we have a steam colleague who is here and wants to introduce one of the members of the panel and since he's not a member of the committee with that i'm down front there and then we're going to subject him to a lot of questions after he does an introduction i hope you know the subject matter turn on your bike and go right ahead thank you mr chairman as a former member of the committee it is pleasure to to return for just a brief introduction and the reason i thought was important at this in your direction is because i find that when we talk about public policy here in washington sometimes it can take on a theoretical level and there's no substitute for looking at actual practical applications out in the country and when it comes to transit policy i think it is very instructive to look at the experience in my home state of utah and the witness i wanted to do says michel legrand who has worked for the you taught transit agency for thirty years and he will tell you a remarkable story about an agency that has grown that has met the needs of a growing population and brings projects on schedule either on or under budget they have a tremendous track record of being innovative and i think that that is  instructive for this committee to hear some success stories you know often in politics in the news cycle we hear things that don't go right and things that aren't working and mike allegro is an individual who has been part of a wonderful success story and so i am very glad that is here today to testify before the committee as you consider setting new policy in advance of the next service transportation bill and that's why i really want to stop by just to make that introduction and i hope you will take his testimony with great interest and we can all learn from that and with that mr chairman i really appreciate your willingness to let me come for the committee to do this and i will yield back my time happy to answer any questions on the future but oh good then how do you think we can finance the referenda passed in one of the most conservative states in the country where the voters just said yeah we're ready to step up the plate funding for transportation infrastructure and it's partly due to the fact that mr allegro and his agency have done such an effective job of letting people know look this is what you get for what you pay for and i think we have a wonderful tracker in that regard so i think you've identified on the element which is that people might be willing to pay more if they can see not to make  result exactly thank you thanks for taking the time and i mean it sounds like an exciting story earlier today well i want thank everyone for being here will they're setting up while they're setting up for the witnesses i'll just make a really brief statement i don't think it's it's news to anybody in this audience or many people in this country that we have a severe problem with our transportation infrastructure the  commission report that we received earlier this year is in a lot of ways a road map so to speak of that crumbling infrastructure i think does an excellent job of documenting the needs  obviously there's going to be tremendous controversy over how we can begin to finance the needed additional investment for those needs i'm hoping that today this esteemed panel will help as one of those who provide testimony to this panel i won't be able to stay but i wanted to introduce to the committee linda watts and she has a great  resume and background in transportation over twenty years she heads up our links which is central florida regional transportation authority she's the c e o of  that body she's worked in corpus christi headed up transportation efforts in both corpus christi and for worth serves on many national regional and state panels  those experts in transportation in their own right she is going to hopefully talk to today about the challenges that many of our metropolitan smaller urban area transit dramatic increase in ridership and it's creating quite a challenge that she's having to choose between closing down some operations where people are struggling to find economical way to get around the community to last week i did my little northeast corridor tour but i had a chance to visit the new york city the long island to grand central station the second avenue subway extension underneath new york city there they are boring through solid rock at the first new transportation lanka subway link in new york city which will eventually connect the j f k airtrain through long island railroad road in to ghent grand central station but i recommend all the members of the panel to get a chance to go up there you go down into the bowels of manhattan and see them cutting through solid rock with the latest technology equipment a seven point two billion dollar subway extension which is quite exciting for our biggest metropolitan area in the countries that if you get a chance highly recommend visit you i reckon i said next the ranking member and then we'll turn to other members hopefully your memory can always put your opening statement right there well thank you very much mr chairman and i'll be very brief i want to thank you for holding this hearing on maintaining our nation highways and transferred infrastructure i also want to thank all of the witnesses for providing the testimony that i'm sure will be extremely important to the subcommittee as we begin the process of reauthorizing the highway and transit programs we've already useful design laugh our highways are also suffering from increased wear and tear because of the growth in the movement of freight the volume of freight moved daily has caused more damage to our highways than was originally anticipated forty to fifty years ago when our highways were being built our the condition of our highways isn't the only challenge we face the large increase in crude oil prices has caused many americans to switch from driving to public transit this sudden increase in ridership will have a big impact on mass transit systems around the country the existing conditions of our nation's transfer big holes in facilities is already poor and this increasing ridership could make a bad situation worse in a very short time it will also have an effect on the our oil production in this country because we don't have to produce it all but if we would produce just a little bit more then these foreign energy producers would realize that they couldn't keep raising their prices every day and if we don't have some increased energy production in this country in other words if we don't drill for a little more all then we're going to run the real real risk of shutting our autonomy down because it's already having tremendous effect on tracking aviation our farming and everything else so with that back the balance of my time and thank you mr chairman for calling this hearing i don't have any requests for opening statements what may be our next starting some of the questions that will help provide some of the answers i'm very concerned about some of our infrastructure in my state and i'm sure in other states we need that investment we need to be able to create the jobs that those investments are going to make bring about there may be a need for gas tax increase i don't know but i think we are having these hearings will bring a lot of the information forth and be able to at least understand a lot of what we need to face in america must understand as mr madison from you so was saying people buy into if that funding is going directly into the project that we say it's going to go and that would be in the infrastructure repair special thanks to mr beeler are my own state's secretary of transportation for green to come here i think your observations and your insights going to that a tremendous amount of gravity to what we're doing here and look forward hearing from you thanks very much  united states maybe we ought to think that through again second what are those highways composed of maybe we ought to think that through and see if we can use other materials and the third thing is the price of crude oil should not be overlooked in the mr chairman i'm pleased that we're holding this hearing as a serious part of a series of hearings on this immense challenge that we're facing i know each of our districts our states reflect the challenge that we see at the national level on how we're going to meet short  shortfalls in funding and also how do we deal with the federal state relationship with highway funding and flexibility i know that's an important issue i've discussed it with former transportation officials in my state of louisiana as well as our current transportation official and what flexibilities are needed a state level how is that relationship going to play out as we craft another highway bill finally just looking at my district where we have immense challenges with interstate forty nine which is a major transportation route for trucking for in particular for our energy industry we have serious congestion how we're going to deal with this how we're going to pay for it is a serious concern we have aged infrastructure one of the key bridges in my district on interstate ten in lake charles louisiana is structurally deficient there's an intense debate going on now about safety about the ongoing transportation concerns and also the impact this is going to have on the united states because lake charles is a major refining center for our country so this nexus between energy and highways is critically important and finally i want to mention the need for interstate forty nine which is a key hurricane evacuation route between new orleans going north to get folks out of new orleans it's also a key commerce and an energy corridor or and this should be a national priority and we've been working on this for well over a decade and i would hope that as we craft the next highway bill will find sufficient funding to complete this absolutely necessary piece of infrastructure and  we we had some seventy eight billion dollars worth of congestion cost in two thousand and five and as we look at the price of gasoline and of course no out taxes in federal level also it's that taxes in south carolina is based on look forward to maybe some solutions from no witness at least some recommendations and also i would like to you know bob tail back on what charlie said about the lose yeah no we had the same problems out carolina we were in the middle process of missouri department transportation chairman members of the committee i'm p k run director of the missouri department of transportation and currently president of the american association of state highway and transportation officials i'm here to talk about the need to increase investment in the nation's transportation infrastructure we have grossly underfunded both our state and federal transportation systems over the last three decades if we continue this downward spiral we risk losing our status as a global leader as well as precious lives we must recognize china and india are investing hundreds of billions of dollars more every year than we are in the united states to put it simply we must step up now to remain globally competitive or we will end up with a second rate transportation system and a much less mobile and prosperous society than we have today like most states missouri's transportation needs far exceed  resources we have initiated innovative ways to shore up our ailing infrastructure with additional funding from a state constitutional amendment that directed highway user fees to mota we have improved twenty two hundred miles of our state's busiest highways in just two years excel or a good fifty three critical highway projects and moved ahead with one point six billion dollars in new construction projects and and road conditions have improved on our major roads from forty four percent in good condition to seventy eight percent in good condition during the same for your time but our progress is tenuous our next priority is improving our bridge in mentor more than eight hundred of missouri's worst bridges will be repaired or replaced within five years under the safe and sound bridge improvement plan this project is an innovative design build finance and maintain contract that involves private activity bons to encourage innovative financing and construction the missouri bridge partners contract scene will finance the projects capital cost estimated between six hundred million and eight hundred million dollars missouri bridge partners will also be responsible for designing construction of these bridges and structural maintenance for at least an additional twenty five years mota will pay for the program over twenty five years with federal bridge funds while safe and sound will fix more than eight hundred bridges it will not address our large river bridges that spanned more than a thousand feet to replace all the bridges all of the large bridges that need to be fixed would cost in excess of seven billion dollars to make sure they are at least in satisfactory condition would cost three hundred to five hundred million dollars over ten years either way we don't have the money innovative solutions and program efficiencies will only go so far what we really need is a significant infusion of money dedicated to the nation's transportation system at a minimum the federal state local funding partnership must continue and the historical federal share of forty five percent of capital investment must be maintained federal highway funding would have to be increased from forty three billion in two thousand and nine to seventy five billion by two thousand and fifteen to restore the program's purchasing power back to the one hundred ninety three level in addition to more funding states need flexibility in using federal aid for asset management approaches that can significantly extend the life of highways and bridges if we systematically repair and maintain pavements and structures they do not deter to the point where they have to be replaced we also ask that you make preventive maintenance eligible for federal ai a thorough assessment of the interstate national highway system corridors rehabilitation and construction costs needs is critical the interstate system has more than fifty five thousand bridges many of which are reaching forty to fifty years of age bridges and other structures this old usually require substantial rehabilitation or reconstruction as we go out another twenty to thirty years they will require complete replacement i am very concerned that the investment made the transportation by our grandparents that have given us unprecedented mobility and prosperity are not being made by our generation our are children and grandchildren will not enjoy the same economic advantages and quality of life because of our refusal to pass along a comparable legacy we must either find ways now to fund a transportation system that will ensure economic prosperity or be content to sit in traffic and watch our highways crumble because of overuse and a lack of funding we can't afford to wait jobs and lives are at stake thank you target of some of the activities that we've been looking at just in a rage dollars you'll see you'll sense the frustration and difficulty of our challenges and we're not much different than the rest states around the united states but let me just try and paint a picture a little bit as i see things in pennsylvania obviously transportation funding and infrastructure improvements have always been a challenge but we are seeing in pennsylvania and again not different than others forces that are work that have c us all to radically change our approach and let me just give you a couple of examples i've had the pleasure of being a secretary for now five and a half years or so in the period from two thousand and three to two thousand and seven the cost of construction increase inflation related to construction has gone up sixty three percent in those five years never in in our history have we seen those kind of increases and we keep looking around the corner hoping that there's a brighter day as we looked at the first quarter of two thousand and eight we see hot mix asphalt cost in one quarter versus last year twenty seven percent  not surprising given the petroleum but it's a huge number nash and more frightening it's been steel prices in the first quarter pennsylvania has seen in steel prices of fabricated steel go up forty nine point seven percent we are in a world that we just don't understand i would submit obviously with fuel prices you know jumping is as high as they had it's been it's been wonderful to see folks flock to transit but we now started watching our our transit friends not being able to catch the ball if you will as their costs have jumped as well in pennsylvania about twenty five to thirty million dollars more in transit fuel costs related to diesel price increase has been the impact and increase in diesel fuel simply to catch that problem so it's as i say we are really in a different situation from a highly standpoint we have always in a highly side of things kind of prided ourselves trying to keep up and deal congestion issues let me just tell you over the last three cycles that i've been involved with as we updated our transportation improvement program a four year program we all deal with across the united states less recycle in pennsylvania we've gone through about twenty five or so percent of our program dollars were earmarked for capacity improvements or some kind of congestion improvements this cycle because we have been in such a downslide and needing to change our business we're now probably going to be in the neighborhood of ten percent and what that tells you is that we have had such dramatic changes in these outside forces if you will of inflation that that's where we are another interesting statistic in pennsylvania is in the last period of time that i got while i've been secretary we've increased the amount of money we spent on our bridges pennsylvania as a horrible distinction of having the highest number of structure deficient bridges of any state united states we tripled the amount of money we spent on bridge construction ironically the number of structure deficient bridges gone from fifty five hundred to six thousand in same period simply because the age of our infrastructure is so high average age of our bridges is sixty  pennsylvania we've had a recent piece of legislation last year that helped the transit industry especially on operating side and a little on the capital side but our our our our partners in transit are struggling to keep their leads in decent shape and there is the rest of their infrastructure in good shape otherwise they will be slaves to the increased maintenance costs simply to try to operate their system because of those issues and as i say ironically at a time when transit demand isn't also at an all time high  here's what we've been doing to try to deal with our problem as i mentioned huge change in the focus of our program re saluting the flag of maintenance and sometimes maintenance only and it's sure not what we want to  do so huge focus on maintenance in the case of our bridge program my good friend pete ron is is working on trying to deal with eight hundred bridges over the next five years we're trying to deliver in pennsylvania eleven hundred  forty five bridges into construction in the next three years and then the twenty months after those three calendar years we're trying to deliver another five hundred fifty bridges simply our backlog is that awful at the same time we've got to  make sure that we are using all of our powers to design properly and so we're shifting to one hundred year bridges and at the same time we've got to focus on our highway design to make sure we live in the smallest footprint possible because the costs will otherwise outstrip our situation so the bottom line is we are clearly changing the way we have focused our business and one scary thing for all of us is we just don't know where it's ending we had hoped that  our our situation was going to get better it's not getting better we clearly have got to deal forthright with with the revenue problem we will face and it's not an easy one we know that thank you very much appreciate that and if to the extent and member of the committee i am leo bowman i'm a county commissioner benton county washington state today i'm representing the national association of counties where i serve as vice chairman of the transportation steering committee i want to thank you for inviting neko to this hearing on maintaining our nation's highways and bridges and transit infrastructure neko represents the nation's three thousand and sixty six counties that own and maintain already five percent of the total highway mileage in the united states forty four percent of that all of the nation's bridges we also own or participate in about one third of the transit systems across the nation nato members have a huge investment in this system and much of what counties do is maintain the existing system for that reason we agree with the first recommendation of the national surface transportation policy and revenues study commission and i quote the nation the nation's best in the nation is best served when transportation facilities are well maintained this is certainly true as it applies to the three county region where i serve as vice chair of the ben franklin while our t p o our region occupies four thousand two hundred sixteen square miles in the war southeastern washington state we have three hundred thirty bridges we have three thousand seven hundred miles of county roads which only six hundred fifty miles are federally aid at all eligible our economy to the commie depends on these roads and bridges being well maintain our region produces over one billion dollars in agricultural products each year for these products to get to market cheaply and efficiently we must continue to invest in our mostly rural road and bridge system maintaining the system means that upgrading roads and bridges the standards that enable these facilities to handle today's heavier and wider vehicles seasonal emergency weight restrictions and closings are a serious problem for our agricultural economy the other reason maintenance is so important is because of safety we know that nationally twenty five thousand people die each year on rural roads there's a fatality rate that is two and a half times greater than on urban roads in our region broken and damaged roadway components get top priority nothing is more important than safety to our elected officials let's talk about financing our our t p o forecasts and over the next twenty years we will collect five hundred sixty one million dollars of which we will spend three hundred fifty six million dollars on maintenance this reflects our historic sixty three to thirty seven percent split between maintenance and operations and new capacity we also have five hundred forty six miles of roads which are in need of upgrading to current all weather and safety standards we estimate the cost of the improvements to be between one half million and one million dollars per mile while that sounds like a lot of money our engineering staff in forms us that these upgrades will reduce normal maintenance costs between eighty and ninety percent almost all of the revenues counties have for maintenance as local property taxes and fuel taxes that are shared to us by tax revenue with locals but the amounts are very small uneven nationally there are few if any local fuel taxes relatively few local sales taxes dedicated transportation and most counties need to ask for permission levy a new tax as the local elected officials over eleven years i can tell you that raising property taxes two main highways to maintain highways and bridges politically unpopular because it is totally an related to the usage of the system in our system see little our citizens see little connection between better roads bridges and increasing taxes i would direct you to a recent publication in titled franchise financing transportation in the twenty first century and in governmental perspective i want to have a copy for every member here today which is essentially released was recently released by nato and five other state and local government aid organizations that describes this issue in detail what would  help one answer is that more federal resources directed to rural roads and units of governments that are responsible for them the highway safety improvement program needs to be targeted to those roads that need safety improvements and local governments need officials need to be part of the process and that develops the state strategic highway safety plan something that is currently regulations do not allow related to this high risk group for road program needs far more funding than the ninety million dollars currently available bridges on nonfederal aid roads need more funding and necco would support an increase in the op system set aside at to at least twenty percent service transportation program were all set the project delivery process needs to be streamlined so that delays are reduced and the cost for rural counties to use federal funds does not discourage participation in the federal highway program mr chairman i also serve as a chairman of the board of the director regional transportation authority chicago illinois thank you mr chairman and members of the committee the r t a is an oversight agency for chicago we oversee the operations of the chicago transit authority which is serving the core of our region the metra commuter rail agency which serves throughout this six county region of chicago and pay suburban bus maintenance needs clearly are one of the most important issues facing my many worries with our transit system doesn't please to have the opportunity to address this important matter before you today earlier this year i'm proud to say that we were very successful in achieving a victory in springfield in our legislature when they provided us over five hundred million dollars in new operating assistance dedicated to our region it was only a partial victory over we had also put forward to them billions of dollars in unfunded capital needs which they are now seriously considering with an eye towards authorization least sandor the head of the m t a system in new york and i formed a loose coalition of the largest transit agencies in the country all these agencies are rail systems but they also have the most extensive bus systems in the country we call our group the metropolitan rail discussion group and includes representatives from new york what's angeles philadelphia boston new jersey pittsburgh cleveland atlanta san francisco and washington d c we have come together to develop authorisation principles but we are working within our trade association after to develop a unified industry position our group provides two thirds of the transit says trips nationally but we receive less than half of the federal funding our core principle is that the federal transfer program should be allocated according to need in order to achieve the match impact on issues of national importance we strongly believe that the largest transit systems in the nation are best able to serve the national interests of limiting the growth of traffic congestion reducing greenhouse gases improving air quality promoting energy independence and generally providing mobility benefits that support the growth of the nation's economy through the engines of economy that you find in the largest metropolitan areas in the country the infrastructure maintenance needs of these systems are great we have just begun a process of conducting a transit capital assessment of all of our group's members better quantify these needs and we will submit a report to this committee for your record when it's completed however we believe that the chicago regional transit system is very typical of our members of our group in the larger urban systems our strategic plan adenike fight a five year capital need of sixteen point one billion dollars to maintain enhance and expand the region's transit system and there is tremendous support for our region for this it's not just a city of chicago issue it's a suburban and outer suburban issue as well we have strong support for our operating needs and our capital needs as evidenced by the success we had in springfield of this five year figure ten point three billion dollars would be dedicated to maintaining the system that includes two point nine billion for rolling stock two point one billion for trackin support structures one point four billion for signals electrical and communications network one point eight billion for improving and replacing support facilities and equipment one point one billion for improving passenger facilities and one billion for other systemwide improvements but of this ten point three billion dollars maintenance need only two point six billion is funded our transit system is deteriorating and this must be reversed another issue of concern for large urban transit systems has been constrained capacity to deal with increased demand in ridership particularly what we're experiencing with the higher prices of fuel many of our systems are bursting with riders during the peak hours we need to add capacity to existing rail lines and can do so in a very cost effective ways to meet our maintenance capital and passing needs the largest systems in the country line not just on federal funding but hall also have substantial state and local contributions while we need to increase federal capital support we also need to increase funding at the state and local levels while we believe the needs of the largest  systems are particularly acute we recognize that newer systems and smaller systems also have important maintenance needs mr chairman thank you for the opportunity to testify i appreciate your interest in this important topic and i look forward to your questions thank you i thanked him and mr michel legrand system general manager and chief capital development officer utah transit agency i thank you and good morning chairman de fazio ranking member duncan for inviting the utah transit authority to testify on behalf of all the new rail start cities in the united states and i particularly want to thank congress and matheson for such a kind introduction and to the benefit of this committee i can shorten my presentation most of my bullet points i just arrived from the american public transit association's rep conference in san francisco where speaker pelosi talked about the same themes that you're hearing about today investing in our transportation infrastructure and the fact she quoted she was quoted as saying the long term benefits of investing on infrastructure far outweigh the costs in salt lake city we opened our first light rail line ten years ago we have since opened to more light rail lines and our first commuter rail line tripling our rail network in less than ten years and we're proud to be one of the most cost effective systems in the country but it's not enough we're on an aggressive path to double our rail system again by twenty fifteen and our local leaders are already talking about the need for more transit utah's recognize that we are facing a transportation crisis the ramifications go well beyond mobility and threaten our economic vitality the business community utah led by the salt lake chamber of commerce recently supported and led the effort to double our sales tax through our transit referendum in salt lake and utah counties because they recognized this transportation crisis and our connection to economic development and quality of life well though we are investing over seven billion dollars in highways and transit it's a multi modal program we're only about one third of the way there in meeting our twenty three billion dollars of needs i'd like to share with you for a moment some of the successes we've had in utah that the congressman has talked about and make a few recommendations for your considerations during the next reauthorization utah as you probably know as one of the most conservative states in the country is home to more than two point six million residents and is the third fastest growing state in the nation during two thousand and two we were fortunate enough to host the winter olympics and the utah transit authority carried over more over more than four million people during seventeen days and it was heralded as perhaps the best transportation system ever for the winter games not only did the games give our community a very unique perspective on using public transportation more importantly it taught us all how to resolve our issues collectively at the federal local and state levels the rapid growth in our system has been financed by a combination of local and federal funds e t a has approximately tripled its local revenues in the last seven years and we have secured fo full funding granted humans through the federal transit a ministration the development of our rail system has also created approximately four billion dollars in transit oriented development and we believe that utah like many of the other cunt cities in this country is experiencing a transit renaissance some of the key factors to arcs success i'd like to share with you number one we have built all four of our new start light rail projects ahead of schedule and under budget just a month ago we opened up our first commuter rail line up for their model line extending from salt lake city to ogden to the north we completed this project six months ahead of schedule and under budget and our rider ship is already exceeding our expectations this is happened number one by a focus on fiscal constraints by our organization but also and perhaps more importantly by an excellent relationship with our stakeholders the metropolitan planning organizations the highway departments our congressional delegations it's really not anymore about the mortar and bricks it's about the relationships therefore we believe that congress should consider a new national transportation policy that allows metropolitan regions the flexibility to determine and prioritize its transportation needs as the interstate highway system was originally designed to connect the nation's cities a new national transportation policy should be designed to maintain the health vitality and international competitiveness of this country secondly the utah transit authority is now embarking on a major transit twenty fifteen program which  is going to build seventy miles of rail in the next seven years this excel or eight program comes about by the local support of a referendum and with the great support of the f d a administrator jim simpson who signed an innovative of understanding with us to allow us to expedite the federal funding process this building of seventy miles some of them with federal funds some of them not well i was on a unique opportunity to simultaneously compare the project delivery methods in the time required to build federal versus nonfederal process and we're working with the federal transit of ministration to show them how we might be able to streamline the federal process as you've heard earlier in addition to expanding our system e t a recognizes the need to maintain its current infrastructure for example we have needs to replace one thirteenth of our fleet every year and that translates to approximately seventy buses or thirty five million dollars every year as a new start rail city we're already getting to the point where we need to rehabilitate our rail vehicles the fixed guideway modernization program in its current form is heavily skewed towards tier one cities or older cities and u t a recognizes that the system has been built fifty one hundred years ago and have significant maintenance needs however we recognize that transit world has changed dramatically since this rail modernization program was created and like u t a there are a growing number of cities that have been had rail systems built in the last ten to twenty years these newer rail systems are beginning to face significant maintenance challenges as well and as such we believe the rail modernization program should be updated to reflect this new reality and changes in the transit industry additionally we recognize the need for adding current capacity and one of the unique things we've done in utah is a bought used to rail cars to quickly expand to the system and divide it on a less expensive basis and we believe that has saved millions of dollars for the taxpayers of our community so we believe that the current formula price program needs to be considered in terms of adding what is typically called an industry core capacity in closing i'd like to make some suggestions for new rail start cities we would recommend that congress retain an eighty percent federal funding ratio for all capital projects especially the new starts program i don't believe that the utah chance of thirty would be where it is today without the heavy infusion of federal dollars at least for our first project congress should create incentives to increase state and local investments in public transportation and support innovative financing to leverage funding from all sectors a encourages congress to look at newer rebuys programs that assist in maintaining the systems that we own and to develop a new program that provides resources for systems to quickly expand their capacity and finally u t a support the recommendations that will be soon coming out of apt to provide a significant increase in the federal transit program with a total investment of no less than one hundred twenty three billion dollars over the six year authorization period that would support a doubling of ridership over the next twenty years thank you very much for this opportunity to speak to you and i'm happy to answer questions afterwards thank you mr allegro next week have ms linda watson chief executive officer central florida's regional transportation authority links central station mr chairman members of the committee thank you very much for the opportunity to testify to you on the challenges of a best only transit system i've been  testify today on the maintenance maids of the best system in central florida but you'll find most of what i have to say will apply to any transit system that includes buses a law so address some of the challenges we face and the role of federal funding and policy decisions on the operation of our system length is the business name for the central florida regional transportation authority the agency responsible for providing transit services in three counties in central florida and it also includes the city of orlando we serve a resident population of one point eight million people in a twenty five hundred square mile service area the size of the state of delaware when you consider the fifty million annual tourists that visit our areas and the cars that they rent to get around there are traffic congestion and lost time in traffic increases every single day links provides transportation services to this large urban area with only two hundred ninety buses which is well below the number of buses used in peer cities anywhere from one hundred to three hundred fewer buses than some of our other peer cities a burden the lack of the says forces on is that ninety percent of our routes operate on thirty or or more minutes frequency this is occurring while our customers are standing at one of our five thousand bus stops of which only about five hundred have shelters it's extremely difficult to talk someone out of their automobile when that's the best alternative that you can present to them is a waste of an hour and a half or more before their next bus arrives but despite the small despite the small fleet we operate the infrequent service and the lack of shelters from the intense florida sun links has seen ridership increases twenty four of the last twenty five years the only exception was right after two thousand and one in september eleventh two thousand and one ridership is seven percent for the first quarter of this of this calendar year and that's in addition to a seventeen percent fare increase that we just implemented in january central florida's population is going to double from three and a half million to seven point two million by twenty fifty the state of florida will soon surpass new york as the nation's third largest our transit system in central florida as well as other systems in the state are woefully unprepared to meet this huge demand the transport and provide the transportation necessary to get our workers to work and to move our citizens within the community and if we are unprepared to move our people within our communities how can we be prepared to compete globally in terms of transportation federal funds have been absolutely essential in building our capital program including a downtown twenty four by transfer station and office tower a twenty two hundred fifty bus maintenance garage and for super stops what we've been unable to do though is maintain these facilities this is where a policy change is needed to help bust only systems build the systems of tomorrow as you know rail systems have a rail modernization formula funding program which allows them to be able to rely on a consistent annual source of funding to keep their system safe secure and clane this allows them to not only contain operating cost but enhanced the transit trip for their customers on the other hand our thirteen year old super stops need repairs improved lighting and security and although we can use our federal formula for doing this we have the tough decision to my about replacing buses that are well beyond their retirement age or maintaining facilities and improving their is as america competes in the twenty first century the nation's policy makers have to create a new strategy a new foundation for keeping the united states the driving force in the global economy a well planned highly coordinated rapid transit system can be that foundation just as public policy in the nineteen fifties pushed america toward a carson or transportation system public policy in the new millennium can push america toward a transit center transportation system with that in mind i would like to recommend consideration of the following public policies one create a separate funding formula category for best maintenance similar to the rail modernization formula program this  bus systems to maintain their fleets and facilities without competing with capital names number to dramatically increase capital funding to transit to stimulate the development of a national and local rapid transit system the vision for this rapid transit system should be one that connects major cities as same mostly as the current highway system does the local transit system should be a combination of rail and that removes the need for the car when in an urban area the third one is to create funding incentives that force local governments to develop smart growth plans such as high density development around mull dime modal transit says them for fund bus only lanes on both interstate highways and major transit corridors and metropolitan areas five increase funding for fifty three sixteen job access and reverse commute as fuel prices continue to rise the population attempting to return to and stay in the workforce is rising and they are further reliant on public transportation increased funding for fifty three seven chain new freedom for a program america's population is aging and as gas prices are soaring that can be a lethal combination for a segment of the population that is used to being mobile so it seems obvious that a car center transportation system that works so well for us in the twentieth century is failing this now we have to find a new effective way of dealing with soaring fuel prices and time can seaming congestion and pollution transit is the solution for the twenty first century it will take bold policy decisions to get people out of their cars but it was bold policy decisions in the nineteen fifties that got them into the cars in the first place china spends nine percent of its gross domestic product on infrastructure and india spends eight percent the united states is heading in the wrong direction and spending less than one percent and we have a multitrillion dollar backlog in deferred transportation infrastructure needs perhaps a more balanced funding of highways and transit would give people a real choice t and also come out of pennsylvania that which is has a go at the issue of flexibility capital investment versus maintenance and i guess the question first to mr brown would be you know and we've already i mean you've identified capital investment backlog as most everybody else has and yet you're saying you'd like to see more flexibility in you know in the federal funds and i guess the question should be we already started in the seventies and eighties and particularly more recently giving more flexibility as the pedal interstate  completed and allowing states to divert money into maintenance preventive maintenance and that and i'm not exactly certain why or what additional flexibility you feel you need  particularly given the capital investment backlog and should the federal funds you know i just don't quite understand what you're getting that they want to tell me i mean what is it you feel is the real constraint today you would be pretty specific how would you differently use the federal funds and make the decisions between capital investment and maintenance that you can't do today  the flexibility that we would lie is among these various programs there are different restrictions on any one of these hundred eight federal funding categories and some have the to actually deal with the problems and you still have to have a discussion and debate with the federal highway administration as to the actual definition of what is preventive maintenance versus an ongoing maintenance activity and it's it's it's very muddled and it often is determined by the personality of the federal administration official that you're dealing with as to as eligibility one activity over another and a clearer broader statement of eligibility for these funds across the board would be more helpful and productive to add to the management of our systems say not asking for a block grant or something what you're saying is smush smaller number of programs but still certain flexibility between the programs probably makes the most sense as i do with my colleagues around the united states we certainly see that pennsylvania's  preservation age may have some similarity other states but boy are our needs are certainly different and the flexibility really will help all of us then tailor and those programs to our specific issues  think i mean given the fact again i mean the refraining from everybody and i would expect that is there is not money either at the state level or the federal level i mean altogether you're looking at innovative ways to enhance that but i mean should the federal money i mean given the inadequacy of should should the fed perhaps choose a priority and say look we want to target more of our money to new you know new capital invent you know or do i mean is that something that discussion we should be having here i think it's a great question and the reason i think so is that i think there is clearly a national agenda we've all got to struggle with as we turn a quarter corner toward authorization i personally think there's a very strong need for a very strong national transportation modes and find a way to shift more freight moving from highways to to rail and so on and and my colleague linda watson talked about the importance of an inner city rail system and those kind of things i think certainly concur that we've so we've got a number of different i believe stronger on national agenda as if we're going to be able to keep ourselves globally competitive in addition to then having a sustainable environment that's a very very important policy issue we're going to be facing not just in the transit side but on the on the highway side that is the distribution of dollars capital investment a one time investment by the federal government in its partnership with state and local government in which the non federal partner commits to do the maintenance it was a very long time before we came to the interstate maintenance category in the federal aid highway program the interstate program was ninety ten federal ninety percent state ten percent and then it's yours states you maintain it capital side and now we're hearing requests for more flexibility for states and for local governments to use funds for maintenance as we're hearing an increasing appeal for from states to use more of their funds for maintenance maintenance could swallow up the whole federal highway program on the highway side how much do you think it would swallow up if we gave we gave the flexible as a just blanket gave flexibility  areas use money for capital investment or for maintenance how much would be swallowed up in maintenance boy you know you probably could you probably are right if we don't have very clear goals we could probably use the entire allocation for maintenance think you're exactly right which means that seems from my standpoint that we've got to as clearly as we can why it's just not easy stuff not not for the faint of heart but as clearly as we can identify what those goals are that we want to adhere to on a federal basis so it probably means we've got to think about hierarchies of systems the national highway system means something certainly we need to think about continuing inner city freight movement inner city passenger movement and decide you know what what t briefly and that is that i believe the the heart of your question is indicative of the amount that we have under invested in transportation over the decades and the problem is today that we have this huge backlog in capital needs we have a huge backlog and maintenance needs and i think the fact that you could take the entire federal program and and have it swallowed up in maine and is just simply the fact that we've under invested for three decades i agree with that but we were now in point of a new program mr fazio mr duncan this mike and i are all in all the members of the committee going to have some very difficult choices to make the states repeatedly ask congress for flexibility in the transportation program give us more if you are categories more flexibility let us draw down money out of our bridge program for example and what are they done in the last four years that take it four and a half  billion dollars out of the capital account of the bridge program and distributed elsewhere and then a bridge collapse in minnesota and then what do they do with turn around and blame the bicycle program for a bridge a bridge collapse in minnesota that's baloney now we want to have a balance here and we're not going to have unlimited dollars to deal with even though i hope we get as close to the recommendation of the commission as possible a fifty percent or better increase investment but this this whole yang and yang between capital investment and maintenance is a matter of high policy significance and we're going to have to belabor our way through thank stream now thank you mr chairman for helping certain refocus my question then so i would direct to mr segment and mr allegro the same question as modified by the chairman here because i think we see the same question in conflict with trans that and to also are you know i went to chicago and had an appalling video presentation on the state of the i thought sections of the l that are kind of held up with two by fours where you run trains al i mean you know but i mean they're supported they were it was the math and they run in the train the limited speeds and you're so you could make an argument for the heritage systems need the investment but then clarify the largest oldest systems that i work with they're not just old systems they're new systems as well i mean over the last twenty years these systems have been attempting to address the demand for more transit throughout their areas due to growth so the growth isn't just occurring in the western states of the southwestern states it's occurring in the older cities in the northeast and midwest and even on the west coast  we really represent all the need that's been discussed here on the transit side with respect to where the federal government emphasizes its investment in new versus maintain i think you have to step back first and ask how are you best trying to serve your your goals the addressing those those issues of national importance in terms of climate change and clean air and and energy independence and let that guide us to how you set your priorities clearly we've got to maintain these systems these these systems are as i said in my testimony providing over sixty percent of the ridership and that ridership is dramatically growing into the future i so caution you though to make sure you do not create disincentives for the for state and local investment we are not coming to the federal government to solve all of our needs but we've been relying on a federal program soley for the last five years on our capital program and our matches provided by toll credits and as you know toll credits is not real money  that created a big disincentive for our state to really address the match requirement they should have stepped up and done so i really caution you in that regard but but just just again to follow up on the  and the short answer would be pretty soon we haven't reached that point yet but we are very cognizant of the fact that we need to maintain our priscilla days in our services that we operate annually at our organization our board requires us to develop and relook at a thirty year plan every year they adopt a new plan to make sure that we are indeed investing in reinvesting in the systems that we've built and the necessary real a bit really rehabilitation of the systems that we own buses and rail i think as i mentioned in my testimony the core capacity issue is also one that is troubling to us as we are seeing double digit digit increases in our ridership are struggling with the ways that we can add capacity to the systems that we've already built and so we're looking at many innovative and creative ways and we are trying to leverage the federal dollars as best we can with the resources that we have locally as well as other programs such as transit oriented development and there are types of programs that would help maintain that base but from our organization's perspective it's vital and fundamental and as as we've mentioned replacement of the buses every twelve thirteen years it's automatic it's a part of our program we recognize we have to do that our rail system now is approaching ten years old and we're beginning to reach the mid life time period renovate those light rail vehicles we have an aggressive program in place to look at that and the financing plan to do it but those needs are going to continue to grow thank you mister well thank you mr chairman worked on a bill that was supposed to cover six years and it was two hundred eighty six billion dollars which comes out to about forty seven and a half billion a year when everybody today is said in it that we need much more investment in our highway and transit systems in this country three weeks ago there was a front page story in the washington post that said that we had a two hundred ninety five billion dollar cost overrun and just the pentagon seventy two largest weapons systems that didn't count the cost overruns that amount of occurred in the thousands of other large medium and small contracts that the pentagon has and yet we just blink our eyes about that in the pentagon knows that we're going to keep on giving them big increases no matter how wasteful and inefficient they become because both parties are falling all over themselves trying to prove how patriotic they are and yet it seems to me it's a blind patriotism that says we're just going to keep on giving these huge increases to the pentagon at the expense of all other needs in this country and we're going to we had a report last week on the defense  spend seven hundred eleven billion this year more than all the other nations of the world combined trying to maintain this impera cross the globe and once again i say at the expense of all of these needs that we have in this country but  let me get to and i'll say that even with the feeling that i have the national defense is one of the most important and legitimate functions of the federal government but you can't give anybody everything that they want and just cheat everybody else mr ron i'm curious as to exactly what is the missouri bridge partners and we always hear in this committee about innovative financing yes that's one of those terms everybody's in favor of innovative financing but i'd like to know if if you use that and if you used innovative financing whatever that is i'm sure it means different things to everybody but have you used that on some projects and would you for the most part innovative financing means we borrow the money and we're paying for it in a way other than normal but in the end we've borrowed money and i always i would just add that i you know i our organizations run the same as many family households that you would like to pay as you go when you can't pay as you go you borrow and if you borrow too much you you go bust and all around the country we're borrowing as as organizations and i think it's a it's an indication that we no longer can pay as we go and we're looking for some solutions somehow well but they're short term they don't represent the long term answer to our transportation needs ultimately we have to have more money the missouri bridge partners and the safe and sound program is one in which we kept falling behind in our bridge conditions we we are deficient burst structurally deficient bridges kept growing even though we were putting more and more money into it and we wanted to come up with a radical approach to somehow get in front of the curve on our bridge in mentors and so we took eight hundred and two of our structurally deficient bridges that were environmentally clean meaning there were an environmental issues associated with them and there were not highway safety issues associated with the bridge the problem was just simply they were old and crumbling so we took these eight hundred bridges we put it into a single proposal asking industry to come with a proposal in which they would they would design the bridge replacement or rehabilitation structures they would then build them and they would finance those for a period of twenty five years and during that twenty five year period they would be also responsible for the maintenance of those bridges and their ultimate condition so they needed to bring these eight hundred bridges up to a good condition within five years they then needed to  maintain them in a good condition for twenty five years and at the end of twenty five years they needed to still be in a good condition and in this way we will where we really are taking a huge portion of our deficient bridge structure out of that condition limit i've got questions for all other witnesses and so i need to move on quickly on the borrowing part that you mentioned allowed to go if you know had them how does your borrowing now compared to say ten or fifteen years ago we are borrowing much more today than we did ten years ago and the we are using the private activity behind us but innovative financing i just wanted to mention that we are utilizing private activity bonds in which the mis partners which is the private sector teen that has been selected to do this work they will utilize private activity bonds which are they can borrow money and tax exempt status in utilized by a private entity for the benefit of the public sector and so that and then the fact that they borrowed the money and were going to pay it back to them falls into this innovative and i just wanted to follow up on  on the ranking members question on i read the proposal i was public is i mean you have an initial period where you don't pay them anything up till what two thousand and twelve or something like that and then you would begin to make payments from that point forward so negotiations for contract if we dissipate a contract within the next three weeks so we can build we still don't have all of that that i can disclose public right but what i but what i can say is that number one we have decided that we are going to make some interim payments during the five years because the capitalized interest costs were driving great you're going to carry that all for that's like heard about those kind of loans you know i agree that unlike some lot of people have and exactly and so we've decided that we will make some payments based on performance milestones so they're going to have to have one hundred fifty bridges complete before we all right so you're not going to carry all of it with the furred interests forward but you are going to have some sort of interest i would just be interested when you get and i realize if you're in negotiations you  but when you conclude that i would be interested as i'd like to see a comparison between what it would have caused serious state to go out and borrow that money straight up front do the work and what you're going to get out of this you know for a rate of return or interest costs in this deal i realize there may be other attributes to it in terms of volume or whatever speed you know it's plus the fact that we are transferring all of the risk of inflation seen so we lock in the prices for the next five years but the  return i will be able to answer that question and because of private activity bonds did just that the difference between the two are are not you would expect but anyway we will i think we'll have more questions would like and perhaps will direct them to you in writing four your department has moved investments from increasing highway capacity to just trying to keep the system maintained i'm in good repair how much of a shift are you talking about and is that to increase in the future i mean what what impact has this had on your system and what do you see in say the next five years or so clearly we've made a major shift we had been devoting in the neighborhood of twenty five or so percent of our revenues to capacity and congestion really a physical improvements and then in the in the series of the last three updates of our program we're probably going to be closer to update at five percent and down to nothing i don't i honestly don't know it's really going to be dependent on where inflation goes and then where our revenue sources are unfortunately we are one obviously as with many states where depending on gas tax revenue i just got a report last night that our current zero seven zero eight budget which ends up in engine in a june we've got an update that we're going to be facing something like ninety nine million dollars less in gas tax revenue simply because of la use and projected to be about one hundred ninety for the for the next year and i would see it's the message is stay tuned because we don't know gas prices are going so those are the kind of drastic changes that we've had to react to we've got no choice and we've had and we've in fact reacted that way it's not the right answer but it's what we had to do well let me ask you this i know that over the last thirty or forty years you've been you've lost several members of congress due to population decreases or are faster population growth in other states do you know what the projections are for pennsylvania are you going to continue to lose population or and have you factored that in to your projections for the future of what what are the projections here we were at about twelve million population in pennsylvania and we've been in a one to two percent growth it's really depends on where you are in the state if you're close to the eastern portion of the state or the or the southeastern portion of the state the megalopolis increase is clear and there's been population increase in that area and other parts there's actually been decreases but in terms of the long term clearly we have been attempting to project ahead what our current revenue sources will produce certainly related to changing people's driving habits and so on that's why we've gotten next year we we  this budget was submitted just a few months ago we're getting such surprises because of the rapid rise in the indies a feeling gasoline if we had to make adjustments and as i say we're really in a volatile very as we all know to state and local sources and and i read a few days ago that two thirds of the counties in the u s were losing population that surprises people in my area because we're in a fast growing area but it's your county  is it is it growing or and what do you think we should do it seems to some of us we need to direct more funding to the fast growing areas than the there is that are losing population but if you has this how do you see this another only in relation to your county but in addition in relation to your entire state our state of washington i believe is a definite growth mode we benton county my county we're experiencing around a two and a half to three percent as we have for the last basically twenty years where only up to one hundred sixty six thousand my county my transit agency serves up by county citizens just imposed a doubling of their of their sales tax dollars that goes to the dedicated to trash it and we just raised our franchise fees by up to twenty percent we have continued to have growth thirty two percent within the last five years since the imposition of of an additional three transfer percent sales tax and and just last month of april we had a twenty percent increase in and utilization even after a february increase of twenty percent  i really appreciate your questions your opening statement that mr duncan and in the ranking member was talking about the cost overruns in the military budget i can only say amen to his observation about that issue of if we had had the same proportion of overruns and transportation there'd be a national outcry and criminal investigations closing one of every transit agency and every highway department in america  it's in the military budget it's all right well it's not all right there and it's not all right anywhere else this panel has given us some very important testimony which i greatly appreciate but i investments and maintenance what should be what is the appropriate national policy in the appropriate balance in the partnership between the federal government and in the case of highways states in the case of transit systems local governments ms watson you were you gave a very clear six point statement of issues you would recommend for us one of which really caught my attention because i was talking about all of this past weekend at various transportation events in my district and i have been elsewhere and that is the relationship between land use and transportation we see it in aviation we see it in the highway program we see the transit program but you are focused on  incentives to force local governments going from your statement to develop smart growth plans identity development around multi modal transit systems we've seen the effects of  capital investment clustered around transit stops and in the light rail systems of this country dallas area rapid transit is one nearly a billion dollars clustered around the twenty eight stops on the direct west and before they even started on dart east there was one hundred twenty five million dollars of capital investment announced for the planned stops along that here in washington d c over twenty five billion dollars in capital investment clustered around the stuff but that was that investment and we can go system by system all around the country which i won't do and point out how transit has attracted development but we need to take the model turn that model around and say and establish the land use policy first ibis to the community that required a developer to put in the bike lanes but in  paths but in stops for bus service before they even plotted out the land they're going to develop for housing and for shopping centers that required wal mart to do planning it's development to put in bicycle access bus access before they begin their development what incentives do you recommend that we might include in the next transportation bill to encourage to stimulate wise smart growth compact growth land use policy connected to multi modal transportation systems i think perhaps maybe something similar to what has been done with the highway system when the highways were built federal funds were made available for the construction of those and maybe knowing or not knowing that created in many senses the suburbs and that kind of sprawl development and we were really in the in the development the interstate program first a national plan was laid out to connect cities a fifty thousand five hundred greater that was not a land use plan that was connecting with what already is we need to prevent the sprawl yes and everything you've said i would agree with i think we're very similar in thinking on that there's a lot of people moving into the inner cities whether they're baby boomers or x y generation people like the dance development and walkable commute cities where they can work and advance in similar areas and i believe the communities that are doing the smart growth planning that is friendly to our environment could be incentivized with funding available for transit facilities which assuming that i have those comprehensive development plans that incur a huge and develop that kind of i'd like to ask all the other members of the panel to comment but i don't have time i have to go to other transportation issues and have to curtail my questioning but i want to be to think about this you're all premier thinkers and leaders and policy your respective roles and we need your thoughts about supplement your your testimony help us to get to the new jersey model ten percent of all transportation in the state of new jersey is by transit they have achieved the national goal that we should set for america if we achieve a ten percent moji have to transit we could save all the oil the equivalent of all the oil we import from saudi arabia that's five hundred fifty million barrels a year multiply that by one hundred thirty dollars plus a barrel that's a huge savings and the cost to get there is minuscule compared to the cost we're sending overseas we've come a long way from the day i remember and i was on the staff here and we saw in the congress started urban mass transit administration and i remember the critics who said what do you mean we're going to start bussing catholics to church and it took a long time to get over and then in some of that discussion mr amin mentioned one hundred eight different programs and the need for clarity and perhaps that's something this committee needs to look at as we go into the next highway bill in providing more clarity about those guidelines about what constitutes preventive maintenance versus repairs and so forth and we need to provide the oversight to make sure that the department is doing what it says intended to do i want to step back and sort of take the thirty thousand foot view for minute and clearly we have funding issues at the local state federal level and when you have that kind of scarcity with the increasing cost in unpredictability on commodities such as asphalt cement steel so forth what we have scarcity you need a good strategy a good strategic plan are you satisfied or each of you are each of you satisfied with the strategic plans in your respective states and could you highlight any deficiencies you dollars that we predict are going to be available and so i believe that we have good strategic plans with the constraint of available dollars but but the strategic plan does not get us where either we want to go or the public wants us to go but i believe it gets us where the public apparently wants to pay for and and that's the issue is that we're doing we are in many cases performing we are determining within our programs and within the modes what are we going to let to continue to slip what are we going to do away with as we move forward as we have to address the issues of these the inflationary costs within the construction industry far exceed the the c p i that that the the average consumer has seen over these last decades the pressures upon us the u deterioration of our system all of these things we do factor in we in fact do have strategic plans in place but they continue to show a path of continuing to crumble infrastructure higher congestion and fewer choices available to to the public and so if we can change that paradigm and we can change the you know the inputs into it we can end up with a different strategic plan well i heard mr beeler mention earlier the need for a national agenda and i want to try to understand what does that mean because i don't think we can dictate here in congress or the u s department transportation can dictate from the top down what are our strategies going to be on transportation i believe it needs to come from the ground up and i want to make sure that state level states are doing all that they can to really come up with a good plan given the resources we've got because we're going to happen deal with the resources that we have in effect unless we come up with other innovative ways to finance this and or the rural communities really integrated well into those states strategic plans  love to talk about that at the pennsylvania farm in transportation we have talked a little in our case we've got four primary focus areas one is preservation of our system to the extent that we can and actually intelligen transportation systems we're probably not going to have enough money to address capacity so we're going to use as much as we can cameras and information systems so to maximize the utility of the current system next is we will never forget about safety in the case of the highway system especially different industries in certain areas where you may set priorities because of certain strategic industries evacuation routes depending on circumstances certainly gulf coast we have evacuation route concerns and then of course congestion is  overriding concern for everyone so i appreciate and we're looking exactly what you said we're not just looking at urban areas and suburban areas but also reuters and we need to be able to think and encourage land use patterns or is most efficient from a transportation sample and that means thinking about development patterns so that people to the extent that they're encouraged to walk and bicycle even in rural areas it's a good thing in pennsylvania we've got a lot so precious corps towns that we want to help encourage that kind of development as opposed to the kind of sprawl that'll encourage it'll make people so reliant on only auto travel it's just the wrong thing to do in pennsylvania we've also put significant subsidy into as an example of an inner city rail line between harrisburg and philadelphia that one line has grown dramatically even before the most recent feeling so having a balance of different kinds of modes including public transportation whether it's within an area or between areas critical local government officials in be part of that crash process that develops their strategic highway safety plan current regulations and not allow local governments to be involved in that process all is a good process is a good plan i really don't know because i'm not allowed to be part of it and so i don't know the arguments that built it so if we were there we would have a better idea that i would also mention that again that that in my community the citizens  the one they voted in themselves a five percent gas tax increase they allowed our state legislature to bring in a nine and a half percent gas tax increase within the last five or six years the reason for that was because every dollar every dime went to projects specific they were projects that they could see and they felt the need was concurred that concurred with that need in our local community we did in fact assistance doubled our sales tax they did allow and encourage us to increase their boarding fees because they could see the outcome of that it was not a deep hole so i think the citizens and in my communities at least i can see the need they would generate buy into that are going to test them again and say every time you do an authorization you set goals for that authorization and there's they're set out there and and they're somewhat tied to the planning process but i from my perspective there's lip service paid to those goals at the regional and state levels i do not believe that there is a strong incentive for urban areas or even states to seriously address those goals and there's no accountability i think the revenue commission called for performance measures  we are doing formants measures in chicago and they're tied directly to a strategic plan so in terms of dictating sure i don't think you should be dictating the details of a of a capital improvement program but you certainly should areas i know it's not complete but can you tell me what factors you take into consideration i am from new jersey and i'd be interested to see it and if we could have at the end of your process if we could have a copy way according to a set set of create to are not criteria categories rolling stock facilities like trickle in communications and and to just give that give us that information we will aggregate it for you and submit it for the record that will sort of give you the baseline view of where we're at with our unfunded maintenance needs that that's our intent and the ultimate goal is what to give you a better picture of how serious the maintenance needs are particularly for the largest transit systems in the country i tried to give you an example of those maintenance needs by by using chicago but what i'd like to provide the committee is is a more definite detailed summary and that's what we intend to do and i you know you go with manpower far's i assume that's the lesson you go for the bill yeah i'd be happy to we've done everything from having a much greater use of recycled asphalt as an  example we have clearly had a different focus on our design design and looking at the footprint of when we have new reconstruction to see if that we can end up with a in this case a roadway that has a smaller footprint than we have typically designed for in the past we simply cut out huge amounts of capacity projects that we no longer can afford we alleviate levy their call for them to be  or simply stopped we've also are focusing on a case of our bridges some on making sure we're looking at a one hundred year design so when that design when that projects is on any new replace bridges are put in place we've got a longer life we've also in the case of our our bridges some had a special preservation program to simply try to extend the life of our staff so we are trying quite a host quite a series of activities and then finally we're walking into the there's a very difficult issue of trying to think about better land use connection with transportation investment is more difficult because that obviously the department transportation doesn't control and use its all the twenty five hundred fifty some odd i've you know with all these cuts is not a priority going to be a problem in the future it may well be i would also point out just by you mention a pennsylvania new jersey we've been working with the new jersey department of transportation on something called the smart transportation design guidebook so it's again it's a it's a kind of a joint effort that we're going to both benefit from as we just turn the corner and think of our jobs differently guess on a small community aspect of it we just back and re evaluate going to prioritize the projects and part of that huge part of that is just revaluation of which ones causing us the most to maintain and trying to do the upgrades on that so we can actually reduce the maintenance as i said from eighty to ninety percent by doing a good job on those upgrades nester real key to us thank you i'd like to highlight a couple of things we're quite proud of that we've done in utah there are four of them are in particular like to mention and put on the table one of them is our construction methodology so i think we're unable to use very innovative construction techniques that allow us to be very creative in the way we deliver projects that we've done design did build we've done design build we're using construction manager general contractors and we're now looking to our new approach where we share risks with the contractors and the designers called alliance ng that has been very fortunate as to us in terms of the delivery of our projects as we build our capital projects we sign very delicate agreements with local governments so that our expectations of what we're building are met as well as maintaining the cost of those keeping up those facilities so we don't allow this cities they get us to build things that are going to be very expensive to maintain thirdly we are using existing facilities for our maintenance shops in fact when we acquired the union pacific railroad  top they gave us a maintenance facility we probably have the lowest cost maintenance facilities united states because we're using reusing buildings that been out there and then lastly i appreciate the state in new jersey and new jersey transit because we've been acquiring used rail cars to supplement our fleet and we have a thirty twenty nine m j a d comment cars that we're quired from njt to help us supplement our feet and get more service on the road for less cost drop correct to assume that the last thing you do is cut manpower now not in our case where we're rapidly rapidly growing in the last thing we want to do in the trans in industry is reduced services so one of the things you've heard today is that we're having a fuel surcharge and we have had a successful outcome just recently in utah about saying as the price of diesel fuel goes up for our fleets we need to incur that cost some of it ourselves by belt tightening with more of that comes from an increase in our fares thank you i think  minded you want to make a very short comment on your last point about labor what will happen on the operating side if you don't maintain the system as you become more and inefficient on the operating side and that eats into your ability to pay feeling great she again thanks for being here secretary and he on page three of your testimony as well as page or i know you refer to the two proposals under consideration in pennsylvania leasing the turnpike as well as act forty four which would provide for the tolling of interstate eighty northern tier i just want to be clear for the record that the commonwealth is pursuing both well x forty four as law you are awaiting approval of  know if the tolling of interstate eighty will be approved by the federal highway administration and the governor has as in his continued governor rendell has been a real champion for trying to increase infrastructure investment and in his continued effort he has said that he simply wanted to know what it would mean if we considered privatizing the pennsylvania turnpike in effect leasing similar to indiana and in fact that process was completed at least in terms of the taking bids a few weeks ago and it turned out surprisingly that the amount of proceeds projected from the ak forty four that included tolling  four so if the governor wanted to is in process of talking to the general assembly to see if they are willing to consider the question i'm getting from some my constituents would secretaries this is if i eighty is to be told and approved by the federal highway administration would then the commonwealth still seek to privatized the turnpike system knowing that i eighty would now be part of the turnpike system governor the governor has proposed as part of his proposal to leave the turnpike that he eighty ok so i eighty would not be part of any any lease so the committee knows this act forty four depended on increasing the turnpike tolls by about twenty five percent beginning in two thousand and nine and about three percent thereafter was average action coupled with tolling interstate eighty for the first time at the same tolls structure which would mimic the main line of the pennsylvania turnpike there about sixty to seventy five miles apart but across the state interestingly enough the private marketplace in this recent bidding showed that it would provide enough upfront dollars to be invested to be able to pull off of that not only the amount equal to this other option but in fact it would exceed by an amount of nine about a in excess of one hundred million so i can tell my constituents that should i be told that would be not become part of a privatized turnpike that's what the governor's proposal is ok and then the make sure that they know that your engine will make sure it gets yes i just like to see whatever and i don't see it been done on diversion off of coming out new jersey i suspect they'll be a lot of traffic coming down off to a seven on the seventy eight avoiding i eighty should have become told your second comment there was a national publication that i know cause you some concern heartburn with respect to pennsylvania's bridge funds being diverted elsewhere i know it created a lot of heartburn some members of the committee were concerned about that this month give you the opportunity to explain that dollars to be used and transferred to other programs pennsylvania took full advantage of then i think of some mistaken was the leader in all of this stage in terms of amount of money and bridge funds were shifted to other programs  the federal permission makes you want to ask why did you do that when you have perhaps the largest number of structure deficient bridges of any state united states well the answer is pretty simple first of all the amount of money that we shifted we spent much more on our bridge program in pennsylvania than all of the money combined it was in shifted into what we really was going on was it was simply to be more efficient in terms of our bookkeeping the federal requirements are that if you use bridge funds on a project let's say you've got a five mile highway you're rebuilding and there's three or four bridges in that stretch you've got to keep two sets of books and so what we decided to transfer the money elsewhere use other portions of federal dollars to build and so it's sort of a net zero sum game but if you were interested in in picking at if you could you could you could try to make a story out of bottom line though is we we have spent so much more on our bridge program than in that program would even allow we're just trying to simply be able to have a officially it was a name that document and it was a report and transportation was transportation week madam chair and i have listened with great interest to the testimony given here today and while there is nobody from my neck of the woods in california it is interesting to hear the different ways that you address  the issues that you have in transportation your areas i listen with great intent in regard to the comparison of foreign investment versus u s but many of the states do not have not invested much in their infrastructure one can tell you california's been one of them so that they rely mostly on federal funds instead of being able to invest in our own infrastructure why is that anybody dress from the transit perspective when i mentioned it earlier we've unfortunately gotten to a position where i will do a five year capital program at the state level that winds up driving out to ten years rather than five years the reason for that is that those those capital programs are largely bond programs and require new revenue sources new revenue streams in order to pay for those bonds and when the program expires there unfortunately is a lack of political will really to identify new revenue streams which usually comes in the form of tax mostly mostly new user fee areas but also what i mentioned specifically earlier is that on the transit side i mean we used to have we used to be able to say that if you don't do a new state capital program we're not going below match federal dollars and those federal dollars are going to fall off the table and go to some other state but we've got this toll credit to nadine they know we have told credits because we have a well known toll highway authority that produces hundreds of millions of dollars in tolls each year and those toll credits replace real money for matching purposes so that's a huge disincentive and there isn't a there isn't a clear incentive to come up with real money for matching and again it is sort of takes away the the opportunity for people to to find the political will to do what they need to do now that said the the backlog of capital projects in the state of illinois huge and it's putting a great pressure it at the state level to do a capital initiative and we will do thank you up on you like when i think i think you've hit the nail on the hit the political will and that i think is i have very short time to do that answer it very quickly sir yes ma'am the the federal share capital expenditures for for highway program is forty five percent it's pretty much stayed within that realm over the last several decades so you probably should be it's actually shrunk a couple of percent so the idea that the federal government has picked up a larger share of the construction in the realm of highways is is fact not borne out by by the fact that the states have been contributing contribute dollars towards that about fifty five percent well many many of the things that  coming up and one of my concerns is the rail versus highway in other words getting people out of their cars and into mass transit given the higher gasoline cost that's going to reduce the taxes that are going to be available to the states which then brings on more reliance on rail however the railroads own a lot of the rail itself so there biggest issue is the biggest producer of fund movement versus commuters that brings in real crossings the railroad great separations which are critical to be able to move not only commuter but goods movement and how is it that we may be able to  marry it if you will be able to put priorities to increase the right or ship and still maintain the economy that movement bring especially from the west to the east yes i don't an answer for you that is a huge problem that we have thank you mr legrand this is like thank you perhaps a utah is a good example where we have formed a wonderful partnership with the union pacific railroad in two thousand and two we purchased perhaps all of the railroad rights away in our urban areas and allowed the rare roads to continue to run their service so we actually bought a portion of their rare road right away and are now running our own passenger service next to their freight services so we're quite proud of that model and that's one of the reasons that has allowed us to greatly expand expand our system so in in utah you'll you'll see a new you've heard that we are rapidly expanding our system and our local community has agreed to pay for that investment thank you very well we have an excellent relationship with virtually all of the freight railroads they all converge on chicago we have the largest freight r and united states third largest in the world so our commuter rail system runs largely freight rail tracks but as you probably know you probably heard of the create program that chicago and  sion american roads has put forward to address the huge capacity problem that we have that needs to be addressed again we need the political will at the state level to step up and match what might be and they need to make a commitment as well i have the alameda cory's going to my district which brings the an over fifty percent of the nation's goods to the east area to the eastern area and yet i have fifty four great separations crossings only twenty are going to be great separated not only is it going to slow down the train traffic but it's also going to be more imposing on the community quality of life the environment the safety you name it so those are issues that i'm is rail crossing that you're talking about it's a huge issue for me i fight with the railroad company all the time get no where i get lip service and nothing happens and that's another twenty five minute discussion however it's a sas is that we actually in washington state in my community have what's known as rail access this is where everybody brings their produce into one location within four days it's on a train within five meters after that it's an action a new york state and it's local produce and so it's a private some type of a program but i'm not sure how that works but it is working well for us here in fact they're doubling that process now it's two times a week they're going out with that so there is some success thank you sir thank chair mr baker you mentioned earlier that oh you can cameras you know things like that that you could increase the capacity in the system i'm always amazed and being on the committee for several years now you know in driving around you notice things like signage and sometimes signage is totally screwed up and as a result it really does exacerbate the problem how much and again i don't know exactly but is there a lot of low hanging fruit by doing those kind of things getting that strike that we can increase the capacity a little bit more without you know certainly we've got to spend a lot of money on the infrastructure but what can we do in regard to that that we can almost fix overnight yeah i think it's pointed out especially in very congested corridors if you can do incident management much better remains it's a huge huge issue people have talked about as having to lay being as much as fifty percent related to these temporary incidents of crashes or breakdowns and so on and how that has a huge impact on the capacity of system for a period time but you know coupled really really makes a difference if you can get out there quickly to remove those blockages it and that's what the kind of thing we're trying to thing is it simply providing better information to the public about about blockages that are in the system you know ten miles ahead allows people to react differently so no i think it is one of those low hanging fruit issues simply as we've seen in it's a number of states of campaign simply retiming traffic signal something is small is that can make it and make attended fifteen percent difference in your system now you know the average writer doesn't  in many cases fairly inexpensive to do and even in some cases spending a lot of money down the road or you still don't take care of that problem that makes sense so something that would be helpful to me is you know any suggestions we don't have time now but any suggestions if you could just write a little notice to how we can incentivize people to do that i think would be very very helpful mr on your testimony again being in arkansas you know next missouri you know is in dire straits as it is through the route the rest of the nation i guess you know the question is how are you using the the assets you've got now how are you maximizing that kind of keep things what are your what are your best practice areas of keeping things going  right now most of what we're dealing with are surface treatments i seventy is is now fifty two years old and it's it's much underneath and where we'll put a three inch overlay on it and it will be smooth for a while but with thirty five to forty percent truck traffic on it it doesn't last and that's why and what we're doing right now is just trying to hold it together bottom line is though we need to reconstruct i seventy and our costs we were we've got a clear d i s phone at three and a half billion dollars to rebuild i seventy across the state and we have zero dollars how much how much  loss and buying capacity of experienced in last fifteen years would you guess it's huge sixty percent fifty percent sixty to eighty percent with what we're seeing in inflation right now our projections  it was it would has been that it would be eighty percent by two thousand and fifteen but i believe that current inflation rates that that's going to occur much sooner than that and still the dollars that we're putting into this are buying so much less i think the  figure that dan flower uses again this was several months ago you know prior to the oil run up in things i think his was sixty percent in the last fifteen years so those numbers are very helpful to us because you know you feel like you're doing something but when you actually interesting you were going to have ordination of very quickly because we're going to try to get you out of here without having to wade through a bunch of oh thank you coordination of signal lights in washington state the decision at citizens initiative that would do exactly  you we have two remaining people with questions and in order arrival first would be miserable very briefly there are all kinds of reasons for wanting to support  transit and i was particularly interested in mr they were in your testimony turning to pages four and five of your testimony and make some recommendations and i would just like to know which of these recommendations are best done by congressional action the statute statutory changes to just go over them very quickly yes i can if you're referring to those that are starting with allowing for the exceptions yes many of them are required to the new starts process that we're heavily involved  are there any that requires congressional or statutory clarification or authorization in your suggestions perhaps the one dealing with the new starts rating called the transportation system user benefits that's one of the federal requirements that i'm aware of and there are some keen interest i believe in congress is to relooking at that factor what about on page five of your testimony you have some suggestions on streamlining project delivery any of those require are best done by congressional a statutory action i don't believe so all right thank you very much thank you those are good questions and we're always interested in ideas on how to streamline the process there we've been trying to get them to develop rules that are can grow with the law we don't think they have any ideas have the great mystery to thank you mr chairman earlier today in the discussion there was much talk about flexibility i'm one of the new kids on the block i just recently served in local government less than a year ago and then in the state assembly so i would welcome any suggestions you have as we go through this safety lou process any suggestions that you'd like to see very specific about the flexibility required i would be willing to bring those forward with the chairman and seek help because i saw that very closely and serving with local government which leads me to my question one of the things that i found in local government is that oftentimes the federal funds that were available were only available or they were very restricted to doing the actual project itself and there were great restrictions having to do with the pre planning the design which often times the time period that it takes to do that to bring these projects to fruition and to make these changes in maintenance oftentimes isn't included do you find that to be the case and this might be a more question directed to mr b i'm sorry ma'am could you repeat are trying to write down your the request on the on the flexibility my question was do you find that the maintenance funding is so restricted that it doesn't allow you to pay for all aspects towards the improvements and what i mean by that is in the capital investment side there's great restrictions prohibiting you from using funding on the planning side on the design side except for us and so my question is have you found that to be the case on the maintenance side as well maintenance side again we just we just try never to use federal money or somebody else's money for maintenance because it's so so inflexible and so insecure in china so we just try not governing we can't afford to maintain and then we try to maintain the best we can without using any other other funds to do that just to keep yourself safe you find that on the capital investments i to be a challenge obviously yes ok mr chairman i'm going to conclude by just saying that as we move through this process i think that's one area we should consider is at what point along the phases can local governments and state entities utilize the funding and the second thing would be us seriously looking at requiring with federal funding regional planning and what i mean by that i was a member in addition to being on the council i was a member of skag which is the southern california association of governments and given our limited funding i think one of our pushback should be in addition to the gains that we will provide is requiring future projects must have regional benefits and then that way we can cover as much as possible thanks to china i think the general idea she's a member of the committee but has been very incisive in our observations and questions and look forward to working with her with her experience and i could think another way we could approach it would be with regional planning we might give more flexibility and with our original plans we might be more prescriptive some something along those lines but we are also interested in working on the multiple stovepipe issue which was raised earlier and flexibility but we also have to determine what the proper priorities are for the fed investment versus the state investment and that's an ongoing dialogue i think we'll want to have with with all of you i want to thank you for taking your time to be here today for presenting testimony i think we can agree on one thing which is we need to invest more now we're going to figure out in what form and