Michigan did not use stimulus funds most effectively

Printable View

February-07-11, 05:59 PM
iheartthed

Michigan did not use stimulus funds most effectively

Quote:

Michigan did an average to poor job in effectively using $850 million in federal stimulus money it received to create jobs, a report due out Tuesday says.

The report by Smart Growth America suggests
Michigan can create jobs faster by investing more in existing roads and improving public transportation than by putting money into new road projects.

Bill Shreck, director of communications for the Michigan Department of Transportation disputed the findings by the coalition of national state and local organizations working to improve the way in which towns, cities and metropolitan areas are built.

...

Michigan used 81 percent of its stimulus money on existing roads, ranking it 24th amongst the states.
According to SGA, the remaining 19 percent was spent on new roads. Michigan spent only 2.6 percent of its stimulus money on public transportation, ranking it 38th amongst the states, SGA said.

Megan Owens, spokeswoman for Transportation Riders United, claims:

Quote:

"We spent as much on widening a few miles of M-59 in Oakland County as we did for all of public transportation in southeastern Michigan.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110207/...#ixzz1DJhndnlz

Great job.
February-07-11, 06:07 PM
professorscott

This is a structural problem in Michigan. We are stuck in the 1950s in our transportation thinking - not everyone, but enough of our transportation and planning professionals to cause a huge problem.

We think the solution to every transportation problem is more and bigger roads, and we are willing to spend unlimited sums of money on massive projects like M-59 and M-53 in Macomb County; but then whenever someone proposes spending a small amount on transit, the chorus of "but however shall we pay for it?" arises.

We will never improve as a state until our professional class moves at least into the late 20th Century. The 21st may be too much to hope for. But I don't see any movement in this direction. It's why we're failing: we still think it's 1956, but it's not.
February-07-11, 10:01 PM
DetroitPlanner

This depends on how you slice the pie. Does the Port Authority count as public transportation? How about the $20 million that went into bike paths does that count as roads?

How does the $150 million for High Speed Rail factor into this? What about the $60 milliongoing to the Dearborn, Birmingham and Battle Creek Intermodal stations?

Local Communities got 25 percent of the road funding while MDOT got 75 percent. MDOT does not run any transit. SMART and DDOT alone got $60 million, while AATA, Blue Water and Lake Erie got another $10 million.

TRU is not telling the right story here. They of course have an agenda and will make things look the way they want it to look. M-59 came in some $15 million under budget. Those savings were used to resurface other roads in Southeast Michigan most of which will provide a smoother ride for bus passengers.

One of the bright spots Michigan did recieve an indirect boost from the money spent by transit agencies throughout the United States in terms of job creation. How? 40 percent of the jobs related to producing bus parts or chasis are found within this state. Think about it. Detroit Diesel, Lear, Ford, GM, all make parts for these vehicles. I would have loved to see more go towards bus purchases!
February-07-11, 10:22 PM
DetroitDad

I agree, but I'm also thinking road maintenance may be necessary to keep us stable during the transition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by professorscott

This is a structural problem in Michigan. We are stuck in the 1950s in our transportation thinking - not everyone, but enough of our transportation and planning professionals to cause a huge problem.

We think the solution to every transportation problem is more and bigger roads, and we are willing to spend unlimited sums of money on massive projects like M-59 and M-53 in Macomb County; but then whenever someone proposes spending a small amount on transit, the chorus of "but however shall we pay for it?" arises.

We will never improve as a state until our professional class moves at least into the late 20th Century. The 21st may be too much to hope for. But I don't see any movement in this direction. It's why we're failing: we still think it's 1956, but it's not.
February-08-11, 12:08 AM
kraig

The biggest problem was that Jennifer Granholm hijacked the stimulus money that was intended for local municipalities. That's why pretty much nothing was done.
February-08-11, 01:27 AM
professorscott

Quote:

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

This depends on how you slice the pie. Does the Port Authority count as public transportation? How about the $20 million that went into bike paths does that count as roads?

Public transportation is a well-defined term among American transportation professionals, and refers to vehicles on land that move people around a metropolitan area, so clearly neither money spent on a port authority nor money spent on nonmotorized transportation counts as public transportation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

How does the $150 million for High Speed Rail factor into this? What about the $60 milliongoing to the Dearborn, Birmingham and Battle Creek Intermodal stations?

What $150 million? Do you really think any of that will actually come to this area? I don't! Perhaps that $60 million will be spent, but those are intercity passenger rail stations. I will be surprised if one dollar of that money goes to improve anything for people using public transportation in or near those stations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Local Communities got 25 percent of the road funding while MDOT got 75 percent. MDOT does not run any transit.

It's ironic that you made that statement without realizing its impact. In other states, the state DOT has a direct role in public transportation, but in Michigan, that is left to poorly funded local agencies with no hope of regional governance [[because of our state's insane insistence on "home rule". So what you're saying is: three fourths of all the money goes to an agency which absolutely won't be able to spend it on transit improvements.

So, as I said, the problem is structural. Our state government has such a deeply embedded roads-only bias that nothing will ever get done, and we will just continue to fail. Your post only confirms my pessimism. I hope someday perhaps I can live in a state with a vision for the future, rather than a vision for the past. More and more, I fear the only way I can do this is to leave Michigan. We simply refuse to admit there might be a better way of doing things.
February-08-11, 01:49 AM
lilpup

there was a "shovel ready" requirement for that money
February-08-11, 02:01 AM
NorthEndere

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilpup

there was a "shovel ready" requirement for that money

Bingo; circle gets the square.
February-08-11, 08:17 AM
iheartthed

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilpup

there was a "shovel ready" requirement for that money

I think that makes it even worse. Michigan had no plans on the table to more effectively use its own money. No wonder...
February-08-11, 09:45 AM
DetroitPlanner

Quote:

Originally Posted by professorscott

Public transportation is a well-defined term among American transportation professionals, and refers to vehicles on land that move people around a metropolitan area, so clearly neither money spent on a port authority nor money spent on nonmotorized transportation counts as public transportation.

So, as I said, the problem is structural. Our state government has such a deeply embedded roads-only bias that nothing will ever get done, and we will just continue to fail. Your post only confirms my pessimism. I hope someday perhaps I can live in a state with a vision for the future, rather than a vision for the past. More and more, I fear the only way I can do this is to leave Michigan. We simply refuse to admit there might be a better way of doing things.

So the 20 percent of funding that DDOT and SMART directed from thier stimulus program to fund operations does not count as money going to transit? Thanks for letting me know that O swamii of transport spending.

There are flaws in this report. MDOT spent 2 percent on public transport. MDOT did not count the 25 percent of highway funds that the locals got OR the tens of millions that transit agencies got as MDOT's money.

In terms of capacity projects, most of the dollars that went for those in the State went to projects in Grand Rapids or Kalamazoo as approved by thier local officials. Gee and how many times have we heard on this board we must be more like GR? Along M-59 during peak hour that freeway was moving at 35 mph. How can our industry compete with other regions if we have bottlenecks like that?

Every report has a bias in it. It is up to the reader to question just about everything published, review it against all the facts, and come up with your own conclusions.
February-08-11, 12:49 PM
Detroitnerd

Quote:

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think that makes it even worse. Michigan had no plans on the table to more effectively use its own money. No wonder...

What's the problem? It's simple: You just lay down concrete and the prosperity follows ... ;)
February-08-11, 08:00 PM
NorthEndere

Quote:

Originally Posted by iheartthed

I think that makes it even worse. Michigan had no plans on the table to more effectively use its own money. No wonder...

Well, you can thank the legislature [[specifically the state senate) for that as they've refused for years, now, to change the local formula for the funding of roads. Kind of doesn't make sense to really plan for capital projects when your legislature is barely scrapping together money for even basic maintenance.

You're entire premise is wrong, or at the very least where you choose to place the blame. This is yet another example of someone indiscriminately running off at the mouth without knowing what they are talking about; complaining, but with little to no appropriate focus for the criticism. Michigan didn't misspend stimulus money; it spent money on what it could given it's broken road funding system.
February-08-11, 08:32 PM
MikeM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthEnder

Well, you can thank the legislature [[specifically the state senate) for that as they've refused for years, now, to change the local formula for the funding of roads...

...Michigan didn't misspend stimulus money; it spent money on what it could given it's broken road funding system.

http://www.rcocweb.org/Lists/Publica...%20_10-10_.pdf

Quote:

MDOT, at the state Legislature’s direction, was forced to borrow $40 million and implement numerous budget cuts in order to come up with the $84 million local match needed to access the $475 million in federal funds it is entitled to in FY 2011.

The $40 million short term loan must be repaid next year, when MDOT predicts it will already not be able to provide the $90 million local match to access that year’s federal funds.

Quote:

The state Legislature addressed the question of the distribution of state-collected
transportation funds through the creation of a road funding formula that is spelled out in Michigan Public Act 51. The formula divides the funds among the state, county road commissions and cities & villages.

In the Act, the Legislature established a single “pot” for state-collected road funds
known as the Michigan Transportation Fund [[MTF) and then created the MTF distribution formula. According to the formula, money is first taken off the top of the MTF for a number of items including the Bridge Fund and mass transit. The formula then calls for 39.1 percent of the remaining money to go to MDOT [[with jurisdiction over 8 percent of Michigan’s roads), 39.1 percent to go to county road commissions [[with jurisdiction over 75 percent of Michigan’s roads) and 21.8 percent to go to cities and villages [[with jurisdiction over 17 percent of Michigan’s roads).

Quote:

While federal funds coming to Michigan have increased slightly in the last couple of years, the increase has been minimal for most road commissions.

Besides, federal funds can only be spent federal-aid-eligible roads, which represent onethird of all public roads in Michigan. That’s because the federal road funds coming to Michigan are spread among the Michigan Department of Transportation [[MDOT), county road commissions and cities and villages. After deductions for special programs and “earmark” grants, current legislation and historical tradition set the division as follows:

75% = MDOT
25% = Divided among county road commissions,cities & villages statewide

That means by the time the 25 percent local portion of any increase in federal road
funding is spread across the 83 county road agencies and 533 cities and villages in

Michigan, no single agency receives a very substantial increase.