Interesting numbers on transportation in the just released Senate budget proposal...
From the Carolina Journal...
The Senate proposal also eliminates a $215 million annual transfer from the Highway Fund to the General Fund to pay for the Highway Patrol. Senate leaders say this change, plus the additional $100 million a year additional income from DMV fees would provide sufficient funds for highway construction, thus eliminating the need for a $1.5 billion transportation bond package proposed by McCrory.
“The idea on transportation is that rather than borrow a billion or billion-and-a-half dollars, we could put $300-plus million annually — additional dollars — into transportation,” said Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham. “The feeling was we could build the projects that are not being built presently and do it without borrowing money.”
Now, Governor Pat certainly can't like that at all. He and his team have been running around the state giving the hard sell on his bond package.
Hardly a day goes by where some email blast lands in the ol' inbox talking about the virtues of his bond propisal, but it appears the NC Senate doesn't see it that way.
What the Senate proposal does show is that transportation funding can be achieved if the correct priorities are in place and there is the political will to implement those priorities.
Through a few strokes of the budget pen, they came up with $315 million per year in new money.
Now let's look at that from the perspective of the I77 HOT Lanes project.
How much is $315m/yr over the 50 year life of the HOT lanes?
Answer: Over $15 billion.
How much is the true funding gap if the current HOT Lanes plan was converted to general purpose lanes or even one new GP lane and an extension of the current HOV lane while still spending the state dollars committed directly to the HOT project?
Answer: $655m total cost - $95m direct state input - $75m DRAM committment - roughly $80m in "bonus funds" being spent to directly help the HOT lanes project - $50m in toll collection costs not needed for a non-toll project leaves a $355m funding gap.
The Senate's proposed new budget just found nearly that much in the couch cushions.
And the State means to tell one of the areas that is a major economic engine the only way to widen the road is to suck billions of dollars out of the local economy over the next 50 years rather than using a tiny percentage of the billions they just "found" to achieve the same thing?
That's not a money problem. That's a political will problem.
Update: A reader sent in this comment...
"We need to stop the apples-to-apples comparison because we don't need an apple, we need a grape."
That's a good point. What has been proposed by NCDOT is a "kitchen sink" type of project. It's more than what's needed to solve the problem with goodies like new bridges and new exits thrown in to jack up the cost to attract companies like Cintra and buy political support from some local politicians.
The point of this piece is that even when you accept those unnecessary pre-conditions this is not as much of a money problem.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
Monday, June 15, 2015
Does Governor Pat care about North Meck's opinion on transportation?
There have been recent reports of Governor Pat's office soliciting support in various parts of the state for his multi-billion dollar "Connect NC" bond package.
Various local bodies from municipal and county elected boards to local chambers of commerse are being asked by Governor Pat to pass resolutions supporting his proposal.
Incidentally, that's not unlike the resolutions Senator Tarte is asking local boards to pass opposing the HOT lanes contract with Cintra - resolutions Huntersville Mayor Jill Swain sees as unnecesary.
We here at aShortChronicle thought it was worth seeing if the same effort was taking place here in North Mecklenburg by the Governor's office.
According to the town clerks from Huntersville, Cornelius, and Davidson, no such request for support of the Connect NC bonds has come into the towns.
Makes sense in a warped way.
Since Governor Pat is committed to sticking the area with 50 years of tolls, he is probably pretty sure asking for support from this area on just about anything is a waste of time?
Does he care about this area's opinion?
Nope. No he does not.
But, the fact that he's going elsewhere around the state asking for resolutions shows that such things carry weight with the General Assembly when its being asked to pass some sort of controversial bill.
That fact may be lost on Huntersville Mayor Jill Swain. Let's hope tonight it is not lost on a majority of the Huntersville Board as they vote on a resolution asking the NCGA to pull the plug on the I77 HOT lanes project.
According to the town clerks from Huntersville, Cornelius, and Davidson, no such request for support of the Connect NC bonds has come into the towns.
Makes sense in a warped way.
Since Governor Pat is committed to sticking the area with 50 years of tolls, he is probably pretty sure asking for support from this area on just about anything is a waste of time?
Does he care about this area's opinion?
Nope. No he does not.
But, the fact that he's going elsewhere around the state asking for resolutions shows that such things carry weight with the General Assembly when its being asked to pass some sort of controversial bill.
That fact may be lost on Huntersville Mayor Jill Swain. Let's hope tonight it is not lost on a majority of the Huntersville Board as they vote on a resolution asking the NCGA to pull the plug on the I77 HOT lanes project.
Sunday, June 14, 2015
Pressure amps up for Huntersville HOT lanes resolution
The Huntersville Board meets Monday, and some sort of anti-HOT lanes resolution will most likely be on the agenda unless some serious shenanigans occur.
The biggest question is will it be a strong resolution like the one Cornelius passed that explicitly asks NCDOT to negate the contact with Cintra/I77 Mobility Partners OR will it be a watered down resolution like the one passed by Davidson which only asked for "fair" alternatives.
There could also be some drama as the pressure amps up a bit over the whole idea of a resolution being needed in the first place - at least that's the perspective of Huntersville Mayor Jill Swain.
In some recent Facebook back-and-forth on the issue, Swain has been questioning why Senator Jeff Tarte is asking for resolutions from local municipalities prior to filing any legislation to stop the toll project. Swain points out that Tarte has submitted dozens of other bills without requiring resolutions - including sometimes things the towns actively oppose. Tarte's response is that going to the General Assembly and asking the legislators to undo a proposal that has gotten to this point realistically requires obvious support from local elected officials. Otherwise, the bill would not go anywhere.
Tarte is right in this instance. If he walked into the General Assembly without a stack of resolutions, any bill very likely would not go forward. That would most likely be true even if he has a few resolutions, but not a complete set. That's just reality.
That's also why the Huntersville resolution is so important and why Swain's opposition to the idea could be so damaging. In Davidson and Cornelius, there are odd numbers of commissioners. In Huntersville, there is an even number and thus the Mayor is more likely to vote in the event of a tie.
What Swain does Monday will matter.
If a strong resolution is presented, Swain's recent comments indicate she might vote against it in a tie situation. If a weak resolution is presented and that were to end in tie, she might also vote against it because she thinks it is not needed.
Swain's former opponent for Huntersville Mayor, County Commissioner Jim Puckett, had this to say on Facebook in recent days regarding the upcoming Huntersville vote on a resolution...
"We need to make sure the folks in Huntersville know this is NOT just a resolution asking for an alternative to tolls IT IS MUCH BROADER. This is a referendum on the future of the moderate to large business community in our region. Either our boards stand with us (Cornelius and Davidson Commissioners do) or they stand against this community. If our elected officials will not at the LEAST take a stand to send the message we want an alternative, then we cannot trust that they will stand for us the next time needed. I for one will not support anyone who will simply roll over or give up because the odds are against them. Real leaders do not take the temperature, they determine the temperature. As for me I want to be known not as a thermometer, a thin fragile instrument shoved up a posterior to gauge what's going on, but a thermostat that makes the machine give me the environment the people want."
Which is it gonna be - thermometer or thermostat?
The biggest question is will it be a strong resolution like the one Cornelius passed that explicitly asks NCDOT to negate the contact with Cintra/I77 Mobility Partners OR will it be a watered down resolution like the one passed by Davidson which only asked for "fair" alternatives.
There could also be some drama as the pressure amps up a bit over the whole idea of a resolution being needed in the first place - at least that's the perspective of Huntersville Mayor Jill Swain.
In some recent Facebook back-and-forth on the issue, Swain has been questioning why Senator Jeff Tarte is asking for resolutions from local municipalities prior to filing any legislation to stop the toll project. Swain points out that Tarte has submitted dozens of other bills without requiring resolutions - including sometimes things the towns actively oppose. Tarte's response is that going to the General Assembly and asking the legislators to undo a proposal that has gotten to this point realistically requires obvious support from local elected officials. Otherwise, the bill would not go anywhere.
Tarte is right in this instance. If he walked into the General Assembly without a stack of resolutions, any bill very likely would not go forward. That would most likely be true even if he has a few resolutions, but not a complete set. That's just reality.
That's also why the Huntersville resolution is so important and why Swain's opposition to the idea could be so damaging. In Davidson and Cornelius, there are odd numbers of commissioners. In Huntersville, there is an even number and thus the Mayor is more likely to vote in the event of a tie.
What Swain does Monday will matter.
If a strong resolution is presented, Swain's recent comments indicate she might vote against it in a tie situation. If a weak resolution is presented and that were to end in tie, she might also vote against it because she thinks it is not needed.
Swain's former opponent for Huntersville Mayor, County Commissioner Jim Puckett, had this to say on Facebook in recent days regarding the upcoming Huntersville vote on a resolution...
"We need to make sure the folks in Huntersville know this is NOT just a resolution asking for an alternative to tolls IT IS MUCH BROADER. This is a referendum on the future of the moderate to large business community in our region. Either our boards stand with us (Cornelius and Davidson Commissioners do) or they stand against this community. If our elected officials will not at the LEAST take a stand to send the message we want an alternative, then we cannot trust that they will stand for us the next time needed. I for one will not support anyone who will simply roll over or give up because the odds are against them. Real leaders do not take the temperature, they determine the temperature. As for me I want to be known not as a thermometer, a thin fragile instrument shoved up a posterior to gauge what's going on, but a thermostat that makes the machine give me the environment the people want."
Which is it gonna be - thermometer or thermostat?
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Davidson Town Hall gives itself big raise with new budget
Davidson's Town Board passed the FY2016 budget this past Tuesday which was 6.5% bigger than last year. I don't know about you, but I don't know too many people who get those types of raises these days.
John Deem point out a few "highlights" in the Observer today in an article titled "Davidson budget keeps taxes unchanged". From the Observer...
John Deem point out a few "highlights" in the Observer today in an article titled "Davidson budget keeps taxes unchanged". From the Observer...
- Funding that would allow for an average 4 percent, merit-based pay raise for town employees.
- The addition of a firefighter to staff the Odell Fire Department Station 2 on Shiloh Church Road.
- A pay classification and staffing-level study to ensure that the town is “able to retain employees and make the best use of employee skills and abilities.”
- Forensic and property management software for the Police Department, document management software for the town administration, a pickup truck for Public Works Department and public information software.
- Pedestrian walking lights on Main Street near the Flatiron Grill, and improvements to Roosevelt Wilson and other town parks
Those all sound like good things, but there are some other tidbits that are left out of this article which should give taxpayers pause.
The actual amount of money set aside for Mi-Connection fell $200,000 this year. Davidson continues to have the highest tax rate and by far the highest solid waste fees of the local towns. This is primarily due to the subsidies for the cable company. This budget seems to make it clear that as those subsidies fall, the taxpayer should not expect any relief from town hall.
Instead, money will continue to be spent on things like electronic information kiosks and something called a "solar and pedal powered vehicle" for Recreation Department staff.
The actual amount of money set aside for Mi-Connection fell $200,000 this year. Davidson continues to have the highest tax rate and by far the highest solid waste fees of the local towns. This is primarily due to the subsidies for the cable company. This budget seems to make it clear that as those subsidies fall, the taxpayer should not expect any relief from town hall.
Instead, money will continue to be spent on things like electronic information kiosks and something called a "solar and pedal powered vehicle" for Recreation Department staff.
Toys for town hall rather than figuring out how to give money back to taxpayers after years of over taxation seems like there are still some misplaced priorities that need to be fixed.
Auto repair returns to Davidson with new Woodie's outlet
It has been 7 ½ years since you could get your oil changed in Davidson. 7 ½ years since you could get your car inspected. 7 ½ years since you could get a flat fixed or your car repaired without having to leave town limits.
The days of being able to do all those things ended in Davidson with the closing of Stowe’s Exxon at the corner of Main and South Streets in December of 2007. For decades, the service station at the site where Flatiron restaurant now sits in the Stowe Building provided these valuable services. They are services that have been missed.
Even in Davidson, a town known for its focus on walkable design, bike lanes, and greenways, almost every household has at least one car. For this past many years, residents have had to go elsewhere to take care of those needs.
Well, that long drought ended last week with the opening of the newest Woodie’s Auto in the Circles @ 30 area near the Harris Teeter.
When asked about the opening, Kim Flemming, the town’sEconomic Development Manager, said “we welcome Woodie’s Auto Service to Davidson’s business community and look forward to their providing a valuable service to our citizens.”
While Ms Flemming certainly is correct about this being a valuable service – one that has been sorely needed in town, it is hard to imagine how close this came to not being a reality.
This project only came to fruition because Davidson’s Board voted to grant a variance to a town ordinance requiring all new commercial buildings in town have two working floors.
Even though the new building looks like it is two floors, as an auto repair facility it really only has one. In an attempt to show they were meeting the spirit of the ordinance, the running joke by those who supported the project at the time was that the cars pulled in on the firsts floor, and were repaired on the second – once they were hoisted on the lifts. More seriously, the building was designed so that in the event Woodie’s ever left the location a second working floor could be installed.
Still, at the time in the Spring of 2013 that was not enough to sway the Davidson Planning Board or Town Planning Staff. The citizen-led Planning Board voted 8-1 opposing the variance and the town staff opposed it as well. Holding to the strict “letter of the law” outweighed allowing a needed business to open.
However, in April of that year the Town Board of Commissioners voted 3-2 in favor of granting the variance and letting the project go forward as proposed.
After a passionate and sometimes heated public hearing with several citizens speaking against the project, Commissioners Laurie Venzon, Brian Jenest, and Connie Wessner voted to approve the variance request. Commissioners Rodney Graham and Jim Fuller voted against it.
Two years later now that the building is there, what do the Commissioners who opposed the variance request think?
Commissioner Graham said that he had actually run into the Woodie’s team after the vote and told them that even though he had voted against the variance request, he told them he'd certainly be a customer once they opened.
He also passed along some good news about employment opportunities for local residents. Graham said “I had a conversation with the owner of Woodies a couple of weeks ago about their efforts to recruit Davidson residents to be employees at this new location. In conversations with others who have been involved in this effort I am encouraged that Woodie’s has made a sincere effort to hire Davidson residents at this location, and am hopeful that Davidson residents will respond positively to these employment opportunities. Having Davidson businesses hire Davidson residents is beneficial on many levels.”
Commissioner Jim Fuller echoed hose sentiments. Saying “my answer doesn't differ greatly from Rodney's. I voted as I did out of conscience, thinking about our commitment to preserving the small town character of Davidson, and, as well, a genuine concern for neighbors and trees--which I find go together nicely in our town. Yet, respecting the majority's vote, I sincerely hope Woodie’s succeeds, becoming one of our corporate community leaders.”
Both comments are definitely good to hear.
As growth and development continue to pick back up in town, the town will certainly have many more opportunities to work with developers in search of common ground and compromise like they did with Woodie’s. While one can expect the Planning Board and staff to stick to more doctrinaire positions, it ultimately comes down to the elected officials to make the decisions.
Let's hope those who vote do so on the basis of common sense realism.
The days of being able to do all those things ended in Davidson with the closing of Stowe’s Exxon at the corner of Main and South Streets in December of 2007. For decades, the service station at the site where Flatiron restaurant now sits in the Stowe Building provided these valuable services. They are services that have been missed.
Even in Davidson, a town known for its focus on walkable design, bike lanes, and greenways, almost every household has at least one car. For this past many years, residents have had to go elsewhere to take care of those needs.
Well, that long drought ended last week with the opening of the newest Woodie’s Auto in the Circles @ 30 area near the Harris Teeter.
When asked about the opening, Kim Flemming, the town’sEconomic Development Manager, said “we welcome Woodie’s Auto Service to Davidson’s business community and look forward to their providing a valuable service to our citizens.”
While Ms Flemming certainly is correct about this being a valuable service – one that has been sorely needed in town, it is hard to imagine how close this came to not being a reality.
This project only came to fruition because Davidson’s Board voted to grant a variance to a town ordinance requiring all new commercial buildings in town have two working floors.
Even though the new building looks like it is two floors, as an auto repair facility it really only has one. In an attempt to show they were meeting the spirit of the ordinance, the running joke by those who supported the project at the time was that the cars pulled in on the firsts floor, and were repaired on the second – once they were hoisted on the lifts. More seriously, the building was designed so that in the event Woodie’s ever left the location a second working floor could be installed.
Still, at the time in the Spring of 2013 that was not enough to sway the Davidson Planning Board or Town Planning Staff. The citizen-led Planning Board voted 8-1 opposing the variance and the town staff opposed it as well. Holding to the strict “letter of the law” outweighed allowing a needed business to open.
However, in April of that year the Town Board of Commissioners voted 3-2 in favor of granting the variance and letting the project go forward as proposed.
After a passionate and sometimes heated public hearing with several citizens speaking against the project, Commissioners Laurie Venzon, Brian Jenest, and Connie Wessner voted to approve the variance request. Commissioners Rodney Graham and Jim Fuller voted against it.
Two years later now that the building is there, what do the Commissioners who opposed the variance request think?
Commissioner Graham said that he had actually run into the Woodie’s team after the vote and told them that even though he had voted against the variance request, he told them he'd certainly be a customer once they opened.
He also passed along some good news about employment opportunities for local residents. Graham said “I had a conversation with the owner of Woodies a couple of weeks ago about their efforts to recruit Davidson residents to be employees at this new location. In conversations with others who have been involved in this effort I am encouraged that Woodie’s has made a sincere effort to hire Davidson residents at this location, and am hopeful that Davidson residents will respond positively to these employment opportunities. Having Davidson businesses hire Davidson residents is beneficial on many levels.”
Commissioner Jim Fuller echoed hose sentiments. Saying “my answer doesn't differ greatly from Rodney's. I voted as I did out of conscience, thinking about our commitment to preserving the small town character of Davidson, and, as well, a genuine concern for neighbors and trees--which I find go together nicely in our town. Yet, respecting the majority's vote, I sincerely hope Woodie’s succeeds, becoming one of our corporate community leaders.”
Both comments are definitely good to hear.
As growth and development continue to pick back up in town, the town will certainly have many more opportunities to work with developers in search of common ground and compromise like they did with Woodie’s. While one can expect the Planning Board and staff to stick to more doctrinaire positions, it ultimately comes down to the elected officials to make the decisions.
Let's hope those who vote do so on the basis of common sense realism.
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
"Cutting the cord" with Sling TV
With summer vacation upon us, here's an idea to try something different and save a few bucks.
“Cord cutting.”
The idea that consumers can live without traditional pay TV service has been bubbling under the surface for years now, but 2015 is shaping up to be the year when the pieces fall in place to actually make it cost effective and easy.
Over six months since “cutting the cord” at the Short household, it is safe to say nobody in my family misses it. We’ve found out that when it comes to TV, our household is like a growing number of homes across the country.
The TV we watch comes from a relatively limited number of channels, and the way we watch TV has fundamentally changed with the advent of streaming.
Last year, the ratings people at Nielsen put out a study showing that while the average number of channels in pay TV packages ballooned from 129 in 2008 to 189 in 2013, the average number of channels watched per household only went from 17.3 to 17.5.
Over that same time more and more households have moved a larger portion of their TV viewing to online streaming via so called Over The Top (OTT) services like Netflix. By the end of 2014 40% of households subscribed to at least one streaming service.
I didn't know it at the time we made the decision to cut the cord, but between those two statistics it's clear our household falls right into that trend. The fact that we watch relatively few channels and most of our TV content is streamed led to the decision, and it would appear, many more households are coming to that conclusion as well.
For the first time ever, the traditional pay TV industry lost customers in Q1 of a calendar year – losing a net of 31k subscribers. That was down from roughly 370k net adds last year, or a 400k swing. That's an ominous sign when one considers 2015 is shaping up to be the year when many of the gaps in the streaming landscape will close.
Those gaps will close with the advent of “skinny bundles” via services like Sling TV which launched in February and the rollout of HBO Now as a standalone product.
In the interest of transparency, I've been given a “reviewer account” from Sling TV for the past few months which means I'm getting it for free. That account also includes HBO.
So, what do you get with Sling TV?
For $20/month, you get 22 traditional channels including cable stalwarts like TBS, TNT, ESPN, ESPN2, AMC, Disney Channel, History Channel, Food Network, Travel Channel, HGTV, and CNN. The Weather Channel is reportedly also on the way. For $5 a piece, you can add on different channel packages containing several channels each in categories like Family, News, Sports and Movies.
The big “get” here though is ESPN. Until Sling TV launched, the only way to get ESPN was through a traditional pay TV subscription. For an additional $15/month, Sling TV is also one of the first avenues to get HBO via streaming.
So, what are the trade-offs for lower monthly bills?
A lot has been written about the so called limitations of the platform such as its single stream setup (meaning the account can only be accessed by one devise at a time) and the lack of a DVR. Those have been a non-issue for my household.
If I'm watching sports and my kids want to watch something else, they are on Netflix anyway, so that limitation doesn't matter. Also, if I just want the TV on for back ground or to watch something mindless there's always something on TBS, TNT, Food Network, or HGTV that falls into that category. You don't need DVR for that, but Hulu Plus basically provides the same functionality as a DVR for most broadcast network shows if that's something you must have.
Another common criticism of Sling TV is that it doesn't have local broadcast channels. No, it doesn't, but a $30 digital antenna works just fine on the living room TV.
Yes, the channel selection is limited, but remember, most of you are only watching 17 stations anyway. The only cable channel I personally watch that's not included on Sling TV
Is FX. For the political junkies out there, there's also no MSNBC or Fox News.
If these things are something you can't live without, then maybe cord cutting is not for you.
Me? I’ll take the $850/year we’re saving off of our old cable bill and put that towards our next summer vacation.
“Cord cutting.”
The idea that consumers can live without traditional pay TV service has been bubbling under the surface for years now, but 2015 is shaping up to be the year when the pieces fall in place to actually make it cost effective and easy.
Over six months since “cutting the cord” at the Short household, it is safe to say nobody in my family misses it. We’ve found out that when it comes to TV, our household is like a growing number of homes across the country.
The TV we watch comes from a relatively limited number of channels, and the way we watch TV has fundamentally changed with the advent of streaming.
Last year, the ratings people at Nielsen put out a study showing that while the average number of channels in pay TV packages ballooned from 129 in 2008 to 189 in 2013, the average number of channels watched per household only went from 17.3 to 17.5.
Over that same time more and more households have moved a larger portion of their TV viewing to online streaming via so called Over The Top (OTT) services like Netflix. By the end of 2014 40% of households subscribed to at least one streaming service.
I didn't know it at the time we made the decision to cut the cord, but between those two statistics it's clear our household falls right into that trend. The fact that we watch relatively few channels and most of our TV content is streamed led to the decision, and it would appear, many more households are coming to that conclusion as well.
For the first time ever, the traditional pay TV industry lost customers in Q1 of a calendar year – losing a net of 31k subscribers. That was down from roughly 370k net adds last year, or a 400k swing. That's an ominous sign when one considers 2015 is shaping up to be the year when many of the gaps in the streaming landscape will close.
Those gaps will close with the advent of “skinny bundles” via services like Sling TV which launched in February and the rollout of HBO Now as a standalone product.
In the interest of transparency, I've been given a “reviewer account” from Sling TV for the past few months which means I'm getting it for free. That account also includes HBO.
So, what do you get with Sling TV?
For $20/month, you get 22 traditional channels including cable stalwarts like TBS, TNT, ESPN, ESPN2, AMC, Disney Channel, History Channel, Food Network, Travel Channel, HGTV, and CNN. The Weather Channel is reportedly also on the way. For $5 a piece, you can add on different channel packages containing several channels each in categories like Family, News, Sports and Movies.
The big “get” here though is ESPN. Until Sling TV launched, the only way to get ESPN was through a traditional pay TV subscription. For an additional $15/month, Sling TV is also one of the first avenues to get HBO via streaming.
So, what are the trade-offs for lower monthly bills?
A lot has been written about the so called limitations of the platform such as its single stream setup (meaning the account can only be accessed by one devise at a time) and the lack of a DVR. Those have been a non-issue for my household.
If I'm watching sports and my kids want to watch something else, they are on Netflix anyway, so that limitation doesn't matter. Also, if I just want the TV on for back ground or to watch something mindless there's always something on TBS, TNT, Food Network, or HGTV that falls into that category. You don't need DVR for that, but Hulu Plus basically provides the same functionality as a DVR for most broadcast network shows if that's something you must have.
Another common criticism of Sling TV is that it doesn't have local broadcast channels. No, it doesn't, but a $30 digital antenna works just fine on the living room TV.
Yes, the channel selection is limited, but remember, most of you are only watching 17 stations anyway. The only cable channel I personally watch that's not included on Sling TV
Is FX. For the political junkies out there, there's also no MSNBC or Fox News.
If these things are something you can't live without, then maybe cord cutting is not for you.
Me? I’ll take the $850/year we’re saving off of our old cable bill and put that towards our next summer vacation.
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
After "washing his hands" of I77, #NCSEN Tillis proposes new interstate
Just last week we brought you word how Senator Thom Tillis washed his hands of responsibility for tolls on I77 by pawning it off as a "state" responsibility. This week he's proposing a new interstate for Eastern North Carolina.
What do you bet this one won't involve tolls?
From Senator Tillis's website...
What do you bet this one won't involve tolls?
From Senator Tillis's website...
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) introduced The Road to Opportunity and Development (ROAD) Act of 2015. The bipartisan legislation amends the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, designating the Raleigh-Norfolk Corridor as a future part of the interstate system, while creating opportunities for increased commerce and investment in infrastructure and jobs.
Tillis’ Senate bill is co-sponsored by Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Mark Warner (D-VA), and Congressman G.K. Butterfield (D-NC-01) introduced a companion bill in the House.
The ROAD Act of 2015 would designate the following as a high priority corridor:
- U.S. Route 64 from its intersection in Raleigh, North Carolina, through Rocky Mount, Williamston and Elizabeth City, to U.S. Route 17 at its intersection in Norfolk, Virginia
The designation of these two highways as high priority corridors ensures the two portions of the roads will become part of the Interstate system once they’re fully built and upgraded to interstate standards. Such designation would easing traffic congestion among Norfolk, Raleigh and the North Carolina coast.
“I am pleased to introduce yet another bipartisan bill that focuses on improving our state’s infrastructure, reducing traffic congestion, and supporting the creation of good-paying North Carolina jobs,” said Senator Tillis. “The ROAD Act will prove essential in enhancing interstate commerce between North Carolina and Virginia, and promoting economic growth for local communities along the Raleigh-Norfolk corridor.”
“The ROAD Act will open up new opportunities in North Carolina,” said Senator Burr. “Legislation like this is vital to our state's infrastructure, benefiting all of those who use our roads and highways and encourages economic expansion by connecting some of the east coast’s largest ports to North Carolina’s cities and towns. I’m excited to see the possibilities the ROAD Act will open for all North Carolinians.”
“This bill is a bipartisan step toward integrating the Hampton Roads region of Virginia with North Carolina’s Research Triangle,” said Senator Kaine. “Hampton Roads has so much to offer, including a skilled maritime workforce, top-tier academic institutions, a robust tourism sector, and one of the East Coast’s leading deepwater ports. The benefits of interstate highway service to Raleigh will benefit people and businesses in both states and strengthen regional commerce throughout the mid-Atlantic.”
“I am proud to join Senator Kaine and our colleagues from North Carolina in introducing this bipartisan bill,” said Senator Warner. “Designating this corridor as part of the interstate system will help facilitate commerce, boost tourism and improve the quality of life in and around Norfolk and the entire Tidewater region.”
The ROAD Act is the second piece of legislation Sen. Tillis and Rep. Butterfield have introduced to improve North Carolina’s infrastructure, after introducing the Military Corridor Transportation Improvement Act of 2015 two weeks ago. Both bills will help to advance the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s Strategic Transportation Corridors Vision, which aims to provide North Carolina with a network of high priority corridors that promote economic development and enhance interstate commerce.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)