by Peter B. Fleischer
Recent proposals for a super-large multi-hundred billion dollar Federal stimulus for infrastructure, with much of the funds being sent to the states, brings to mind the old saying "Be careful what you ask for, you may get it."
That said, I want to weigh in with a suggested approach embedded in a philosophy for spending this money that I hope will be adopted in New York (and perhaps by other states as well) in advance of the flow of funds. Particularly if the funds are predicated on a "use it or lose it" basis, the future funding feeding frenzy will need to be managed. So here are a few recommended steps for New York:
Assert an economic growth philosophy linked to state goals for climate change, social equity and energy. Don't just spend the money: this is almost certainly a one-time windfall. Spend it wisely and strategically, with an eye on (re)creating the state in which we want to live. In smart growth, we have a clear and comprehensive philosophy. It is in essence a strategy to leverage public infrastructure investments in ways that maximize public and private return. Smart Growth balances the state's economic, environmental, equity, and energy challenges while allowing for significant regional differences.
Designate the state's Smart Growth Cabinet as the entity to coordinate expenditures from the infrastructure stimulus. The best bang for the infrastructure buck will result if the spending is planned synergistically among the state agencies, and priorities are established as to which agencies get how much, for which projects, and when. Of course, the advantage of having a coordinating entity should not be offset by the risk of slowing down the process, and risk losing funds. It will be no small task to expeditiously determine the appropriateness as to policy, the likelihood of effectiveness, the cost and the value of the hundreds, if not thousands, of projects that will be put forth. Still, some entity should ensure that the funding goes for needed projects, not for just any projects. And if that entity has to work smart and fast, so be it. The advantage of the SG Cabinet is that it already exists, it already coordinates, and it is already charged with making sure that state spending is consistent with state policy.
Empower the SG Cabinet to establish a clear set of criteria for project inclusion. This approach was successfully used in Massachusetts under former Governor Romney. All capital projects proposed for state funding were screened against the same written criteria, and then ranked whether they were road, water, sewer, transit, parks or other.
Recognize the necessity of phasing. Projects on any initial list may not be the best projects for the long term. Nevertheless, there will be funds that must be spent quickly. We should be mindful not to spend so much on what may be lower quality projects now, so that the state is precluded from funding better projects as they come along. Spending in pulses is recommended. If projects must be chosen in 30-60-120 days, then the criteria will simply need to be devised fast. It is of course, entirely possible that the process will be lengthened and more time will be available to ensure that projects meet reasonable and useful criteria.
Be ready to participate in projects of national scope. If Federal funding is designated for a national passenger or national freight rail system, or for a new smart energy grid, we must be ready to enlist the needed planning, engineering, and legal resources in the effort. Large scope projects would offer enormous benefits now, and positive long-term consequences for New York.
Enhance regional planning. Counties might help inform the SG Cabinet of regional infrastructure needs and concerns. Counties could also be given longer term responsibility for certain types of community and economic development planning.
If not otherwise directed by the federal government, the state, through the Smart Growth Cabinet, should establish funding allocations to address the following categories of projects:
- School Retrofits
- Other Building Retrofits
- Roads/Bridges/Bike/Pedestrian
- Ports/Airports
- Freight Rail/Passenger Rail
- Public Transit
- Clean Water/Wastewater/Levees, Parks
- Energy Grid
- Affordable Housing.
I strongly support over-weighting of the non-road categories since those areas have been the least well-funded areas in the past. In addition, by funding the non-road projects, New York will achieve its climate and energy goals faster while aiding the parts of the state that need capital spending the most -- the main streets, town centers, and urban areas.
