Will the Stimulus = More Urban Sprawl?

x

President Obama has promised to create jobs and support economic well-being in American communities by investing billions of dollars in our country's infrastructure. When Obama first spoke of his vision for infrastructure improvements it sounded very promising (Obama on infrastructure investment). Given his background as an advocate for "green" solutions and the fact that he hails from a city with a great multi-model transit system, lots of folks got their hopes up when he spoke about creating a 21st Century infrastructure system. The closer the stimulus package gets to becoming a reality, hopes are fading that the stimulus money will be invested in infrastructure that supports more than vehicles.

"We will create millions of jobs by making the single largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s. We’ll invest your precious tax dollars in new and smarter ways, and we’ll set a simple rule – use it or lose it. If a state doesn’t act quickly to invest in roads and bridges in their communities, they’ll lose the money."

-President Obama

We certainly support Obama's desire to invest in "new and smarter ways". However, "new and smarter ways" are in direct conflict with Obama's "use it or lose it" policy. As with all good things, it's going to take some time to plan the new and smarter ways...time is not something we have; the economy needs to be resuscitated as soon as possible, which immediately rules out the most innovative, or smartest, solutions as candidates for the stimulus money.

OK, so the most forward-thinking ideas are incompatible with the basic premise of the stimulus (spend quickly). Surely state, regional, and local governments are equipped with the skills, staff, and tools to build sidewalks, bike lanes, and transit stops just the same as highways, right? Right. HOWEVER, many states and regional governments have no intention to spend the stimulus money on anything BUT highways. The least Congress and the Obama team can do is specify that a set percentage of the stimulus funds must be used to develop non-vehicle projects. Yet, it seems unlikely that the federal government is willing to hold local governments accountable to this simple standard.

Here in Missouri, it is likely that the overwhelming majority of the stimulus infrastructure money will fund highways, and thus, further fuel sprawl in our urbanized areas. We want to be clear: We are not suggesting that investments to improve American highways and bridges are bad investments--highways and bridges are a critical component of a strong multi-modal system. We simply believe that a portion of the stimulus infrastructure funding should be spent on more localized infrastructure that makes cities, towns, and villages vibrant places to live, socially and economically.

Here's a great article from the New York Observer on this topic:
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/infrastructure-spending-and-obama-s-vision-thing

Missouri Bicycle Federation published an analysis of MODOT's stimulus project list:
http://mobikefed.org/2008/12/analysis-of-modot-economic-stimulus.php

Here's an article about rail getting a back seat and the lack of oversight related to the stimulus dollars:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aV2SxqQRuOFw&refer=home

Here's an article about "green jobs" competing for a piece of the stimulus money:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28375225/