On November 10 – only four days after receiving the final report from his Transportation Vision Committee – Governor Kulongoski unveiled his Jobs and Transportation Act of 2009.

Gov. Kulongoski calls his package “the largest, most comprehensive and greenest transportation initiative in Oregon history.” Oregon’s environmental community – or at least the “establishment” environmental community represented by organizations such as the Oregon Environmental Council – supports it.

Ironically Republican honcho Jack Roberts, who likes the plan, reveals why progressives should be wary of it:

The Transportation Visioning Committee that recommended the major elements of this plan was largely dominated by representatives of business and local government. Transportation is the lifeblood of commerce, while local governments are major stewards of our transportation infrastructure. This is not a plan foisted on an unwilling public by a left-wing cabal of big-government enthusiasts and central planners.

Two observations about the package must be made at the outset.

First, the package is completely oblivious to the reality of peak oil. How can a transportation planning proposal completely fail to consider how the transportation system will be powered? The package simply assumes that the fuels needed to maintain a car- and truck-dependent transportation system will continue to be available, at prices low enough so that people and freight will keep taking to the roads.

Second, there’s nothing forward looking about the package. The vision remains the same as that laid out by General Motors Futurama exhibit at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York. GM produced a short film (view the video clips Part 1 and Part 2 at YouTube) looking into the future of 1960 which now seems spooky in its prescience. That vision, designed by GM to sell cars, became enacted as official policy, across the U.S.

Here’s what GM envisioned back in 1939. The “American scheme of living” demands “an ever accelerating rate of progress, a greater world, a better world, a world which always will grow, forward.” In concrete terms, GM envisioned “express motorways” for automobiles flowing through the countryside, our cities “redesigned around a modern transportation system” with “residential, commercial and industrial areas all separated from each other, for greater convenience and greater efficiency.” The film declares:  “Over space, Man has begun to win victory.” That dream has now become our nightmare, and the vision as bankrupt as GM itself.

Now to the governor’s proposal. The Press Release states:

[The act] invests $1 billion every biennium into the state transportation system, creating 2100 jobs annually over the first five years.  The plan includes policies to reduce vehicle-miles-traveled in urban areas, a dedicated fund for non-highway transportation investments, a new transportation utility commission, and dollars for rural counties hit hardest by the scheduled sunset of the federal forest payments. The Act also recommends a series of funding options, including bonding, a new vehicle title fee, and a path to transition away from the gas tax as the central funding source for transportation.

Is Kulongoski’s package really green – or just greenwashing? Let’s take a closer look.

First, it’s important to note that the “Act” isn’t an act at all, in the format of a “bill for an act” to be presented to the legislature. It’s a slick document presenting a conceptual outline of the plan and its elements, with tables summarizing expenditures and funding sources.

The document starts off ominously:

Since taking office, Governor Kulongoski has been committed to creating family-wage jobs by investing in Oregon’s transportation system. This commitment continues with the Governor’s Jobs and Transportation Act for 2009 with an investment that will create and retain jobs for Oregonians and strengthen the economy.

This is pretty up-front: the package isn’t first and foremost about transportation at all. It’s really a make-work program – and the objective is to “strengthen the economy” and “keep the economy moving.” It’s about growth. OTIA will wrap up by 2010, and all of those construction workers, designers and engineers will be out of things to do. Better come up with something else to keep them busy, quick! And be sure to spread the pork around all of the state, so everybody’s happy.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with putting people to work. But are the end results good or bad?

Which brings us to the details. Here’s what the Act proposes to do:

• Create a trust for the most timber dependent counties ($6.5 million annually).

As fuel taxes don’t cover road costs, this would ensure that the subsidy for local roads continues, at least for the twelve counties covered. The money would go into a trust fund to be tapped when the federal money runs out.

• Expand Elderly and Disabled Transit Services ($5 million annually).

To be distributed to transit districts and counties so service levels can be maintained (note, not increased) “as costs and demand for services increase.”

• Increase funding for CollectOregon ($150 million).

ConnectOregon I & II directed $200 million of lottery bond money to railroads, ports, airports and transit systems in 2005 and 2007 “to improve the flow of commerce throughout the state.” Each ODOT region would be awarded 10% of the $150 million to be used for multimodal transportation projects. In 2005 and 2007 the money was spent on business, local government, and special district pet projects, with heavy emphasis on rail freight and aviation facilities.  The transit projects mostly go towards facilities like “transit centers” or “operations and maintenance centers” – not increases in service (the 2005 project list is found here and the 2007 final application list here). While not clearly stated, it appears that the $150 would be spread over the biennium – though note that the 2007 project list isn’t even finalized yet, as of November 2008.

• Address key bottlenecks statewide ($600 million)

Here’s the meat of the governor’s proposal: adding road system capacity. One-time bond proceeds would be applied “to relieving key freight bottlenecks across the state . . . so freight can move more efficiently throughout Oregon and the region.” In other words, subsidies for the trucking industry. Recall that the Transportation Vision Committee in its report argued adding road capacity was part of a climate change strategy: “properly designed capacity projects addressing system bottlenecks could have a net greenhouse gas reduction benefit by contributing to congestion reduction.” That’s right: they claim with a straight face that adding road capacity reduces greenhouse gas emissions!

In tune with the Vision Committee, the governor’s proposal asserts that new transportation policies will ensure that environmental concerns are accounted for in transportation planning instead of only looking to build or expand. Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions created by the transportation system will be directly addressed by encouraging electric cars, imposing new environmental standards for construction, and providing incentives to drive less.

So here’s the plan: build more but greener roads, replace oil-powered vehicles with electric vehicles, while designing incentives to drive less.

As we’ll see later, the incentives proposed are woefully inadequate.

What are the governor’s proposed policies, and would they actually accomplish the stated objective? Here’s the list:

• Create dedicated funding for non-highway projects

Oregon’s constitution requires that gas tax proceeds be spent exclusively on the road system. Rather than directly confront the problem by amending the constitution, Kulongoski would find other (unidentified) funding sources. The big question is: what has this got to do with addressing the environmental impacts of transportation fuels? The consequences of fossil fuels’ externalities (global warming and climate change) continue to be pushed onto the commons with drivers getting off scot free and the road monopoly is left untouched.

• Meet Oregon’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals

The strategy is to reduce discretionary trips in single occupancy vehicles – at least in urban areas. The tools mentioned are: expanded pedestrian and bicycle programs, increased carpools and vanpools, a statewide rideshare program, education and marketing, and incentive programs designed to reduce the number of cars on our roads. These are pretty wimpy tools, given the scale of the problem. Rural Oregon, for political reasons, is completely off the hook. Damn lefties can do what they want, as long as they do it in Portland. More realistically, rural Oregon is abandoned. There’s no recognition that the declining fuel supplies and soaring prices that our future surely holds will hit rural Oregon the hardest.

• Account for carbon in transportation planning

The Act directs ODOT to develop a “least cost planning model” and consider the least cost option, such as increased investments in rail or transit, in order to relieve congestion, rather than just building additional capacity. This would be great, if the model includes environmental impacts – including the cost of climate chaos – and the consequences of peak oil. It doesn’t make any sense to add road capacity if the oil isn’t going to be there to fuel the cars that would use them.

• Transition Away From the Gas Tax

The problem the Act is getting at here is that higher fuel prices are resulting in people to driving fewer miles in more fuel-efficient vehicles. Ergo, less fuel tax revenue. The governor wants to transition to a user fee based funding system – at least in urban areas (once again, for political reasons, rural areas are off the hook). However, during this transition, a temporary two-cent gas tax increase would “provide the short-term revenue needed to adequately fund Oregon’s transportation system as the state identifies longterm solutions for sustainable funding.”

Kulongoski identifies “actions” intended to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions:

• Encourage electric vehicles

The Act would shift the tax credit from hybrids to plug-in hybrid and all-electric vehicles. The vision here is a continuation of the GM vision – “victory over space” – with electric cars replacing our current vehicle fleet. Let’s do a little thought experiment. Suppose a substantial fraction of transportation was to be powered by electricity rather than fossil fuels.  Where would the additional electricity come from? Coal fired power plants? If not, where in the governor’s plan is any provision for additional generation or transmission capacity?

The Act would also create a medium speed electric vehicle designation. Currently, Oregon defines a
low-speed vehicle as a four-wheeled motor vehicle with a top speed of 25 mph. Such vehicles cannot travel roads that have a speed limit of more than 35 mph, preventing wide adoption of small fuel-efficient neighborhood electric vehicles. Want to get really green? Come to some accomodation with space, rather than insisting on victory. Let’s say, prohibit the production of any car capable of exceeding 35 mph (or even 25 mph!) and require that existing vehicles be retrofitted with limiters. That would cut space down to a more human scale, and begin to change the way we live within the landscape.

• Green standards for transportation programs

The Governor proposes broadening the use of environmental standards to all transportation
construction contracts funded with state funds. Can a project such as the Eugene-Springfield flyover – or the Colombia River Crossing – be “greened”?

The Governor also proposed “consumers incentives to make more environmentally friendly choices when it comes to transportation options”:

• Variable first time title fees

The first time title fee would be $100 except for vehicles with a combined EPA rating of above 30 mpg, for which the title fee would be reduced to $50. Whoopee! As John Gear astutely points out, with the average new vehicle costing in excess of $20,000, does anyone actually think knocking $50 off the initial title fee would make any difference in the choice of vehicle?

• “Pay-as-you-drive” (PAYD) auto insurance

Studies suggest that drivers paying per-mile premiums reduce driving by 5–15% and save up to 25% on their premiums under PAYD. The 2003 Legislature approved a tax credit for insurance companies who pilot the concept in Oregon, which is scheduled to expire in 2010. The governor would extend this program. John Gear has a better proposal: how about a mandate that insurance companies wanting to write auto policies in the state MUST offer a PAYD option? He notes that we’re not getting anywhere with this carrot-only approach. Better yet: mandate PAYD exclusively.

• Congestion Pricing Pilot Project

Noting that time-of-day charges and variable pricing “have been used successfully in other countries to improve the follow of traffic, reduce fuel consumption, improve air quality, and ensure reliable freight movement,” the governor proposes to “seek out a willing community or group of volunteers to conduct a pilot project on congestion pricing.” There’s a bold step for you.

Under the Act, the bulk of the money ($499 million) would continue to go to state and local roads and streets, including $15 million for the Columbia River Crossing(which is as “green” as the Eugene-Springfield flyover).

Multimodal expenditures are misleadingly reported. The document headlines the total amount allocated for “multimodal Investment” at $234 million – which sounds substantial, compared to the $499 million for highway expenditures. But yearly expenditures are only $65.1 million – and that includes $44 million in federal “STP” dollars, which in the past have gone to projects such as refurbishing the Lebanon Train Depot which now serves as meeting chambers for the city council and has as much to do with multimodal transportation as my sofa. And aren’t these “flex” funds already intended to be spent on things other than highway?

Other multimodal expenditures are equally suspicious, such as the $16.1 million of lottery funds for “a new train” for the Amtrak Cascades line. That’s a one-shot deal, to replace an existing train. No increase in or improvement of service would result. Shouldn’t we be investing in electrifying our rail system rather than replacing one diesel engine with another, guaranteeing dependence on diesel fuel for the expected 20-year lifetime of the engine?

The governor would spend 2.5 cents of a cigarette tax package for elderly and disabled transportation services. Why are we relying on smokers and gamblers to pay for our “multimodal transportation needs?

“Multimodal” transportation should first and foremost rely on feet: we would arrange our lives so we didn’t need to move around so much. That would require dramatic changes in land use and economic policies, to minimize the need to move people and stuff around. Kulongoski’s proposal is a continuation of man’s war against space.

That the environmental community would support this proposal makes one despair at the state of the environmental community.