^Budgets and financial matters are boring. You can't take a photo of it.

^Budgets and financial matters are boring. You can't take a photo of it.

 

You're probably right. **sigh**

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2013/12/gop_lawmakers_to_seek_funding.html#incart_river_default#incart_m-rpt-2

 

There has been a decided lack of discussion on this topic. Are people on this blog are actually happy with the highway-only mindset at ODOT?

I think a lot of us missed it because it came out over Christmas.

I've been so focused on trying to get funding for projects from non-ODOT sources that I haven't had time to get involved in the more long-term and more-laborious efforts of a statewide campaign for transit funding. ODOT's actions and policies have basically forced me to consider them as non-existent except for my occasional barbs about their my-way-is-the-highway actions and policies, etc. To me, ODOT has become some agency that isn't really here anymore. I know it's out there somewhere, but I have so little to do with it anymore that I sometimes have to be reminded that it still exists. In fact, All Aboard Ohio almost missed the deadline on submitting input to ODOT's Access Ohio 2040 plan (it was this past Wednesday). Not surprisingly, the plan says almost nothing about non-highway modes. We weren't the only one to almost miss the comment period, as the Ohio Environmental Council put something together at the last minute and said "Everything that All Aboard Ohio said, we agree with!"

 

So ODOT doesn't exist for me like it dominates the lives of others. I seldom drive anymore, and when I do it's when I make my bigger shopping trips to the grocery store, or I have to pick up something heavy from a family member's house. To me, ODOT exists more to keep highway contractors employed, to get suburbanites to their drive-throughs, and to get farmers into town to buy more fertilizer or to attend church. To improve trains, transit, bike facilities and pedestrian routes? I go to my city, MPO and the feds.

Here's an article from the Toledo Blade:

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2014/01/16/Push-starts-for-1-875B-bond-issue.html#6hHzTTBGbwXIiQ8k.99

 

This is a ballot initiative subject to voter approval. If approved, it will raise $1.9 billion for the Ohio Public Works Commission (not ODOT). The money is only eligible for roads, bridges and water projects, even though it is general revenue not subject to the gas tax restrictions of Article XII, 5a of the Ohio Constitution. Public transportation or any other form of non-highway transportation is NOT eligible and it's been this way for years. Fight this or be left out as always.

 

I invite anyone who is interested in a grass roots effort to oppose this to email me privately.

http://allaboardohio.org/2014/01/17/aao-where-are-the-trains-transit/

 

AAO: “Where are the trains & transit in ODOT’s Access Ohio 2040 plan?”

January 17, 2014

 

For Immediate Release

Contact: Ken Prendergast, Executive Director

216-288-4883 [email protected]

 

All Aboard Ohio this week thanked the Ohio Department of Transportation’s Access Ohio 2040 planning team for its detailed draft planning document, but wondered why so few ideas were offered for improving and expanding passenger rail and public transportation services. While 9% of Ohio households have no cars (or 1 million Ohioans!), and many more households with multiple wage earners must share a car, ODOT spends only 1% of its $3+ billion per year budget on public transportation and freight rail, with nothing for passenger rail.

 

In its submitted comments, All Aboard Ohio Chairman Ron Sheck wrote “We believe the draft document gives short shrift to passenger rail, intercity bus and local transit; and largely ignores the connectivity between modes that allows travelers to make their trip without an automobile.” It noted that Ohio is trying to compete for jobs and residents (especially young people) with states who are more aggressively pursuing intercity passenger rail and local public transit services that help foster more vibrant urban centers and smaller, yet dynamic college/research-based towns.

 

To rectify that, the statewide nonprofit association that represents rail and transit passengers made several suggested additions, including:

 

+ Improve Amtrak passenger service on the Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland-Buffalo-Albany-New York/Boston Lake Shore Limited route; and also on the Chicago-Toledo-Cleveland-Pittsburgh-Washington DC Capitol Limited route. The first steps are underway to improve stations in Ohio at Bryan, Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria and Cleveland.

 

+ Increase the frequency of Amtrak’s Chicago-Indianapolis-Cincinnati-Charleston-Washington DC-Philadelphia-New York City Cardinal from tri-weekly to daily.

 

+ Develop a new higher-speed corridor (up to 110 mph as in the Chicago-St. Louis and Chicago-Detroit corridors) linking Chicago-Ft. Wayne-Lima-Columbus and intermediate points with multiple daily round trips by upgrading existing freight rail lines.

 

+ Extend the current Indiana DOT/locally-funded Amtrak Hoosier State from its eastern terminus in Indianapolis to Cincinnati providing daytime service linking Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Chicago.

 

+ Develop Amtrak Thruway connecting bus services to better link intercity trains serving Toledo with Detroit, Dearborn and Ann Arbor and Amtrak/Michigan Wolverine trains serving central and western Michigan cities and towns.

 

“Public Transportation needs much more attention than it has received in the Access Ohio 2040 draft plan,” Chairman Sheck wrote in All Aboard Ohio’s comments submitted on Jan. 14, 2014. “It is very disappointing to see the minimal level of proposed state funding for public transportation assistance to our urban and rural communities. Neighboring states either provide state funds directly to transit agencies for capital or operating expenses, or allow greater flexibility in local funding. Ohio needs to do better in both areas. We hope ODOT will give serious consideration to our concerns and recommendations.”

 

END

So ODOT doesn't exist for me like it dominates the lives of others.

 

I understand, but just because ODOT is intransigent and Kasich is clueless and ideological is no reason not to band together and start making some noise about this.  If the American colonists just considered the Brits non-existent and did nothing else, we'd still be living under the Union Jack. 

 

This is an opportunity to raise the profile of the desperate need in this state for transportation alternatives. 

I understand, but just because ODOT is intransigent and Kasich is clueless and ideological is no reason not to band together and start making some noise about this.  If the American colonists just considered the Brits non-existent and did nothing else, we'd still be living under the Union Jack. 

 

And the bad part of that is, what? :)

 

(FYI: I love England)

There has been a decided lack of discussion on this topic. Are people on this blog are actually happy with the highway-only mindset at ODOT?

I don't know what you want.

Once again, ODOT, or the Ohio Department of Transportation, used to be called the Ohio Department of Highways. Sure, they dapple in railroads, airports, waterways, bicycle routes, and public transit, but their traditional role deals with highways. The "T" in "ODOT" is just some modern politically correct terminology.

 

 

Once again, ODOT, or the Ohio Department of Transportation, used to be called the Ohio Department of Highways. Sure, they dapple in railroads, airports, waterways, bicycle routes, and public transit, but their traditional role deals with highways. The "T" in "ODOT" is just some modern politically correct terminology.

 

 

 

Absolutely correct! The difference this time is that there is going to be a ballot initiative to create $1.9 billion in new bonding authority for the Ohio Public Works Commission (NOT ODOT) for roads, bridges and water projects. Public transportation projects are NOT eligible for this funding. The wild card is that this is subject to a vote by the public, unlike the "gimme" funding process for ODOT. That's a chance----but only if people get motivated and involved---to change the discussion by demanding a slice of the pie for public transportation.

There has been a decided lack of discussion on this topic. Are people on this blog are actually happy with the highway-only mindset at ODOT?

I don't know what you want.

 

I want anyone who is interested in better transportation policy in Ohio----that has major funding for non-highway transportation---to step up and oppose any initiative that does not address this goal.

^ And despite ODOT's history, they're not the Ohio Department of Highways anymore.  The 1960s are long gone, they need to be brought into the future, even if it means dragging them forward kicking and screaming. 

^ And despite ODOT's history, they're not the Ohio Department of Highways anymore.  The 1960s are long gone, they need to be brought into the future, even if it means dragging them forward kicking and screaming. 

 

The only way to do that is to vociferously oppose any funding initiative that does not contain serious funding for public transportation. The highway contractors have to be shown that they will face organized opposition until an accommodation is reached. Otherwise, the beat will go on for the roadbuilder gravy train. It's all about the money, folks.

The highway contractors do deal with limits from the freight railroads and graveyards. So there are some things that they do work around.

The highway contractors do deal with limits from the freight railroads and graveyards. So there are some things that they do work around.

 

They need to be given a major heartburn when it comes to money. Maybe they'll work around that and be willing to share the pie.

The highway contractors do deal with limits from the freight railroads and graveyards. So there are some things that they do work around.

graveyards?

Oh yes, you pretty much can't disturb cemeteries for road projects. You can, but you have to get every person's survivors or descendents to OK it. And that doesn't happen. Sorta like how you drive through a strip mine but see the cemeteries left untouched looking like islands.

 

And the bad part of that is, what? :)

 

(FYI: I love England)

 

 

I had a feeling you'd say that  :wink:  But my point is still valid.  We shouldn't slink away silently.  This is an opportunity we need to seize. 

 

The only way to do that is to vociferously oppose any funding initiative that does not contain serious funding for public transportation. The highway contractors have to be shown that they will face organized opposition until an accommodation is reached. Otherwise, the beat will go on for the roadbuilder gravy train. It's all about the money, folks.

 

I agree Bill.  We have nothing to lose by organizing and making noise about this but a chance, even if slim, to change the conversation. 

The Wisconsin DOT has been called out for discriminatory practices in their pro-highway anti-transit policies, specifically related to the Milwaukee area "Zoo Interchange."  Could this be an avenue to take with other DOTs in a more generalized sense?

 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/wisconsin-dot-broke-civil-rights-rules-us-agency-says-gk6mgin-168396106.html 

The Wisconsin DOT has been called out for discriminatory practices in their pro-highway anti-transit policies, specifically related to the Milwaukee area "Zoo Interchange."  Could this be an avenue to take with other DOTs in a more generalized sense?

 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/wisconsin-dot-broke-civil-rights-rules-us-agency-says-gk6mgin-168396106.html 

 

That's been considered. No one with financial means in Ohio to pursue such a lawsuit is interested in filing one. Several organizations have been approached.

 

BTW, here's an economic reason for pursuing a more diverse transportation system for Ohio........

 

Jeff Speck ‏@JeffSpeckAICP  8m

2000-2010, states that built the least urban road miles grew 64 - 94% faster than their asphalt-enamored neighbors.

http://bit.ly/KznJTG

 

EDIT: I was just compiling a list in another discussion of how ODOT has gotten taxpayers to pay for its inability to live within its means. Here are a few of them....

 

ODOT has no qualms about spending money for new lane-miles it can't afford to maintain. ODOT figures it will build it and someone will come forward someday to pay for it and more new things, such as taking the Highway Patrol's budget off the gas tax and putting it onto general taxpayers, raiding all revenues from the state's Commercial Activity Tax on gas stations, mortgaging the Ohio Turnpike, and now putting a $1.9 billion bond issue before voters.

BTW, here's an economic reason for pursuing a more diverse transportation system for Ohio........

 

Jeff Speck ‏@JeffSpeckAICP  8m

2000-2010, states that built the least urban road miles grew 64 - 94% faster than their asphalt-enamored neighbors.

http://bit.ly/KznJTG

 

 

That's the kind of stuff I meant when I said people seem happier in functionally obsolete areas.

PA provides a model for Ohio transportation

 

Tuesday, April 08, 2014   

Pennsylvania DOT seeks applicants for new multi-modal funding program

 

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is accepting funding applications for multi-modal transportation improvement projects under the state's new Multimodal Transportation Fund.

 

In fiscal-year 2014-15, PennDOT will distribute $20 million to successful applicants. The application period closes on June 30.

 

Eligible projects, which can cost between $100,000 and $3 million, require a 30 percent funding match from local sources. PennDOT will evaluate the applications and issue funds based on such criteria as safety benefits, regional economic conditions, technical and financial feasibility, job creation, energy efficiency and operational sustainability.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/prdailynews/news.asp?id=40035

Be a transit planner for a day – design your own transit system

 

Ohio Department of Transportation • News Release

 

Division of Communications

1980 West Broad Street • Columbus, Ohio 43223

www.transportation.ohio.gov

 

COLUMBUS – The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) is asking Ohio residents to design the transit system that they would like to ride.

 

ODOT has designed an interactive tool and survey that lets users decide what the priorities should be – and matches those with the dollars it takes to deliver them. The survey also illustrates the community benefits based on how funds are spent, helping users understand the trade-offs that decision-makers must face as they invest in our transit systems.

 

For example, residents of urban areas like Akron or Toledo may want more bus service, running more often, on more days. Those who live in rural areas like Athens or Holmes counties may want van service that takes them to medical appointments or shopping locations. All across Ohio, residents may be thinking of new types of vehicles, services, and technology, which the survey will also help measure.

 

Ohioans are encouraged to use the interactive tool and take the online survey by June 30.

 

The interactive tool is located here: http://www.ohiotransitsurvey.com/. Click “Proceed to Next Page” to be guided to the corresponding Ohio Transit Survey. (Google Chrome users may need to use only “ohiotransitsurvey.com” to access the page.)

 

The survey findings will assist ODOT’s evaluation of how transit needs and preferences vary by audience, region and experience. This feedback, along with other analyses of Ohio’s unique transit needs and the nation’s best practices, will shape recommendations produced by the ODOT Statewide Transit Needs Study, expected by the end of this year.

 

For more information on the ODOT study, visit www.TransitNeedsStudy.ohio.gov.

 

###

 

For more information, contact: Steve Faulkner, ODOT Press Secretary, at 614-644-7101, [email protected].

America split between two community ideals

 

http://t.co/WfOYPWtr0K

Yet Ohio transportation policy completely ignores half of the population

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/2014/06/driven-away-odot-will-continue-to-fund-sprawl-until-2017Blog

 

Driven away: ODOT will continue to fund sprawl until 2017

 

Marc Lefkowitz  |  06/20/14 @ 2:00pm

 

When Plain Dealer Editorial Board President Brent Larkin sounded off this week about the diminishing returns for a shrinking city and flat region still betting the farm on sprawl, it led us to wonder, what is behind it and how could we flip the paradigm to a region that is growing up and in?

 

In 2008, GCBL director David Beach pointed out in his “transportation manifesto,” it will take a combo of vision and will to return the balance from where we stand today.

 

If we really want to go beyond wringing our hands about sprawl, we should start by taking a closer look at what projects are in the pipeline — what is funded by ODOT for the next four years. We scanned the entire 430 page ODOT funding schedule for 2014-2017—it is staggering how many projects will widen roads to and within new suburbs and traditionally rural towns. Essentially, it is a roadmap to moving cars around instead of investing in place.

 

Wider and more roads often sound like a beneficial thing, but as Wired explained this week, adding roads only boosts the demand for that road—resulting in a shorter drive until everyone knows about it.

 

Cognitive dissonance is one way to describe Ohio’s $2 billion four-year transportation budget. Its pipeline will continue to induce demand and then offer to fix the “problem” when it breaks. Meanwhile, the real, serious concern about revenue projections for Ohio and its metropolitan areas worsens. Even this week’s Hail Mary from Congress to finally raise the federal gas tax will only add fuel to the fire.

 

What needs to happen before we give ODOT even more money to play with is an overhaul of the system similar to what NOACA Executive Director Grace Gallucci is calling for in devoting at least 50% of the transportation agency’s annual budget for projects that fix and improve the roads we have (and can barely afford) to keep up.

 

The second thing that needs to happen after getting serious about a fix-it-first strategy is to clear the pipeline of more and wider roads that are adding to the state’s fiscal strain while fueling unsustainable land-use patterns (more on that in a minute), and replace them with projects that promote walkable urbanism.

 

The few projects on ODOT’s list that support quality of life in urban areas staggers the mind when you consider Larkin and local leaders like Brad Whitehead of the Fund for Economic Future’s calls for a new direction. But then, how much does the ODOT list disconnected from the ideas being expressed in the upper echelons of the power structure in Cleveland?

 

To be fair, we happen to live in a time when half of Cleveland’s share of the road dollars will be soaked up in the (region-serving) $1.5 billion Innerbelt Project and its $360 million set of bridges. We can’t do anything about that. But, we should know better than to invest another $369 million in an extension of the I-490 highway known as Opportunity Corridor. Is this the best use of limited public dollars? The state is bonding or raising funds from debt service to the I-80 toll road to pay for Opportunity Corridor. The federal government is kicking in $6 million, and the county is pitching in $16 million.

 

In addition to the Innerbelt and Opportunity Corridor, Ohio is investing heavily in highway and road capacity. ODOT will sell $136 million in bonds—again, debt investments which Bloomberg News questioned for soundness—to pave the way for two more lanes on I-271 in between I-480 and Summit County. Highways have ballooned the region’s footprint, Beach says, in a short time and have led to more cars on the road.

 

Where are Ohio’s priorities? The 430-page $2 billion list is a windfall for highway builders opening up access to once-rural places and more lanes for driving in new suburbs. In our area, which is one of the most urban in the state, the list of projects is weighted toward getting people out onto highways or driving through rather than inviting people to get out of their cars and stay.

 

Even urban projects like Cleveland’s West Shoreway conversion to a boulevard read like they were designed by highway engineers. The West Shoreway is on the list for $34 million to be repaved, but to call it a boulevard when highway ramps will remain and intersections were deemed too slow, is a bit of a stretch. To be fair, the West Shoreway will get $11 million for a bike path that will connect West 25th Street with Edgewater Beach. The other bright spots for quality of life on the list include:

 

$2 million for stage 3 of the Towpath (from Steelyard Commons to Literary Road in Tremont)

$8 million for stage 1 of the Towpath from Harvard Avenue to Steelyard.

$14 million for stage 4 of the Towpath from Steelyard to Canal Basin Park in the Cleveland Flats

$9 million for a reconfiguration of Van Aken, Warrensville and Chagrin roads to support a transit oriented development

 

The projects that will be unlikely to support a stronger core and reinvesting in legacy cities far outnumber those that do (as an aside, ODOT spends more on herbicidal spraying along the highway than it plans to spend on bike lanes). Here is just a sampling:

 

$22 million to widen Bagley Road between Cleveland and Middleburg Heights

$15.4 million to widen Royalton Road in North Royalton

I-422 between Solon and Bainbridge will get $5.9 million

$13 million to widen Chagrin Boulevard in Woodmere near Eaton

$8 million for sound walls on I-90

 

Again, wider roads “induce the demand” for more driving, the source of 28% of our region’s CO2 pollution. Unfortunately, this road agenda is moving in the wrong direction. We need a new agenda that focuses on transportation choice, that is serious about climate change, tackling our fiscal crisis, duplication of tax service through fragmentation. That agenda is about moving away from the sprawl model of the last 50 years and back to the Main Street model that will continue to be attractive for the next 50.

I like Grace Gallucci

 

ODOT should fix roads with some of the money it uses to build new ones, NOACA chief says

 

on September 18, 2014 at 10:00 AM, updated September 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Transportation planning chief Grace Gallucci wants the state  to break from past practice and use some of the money it normally spends to build highways and bridges to repair crumbling roads instead.

 

The executive director of the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency said Wednesday that NOACA has asked the Ohio Department of Transportation for $30 million to fix over 70 miles of roads in 26 communities in its five-county region.

 

The planning agency sets priorities for transportation projects and directs $50 million a year in federal, state and local money to road, transit and air- and water-quality improvements in Northeast Ohio. It routinely spends about 90 percent of its construction budget on fixing decaying bridges, highways and streets.

 

What makes NOACA's $30 million funding request unusual is that it's trying to tap the pool of dollars overseen by ODOT's Transportation Review Advisory Council – which only deals with projects that add capacity to Ohio's roads and cost more than $12 million, or projects that reduce congestion.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/09/noaca_chief_asks_odot_for_more.html#incart_river

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  1m

WANTED: an @ODOT_Statewide more supportive of 1M car-free Ohioans than using falsehoods to ridicule their advocates.  http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/09/opportunity_corridor_a_boondog.html#incart_river …

Wow - the quote in that article from the ODOT guy is so ridiculous and condescending. And it doesn't even speak to the facts of the opponents' argument. I know there's a name to that logical fallacy (I never could remember all the names).

"Non-traditional" AKA not 1950-'90s building binge. Calling post-WWII sprawl "Traditional" and urbanism/limited road expansion "Experimental" is some kind of Jedi Mind Trick sprawl proponents try to pull. More of that "the world didn't begin until after WWII" crap.

Wow - the quote in that article from the ODOT guy is so ridiculous and condescending. And it doesn't even speak to the facts of the opponents' argument. I know there's a name to that logical fallacy (I never could remember all the names).

 

We discussed this a little on the OC thread.  PIRG has negative credibility among those on the political right.  It's kind of like CCV criticizing the design and layout of the Hard Rock Casino.  Everyone knows their agenda, and their observations are predictable and irrelevant.

So many different threads to post this in:

 

 

ODOT research says bus, rapid transit dollars need to double to $1.8 billion to serve unmet needs

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation has been criticized in recent years for not directing enough money to supporting Ohio's 61 transit systems and the 115 million bus and train rides they provide each year.

 

Ohio ranks 41st among the states in the yearly amount it spends – 63 cents per person – on public transit.

 

Now, in a new study that ODOT says is an "honest, transparent assessment of transit funding in Ohio," an ODOT-hired consultant has taken a detailed look at current spending – and what it would take to close a funding gap to meet public transit needs a decade from now.

 

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/12/odot_research_says_bus_rapid_t.html#incart_river

Follow up article.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/12/public_transit_thinkers_praise.html#incart_river

Annual cost to Ohio's economy from car crashes? $11.7 BILLION! Giving Ohioans real transport choices would cut that. And yet the Dispatches editorializing in opposition to more/better trains/transit. Amazing how reasonable solutions totally disconnect from the information at their very fingertips....

 

Transportation Insider

By Rick Rouan

The Columbus Dispatch  •  Monday January 26, 2015 7:40 AM

 

Ohio is making progress but still has several gaps in key traffic-safety laws, an advocacy group argues in a new report.

 

Ohio’s 2015 report card from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety admonishes the state for its secondary-enforcement seat-belt law and its motorcycle-helmet rules, among others, and places it in the second of three safety categories.

 

Nine states were given the group’s worst rating.

 

Ohio needs a primary-enforcement law for seat-belt use in both the front and back seats, the group said, meaning that law-enforcement officers could stop drivers upon seeing a seat-belt violation. Now, they can cite people under the seat-belt law only if they stop drivers for some other violation, such as speeding.

 

Ohio also should increase the minimum age for a learner’s permit to 16 from 151/2 and enact an ignition-interlock law for people caught driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the group said. It also said the state needs primary enforcement for all drivers caught texting while driving.

 

The economic cost of motor-vehicle crashes in Ohio is about $11.7 billion a year, according to the report.

 

MORE:

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/01/26/transportation-insider-columbus-adds-snowplows-but-number-slippery.html

Those same idiotorial writers probably view this news as a plus: Ohio's $11.7 billion auto accident industry.

Here's a surprise: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/SPR/Research/reportsandplans/Reports/2014/Planning/134819_FR.pdf

Did anyone know ODOT hired a bunch of planners to do a report on "The Value of Balanced Growth for Transportation?"

Uh, no. Of course if elected officials are run by the petroleum and highway construction interests, it won't matter how many good reports ODOT issues. Constituents need to tell their elected officials their political futures depend on giving ODOT "political cover" as well as the budgetary and legal tools to provide a wider variety of transportation choices. Right now, elected officials aren't hearing enough from everyday folks about their everyday challenges of living in a car-dependent state.

I noticed the Governor's budget increases state tax support for public transportation to get 1 million Ohioans in no-car households to their jobs, health care, education, shopping and social activities. Gov. Kasich seeks a mere $1 million-per-year increase when nearly $2 billion of dollars in transit needs were identified by a new Ohio Department of Transportation report.

 

While the Top-10 states supporting public transportation all invest at least $50 per capita on public transportation, Ohio (the 7th most populous state) invests only 60 cents! Gov. Kasich proposes to increase that to 70 cents per person per year. How small is that?

 

For 70 cents, you get:

 

+ 1 gallon of gasoline -- in 1998

+ Wages paid to a woman in America for every $1 we pay a man

+ A taco on any Monday at El Ranchero's

+ One hour of work in a 16-hour workday for a 13-year-old child making iPhone parts in Shenzen, China

+ One hour of work from an American iron worker -- in 1915

+ A watt of electricity from rooftop solar panels

+ A double coupon at Fred's Super Dollar store every Saturday

+ State taxes paid by each Ohioan over an entire year to support public transportation

 

We can do better in Ohio. How do we know? Because we have done better in Ohio when it's economy was one of the wealthiest, most inclusive in the nation.

 

Ohio's state support for public transportation should rise from $7.3 million per year to $15 million, or roughly double. That will allow Ohio to leverage twice as much flexible federal transportation funds to get more Ohioans to reach more jobs. It's a simple choice: public assistance or public transportation!

$50 per capita X 11 million Ohio citizens = $550 million. THAT'S what Ohio should be spending on public transportation if it was on a par with the other top 10 states.

It's painful to see how far behind we are other states, and how backward-thinking we are. However, I think political will and consensus towards transit even among Repubs is building. See that Republican state legislator in Georgia the other day who came out in favor of MARTA. Also see that ODOT study. Long term, I think Ohio's transit funding can only go up.

 

The mere fact that Kasich proposed an increase is inspiring.

I'm not inspired by Kasich's proposed increase. But it's better than the alternative. Still, it completely ignores the massive and growing need for improved transit.

Here is ODOT Director Jerry Wray's testimony on the 2016-2017 biennial budget for ODOT...

 

http://search-prod.lis.state.oh.us/cm_pub_api/api/unwrap/chamber/131st_ga/ready_for_publication/committee_docs/cmte_h_fin_app_1/submissions/cmte_h_fin_app_1_2015-02-04-0900_66/odotdirectorwraytestimony.pdf

I found this fascinating:

 

Finally, we are respectfully requesting to move the Ohio Rail Development Commission into a newly developed division at the Ohio Department of Transportation--called the Division of Freight. This new division would serve Ohio’s interests in rail, maritime and highway freight. By combining these efforts into a truly inter-modal division, we will have the ability to more effectively coordinate projects, technical analysis and freight programs.

 

Apparently the Kasich administration doesn't want to just kill passenger rail planning. They want to bury it and make sure it never comes back.

Lots of embedded links at:

http://allaboardohio.org/2015/02/06/where-is-odots-passenger-division/

 

 

Where is ODOT’s “Passenger Division”?

kjprendergast on February 6, 2015

 

What would Ohio’s transportation system look like if the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) had the same passion for moving people as it does for moving freight?

 

That question is being asked by the nonprofit All Aboard Ohio as ODOT seeks to create a Division of Freight to oversee the rail, maritime and trucking modes to foster more intermodal connectivity for cargo. As part of this, the Ohio Rail Development Commission would cease to exist as an independent commission and instead be fully assimilated into ODOT.

 

Please ask your state legislators in Columbus to support $62.5 million per year in state and federal funds for ODOT Public Transit for urban, rural and intercity public transportation capital and operating support. This amount was a draft policy recommendation to ODOT by its consultants who assessed Ohio’s critical public transportation needs outlined in a recent ODOT report. Without a larger state funding share for transit, Ohio cannot leverage federal transportation funds that are instead going to states and cities with robust transit programs.

 

Please contact your STATE REPRESENTATIVE and your STATE SENATOR.

 

So why isn’t ODOT pursuing an effort similar to its proposed Freight Division to create an ODOT Division of Passengers to foster more intermodal passenger transportation among intercity, regional, rural and urban buses and trains, cars, bikes, Amish buggies, walking and ground transportation access to/from airports?

 

“The reason is that, unlike freight where ODOT is appropriately focused on the movement of goods, ODOT is not focused on the movement of people but rather their vehicles,” said All Aboard Ohio Executive Director Ken Prendergast. “Thus, if an Ohioan can’t afford to drive, isn’t able to drive or doesn’t want to drive a car, then ODOT is not interested in you. That’s a lot of Ohioans being neglected and isolated.”

 

How many? One million Ohioans are without a car to get to work, school or between cities.

 

According to the U.S. Census’ American Community Survey, 25 percent of Cleveland households have no car; 23 percent in Cincinnati; 20 percent in Dayton; 10 percent in Columbus. Even households that have cars may not be able to fully use them. For example, many cars aren’t maintained for safe, reliable operation due to the decline in Ohioans’ real wages and the high cost of driving.

 

The cost of owning and maintaining a car is nearly $9,000 per year. Basically that’s a transportation system access fee that all Ohioans are forced to pay by the government due to its lack of support for less expensive passenger transportation alternatives. Many Ohioans don’t earn more than $15 per hour — the minimum income needed to afford owning a car.

 

Also, Census data shows that 13 percent of Ohioans are 65 years and older today. That will rise to 20 percent by 2030. After the age of 65, physical driving abilities erode dramatically. The large Baby Boom generation began turning 65 years old in 2011. Increasing numbers of elderly Ohioans face house arrest as Baby Boomers demand a level of mobility and an active lifestyle that far outpaces any of America’s previous generations, and thus outstrips the current resources of public transportation systems to provide that mobility.

 

Employers in Ohio depend on access to labor and thus need public transportation. Many companies are forced to provide their own employee shuttles at their own expense to get workers to their factories, warehouses, hospitals and other large places of employment. Small business owners can’t afford to provide their own employee transportation. The typical job is accessible to only about 27 percent of its metropolitan workforce by transit in 90 minutes or less.

 

Furthermore, Ohio is a populous state with metro areas spaced ideally for passenger rail. Ohio is tied with Florida and Texas with the second-most metro areas of 500,000 or more people. Only California has more large metros. Yet California, Florida and Texas are all developing fast passenger train infrastructure and services linking their cities with a mix of private and public funds. Ohio has chosen to be a passenger rail pariah.

 

ODOT Director Jerry Wray gave testimony this week on ODOT’s 2016-2017 biennial budget to the Ohio House of Representatives Finance & Appropriations Committee. READ WRAY’S TESTIMONY HERE.

 

“In his testimony, Wray said ODOT will promote more seamless connectivity among transportation modes to find the most cost-effective, timely and reliable services, routes and facilities to move freight in and through Ohio,” Prendergast said. “Replace that word ‘freight’ with ‘passengers’ and Ohio would gain a policy foundation upon which a truly multi-modal transportation system can be built to mobilize more people to fully participate in Ohio’s economy.”

 

Sadly, ODOT ignored most its own study that it commissioned last year. A proposed change in the state’s sales tax policies in terms of what commercial activities may be taxed could result in a small funding boost for transit systems that benefit from county-based sales taxes. While any and all increases are welcome, much more support is needed in all 88 counties to address the large, growing and unmet needs of Ohio transit systems and its benefit would be limited to only eight counties:

 

+ Cuyahoga (Cleveland)

+ Franklin (Columbus)

+ Lake (Painesville)

+ Mahoning (Youngstown)

+ Montgomery (Dayton)

+ Portage (Kent)

+ Stark (Canton)

+ Summit (Akron).

 

That leaves 80 Ohio counties with no increase in transit funding, including Allen, Belmont, Butler, Clark, Hamilton, Jefferson, Lorain, Lucas, Muskingum, Richland, Trumbull, Wood and other populous counties.

 

The Ohio Statewide Transit Needs Study reported that Ohio should spend $1.1 billion per year over the next decade to meet growing ridership, operating costs and capital improvement needs (ie: new buses, trains, waiting shelters/stations, facilities, etc). However, local governments currently spend only $659 million per year. Transit spending must double to meet the need that ODOT’s own report measured.

 

Instead, ODOT offered to increase its tiny $7.3 million per year transit spending by a mere $1 million in 2016 and again in 2017. Thus, the roughly 60 cents per capita that Ohio spends on transit will rise to a still-pathetic 70 cents paid by each Ohioan per year. What else can you get for 70 cents?

 

+ 1 gallon of gasoline — in 1998

+ Wages paid to a woman in America for every $1 we pay a man

+ A taco on any Monday at El Ranchero’s

+ One hour of work in a 16-hour workday for a 13-year-old child making iPhone parts in Shenzen, China

+ One hour of work from an American iron worker — in 1915

+ A watt of electricity from rooftop solar panels

+ A double coupon at Fred’s Super Dollar store every Saturday

+ State taxes paid by each Ohioan over an entire year to support public transportation.

 

By comparison, the top-10 states in terms of their annual support of public transportation all invest at least $50 per capita. Ohio, the nation’s seventh-most populous state, spends less than West Virginia, North Dakota, South Dakota or Wyoming on public transit.

 

At the Ohio House hearing last week, state representatives like Emilia Sykes (D-Akron) and Dan Ramos (D-Lorain) pressed ODOT Director Wray on why Ohio’s transportation agency ignored its own study of public transportation needs.

 

“Local communities are primarily responsible for devising their own public transportation systems since Ohio is a home rule state,” Wray responded.

 

Yet ODOT is willing to provide a tiny amount of funding to rural and small urban transit systems, and Ohio spent much more on transit in the past — $42 million per year in 2001 — which apparently wasn’t in violation of home rule. And of course ODOT pours massive operating subsidies into maintaining roads in townships and small towns that otherwise can’t afford to maintain the roads themselves. Meanwhile urban areas must maintain their state and federal thoroughfares, including removing snow and ice, maintaining storm drains, and cutting grass or other landscaping. These are some of the examples of cities subsidizing suburbs and rural areas, thereby undermining cities which are the incubators of innovation and economic growth.

 

Rep. Ramos noted that young people are choosing to relocate to cities that have good public transportation — few of which are in Ohio. He asked Wray how the state could help local communities to “build a real multi-modal human transportation system.” Instead Wray told him to go ask someone else for the money.

 

“Nobody has the money to build it,” Wray said. “I recommend you work with metropolitan planning organizations on the issue.”

 

Wray will testify further about the ODOT budget request this coming week to the Ohio House Finance Subcommittee. Then the Ohio Senate will hold hearings. Again, please ask your state legislators in Columbus to support $62.5 million per year (not including federal elderly/disabled funds Ohio will get anyway) for ODOT Public Transit for urban, rural and intercity public transportation.

 

END

Toledo man walks 15 miles in commute to Bowling Green. Why?  Tiny transit $$, car-only land-use design & low incomes. http://t.co/kbh84r2TTB

Not sure if anyone saw this, but ODOT released the final report of the "Transit Needs Study." The ultimate recommendation from it is to increase state funding to 10% of total budgets. Also to explore a dedicated funding source.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/Transit/Pages/default.aspx

Not sure if anyone saw this, but ODOT released the final report of the "Transit Needs Study." The ultimate recommendation from it is to increase state funding to 10% of total budgets. Also to explore a dedicated funding source.

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/Transit/Pages/default.aspx

 

And I would be surprised if this goes anywhere but nowhere.

 

Ohio cities to state DOT: No more new roads, just fix what we have

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/04/02/ohio-cities-to-state-dot-no-more-new-roads-just-fix-what-we-have/#.VR2uUnPqGl0.twitter

 

Ohio cities to state DOT: No more new roads, just fix what we have

http://usa.streetsblog.org/2015/04/02/ohio-cities-to-state-dot-no-more-new-roads-just-fix-what-we-have/#.VR2uUnPqGl0.twitter

 

Gawd, does she lecture from a high horse.  I'm kind of glad she's not on my side.  I wonder if that's just how she is about everything.

 

The problem with "construction only" if you are trying to increase access to a certain place is you end up decreasing access for up to a year.  Waterloo will give us an example of how that works out over time.