Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2009 > January > 21 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USThe three-way deal on transportation that’s cooking: It’s a 50 percent thing
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Gov. Sonny Perdue, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and House Speaker Glenn Richardson are closing in on a final deal to reshape and reorganize the agencies that control the way Georgians move around.
Very likely, in the process, they’ll also attempt to destroy the decades-old grip that the state Department of Transportation and its ruling board have on policy — and millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars.
The trio is expected to ink a deal within the next two days. Details are being held close to the vest, but a few hints have been dropped, some important committee assignments have been made, and at least one highly interesting bill has been filed.
We’re not talking about the one-cent sales tax for roads, whether statewide or by confederacies of counties. This is about “governance,” and Perdue’s renewed demand of proof that the state bureaucracy can handle the increased transportation funding that the business community has demanded.
The legislation that’s about to be unveiled is highly, highly likely to concentrate a great deal of power over transportation policy in the hands of three men.
The key to the deal can be found in the Georgia Constitution. Most state lawmakers assume that the annual fortune generated by the state motor fuel tax must go to the DOT. That’s incorrect.
All the Constitution requires is that the cash go toward “providing and maintaining an adequate system of public roads and bridges in this state, as authorized by laws enacted by the General Assembly of Georgia.” No agency is specified.
This is important because the triumvirate is demanding that the reorganization of the state’s alphabet soup of transportation agencies be accomplished without a constitutional amendment. For that would require that Democrats in both the Hosue and the Senate be brought into the bargain.
You’ll remember a mention of a proposal backed by House Majority Leader Jerry Keen (R-St. Simons Island) to change the way the state DOT board is structured. Right now, rank-and-file members of the Legislature elect each board member, based on lawmaker residency in the state’s 13 congressional districts.
Keen would have the governor name one-third of the board, the speaker appoint another third, and the lieutenant governor the final third. The governor would appoint the DOT commissioner, the agency’s executive director.
The current, decentralized system has allowed the DOT board to operate in semi-independent fashion, playing the demands of both governors and the Legislature against one another. The only hitch: The dysfunctional agency has made billions of dollars of promises it can’t fulfill. And traffic in metro Atlanta is choking the rest of Georgia.
But — and here’s the point - changing the structure of the DOT board would require a change in the state Constitution, which would require a two-thirds vote of both chambers in the General Assembly. And a deal with Democrats.
But why would Democrats agree to such a thing? They currently control four of 13 seats on the DOT board, by virtue of their control of four congressional districts. Adopting Keen’s proposal would mean giving up all Democratic influence. Not likely.
So if the GOP triumvirate is to get its way, all must be done with a 50 percent vote of the House and Senate. Which brings us back to that constitutional clause mandating that the revenue stream generated by the state’s motor fuel tax — the heart and soul of the DOT — go toward “public roads and bridges.” Redirect that river of cash — or most of it, or a significant portion — to another agency, and DOT becomes a subservient (and perhaps irrelevant) pothole department.
A bill has been proposed in the last few days by Tommie Williams, the Senate president pro tem — the ranking member of the chamber.
S.B. 40 is not the governor’s legislation. And Williams says his measure is intended only to strip the DOT’s authority over public-private initiatives and hand it to the State Road and Tollway Authority.
“I did not intend to broaden [SRTA] power beyond that,” the Senate leader said.
Despite Williams’ intentions, a careful reading of the legislation shows no limits on the ability of the Legislature to shift transportation duties away from the DOT. The measure also greatly expands the governor’s power “to commence the study of any given [transportation] project or projects and to provide for their construction.”
S.B.40 doesn’t contain any hint of the power-sharing that’s likely at the heart of the three-legged deal. But the bill does demonstrate the language that might be used to strip the state DOT board of influence. Consider that the measure could very well be the precursor of legislation to come.
S.B. 40 has a set of influential sponsors, in addition to Williams: Jeff Mullis (R-Chickamauga), chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee; Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) and Doug Stoner (D-Smyrna).
Stoner, the Democrat, told us on Wednesday evening that he signed onto the legislation with the anticipation that it would only affect PPIs — but acknowledged that the language is curiously open-ended. If the measure is intended for something other than PPIs, Stoner said, he would withdraw his support.
Comments
By SF
January 22, 2009 7:13 AM | Link to this
It seems Commissioner Evans has alot of dates in her future if shes gonna make this turn in her favor.
By johnatl
January 22, 2009 9:56 AM | Link to this
Great! If this passes, we can expect spaghetti junction sized “super bypasses” to be built around Warner Robins, Dalton, Tifton, Dublin - and of course, the tripling of the width of our super-duper new “Go Fish” bass ramps. They will then mortgage the future of our State to build the idiotic tunnel from 400/I-85 to I-675. I am extremely worried about the future of our formerly great State with this trio of clowns in charge.
By Allen
January 22, 2009 10:36 AM | Link to this
Great. Take the planning and operation out of the hands of registered professional engineers, and put it in the hands of politicians. That always works.
By yelladawg
January 22, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this
We need to get rid of these guys and put Roy Barnes back in office.
By rdhood
January 22, 2009 10:48 AM | Link to this
It’s the devil you know vs. the devil you don’t know. Wayne Mason and Wayne Shackleford held sway over the DOT for decades… using roads to coerce Counties who needed roads to develop their (the Wayne’s) way or die. Don’t do what they want you to do? No roads for you. Politicians may not be able to do better, but I don’t think that politicians could do much worse. The Waynes weren’t guided by engineering principles, but by developers and the good-old-boy system. It seems to me that will still be the case.
By BPJ
January 22, 2009 10:52 AM | Link to this
And please note: the sales tax on gasoline (calculated in cents per dollar) is not subject to that constitutional restriction, meaning that there is plenty of money there for transit, if the political will of a majority is there.
The motor fuel tax (calculated in cents per gallon is restricted to “roads and bridges”, and an attorney general’s opinion interprets that to exclude transit.
Finally, if we look at the longer term, financing transportation (whether for cars, transit, etc.) through taxes on gasoline is not sustainable.
By rptrcub
January 22, 2009 11:18 AM | Link to this
As much as I want transit improvements (and GDOT is a roadblock to this, as well as the legislature in general), we can’t ignore the fact that we need road expansion to a certain degree — including bypass routes. And we also should have built the Northern Arc when we had a chance. Thanks NIMBYs, you’ve screwed all of us over.
By old boy crooks
January 22, 2009 11:18 AM | Link to this
rdhood has it right. a change is long, long overdue. the wayne’s used the offices to direct roads to properties they owned. the access of the roads made the properties much more valuable and made both of them rich. of course, one of the end results for the public is poorly planned road system and disasterous (and probably permanent) traffic problems. thanks, waynes (you big d’bag rednecks)!
By cynthia
January 22, 2009 11:52 AM | Link to this
The DOT has long been the most powerful agency in state government, run by the “good ol’ boys” (apologies to Ms. Evans) and their deep pocketed land owning cronies. They have historically worked with virtual autonomy and impunity. The current proposal may not be the solution but at least this money-sucking agency is being given a second look. The old adage of “our way or the highway” was long ago changed by DOT to “our way AND the highway”.
By Road Scholar
January 22, 2009 11:54 AM | Link to this
So these three bozo’s (and the ones who will replace them after the next statewide election) can make better transportation decisions than the Board or the PROFESSIONAL engineers and planners within the Department and in the regional planning districts and the metro planning MPO’s which make reccomendations to them. While I agree that GDOT needs to focus their program of projects they can afford and to spend more money on transit, this is another attempt to control the state by the repubs.
What have they done in the past 6 years? The governor manipulates the Board to keep a Commissioner in charge which answers his beckon call. No meaningful legislation has been passed. The only funding created was a bond package, which has put GDOT in a financial hole. (1/5th of the funds in their budget now goes to debt retirement for FAST Forward). and now they feign diabelief with GDOT and the lack of projects. What have they done to put projects under construction and people to work?
By cynthia
January 22, 2009 12:02 PM | Link to this
The DOT has long been the most powerful agency in state government, run by the “good ol’ boys” (apologies to Ms. Evans) and their deep pocketed land owning cronies. They have historically worked with virtual autonomy and impunity. The current proposal may not be the solution but at least this money-sucking agency is being given a second look. The old adage of “our way or the highway” was long ago changed by DOT to “our way AND the highway”.
By ....
January 22, 2009 12:12 PM | Link to this
may i also point out the DOTs debt is from the fast forward program, which was a product of Perdue… So all of the current transportation crisis rests on his shoulders, and now he wants more control… as much as Evans has made news, she is making the DOT work within it’s budget, which is going to cause a crunch on the transportation for a few years, but you can’t fund as much as GA wants and stay fiscally balanced… its just not possible
By DOT employee
January 22, 2009 12:23 PM | Link to this
This is just Sonny’s way of getting control over Obama’s economic stimulus package.
By cynthia
January 22, 2009 12:54 PM | Link to this
The DOT has long been the most powerful agency in state government, run by the “good ol’ boys” (apologies to Ms. Evans) and their deep pocketed land owning cronies. They have historically worked with virtual autonomy and impunity. The current proposal may not be the solution but at least this money-sucking agency is being given a second look. The old adage of “our way or the highway” was long ago changed by DOT to “our way AND the highway”.
By rj
January 22, 2009 1:59 PM | Link to this
* you are exactly correct in your assessment* this is all about control and no funds are safe so long as the three muskaters are present. They have already raided some funds intended for solid waste and othes and placed in general fund. The only way legal to protect is that the funds generated must be legislatively described and referred to as Trust Funds.I don’t want Glenn Richardson in control of anything
By whoDean
January 22, 2009 2:03 PM | Link to this
DOT needs reform, top to bottom.
By Mark
January 22, 2009 2:04 PM | Link to this
Any group that is foolish enough to have wated all that money buying ramp meter lights that DON’T cut down travel times deserves to have power removed.
By Mark
January 22, 2009 2:06 PM | Link to this
Any group that is foolish enough to have wated all that money buying ramp meter lights that DON’T cut down travel times deserves to have power removed.
By PAY ATTENTION!
January 22, 2009 3:06 PM | Link to this
The govenor has been planning this for a long time and now that he has someone in place that answers to his beck and call we can see that he feels it is time to strike.
PAY ATTENTION, it was the govenor’s plan, - FAST Forward - which has mortgaged the GDOT’s financial future by doing 20 YEARS of road work in 7 years. Now that this department is neck deep into working out his plan, Sonny wants to complain that they have spent to much money. BTW - The Govenor suspended the gas tax in September of 05, refused to abide by the rules and increase the tax in 07, but decided to follow the rules and allowed the tax to be lowered by 4 cents per gallon on January 2, 2009. (Note to AJC - All of this information is easily found on the internet with a simple google search.) Any money troubles the DOT faces can be laid at the feet of those who have laid the trap and then tripped the innocent for their own gain.
And remember the commisioners of the GDOT are hand picked by the govenor so any complaints of how commisioners in the past have abused their authority can be directly traced to the govenor’s that put them in power.
The GDOT used to be a political animal that the most powerful politicians in this state had control over. Political hirings and firings were par for the course at the DOT. But times changed and a new structure was developed to protect the Department from power hungery politicians and since then the DOT employee’s have been isolated from political power sturgles and Georgia has enjoyed some of the best roads in the USA. Now these three are scheming a plan to reverse the progress and return the citizens of this state to roads that are built based on the politically motivated whems of an authority that is controlled by a handful of politicians. The GDOT has and will do a great job for Georgia IF they are not bound by political power strugles.
The DOT may need reform to widen their mandate and include transit but not “reform” by people that are lusting after power.
By whoDean
January 22, 2009 3:15 PM | Link to this
DOT needs reform, top to bottom.
By nobody
January 22, 2009 5:28 PM | Link to this
GDOT is already getting reformed top to bottom. That means career bureaucrats are frozen, scared that any decision will be ‘wrong’ and they’ll be fired before their sacred retirement arrives. The organization is in limbo and inaction is their M.O.
A new funding organization will not help GDOT or the Federally-mandated transportation planning process at all, only place incredible power into the hands of a few politicians who probably don’t even know that there is a Federally-mandated planning process.
Honest opinion? Can politicians screw up our transportation system any worse than GDOT already has? Perhaps their acts of self-interest will also benefit the state. They’ll have a plan, which is more than I can say for GDOT.
By Please on trains
January 22, 2009 5:29 PM | Link to this
Sonny, ya got $80 million from the Feds for the train to Lovejoy (and then hopefully Macon).
Spend the damn money you fool. Stop hating on trains.
By nobody
January 22, 2009 5:38 PM | Link to this
“Williams says his measure is intended only to strip the DOT’s authority over public-private initiatives and hand it to the State Road and Tollway Authority.”
Hey, Tommie Williams … SRTA is a bureau within GDOT now. You’re not really accomplishing anything!
By PAYATTENTION
January 22, 2009 9:50 PM | Link to this
The DOT isn’t is perfect but let a few politicians get a grip on the money and see what happens! You think the current situation is bad…you haven’t seen nothing yet! The only plan politicians have is how to stay in power.
PAY ATTENTION…FOLLOW THE MONEY!
By Roadking
January 23, 2009 4:27 PM | Link to this
The other part of this is the “Alternate Project Delivery Method” where they choose the “most qualified” contractor rather than the low bid method.