The way things are falling into place, though, it is clear that heading to the ballot box this year would severely handicap a favorable voter response.  It is unlikely that public confidence in the economy, a key success factor for votes on infrastructure initiatives, will turn around by the end of the year.  This also does not appear to be a good time to secure financial contributions toward another successful FasTracks campaign.  

In a signal that others recognize these same barriers, the Denver Post covered the comments of my fellow Board members regarding a potential 2010 election, http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14290768?IADID=Search-www.denverpost.com-www.denverpost.com, and followed-up with a editorial the next day, http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14306877?IADID=Search-www.denverpost.com-www.denverpost.com.

Delaying a future FasTracks vote likely will lead to increased costs for the program, as we will not be in a position to capitalize on the low construction rates available during this recessionary period.  Phil Washington also reports that there is a risk RTD will lose some of the talented staff it attracted due to the excitement of the FasTracks program.  These are all negative consequences of a delay in going to the voters, giving further weight to the gravity of this difficult decision.

The RTD Board is scheduled to make a formal decision regarding a 2010 vote in the next two months.  In the meantime, you can see the balance of issues at play and how I am leaning.  It would be great to hear your perspective on this matter as I move toward a final position.

No matter how you slice it, the news RTD received from the Federal Transportation Administration yesterday is a big leap forward toward realizing the full vision of the FasTracks plan.  You can read about all the developments at the following link: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14345646.  The summary, though, is that the federal government has agreed to take the following steps in support of the East and Gold train lines (collectively known as the Eagle project) and the Union Station project:

     – The President’s recently released proposed 2011 budget recommends $120 million dollars for the FasTracks program – $40 million dollars each for the East Corridor, Gold Line and West Corridor projects. 

     – In addition to these specific funding recommendations, the President’s budget also signals its intent to sign Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGA) totaling about $1 billion for the East Corridor and Gold Line. 

     – The $40 million recommendation for the West Corridor is part of the full $308 million FFGA approved in 2009. 

     – FTA also announced the U.S. Department of Transportation’s approval of about $300 million in federal loans to help fund the Denver Union Station project.  

Our financial plans always calculated that we would receive this level of federal financial support, but it is great to see it coming to fruition.  The promise of a billion dollars in federal transportation funding was the basis of my agreement to the financial plan that committed RTD to fund the East line with most of the remaining FasTracks dollars we have available for the foreseeable future (which also led to my proposal for the the Regional Equity Compact Resolution:  http://www.johntayer.org/2009/09/19/the-regional-equity-compact-resolution/).  The upshot is that we can now move forward with three substantial elements of the entire FasTracks system.

Of course, none of this funding does anything to finance the two arms of the FasTracks system that are slated for Boulder County, the Northwest Rail line or bus rapid transit (BRT) service.  Securing these resources, without an intolerable waiting period, likely will entail further federal support and/or additional taxpayer funding.  I also will push RTD to explore other creative financing mechanisms and cost-cutting measures. 

However, now that we have a clear path toward financing the East and Gold lines in hand, along with the Union Station development, we know the Boulder County lines will not be competing for additional resources with those FasTracks projects.  The other benefit for our corridor is the confidence the federal government is demonstrating in RTD’s capabilities through these new funding commitments.  This bodes well for further federal support. And it serves as an encouraging vote of confidence for RTD and its ambitious FasTrax project.

That is the best you can probably say about the 2010 Annual Program Evaluation (APE).  This document, which RTD prepares annually for the Denver Regional Council of Governments, provides the most recent snapshot of the financial picture and technical adjustments to the FasTracks program. 

You can access a summary of the 2010 APE document at the following link: http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/media/uploads/main/1_5_10_APE_Presv_Final.pdf. 

Most critically, the new APE finds that costs for the entire FasTracks program have dropped $400,000, to a total of $6.5 billion.  This cost reduction is due primarily to lower material prices and more refined system designs. 

Unfortunately, sales tax revenue continues to drop, as well.  The new estimates for the life of the program fell another $1.3 billion.   The resulting gap between revenue and costs for the FasTracks program is about $2.4 billion, $200 million more then previous estimates.

What makes this year’s APE particularly noteworthy is the great effort RTD staff made to test its financial numbers.  Specifically, you may remember that I previously advocated for a new look at RTD’s sales tax projections.  Staff responded by recruiting groups of subject-matter experts, in both construction cost inflation and sales tax revenue modeling, to scrutinize RTD figures.  As a result, this year’s APE numbers reflect the input from some of the area’s best forecasting minds.

So, as you can see, we still have a difficult financial hurdle to overcome as we work toward build-out of the FasTracks system . . . but at least there is reason for greater confidence that this is the hurdle, as we now have much greater confidence in the financial picture for the full program.

Specifically, proponents of the beltway are asking the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) to add a significant roadway link to the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), the Jefferson Parkway.  Getting the Jefferson Parkway in the RTP is the green light the project needs to begin moving toward implementation.  This includes securing the necessary financial support for what is designed to be a privately funded toll road.

You can learn more about the Jefferson Parkway proposal, including the many concerns communities like Golden and Boulder are raising, at the following links:  http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2009/12/jefferson_parkway_a_weird_disc.php and http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_13895972.  It was many of these same concerns that drove me to testify at the DRCOG public hearing regarding this matter.  Most troubling to me, the Jefferson Parkway will create the need for about $1 billion in additional roadway improvements, beyond what the private sector is offering to handle.   These are unfunded transportation needs that will compete with other critical projects, such as the HOV lanes for US 36 that are the foundation of bus-rapid-transit service between Boulder and Denver.

You can read my public hearing testimony at the following link:  Jefferson Parkway Comments.  The DROCG Board will issue a final decision regarding the proposal to add the Jefferson Parkway to the RTP at its meeting in January.  I am hopeful that they will send the beltway proponents back to the drawing board.

Can FasTracks Be Saved: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_13573154?IADID=Search-www.denverpost.com-www.denverpost.com.

Just to offer a different perspective, here are two critiques that I think well articulate some of the deficiencies in the Denver Post column:

Don’t Throw FasTracks Under the Bus: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-rosenthal/dont-throw-fastracks-unde_b_332455.html; and,

Spense Havlick Response to Denver Post.

I am sure there will be many other responses and counter-arguments to come, but I thought these two critiques were worth sharing.

Click the link below to access a video update on all the current construction activity associated with FasTracks.  It is an impressive story that often gets lost amidst concerns about funding for full build-out of the system.

FasTracks At Work – 2009: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ1YL2mwWKo.

          Denver RTD directors start to look for “Plan B”:  http://www.denverpost.com/news/frontpage/ci_13346227;

          Boulder transit lines could stall without tax hike: http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_13353612?IADID=Search-www.dailycamera.com-www.dailycamera.com; 

          There’s no Plan B for RTD:  http://www.denverpost.com/carroll/ci_13369198;

          RTD board plan for failure would be a new insult to Aurora:  http://www.aurorasentinel.com/articles/2009/09/19/opinion/editorials/doc4ab26d5c35052170365479.txt

Fundamentally, the Regional Equity Compact resolution attempts to address concerns that Noel and I had about the impact of committing practically all of the remaining FasTracks dollars and bonding authority to the East and Gold rail lines.  We recognize the value of proceeding with plans to fund these corridors, particularly with the expectation that we will receive significant federal financial assistance for moving forward on the creative public-private partnership that we are cobbling together for this project, collectively known as the Eagle P3.  However, we also think it is necessary to address the transit needs of those corridors that will forgo their own transit investments, as envisioned in the original FasTracks plan, for the forseeable future in the absence of public support for a future sales tax increase.

We received a great deal of support for the Regional Equity Compact resolution and the principles it represented from fellow Board members.  However, after discussions with our Board colleagues and other regional stakeholders, we agreeded to pull the resolution from formal consideration at next Tuesday’s Board meeting.  We did this with the understanding that the Metro Mayors Caucus will take-up our regional equity concerns and return to the RTD Board in the next 60 to 90 days with their own proposal for addressing these issues.

I look forward to seeing what the Metro Mayors recommend and the opportunity to build a larger regional consensus for moving forward on future plans for implementing the FasTracks program.

The Regional Equity Compact

The basics of the plan remain much the same since we first envisioned the necessary improvements:  A bus/high occupancy vehicle lane along the entire stretch of US 36, some roadway expansions at critical pinch-points, and a complete bikeway.  There have been some minor tweaks along the way, though, to accommodate specific community interests and funding realities.  A full outline of the US 36 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which comprises the build-out plan is available at http://www.us36eis.com/.

Now that we have arrived at this momentous point, poised to begin moving from talk into action on US 36, there is one missing ingredient . . . money. 

Ultimately, RTD and and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) were expected to share in most of the cost for completing the planned improvements to US 36, but neither agency has much funding available in the foreseeable future.  It is in recognition of this financial hurdle that the transportation advocacy organization, US 36 Commuting Solutions, has been rallying support for funding from all available sources to help fix US 36.  You can learn more about the effort at http://www.36commutingsolutions.org/Help%20Us%20Fix.htm.

Proving that politics and transportation funding can make strange bedfellows ( : , Bob Greenlee and I joined together in the effort to identify funding resources or US 36.  The venue was a joint statement of support that appeared in the Boulder County Business Report and the Daily Camera.  You can read our full opinion piece here, http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_13224989?IADID=Search-www.dailycamera.com-www.dailycamera.com.  In summary, though, we note the important progress that the final EIS represents along with some responsible compromises, and ask the public to come together in support of completing these critical transportation investments.

If Bob and I can get together around this plan for US 36, then I hope you can join us, too.  But please let me know if you have any questions about the US 36 investment plan or suggestions for addressing the funding shortage.

I am also including a link to the update section of the FasTracks website, which provides a good overall perspective on the current state of affairs for the program:  http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/main_152.

Next on tap . . . watch for an important decision by the RTD Board on proceeding with the RFP (request for proposal) for the Eagle P3 project.

FasTracks Summer Newsletter – Introductory Note

Specifically, during debate over issuing the request for proposals for the East and Gold rail lines, I offered the Renewable Electrical Energy Source Amendment (the Renewable Energy Amendment).  The Renewable Energy Amendment requires the three consortiums of private entities that are bidding on the East and Gold rail line projects (technically the Eagle 3P project, as RTD is marketing it as a single public-private partnership opportunity) to include in their bid proposals a plan for operating the system using renewable energy.

As Kevin Flynn mentioned in his coverage of the Renewable Energy Amendment, which you can find at: http://www.indenvertimes.com/2009/04/21/rtd-will-consider-renewable-energy-option-for-fastracks/, the purpose of the amendment is to get some creative thinking on how RTD can best free itself from dependence on traditional fossil fuel power.  I am convinced that there are many affordable opportunities for RTD to obtain electric power through renewable sources.  I also am confident that the bidding parties, in their effort to secure favorable support for their proposal over the other competitors, will give thoughtful consideration to the renewable energy options they can offer in their Eagle P3 package.

Purusing renewable energy sources for RTD’s electric powered rail lines is consistent with the agency’s general sustainability policies.  Even more important, securing cost-effective renewable energy sources can free RTD from reliance on volatile fossil fuel rates that wreak havoc on RTD’s operating budget.  By giving the Renewable Energy Amendment their unanimous support, my Board colleagues demonstrated their commitment to fiscally prudent planning . . . for the long-term future of RTD.

In a final note, I want to thank Bob Wilson for his encouragement and support in advancing the Renewable Energy Amendment.  Bob has extensive experience in the energy field and a passionate belief in the future of renewable energy sources.  He brought all of this to bare in his research and advocacy on behalf of the Renewable Energy Amendment.