American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Impacts on County Governments
Local Roads Matter
“Local Roads Matter” in “Restoring the Partnership” to provide sound and sustainable investments in our county owned roads and bridges. The National Association of County Engineers (NACE) has embarked in a “Local Roads Matter” campaign to remind and reinforce to our citizens and government partners that local roads are critical to every facet of their lives. We welcome the opportunity and thank the Administration and the Congress for their assistance through the ARRA. Safe and efficient roads and bridges are necessary for economic vitality, to revitalization, to schools, to trade, to healthcare, to business, in times of crisis, to families and to our overall quality of life. Local roads are the vital foundation of a successful, integrated transportation system. Counties and local governments maintain 3 million miles, about 75% of our nation’s highways and of the 597,340 bridges, 298,638 are owned by local government, about 51 per cent of the total. Of the total bridges, 154,101 bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Of the 73,784 bridges rated “structurally deficient”, about 52,000 or 70 per cent are owned and maintained by local government, mainly counties.This is a significant percentage of our transportation system and usually the critical first or last mile in the safe and efficient movement of people and goods in our country. To the traveling taxpayer in our counties, they don’t know, nor do they care what government jurisdiction is responsible for the condition of the pavements or bridges. They want it fixed and they want it fixed with the tax dollars they believe are already out there. Additionally, Counties have proven that when dollars need to be spent, Counties can do so in an efficient; cost effective manner. Accountability and transparency of every dollar spent at the local level is standard procedure for County Boards. Common sense approaches such as risk based programmatic review are important to increasing the buying power of the construction dollar.
Rural Road Safety
Nationwide data documents that over 56 % of fatal crashes (23,260 in 2007) occur on rural roadways (roadways with populations of fewer than 5,000). Looked at another way, the rate of fatalities per vehicle mile traveled on rural roads (2.25/100 Million miles VMT) was more than twice the urban fatality rate (0.89/100 Million miles VMT). In a 2008 AAA Crashes vs. Congestion report, the cost of traffic crashes was found to be more than two and one-half times higher than the cost of congestion -- $164.2 billion for traffic crashes compared to $67.6 billion for congestion. In our nation’s response to the astronomical burden of health care, improving the safety of our rural, two lane roads should be a primary initiative. The magnitude of rural road mileage and the widespread dispersal of crashes makes preventing and responding to rural road crashes difficult. While ARRA promotes the use of transportation dollars on any public road for the purpose of targeted safety countermeasures, it is unlikely that a significant portion of the monies will be allocated with consideration of the competitiveness for limited funds within each state. Recognizing this, NACE in cooperation with and assistance from the Federal Highway Administration co-sponsored an ARRA webinar on February 25th, reaching close to 500 participants, outlining generally the program’s criterion but with an emphasis on what types of safety related improvements, many low cost, could be added to resurfacing projects which in all probability will comprise the bulk of the transportation projects accomplished under ARRA.
Concerns and Constraints
O Managing Expectations
In communicating the reality of the ARRA we must be mindful that local transportation projects comprise a relatively small amount of dollars and as such we must manage citizen expectations. Not every community, and in particular rural counties, will get a project from ARRA. Of the 27+ billion in transportation dollars 30%, through Surface Transportation Program (STP) formulas, could be available to local governments. It must be recognized, however, that the legislation did not specify jurisdictions would receive funds but areas and as such many State Transportation Agencies could fund state projects in rural or local areas. Under STP the 30% is considered a funding floor not a ceiling. This amounts to about $8 billion or 1% of the total stimulus dollars. Additionally under STP guidelines all bridge and safety projects on any road is eligible for ARRA dollars.
O Local Government Sub-allocations from State Transportation Agencies
NACE understands that expediency dictated the use of existing funding mechanisms, the Surface Transportation Program (STP), to apportion ARRA funds to the states. We continue to stress with our members to work closely with their State Transportation Agencies in the sub-allocation process, particularly in rural areas not covered by Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) or equivalent organizations. We also understand that in some states this partnership works well but unfortunately in many states it does not. We would encourage the collection of statistics which detail just where ARRA funds are eventually spent (where, on what roads, and whether the road is a state or local one).
O Federal-aid Streamlining Opportunities
In April 2007 the FHWA issued a report “The Administration of Federal-Aid Projects by Local Agencies” which outlined the need for improvements to this program by both State and Local Agencies. A NACE task force has concluded and provided recommendations to this program which are currently being reviewed with the FHWA. A shared commitment of all the stakeholders is encouraged to allow Local Agencies greater access of funds through Federal-Aid. Many of the improvements need to be pursued in the next transportation authorization legislation.
Recommendations:
- Establish Federal-aid funding thresholds below which procedures, reviews, certifications and the process would be relaxed and/or streamlined to reflect the risk encountered.Additionally certain projects under a designated dollar threshold involving no real estate transactions would receive categorical exclusions from meeting federal and state requirements and comply with local regulations only.For example, projects under $1 million in value for safety, intersection improvements, beautification, sidewalk improvements, bridge and road reconstruction projects (replacement in kind within existing footprint and/or on previously disturbed land) and involving no real estate acquisition would qualify.
- Establish in every State Transportation Agency the equivalent of a “federal and state aid office” or “local roads office” to work with Local Agencies on how to access both state and federal-aid dollars. This office should facilitate communications about, and serve as a clearinghouse for, information about federal-aid programs involving Local Agencies, and ensure that local agencies are educated —by the DOT or another entity such as the Local Technical Assistance Program Office (LTAP) — on both the federal and state regulations related to the administration of those programs.
- Modify federal legislative language in specific programs to clarify or authorize and possibly mandate the use of federal funds on program management of federal-aid projects being submitted by Local Agencies.
- With clear and consistent FHWA Division Office interpretations of federal-aid regulations State Transportation Agencies need to take the lead to implement in a continuing communications process with Local Agencies on the administration of federal-aid and state programs.The goal of all stakeholders is to work in cooperation and collaboration to clarify and distinguish between regulations as to whether they are state or federal requirements and engage in a continuous process to review these regulations for streamlining opportunities.
- The FHWA should provide consistent interpretations of their regulations and provide firm guidance and direction to State FHWA Division offices to help facilitate cooperation and collaboration among State and Local agencies in the streamlining and administration of federal-aid programs.The several best practices already being implemented by some states need to be shared and promoted among all State Transportation Agencies.
- The FHWA Division offices should willingly respond to questions from Local Agencies about interpretations of federal regulations without automatically referring those questions to the State Transportation Agency to reply.