Trump Administration Infrastructure Program Priority List: Part One, the list
The McClatchy Newspapers Group, led by the Kansas City Star ("List of 50 infrastructure projects used by Trump transition team came from consulting firm") and the Tacoma News-Tribune, uncovered a document listing as priorities 50 different projects. Later reporting determined that the list was compiled by CG/LA Infrastructure, an infrastructure consulting firm that organizes conferences and conducts other activities promoting a focus on and investment in infrastructure of all types.
(Note that I attended the CG/LA 7th Annual North American Infrastructure Leadership Forum in 2015, which I found very useful, and it led to my writing the post, "Town-city management: "We are all asset managers now"," which discusses at great length how elected officials, "governments," certain categories of stakeholders and definitely citizens need to take responsibility for the long term in terms of infrastructure, civic assets, and "capital budgeting.")
While many of the articles posted the original document, they did not include a graphic of the projects in order of importance, which I have done below. Also most of the coverage focused not on the entire list or what priorities the grouping indicates, but on projects in their community, region, or state, such as the Washington Post reporting on DC-area projects.
Problems with the list as presented. As someone focused on master frameworks, to me the list has plenty of gaps, and no one seems to be asking "bigger questions," such as the need for a formal capital budgeting process. From the WSJ article "Trump's Infrastructure Mistake":
Infrastructure projects selected in the traditional way, by governments, are chosen based on public benefits, the community’s ability to pay—and sometimes crass political favoritism. It would be nice to get rid of the latter, which is the main argument for a public infrastructure bank.Another interesting thing is that some of these projects are already funded and underway.
Under the Trump plan, project selection would be left to profit-seeking investors, using the same criteria they use to decide which hotels to build, for example. Ironically, Messrs. Navarro and Ross criticize President Obama’s modest 2015 infrastructure proposals because, “These will not fix the 237,600 water mains that break each year. Nor will they stop the 46 billion gallons of water lost each day from pipe leaks.” Does the Trump team really think private-equity investors will swoon over repairing plumbing?
This list can't be considered to be definitive, in terms of need and impact. And many of the projects are private, such as utility-related, not necessarily requiring public funding, although permitting and access issues could be considerable.
(Separately, there is the issue of the difficulty of complex environmental assessment requirements, which add years to the evaluation process. There is a need to reduce the complexity and length of these processes.)
Not to mention that one of the reasons that there are a preponderance of certain types of projects here, waterways in particular, is because of the failure for many years of Congress to fund needed projects, although that isn't limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, but includes most federal agencies, especially the National Park Service, and housing programs supported by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Priorities. For example, at #14 the Cotton Belt line, a commuter rail line proposed for Dallas and Fort Worth, is estimated to have a daily ridership of about 16,000 people by 2035. Given that level of impact, is it really the fourteenth most important infrastructure project we could do in the US? It certainly doesn't rise to the level of a determination of a federal emergency or national security need.
For example, if the #7 Subway Line in NYC were extended into New Jersey, it would add capacity and redundancy in Manhattan, improved traffic capacity by reducing bus traffic, and simpler commutes for hundreds of thousands of people every day ("7 things to know about the proposed No. 7 subway extension into Secaucus" and "Could extending a NYC subway line to NJ help ease traffic?," Newark Star-Ledger). The estimated cost in 2014 was $5 Billion.
Compiled by CG/LA Infrastructure and shared with the Trump Administration:
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Amtrak NY Gateway | New York/New Jersey | $12 Billion |
| 2. Brent Spence Bridge, I-75 | Ohio/Kentucky | $2B |
| 3. Nat. Research Lab. for Infrastructure | Ohio | $2B |
| 4. Locks/Dams on the Ohio River | Illinois | $3B |
| 5. I-95 Improvements, NC | North Carolina | $1.5B |
| 6. I-95 Bridges in Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | $8B |
| 7. Mississippi River Dredging | Louisiana | $1B |
| 8. New Air Traffic Control System | National | $10B |
| 9. Plains/Eastern Electric Transmission Lines | Oklahoma/Mid-South | $2B |
| 10. Cleveland Water Tunnels | Ohio | $3B |
| 11. South Carolina Dams Repair | South Carolina | $850 Million |
| 12. Hydroelectric Dams Repair/Improvement | National | $4B |
| 13. Texas Central Railway HSR | Texas | $13B |
| 14. Cotton Belt Commuter Rail | Texas | $1.1-$2.8B* |
| 15. Cadiz Valley Water Storage | California | $250MM |
| 16. Trans West Express Elec. Transmission | CA/AZ/NV/WY/UT/CO | $3B |
| 17. Chokecherry/Sierra Madre Wind Energy | Wyoming | $5B |
| 18. Second Avenue Subway, Phases 2 and 3 | New York City | $14.2B |
| 19. Savannah Harbor Expansion | Georgia | $706MM |
| 20. Atlantic Coast Gas Pipeline | WV/VA/NC | $5B |
| 21. Champlain Hudson Power Express (Transmission) | New York | $2.2B |
| 22. DC Union Station Expansion & Rehab | DC | $8.7B |
| 23. Maryland Purple Line light rail | Maryland | $5.6B |
| 24. Detroit M-1 Rail (light rail) | Michigan | $528MM |
| 25. Gordie Howe International Bridge | Michigan/Ontario | $5B |
| 26. Kansas City Airport | Missouri | $972MM |
| 27. Peace Bridge/New York-Ontario | New York/Ontario | $700MM |
| 28. MBTA Green Line Extension, Boston | Massachusetts | $3B |
| 29. Augustin Plains Ranch Power Project | New Mexico | $600MM |
| 30. I-93 Rebuild, New Hampshire | New Hampshire | $800MM |
| 31. Lake Pontchartrain Bridge/Causeway | Louisiana | $125MM |
| 32. Port Newark Container Terminal | New Jersey | $500MM |
| 33. Howard Street Tunnel (railroad) | Maryland | $425MM |
| 34. Red and Purple Line Modernization, Chicago | Illinois | $2.1B* |
| 35. I-395/I-95 Reconstruction, Miami | Florida | $800MM |
| 36. Chicago Union Station Redevelopment | Illinois | $1B |
| 37. Upper Mississippi Locks 20-25 | Illinois | $1.8B |
| 38. Illinois River Locks - Lagrange and Peoria | Illinois | $640MM |
| 39. Colorado I-70 Mountain Corridor | Colorado | $640MM |
| 40. Colorado I-25 Improvements | Colorado | $1B |
| 41. IHNC Lock Replacement, New Orleans | Louisiana | $893MM |
| 42. Chickamauga Lock | Tennessee | $383MM |
| 43. Soo Locks Reconstruction | Michigan | $580 |
| 44. Huntington Beach Desalination Plant | California | $350MM |
| 45. Upper Ohio Navigation Improvements | Pennsylvania | $1.7B |
| 46. Monongahela River Locks-and-Dams | Pennsylvania | $900MM |
| 47. Seattle Airport Expansion | Washington | $2B |
| 48. Arlington Memorial Bridge | DC-Virginia | $250MM |
| 49. Statewide Energy Storage and Grid Modernization | California | ? |
| 50. St. Louis Airport | MIssouri | $1.8B |
* The $1.1 Billion figure for the Cotton Belt Line is for single tracking.
Waterway/Port projects
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 4. Locks/Dams on the Ohio River | Illinois | $3B |
| 7. Mississippi River Dredging | Louisiana | $1B |
| 11. South Carolina Dams Repair | South Carolina | $850 Million |
| 12. Hydroelectric Dams Repair/Improvement | National | $4B |
| 19. Savannah Harbor Expansion | Georgia | $706MM |
| 32. Port Newark Container Terminal | New Jersey | $500MM |
| 37. Upper Mississippi Locks 20-25 | Illinois | $1.8B |
| 38. Illinois River Locks - Lagrange and Peoria | Illinois | $640MM |
| 41. IHNC Lock Replacement, New Orleans | Louisiana | $893MM |
| 42. Chickamauga Lock | Tennessee | $383MM |
| 43. Soo Locks Reconstruction | Michigan | $580 |
| 45. Upper Ohio Navigation Improvements | Pennsylvania | $1.7B |
| 46. Monongahela River Locks-and-Dams | Pennsylvania | $900MM |
Roads/Bridges. Granted, highway agencies can never have enough money for roads and related infrastructure. But there are many important projects that aren't pursued because of a general reticence to raise gasoline excise taxes. That's why more state transportation departments are expanding freeways through the creation of High Occupancy Toll lanes.
The list misses some important projects that need to be under consideration despite political issues such as the I-5 Columbia River bridge connecting Oregon and Washington ("Failed Columbia River Crossing in 'rear view,' new I-5 bridge idea," KATU-TV, while listing others that aren't in process either, like the Peace Bridge, which aren't anywhere near being underway ("Despite being on Trump 'infrastructure list,' no new Peace Bridge in works," Buffalo News). (Definitely, improved connections between the US and Canada are on the list, but not improved connections between the US and Mexico.)
.
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 2. Brent Spence Bridge, I-75 | Ohio/Kentucky | $2B |
| 5. I-95 Improvements, NC | North Carolina | $1.5B |
| 6. I-95 Bridges in Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | $8B |
| 25. Gordie Howe International Bridge | Michigan/Ontario | $5B |
| 27. Peace Bridge/New York-Ontario | New York/Ontario | $700MM |
| 30. I-93 Rebuild, New Hampshire | New Hampshire | $800MM |
| 31. Lake Pontchartrain Bridge/Causeway | Louisiana | $125MM |
| 35. I-395/I-95 Reconstruction, Miami | Florida | $800MM |
| 39. Colorado I-70 Mountain Corridor | Colorado | $640MM |
| 40. Colorado I-25 Improvements | Colorado | $1B |
| 48. Arlington Memorial Bridge | DC-Virginia | $250MM |
Rail projects. Umm, what about high speed rail in Florida ("All Aboard Florida key financing information made public," Treasure Coast Palm)") or California ("California board approves high-speed rail funding as new lawsuit filed," San Jose Mercury News"), not just Texas?
Penn Station? ("Penn Station Reborn," New York Times), the East Side Access Project in New York City to connect Penn Station and Grand Central Station ("$10B East Side Access project falling further behind schedule," Newsday), electrification from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh ("Pittsburgh to Harrisburg Electrification," Pennsylvania HSR blog), electrification from DC to Richmond, the general program for improving Amtrak's Northeast Corridor ("FRA unveils recommendations for faster rail travel in the Northeast," Washington Post," ), the concept out there to expand Metra service in Chicago and to electrify one of the lines ("Revamped Metra Electric could put South Side on the fast track," Chicago Reporter; speaking of which the discussions to do more intra-NYC service via LIRR and Metro-North, "New York Regional Rail: The Central Segments," Pedestrian Observations) not to mention my transformation concept for integrating the VRE Fredericksburg Line and the MARC Penn Line, and extending the Penn Line north to Wilmington (I will be blogging about this in the next few months), and I am sure other projects around the country.
And additional financial support could speed up projects in other cities such as the rehabilitation subway systems in DC and the San Francisco Bay ("After 40 Years of Service — Reinvestment Needed for Major BART Rehabilitation," press release), more subways in San Francisco for the MUNI system ("SFMTA to study Central Subway extension to Fisherman's Wharf," San Francisco Examiner), and the building and expansion of growing systems in Los Angeles, Seattle, Denver, Dallas, Minneapolis, and elsewhere.
Frankly, why not start the planning process to build the entire Purple Line? Or Maglev maybe?
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Amtrak NY Gateway | New York/New Jersey | $12 Billion |
| 13. Texas Central Railway HSR | Texas | $13B |
| 14. Cotton Belt Commuter Rail | Texas | $1.1-$2.8B* |
| 18. Second Avenue Subway, Phases 2 and 3 | New York City | $14.2B |
| 22. DC Union Station Expansion & Rehab | DC | $8.7B |
| 23. Maryland Purple Line light rail | Maryland | $5.6B |
| 24. Detroit M-1 Rail (light rail) | Michigan | $528MM |
| 28. MBTA Green Line Elaxtension, Boston | Massachusetts | $3B |
| 33. Howard Street Tunnel (railroad) | Maryland | $425MM |
| 34. Red and Purple Line Modernization, Chicago | Illinois | $2.1B* |
| 36. Chicago Union Station Redevelopment | Illinois | $1B |
One public water system improvement project. The Deloitte Consulting Group estimates the cost to fully rehabilitate the water utility infrastructure (including water piping, sewer, stormwater capture, and treatment) exceeds $1 Trillion ! ("The aging water infrastructure: Out of sight, out of mind?"). Can we say Flint, or how most major cities and metropolitan areas face massive funding needs to upgrade this infrastructure. (And what about improving the water quality of urban rivers?
Technically, there are two related projects that address water supply issues, the Cadiz Water Storage Project (#15), and the Huntington Beach Desalination Project (#44), which arguably should be included but that muddies the point about not addressing in a substantive way the massive financial need for rehabilitating"aging water infrastructure."
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 10. Cleveland Water Tunnels | Ohio | $3B |
Airport projects. What about LaGuardia ("$4B LaGuardia Airport Renovation Plan Wins Go Ahead From Port Authority," DNAInfo), not to mention how FAA funding restrictions prevent use of airport related funding streams to fund projects that integrate airports into the local transit system, which makes it that much harder to improve public transit options at LAX ("Here's the mindblowing plan to unf* LAX transportation," Curbed), a $4 Billion project, etc. O'Hare too ("Airlines, City Hall are setting a crucial flight plan for O'Hare," Crain's Chicago Business).
Not being discussed is how various stakeholders propose privatizing the air traffic control system because of the failure of Congress to fund improvements ("Don't Privatize Air Traffic Control," New York Times).
Let alone, ideally, a high speed rail program could shift short distance trips from the air to the ground.
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 8. New Air Traffic Control System | National | $10B |
| 26. Kansas City Airport | Missouri | $972MM |
| 47. Seattle Airport Expansion | Washington | $2B |
| 50. St. Louis Airport | MIssouri | $1.8B |
Power generation and transmission, including hydroelectric projects already listed above. But not mentioned outside of California's statewide project is the need to invest and improve the national transmission and distribution system for electicity ("Transmission and Distribution Infrastructure," Harris Williams Co.)and investing in new technologies and processes to support distributed power systems "at the edge" ("The Grid Edge 100: Deployment and Opportunity at the Grid Edge).
| Project | Location | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 9. Plains/Eastern Electric Transmission Lines | Oklahoma/Mid-South | $2B |
| 11. South Carolina Dams Repair | South Carolina | $850 Million |
| 12. Hydroelectric Dams Repair/Improvement | National | $4B |
| 15. Cadiz Valley Water Storage | California | $250MM |
| 16. Trans West Express Elec. Transmission | CA/AZ/NV/WY/UT/CO | $3B |
| 17. Chokecherry/Sierra Madre Wind Energy | Wyoming | $5B |
| 20. Atlantic Coast Gas Pipeline | WV/VA/NC | $5B |
| 21. Champlain Hudson Power Express (Transmission) | New York | $2.2B |
| 29. Augustin Plains Ranch Power Project | New Mexico | $600MM |
| 49. Statewide Energy Storage and Grid Modernization | California | ? |
Labels: capital planning and budgeting, electoral politics and influence, electric utility infrastructure, infrastructure, political organization, public finance and spending, public goods
posted by Richard Layman @ 12:01 PM&Permanent Link
15 Comments:
There has been a lot of talk on the D side that the infrastructure spend will be a 90/10 split based on tax credits and private partnerships.
Eyeballing that list looks like some of these, but a lot of traditional government spend.
Comparing to 2009 stimulus would be instructive. These look more valuable -- and less road centric.
Definitely agree with you about the last point. There was not that much that was strategic about the original ARRA projects. TIGER was different, although also a way to build support/support your supporters, and a lot of the projects weren't noteworthy nationally, even though important locally.
e.g., I remember one in PGH was a road decking, for not that much money either.
That being said, while an important list of projects, it's a list, and many other equally important projects aren't listed.
Not to mention the exclusion of what we might call "Big Hairy Audacious Projects" that have big payoff, e.g., like an extension of the 7 Subway in NYC.
Maybe my idea of creating a combined MARC-VRE main line as a precursor to working together and electrifying south to Richmond isn't as BHAP as a & extension to Secaucus, but it would have long term impact that is very significant.
THE ONE EXCEPTION (not exactly ARRA) was the attempt to promote HSR, and that fell apart over politics, the same way this broad initiative would if Hillary Clinton were president.
I understand the anti-government position that militates against investment, but it makes no sense and is damaging to the nation.
====
Don't think I can get to the follow up til tomorrow.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-infrastructure-deal-democrats-234279
I'm not sure where the various streetcar/light rail projects were being funded but I think it was through TIGER.
Also note thanks the ongoing idiocy WMATA is not in a place to ask for the money.
One of the posts in the back of the queue is a rethinking about master planning/Comp. Plan partly as a result of the current process, but also some more general thinking, in terms of coming up with a list of catalytic projects.
In other words, you have the plan and its elements, but a separate list of "big hairy audacious projects," some that you definitely pursue, others that you probably can't but are there, "top of mind."
There was an interesting article in the Toronto Star about catalytic projects, that were outlined in a separate vision document not formally part of the planning process there, but ended up happening anyway.
I e-talked with the guy and he sent me the paper, which dates to the late 1990s, but I haven't gotten to it yet.
I was talking with my friend who is a planning board chair last week, and I made this point. He seemed to agree that such would be a useful addition, since the general master planning process isn't focused in that manner.
This comes to the "chance favors the prepared city." One of the reasons ARRA didn't do much is that capital budgeting for transportation planning is required to be "constrained" -- it's called the constrained long range planning process -- focused on what is realizable. E.g., the 7 extension to New Jersey is not realistic, so it is never budgeted for. Or a merger of the MARC Penn Line and the VRE Fredericksburg Line and electrification is too crazy to make it on the CLRP.
Or a discussion of integrating NJT and LIRR/Metro North better + PATH. Etc.
But why not list them, with more than just back of the envelope numbers.
2. Yes, tragedy about WMATA. It's really damning of the public sector. At the same level as the Port Authority process, but somehow, the Governors were allowed to let their over-control slide. Cuomo prevented NY State Legislature from voting in changes to the structure, etc. But PATH seems to be moving forward, despite that problem and the bridgegate mess.
I don't have good info connections anymore into WMATA, so I just don't know what to think about its progress.
oops. Forgot the cite:
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/10/16/toronto-needs-a-new-wave-of-world-scale-projects-james.html
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/10/16/toronto-needs-to-take-one-last-step-to-reach-civic-greatness-james.html
2. thanks for that cite. I'll have to include it in post #2.
That's the crux of the problem. With capital budgeting, this money "wouldn't add to the deficit, would it?"
You know a lot more about macro finance than I do. And technically, capital budgeting is still a form of deficit financing, but it is not the same thing as deficit adding the way the political discussion is.
also from the now indevpsinille politico magazine:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/mayors-cities-president-trump-approval-disapproval-policy-214713
"Start with the new president’s threat to repeal Obamacare. Three-quarters of the predominantly Democratic mayors who responded to the survey say it would be “a complete disaster” for their cities. How about affordable housing? Nearly two-thirds consider it a priority in their cities, but they don’t think Trump’s pick for head of Housing and Urban Development is up to the job. Education? Mayors are almost unanimous in their support for universal pre-kindergarten, but they haven’t heard a peep out of the administration on a subject they say is vital to creating a 21st century workforce"
It strikes that that federal affordable housing credits are one of the federal monies that mayors see?
I don't think mayors are so much involved in making decisions about who gets affordable housing credits, but you're right that the programs are very visible and part of the affordable housing production "system," and mayors/elected officials have very overt relationships with the organizations (real estate developers) involved. E.g., a bunch of the companies are small, but some are bigger, e.g., WC Smith. (I am trying to create a tv program about housing development in cities, and am trying to twist the arm of one of these companies to participate. Sadly, the show's possibility hinges on their participation. If they won't go, I might be able to pull off the concept, but in Baltimore.)
(Not known much, but Related Companies is a huge player in the affordable housing market.)
The big thing with HUD and cities to me, are two programs. 1. Community Development Block Grants. They make less of a difference in DC but are still used. In states, they can make a big difference for communities with limited financing options.
2. general funding for housing authorities as well as the Sec. 8 program. The former is a big deal. The amounts have been dropping, certainly haven't kept up with inflation, and of course, as buildings age, the need for money for maintenance is a big issue. Of course/2, sadly, many housing authorities have WMATA-scale issues of not doing a good job executing maintenance.
Of course, HUD has other programs that fund rehabilitation and "preservation" of HUD-funded projects from days of yore too.
https://blog.abglobal.com/post/en/2017/01/are-sanctuary-cities-truly-at-risk
"Federal aid comes to cities mostly through block grant programs such as HUD’s Community Development Block Grant and HHS’s Head Start and Child Care and Development programs. There are also programs for HIV testing and some funds for police for DNA sample analysis, summer youth jobs programs and the like. Many sanctuary cities report that 5% to 10% of their budget comes from such federal grants."
Is Section 8 administered by the state or the city?
You're probably right, the nexus between developers/mayors on affordable housing is more important that the federal money funding issue.
Dept. of Commerce has a program like block grants, through the ec. dev. administration. DK much about it.
Dept. of Ag. rural ec. dev. program does the same thing in rural areas.
====
DC is more tricky because the feds. pay for (and run) the AG function for adult crimes. I don't know if they pay for the court system or DC.
And our felons are housed in the federal prison system. I don't think we are charged for that. And CSOSA, a federal agency, deals with returnees/probation system.
Where DC is more at risk is that legally it is considered a dept. of the federal govt., with ultimate control by Congress. Sure there is the Home Rule Act, but it can be altered, replaced with something else, theoretically.
I still think that out of "the best defense is a good offense," DC ought to be aiming to be exemplary in how it functions as a city-state, not giving Congress "cause" to step in and usurp/re-assert its authority.
So because of DC's special relationship, it has more to lose probably, under the Trump Administration, compared to the average city.
I don't envy the Mayor and her colleagues having to deal with this now... it's a far cry from the "Constitutional Convention" days less than one year ago!
I didn't know, there is a cap on how much each state gets annually, for federal LIHTC, based on the state's population.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22389.pdf
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/red-state-blue-city/513857/
I never did get around to writing about the Republican agenda for cities, to publish it around the Inauguration.
Some day...
But yes, as long as cities are seen as the bastions of the progressives, there is little interest in helping them.
That will likely be the tension between Congress and Pres. Trump over an infrastructure program.
Anyway, as you know, we've discussed this state over the city issue for awhile. It's an issue in many states: IL; NY; VA; to some extent WA (the rest of the state vs. Seattle); PA; some of the tension in MD between the Eastern Shore and the urban state, and western Maryland, etc.
I don't think that what were seen as necessary conservatizing checks on power--the way that the Senate is set up and the Electoral College too--would create structural conditions that favored overwhelmingly rural interests over urban ones, and in a manner that couldn't be corrected.
Another thing that strengthens this divide is how Congress was set at 435 Representatives. While the effect isn't as pronounced as with the Senate, it does create some issues.
These kinds of political structures are reproduced at the State Legislature level too, in most states.
I think it's gotten to the point where it may not be correctable and will have long term negative impact on the health of the nation generally, especially the cities, but states too.
E.g., the Eastern Shore can knock MoCo all it wants, but MoCo generates such a great proportion of the state budget that they ought to be more appreciative Same with VA vis a vis NoVA, etc. Definitely with NYC vis a vis Upstate NY. Etc.
And of course nationally, the blue states tend to get much less federal spending back than do the red states, which excoriate "welfare."
this:
in a manner that couldn't be corrected.
would be better as this:
get to a point of stasis and in a manner that couldn't be corrected.
Getting very off topic.
RE: obligations. If you include pensions -- like Larry L -- I suspect the obligations invert.
On mayors, again:
http://citiscope.org/habitatIII/commentary/2016/12/can-mayors-actually-rule-world
(When Ford, Rockefeller, MacArthur, etc are sponsoring think pieces be very wary.)
Post a Comment
<< Home