Transcripts For CSPAN Hearing Focuses On Highway And Transit

Oklahoma department of transportation and the president of the dallas area Rapid Transit system. The hearing is about two hours. We will call the subcommittee to order. I like to say good morning and welcome all of our witnesses here today to the hearing. By now weve seen the reports in the resulting collapse of section i85 northeast of atlanta. This is a critically important piece of our system which carries over 400,000 cars a day. With that volume of traffic, its amazing there wasnt any loss of life in this incident. I commend the state and local officials for responding so quickly to the crisis. I want to commend the u. S. Department of transportation for acting quickly to release funds, emergency funds and provide assistance. Were here to examine the implementation of the fast act of state and local partners. Its the first long term surface transportation reauthorization bill in a decade and its Important Foundation for building a 21st century infrastructure. As a fiveyear bill provides very much needed certainty and funding so that our nonfederal partners can make smart longterm investments. The fact that fast act is a forward looking law that puts an emphasis on projects of national significance, streamlining project delivery and ichbnnovative solution. State department and Transit Systems and local entities have the important task of delivering transportation projects to the communities. As they carry out these projects, the witnesses have a firsthand view of how federal transportation policies are being implemented by the u. S. Department of transportation. We look forward to building 21st century infrastructure with our state and local partners. We are going to welcome their input today. Now recognize rankingmember, the subcommittee for your opening statement. Thank you very much. Grateful for this subcommittee hearing. I think it indicates that our subcommittee wants to get behin. Grateful for this subcommittee hearing. I think it indicates that our subcommittee wants to get behind all of the interest that weve heard on infrastructure and see what we can really do we know. We know that a large infrastructure package idea, the idea of a large infrastructure package, which is on the minds of many in the administration and on our minds is not going to magically appear. We did a lot of and ill say, deservedly so, a lot of self con congratulation when we passed the First Service transportation bill in 10 years, and i must say im very grateful, mr. Chairman, that it was a good bipartisan effort and i know you share with me the disappointment in order to get any increase whatsoever after 10 years, we had to make a sixyear bill a fiveyear bill. I dont know how long we can keep that kind of disinvestment from going on. I say disinvestment, because if youre not even investing in a state of good repair, much less the new infrastructure we need, youre not investing, we are disinvesting, and when i say disinvesting, remember how we built this country. Ever since this idea of the federal transportation infrastructure package was created by president eisenhower, the country has understood that you cant be a great country unless you continuously invest in infrastructure of various kinds. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that we face a shortfall just over the next decade if were trying to continue to fund the f. A. S. T. Act funding levels, and it says we need 17 billion more a year than f. A. S. T. Act levels at the federal level to improve our infrastructure and maintain a state of good repair reducing that backlog. Im very pleased that the president has said good things about infrastructure, so i hastened to get a hold of his socalled skinny budget and was very disappointed to see really unheard of cuts to popular Transportation Programs. So instead of investing after my hopes had been raised, for example, in transit, urgently needed to alleviate congestion, the president wants to stop all new investments in transit by cutting off the new starts program. Im grateful im grateful nevertheless for the continuing bipartisanship on this committee. I was pleased to sign a letter with chairman graves and the leadership of the full committee to urge the Appropriation Committee to fully fund all f. A. S. T. Act programs as authorized for the remainder of 2017 and the upcoming 2018 budget. Im still banking on a president who talks about a trillion dollars proposal, at least supporting us as we fight to maintain the meager funding levels we had. We know that the budget, im not terribly im not terribly pulling my hair out that the president s cuts will go through because no matter who is president , the appropriators always rewrite the budget. But i am concerned that the administration seems to be more enamored with pushing private capital and financing, which would end up making projects more expensive than traditional funding mechanisms and regulatory reforms than making investments. And investorcentered approach will do little to improve infrastructure across the nation. You simply cant build your infrastructure and expect that toll roads will somehow pay for it. There must be a revenue stream, and for the modern era in american life, it is always with this committee and subcommittee. Nor can we streamline our way out of inAdequate Funding. Secretary child said recently, the problem is not money imagine saying that about roads and transit. The problem is always money. She didnt say that, that was editorializing. It was the delays to permitting processes that hold up projects for years making them risky are nationwide, undergo any rigorous Environmental Review. Most are what we see everyday, 90 are exempt from rigorous categories asian ategorization c process and are exempt from rigorous levels of review. Also refutes the notion that more streamlining now is the prudent cost of action it concludes that additional streamlining provisions in the f. A. S. T. Act are actually slowing down the department of u. S. Department of transportations ability to implement the project delivery accelerations put into map 21, in other words, streamlining measures on top of each other before they can be implemented and simply does not help and frankly does not happen. I have always defended opportunities for public and continue to believe that it helps us improve the ultimate project. Community input and buy in are crucial to the successful and expeditious advancement of transportation projects getting public im sorry, gutting Public Participation in the name of cutting red tape is something that will harm our roads and well harm constituents who use our roads infrastructure. I i dont believe we can reinvent the wheel when it comes to transportation and infrastructure, i just think theres no way around our obligation, as the congress of the United States to provide states and local governments with the funding and the flexibility that they alone know what to do with to smart and produce smart and efficient projects, allowing the states who have the wisdom once we give them the money, to go ahead. I very much look forward to todays witnesses. Ive read the headlines about atlanta. And i85 will be interesting to hear what we can do and what you can do on that unforeseen circumstance. Thank you very much, and i look forward to the testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. I now turn to the Ranking Member committee, mr. Defazio. Defazio thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks for this important hearing. Ill just restate a few things because they do merit restating. We have a 836 billion backlog on that need, nearly 140,000 bridges need repair and replacement, over 90 billion just to bring existing transit up to a state of good repair, let alone build out new transit options for people, yet we havent increased the user fee here in wdashington, d. C. In the quarter of a century, over the past few years, 17 states have raised their gas tax and nobody has been recalled, nobody has lost their reelection and it has not been a controversy, the American People get it. Theyre tired of sitting in traffic. Theyre tired of blowing out tires, and theyre tired of being detoured around weight limited or closed bridges. Theyre tired of the decrepit state of our mass transit. They want to see action. Im sending a letter to urge her to come down and work with congress to create a consensus around Real Investment and solutions for the nations infrastructure problems. Im hearing a lot of talk about infrastructure banks, private tax credits, and were doing to streamline the federal approval process. Lets address that briefly. First off most p3s are projects a billion dollars or larger. You have got to have a rate of return. We have got to attract the investment. They have to be told of some other way to recoup the investment. Theyre generally 5 to 1 public money to private money. Now, the speaker has said he wants 401 private money to public money. That means no more that means no more p 3s. There are no investors are going to put up, you know, at a 40 to 1 ratio and do a p3. They generally put up 10, 15 at the most, and the rest comes from local bonding or state bonding, municipal bonds, whatever. So thats myth number one. Infrastructure, banks, private activity bonds, you know, those are new forms of local borrowing again they require a revenue stream, hence tolling or some other way of recouping the investment and, of course, they increase the cost. Now secretary chao, unfortunately, was given some alternate facts by somebody. Investors say theyre waiting to invest, so the problem is not money, its delays caused by permitting projects that hold up projects up years even decades, making them risky investments. No, thats not the problem. In fact, we made 42 major policy changes for streamlining in 21. Some of them have run into conflicts with the fast act we did streamlining and more streamlining on top of streamlining, lets get all of that implemented and see if theres still any issues. I dont think youll find many. In fact, more than 90 of the projects go for it, which is basically filling out a few sheets of paper and might take you a month or two months at the most. That isnt the issue here. You cant streamline your way out of lack of funding. 4 of projects require Environmental Impact statements, and as Ranking Member norton noted, most of those are held up at the local or state level because of controversies surrounding those projects redesign and other things, which came out in hearings which are required under the process. Thats 4 of the projects. 96 dont even have to go through a rigorous Environmental Review. A recent report by the treasury looked at 40 economically significantly transportation water projects whose completion has been slowed or in jeopardy, Proof Positive about streamlining. No, the report found that a lack of public funding is, by far, the major factor hindering the completion of those projects. So plain and simple, a provision in the f. A. S. T. Act that says if Congress Appropriates more money to transportation, it flows through the policies in the fast f. A. S. T. Act. We dont need to spend a year or two rewriting the policies, arguing over transit highway split. Arguing how much goes here or there, arguing we dont have to go through any of the policy debate. All we need to do is have the guts to put up a little bit of money and thats why i introduced the penny for progress. As ive said before, if anybody around here thinks theyll lose their election, if they vote on something that caps the indexization increase at one and cents a gallon a year, then you dont need to be here. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. We have mr. Pattern. Hes testifying on behalf of the american state highway and transportation officials. We also have mr. Gary thomas who is president of the executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit, hes testifying on behalf of the American Public transportation association. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. As a representative from dallas, im proud to introduce not only a friend and partner, but a good executive who is mr. Gary thomas, president and executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit, which we call d. A. R. T. , the largest growing metropolitan area in the country. He joined d. A. R. T. In 1988 and since grown it to the longest and largest at 93 miles long. Dart has become a leading example of how to effectively manage and grow flourishing Public Transportation. I happen to know they have strong relationships with our federal partners at us d. O. T. And the federal transit administration, thanks to mr. Thomas. Hes effective at cultivating Strategic Partnerships to meet the needs of robust Transit Network in the dallas metroplex. With that, mr. Chairman, i am proud to introduce mr. Thomas to the committee with great anticipation to his testimony and his plea for money. Thank you, and i yield back. You, mr. S i thank chairman. Its my distinct pleasure to recognize and welcome my friend kaseem reed mayor, of atlanta. I can think of no better witness than to offer the honorable kaseem reed. Mayor reed, when he first came into office, he balanced atlantas budget and took care of the challenge of the unfunded pension system, which had been languishing for many years, thats been taken care of successfully six years ago. He has invested in hiring more Police Officers in atlanta. Our crime rate continues to go down. Mayor reed is the 59th mayor of the city of atlanta, serving in that capacity since 2010. Bipartisan way with federal stake holders on Economic Development and transportation issues. Atlanta experienced Economic Development and a population boom, for instance, his work with governor nathan deal and the Obama Administration to obtain federal support for the port of savannah expansion project has resulted in much Economic Development for the atlanta region and for the state of georgia. Upgrading roads and bridges and improve the citys transportation infrastructure. The city of atlanta under mayor reeds leadership is undergoing a historic 2. 6 billion expansion of the metropolitan atlanta Rapid Transit authority. A. , as well as expanding and completing such as atlantas belt line, which is a 22mile stretch of trails and transit around the city on the abandon railways. This project has opened up a lot of Economic Development in terms of new housing and rehabilitated housing, new residents coming in, businesses , communities being created that are walkable, interconnected, and also at the same time, he has presided over the opening of the Maynard Jackson International Terminal at the Atlanta Airport as atlanta matures into a world class city. He is overseeing currently a 6 billion expansion of the Hartsfield Jackson airport. An international airport, the worlds Busiest Airport at the same time, building a state of the art stadium world class facility with the retractable roof for the falcons. So much that we can talk about leadership ofeds atlanta. Hes leveraging the strength of partnerships with the state of georgia, college and universities in the private sector to build an innovative transportation infrastructure that ensures mobility and creativity for atlantas residents, businesses and visitors, all taking place while atlanta remains an affordable city where every day working people can afford to live, work, and play. With that im proud to introduce to this committee, mayor kasim reed. Chair graves thank you, mr. Johnson. With that ill ask consent that our witnesses full statements be included in the record. Without objection, that is so ordered. Since your written testimony is going to be part of the committee, the committee will please ask that you limit your summary to five minutes. With that, mr. Patterson, well start with you. I am here to testify on behalf of odot. First we want to thank you, mr. Chairman, and other members of your committee for your leadership and efforts to increase the efficiency of delivering transportation projects in collaboration and cooperation with the federal government. s continue to seek opportunities and create solutions to solve the deteriorating Transportation System. All of us have come to realize traditional funding is important that serves as a partial solution to the problem. The f. A. S. T. Authorization of 305 billion for federal highway, highway safety, transit, Passenger Rail programs from 2016 to 2020 could not have have been timelier and supporting our transportation infrastructure. Equally importantly involves policy reformsic contained in both the f. A. S. T. Act. It is our hope that congress will feel comfortable in seeking additional reforms that will provide further opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Transportation Programs and project delivery while remaining responsible stew ards of taxpayer resources and both human and natural environments. Moving forward, we must develop a modern revenue model for serving our transportation investments. Consumption for a fleet of ever increasing fuel efficient vehicles is nearing its end. What we consider what we consider innovative funding today must and will become a new normal for funding transportation. Until that time, it is imperative that the annual Obligation Authority and the f. A. S. T. Act be fully honored, the structural cashflow deficit in the Rapid Transit<\/a> system. The hearing is about two hours. We will call the subcommittee to order. I like to say good morning and welcome all of our witnesses here today to the hearing. By now weve seen the reports in the resulting collapse of section i85 northeast of atlanta. This is a critically important piece of our system which carries over 400,000 cars a day. With that volume of traffic, its amazing there wasnt any loss of life in this incident. I commend the state and local officials for responding so quickly to the crisis. I want to commend the u. S. Department of transportation for acting quickly to release funds, emergency funds and provide assistance. Were here to examine the implementation of the fast act of state and local partners. Its the first long term surface transportation reauthorization bill in a decade and its Important Foundation<\/a> for building a 21st century infrastructure. As a fiveyear bill provides very much needed certainty and funding so that our nonfederal partners can make smart longterm investments. The fact that fast act is a forward looking law that puts an emphasis on projects of national significance, streamlining project delivery and ichbnnovative solution. State department and Transit System<\/a>s and local entities have the important task of delivering transportation projects to the communities. As they carry out these projects, the witnesses have a firsthand view of how federal transportation policies are being implemented by the u. S. Department of transportation. We look forward to building 21st century infrastructure with our state and local partners. We are going to welcome their input today. Now recognize rankingmember, the subcommittee for your opening statement. Thank you very much. Grateful for this subcommittee hearing. I think it indicates that our subcommittee wants to get behin. Grateful for this subcommittee hearing. I think it indicates that our subcommittee wants to get behind all of the interest that weve heard on infrastructure and see what we can really do we know. We know that a large infrastructure package idea, the idea of a large infrastructure package, which is on the minds of many in the administration and on our minds is not going to magically appear. We did a lot of and ill say, deservedly so, a lot of self con congratulation when we passed the First Service<\/a> transportation bill in 10 years, and i must say im very grateful, mr. Chairman, that it was a good bipartisan effort and i know you share with me the disappointment in order to get any increase whatsoever after 10 years, we had to make a sixyear bill a fiveyear bill. I dont know how long we can keep that kind of disinvestment from going on. I say disinvestment, because if youre not even investing in a state of good repair, much less the new infrastructure we need, youre not investing, we are disinvesting, and when i say disinvesting, remember how we built this country. Ever since this idea of the federal transportation infrastructure package was created by president eisenhower, the country has understood that you cant be a great country unless you continuously invest in infrastructure of various kinds. The Congressional Budget Office<\/a> tells us that we face a shortfall just over the next decade if were trying to continue to fund the f. A. S. T. Act funding levels, and it says we need 17 billion more a year than f. A. S. T. Act levels at the federal level to improve our infrastructure and maintain a state of good repair reducing that backlog. Im very pleased that the president has said good things about infrastructure, so i hastened to get a hold of his socalled skinny budget and was very disappointed to see really unheard of cuts to popular Transportation Program<\/a>s. So instead of investing after my hopes had been raised, for example, in transit, urgently needed to alleviate congestion, the president wants to stop all new investments in transit by cutting off the new starts program. Im grateful im grateful nevertheless for the continuing bipartisanship on this committee. I was pleased to sign a letter with chairman graves and the leadership of the full committee to urge the Appropriation Committee<\/a> to fully fund all f. A. S. T. Act programs as authorized for the remainder of 2017 and the upcoming 2018 budget. Im still banking on a president who talks about a trillion dollars proposal, at least supporting us as we fight to maintain the meager funding levels we had. We know that the budget, im not terribly im not terribly pulling my hair out that the president s cuts will go through because no matter who is president , the appropriators always rewrite the budget. But i am concerned that the administration seems to be more enamored with pushing private capital and financing, which would end up making projects more expensive than traditional funding mechanisms and regulatory reforms than making investments. And investorcentered approach will do little to improve infrastructure across the nation. You simply cant build your infrastructure and expect that toll roads will somehow pay for it. There must be a revenue stream, and for the modern era in american life, it is always with this committee and subcommittee. Nor can we streamline our way out of inAdequate Funding<\/a>. Secretary child said recently, the problem is not money imagine saying that about roads and transit. The problem is always money. She didnt say that, that was editorializing. It was the delays to permitting processes that hold up projects for years making them risky are nationwide, undergo any rigorous Environmental Review<\/a>. Most are what we see everyday, 90 are exempt from rigorous categories asian ategorization c process and are exempt from rigorous levels of review. Also refutes the notion that more streamlining now is the prudent cost of action it concludes that additional streamlining provisions in the f. A. S. T. Act are actually slowing down the department of u. S. Department of transportations ability to implement the project delivery accelerations put into map 21, in other words, streamlining measures on top of each other before they can be implemented and simply does not help and frankly does not happen. I have always defended opportunities for public and continue to believe that it helps us improve the ultimate project. Community input and buy in are crucial to the successful and expeditious advancement of transportation projects getting public im sorry, gutting Public Participation<\/a> in the name of cutting red tape is something that will harm our roads and well harm constituents who use our roads infrastructure. I i dont believe we can reinvent the wheel when it comes to transportation and infrastructure, i just think theres no way around our obligation, as the congress of the United States<\/a> to provide states and local governments with the funding and the flexibility that they alone know what to do with to smart and produce smart and efficient projects, allowing the states who have the wisdom once we give them the money, to go ahead. I very much look forward to todays witnesses. Ive read the headlines about atlanta. And i85 will be interesting to hear what we can do and what you can do on that unforeseen circumstance. Thank you very much, and i look forward to the testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member<\/a>. I now turn to the Ranking Member<\/a> committee, mr. Defazio. Defazio thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks for this important hearing. Ill just restate a few things because they do merit restating. We have a 836 billion backlog on that need, nearly 140,000 bridges need repair and replacement, over 90 billion just to bring existing transit up to a state of good repair, let alone build out new transit options for people, yet we havent increased the user fee here in wdashington, d. C. In the quarter of a century, over the past few years, 17 states have raised their gas tax and nobody has been recalled, nobody has lost their reelection and it has not been a controversy, the American People<\/a> get it. Theyre tired of sitting in traffic. Theyre tired of blowing out tires, and theyre tired of being detoured around weight limited or closed bridges. Theyre tired of the decrepit state of our mass transit. They want to see action. Im sending a letter to urge her to come down and work with congress to create a consensus around Real Investment<\/a> and solutions for the nations infrastructure problems. Im hearing a lot of talk about infrastructure banks, private tax credits, and were doing to streamline the federal approval process. Lets address that briefly. First off most p3s are projects a billion dollars or larger. You have got to have a rate of return. We have got to attract the investment. They have to be told of some other way to recoup the investment. Theyre generally 5 to 1 public money to private money. Now, the speaker has said he wants 401 private money to public money. That means no more that means no more p 3s. There are no investors are going to put up, you know, at a 40 to 1 ratio and do a p3. They generally put up 10, 15 at the most, and the rest comes from local bonding or state bonding, municipal bonds, whatever. So thats myth number one. Infrastructure, banks, private activity bonds, you know, those are new forms of local borrowing again they require a revenue stream, hence tolling or some other way of recouping the investment and, of course, they increase the cost. Now secretary chao, unfortunately, was given some alternate facts by somebody. Investors say theyre waiting to invest, so the problem is not money, its delays caused by permitting projects that hold up projects up years even decades, making them risky investments. No, thats not the problem. In fact, we made 42 major policy changes for streamlining in 21. Some of them have run into conflicts with the fast act we did streamlining and more streamlining on top of streamlining, lets get all of that implemented and see if theres still any issues. I dont think youll find many. In fact, more than 90 of the projects go for it, which is basically filling out a few sheets of paper and might take you a month or two months at the most. That isnt the issue here. You cant streamline your way out of lack of funding. 4 of projects require Environmental Impact<\/a> statements, and as Ranking Member<\/a> norton noted, most of those are held up at the local or state level because of controversies surrounding those projects redesign and other things, which came out in hearings which are required under the process. Thats 4 of the projects. 96 dont even have to go through a rigorous Environmental Review<\/a>. A recent report by the treasury looked at 40 economically significantly transportation water projects whose completion has been slowed or in jeopardy, Proof Positive<\/a> about streamlining. No, the report found that a lack of public funding is, by far, the major factor hindering the completion of those projects. So plain and simple, a provision in the f. A. S. T. Act that says if Congress Appropriates<\/a> more money to transportation, it flows through the policies in the fast f. A. S. T. Act. We dont need to spend a year or two rewriting the policies, arguing over transit highway split. Arguing how much goes here or there, arguing we dont have to go through any of the policy debate. All we need to do is have the guts to put up a little bit of money and thats why i introduced the penny for progress. As ive said before, if anybody around here thinks theyll lose their election, if they vote on something that caps the indexization increase at one and cents a gallon a year, then you dont need to be here. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. We have mr. Pattern. Hes testifying on behalf of the american state highway and transportation officials. We also have mr. Gary thomas who is president of the executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit<\/a>, hes testifying on behalf of the American Public<\/a> transportation association. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. As a representative from dallas, im proud to introduce not only a friend and partner, but a good executive who is mr. Gary thomas, president and executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit<\/a>, which we call d. A. R. T. , the largest growing metropolitan area in the country. He joined d. A. R. T. In 1988 and since grown it to the longest and largest at 93 miles long. Dart has become a leading example of how to effectively manage and grow flourishing Public Transportation<\/a>. I happen to know they have strong relationships with our federal partners at us d. O. T. And the federal transit administration, thanks to mr. Thomas. Hes effective at cultivating Strategic Partnerships<\/a> to meet the needs of robust Transit Network<\/a> in the dallas metroplex. With that, mr. Chairman, i am proud to introduce mr. Thomas to the committee with great anticipation to his testimony and his plea for money. Thank you, and i yield back. You, mr. S i thank chairman. Its my distinct pleasure to recognize and welcome my friend kaseem reed mayor, of atlanta. I can think of no better witness than to offer the honorable kaseem reed. Mayor reed, when he first came into office, he balanced atlantas budget and took care of the challenge of the unfunded pension system, which had been languishing for many years, thats been taken care of successfully six years ago. He has invested in hiring more Police Officers<\/a> in atlanta. Our crime rate continues to go down. Mayor reed is the 59th mayor of the city of atlanta, serving in that capacity since 2010. Bipartisan way with federal stake holders on Economic Development<\/a> and transportation issues. Atlanta experienced Economic Development<\/a> and a population boom, for instance, his work with governor nathan deal and the Obama Administration<\/a> to obtain federal support for the port of savannah expansion project has resulted in much Economic Development<\/a> for the atlanta region and for the state of georgia. Upgrading roads and bridges and improve the citys transportation infrastructure. The city of atlanta under mayor reeds leadership is undergoing a historic 2. 6 billion expansion of the metropolitan atlanta Rapid Transit<\/a> authority. A. , as well as expanding and completing such as atlantas belt line, which is a 22mile stretch of trails and transit around the city on the abandon railways. This project has opened up a lot of Economic Development<\/a> in terms of new housing and rehabilitated housing, new residents coming in, businesses , communities being created that are walkable, interconnected, and also at the same time, he has presided over the opening of the Maynard Jackson<\/a> International Terminal<\/a> at the Atlanta Airport<\/a> as atlanta matures into a world class city. He is overseeing currently a 6 billion expansion of the Hartsfield Jackson<\/a> airport. An international airport, the worlds Busiest Airport<\/a> at the same time, building a state of the art stadium world class facility with the retractable roof for the falcons. So much that we can talk about leadership ofeds atlanta. Hes leveraging the strength of partnerships with the state of georgia, college and universities in the private sector to build an innovative transportation infrastructure that ensures mobility and creativity for atlantas residents, businesses and visitors, all taking place while atlanta remains an affordable city where every day working people can afford to live, work, and play. With that im proud to introduce to this committee, mayor kasim reed. Chair graves thank you, mr. Johnson. With that ill ask consent that our witnesses full statements be included in the record. Without objection, that is so ordered. Since your written testimony is going to be part of the committee, the committee will please ask that you limit your summary to five minutes. With that, mr. Patterson, well start with you. I am here to testify on behalf of odot. First we want to thank you, mr. Chairman, and other members of your committee for your leadership and efforts to increase the efficiency of delivering transportation projects in collaboration and cooperation with the federal government. s continue to seek opportunities and create solutions to solve the deteriorating Transportation System<\/a>. All of us have come to realize traditional funding is important that serves as a partial solution to the problem. The f. A. S. T. Authorization of 305 billion for federal highway, highway safety, transit, Passenger Rail<\/a> programs from 2016 to 2020 could not have have been timelier and supporting our transportation infrastructure. Equally importantly involves policy reformsic contained in both the f. A. S. T. Act. It is our hope that congress will feel comfortable in seeking additional reforms that will provide further opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Transportation Program<\/a>s and project delivery while remaining responsible stew ards of taxpayer resources and both human and natural environments. Moving forward, we must develop a modern revenue model for serving our transportation investments. Consumption for a fleet of ever increasing fuel efficient vehicles is nearing its end. What we consider what we consider innovative funding today must and will become a new normal for funding transportation. Until that time, it is imperative that the annual Obligation Authority<\/a> and the f. A. S. T. Act be fully honored, the structural cashflow deficit in the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> be resolved, and the schedule of rescissions of Contract Authority<\/a> be abolished. Even in todays environment of financing solution, it remains imperative that direct funding of transportation investments remain the primary focus. The reality remains the most projects cannot generate adequate revenue to service debt or provide the return on investment required by private sector equity holders. Everyone recognizes that the provides at only nearterm solution to the transportation funding. That is because the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> continues to remain at a crossroads. The Highway Trust Fund<\/a> has provided stable, reliable and sometimes substantial highway and transit funding for deck ka since its inception in 1956, but this is no longer the case. Since 2008, it has sustained through a series has been sustained through a series of general Fund Transfers<\/a> now amounting to 140 billion. According to the january 2017 baseline of congressional of the Congressional Budget Office<\/a>, the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> spending is estimated to exceed receipts by about 17 billion in fy 21 growing to about 4 billion to 2027. Furthermore, the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> is expected to experience a significant cash shortfall in 2021 since it cannot incur negative im sorry, since it cant incur negative balance. Estimates a 40 drop from 2020 to the following year to from 46. 2 billion to 27. 7 billion. In the past, such a similar shortfall situations have led to the possibility of reduction in federal reimbursements to states on existing obligations leading to a serious cashflow problems for states and resulting in project delays. Based on the federal surface Transportation Program<\/a>s long track record efficiency and flexibility, we recommend that any increase in federal funds should flow through the existing f. A. S. T. Act based Program Structure<\/a> rather than through untested approaches that require more time and oversight. Though though the certainty certainly significant benefits from investment and transportation infrastructure goes well beyond shortterm construction jobs created, a well performing Transportation Network<\/a> allows businesses to manage inventory and move goods across more cheaply a variety of suppliers and markets for their products and get employees reliable to work. Congress should encourage the u. S. D. O. T. To implement the provisions of the f. A. S. T. Act fully consistent with the legislative intent. An example of the d. O. T. Regulatory action is the onerous and unanticipated requirement regarding metropolitan planning organization, npo coordination. Although state d. O. T. And theyre already added significant legal and administrative that will serve to constructive and flexible approaches to planning and programming being implemented by states and npos today. Along with the companion to legislation to repeal this rule, we appreciate your committees prompt action last week to bring this before the house rule. Mr. Chairman, thank you for conducting this important hearing to bring a greater awareness of the Transportation Needs<\/a> for the nation and thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. We will be happy to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you, mr. patterson. Mr. Thomas. Mr. Thomas i appreciate the work that this committee does. Thank you, congresswoman johnson for your kind introduction, but more importantly, thank you for what you do in our region,. You have been the stalwart congresswoman in our region for many years, and im grateful for the impact you have had. I am grateful to talk about the impact that the partnership with the federal government and most reportedly the f. A. S. T. Act has had on our community. D. A. R. T. Was created in 1983 when north texans voted to tax themselves a 1 sales tax to create a Transit Agency<\/a> that quite frankly they didnt know what was going to do at that point time. Today, d. A. R. T. Is a multimodal Transit Agency<\/a> operating north americas longest light rail system in the fourth largest metropolitan area in the United States<\/a>. The 2. 3 million residents of our 13 cities, 700squaremile of bus, light rail, Commuter Rail<\/a> and Transit Services<\/a> to give them a choice to get them where they need to go every single day. Ive been part of the public ceo Transportation Industry<\/a> for several years and ceo since 2001. Public transportation is changing the way American Communities<\/a> grow. Equally importantly, we are seeing a significant return on the Public Investment<\/a>. Transitoriented development along d. A. R. T. Rail lines have generated more than 7 billion in Economic Impact<\/a> from new or planned construction. Additionally, in 2014, there were 43,000 jobs that resulting ed from this development, resulting in nearly 3 billion in wages, salaries, and benefits. Now, our region now, our regions customers insist on being mobile and being connected. Our gopass mobile ticketing app was one of the first in the industry to respond to that demand from the multiagency and fair payment system. So just over two years ago, we began working with car and Ride Sharing Companies<\/a> like lyft, uber, and zip car to provide more complete trip. In other words, first mile, last mile opportunities. Now, were using a federal sandbox or mobility on demand grant to make it easier for car and ridesharing customers to connect with transit through that app. Our congressional delegation knows the federal funds will generate Significant Impact<\/a> and Higher Quality<\/a> of life in our region. Were pleased to enjoy consistent bipartisan support. We also believe that we need to bring money to the table. Voters to decide to dedicate a portion of sales tacks to help fund transit in their community. We use to level federal dollars difference makers in north texas. You can imagine the disappointment we had when we heard the details of the administrations 2018 budget. D. A. R. T. s success is prompting calls for more service, as you might imagine. We are advancing plans for second light rail line that we hope will be partially funded by core capacity grant. Unfortunately, it will foreclose the possibility, so despite significant local investment, the project can be delayed without federal funding support. Yet we need the capacity today. We are also bringing an old railroad corridor, the cotton belt, to the Commuter Rail<\/a> line adding a new connection to Dfw International<\/a> airport. In response to local demand, were able to accelerate that project by more than a decade. Loan,he help of a rrif the Railroad Improvement<\/a> financing loan, through the federal railroad administration. Federal support has helped us complete the conversion to compress natural gas, in addition were using federal funds from the low Emission Bus Program<\/a> to purchase seven electric buses that will be in operation next year. Weve been aggressive and intentional in seeking creative ways to fund and deliver our projects. People in communities everywhere are working on solutions that meet their unique needs. They have the vision and the desire they need help with the funding. We believe theres a role for local communities to partner with the federal government to Work Together<\/a> to support these visions with sustainable, substantial, and predictable funding that the f. A. S. T. Act provides. I cannot impress upon the committee strongly enough how important it is to keep the fast f. A. S. T. Act intact and that commitment intact as we move forward. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Members of the committee, i look forward to answering your questions. Chairman graves thank you, mr. Thomas. Mayor reed. Hit your mic. Reed thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, i want to thank you for the opportunity to be here today i want to thank my congressman from georgia. Chairman graves will you pull the mic a little closer . I want to hear everything you have to say. Eed i want to thank you for the kind introduction, im hopeful my wife was watching. It made me feel good about my myself. Thank you, congresswoman johnson. I also want to thank the administration and this committee for your help with regard to the crisis that we have faced with the collapse of the i85 interstate in atlanta, georgia. The level of cooperation from our federal partners cannot have been stronger. I want today take this opportunity to express my personal gratitude. I come here today as the mayor of atlanta and the chairman of the Transportation Committee<\/a> for the u. S. Conference of mayors. The challenge that were having in atlanta with interstate 85 9the use of m. A. R. T. A, the largest Transportation System<\/a> in United States<\/a>, the challenge that were having in atlanta with interstate 85 and its collapse, really points out that an overall Transportation System<\/a> is needed now more than ever. In fact, since weve been facing this challenge with i85, the use of m. A. R. T. A. , the ninth largest Public Transportation<\/a> system in the United States<\/a>, has increased by more than 29 as we work through the challenge were facing. So alternatives, including resilient models we think will be increasingly important in the 21st century. Were also investing in roads, which is an issue that i know is very important to members of this committee, as well. In 2015 in 2015, the state of georgia passed hb 70 which raised the gas tax in order to fund nearly 1 billion annually for bridge and road repair. So were working hard to keep our own house in order in addition to having a strong relationship with our federal partners. The city of atlanta is also moving full speed ahead and leading in our own way. Last november, they moved forward which will generate 2. 6 billion for m. A. R. T. A. , and this item passed with 71 voter support. We also had a second ballot which will raise an estimated 300 million for Infrastructure Projects<\/a> and it received 68 support. I think its important to realize and in the metro area were focusing on roads and partnership with the state, but were also not leaving our transit responsibilities and capabilities behind. City residents are indeed voting with their pocketbooks, and businesses are voting with their tees. Their feet. In the last 42 months after we made these investments improving our road infrastructure and transit infrastructure, we have won 17 either regional or u. S. Headquarters in the city of atlanta. They include businesses like ncr, honeywell, ge digital, ups. We have had the largest net increase of jobs into the city 40more than four years years after making these Infrastructure Investment<\/a>s. This would not have been possible without the stability of the f. A. S. T. And your leadership in making that legislation possible. So i wanted to thank you. The in the last two years, atlanta taxpayers have focused increasingly on making sure that we fund our share of infrastructure, and i think its important to note that we ask this committee, as you develop future legislation, to always as keep in mind what the local community has invested as we try to attract grants and federal support. We are fixing roads and bridges, engineering more than 30 miles of complete street projects, including bicycle lanes and traffic light synchronization initiatives. As a result of all of these items, the city of atlantas has improved seven positions to aa plus as rated by Standard Poors<\/a> moodys and fitch. The point were making is, is that when you invest in these Critical Infrastructure<\/a> items, the market responds and the Business Community<\/a> responds none. Expansion means the position is very real for transit, connecting with heavy rail and the atlanta streetcar systems. None of this would have been possible without your committees support. Mr. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. Chairman graves thank you ray much, mayor. To mr. Schuster. Shuster i will turn to the full committee. Im sorry im late. I did make it to hear all your testimony. I want to thank you all. Thank you for bringing your expertise and thank you, mayor reed, for being here, again. Outside of the ninth Congressional District<\/a>, i think youre probably my favorite mayor in america. Sorry what happened down there on the bridge and 85. From what theyre telling me, theyll rebuild that bridge in about 80 days. This is certainly a tragedy. Thank goodness and god that nobody was killed. We ought to pay close attention to how fast this moves we need to learn for this as we did from the interstate 35 seven years. They built that bridge just shy of 400 days. I was late because i spent an hour with the secretary chao. She came and briefed about ha members of congress. She talked about the infrastructure bill and how important it is to the president. Of course, 40, 45 members were there asking a lot of Great Questions<\/a> and theres a federal component to it, obviously, weve got to figure the revenues out. Publicprivate partnerships are a tool in the tool box. Its not the tool box. We need to make it better. And then figuring out how to unleash the private dollars. Thats a 2 billion road project, 2 billion, 50 million federal money, the rest is california money and state, local, private sector dollars. They want to get about 500 or 500 million 600 million in a loan, theyre dragging their feet. These are the kind of things we have to get out of the way of the states and locals to move these projects forward. I appreciate the three of you being here today. I will be remiss if i didnt introduce and welcome to the committee the dean of the secretary of transportation in the the dean of the secretary of transportation from oklahoma, gary ridly, dean ridly, its good to see you. Just you being in the room were learning through osmosis by you being here. I really always appreciate you being here. Thank you, chairman, for having this hearing. Chairman graves and with that well open it up for questions ,. We will start with mr. Barletta. Rep. Barletta thank you, mr. Chairman. As most of my colleagues know, i grew up working in the Road Construction<\/a> business, and that is experience showed me how difficult it can be for state and local governments to move forward with projects when theyre uncertain about federal transportation spending. Not only that experience, i was a former mayor, as well. I saw it on both ends. And that uncertainty trickles down to private industry. My family would not hire more workers or purchase more equipment without knowing what the future might hold, without knowing what kind of work would be out there and for how long. Now, under the f. A. S. T. Act, federal transportation funding runs out in 2020. Can any of you speak how this deadline effects your ability to move transportation projects forward . Congressman, a few for the opportunity to address that question. From the Transit Agency<\/a> close he perspective we do a very long , range plan, a 20year plan that identifies and assumes in some regards and identifying all of our revenue and identifies all of our expenses. Our projects are very specific. We make sure we know what we can build certainly, prohibits us from that certainty from that reliability of knowing what we can do in that 20year plan, and so it limits us as we look at the one of the Fastest Growing<\/a> regions in the country, we cant always predict out and solve some of the transportation challenges that we need to be doing now to make sure that those projects are in place at that point in time. So the longrange funding is certainly critical for transit as we move forward, thank you. Mayor reed as a follow on to my colleagues comments, one of the things that we could absolutely do right now, which would be to smooth out the process around continuing resolutions even under the f. A. S. T. Act that we have right now. Whenever we have that tension period when were waiting for the continuing resolution process, it effects our ability to budget, and our state d. O. T. , for example, is in a position where it cant adequately prepare to get projects out waiting for that process. So thats something thats within the f. A. S. T. Act structure right now that could help us push a great deal more dollars out to businesses to get folks working. Shuster thank you. Rep. Barletta thank you. One of the biggest complaints i hear from people back home is that red tape in bureaucracy consistently hamper investment and innovation. The f. A. S. T. Act called for greater environmental streamlining to get the projects to completion faster. Can any of you speak to the success of this attempt . Is it actually happening . Or are permits still slow to be developed by stake holder agencies . Mr. Patterson congressman, as i mentioned in my comments, i really appreciate what has happened with streamlining in the effects that came out on the f. A. S. T. Act in that 21. We still have some challenges. There are rulemaking processes that are still underway that we still dont have the rules in place, even after five years. But its important that the rules come out right. We dont we dont want them just to be expeditiously drawn up and be wrong. So we have not felt all of the effects of your efforts and the rest of congresss to provide that streamlining, but were hopeful that it does come does come to pass. Barletta thank you. And just finally, theres no question, we need to find a sustainable Funding Source<\/a> for infrastructure. We cant keep pulling rabbits out of our hat or one trick ponies or whatever we call them. I support a user fee. Its one way we can to that. What solutions do you have for a sustainable revenue stream that we can put in the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> . To help the Highway Trust Fund<\/a> . Mr. Patterson congressman, oklahoma is a member of what we call the western road users consortium, there is a group on the we you move the microphone . Mr. Patterson yes, sir. Sorry. Oklahoma is a member of the western road users consortium , and there is a group on the east coast that is looking at what you call user fees. Some sort of way to Fund Transportation<\/a> beyond the consumption tax that i mentioned in my oral testimony. We see that something has to be done, and i appreciate the federal government and congress providing some grant opportunities for our western right to look at different funding mechanisms. I know that oregon has a test underway, and california just entered into that similar kind of test model. So the states are looking at that, and we hope that the federal government and congress looks at our success and our failures, to develop something for the future. Mayor reed last month, we also have visited with representative shuster and Ranking Member<\/a> defazio to talk about their penny for progress proposal as a guide. Additionally, we strongly believe that local governments and state governments that really put skin in the game ought to have a process where they have an advanced position in attracting federal capital. So how you all would structure that on a longterm basis, we would leave to the wisdom of this body, but when a local jurisdiction or states citizens raise their hands and say were going to be first in on dealing with our own problems, we believe that that municipality or state should be in an advanced position and that significant points should be awarded to whatever pool of money you all ultimately make available for us to deal with some of these tough challenges. Barletta thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Chairman graves. Thank you. Ms. Norton. Norton thank you, mr. Chairman, i would be interested in knowing if any of your states have raised the state gas tax and what the effect what Public Opinion<\/a>, what the effect on Public Opinion<\/a> was and what do you think would with the effect of raising the federal gas tax now that some state gas taxes have been raised. If you if you have both gas taxes, im interested what you have to say about that . Mr. Thomas yes, maam. Texas has not raised their gas tax since 1992. So its much the same case. But when you watch gas prices every day swing, ten, 15 cents a gallon, im not sure how much a penny, penny and a half, two pennies would be noticed. Certainly there have been conversations in austin about gas tax and vehicle miles traveled. There are a lot of suggestions being made. We recognize as a state that something needs to be done, but much like whats happening across the country, the a lot of conversation we just havent made that decision yet. Rep. Norton mr. Patterson and mayor reed . Mr. Patterson oklahoma has not raised our gas tax since 1987. Governor fallin has proposed to increase our fuel tax. Its it is estimated that by june we will have the lowest fuel tax in the country at 14 cents for diesel rep. Norton how is that work out for you . Mr. Patterson its not working too well. So the governor has made that proposal to increase it to 24 cent for diesel and gasoline, and its going through the legislative process at this point. Msrep. Norton mayor reed . Mayor reed yes, maam. our governor in 2015, a republican governor with almost near constitutional majorities in our house and in our senate in georgia with republican majorities in both raised the gas tax and raised 1 billion as a result of that. In the city of atlanta, we passed the 2. 6 billion for the largest Transit System<\/a> in our history and we had a funding , measure that passed with 68 local support, funding more than 300 million in infrastructure. A year prior to that, we had a local referendum for a 250 million infrastructure bond. It passed with more than 80 support. So my state, im from the state of georgia. We have a very conservative state. And all of these measures have been passed with broad majorities. Legislative in legislative majority was the General Assembly<\/a> for 1 billion in road use and the other items involving our m. A. R. T. A. , our Transit System<\/a>, and infrastructure funds have been done within the city of atlanta. Its a nice mix of urban and rural showing that whether you are focused on rural folks or urban folks, people get that we need significant Infrastructure Investment<\/a>. Rep. Norton very instructive. Conservative or republican, no one has found a way to build roads and bridges and Transit System<\/a>s without money. And im interested in the in what the states have done. Because almost half the states have taken the initiative, seeing that the federal government is stuck and has been stuck for a generation, one more question. Id like to i got into the f. A. S. T. Act actually, it was the idea of a number of us funds for alternatives. We dont just criticize the fact that Congress Wont<\/a> or your states with those two states, for that matter, continue to continue to ignore the need for funds. We look for alternative funds and note that some states have found alternative ways are actually experimenting. There is 10 million in the f. A. S. T. Act for such experimentation. Looking at the notions to come forward recently about private investment as a way to fund roads and the investors getting back their investment through i suppose fares or tolls or the rest id be interested in knowing whether you think relying more heavily on private investment would would help us in fact hasten the work that needs to be done on our roads, bridges, and infrastructure . Mr. Patterson in oklahoma, and in many states, we have seen a reliance more on private investors. In oklahoma, we have our turnpike authority, which was created back in the late 1940s to develop a high speed Transit System<\/a> between Oklahoma City<\/a> and tulsa. It has since then expanded on and it is a tolling authority , but the private investors are the moms and pops around the country that buy bonds. So we so we cant forget that that is a private investing opportunity. Rep. Norton could you build most of the roads using tolls . Would the public tolerate that . Mr. Patterson no, maam, we cant and we realize that. We understand that at this point many states are relying on some sort of tolling to make up the difference between Adequate Funding<\/a> at both the state and federal level. Rep. Norton could i get answers, too, from the other two witnesses, please . Mayor reed congresswoman, i think it depends as long as you keep your focus on project models versus tax credit models. I think the conversation has to be around real projects. Probably the most successful private Public Partnership<\/a> we have is the atlanta belt line where we reclaimed 22 miles of old abandoned railroads and now the 400 million in public support has triggered 3. 8 billion in private capital attracted to renovating that entire corridor and creating 1200 acres of green space. That is a project model where Everybody Knows<\/a> the focus is going to be and everybody is tracking the jobs that are being created. The concern that were experiencing is moving to a tax credit model for the Financial Services<\/a> community or the financiers. The most striking and successful Public Private<\/a> partnerships have been project specific with very borrowed Community Buy<\/a> in. . P. Norton mr. Thomas mr. Thomas from a transit industry perspective, its a little bit different. P3s are a great opportunity, perhaps as long as you understand going into it that money is going to cost you more than what you could typically borrow other places. There are levels of Public Private<\/a> partnerships. In in one case with we work with uber and lyft. That is a Publicprivate Partnership<\/a> of sorts. On the other hand when we do a design build project, that is a Public Private<\/a> partnership with no funding or financing involved. When you get to the funding financing level, and of course the associated risksharing opportunities, those cost more money. The private sector is going to expect higher Interest Rate<\/a> on the money they put into a project than what we can typically get through the federal funds or even through a rrif or other loan. Rep. Norton thank you very much. Chairman graves mr. Davis, five minutes. Davis thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses. Mayor reed, sorry about the braves on opening day. Not a not an easy thing, especially after the falcons. Mayor reed i appreciate all the goodwill we can get. Rep. Davis we dont want to remind you of bad things happening to atlanta sports. But as a braves fan myself, its good to have you here. I want to ask about funds that is suballocated to localities, its the most flexible trmgs funding to states. And i was pleased that the f. A. S. T. Act took important steps to increase stbg allocations closer to traditional levels. Mayor, can you explain to the committee the importance to increase those funds to address your transportation and infrastructure problems . Mayor reed congressman davis, i think they are absolutely vital and they will encourage local municipalities to deal with our infrastructure challenges. The one point that i would make here is one that ive already made is that i do believe that local governments that really step up and start solving these problems on their own should have a dynamic, competitive advantage, and that is not in my opinion, enough of the consideration thats a part of this process. But i believe that the steps that were already taking have been vital. But i do believe that our federal partners could encourage us to do more on our own in order to be rewarded for that good behavior. Rep. Davis well, i appreciate hearing that, mayor, and also im pleased, you know, that the f. A. S. T. Act does gradually increase the local control by increasing the sub allocation for stbg, but i would have liked a larger increase. That is why i along with my nevada,iss titus from voted to increase. And while we were unsuccessful, i still believe we should look at ways to increase the local control and flexibility of these transportation dollars. Do you do you have any suggestions additionally to what you responded to my previous question with that congress could take to further promote local control and help communities better address your priorities . Mayor reed i think holding up National Models<\/a> that congress has confidence in for other governments to see would be very helpful. In other words, having some form playing a clearinghouse function where the answer is not always additional money or capital but the answer may be these are governments taking on these challenges and handling them well from a financing standpoint and an execution standpoint. Because everybody is going to come here and ask for more money, but if you are a local leader or a mayor, you have an end date. And to the extent that a body like yours held projects out as models after you verified them and prepared to put your stamp of approval on it, i think that it would make it much easier to scale these projects around the country in communities large and small. Rep. Davis thats great advice. And do you have any projects that you might want to mention here to the committee that are working well as maybe Public Private<\/a> partnerships regarding Infrastructure Improvements<\/a> in atlanta . Mayor reed absolutely. I believe the atlanta belt line is as successful as anywhere in the country. If you have been to new york and enjoyed the high line, the atlanta belt line would be the equivalent of extending that to westchester county. It is 400 million in its 3. 8 public money. Million in private money. It connects 45 neighborhoods that used to be separated by freeways. It has caused the city to connect just socially in a way it had never connected before. That would be one example. Another example would be the atlanta streetcar where we had 98 million in Public Investment<\/a> , and we had 2. 5 billion in new Construction Activity<\/a> within a fiveminute walk of that line. Rep. Davis ok. Im not as familiar with the first project you mentioned. How are you paying back the private portion as a return on investment . What method . Mayor reed its through the use of tax credits for investments. So for example, when you invest in the atlanta belt line, the public went in and did all of the spending that it did to to clean and prepare, and the private sector came in after the Public Sector<\/a> went in and identified the line. So for example, there was a 1 million square foot building that had been boarded up and was dilapidated. It has now attracted a quarter Million Dollars<\/a> investment that used to be owned by my government. I sold it to the private sector. The private sector came in and invested a quarter of a billion dollars. Its built on the belt. It is built on the atlanta belt line, and now 1. 4 Million People<\/a> are using the atlanta belt line. Rep. Davis thank you very much for your responses. Mayor reed thank you for the question. Chairman graves mr. Nadler. Rep. Nadler thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Patterson, your written testimony suggests that the f. A. S. T. Act rises faster for this committee has stood by the 80 20 Highway Trust Fund<\/a> split for decades. Does oklahoma support this 80 20 split as we did in the f. A. S. T. Act . Mr. Patterson we do. We believe nadler the mic please . Mr. Patterson we do believe that the 80 20 split is appropriate and should be maintained. Nadler thank you. And also your testimony makes a compelling argument that direct funding is essential for highway and bridge projects. You say that the funding is helpful but will not preplace real dollars. Can you explain why they wont generate significant return on investment . Mr. Patterson when you typically look at a transportation project across this country, when youre talking about rural or urban situations, there is no opportunity in most cases to additionally, theres no toll tha additionally, theres no Economic Economic<\/a> way to capture the dollars that are generated along a route. An example in oklahoma, we have seen where a small town in southern oklahoma, they grew out and annexed out to what we call interstate 35. They did that because of the Economic Development<\/a> the interstate provided to them. But we could not we as the d. O. T. Cant capture that. But there was benefit to the city through additional sales tax. Rep. Nadler thank you. I have one more question for you, sir. And then i will move on to the other witnesses. Earlier this year, Speaker Paul Ryan<\/a> suggested that an infrastructure package should consist of 98 private funding. Specifically, the speaker said there should be a 40 to 1 ratio between private sector and in a federal infrastructure package. Mr. Patterson, your testimony discusses the importance of direct funding. Do you believe that an infrastructure package that relies on 98 private funding can adequately address the needs of oklahoma and other states . I donterson understand how you get to that perspective. It is something that i would have to learn more about. Rep. Nadler the perspective is basically you have some sort of tax credits with federal funding that amounts to 2 and the other 98 comes in from private p3s or s or something. You dont think that works . Mr. Patterson i dont think it works in oklahoma. Mayor reed but you do think itr works elsewhere, just not in oklahoma . Mr. Patterson i cant speak for the other states but i would imagine not. Rep. Nadler thank you. Mr. Thomas, do you agree that Public Private<\/a> partnerships, state infrastructure banks, and local bonding initiatives are helpful but cannot replace real direct dollars . Mr. Thomas they give us tools in the tool box, but it needs to be a complete tool box otherwise you cant get the project done. Rep. Nadler and its incomplete without the federal funding. Mr. Thomas yes, sir. Rep. Nadler mayor reed, do you believe that private investors will be able to fund the vast majority of highway and transit projects, or will they require federal and state funds to complete . Mayor reed i dont think the private market will do that because they will cherry pick projects, which will leave essential projects the answer is i dont believe i believe that the Public Private<\/a> partnership is important, but it will not replace the need for the federal partners to bear the lions share of the load because the incentive to do a private deal is to make a profit for the private sector. Rep. Nadler so in summary for all three witnesses, the proposal that we have heard, the administration has not made a formal proposal, but the proposal we have heard may be coming from the administration that they will do, i think, an 82 tax credit, again, for private partnerships for p for private partnerships, and that will fund the trillion dollars in infrastructure. Do do any of the three of you believe that would work to fund a trillion dollars in infrastructure if the only federal money basically is an 82 tax credit . Mayor reed i do not i believe you have to have a project model, not a tax credit model. Rep. Nadler what do you mean by a project model . Mayor reed i mean specific projects that youre identifying that the federal government is investing into in order to create jobs as opposed to a tax credit model. Rep. Nadler it has to be a federal investment . Mayor reed yes in addition to a , state and local investment. Mr. Thomas and mr. Patterson . Mr. Thomas i agree with the mayor of atlanta, and the tax credits wouldnt do it all by themselves. Rep. Nadler thank you. Mr. Patterson . Mr. Patterson i agree with the other two. Rep. Nadler thank you. So in summary all our witnesses think the proposal that i outlined which is what you heard would be the administrations proposal would not generate a trillion dollars from Infrastructure Investment<\/a> or anything near it . Is that correct . Mr. Patterson yes. Rep. Nadler thank you very much. My time is well expired, and thank you, mr. Chairman, for indulging us in the time. Chairman graves mr. Ferguson, five minutes. Ferguson thank you, mr. Chairman. Mayor reed, right over here. Glad to have a fellow georgian in and thank you for taking your time. I know the new mantra is if i can get there. Its been tough. But want to thank you on behalf of the rest of the state for your diligence and working of course with the governor to help mitigate what is a very, very difficult situation for not only atlanta but the southeast, and i think it goes to show just how important transportation is, the one break down in the system can have ripple effects throughout an entire region. Can you speak briefly to the cooperation needed between local, state, and federal officials, and most importantly, on the planning process as it relates to transportation projects . And also, a little feed back on how the response was from the federal department of transportation with the emergency on i85. Mayor reed thank you, congressman. And your accent was music to my ears. I felt right at home when you said hello. Heres what i think. I think that the most important fact has been that the governor governor deal and i had a strong working relationship, and so whether it when the state of georgia was competing for tifia funding or we were competing for a number of tiger grants weve always partners. So when you have an emergency like we had regarding the bridge collapse on i85, if you Work Together<\/a>, all of the time in a cooperative fashion, you just get through this challenge the way that you will get through others. The bulk of the credit, congressman, belongs to our first responders. In a tragic event, we had no loss of life. And i think the credit to that goes to our firefighters and our Police Officers<\/a> and our state patrol officers. They they coordinated and shut down the highway expeditiously, and then we coordinated in deploying resources, which included foam fire trucks from Hartsfield Jackson<\/a> airport, which were essential in putting the fire out so that less damage would have been done. Our federal partners have been exemplary. They have worked in the best tradition of the federal, state, and local relationship. And i have been in multiple meetings because we had it was at the state capital when this crisis occurred, and we instantly began working together. And i think thats why were going to get the highway up and operational as soon as we possibly can. And i also think that thats why you havent seen us playing typical political games of blames personship. Rep. Chairman graves ms. Johnson . Rep. Johnson thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman for this hearing. It has been one that has brought a great deal of frustration to me as i sit here and look at that quotation up there on the wall, the section of the constitution article 1, section 8 speaks to the federal governments responsibility to post offices and roads. We have privatized the post offices, and i dont know what were getting from it, but i just dont see how we can privatize transportation. Nevertheless, im one of these people that will try to find a way to work with any philosophy that i can to try to get a job done. But this is a tough approach to attempting to address the essential transportation problems in our country, so im going the ask mr. Thomas, how detrimental will these cuts be , or if theyll be detrimental to the city of dallas, to d. A. R. T. And cities across the country if the cig programs are cut . We have a lot of plans to accommodate the needs in the area, as im sure every major city does. But when you read the president s budget, what is your reaction . How where do we go from here . Congresswoman, right now we have three projects that are well into the process in the dallas area alone. Two are core capacity projects , and one is a small starts project. One is a second alignment through downtown. Again when people think of transit in the United States<\/a>, they dont always think about dallas, texas. But as i have said, we have got the longest light rail system in north america. They all come through a single corridor in downtown right now. If anything happens in that corridor, an accident, a fire we had a fire a few years ago. When the firemen lay the hoses across the tracks, they dont want the trains to run across those hoses and we understand and appreciate that. So we desperately need that second alignment through Downtown Dallas<\/a>. We are proposing a 50 50 split , in other words, bring a 50 of the project from local funds with a 50 match from the federal government on core capacity. The other project is an extension of our older platforms , which would allow us to on 28 platforms to extend those 100 feet, which gives us 30 capacity increase on those two lines, the red line and blue line, again looking for a 50 50 split. Texdot has come to the table with half of that. So were looking at the Core Capacity Program<\/a> for the other half. The third project is an extension of the streetcar project. The Streetcar Program<\/a> that we just opened not too long ago is unique because it uses americanmade streetcars. Streetcars that actually are dual mode. They operate with or without an overhead wire. We intend to we intend to extend that through Downtown Dallas<\/a> with a smart start program. We are well into the process, the environmental process, the working with the community, making sure we know where these projects should go, what the alignments are, building the support locally. All of those go away. They go away. Rep. Johnson now, we still are having tremendous growth to the area. So if they go away where do we go from there . [laughs] thats a good question, congressman. You know, i think you know, i think as we look at, certainly, in our region but across the United States<\/a>, the impact of the Capital Investment<\/a> grants has been important. Its its been critical as transit agencies have continued to provide choices for people in their communities to be able to get where they need to go, whether its to the doctor, to the grocery store, and most importantly to jobs. Well over 80 of the people that are riding Public Transportation<\/a> are going to their jobs. So its imperative that we continue to look for and support the f. A. S. T. Act. It has been incredibly successful to this i think its point. Imperative that we continue to support that through 2020 at least. Rep. Johnson thank you very much. Chairman graves thank you, mr. Chairman and panelists for joining us today. Mayor reed, ill start with you, first of all, thank you for being here. And i wish the best to the braves so long as they dont have any cross interest with the giants. Former National League<\/a> west mates. Now its all changed. We have some commonality with our emergency situations here with you with that bridge and i85 here. And i still harken back to when things went really well after the northridge earthquake in california way back in 1994 where it was projected it might be a year, year and a half having one of the largest freeways in the country knocked out, due to a can do attitude and pulling aside unnecessary red tape. They were able to get that back up within just a few months and saved much, much loss and Economic Activity<\/a> and inconvenience to the people in Southern California<\/a> there. So i hope that that is going well and you are getting all the cooperation in the world from the federal government and others so see your bridge through. And an original timetable from what i saw yesterday moved up from the fall or winter to maybe june. I hope its moving fast for you. We have an immediate need in our own backyard in Northern California<\/a> where you may have seen the story of the oroville dam and the spillway problem we had here in february that resulted partly as a precaution, an evacuation of nearly 200,000 people downstream of that. Nothing really bad ended up happening with the spillway, but the potential of the design was possible, and made that necessary. Infrastructure and Public Safety<\/a> are very intertwined, as we see. Do you feel that the federal transportation Infrastructure Program<\/a>s support the locals in increasing Public Safety<\/a> and being prepared as much as they need to be for emerging situations, im talking about my backyard or what you face with the loss of that bridge in your area . Is the federal government doing a good enough job supporting the local levels in that safety aspect . Again specifying emergency , situations where you need quick action . Mayor reed my sense is yes. I chair a group that is our local disaster planning entity in metropolitan atlanta, and i think that when it comes to emergency response, everything that i have seen shows a high level of professionalism and a high level of coordination. And and so that is an aspect of the government that i feel very good about. I do believe that were all going to have to change at the local level, really, to a posture of being resilient because without moving in to a debate about climate, weather patterns and emergency situations are coming with increasing frequency. And so i think that this is a conversation were going to have to start having more aggressively with our federal partners, the things you experience in Northern California<\/a> really have a great deal to do with being on a permanent resilient footing, and as i sit here testifying right now we are experiencing unusually bad weather in the city of atlanta and have been. So whats happening, local governments are having to be on a on an almost permanent footing of responding to crises of one kind or another frequently, weatherrelated crisis. Rep. Lamalfa do you think greater weight should be given to improved flexibility . Mayor reed no question about it. Flexibility is going to be the is going to be either the order of the day or its going to be thrust upon us by circumstances, so i think its a more thoughtful approach to have flexibility built into the relationship as opposed to good people have to make it up at the last minute. Rep. Lamalfa thank you. I appreciate it. And my experience at your airport has always been very good as i take the red eye from the coast and end up there at 6 00 a. M. Just the line at pop 6 00 is always too long at a. M. There. Mayor reed that is the busiest popeyes chicken in the world. [laughter] rep. Lamalfa thank you, sir. I yield back. Thank you, mr. Chair. Mr. Thomas, i have a question in regard to Capital Investment<\/a> grants. The Trump Administration<\/a> state budget calls for the elimination of the Capital Investment<\/a> starts. Do you think it makes fiscal sense to eliminate an Infrastructure Program<\/a> that has 55 projects from across the country and the planning potentially setting back billions of dollars of Infrastructure Investment<\/a> . Mr. Thomas theres certainly across the United States<\/a>, congressman, theres been a lot of work done in preparation of these projects. A lot of the projects, as they are in dallas, have gone through community meetings, coordination efforts. And in our case, we are bringing a significant amount of money to the table, as we always have and as well continue to the in our financial plan. People have looked at the f. A. S. T. Act as although it only goes to 2020, and we understand there are channels beyond that, we are appreciative of the longterm bill. We would like for it to stay intact and continue to move forward through 2020, so these agencies, including ours, that anticipated that funding can go ahead and get these projects completed and provide those choices to people. Rep. Napolitano but does it make fiscal sense to eliminate them . Mr. Thomas certainly in d. A. R. T. s case, no, maam, it does not. Were bringing money to the table. Theyre getting 50 cents to the dollar on a project. It makes sense to continue do that. Rep. Napolitano another question i have has to do with positive train control. The the f. A. S. T. Act provided 199 million guaranteed for fiscal year 2017 to help Commuter Rail<\/a>roads implement ptc. Our very own Appropriations Committee<\/a> did not make the funding available under the continuing resolution. This critical safety funding will lapse if the cr is extended for the remainder of this fiscal year. Mr. Patterson, mr. Thomas, can you elaborate why this is important to your agencies . Mr. Thomas certainly, the transit industry is hopeful that they will complete the fy 17 budget so that 199 million of Grant Funding<\/a> can be allocated to the properties throughout the country. We have a 2018 deadline system tommuter rail put that Transit System<\/a> in place. That comes on top of operating and maintaining our system every day. So its imperative that rep. Napolitano its already been extended once. Mr. Thomas yes, maam. So its imperative to meet the 2018 deadline so we can get that safety project complete. Rep. Napolitano thank you. Mr. Pattersonrily and mr. Reed. I have been working on an amendment to faa reauthorization to prohibit faa from impacting state and local general sales tax. The issue for 30 years, faa has required excise tax to be spent on airport for airport infrastructure, but for 30 years, the faa has not interpreted it to affect general sales tax, which tax Aviation Fuel<\/a> as well as other products. Sold in the country or the state. Now they are changing their interpretation, requiring state and local to count how much is collected by the general sales tax on Aviation Fuel<\/a> and siphoning the money back to the airport. Major federal thinks it is a problem when state and local governments are being told how to spend their own tax dollars by the faa, it will impact local transportation projects since most sales tax provide for local transportation funding. The Hartfield Jackson<\/a> airport in the state of georgia is one of the most impacted regions in the country with the new rule. It will take millions of dollars out of a local control, a major problem in my state of california. Are you aware of the issue and do you have concerns with the new faa rule should congress fix and return 30 years of precedence that allows the governments to spend their tax revenue as they see fit . Mr. Patterson i dont have any knowledge of i have knowledge , but i cant comment on that. I think the mayor would be better suited for this answer. Mayor reed congresswoman, im on your side. I dont think i could have said it better than you just said it. Well, it is an infringement upon the local control, as far as i am concerned. Thank you, mr. Chair. I yield back. Chairman graves mr. Smucker . Smucker thank you, mr. Chairman. As a business owner, i owned a Construction Company<\/a> for 25 years prior to serving in the state legislature, i understand the importance of a good highway and bridge infrastructure to move goods and employees to job sites and the importance of infrastructure to our economy, essentially. And then when serving in the state legislature, we were one of the states that would have that were able to pass a bill that provided for additional sustainable funding for our highway and bridge system, and in our case, it was a wholesale gas tax that had a cap on it, tied to the price of gas. We essentially lifted the cap, but it generated billions of dollars of additional funding for mostly for maintenance and repair of the current system. In some cases adding capacity. But we had the highest number of structurallydeficient bridges , i believe, in the state at the time. But the reason i bring that up and mayor reed, maybe this question will be directed to you. It was really important for us let me back up. It was a republican legislature. And a republican governor and i mention that because you mentioned that in georgia. But also mention it because at the same time that we were able to gather support for that, we were looking at all aspects of our budget and in fact we really believe we needed to focus on the Core Functions<\/a> of the government. We were able to make the argument to the people of pennsylvania that we have to do it at that level. But it is important to people plotting traffic and congestion and critically important for the economy. It took a concerted effort, it a lot of hearings and a lot of discuss with the public to gain that support that was required to pass that. And i think thats something we will need to do here. To all of the businesses thator rely on this, it is critical for efficient delivery to know we can plan ahead. Mayor, i guess question to you, i you give us some insight think if i understood your testimony correctly while you were there, you essentially passed a 1 sales tax that went to infrastructure and you said also georgia was doing that at the same time. What can we learn from that in building the public support for investment in our infrastructure . Congressman, i think what we can learn is the public is ahead that when wehink talk plainly and explain what the challenges are, the public will come on board as long as they believe that we are going. O make good use of their funds i imagine you experienced that in pennsylvania. In georgia, our state is one of eight states in america with a triplea Credit Rating<\/a> from all three credit agencies. Tight,the reasons is fiscal management, and the decision we made around transportation. We have grown to be the 10th largest state in the union. Regionanta metropolitan is now the largest metropolitan region with afridi p of 335 lion and we have gone from i think the argument that you absolutewe have had an jobs goal and what we are all concerned about is who is going to win the war for talent and i think for folks like you and i, we have to get out and make the case and i thought it was really important that a republican governor, republican house, and a Republican Senate<\/a> passed the billion dollars they passed does our folks are stuck in traffic like you all and on the transit side, we are doing the biggest transit expansion in the history of our system and it will be one of the seven largest expansions in america, but we did it with 71 voter support at the ballot. I think that was a nice bipartisan collaboration. Thank you. I was hoping to get input from the other panels as well, but i see i am out of time. I apologize. No, thank you. Mr. Johnson. Johnson you served in the Georgia Legislature<\/a> for 10 years both in the house and senate and so, you know how conservative thefiscally restrained environment is among our georgia,ve friends in but yet, back in 2015, georgia increased the gas tax from 7. 5 cents to . 26 and increased the diesel tax to . 29 and then indexed it so that every year, it is adjusted in accordance with the Consumer Price<\/a> index. Can you comment about the conditions that existed in georgia that led to the passage of that gas tax increase and also, what political fallout, if any, occurred as a result of passage and then the benefits from passing that increase . , thank you for the question congressman. I think the bottom line is if you want to lose an election in georgia, you would be the person to lose the states aaa Credit Rating<\/a> and i think that everybody was experiencing the same thing. We were all sitting in traffic, we had tried to pass a regional bill, you remember that, the governor and i worked to pass a regional transportation bill that was soundly rejected by the voters at the ballot. So the problem of traffic in atlantic, we have among the worst traffic in the United States<\/a>. It was really impacting our ability to get to jobs and businesses and fight our way out of the recession. Every meeting the governor and i went to when we were recruiting businesses and working to keep businesses in georgia, they said you have to do something about the traffic and so i think it was a matter of having the right leader at the right time. He made the decision to move a bill through the georgia general and i am comfortable saying that 95 of the people who voted in favor of the 1 billion tax increase were all reelected. I would probably become people saying 98 were reelected at the ballot. The risks were minimal, but we did a very good job explaining the need and the city took the leadership on expanding transit within the city of atlanta. I want to ask you about that because atlanta has seen a number of fortune 500 and 14 100 Companies Moving<\/a> into atlanta as a result of our investment in transit. Can you elaborate on what we have done, how it has affected our economy . Thirdlargest concentration of fortune 500 businesses in the United States<\/a> of america and i think what the Business Community<\/a> is doing is depoliticize in transit. Opposed to it being a democrat and republican issue, state farm cited 8000 jobs outside of atlanta. When a company moved their headquarters to atlanta, the second oldest homebuilder in america, they wanted it by a motor stop. We are seeing the Business Community<\/a> and Millennials Want<\/a> to be near transit and so it is listing the transit conversation politicsban rural because everybody wants terrific jobs and we have a generation of ands unlike my generation your generation who are not interested in driving automobiles and so if you want to be first of the future, you are going to have to be in the transit is this and so republicans and democrats have gotten in line and i would suspect that mr. Thomas sees the same thing. When you put down transit and infrastructure, business comes to it because it is a permanent investment and when you put it to voters these items passed overwhelmingly. I think it is really about being first of the future and you just have to decide whether you want to have wellpaying jobs for your people or not and now because of the Business Community<\/a>s insistence on transitand how well investments perform in terms of the economy built around it, it is helping us get out of this old argument of ruralurbandemocratrepublican. Have you experienced the same thing in dallas . A state farme have Development Also<\/a> and they looked for a rail station to be close to and the development around that particular station is phenomenal. 28 new resident russ restaurant, millions of square feet of office space that occur around that particular station, so the developers certainly understand the advantage of that transportation infrastructure, they are looking at our communities our communities understand it. Is debate in north texas where the federal resources end up going because they know when we go in and build the infrastructure there is going to be development, there is going to be job opportunities. There are going to be benefit to the people, not only from a transportation perspective, but all the benefits around the stations. I am out of time and i yield back. Mr. Schuster. Senator schuster i am going to yield my time. Doug as we call him here, he has some more questions i would like to add. I appreciate the discussion from the panel and mr. Mayor, you talked about the process inve crop a georgia, your governor, the city, and others. You are doing things the right way. You are talking to people and you they are expressing what they wish to see happening. Right now in california where we dont have a good Credit Rating<\/a>, the legislature really in total control terms are forcing through at this moment a tax,ned gas tax and car which the people are against, especially in terms of i am going to direct a question to mr. Patterson in a moment, but we have a hice rail issue in california that has shown to be 55 billion short of funding and we dont know where it is going yet we have, crumbling bridges and roads that the people will be forced to pay a higher tax on their automobile registration and gasoline that is probably going to mean about 500 a year additionally that they dont not they dont get to spend on their kids education or whatever for crumbling roads and bridges and they are seen billions and billions spent on highspeed rail at a point where no any no one in the state even wanted. And then the ida audacity that in this new funding, there is not even any upgrades for or, additional lanes additional capacity for roads and bridges. I think what is going on out there is not a collaborative process and is really tone deaf to the needs of these middle income families. I would like to see a much more streamlined process to get in my own traffic 70nty you have state highway and there are projects that could be done in the future or have already been partially done faster and left less costly if the Environmental Review<\/a> process did not have to take nearly as long for issues environmentally that are already wellknown. A brandnew process that we add a lane on the segment that you are going to have issues that are already wellknown on previous studies and the same type of terrain so what can we be doing to assist local agencies without having to be held hostage for some of these habitat tradeoffs to have more efficient construction of transportation projects whether it is rebuilding of older infrastructure or the additional capacity we all want and need us taxpayers . Thank you, congressman. One of the things of this for ass did was provide Better Process<\/a> when we are in yourut adding example, adding additional capacity or lanes to already identified transportation corridors and the intent of congress at the time was to go that hase to fence already been cleared as a transportation corridor. The guidelines we received from the federal Highway Administration<\/a> dont allow fence defense and so fence to fence and so we are having to work through some of those issues with the u. S. Dot andtheir rulemaking process i know the director in california is working very hard on that issue as well as many other of my colleagues from around the country. Thank you for that. I would like to look more into provision to fence you are talking about. Feet please follow up in my office if you get the opportunity. We heard earlier, chairman schuster mentioned something about 45 members had a meeting with secretary shall secretary chao. I would say that we invite her to meet with all members of this committee so we can have a collaborative effort and continue to be bipartisan in our effort to put forward transportation policy. Maybe then they wouldnt have the problems they had with wereh care bill if they all engaged from the beginning. I would just think thats adjusted. Also, i would like to it knowledge mr. Davis from illinois. He brought out our bill that we Work Together<\/a> on and became an amendment to the fast act where we send more money to local thernment as opposed to state for it to be distributed. I think we need to continue down too often theuse politics in the state capital around the dot xts play a bigger part than good policy decisions so the more we can send money to the local government, i think the better. I would like to turn my attention a little bit to another provision that i work have that is to worked on and that is to have complete street planning put into the bill. This isthe First Time Ever<\/a> been done in a federal Transportation Program<\/a> and i was very glad to see that in our district and we just had an increase in pedestrian deaths and so having a policy that begins with planning for the through the operation of transportation that includes all users i think is very beneficial. I know a number of states and local governments are incorporating that kind of safe streets planning and i would like to ask you, man or read, to your leadership, i know atlanta is one of the stars in this area. It you comment on the benefits of it and how it is working and some suggestions for others to follow . Wellthink it has worked and i think it is connecting communities and contributing to a sense of community that people that created and developed the concept had in mind. It is what we thought it is and well executed and so, it is an approach that we are taking, is part of the reason that we had such success at the ballot when the point voters for four cents during the recent referendum. Folks are asking for and it also boost toignificant businesses on complete street corridors. I think the complete street approach is bearing good fruit and it is what we thought it was and it needs to be pushed at every opportunity if you need community to be a leading one. I believe it is not just for safety, but quality of life. You see more people on bicycles, more people walking, all kinds of uses besides just cars and buses. Esther patterson, would you talk about what some of the states are doing as they include this in your planning . Mr. Patterson i know several streets are working on complete downtown oklahoma includes bike lanes, pedestrian drivings well as a new lane. It is where i40 used to go through downtown Oklahoma City<\/a> and we relocated i40 to south of downtown and we are putting in a boulevard that has the complete streets concept to it. If we want to talk about businesses. Downtown las vegas now has rent a bike and that is kind of part of that quality of living. Would you like to comment on how it relates to businesses and improves that aspect of things . Anybody . I can tell you in Oklahoma City<\/a> we have the rent a bike Program Going<\/a> on there and it is. Rowing exponentially we believe that once the new boulevard is in place, it will explode, much like you see here in washington, d. C. Our Bike Share Program<\/a> has been highly popular and we are getting ready to expand it right 400 . Congressman, i think the benefit is how all the different modes of transportation Work Together<\/a> in a single corridor whether it be buses, bikes, pedestrians, automobiles, and that planning effort is what makes all that happened. Also, the planning effort is skipped in the bypass, so thank you very much for making sure is included in the fast act. Thank you, i yield back. Mr. Leventhal mr. Leventhal thank you mr. Chairman, i think others in thinking witnesses and joining us and educating us today. I would like to raise an issue that is near and dear to my , and extremely important to my district, which is before the seventh Congressional District<\/a> which starts off with the port of long beach, which is the second largest port in the United States<\/a>. That is, freight funding, the ofding for the movement freight. As you know and have mentioned the fast act included dedicated freight funding programs for the first time. This including Competitive Grant Program<\/a> dubbed fast lane by dot. Reed, you talked about the importance to your state and city of Economic Development<\/a> at the port of savannah which received a 44 million grant for multimodal connectors. Mr. Patterson, your department was granted 62 million last 6975 four rail so yourparations Organization Also<\/a> put out a report with the American Association<\/a> of port authorities that show the growing demand for multimodal projects. The report stated that in an absolute minimum need of at billion for multimodal projects, yet the fast act only has a total funding for multimodal projects of slightly more than 1 billion 1. 13 billion and that is over five years. The question i have for you is do you agree that there is a greater need for funding of multimodal projects . Absolutely. Knowf the things that we is that out as we have looked at the federal program over the years, since the completion of the interstate highway system, we really dont have a goal, something to hang our hat on, if you will. We were hoping and we believe that this Freight Program<\/a> is the next goal. It is imperative that we be able to move freight across this country by rail, water i think youre doing great, i just want to ask because i have one more followup question and that is exactly what i wanted. Do you have anything to add, mayor reed . The answer is absolutely. Have aenthal ok, now i proposal that i first introduced in the 114th congress will be that i will be doing again, that puts a user fee on the cost of goods by the use of shipping goods to directly fund infrastructure. Goods on the cost of shipping goods by road or rail in the United States<\/a> to directly fund freight infrastructure. Would you support a similar proposal such as a user fee by the owners of goods to pay for the freight infrastructure . Several years ago, a group of us got together and were looking at ways to Fund Transportation<\/a> for the future. Congressman, thats exactly one of the things that we had come up with was an additional surcharge, a user fee, however you would want to label it for Freight Movements<\/a> and dedicated to a freight system. So it has to be dedicated . Theainable and paid by users, in a dedicated funding stream to be used just for freight infrastructure. Would you support that, mayor reed . I dont know. Id have to have the full proposal to consider it. Ok. Were just talking about not so much a specific proposal, but just the concept that those who use the system would pay for the improvements in the system, dedicated in some way to get both back to an appropriate way of distributing that funds. Yes. Thank you, and i yield back. Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today. As we talk about the fast act, which i want to thank all the members of this committee on both sides, the chairman subcommittee chairman, the full , mr. Shuster, our Ranking Member<\/a> norton and defazio, we all work to well getting the fast act together and moved. Im hopeful that we can do the same thing on a new, big trillion dollar or more than trillion dollar infrastructure plan. About that havent talked by the last few people, members who have spoken about complete streets, transit, i think its important that those are included in a new infrastructure package. With freight movement, i also think that is very critical to do. I want to ask a question about something that i dont think at thisas asked about hearing about Vehicle Technology<\/a> and getting that into our infrastructure. Butonly vehicle to vehicle, is vital forlogy maximizing the benefits of autonomous connected vehicles, benefits such as great safety less congestion on our roads and also increase the the efficiency of our vehicles. We really need to find creative ways to invest incentivize investment in Vehicle Technology<\/a>. We need to make investments that best leverage capital. The fast act ensured that this infrastructure would remain eligible for funding, but we also need to consider policies that promote installation of during routine construction and maintenance projects so we are not going back and doing it all over again. I asked witnesses of previous hearings about the state about state and local investments in this technology and some have said that they have been hesitant to make investments because of the lack of industry standards and federal guidance. In january, fhwa released new vti guidance document that can help transportation agencies understand the regional impacts of v to i deployment and emerging technologies and leverage federal aid funds to deploy them. After that long lead up, i would just like to ask mr. Patterson and mr. Reed if you could discuss your experience technology and whether or not theres sufficient federal guidance to promote investment and what more can be done so we make sure that we dupe or the infrastructure for this. Mr. Patterson, you want to start. Mr. Patterson thank you, congressman. I think from an overall perspective and given the advances in technology, its been good that the states have taken a slow, methodical iproach to integrating v to into the system. When you look at technology doubles every year and you look back five years ago in we really got into the discussion about , it has changed. A guidance that came out was helpful and we had a several of our members who were very involved in leading the technology. I can tell you in oklahoma, we are still learning, we are not as far advanced as some other states are in the discussion, but it is something we are beginning to understand and embrace and it was that guidance it is the support of members that get us to the point. Mayor reed, anything to add . Mayor reed we are develop a smart corridor along north avenue near georgia tech and by the Cocacola Company<\/a> that will be really testing all of these technologies at once. So much like my colleague, were in the very early stages of it. Candidly, we have been put a putting a great deal more energy into self driven Vehicle Technology<\/a> and we have been slower on v to 1 . Is there anything the federal government can do to help things along and speeded up and make it easier for states and localities to do this . Mayor reed i think that rules of the road from federal experts would shorten the learning curve from municipalities because thats really the challenge for us when these new kinds of technologies and relationships occur, we have to come up to speed on that and we have to put in a good amount of person power for that. Knowing where the federal government is going in the sende in that regard would an important signal to where we should be going. I think that collaboration and cooperation is going to be very important as the mayor said as we begin to develop our system in oklahoma and as other v to iexpand their capabilities. If you think about it, this is really a turning point for all transportation. Its almost as extensive as going from the horse and buggy to the model t. It is something that we are very customers,in and our the public, is going to demand that kind of reaction from us. Thank you, yield back. Any other further questions . Seeing none, id like to obviously thank our witnesses for your testimony today and your contribution to disk to the discussion today has been very informative and helpful. I would ask unanimous consent","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia600606.us.archive.org\/32\/items\/CSPAN_20170407_075700_Hearing_Focuses_on_Highway_and_Transit_Infrastructure_Funding\/CSPAN_20170407_075700_Hearing_Focuses_on_Highway_and_Transit_Infrastructure_Funding.thumbs\/CSPAN_20170407_075700_Hearing_Focuses_on_Highway_and_Transit_Infrastructure_Funding_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240627T12:35:10+00:00"}