Sam Adams and Rex Burkholder seem to have gotten into a little dust up in the Friday’s Tribune (Freight mobility matters … at least in Portland).
We’re at the beginning of the semi-annual MTIP process, which allocates about $60M in flexible transportation funds. This is only about 4% of the total funds spent in the region on transportation, but since the rules on what it can be spent on are much less restrictive than most funds, it consumes a big chunk of the mindshare of the cities and counties vying for the funds.
Sam makes the point that in the current environment, with the economy and freight being top-of-mind, somehow only Portland is applying for MTIP dollars for freight projects. Rex counters that many jurisdictions are working on building out their general infrastructure, which will help with freight mobility.
Can’t we all just be friends?
8 responses to “Walking the (Freight) Talk”
Its a tough call. My opinion is that the suburbs should expand their general infrastructure, as Burkholder argues. But I believe that the suburbs should be aware of the regional freight issue, and should commit to spending $$ on freight in the coming years.
I tend to think the suburbs and Portland have different interests when it comes to transportation; the suburbs want to promote SOV commuting and ease local traffic.
Wheras the city, I believe, is inclined to promote alternative forms of commuting (MT) and a congestion-free road system (no bottlenecks or SOVs) which will also help freight transportation.
Still, the suburbs are not beholden to Portland (maybe they should be?) and they can essentially focus on whatever issues they please.
Rex has gone the way of all JPACT chairs and become a lobbyist for the highway builders. Sam is right. The only real investment in freight mobility are targeted investments. As Rex points out, investments in the general highway system get filled up with commuters.
I think the most telling comment in the article was the one from the business alliance about the effects of congestion on “sales calls” rather than freight. Are cheaper sales calls really a priority for building expensive transportation infrastructure? Making more local sales calls is not going to do much to bring money into the regional economy.
If Rex has flipped, then we’re doomed (I don’t think he has).
But we have to maintain the consent of the governed and telling the business community we just don’t give a damn about their costs of doing business is not a viable strategy.
I work in high tech marketing, I know what the impact of the cost of a sales call is and it’s not trivial. But I also know that for just that reason a business would happily pay a fairly steep differentiated toll to have a salesperson get one more call in on a given day.
We need strategies to reflect our priorities for the transportation network, and a sales call has a different priority than a trip to Target.
Ross – Your comments are just offensive. Rex has not become an apologist for anything. the fact is that MTIP represents only 4% of the total transportation spending in the region. A lot of suburban jurisdictions are spending their own gas tax revenue, SDC and TIF funds, and property taxes (in the case of WA County) on targeted freight improvements. Since the MTIP is the only source of flexible transportation dollars available, a lot of these jurisdictions are applying for boulevard, bike, ped and transit projects. To say that only Portland cares about freight since they want to spend MTIP dollars on frieght projects, is completetly wrong and misleading.
I missed the Friday Trib, but both Sam and Rex have spent far too much time listening to a small group of “freight advocates” who use freight as a stalking horse for roads.
Any business will lobby for public investment that reduces their costs, but the businesses that survive are the ones that find innovative ways to compete regardless.
Public policy should be ruled the simple recognition that talent drives economic development, not transportation.
Investment in a tram that faciliate the expansion of the region’s only research institution and City’s largest employer makes all kinds of sense because it nurtures talent.
Widening I-5, whether at the Sough Bridge or across the Columbia, compromises the very livability of North Portland (20K more vehicles per day!) that attracted the North American HQ of one of the largest traded sector employers in the City, adidasAmerica…just so we can get empty containers faster to T-6 for export to China?
The Tribune article is right on and to me and correct. Sam Adams has shown more balance in this tough world of transportation priorities then most.
Ross – Your comments are just offensive.
Brian, I’m sorry you are offended by criticism of Rex and his work as chair of JPACT. But I think some of the direction at Metro on transportation has gotten a free pass because of the backgrounds’ of its members. As elected officials you have to walk the walk. When you don’t, there is nothing “offensive” about people calling you on it. People’s unwillingness to “offend” Rex is probably part of the problem.
You tell me how the region’s priorities would have been described differently if Monroe or Kvistad were still chair of JPACT: “But Burkholder said the freight issue needs to be considered along with all other transportation problems – including the growing number of commuters clogging area freeways, roads and streets.”
I have not looked at the list of projects being proposed for funding. So if the other jurisdictions are only applying for “boulevard, bike, ped and transit projects” as you suggest, then you have a point.
I know what the impact of the cost of a sales call is and it’s not trivial.
We aren’t talking about the cost of a sales call, the concern is the added cost created by congestion. I am sure there is a cost, the question is this a priority for the region with real economic impacts, or is this just a pet peeve of a few business people.
But we have to maintain the consent of the governed and telling the business community we just don’t give a damn about their costs of doing business is not a viable strategy.
I think we all ought to give a damn about their real costs. But we also need to recognize that they are not necessarily balancing those costs against the less direct benefits of investing elsewhere. And frankly, while we would be foolish not to listen carefully and consider what they have to say about the impact of transportation on their business, I don’t have to give a damn about their personal opinions based on how long it takes for them to get to work. At least no more than I do the guy on the shop floor and probably less.
To say that only Portland cares about freight since they want to spend MTIP dollars on frieght projects, is completetly wrong and misleading.
Maybe. But the concern about freight in the suburban jurisdictions often seems to focus on projects that include a healthy provision of more highway capacity for commuters and opportunities for real estate development. Sam’s calling them on that is not a bad thing and Rex immediately jumping to their defense isn’t a good thing.
Its very difficult to identify projects that will actually benefit freight and not just fill up with commuters. Rex, as chair of JPACT, ought to be praising Portland for doing that and encouraging other jurisdictions to do the same thing whether with MTIP money or other sources of funds.
We aren’t talking about the cost of a sales call, the concern is the added cost created by congestion. I am sure there is a cost, the question is this a priority for the region with real economic impacts, or is this just a pet peeve of a few business people.
Delay, and perhaps more importantly, uncertainty, are real cost drivers to business and I believe this to be a priority. Do I want to spend $6B on it? Absolutely not. But saying “just let them adapt” is also not a reasonable position.
My belief is that we need tools to give differential priority to different kinds of trips. I agree that building capacity that will be largely used for longer commutes or discretionary trips is a bad idea. But ‘doing nothing’ is also a bad idea.