PHOENIX – The Arizona Department of Transportation's latest five-year construction plan is up for public comment in Phoenix today.
The proposal contains money only for highways and airports. But Serena Unrein, a public interest advocate for the Arizona Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) Education Fund, says alternatives such as rail, transit and bike paths need to be included, because not everybody drives.
"Americans are driving less and young people in particular are choosing not to drive,” she says. “And as we are seeing seniors who are unable to drive, we are going to need more transportation options than just single-occupant vehicles."
Because of limited funding, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) says it must focus on preserving the state's existing highways.
ADOT is facing a $350 million dollar budget cut in the coming year due to flat revenues from gas and vehicle license taxes. There's also less available federal funding.
Unrein says much of ADOT's money is restricted, but not federal surface transportation dollars.
"States are allowed to 'flex' those dollars to fund things like transit and bike lanes and pedestrian infrastructure,” she explains. “And ADOT could choose to flex more of those dollars to invest in these transportation options that people are increasingly looking for."
ADOT has examined passenger train service between Phoenix and Tucson, the two metro areas with three-quarters of the state's population. Unrein says that planning needs to continue.
"There's no way to get between Phoenix and Tucson except on the I-10 right now,” she says. “And so many people have thought for a long time that a train makes a lot of sense, so it would be great if ADOT could continue to move their studies on passenger rail forward."
All transportation projects are expensive, but Unrein says options beyond highways benefit everyone.
"That'll help to reduce traffic congestion and save people time,” she says. “And it will also help to improve our air quality. And those are things that might not be easily tied to a dollar amount. But I think that we all value our air quality and we all value our time."
Other public hearings on the ADOT five-year plan are scheduled for April 12 in Tucson and May 10 in Flagstaff.
get more stories like this via email
City and county governments are feeling the pinch of rising operating costs but in Wisconsin, federal incentives are driving a range of local projects, taking off some of the pressure in making communities economically viable.
Dane County is no stranger to embracing clean energy and federal aid from policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law are spurring more activity.
Joe Parisi, Dane County executive, said there have been past government credits for things like solar installations and the latest approach is more expansive, with a robust list of those who can benefit.
"Everybody -- a business, a nonprofit, a church, a temple, even a government, and a local government -- gets 30% back on renewable energy projects," Parisi pointed out.
For example, a local construction company put solar arrays on several of its facilities. Parisi noted the new credits speed up the pace of reimbursements, creating more energy savings in the near future. Federal officials said demand has been strong for the programs but Parisi said one challenge is creating broader awareness so under-resourced areas can apply.
Locally, the website for the Dane County Office of Energy and Climate Change has posted details about project opportunities and investments. Beyond clean energy, Parisi emphasized the federal government's push for more "Made in America" manufacturing creates opportunities for local plants and regional economies.
"There's money to help retooling to manufacture (products)," Parisi stressed. "Then, there's a stronger market for those components now because they are made in America."
National polling shows Americans are greatly concerned about things like inflation but Parisi argued long-term investments stand to help reduce operating expenses for government agencies and businesses, hopefully keeping local taxes in check and providing savings for consumers.
get more stories like this via email
Two pieces of legislation in Connecticut could bolster public transportation if they make it through the General Assembly.
Senate Bill 277 would restore funding to Shore Line East to increase rail service. Ridership plummeted during the pandemic, though it's been growing modestly since then.
But as more people opt to work from home instead of commute, some question whether there's a need for more rail service.
Jay Stange, coordinator with the Transport Hartford Academy, said state investments can help transit lines attract the riders they need.
"Ridership on the Hartford Line, which has been supported by state investment, is up every year," said Stange. "We also are seeing huge increases on the Waterbury Line in Connecticut, where those service investments have been made. The bottom line is that if you don't have the service, you won't have the riders."
The 2023 budget cut funding for Shore Line East to 44% of what was required for pre-pandemic service.
The bill received wide support at a public hearing, but some residents don't agree that funding cuts cause low ridership.
Stange said restoring this funding would provide economic benefits through growing jobs and tourism.
Another bill incentivizes transit-oriented development.
House Bill 5390 would provide water and sewer funding for land-use planning and other developments, making it easier to build housing where transit and rail services exist.
Stange said it's time for the state to build better.
"Connecticut is starting to see," said Stange. "that the development pattern of the last 70 years - where we build new interstate to green-land development that's mostly single-family homes - is a money-losing proposition, in the long term."
Studies show transit-oriented development reduces air pollution and uses large plots of land to accommodate growing populations.
The bill faced opposition from communities concerned about the need for local control for developing these projects. The new version of the bill allows communities to "opt in" for these incentives instead.
get more stories like this via email
Federal and agency officials convened with stakeholders in Southeastern Utah to discuss how federal funds can help grow and strengthen local economies.
Lenise Peterman, mayor of Helper in Carbon County, said money from major legislation like the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act often bypasses communities like hers, which are often the most in need.
Peterman was part of the "Coal Country at a Crossroads Listening Session," examining the challenges of smaller, rural communities in addressing needs for clean energy, workforce and economic development, and infrastructure.
"I felt very optimistic, because I felt like I was no longer just this region, somewhere tucked away in the intermountain area, but somebody that they had to look at and see, and hear them say, 'I need to get this funding. How do I do this?'" Peterman recounted.
Like many rural towns, Helper has seen a declining coal industry. In 2022, five operators in Utah produced coal worth $504 million, down 15% from the previous year. Peterman pointed out power plants and coal mines have traditionally been the sources of well-paid jobs, but communities like hers are figuring out how to adapt with the times and ensure people can continue to call rural Utah home.
Peterman said she considers the listening session a success, as it brought together federal officials and local leaders to focus on possible solutions. She noted one message was the government may need to do more to ensure communities like Helper, as she put it, "don't fall through the cracks."
"How do we equate a rural community with these more urban areas that have headcount, and have people on staff who can look into these federal funding opportunities and collect them?" Peterman suggested.
She added she works with a team of 15 other individuals but is the sole grant writer for her town. Legislation in Congress, called the "Rebuild Rural America Act," would have allocated money to help smaller communities compete for federal dollars but got stuck in a Senate committee last year.
get more stories like this via email