MoDOT takes low road with stimulus funds
Missouri Governor Jay Nixon, left, and MoDOT Director Peter Rahn (Laurie Skrivan | Post-Dispatch)
Missouri’s Highways and Transportation Commission will hold a special meeting on Thursday afternoon to divvy up more than $400 million in federal stimulus money allocated to Missouri under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
The independent, six-member commission, which governs the Missouri Department of Transportation, decides how to spend $2.4 billion a year in state and federal transportation money. This year the job also includes deciding how the stimulus money will be spent, and the stimulus money comes with special rules:
It’s supposed to maximize economic development and job creation in distressed parts of the state.
But so far, state transportation officials are taking the low road by ignoring those rules. The usual highway department politics reign supreme. This has aggravated regional rivalries and shut out the public from the decision-making process.
Gov. Jay Nixon bears a significant part of the blame. He’s responsible under federal law for certifying that funds will be put to good use. Yet he has failed, so far, to enforce fairness, openness and discipline — in a word, to lead.
President Barack Obama used his inaugural address to set the standard for how public stimulus money should be handled.
“Those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government,” Mr. Obama said.
Missouri deserves an “F” in two of these categories — bad habits and transparency — and an “incomplete” in spending wisely.
The clearest failure comes in using stimulus funds to perpetuate, rather than reform, bad habits. The state has a long, destructive history of rural-urban animus when it comes to transportation projects. The federal stimulus created an opportunity to soften hard feelings, but only if the commission carefully balanced rural needs with those of the state’s population and employment centers.
That hasn’t happened. MoDOT has decided the St. Louis region doesn’t deserve its proportionate share of stimulus funds. Reason: St. Louis already has a big project underway in the U.S. Highway 40/Interstate 64 reconstruction and another one pending in the new Mississippi River bridge.
The problem is that the federal legislation doesn’t empower MoDOT to impose such conditions. Federal funds are designed to maximize Missouri jobs, not serve as MoDOT’s political piggy bank.
MoDOT also has failed Mr. Obama’s challenge to conduct its “business in the light of day.”
The agency has been opaque. The federal stimulus law requires that priority be given to economically distressed areas and that stimulus recipients “use the funds in a manner that maximizes job creation and economic benefit.”
MoDOT is recommending that nearly 40 percent of money available for use in any part of the state go to projects in areas that are not economically distressed. We’ve been asking agency officials to explain why they’re ignoring federal priorities. We’ve inquired about the relative “job creation and economic benefits” of the projects MoDOT approved and the ones that didn’t make the grade.
MoDOT has refused to provide that documentation. It even refused to make public the briefing materials being sent to Highways and Transportation Commission for its Thursday meeting — saying it will make the materials available only after the meeting is over.
So the public has no way to judge whether Missouri actually is making the most of stimulus funds, spending them wisely to create jobs or promoting the economy in distressed parts of the state.
What an embarrassment for Missouri.
Mr. Nixon says he is frustrated that the process is not as open as it should be. The governor can do something about his frustrations by forcing MoDOT and the highway commission to become accountable and make sure they follow federal law while being fair to all parts of the state.
Mr Roth: I appreciate your comments regarding the Porkulus package, but the unfortunate reality is that you really have no clue what you are attempting to speak about. It’s not that you didn’t comment intelligently, because you did, but only as far as your limited knowledge of transportation and construction allowed you to. The reality of the MoDOT projects is that they will have no impact on the community they are built in regardless of where they are. That is because construction of roadways may be LOCATED in a depressed area, but no materials, supplies, or labor force COMES FROM that area. Other than someone buying a soda or a lunch now and then, the only impact you are going to see is traffic slowdowns and detours (which actually have a negative economic impact on the immediate area). The concrete plants don’t move, the contractor supply companies don’t move, and the contractor certainly doesn’t hire a bunch of new people to build a project that their current roll of workers has been doing for the last 20 years. As an example, do you think that a company like Millstone-Bangert is not going to continue to use the same people from Calhoun County, IL that make up about 2/3 of their workforce?
Yes, people will work, and materials will be bought, and the road improvements will have long term affects for the state. These positives will happen regardless of where it is built. You could spend every dime of the Porkulus in Kinloch and Ferguson and other areas to the north and all you would have in the end is a nicer, quicker way to drive through those same run down mismanaged dumps. No one is going to move an accounting firm to Kinloch just because they have a new road. Get real.
I am not a big fan of Jay Nixon, but I would rather see him let MoDOT put this money to work where they want to instead of letting those who know nothing about transportation and construction, like a lawyer or newspaperman, help decide those things.
Tim -
There’s no question that issues of engineering and construction should be left to transportation and design professionals. But the economic effect of a transportation project is not limited to the jobs created and supplies purchased during the design and construction phases.
Transportation aids commerce. And while a bridge in a rural area serving 1,000 vehicles a day no doubt is important to local people who as a matter of routine need to get from point A to point B in the most efficient and convenient manner, construction of that bridge might not serve as great an economic development purpose as a project in a more densely populated, commercially or industrially oriented locale.
An economically distressed area could become less so with smart transportation improvements. Presumably that’s why Congress decided that such areas should be given priority as the local for projects — not because construction workers will buy a sandwich in a nearby market.
Secondary economic effects of transportation projects may not lend themselves to precise measurements. And, no, an improved bridge might not be a big draw for an accounting firm. But widening an arterial serving a distressed brownfield district might brighten development prospects for an industrial park.
The point is that, when a government agency is handed a big pot of money, and told priority shall be given to distressed areas and that the recipient of funds must use it in a manner that maximizes jobs and economic benefit — that government agency had better offer some justification for applying nearly 40 perent of the funds outside of distressed areas, and be able to explain why the projects it picked are better suited to generate jobs and create economic benefit than competing projects.
MoDOT has offered no such justification or explanation.
This is not a question of lawyers or journalists second guessing engineers on issues of design or construction. It’s a question of whether, among a number of technically justified transportation projects, the projects selected to receive funding meet the legal conditions to that funding — which are not limited to matters of transportation, but relate to equity, job creation, and economic recovery.
There are many points to consider from this editorial piece. As a person with many local political ties, I can tell you that local leaders are upset beyond belief.
NO ONE and I mean NO ONE has approached the Mayor or City Council in our community about what needed to be done. NO ONE has asked, “How can the stimulus funds be used to benefit your community?” NO ONE has asked, “What is your unemployment rate?” The term “shovel-ready” has taken precendence over what the original intent of the legislation was, that being to create jobs and SUSTAINABLE economic development.
Could any of you posting on here, describe in detail for me how the Page Avenue Extension is of benefit to surrounding areas like Lincoln and Warren County? Do you realize that St. Charles County, in 2008, created over $4 BILLION, yep that is billion with a “B”, in gross sales tax? Did you know that the unemployment rate for January in St. Charles County was 8.3%, while in Warren County it was 13% and in Lincoln County 13.5%?
So if the stimulus bill was to create jobs and sustained economic growth, why was it NOT applied to Warren and Lincoln Counties where the numbers show a greater need?
Tim - Shame on you for using Kinloch and Ferguson in the same sentence. Yes, Kinloch is a mismanaged dump. Ferguson, on the other hand, is neither of these things. If you ever have a little time to spare, I’d be happy to give you a tour of a few of our beautiful, historic neighborhoods. As an added bonus, pick a nice day and we’ll do it in my MINI Cooper convertible. At the end, we’ll stop for an ice cream at the Whistlestop, located in the old train depot, which also houses a nice little photo history of Ferguson. Anyone else who isn’t familiar with Ferguson is similarly welcome to come see our beautiful little town - just email me to make arrangements.
nick@kasoff.net
Nick, Ferguson is not as bad as Kinloch, but it was what jumped in my mind. I still think it is a mismanaged dump though or I wouldn’t of added it in that list.
Little One, I guarantee you your community, whatever it is, submitted their list of projects to the Boonslick Regional Planning Commission to try to get their piece of the pie (you do know that Warren and Lincoln are part of that group, not the East-West Gateway Coorinating Council that St Charles is a part of I assume). You can be sure they pushed MoDOT for a project as well. All the various government entities did. Not everyone got money or projects of course. Just what exactly do you expect to happen to the unemployment rate if Lincoln or Warren received funds for a project? It wouldn’t do squat for it.
Lastly, Mr Roth: You write “An economically distressed area could become less so with smart transportation improvements. Presumably that’s why Congress decided that such areas should be given priority as the local for projects”. Congress? The same clowns who gave 350 billion without strings to the financial companies? Congress, like the other people I mentioned in my first post, also have no clue what is and isn’t prudent when it comes to transportation and construction. The Democrat majority put that caveat about economically distressed in there as political pandering to their constituency (just as the GOP fought for tax breaks for their block of loyal voters), and I think you know that. “Smart” transportation projects to help down areas involve Urban Planning. Urban Planning is a complete development plan, not just road improvements, and takes years to accomplish anything (see Washington Ave in the City as an example). Don’t forget these projects were supposed to be “shovel-ready”. Urban Planning jobs don’t progress without funding, so I am pretty confident that there aren’t any out there just waiting for money to appear. In fact, that is the beauty of Congress, they always seem to contradict themselves. Spend it on shovel-ready plans, but in economically depressed areas where no one has any plans for anything… pure genius.
You could argue that the 141 job, where economically activity is already growing and moving at a fast clip, WOULD be the most efficient use of dollars in our area. Strreamlining transportation in that area makes more economical and environmental sense. Building a bunch of new roads in Kinloch and Ferguson isn’t going to bring in industrial jobs (and I think you know that too). Growth in St Louis has been flat since 2000, as has our population. Manufacturing jobs have steadily declined in America for years and there is ample space in our industrial parks right now with the economy the way it is. There are other concerns too about bringing your business into some of these areas.
Let the transportation people make the decision. They are the only ones who have a clue how to consider all these factors properly.
One thing the editorial doesn’t seem to recognize is that the Governor actually has fairly little authority in this area. The Highway Commission is pretty autonomous. This has been a matter of frustration for Governor Blunt and other past governors, not just Governor Nixon.
The governor has much more leverage with the stimulus money than with ordinary transportation projects, because he must certify the projects’ compliance with federal requirements.
If the governor is not satisfied with MoDOT’s and the highway commission’s work, he can — and should — send them back to the drawing board.
Kudos to the Post for pointing out, seems to me fairly, that Nixon has failed to lead in this area. What sayeth my conservative brethern who have criticized the Post at every turn for being biased?
Mark B - The Post will be plenty mean to Mr. Nixon for a short while. Just not on anything of enough importance to become a campaign issue, nor close enough to the election that anyone might remember.