Transportation Bill Legislators
D~~~E
~cÆ~
MEMORANDUM
August 31,2004
C/)
')
: ~I
-
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM:
Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: Transportation Bill Right-of-Way Language
Economic Development Director Bill Baum and Cable Franchise Administrator Merrill
Crawford are providing information about objectionable language contained in the
proposed federal Transportation Bill, and request approval to send letters of concern to
Congressman Nussle and Senator Grassley.
I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council
approval.
f!L¡"(;~)~/J¿ l
Mic ael C. Van Mllhgen
MCVM/jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Bill Baum, Economic Development Director
Merrill Crawford, Cable Franchise Administrator
D~
~cÆ~
MEMORANDUM
August 30, 2004
FROM:
Michael Van Milligen, City Manager
William Baum, Economic Development Director ø~~
Merrill Crawford, Cable Franchise Administrator
TO:
SUBJECT: Transportation Bill Right-of-Way Language
Introduction
The purpose of this memorandum is to advise you of objectionable language in the
proposed federal transportation bill, and request approval of letters of concern to
Congressman Nussle and Senator Grassley.
Background and Discussion
Congressman Nussle and Senator Grassley are on the conference committee to iron
out differences in the new transportation reauthorization bill, the Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users. Congressman Nussle has been very instrumental in including
funds for the IA 32 (Southwest Arterial) project and the expansion of the US 20 Julien
Dubuque Bridge. $20 Million and $25 Million have been identified in the House version
of the bill. Therefore the City has been very supportive of the passage of the bill.
However, the National League of Cities and the National Association of
Telecommunications Officers and Advisors have advised us that a provision of this bill
will preempt our authority to manage our public right of way.
The proposed provision would allow a private provider of intelligent vehicle highway
systems (IVHS) to be exempt from rights-of way laws and regulations. This provision is
a direct threat to local control over public right of way, and the City of Dubuque should
be concerned about the potential future impact of this language.
Action Requested
We recommend the City Council review and approve the attached letters to
Congressman Nussle and Senator Grassley, asking the provision be removed from the
new transportation bill.
September 7,2004
The Honorable Charles Grassley
135 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-1501
Ref: Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
Dear Senator Grassley:
The City of Dubuque appreciates your support for our transportation projects in
new Transportation Reauthorization Bill referenced above. Identification of
funding of $25 Million for the expansion of the US 20 Julien Dubuque Bridge, and
$20 million for Iowa 32 (Southwest Arterial) is critical to the completion of
Dubuque's transportation priorities. Your efforts on our behalf have been
outstanding.
I am writing on behalf of the City of Dubuque to express our concern with a direct
threat to state and local government authority over public rights-of-way,
contained in the Transportation Reauthorization bills currently in conference.
The objectionable language is contained in the House bill (HR 3550) in Section
5205(g)(4). In the Senate bill (S. 1072), it is in Section 2105(a)(5), and in the
Administration's proposed bill, it is in Section 55030)
The damaging provision would preempt state and local government authority to
manage and control its public rights-of-way for the deployment of a privately
owned and operated intelligent transportation system on highways for which
federal funds have been used. This language essentially allows the U.S.
Secretary of Transportation, to execute a "takings" of rights-of-way under state
and/or local control, for the benefit of a private entity.
The intelligent transportation system (ITS) referenced in this language is a
network of privately-owned devices and transmission systems that are installed
in the rights-of-way adjacent to highways and provide real time traffic data such
as traffic speed and volume. Under the current pilot program, deployed in
Pennsylvania, the U.S. Department of Transportation provides funding for the
deployment of the system. In choosing to participate in this program, a local or
state government would be given access to the traffic data tracked by the ITS
network as well as a share of the revenue the private company receives for
selling this information to commercial entities and commuters. While extending
and expanding the program to other metropolitan areas, a change to this
program contained in the Senate bill, if accepted in conference, would appear to
require any revenue generated by this program to be reinvested into this ITS
network.
The Senate bill is also more problematic as it contains language that would
exempt the rights-of-way authority of governments along "major transportation
corridors serving [a] metropolitan area" that is participating. This language would
impact our ability to manage growth, in particular growth in fringe areas of the
community.
While ITS systems under this program could provide some benefit to those local
and/or state governments that choose to participate, we feel that any benefit
would be overshadowed by the broad preemption of state and/or local right-of-
way authority that is required in exchange.
As I indicated previously, the inclusion of our two major transportation projects in
the Transportation Reauthorization bill is our top priority. However, preserving
state and local control over public rights-of-way is essential. We urge you to work
to remove these rights-of-way provisions from the transportation legislation in
conference.
Sincerely,
Michael C. Van Milligen
City Manager
F:IUSERSIWBaumlFederallnitiativeslLETTER TO Senator Grassley.doc
September 7,2004
The Honorable Jim Nussle
Room 303 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-1502
Ref: Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
Dear Congressman Nussle:
The City of Dubuque appreciates your support for our transportation projects in
new Transportation Reauthorization Bill referenced above. Identification of
funding of $25 Million for the expansion of the US 20 Julien Dubuque Bridge, and
$20 million for Iowa 32 (Southwest Arterial) is critical to the completion of
Dubuque's transportation priorities. Your efforts on our behalf have been
outstanding.
I am writing on behalf of the City of Dubuque to express our concern with a direct
threat to state and local government authority over public rights-of-way,
contained in the Transportation Reauthorization bills currently in conference.
The objectionable language is contained in the House bill (HR 3550) in Section
5205(g)(4). In the Senate bill (S. 1072), it is in Section 2105(a)(5), and in the
Administration's proposed bill, it is in Section 55030)
The damaging provision would preempt state and local government authority to
manage and control of its public rights-of-way for the deployment of a privately
owned and operated intelligent transportation system on highways for which
federal funds have been used. This language essentially allows the U.S.
Secretary of Transportation, to execute a "takings" of rights-of-way under state
and/or local control, for the benefit of a private entity.
The intelligent transportation system (ITS) referenced in this language is a
network of privately-owned devices and transmission systems that are installed
in the rights-of-way adjacent to highways and provide real time traffic data such
as traffic speed and volume. Under the current pilot program, deployed in
Pennsylvania, the U.S. Department of Transportation provides funding for the
deployment of the system. In choosing to participate in this program, a local or
state government would be given access to the traffic data tracked by the ITS
network as well as a share of the revenue the private company receives for
selling this information to commercial entities and commuters. While extending
and expanding the program to other metropolitan areas, a change to this
program contained in the Senate bill, if accepted in conference, would appear to
require any revenue generated by this program to be reinvested into this ITS
network.
The Senate bill is also more problematic as it contains language that would
exempt the rights-of-way authority of governments along "major transportation
corridors serving [a] metropolitan area" that is participating. This language would
impact our ability to manage growth, in particular growth in fringe areas of the
community.
While ITS systems under this program could provide some benefit to local and/or
state governments that choose to participate, we feel that any benefit would be
overshadowed by the broad preemption of state and/or local right-of-way
authority that is required in exchange.
As I indicated previously, the inclusion of our two major transportation projects in
the Transportation Reauthorization bill is our top priority. However, preserving
state and local control over public rights-of-way is essential. We urge you to work
to remove these rights-of-way provisions from the transportation legislation in
conference.
Sincerely,
Michael C. Van Milligen
City Manager
F:IUSERSIWBaumlFederallnitiativeslLETTER TO Congressman Nussle.doc