LANSING, Mich. – Better roads drive better jobs, Gov. Rick Snyder said Wednesday (October 26th) in calling for the revitalization of Michigan’s deteriorating infrastructure.
Snyder highlighted Michigan’s critical needs in his Special Message to the Legislature on Infrastructure. He released the recommendations during a news conference at Lawrence Technological University in Southfield, a leader in developing innovative road construction materials.
The governor’s message focuses on four primary needs:
- A modern transportation system that moves people and goods efficiently, reliably and safely.
- A multimodal system serving the movements of a new generation of Michiganders that is more active, urban-based and tech savvy.
- Water and sewer systems that support and protect Michigan’s rich environment.
- Integrating the broadband telecommunications network, connecting every business and household to the Internet.
“Modern roads, clean water and broadband access are among the building blocks of Michigan’s prosperity,” Snyder said.
Michigan is ideally positioned to emerge as a global trade center due to its location within the international shipping and logistics stream between Detroit, Chicago and Toronto. Taking advantage of that opportunity demands a modern infrastructure.
While noting the state’s continued innovations in transportation infrastructure and new technology, Snyder called for further cost savings and efficiencies through additional reforms and best practices. Proposals include:
- Allowing counties to absorb their county road commissions to ensure greater accountability. Michigan is the only state with county road agencies.
- Giving the state the authority to audit county road agencies.
- Updating Public Act 51 of 1951 to remove cities and villages that receive less than $50,000 in transportation funding from the distribution of P.A. 51 funds. Rather than go to jurisdictions, money will stay with the road so it can be distributed to whatever larger road agency maintains those roads and bridges.
- Ensuring that agencies covered under P.A. 51 conform to Michigan’s new law requiring employees to contribute 20 percent of their health care premiums, and have new employees placed on defined contribution retirement plans.
- Allow agencies covered by P.A. 51 to open construction and maintenance contracts to competitive bidding from the public and private sectors.
Snyder also is urging dramatic reforms to Michigan’s transportation user fees to ensure sustainable funding for roads and bridges. He pointed to the 2008 Transportation Funding Task Force and this year’s House Transportation Committee work group, both of which cite the need for significant funding increases. Recommendations include:
- Allowing counties and regional authorities to levy a local vehicle registration fee to support transportation if approved by local voters.
- Eliminating the state’s current 19-cents-per-gallon gas tax and 15-cents-per-gallon diesel tax in favor of a percentage wholesale tax on fuel, which is a more viable long-term funding approach. The wholesale tax would be revenue neutral upon enactment.
- Increasing investment in our infrastructure by $1 billion to $1.4 billion each year. For the sake of discussion, a state registration fee increase of $10 per month on the average passenger vehicle would raise nearly $1 billion.
- Distributing new transportation funding based on road use and traffic volumes, with a seven- to 10-year transition period for full effect. This would include any new revenues beyond what is collected and spent today.
The governor pointed out that Michigan loses nearly $3 million each day in the value of its transportation assets, or $1 billion annually. Each dollar spent today to preserve a road or bridge saves Michigan at least $6 in future rebuilding costs.
Further developing Michigan’s bus and rail transit, aviation system and ports is essential to the state’s future as well. Michigan has rail freight projects, such as the Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal and Detroit Railroad Tunnel expansion, ready for construction with additional investment. Thanks to the Legislature’s actions, Michigan also has secured $440 million in federal rail funds to accelerate passenger rail service from Detroit and Pontiac to Chicago.
Recognizing the importance of aviation to the global transportation network, Snyder proposes continued investment in the safety and efficiency of airports. He also will work with Michigan’s congressional delegation to secure additional funds to dredge Great Lakes ports and pursue construction of a new shipping lock in Sault Ste. Marie.
Michigan’s abundant water resources, which support many of our economic and quality of life benefits, must be protected as well. For example, failing sewer systems can have a direct impact on the number of beach closings across Michigan each year. The governor is endorsing recommendations of the State Revolving Fund Advisory Group to use $1 billion approved by voters in 2002 to provide grants and low-interest loans to help communities upgrade sewer and water systems.
Broadband service is another critical link to Michigan’s future, according to Snyder. To complement $247 million in federal broadband funding, Snyder is calling for the interconnecting of local governments and school districts to avoid duplication. He is also urging the Michigan Public Safety Commission to open its communications system towers to Internet service providers, and is encouraging the streamlining of utility work permit clearances in state road rights of way.
The entire Special Message on Infrastructure is available at www.michigan.gov/snyder.
Source: News release from Governor Rick Snyder
OK….since it was for the sake of argument, let’s have the argument. Its being suggested that an average increase of $10 per month per passenger vehicle to fund these infrastructure projects. Heck why not make it look really pretty and call it 33 cents a day increase. What it really is, is average $120 MORE a year per passenger car to fund roads…that’s just the average, it doesn’t cover the min and max. Where the real wear and tear is from commercial trucks (at least that’s what I was told why we need our bypass on 131 is because the commercial trucks are shaking the bejesus out of everything, so stands to reason they’d do the same to the roads). Why not do what some counties in Indiana do with a wheel tax so that those that proportionately deteriorate the roads pay proportionately their share instead of disproportionately disperse the burden over the citizens vs business. I mean the state is already passed on its budget burden on local governments, now its talking about cutting locals even further by getting rid of the personal property tax, now this. My money clip is going to resemble a paperclip with a penny in it if you folks in Lansing keep this up.
Here’s a starting point for a cost save. Keep your 131 bypass around us if its going to be a 2 lane as long as I envision it will be. I was the one that sat down with MDOT’s Jason Latham to negotiate the half dozen points the village wanted in order for them to endorse this bypass. One of those was that the state buy enough land to eventually build a true 4 lane bypass in the near future. If I’d have envisioned the states dire straights or this economy I’d have never negotiated these points and would have stood fast against this bypass. There won’t be 4 lanes in my lifetime…it’ll be 2 lane around our town…dumping in to a community an area just North of us that has enough stop lights to resemble US 31 through Kokomo Indiana. I’ll eat all the time and energy it took to negotiate those points on behalf of the village, the state can keep its $25-$30 million and our village doesn’t have to take one for the team for a two lane bypass that’ll stay 2 lane for longer than I think most of us envisioned. The only big winners in that are those that’ll own property off the exits of that bypass. I’ve witnessed that first hand in Cadillac where all the gas stations, restaurant chains, and eventually big box stores moved in. Look at the original bypass around TR that now needs a bypass for that bypass…Let’s see….. gas stations, restaurants, and a few of big box chain stores.
And conceptually, having better roads probably does offer some levels of competitive advantage compared to other STATES that may not do the same. But will that help us compete against countries like Mexico, India, or China. I heard that argument once upon a time from our EDC to rationalize a bypass and that gave me quite a chuckle. I dare say when I am in Mexico next week the roads to our plant are not the reason we are there. In fact last time I was down there, I told our driver Enrique that if this escort driving thing doesn’t work out for him down there, then there’s probably a future for him in NASCAR. And I work for a $1 billion a year facet of a $27 billion a year multinational corporation.
And Mexico road and driving pales in comparison to India. My supplier quality counterpart is heading back there next week….he won’t drive there, and we still don’t quite understand how they get materials in and goods out of some of our suppliers there when the mentality there is “if you see an opening…make a lane”.
So you can pretend that roads are gonna help us compete globally, and I understand the thought, but when wages in these countries are pennies on a dollar compared to here, and costs comparisons for regulatory requirements are disproportionate, I see good roads as a means to making it easier for the trucks moving equipment and machinery used for manufacturing that used to be in our state, now out of our state to these “best cost” countries…so we’d have that going for us (makes me all warm and fuzzy for ponying up for that average extra $120 a year registration fee).
And last time I checked, when we build roads they usually go both ways right? I mean sure we get material in quicker and finished goods to market quicker, but by the same token alot of those materials and parts inbound are from other other countries and it’ll get foreign finished goods to our markets too….so remember, the roads don’t just ship goods we make here outbound, it also allows cheaper foreign goods to get inbound to our state quicker also.
Do we need to improve the roads, yes. but it won’t stop the bleeding of jobs to best cost countries…it’ll take much much more than that.