Robert L. Darbelnet

The use of public-private partnerships (P3s) as a financing method for new transportation projects is a trend that is increasing in popularity in states and localities across the country. Many times, these P3 projects are meeting state and local needs that have been previously identified by both government and the private sector. However governments bring these projects to fruition – either through legislative adoption or voter referendum – they need to be accompanied by a robust public review and evaluated through a process that is fully transparent.

The price of tolls, or even the necessity of placing tolls on a P3 project, will differ from project to project. The most important principle is that project originators must convey how any charges are a true user fee that is directly tied to the costs of using the facility. The public has demonstrated a willingness to pay for improved transportation in certain areas of the country when the case is properly made.

In terms of how the P3 process should unfold in order to best protect the public interest, w

The future of federal transportation funding is the question on the table. Whether we have any hope of getting buy-in for something like the gas tax in the near term comes down to a few long-shot possibilities. I think many of us are holding onto the hope that Congress will pull a grand bargain rabbit out of their hat that will include a near-term transportation funding solution. But while we wait with baited breath, the Highway Trust Fund solvency clock keeps ticking, bringing us ever closer to another funding crisis. If we don’t get any magic in the next few months, the funding discussion just gets that much harder as we get closer to the end of MAP-21.

All around us, states and localities are not sitting back but are acting swiftly to tackle transportation funding problems in their areas. But that activity has not translated into Congressional urgency or public outcry. We have some great policy leaders who helped lead the way on MAP-21 and who consistently stress the importance of infrastructure to our economy. But devising an elixir to produce a concr

In their most recent Report Card the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave the nation’s bridges a “C+” grade, up from a “C” four years ago; and roads got a “D” grade, up from a “D-” in 2009. I imagine most of us that follow this blog were not expecting to find that our roads and bridges had secured a place on the honor roll. The good news for drivers is that the condition of the nation’s roads and bridges has improved slightly since the last report card was issued. The bad news is grades like these aren’t going to get us where we need to go in terms of safety, mobility or economic recovery. We don’t want a C+ economy, and can’t settle for a D, or even C+ transportation system.

One of the most impactful statistics in the Report Card is the fact that as a result of poor road conditions motorists are paying $324 per year on average in repairs and additional operating costs. Too often the public fails to grasp the larger facts and figures that describe our needs: 151,

Every year the Texas Transportation Institute does a wonderful job of identifying the state of congestion on the nation’s roads—essentially confirming for many of us what we already know to be true viscerally … congestion is frustrating and increasingly sucks away our precious time and money.

This year’s TTI rankings are notable for a compelling new variable – the “Planning Time Index” which is a unique measure of just how time must be built into a trip in order to actually get somewhere on time. The extreme variations in travel time heighten the pressure on commuters and add another level of frustration to daily routines.

While the costs associated with traffic congestion are significant and growing, the societal costs associated with traffic crashes also deserve a greater level of both understanding and concern. Two years ago AAA examined the same urbanized areas in the TTI study, and found the total cost of traffic crashes is nearly three times the cost of congestion – $299.5 billion for traffic crashes and $97.7

Reading this week’s question took me back to images of flying cars, hoverboards, skyways, hyper-lanes or other inventions that Marty McFly took full advantage of in Back to the Future II. To be sure, these kinds of technology are likely not to be online by 2015 as the film’s setting suggests. In fact, these ideas and others depicted by Hollywood or in science fiction novels are not even close to being just around the corner. However many innovations that would have been impressive even to Marty or chief innovator Doc are nearing deployment in the transportation system as we speak.

In reality, the evolution of personal mobility is not measured in drastic leaps of advanced technology, but rather in tedious, studied, incremental steps that are carefully introduced in the marketplace to serve a specific consumer need. For example, in 2003 when I served as chairman of the board for the Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITSA), we had little discussion on how traffic safety issues might be addressed in the future deployment of autonomous v

In a November 2011 letter to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the “Supercommittee”) AAA underscored the role that sound transportation funding policies can play in improving the nation’s fiscal and long-term economic situation. When we wrote the Supercommittee, the Highway Trust Fund was facing near-term insolvency. Thankfully, MAP-21 helped save the program from falling off its own imminent fiscal cliff. But two years from now we will be facing a similar situation. While MAP-21 helped ease the pain, it did not provide an ultimate cure.

So again the countdown clock ticks. Equally imperative now, as it was last November, is the need to put the trust fund back on firm footing and end the need for future General Fund bailouts. Returning the federal program to a user-paid system should be the stated goal. We know that three federal commissions, including Simpson/Bowles, have concluded that at least for the next decade, the federal gas tax remains the best way to generate significant amounts of transportation revenue.

AAA is on record

I would submit that most contributors to this blog are frustrated by the seeming disinterest of the public when it comes to transportation issues. We’ve all been sounding the alarm on this topic for years now, but the public hasn’t engaged. Just over five years ago, a bridge collapsed in this country and while many thought the immediate reaction would translate into Congressional momentum for increased transportation funding, it didn’t happen.

Just because the public does not seem to be lending us an ear does not mean we should stop trying to reach them, however. We need to find ways to tell a better, more compelling story, or to let the public tell us their stories. Through our transportation website (www.MakingAmericaStronger.AAA.com) AAA is asking people to submit “just one thing” that they would tell their member of Congress about their daily commute or the roads and bridges where they live. Going beyond political rhetoric and the inside the beltway terms of art and jargon might help people better understand that they are part of the tra

AAA has long supported the user-fee based approach to funding the nation’s transportation system and believes any successor to federal and state gasoline taxes over the long term should be a revenue generator in that same construct.

The potential for action on a mileage-based user fee is limited by many of the same challenges confronting consideration of a gas tax increase – including lack of political and public support, opposition to tax increases in general, and concerns about the economy. Mileage-based user fees have the added hurdle of being new, combined with privacy, security and administrative concerns that must be addressed. Technology seems to be the least of its challenges. Pilot tests like those in Oregon, Minnesota, and elsewhere around the country will continue to test different models (from low tech to high tech) and gauge public acceptance. It is important that these pilot tests continue. They represent a great opportunity to get a real sense of what people want, don't want, expect, and fear in a mileage-based user fee arrangement.

More and more frequently I hear people say that they don't intend to vote for any incumbent Member of Congress. They don't always have definitive view on who to blame for the logjam in Congress but they are clearly frustrated with our elected officials' inability to take care of the nation's business. While it may not be at the center of every voter's radar screen, the stalemate in transportation illustrates why people are fed up.

Giving the transportation challenges facing the nation, Congress needs to work quickly to pass this critical legislation. Any forthcoming conference report may not perfect in policy, funding or duration, but it will likely contain program reforms that stakeholders have called for for years and the nation can build upon in the future. AAA predicts that over 35 million travelers will take to the roads during this Independence Day holiday period. This is an opportunity for Congress to prove that it can deliver legislation that will improve mobility and safety for millions of Americans.

Every business sector is dependent on a safe and effi

Since my quote found its way into this week’s question I will offer a few additional thoughts. The fact that we are heading for an impending “brawl” doesn’t mean the effort won’t be worthwhile. Rarely in politics these days is anything viewed as less than a “fight” which requires the use of “bare knuckles” while dodging treachery at every turn, such as “poison pills,” “killer” amendments, and the eternal hope that the term “gate” is not attached to your good name.

None of this should diminish our efforts to actively engage in a fight for what is truly a national priority: reforming, modernizing and funding our nation’s transportation network to improve safety, global competitiveness, quality of life, and provide for a sustainable future. America’s transportation system is at the heart of this challenge.

Will it ultimately lead to a finished product, let alone one that achieves widespread support? No one can say for sure, but the process that is before us – wa

I think there is widespread agreement that transportation spending is a wise investment that pays dividends now and into the future. Certainly, there are examples of both bad and good transportation spending over the years. The public reaction to high-visibility projects like the now-infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” readily illustrates the “bad”, whereas the I-35W bridge replacement in Minneapolis was viewed as necessary and good. The public is most upset when they feel policymakers don’t have a strategic investment plan that clearly outlines where revenues will go and the expected benefits. And when neglecting our infrastructure leads to decay and more expensive repairs, the taxpayer is justified in questioning the competence of those who lead.

In January 1983, President Ronald Reagan doubled federal gasoline taxes. During the legislative debate of the previous year, he said it would take a “palace coup” to gain his support for increasing the gas tax. But as negotiations got serious, what were once horrible funding options took o

AAA applauds the action of Congressman Michael Grimm (R-NY) and Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) to protect motorists from unreasonable transportation fees and ensure tolling revenue is not diverted to non-transportation related purposes. The, “Commuter Protection Act,” would restore much needed federal oversight to prevent tolling authorities from diverting tolls on Interstate bridges and tunnels to non-transportation related purposes and strengthens public accountability. It is important to note that Rep. Grimm and Sen. Lautenberg are not asserting a new federal role with this bill - but rather, they are simply positioning the U.S. Department of Transportation to its rightful, prior role as arbiter in evaluating the affect toll increases have on our national highway system.

While it is true that actions of a specific tolling agency in the Northeast have precipitated the introduction of this legislation, the interest is truly national in scope. Whether you support or oppose tolling - especially the expansion of tolling on federal highways - all should agree

While we applaud the willingness of the House Republican Leadership to fund a six-year transportation bill at current spending levels, it seems we’re still dabbling at the margins in terms of how to fund transportation going forward. Is revenue from expanded domestic oil and gas drilling the best way to fund transportation in the future? No. Will it become a politically viable way to ensure additional revenues into the Highway Trust Fund down the road? Possibly.

In reality, there is no easy solution besides the federal gas tax that can check all the boxes of being user-connected, easily administered, capable of being implemented tomorrow and understood by the public. It has been the long held position of AAA that a strong linkage needs to exist between revenues paid by motorists and the benefits received from the government in terms of safer and better roads and bridges. This link is vitally important to the future of our nation’s transportation network and to regain the trust motorists have in the government to spend their tax dollars in an accountable, appr

Garnering public support for appropriate levels of transportation investment will require rebuilding a trust that has waned over the years as the federal transportation program has become more complex and convoluted. The public’s mistrust in the ability of government to deliver recognizable transportation improvements wasn’t born overnight.

Robert Crandall’s recommendation, “Feel the Pain,” to make every Member of Congress drive themselves to work and to require those living within 500 miles of Washington to commute to their home districts via automobile is a humorous illustration of the serious problem at hand. Every Member of Congress represents a district with a variety of constituents coping with varying levels congestion concerns, but our problems go beyond the everyday frustration and inconveniences. Families often struggle to get kids to school, sports and other activities on time. There is a serious impact on businesses whose bottom line is impacted when deliveries of goods and services are delayed due to traffic. Also over loo

Those in the transportation community who watched President Obama’s ‘jobs’ speech last week hoping for fresh policy ideas likely came away sorely disappointed. The President reiterated his previous support for a $50 billion, front-loaded investment in transportation, coupled with his long-standing support for establishment of a National Infrastructure Bank. Nothing fresh or new there; but I’d offer that there is reason to celebrate whenever the President cites the need, importance and critical value of a quality transportation system while addressing millions of Americans as well as the entire Congress. In fact, we as a community need to work hard in the coming days and weeks to amplify this message.

Please don’t think that I am giving the President an outright pass here. In his address, he failed to mention the need to enact a multi-year authorization bill to accompany this upfront investment. In my view, this was a missed opportunity. States need certainty and stability in their transportation budgets in order to plan for and implement multi-

When it comes to providing inspiring results for leadership and teamwork, few can equal the impressive work of the late, legendary basketball coach at UCLA, John Wooden. Among my favorite of many Wooden quotes is “never let what you cannot accomplish get in the way of what you can.” I think the coach would commend Chairman Boxer and Senator Inhofe for their work in developing a transportation proposal with the intention of garnering bipartisan support in the Senate. At a time when compromise and collaboration have been viewed negatively, the historically bipartisan transportation legislation should be viewed as an opportunity to focus on what Congress can and should do.

While the gap between Chairman Mica’s plan (six years and funding cuts) and Chairman Boxer’s plan (two years and searching for added revenue) is stark, I am not giving up hope on a compromise. With the support of President Obama, this Congress can pass a bipartisan bill that is multi-year, reforms current programs, provides additional innovative financing methods, el

America’s transportation needs are nearly as diverse as Americans themselves. A teacher living in New York’s Manhattan and a farmer living outside Manhattan, Kansas, clearly have different transportation needs that our system must be able to accommodate. An efficient transportation system must provide users with choices, but the fact remains that travel by automobile meets the transportation needs of most Americans, even in areas where public transit is widely available.

“Is the public rational about its travel?” The short answer would have to be “yes.” Commuters choose to carpool or participate in rideshares when it fits their needs. They choose public transportation when it is “rational.” Those lucky enough to live within walking distance of their jobs must relish the simple nature of their commute. Those travelers that choose the route of the single-occupant vehicle do so because it fits their personal lifestyle needs for that trip.

“Can the public policy follow their lead?” Public policies should

Given the critical importance of transportation to the nation’s economy and safety, the speedy enactment of a multi-year surface transportation bill should be a top legislative priority. AAA appreciates Chairman Mica taking a positive first step towards that outcome with the outline of a bill.

Although details are lacking, AAA welcomes the fact that Chairman Mica proposes to more clearly identify national priorities, consolidate programs where appropriate, improve the delivery time of transportation projects, and transition the program to a more performance-based system. Performance measures will help ensure the wise use of limited resources, not only from the project selection standpoint, but throughout the entire project development process. The statement that highway and motor carrier safety programs will be “held harmless” from any funding cuts is also very encouraging.

Of concern, or course, is the funding level. A 35 percent reduction from SAFETEA-LU spending levels is unacceptable given the immense backlog of maintenance and capacity n

AAA predicts that more than 39 million Americans will travel 50 miles or more from home during the upcoming Independence Day holiday weekend. Whether it is a family trip to a relaxing beach, an outing to one of our inspiring national parks, or a reunion with family many states away, at some point those Independence Day travelers will likely end up on part of the Interstate Highway System.

If Dwight Eisenhower were with us today, he would no doubt be pleased to see that his vision of a nation connected by a network of super highways has become reality. At the same time, you don’t need to be a visionary to recognize that there is trouble on the road ahead. Today’s Interstate system bears the brunt of more than 3 billion annual vehicle miles traveled, stretching to its limit, and in some places, way beyond. The challenges ahead are daunting, the stakes are high, and the consequences of inaction are formidable.

The numbers don’t lie. The transportation reauthorization bill has been extended seven times. As of 2008, the Federal Highway Administrati

Since the conversation on SAFETEA-LU’s successor began a few years ago, there has been a near unanimous focus on the need to transition to a more performance-based method to fund the nation’s roads, bridges and transit systems. AAA supports this shift. The challenge going forward does not seem to be internal division within the transportation community, or political problems associated with the shift, but rather the complexity of the reform itself. It will take time – and money – to implement this new approach. Time will be needed to achieve consensus on common standards and to identify data needs and inconsistencies. Money will be needed to improve data collection in every state. Data isn’t sexy and doesn’t lend itself to a ribbon-cutting, but it is vital to the success of a future performance-based system.

A lot of good work has been done to begin identifying potential performance measures and help policymakers evaluate various metrics. Most recently, the National Transportation Policy Project in association with th

Since the conversation on SAFETEA-LU’s successor began a few years ago, there has been a near unanimous focus on the need to transition to a more performance-based method to fund the nation’s roads, bridges and transit systems. AAA supports this shift. The challenge going forward does not seem to be internal division within the transportation community, or political problems associated with the shift, but rather the complexity of the reform itself. It will take time – and money – to implement this new approach. Time will be needed to achieve consensus on common standards and to identify data needs and inconsistencies. Money will be needed to improve data collection in every state. Data isn’t sexy and doesn’t lend itself to a ribbon-cutting, but it is vital to the success of a future performance-based system.

A lot of good work has been done to begin identifying potential performance measures and help policymakers evaluate various metrics. Most recently, the National Transportation Policy Project in association with the

If the question is ‘do we need more highways?’ the short answer is ‘yes.’ If the question is ‘are the Mayors correct in supporting transit at the exclusion of highway improvements and capacity?’ the short answer is ‘no’ -- even though transit may be a good solution for their city’s needs.

AAA is on the record as being open to the idea of increased gas taxes to pay for a better system. In some cases, a “better system” is one with new capacity, be it a lane, highway, bridge, transit system, etc. While it’s famously said that we cannot build our way out of congestion, we also can’t strictly manage our way out of it either. Infrastructure investment should go to the most pressing needs in accordance with achieving measurable travel and safety improvements for customers. These solutions will not be the same in every city, or even be the same priority of local, state and federal policymakers. We need a program that is flexible, and balanced enough so that all parties can work together in a productiv