New Analysis: 59% of Road Stimulus Went to Repair, 33% to New Capacity

Shovel_ready.jpg(Photo: DMI Blog)

In the first year of the Obama administration’s economic stimulus law, 59 percent of its $27 billion in transportation formula funds went to projects that preserve existing roads, while 33 percent was used to build new pavement, according to an analysis by the advocacy group Smart Growth America (SGA).

The new data, unveiled today by SGA state policy director Will Schroeer at a green jobs conference in Washington, brings a measure of good news to clean transport advocates who had viewed the stimulus as somewhat of a disappointment for its failure to fund roads and transit on a more equal footing.

The SGA analysis does not include the law’s $8.4 billion in transit aid, looking solely at the formula funding that is often depicted as dedicated to highways and bridges.

In fact, states were allowed to redirect some of that larger pot to transit, though not all took advantage of that flexibility. "Some states were really, I have to say, dishonest with the public about what the money could be spent on," Schroeer said today.

Here’s how SGA’s one-year analysis of the $27 billion in stimulus money shook out:

59% spent on road system repair/preservation
33% spent on new road capacity
3.9% spent on non-motorized transport (e.g. bike-ped)
1.7% spent on transit and related projects
2% spent on other uses

Several other speakers at the green jobs conference emphasized rules that allowed only 10 percent of federal transit stimulus aid to go towards operating budgets that ensure trains and buses can keep running. The lion’s share of the transit spending went to capital projects, such as extending rail lines or purchasing new equipment.

Brian Turner, director of the Transportation Learning Center, a transit-training group, lamented that federal spending is weighted towards "physical capital … Any economist who went to class knows that there is another class [of investment] that’s equally important: That’s human capital."

The debate over how to free up more federal transit funds for operating has split the transit industry, with its biggest lobbying force viewing the change as a short-term response to the recession while unions and other transit agencies push for a permanent shift.

Nonetheless, SGA’s past work on the job-creation performance of transit relative to roads has appeared to make some headway with Democratic lawmakers. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told conference attendees today that her colleagues “have stood strong in the drive for good, green jobs. … We’ve said all along that clean energy is about four things:
jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs."

  • Nick

    I don’t believe they spent $1.05 Billion dollars on bike and pedestrian improvements. Where exactly did that money go?

    To put it in perspective, you could build out SF’s $14 million dollar Bike Network 75 times.

  • JohnB

    Nick

    Do you mean the 3.9% that went to non-motorized transport?

    Much of that might have gone on paths for walkers and hikers, maybe even bridleways for horse riders.

  • Sean T Hedgpeth

    Yay, the ARRA funds go to new pavement! How innovative! In Switzerland, I saw them tear up ‘old’ pavement that didnt even turn gray yet.

    Here is my recommended shares:

    59% Transit Operations
    33% Bike/Ped
    3.9% Existing Roads
    1.7% Transit capital
    2% spent on other uses

    That would create/retain some jobs. I think the non-motorized money went to parking lots for when the car’s engines were off, thats non-motorized right?

  • William Schroeer

    Nick asks a good question. I gave these figures at the conference because I wanted to give attendees recent data, but I did so before we had a report ready to go with the data, and this is a caution against doing so.

    In our ARRA analysis, projects categorized as Non-Motorized Transportation include four types of projects:
    · Bicycle Projects
    · Pedestrian Projects
    · Trails
    · Streetscapes
    Many of the smaller projects are sidewalks and ADA improvements; large ticket items are most often multi-use trails or grouped ADA projects within a large jurisdiction.

    It is also important to note the overlap between the Preservation and Non-Motorized classifications, and that the funding totals do not and cannot reflect incidental bike/ped improvements that are being undertaken as part of larger projects. Many large, expensive projects included bike lanes, sidewalks, ADA accommodations, and/or streetscaping along with pavement rehab, restriping, and drainage work. The analysis categorized such projects overall as Preservation, even though non-motorized components were included.

    An important lesson we draw from our analysis of stimulus spending is the need for better data on the kinds of projects funded, whether with stimulus or regular funds. In other words, better transparency. For more on that need, see SGA’s report on 120 days of stimulus spending: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/stimulus.html

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

New Stimulus Data: Road Funds 77% Under Contract, Transit at 74%

|
As of the end of February, nearly $5.4 billion of transit stimulus money, or 74 percent, was under contract for projects in the 50 states and D.C., according to a Streetsblog Capitol Hill analysis of data released today by the House transportation committee. (Photo: DMI Blog) The success rate of transit stimulus spending was slightly […]

Killing the Myth of the ‘More Shovel-Ready’ Road Stimulus

|
During debate over the White House’s $787 billion economic stimulus law, transit advocates watched as their projects were shortchanged and more "shovel-ready" road projects got the lion’s share of the transport pot — about $8.4 billion, compared with $27.5 billion for highways and bridges. (Photo: DMI Blog) But transit money is getting put to use […]

New Analysis: Major Cities Still Shortchanged by Transportation Stimulus

|
The Obama administration’s awarding of $1.5 billion in competitive transportation stimulus grants on Wednesday sparked elation in cities such as Kansas City and New Orleans. But those celebrations were more than just anecdotal evidence of the so-called TIGER program‘s urban impact, according to a new analysis from the Brookings Institution’s Rob Puentes. (Chart: The Avenue) […]