the housing, transportation, and energy costs and choices that American families experience each day.” â€" Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan, Testimony to the House Appropriations Committee, March 18, 2009


Dear Friend,

I am pleased to announce that the House Democratic Caucus is reinstating the Livable Communities Task Force (LCTF). From the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to climate change legislation to the new Partnership for Sustainable Communities between the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Transportation, and Department of Housing and Urban Development, livable communities issues are at the forefront of this administration and Congressional activities.

When I came to Congress 13 years ago, the concept of livable communities was considered “novel.” Since then, I’ve watched it move from being desirable, to mainstream, to essential to our economy and the planet. I am pleased livability has become a focal point of this administration’s housing, transportation, and environmental efforts.

As Chairman of the new Livable Communities Task Force, I’d like to provide you with information about our efforts as well as invite you to join in this important undertaking.  Communities across the country are finding creative ways to improve their citizens’ quality of life. Federal policies â€" including transportation investments, tax incentives, environmental protections, citing federal facilities, and everything in between â€" have a profound effect on these efforts at the local level. The LCTF seeks to identify ways in which the federal government impacts community livability so it can be a strong partner in enhancing quality of life in communities across the country. Intended to play both an educational and legislative role in Congress, the LCTF will engage Members of Congress on livability issues by:

holding briefings with experts,
roundtable discussions and town halls with stakeholders,
sharing information via newsletters and dear colleagues,
collaborating with appropriate federal agencies, and
developing and promoting livable communities legislation.
Task Force members will support federal policies that:

provide communities with the tools to solve their own local problems;
promote cost-effective and environmentally friendly solutions to infrastructure challenges;
encourage multi-objective and multi-benefit management choices;
focus on partnerships between local government, private companies, federal agencies, non-profits, and citizen groups for finding solutions; and
coordinate federal transportation, environmental protection, and housing policies.
A current list of members of the Livable Communities Task Force is below. Please note that the list is likely to grow and will be kept updated on our website (www.blumenauer.house.gov/livablecommunities).

As an important stakeholder in promoting livable communities, I invite you to join this Congressional effort. The Task Force will be highlighting local and national livability initiatives and events, so please send any information you would like us to be aware of to livablecommunities@mail.house.gov.

You can also email us to receive:

periodic e-newsletters on livable communities information and briefings;
invitations to briefings on topics important to the livability of our communities; and
information about opportunities for the Task Force to provide a channel for your activities, studies, and ideas on briefings and legislation.
Thank you for your interest in this issue. I look forward to working with you to make our communities safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

Sincerely,

Earl Blumenauer

Member of Congress

Chairman, Livable Communities Task Force

http://movingslower.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/new-task-force-on-livable-communities-in-the-us-congress/

[JeffreyS]

There is something to be said for the power of ideas, Ock.  And I think that we are all discovering that there is a real need for people who are not trying to push a development or consulting based agenda to be present at these public forums.

And that is why us "consultants" are constantly trying to find ways to engage the public...whether it be public workshops, open houses, etc.....the frustrating thing is it seems like many of the regular posters on MJ never come off the website!

Guilty! I have only been to two city council meetings both times the issue I went for was put off until a later date.

[FayeforCure]

There is something to be said for the power of ideas, Ock.  And I think that we are all discovering that there is a real need for people who are not trying to push a development or consulting based agenda to be present at these public forums.

And that is why us "consultants" are constantly trying to find ways to engage the public...whether it be public workshops, open houses, etc.....the frustrating thing is it seems like many of the regular posters on MJ never come off the website!

It's VERY hard to engage the public in NE Florida, because under Republican rule the role of PUBLIC transportation has been somewhat of a fringe issue. Remember in the "You're on Your Own" society advocated by the Republicans (who incidentally also HATE PUBLIC schools), if you can't afford your own transportation, you're out of luck.

It's a mindset that CANNOT be broken under Republican rule.

[cline]

It's VERY hard to engage the public in NE Florida, because under Republican rule the role of PUBLIC transportation has been somewhat of a fringe issue. Remember in the "You're on Your Own" society advocated by the Republicans (who incidentally also HATE PUBLIC schools), if you can't afford your own transportation, you're out of luck.

So you are saying its Republican's faults that the majority of citizens of northeast Florida choose not to get engaged?  

Doubtful.

[FayeforCure]

It's VERY hard to engage the public in NE Florida, because under Republican rule the role of PUBLIC transportation has been somewhat of a fringe issue. Remember in the "You're on Your Own" society advocated by the Republicans (who incidentally also HATE PUBLIC schools), if you can't afford your own transportation, you're out of luck.

So you are saying its Republican's faults that the majority of citizens of northeast Florida choose not to get engaged?  

Doubtful.

We definitely are lagging behind on rail compared to the rest of the nation,........remember the "if it can't pay for itself or even be done profitable, it shouldn't be done" concept that is being advocated by Republicans on transit issues.

[Ocklawaha]

Hell's bells, I'm no Republican, but the more venom that is regurgitated on them by the loony fringe here on MJ, the more I'm thinking we all need to join them. If for no other reason then to keep the hate vendors from getting a foothold.

The sleaze just keeps on coming.

OCKLAWAHA

[FayeforCure]

Ock, nothing to do with hate, just the regressive policies that Republican rule brings.

After all, supporting anything PUBLIC as in PUBLIC transportation is somewhat of an oxymoron in Republican phylosophy, hence Democrats being better on this issue:

Every community in America â€" regardless of its size, geographic location, demographic composition, or economic base -- aspires to become a place where families are safe, enjoy personal and environmental health, can select from a range of housing and transportation choices, and have access to educational and economic opportunities.  These are the building blocks of livable communities.

Unfortunately, the federal government has all too often hindered or even blocked the ability of local communities to achieve these goals. In fact, federal policies have often led to today’s unproductive and even destructive patterns of community neglect,  inefficient energy use, economic dislocation, and environmental damage.  Sadly, in many cases, American taxpayers have paid for it.

It’s time to change this relationship.  It’s time to create a new, dynamic partnership in which the federal government enables and helps local governments create livable communities where people are safe, healthy and economically secure.

The Livable Communities Task Force recognizes that federal policies â€" from transportation to tax incentives to environmental regulations and everything in between â€" have a profound effect on the livability of communities. This Task Force seeks to identify the ways in which the federal government can affect community livability and improve Americans’ quality of life. This includes reducing the nation’s dependence on oil, protecting the environment, improving public health and investing in housing and transportation projects that create jobs and give people more commuting choices.    

The first step is to create a legislative agenda for Congress that demonstrates the federal potential for shaping livable communities, demonstrating the power of the federal government to analyze the needs of a community and help them create solutions that work best for them.

With significant resources, and in coordination with the administration’s new Partnership for Sustainable Communities (which spans the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency), the Federal Government is poised to help communities take advantage of federal and local investment opportunities to provide a range of housing and transportation choices, create safer and healthier communities, strengthen their economies, and protect their environment.  

http://blumenauer.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=1553

[CS Foltz]

"Federal potential for shaping livable communities"? Thats is all fine and good but with some vision and a plan, local level should be able to do just fine! I am not comfortable with the Federal government trying to shape much of anything..............nothing has been shaped to this point and all of a sudden now?

[tufsu1]

CS...the Feds generally fund 50% of the cost of transit projects....the plans have been and will continue to be local/state...but FTA won't recommend approval if they don't see the 'livability'.

[Ocklawaha]

Though some might damn my photo spreads, THIS ONE illustrates the level of service that is being cheered by Faye and like minded citizens.  When I wrote that Amtrak needs to do better, rise above Greyhound and basic accommodations, and restore trains with marketing personality, menu's and special services, I was told "Your Photos be damned! (implied - Amtrak is fine as it is)--- Sorry folks but it ISN'T FINE!

Ock, this is your typical case of grandiose thinking.......though I applaud you for traveling to Orlando to participate in the HSR meeting,.........you're a bit late to the (Democratic) party on the idea of livable communities, which has been a cornerstone of the Democratic Party for a VERY long time:

Even LaHood made a statement way before the Orlando meeting to express this administration's support for livable communities and its transportation needs:

Not really Faye, both you and I know we didn't invent this concept, but Stephen bringing it into a rail meeting with every national and state official, was a master stroke.  Perhaps it reminded some of our goals, perhaps, it introduced others to the concept, and perhaps it changed a mind or two, either way, friend Stephen is to be praised for taking the mike and preaching the gospel.

It's VERY hard to engage the public in NE Florida, because under Republican rule the role of PUBLIC transportation has been somewhat of a fringe issue. Remember in the "You're on Your Own" society advocated by the Republicans (who incidentally also HATE PUBLIC schools), if you can't afford your own transportation, you're out of luck.

It's a mindset that CANNOT be broken under Republican rule.

BS, drivel, garbage, absurd, debris, balderdash, poppycock, twaddle, baloney, bull, bunk, trash, foolishness, hokum, hooey, horsefeathers, refuse, ridiculousness, rot, rubbish...

It was the Democratic Mayor of Jacksonville, who insisted on the Skyway and refused to even see the supporters of Streetcars, or the City Councilmen that supported streetcars. It was under the Democrats that the original streetcar system was scrapped. It was Democrats that allowed Amtrak to leave downtown due to expenses, when the city could have taken a leading role in keeping them downtown.  It was a Democratic President that launched the most successful campaign to destroy Amtrak, loping about 7,000 route miles from the system forever. (Washington DC-St. Louis; Chicago-Houston; New York-Tampa; Chicago-Seattle; Chicago-Miami/Tampa)

We definitely are lagging behind on rail compared to the rest of the nation,........remember the "if it can't pay for itself or even be done profitable, it shouldn't be done" concept that is being advocated by Republicans on transit issues.

On Tuesday, Subsidy Scope, a subsidiary of the Pew Charitable Trust, reported that Amtrak, America's passenger rail company, "lost" an average of $38 per passenger. Citing a new metric for train depreciation, the report suggested that the railroad company has been less than transparent in its estimation of its own profitability.

It's interesting that the government spends an average of $38 on each Amtrak passenger, this isn't really news. Over a year ago, in fact, Amtrak president Alex Kummant stated that each passenger on the railroad represents a public capital expenditure of approximately $40, and similar figures have been bandied about for years. In fact, its amazing that some political think tanks and advocacy organizations continue to criticize Amtrak for its failure to make money. The "dark secret" seems to be that Amtrak is a financial failure, and that if rail travel were privatized, it would somehow be able to make a profit. This just isn't going to happen, however, if it were privatized with a system of built in financial incentives for such things as "Route Additions," "New Equipment," "Station Improvements," "New Trains," "Advertising," "Fuel Conservation," "On Time Performance."

The benefit of a transportation system doesn't present to the system itself, but rather to the economy and to the cities and citizens it services. The Pew Trust, by looking at the cost of tickets, comes to the same tired old "solution,"  that transportation systems have to pay for themselves." As officials and politicians calculate the value of America's passenger rail, they need to get past the idea that it must pay for itself. The measure of a rail line's profit is the energy and vitality that it brings to an area and the commerce that it supports.

Republicans KNOW the answer. Long-distance trains are the problem. This is perhaps one of the biggest myths. If you eliminate every long-distance train, your avoidable costs would decrease about $70 million a year-after about a year and a half of making labor protection costs. On a fully allocated basis, after five years, you might save annually about $300 million. Focusing on this problem is not going to save Amtrak. This approach is a red herring.

A Democrat War Cry! The Northeast Corridor (NEC) is profitable. The NEC may cover most of its above-the-rail costs, but it is an extremely costly piece of railroad to maintain. The NEC is not profitable and never will be. Sure, private groups might be interested in having it, but they would take it only with the promise of massive capital infusions.

A Bi-Partisan Solution? There is a quick fix - reform. The word reform is like catnip to those interested in a quick fix to Amtrak. If the answer were quick and easy, we would have solved the problem long ago. What needs to be done is to tightly manage the company and its finances and begin to make incremental but critical improvements to plant and equipment.


OCKLAWAHA

[stjr]

There is something to be said for the power of ideas, Ock.  And I think that we are all discovering that there is a real need for people who are not trying to push a development or consulting based agenda to be present at these public forums.

And that is why us "consultants" are constantly trying to find ways to engage the public...whether it be public workshops, open houses, etc.....the frustrating thing is it seems like many of the regular posters on MJ never come off the website!

LOL, Tufsu.  I didn't realize you had such a sense of humor.  

My experience is that:

(1) consultants consider themselves "experts" and that they have nothing to learn from the lowly public they are supposed to serve so are seldom open minded to public input

(2) the politicians who take the consulting firms contributions for their campaigns accept (1) as an indisputable truth so they can justify siding with said consultants and "cover their tracks" regarding their "political obligations"

(3) the consultants, for additional insurance, have successfully lobbied to make sure quasi-judicial hearings such as zoning are required to give so much weight to "experts" that even when they fabricate the facts and the public has presented incontrovertible evidence the "expert" is wrong, or even lying, the consultants position will be taken as the only "correct" one in reaching a decision

(4) the public gets frustrated trying to show up at hearings where they are:
(a) frequently scheduled at times convenient for consultants, but not the working public, such as in the middle of the day, and at locations inconvenient for the interested public or lacking in adequate free parking
(b) frequently REscheduled at the hearing forcing the public to attend multiple hearings at said inconvenient times
(c) giving consultants unlimited time to advocate their cases but limiting the public to 3 minutes typically
(d) denying the public the chance to rebut consultants fully
(e) they find out at the hearing the consultants have done backroom deals with the bureaucrats and further input is of no consequence as the issue is already decided.

Add that most of the public isn't going to get wind of a hearing unless they read the legal notices.  I don't know many people who do that religiously.  Hearing publicity isn't too good.  Failure of the press to cover most issues presented at hearings makes it doubly hard.

The fact is, the public doesn't usually feel they get a far shake at "hearings".  Most "hearings" are really just a charade and the public has stopped going to most of them because they know they will be marginalized and steamrolled.

Do you really think a hearing featuring a public outcry against a project like the Outer Beltway would get FDOT, JTA, TPO, etc. to hesitate for even a second in pushing such a project through?  Especially, when the hearings are scheduled at a point after which years of "planning" and engineering are already invested by such organizations?

Sorry to be such a downer on your parade but I have been to my fair share of hearings and know first hand how they usually work.  You need to sit on the other side of the fence and you will understand what its like to sit in the bleachers, not the box seats given to consultants.

If they really wanted more public participation, maybe they should set up message boards like MJ.  They you would get the input you yearn for for sure.

[tufsu1]

well then stjr...you just haven't met the right consultant  

Seriously, it is important not to confuse public hearings (like yesterday's on the Springfield Car Wash) with public workhops an the like...those are often held in the evening and in the affecetd area.

I would hope that those who showed up at any of last year's public meetings for the LRTP feel that people listened to them.

Thoughts from others?

(I know Ock, Lake, Lunican, and CS showed up).

btw...an overwhelming number of people at the LRTP workshops wanted more/better transit....and whether you or I like it, a significant # also thought the Outer Beltway and 9B couldn't be built soon enough!