|
|
|
 |
|
Home / Washington Business - February 2006 / Q&A with Secretary of Transportation Doug MacDonald: His Job is Getting Things Built |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Q&A with Secretary of Transportation Doug MacDonald: His Job is Getting Things Built |
|
|
|
Written On: February 2006 |
|
|
|
Doug MacDonald, a native of Mercer Island and a Harvard Law School graduate, has been Secretary of Transportation since April 2001. Mr. MacDonald joined WSDOT following a 9-year tenure as Executive Director of the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority where he provided leadership for the large capital investment program and for operating improvements to achieve higher quality of drinking water, for wastewater treatment and for public sector business efficiencies.
Q: With the failure of I-912, how is the department organizing its project lists to address critical needs?
A: Today, project lists are mostly set by the Legislature. The money that survived I-912 from the new gas tax increases had already been assigned by the Legislature to specific projects to be constructed in specific time frames over the next 16 years. The Legislature also selected the projects for the "Nickel Program" enacted in 2003. Other projects are designated by the Legislature each biennium for the funds not covered by those two programs.
We think the Legislature did well in selecting projects that address safety needs, ease chokepoints, and add some new capacity and also assure that existing facilities are properly rehabilitated. Our job is to get the projects built.
Q: The other part of the transportation-funding package that was not addressed in I-912 is the fees the Legislature passed. How are those fees being used and for what projects?
A: In addition to the gas tax increases, the Legislature added a weight fee on passenger cars (most of us will pay $10 a year), increased the light-truck weight fees by $10 to $30 a year (depending on weight), and added a yearly $75 motorhome fee. Drivers’ licenses and license plate charges were increased a bit, too. Together these fees raise about $110 million each year. These revenues will be applied partly as cash and partly as long-term support for bonding for the benefit of the entire 2005 project list. That includes highways and some investments for which gas tax funds generally are not eligible such as freight rail and passenger rail projects, public transportation needs, and safety projects for walking and biking.
Q: In looking ahead at the transportation infrastructure needs, will we need to raise more money to fund it? If so, where do you see the funding coming from?
A: The need for regional funding identified by the Blue Ribbon Transportation Commission in 2002 must still be addressed. Even with the statewide package of projects funded by statewide tax increases, regional needs remain. Businesses and citizens in the central Puget Sound area are going to have to step up if these needs are to be met. This is a major unresolved topic on the transportation agenda.
Q: Recently the U.S. Chamber of Commerce released a report calling for tolls and mileage charges to replace gas taxes. The theory is that as vehicles become more efficient and hybrids take over the highways, there will be insufficient revenue to support the growth and maintenance of our highway network. Is the assessment on target, and, if so, what does it mean for Washington?
A: The U.S. Chamber is right that the current system will need changes. Almost everyone agrees that in the future gas tax revenues can't do the whole job. There is broad agreement that tolling will have to resume its long-standing role. We're already part of that national trend with toll financing for the new crossing at Tacoma Narrows. Shortly we will be piloting a tolled HOT lane on part of SR 167. This is one of many projects around the country where variable charges for road use will try to improve highway efficiency, reduce congestion and raise revenue. Change is coming. We have no choice but to pay for a transportation system that will support our economy and our communities.
Q: Have the road slides on I-90 near Snoqualmie Pass changed your priorities? Specifically, will I-90 widening start sooner than 2010?
A: We have not changed our basic priorities. However, we have taken a closer look at similar slide hazard areas along I-90 across Snoqualmie Pass. This continues a statewide program in place since 1995 identifying 2,700 slope hazard locations on the state highway system and correcting, so far, over a hundred of them at a cost of more than $100 million. We expect the 2006 Legislature to consider moving up the I-90 widening project, scheduled to begin in 2011, in the Lake Keechelus area containing some of the most worrisome slopes. Other special work may also be considered for several other sites on the I-90 slope hazard list.
Q: The television commercials opposing I-912 put a sense of urgency around projects like the 520 floating bridge and the Alaskan Way Viaduct. How will we address those critical needs, and what needs to happen to complete those projects?
A: The governor, legislators, the mayor of Seattle and other local officials have all given these projects their full commitment. On the viaduct, the question is how best to match project visions against the available funding — the state gas tax increases and other local and federal sources — to achieve the most cost-effective implementation.
The SR 520 corridor presents some very tricky questions. What transportation benefits should the corridor provide? Where will impacts of new facilities fall and how will those best be reconciled with local neighborhoods? How will tolls and other financing sources add to the down payment committed to by the 2005 Legislature? The Draft Environmental Impact Statement coming in May should add some clarity on these points and underscore the project's urgency.
Q: What are some of the other critical projects which impact safety? When will they be addressed?
A: Two favorite projects of mine show the range. One is the statewide program to install cable barriers on freeway medians to prevent crossover collisions. Lives are being saved across the state by this simple technology. Gov. Gregoire directed this inexpensive but effective program to continue even as Initiative 912 attacked its funding source. We finished the first new installation in November. It added 70 miles of freeway median in to the 50 miles where cable barrier had already been installed. More is coming with the money the Legislature directed in 2005.
Another favorite program of mine is the cluster of projects to straighten out the mess on I-5 through Tacoma, a perennial list leader as the state's worst accident location. We began a Nickel Program project last summer and construction is now highly visible alongside I-5 between 48th Street and Pacific Avenue. This entire program won’t be finished, however, until the Nalley Valley Viaduct is rebuilt in three stages, smoothing the I-5 merges and completing the SR 16 widening to I-5 from Gig Harbor. The Nalley Valley reconstruction projects will be funded with money from the 2003 and 2005 gas tax increases and construction will begin in 2008. There are dozens of other projects coming all across the state. Some fix bridges. Some ease conflicts with freight. Some smooth nasty merges and other accident- and congestion-prone bottlenecks. Almost every project includes safety dividends.
Q: Increasingly, security is a concern for our state ferry system. How are those concerns being addressed, and where is the funding coming from to beef up the state patrol's presence at terminals and on the boats?
A: The U.S. Coast Guard, the Washington State Patrol and Washington State Ferries are all working together on ferry security. The State Patrol has created a new vessel and terminal security unit. New resources, from explosive-sniffing dogs to new surveillance cameras, are in place. Everyone is participating in training and drills and we are asking riders to help, too. Federal money secured by our congressional delegation has helped defray some of the costs, so an already strained ferry budget is feeling the pressure.
Q: There is a concern about the safety of the Steel Electric boats built in the late 1920s. How are those concerns being addressed, and when will those boats be replaced?
A: The Ferry System operates four vessels built in 1927. They are operated under current certificates issued by the U.S. Coast Guard. Their hulls would not meet today's standards for new vessels. For this reason and efficiency considerations, they should be replaced. The replacement program has not moved as quickly as we had hoped, and we expect that it will be several more years before the last of these vessels can be retired.
Q: In the past, J.M. Martinac, a Tacoma ship builder, presented a plan to build five Island-class ferries to replace the Steel Electric boats. Why has that plan not been adopted?
A: J.M. Martinac Corp., once an active Puget Sound shipbuilding firm, submitted in 2001 a proposed vessel concept and contracting/finance plan for a new ferryboat class. The vessel concept did not meet WSF's needs. The proposed procurement and business arrangement did not match a competitive procurement approach enacted by the Legislature in 2001. In 2003, the attorney general and the state treasurer also found other deficiencies in matching the proposal to state law. Subsequently, Martinac has participated in the procurement program being conducted by the Ferry System.
Q: How do you see the state addressing the need to add rail capacity? Is it through raising track elevations to bypass traffic crossings, or is it in finding new routes across the Cascades?
A: Rail freight capacity is important. It matters for our position in global trade. It matters for our agricultural producers. It matters because all forms of freight rail help ease highway congestion. Rail capacity improvements require investment from the railroads themselves. They require careful integration with the state’s transportation programs for public investment plans. They may merit new state and other public funding, adding to the hundreds of millions of dollars WSDOT and Sound Transit have paid or committed for track improvements to make both freight and passenger services more efficient on the mainline and to separate motor vehicles and freight trains at grade crossings. Look for a lively discussion of whether the BNSF tunnel at Stampede Pass should be crown-cut for use by double-stack container trains, and how that project should be funded. Also, keep an eye on short-line rail needs and prospects desired by local communities and shippers all over the state.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
