Welcome to the Talking Freight Seminar Series.
My name is Jennifer Symoun and I will moderate today's seminar.
Today's topic is AASHTO-FHWA Freight Partnership Findings and Discussions.
Please be advised that today's seminar is being recorded.
Today we'll have three presenters. Tony Furst of the FHWA Office of Freight Management and Operations, Butch Brown of the Mississippi DOT, and Leo Penne of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
Tony Furst is a director for the Office of freight management.
He directs a multilevel staff which develops policy for the Federal Highway Administration.
He develops and promulgates professional programs for training freight professionals.
He a violet and promotes freight improvement for national and international deployment.
Prior to joining the this FHWA, he held a range of positions as a program coordinator, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation as a regional coordinator in the northeastern states and California
and transportation Security Administration.
Butch Brown is a longtime businessman and a former mayor.
A graduate of the Southern University of Southern Mississippi with degrees in management, he served as a instructor at USM.
He was selected to be the executive director of the Mississippi Department of Transportation in 2001.
He has served on the executive for of directors on the Mississippi Finance corporation, White House Conference on small business, and was a member and former chairman of the Mississippi, Louisiana bridge authority.
In January of 2005, he was appointed to a three-year term on the executive committee on the Transportation Research Board.
Currently, he serves as chairman of the Latin American trade and transportation studies.
Awards he has received, the 1996 and 2003, NLC award.
During his service as a mayor, his community received many awards.
Leo Penne is a program directors for AASHTO.
Rail, truck, aviation, a port and waterways, having significant an freight movement in transportation infrastructure.
He shares the responsibility for communicating the economic benefits of transportation and demonstrating the linkage between transportation and economic development.
He helped the director of the state of Nevada, Washington D.C. office.
He was the director of August and policy development, the Economic Development Administration.
Senior legislative counsel and assistant director of policy analysis and president of Leo Penne Associates.
He focused on transportation towards an economic development for Nevada.
He developed and carry out programs for advocacy, policy development and research in areas such as transportation, urban development, environmental protection, training and tourism and has written books, reports
and articles on these subjects.
He holds degrees in political science and has served as a faculty member at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
I would like to go over a few logistical details.
Today seminar will be 90 minutes for 60 minutes for the speakers and 30 minutes for questions.
If during the presentation, type it into the smaller text box in the lower right hand part of your screen.
Please make sure you are typing it in the pin text box.
Send your question to everyone and as with presenter your question is for.
They will be unable to answer your questions during the session, but I will start the questions off with the questions that have been typed into the text box.
The operator will give instructions on how to ask questions over the telephone.
If you have a question after the seminar, you can send a question.
You can pose questions to see what questions have been asked by other providers.
Finally, I'd like to remind you that the seminar is being recorded.
It will be posting to the freight Web site within the next week.
For those in your office that could not attend the seminar, they can access the recorded seminar.
The PowerPoint presentations will also be available in the next week and I will notify everyone.
We will not go ahead and get started.
For those that just joined us, it is the AASHTO findings and discussion.
Our first presentation today will be given by Tony Furst from the Federal Highway Administration of freight and administration.
If you have questions for Tony and they will be answered at the end of the seminar.
With that, Tony, I will bring up your presentation.
Let me and large it and I will turn it over to you.
Tony, you can go ahead.
Thank you, a Jennifer.
I trust that you can hear me okay.
There is an echo, but it is okay.
We are endeavoring to do this over the Web.
We have microphones, telephones and computers sitting on one platform here.
Hopefully it will work and you will not get any feedback.
This is a follow up on the meeting that we had in April of 2005.
On this slide, we held in February of 2007 in Mississippi thing pings to Butch's hospitality.
You can see that over 100 participants.
On the slide here, I will not read through them, but you can see the participants.
What was valuable to us and recently assembled there was the sense of community and sense of networking.
There was a lot of on-line discussions during the meeting itself.
An awful lot of activity took place during a break out sessions and after hours when we had a host of events that Butch helped put together.
It was wonderful to see a broad range of people collaborating and working on issues that were very important to them.
Before we held the actual meeting, we did a survey where we got together some ideas on what we would present compared to the 2005 material that we put together in Columbus, Ohio.
The responses that you and see here, which is pretty remarkable for surveys, if you think about it.
This is a 90% rating on most of them.
As we go forward with another one of these, probably an '08, we will have the NPOs might represented.
Which will go through the purpose of the meeting and see what the survey told us and what we got at the meeting.
Here are the survey findings, the freight Transportation in your organization.
The differences between '05 and 06 and 07 are striking.
had the greatest advance in that regard.
It is a quadrupling of their interest and prioritization of freight within their division of administration offices, which for me is a very important move forward.
We did not service the NPOs and '05.
And 06, there is a distinct participation and their agencies.
thinks it is extremely poor and are somewhat of a high priority.
Neutral was about 13%.
The survey findings were also kind of interesting FHWA thought was going to be the high priority issues in their respective states.
When it talks about commercial vehicles, it is size and weight issues and other commercial vehicle issues, all of the issue is basically.
When you see rail listed it is really a capacity issue and same with the water and ports.
Is the freight movement system to handle the freight clothes that we see going forward.
They are talking about all modes, not just the highway mode.
For commercial vehicles, it was the same as it was for the state.
All of the truck parking issues and truck volume issues.
When we talk to the NPOs and regional councils, there was an awful lot of compatibility for what we saw in the FHWA offices.
Again, the commercial vehicles was front and center for some of their concerns.
They also talked about truck routes and the emperor structure and ordered to be able to handle truck sizes, particularly the 53 footers.
When they talk about infrastructure on the left-hand side, they are talking mostly about maintenance issues.
When we have these items listed, we asked them to ad amplifying information.
What I am giving you is the amplifying information.
They are definitely thinking about all modes of activity.
When we were in Mississippi, we asked the administrators, we had a number of people there about what their major concerns were.
Growth and freight volumes mirror what we have been able to put together within the FHWA and DOT.
There are large volumes of freight moving through the system and that goes with the ability of the system to be able to handle that.
We are cognizant of the globalization and the changing that we have in front of us and the concerned about fuel and environmental issues.
The multi jurisdictional efforts were a concern of theirs.
They felt that all of this is very dynamic and will not play out in individual issues.
You can talk about all of these individually if you want to.
When they brought forward is that they all need to be looked at simultaneously, which is an awful lot on anyone's plate.
None of these will play out in isolation.
They all need to be dealt with together.
When we actually got to the meeting, after we did the survey and listen to the private sector talk about their concerns, we talked to a number of the people about what they thought some of the resolutions should they.
These are the things that came out of depth.
We need to talk about it as a systems perspective.
We need to develop a multi modal infrastructure.
There is a lot of constraints that go along with that including jurisdictions, planning, the whole 9 yards.
We really need to think about ways to put this together.
The more times you try to get multiple people together to come to a consensus, you start to escalate by cubes the complexity of the situation.
There needs to be a defining point where we get as many people as we can to the table without open the doors and make it impossible to coordinate everyone's activities that it becomes a solution that we cannot reach.
The other piece that became clear is education, not just the staff but also the political leaders and general population.
What you will see when we get to the very end, and a lot of these activities regarding education and political leaders and the general population is an area that we need to think about moving forward.
Again, we had survey bindings on freight leadership, basically, that paragraph on the left-hand side.
It has been called a freight champion in our circles.
We had a discussion about that in Columbus and Mississippi.
The concept of what a freight champion is is evolving.
We thought it would a political leaders that had the horsepower to make it happen.
Through a number of discussions, exactly what a freight champion ends is evolving.
It can be within a state DOT that actively supports and move forward with the idea that freight should be considered and puts the horsepower behind it.
The leadership or your organization recognize the important freight?
Is great to see how many here at FHWA thinks so.
When I saw this slide, they changed it to NPOs, we double checked the data and this reflects almost 1 to 1 on how important they think freight is and the leadership
and recognition for freight as an important activity within their region or locality.
When we were at the meeting, we had a discussion on freight champions.
The idea of a freight champion, the role is changing considerably.
Richard from the California State DOT walked us through a review of exactly what constitutes a freight champion, and the attributes and qualities.
It was determined that a champion can establish an institutional capacity and enables people who have an interest in freight to work together to help solve problems.
We started talking about freight Planning and exactly what was going on in freight planning in the different locations.
These were the survey findings from the regional responses and NPOs.
Over half of the NPOs have a long-range plan.
We had some discussions on whether you need one or the other or both.
That discussion is still ongoing.
64% of the NPOs were unable to move more than half of their freight project on to implementation.
They identified the following barriers, limited funding and the sporadic freight industry involvement.
You will see this come about later when we start talking about where we are with freight involvement and the needs of that.
Some of it had to do with engaging the private sector and improving that course and getting it out to more people so that we can turn sporadic freight involvement and to retain and concentrated freight involvement.
When we got to do and got to freight planning, at the same themes that you heard regarding the issues came forward regarding freight as a multi jurisdictional issue.
Funding as you saw earlier was an issue.
I know the department is pushing heavily on the idea of private sector involvement and the idea of bringing private sector involvement into the planning.
It is something that we will look forward to developing within FHWA and getting that out as quickly as we can.
We have already started work on putting that together.
Then, we talk about the national freight policy and what people could do within the national freight policy to support it.
As a background, the national freight policy is in national.
It is not federal.
It is to be a collaborative with all the players that have freight Transportation.
The federal government does not-the private sector does, the states do.
Everyone needs to be involved and coming up with solutions for freight movement around the country.
It is evolving.
The ownership component, if you propose an activity at the bottom, it the responsibility is drive the national freight policy.
When you propose it, you own it and you are taking activity to improve the tactics or strategy that gets us to the objectives.
These are the seven objectives that are part of the national freight policy.
How do we accomplish these different policy objectives?
That is where we get to questionable items that help us advance any number of these objectives.
When we did the survey regarding the national freight policy, a lot of the NPOs and a lot of the FHWA division offices as well were not aware of the freight policy framework.
66% that they were not planning on implementing any activities.
I've highlighted part of the policy framework.
There is an awful lot of activity around the country around the freight policy framework.
People are not aware of the freight policy for the mark and the activity that they are working on relates to the freight policy.
When people start understanding the scope of the national freight policy, but how the activities they are doing support the national freight policy.
When we got to the partner ship meeting and held a workshop on the national freight policy, we organize all of the people by regions.
We put the FHWA division office, these state DOT, to talk about how their activities would support the national freight policy.
Put a number of states together so that they could get a better understanding about how things were going.
They collectively identify all of the things that you see here.
There were new activities to the freight policy, not necessarily new policies to what they were doing in their respective organizations.
These are a lot of the common tactics that came out of the work that we did.
As you can see here, established a program along the NHS.
This came from a lot of the people present.
It is a discretionary program.
We got it out of Section 1305.
We had a solicitation for proposals in 06.
There is one available for fiscal year 07.
It is identified as a priority issue.
When we asked people what issues they face in the next 5 to 10 years, obviously commercial and motor vehicles was one.
Not only do they identify it as a priority, but a number of them were taking it as a priority as an issue for them.
You can look through the rest of the list and see some of the other activities that people have proposed.
It was a very good discussion within the respective groups on what was going on.
Then, at the last one there that I wanted to mention was 4.1. to, the regulations and institutional arrangements.
This is the converse of the way it reads in the national freight policy.
We talked about removing some of the impediments to advancing the idea is.
This put a completely different spin on it.
What can we do to improve freight instead of removing impediments, what can be put in place to accelerate or advance.
We can talk about revising that objective within the national freight policy.
We continue to talk about these as a number of discussion items.
The word is not getting out as cleanly as efficiently as we would like.
We might have to think about ways of marketing the freight policy better than we are currently doing at.
Address funding in the policy.
A lot of this, John mentioned this quite a bit when he had his presentation remarks for AASHTO.
If you look at what is being proposed now with their critical commercial corridors, that could be a strategy or tactics that you could stick underneath the objective of adding physical capacity.
You can include the funding part of it and how you look at your strategies and tactics that you want to put forward.
My thinking is you do not need to address it, but can talk about it within the strategies and tactics.
Continue to enhance the policy, work on what we are doing.
We have a Web site but we are putting up on the FHWA site.
It will allow you to access the Policy and Research strategies and tactics that other people are putting forward.
We conducted a survey on the freight Professional Development Program.
From what FHWA and the regional councils thought was the most important pieces of that and what they would like to see move forward.
Engaging the top of---
Regarding the inability to get the freight industry to the table and keep them at the table.
By was to engage them when that collaboration takes place and keep them at the table for quite some time.
FHWA feels they need a lot of beginner level training.
I agree with that.
The NPOs need to be a little further along.
We talked with them a lot about what some of those training's should be and what topics should be covered.
We ask them what the delivery mechanism is that they felt would be most appropriate.
They talked about in prison workshops and seminars.
They want the one on one Contact.
It helps them understand things better as opposed to a web based or CD based training program.
When you start talking about-sorry about that.
We are working at FHWA to get a number of the staff within the Office of freight office instructor qualified.
We have new course offerings rolling out at the end of this year.
We need to figure out who will teach them and can we tap FHWA offices or the state DOTs to provide the instructors for these courses?
When you get to this level of engagement, when you talk about state DOTs, you talk about a peer to peer exchange.
It almost becomes that level of activity.
When we run at the partnership meeting, we talked about freight Development.
The needs were identifying the stakeholders and keep them engaged, and freight forecasting and measures, we have work coming out on the financing freight Project.
We have freight forecasting.
We have the engaging freight stakeholders.
They can be modified and approved.
For the most part, where they are right now is good for the beginning level.
We are always going to be evolving these courses.
Freight 101 came up as a subject in every group on how we provide basic training to the elected officials and to the general public on the importance of the freight movement so they do not have the idea that trucks are the enemy
and that they are there to get the goods that they need.
We talked with them during the meeting about what the preferred delivery mechanisms are.
They closely reflect what we saw in the survey.
This is what they would like to see.
They did talk a lot about [indiscernible], brochures and presentations and Best practices.
We also talked about a number of alternative delivery mechanisms that could be available to us.
We put together a number of people to go to different freight facilities and see what is going on there and how the freight industry is moving goods.
We would take a person and put them in place at any major firm so that they can get a much better understanding of how that from a case and what the issues are facing them as they go through freight movement.
Executive level freight movie where we find a way to target the elected officials through a very short executive level activity.
That would need to be professionally done.
A video for the general audience is in the works.
We can take action on these and tap out to the state DOTs on how to put these together.
Then, there were a number of discussion items we had regarding freight Professional Development.
We need to better market and outrage freight Professional Development Program so that people understood the opportunities that currently exist.
We started moving on to an understanding the freight earlier at the grade school level.
It presents some opportunities.
I do not want to get spread to then, the getting to people at a young age and having them understand early on is better than having to face them later.
There is the introductory course that we talked about earlier, the freight won a one, considering required freight DUI as a required advancement.
That needs more discussion, but is a possibility.
to complement the national or international that FHWA and AASHTO work together on.
When we did the survey, the next steps that people recommended for FHWA was to provide training and technical assistance and how rich.
We will provide support as needed and assist in the data collection efforts and developed analytical tools.
At the partnership meeting, the next steps we came up with, the deadly for the national freight policy was to continue to identify strategies and tactics.
All stakeholders are part of this.
You have a role to play within the national freight policy.
Those strategies and tactics, those of you that put together ideas and what you can do to advance the national freight policy, you would continue to work on those.
All of the people that said that they would move forward with it, they will.
I can tell you that FHWA is moving forward with all of the things that we committed to.
We will get the national freight policy put into a database.
We already have the contract for that and are working with the contractor to put together the website that will allow people to look at the database and see what their are within the respective areas.
We are thinking about holding a brown tables and that we can work on but in FHWA.
How we would go about doing that and find it is something that needs to be determined.
We will hold follow-up meetings with the NPOs and state DOTs.
We will work with that within our respective organization and I am sure that AASHTO will also within there's.
We will continue to address the developing needs that were identified and developed channels of communication and development opportunities.
This is not one area that we need to think about and market a little bit more professionally then we have in the past.
Opportunities evolve as we move forward.
We need to develop marketing materials.
There is a whole host of ways that we can do this.
We need to find the most appropriate mechanism to move forward.
We need to provide guidance.
We have provided this and will move forward as quickly as we possibly can.
That I believe, Jennifer, completes my presentation.
I will turn it over to you.
I believe that Butch is next.
If you have any questions for Tony, please post them into the chat area and we will get to them at the end of the seminar.
Our next seminar will be by Butch Brown, the executive director of the Mississippi Department of Transportation.
He will be giving some remarks over the telephone.
It does not have any powerpoint slides.
I will have the presentation by Leo Penne showing up on the meantime.
I appreciate the opportunity to participate.
I say to go ahead and use Tony's sites.
We will go blindly into the dark here.
Will come from Oklahoma, hear.
At the Standing Committee on water transportation annual meeting.
We are still assembled here at our meeting and enjoy doing this kind of presentation as a part of the annual proceedings that are here.
I will be brief.
I dismounted to make a few observations.
From the discussions about the meeting and follow up on a couple of things that Tony set.
One of the more outstanding things that came from the meeting on the freight partnership comment came from Senator Trent Lott.
For those that do not know, he spoke to us there by satellite and participated in our program for the better part of one hour.
I think the thing that was overpowering and had a great deal of emphasis from him, was his new stance on intermodal ism and his commitment to transportation instead of highways.
For many years, Senator Lott has said that education highways and economic development are all joint partnerships.
Nowadays, he is saying that intermodalism and education will be the factors for economic development.
That is a big change and a very important change in dialogue.
Somewhere along the line, we are doing something right.
To go back to something that was said earlier, indeed, Trent Lott, and I am not running his campaign, believe me, I do not think he needs my help.
If there is any one champion for freight and intermodalism, today, it would be Senator Lott, and I would encourage all of you listening and participating to contact his office and thank him for his participation.
It is truly a genuine and very influential in our efforts.
The other thing that came from our meeting, I thought that was unique and different, and I have had a tremendous amount of feedback and comments about it were the participants from the private sector.
We seem to all meet together.
We talk in governmental forms, whether it be the state, the federal or the NPOs regional council or what ever.
Now, we have had an opportunity to bring in the top leaders who participated on our first day of the freight conference.
When you have presidents and vice presidents of the largest corporations in the world that deal in a David manner with transportation and transportation infrastructure, it is quite enlightening to hear what they say as we sit there
and develop and formulate policies for the future.
I think that we certainly need to remember that they are our partners, and they played the vital most integral role in what we do.
They are the stakeholders' that use the system.
With that said, I think we need to make sure that we keep them included in the future and in our meetings and other participatory programs.
They have expressed a great deal of appreciation for having had the opportunity to participate, Tony and Leo in the for a conference and forum and look forward to doing it again.
The other stakeholders that participated, I thought was a dramatic list.
We had a great broad cross-section of the participants, including the private sector.
We have the NPOs and the FHWA and the state DOTs.
We had consultants and contractors, actually there.
There was a great deal of outside of our traditional way that we do business participation.
I think those stakeholders' all in attendance really made a difference in the outcome of that meeting.
I encourage us to keep doing that.
The breakout sessions that came at the end of the conference were the group's work separated regionally and that sort of thing, I think was also very, very beneficial in spreading the word, if you will, about what we were all about,
a rather than talking to each other within of our own NPO organizations and state DOTs, we actually had the pleasure of learning from others and including their remarks into our thinking process and certainly the discussions
and recommendations that followed.
The attendee interaction and hospitality side of the meeting, we, the state of Mississippi DOT were proud to have a part of it.
We hope to for a--1 of Southern hospitality and a good working relationship and atmosphere.
We feel in the Deep South,--the only way that you can do that is to become firmly.
We tried that.
We hope it worked.
We think it did.
I'd like to cover another thing that Tony said in his remarks and that is marketing the freight policy.
It is a big topic of our meeting here in Katusa yesterday.
There is a woman named Leslie Blakey.
She is the Coalition for gay Ways and attrite cars.
She is based in Virginia.
If there is anyone that has a firm grip on how to market what we do, her and her colleagues have hit upon it.
She is not the only one that does or her organization is the only one that can do what she is promoting and trying to do, but her efforts are very good and noteworthy.
Know where the, I think is the key.
Marketing our freight policy nationwide and including that marketing effort and make it part of freight won the one that Tony talked about is something we need to do.
We need to become more branded and recognizable.
We need to be more presentable and identifiable by the public at large.
When I talk about the public at large, we need to start that public effort with our congressmen and senators and stakeholders.
There are many, many people involved in transportation and freight infrastructure that do not know that we are meeting here today or having this Web - webinar this afternoon.
It ought to be on the front burner of what we are doing in selling a freight policy situation nationwide.
What we are selling, what we have been selling is to ourselves.
We need to start selling it to the people that are the users, whether it be the largest takeovers that we identified in our conferences and seminars, but just as importantly, to the students in our grammar
and elementary schools all the way through our high schools and colleges and certainly to the marketplace in general.
Of someone like Leslie, somebody to market the policy that we are working so hard to develop and implement.
With that said, all in all, we certainly enjoyed having the people from all over the country, and we are pleased with the outcome.
We hope that those who attended were as well.
Having been there, I can say that I enjoyed it.
I saw you with Elvis Presley.
[ LAUGHING ]
I will move on from there.
[ LAUGHING ]
Our next presentation at our final presentation is going to be given by Leo Penne of AASHTO.
Leo, when you are ready, I will begin.
I will move along expeditiously.
I will pick up on some of what Mr. Brown had just said.
While he was speaking, I moved to the second slide in my powerpoint.
That is the [Natches].
The opportunity to better understand the history of that location in the context of freight, transportation, and then the contemporary situation, that this was a great plus for what one could get from the event.
I was thinking about what one remembers from meetings of this sort.
My second slide does not exist, apparently.
What I think people remember and is the people and the places.
I want to open up saying a little bit about both of those.
First, about the place.
On this slide, I have put together a couple of graphics.
The map shows the location of [Natches].
Many of the participants, when they left their home towns of Fort [Natches], they were not sure where it was and if it was or whether it was possible to get there or back.
What the it slide shows you is that is directly connected to a large part of the United States through the water system, nor the to the Twin cities' common North East to Pittsburgh,
Northwest to where our water committee is meeting at this moment in Katusa, Oklahoma., and then to the world in the lower Mississippi, to New Orleans and beyond.
The large photograph, I happen to have a framed picture of that bridge in the sunset and the opportunity to get out on the lower Mississippi and to get the kind of briefing that we got on the current management of the river
and the history of that and the history of the river itself, was, I thought, a very useful, not just enjoyable, but useful.
In the smaller photographs below, in the center, cotton growing in the Delta.
On the bright, the historic [Natches].
On the left, the contemporary downtown.
At the meeting, both Butch Brown and Governor Barber mentioned a book, the rising tide by John very.
It is a book that focuses on the flood of 1997, which was a phenomenal, catastrophic occurrences, but also relates that to the history of navigation on the river, the management of the river to the Corps of Engineers
and the science of the flow of the river, the history of the cotton industry in the adult the, the relationship of the politics of Mississippi to Washington and the financing from overseas and so on and so forth.
It is tremendously interesting and a book that I would recommend to people just on its merits, but for those of you in Natches to get Broughton and deepened understanding of having been there and seen in.
By the way, I would mention to you another book, it travels of a T-shirt in the global economy which basically is on the subject of cotton in the contemporary world.
The movement of the center of cotton growing in the United States to Texas and recounted all of the moves that are made from the point that you harvest cotton to the point that you dispose of the a surplus of T-shirts in Africa
and all of the points in Asia, at the United States, Europe and elsewhere in between.
I want to use my time, not only to recount some of the details of the survey and program, but to give you some of my impressions and observations about the place, about the people.
And the people, I found again, if you are going to think about this event next year toward the year after or three years from now on, you will remember Natches and some people, people that struck you as interesting, a valuable, funny.
There were some very good people on the platform and in the audience at this meeting.
I will just mention a couple and relate them to some of the points of the meeting.
In no particular order, and briefly, Cecil [indiscernible], the state of Minnesota talked about the Minnesota freight office.
He is a veteran with what I thought was a very sound advice on how you operate internally in order to establish a significant freight presence within the state DOT, Richard Nordall, the state of California, it sounds strange to say this,
but he delivered a inspirational sermon on the freight and the importance of being a champion when in support of freight.
Barbara Ivanoff, the state of Washington has showed the analytical side, the business side of determining what you can and ought to do in a freight office in a state DOT.
Ted Dalberg, he always by his presence and personality emphasizes that being able to work well with people in the business community and being able to see the connections between the private sector
and public sector in useful day to day ways that is how you move ahead in trying to do a coordinated program.
We had some of our old friends, David [indiscernible], 30 years in the railroad business, now with the state of Maryland running the freight logistics office, Steve Slavic, which the state DOT,
and the leader in our efforts to do the bottom line port.
New people from Indiana and Oregon.
Certainly, I came away with understanding how different kinds of people proceeding in different ways can get to the same point, which is to advance the efforts to establish freight Transportation in their particular organizations.
Those of you on this webinar have heard Butch Brown.
Obviously, somebody at this meeting provided considerable leadership and direction.
Also, he challenged people to go home and have at least not one thing that they came away that they were going to do when they got home.
We heard from the governor.
Obviously, for the governor to show up and the senator to show up, this was an important event, and certainly was important for the participants to realize that this was an event that was significant enough for governors
and senators to pay attention.
And, the Mississippi DOT, in addition to Butch Brown, to get time to spend time with Steve Slavic, [indiscernible], you realize that the Mississippi DOT, and I suspect that some of you from places like California and Florida,
and you barely know that there is a Mississippi.
Would you have an opportunity to spend some time with these people, you realize that this is a first rate crowd and doing some very interesting and important and valuable things.
The place, the people, these were impressions or observations that I came away with, that I think our personal, but they also relate to what the point was.
I want now to turn more to the substance and detail.
Tony mentioned that the response rate on the survey was a remarkable.
It certainly was.
Here, I commend Juan Florez from the AASHTO staff that they were going to respond to the survey or they were going to hear from him every day for the rest of their lives.
47 states may have wound up being 49 after this was put together that responded to the survey.
Certainly the most important response from States was that freight transportation is a high priority in the state of DOTs.
Extremely or someone it, being the better part of the respondents.
I would they that in the Natches, you will be pleased to know that since I constructed the slides, you are not seeing this morning that I am responsible for that.
In Natches, what I took away was the observation that is frequently made that freight does not vote is no longer the case, certainly within the NPOs, the state DOTs.
Freight is the voting and is being her.
People are taking it seriously and giving it a high priority.
I also heard at Natches that the institutions need to flow with the freight, which is to say that freight does not respect borders, but the institutions are all established on jurisdictional basis.
That means that they all involve stopping at a county line, city line or state line.
Butch Brown reference to Senator Lott.
When he said in his presentation that it is important for us to come together in every possible venue to talk about how we will do a better job in the freight arena.
As Butch said, he spends an hour or more in a video appearance at the conference.
I have dealt with senators over the years.
It is a very impressive to see a senator that one, has that kind of interest and, two, can handle themselves for an hour or more without benefits of someone shoving notes in front of him.
His participation, I thought, was important and useful.
In the survey, we asked about high priority freight issues.
The state response is tracked closely with the responses of the federal highway division offices and with the NPOs.
The performance of the freight system, the need to expand upgrades, both highway and other infrastructure, intermodal connections and facilities were among the top items.
Truck size and weight and access to the class one, at diverting highway traffic to rail were the others.
In the next five years, people will think that capacity congested checkpoint must be the focus.
They are concerned about funding policy to deal with those a priorities.
They are alert to the reality that what they do locally is going to be a function, in part, and a success of what they do,
or lack of success will be a function of developments around the world that they do not necessarily have any influence at all on.
In Natches, and Tony mentioned the focus on freight champions, I came away thinking several things.
One, that everyone agreed that you needed people who were both effective and enthusiastic to Advanced freight within their organizations, but there were all kinds of people, they are people who can take advantage of the situation,
sees opportunities as they present themselves and they are people that understand the importance of establishing an institutional capacity, and not just a personal influence, but that something will function beyond their tenure.
It will provide for some continued freight success in the state after they are gone.
The top three issues, state, region and locality, one of the important things that came out of the survey and out of the discussion and Natches was the need for planning and analysis.
Determine the freight capacity needs on the state trade corridors and to do that requires something more than simply looking out the window to see which way the traffic is moving, or to see if it is moving.
And the region, developing connections to the entire transportation system and regional gateways, multistate regional corridor groups, in other words, the institutions flowing with the freight.
On the localities, reducing or minimizing the ingestion, maintenance of existing facilities.
And Natches, both Tony and Butch made reference to the private sector participants.
For me, the presentation that Tracy, the head of Corporate logistics for Wal Mart was the most striking.
She said at the meeting that there is nothing more valuable that public sector planners can do been to understand what you do it impacts the competitiveness and of private industries.
The only way that you will do that is by having some involvement with the private sector.
I thought from my point of view that the description that Rosser offered on how Wal-Mart on a quarterly basis is suggesting is distribution system was on the one hand very interesting and on the other hand frightening.
That is to say that Wal-Mart is looking at the origins of their products, the destinations for their markets, the location of their distribution centers, and then on the basis of the data that they have,
making adjustments quarterly in how things get from one place to another.
If you are in the long term capital investment business, public infrastructure, and you are looking at a private sector, in this case, the world's largest company, that is constantly making changes in patterns of traffic,
it certainly suggests a challenge.
We asked in the survey, is there somebody in a position of authority who actively advances freight Transportation?
The answer was, for the most part, yes, and considerably more than when you asked this the last time around.
And Natches, there was considerable conversation about partnerships developing and nurturing them, maintaining them, and I suspect, that the two underlying realities of partnerships are one, that there has to be, matters of separate
and mutual interest involved.
Partnerships work if people bring their particular objectives to the table, if they are recognized by all of the partners, and if they have an arrangement that enables everyone to get some of what they want.
These are not charitable activities.
They are matters of interest.
The other is, communication.
It is necessary to be constantly or continuously communicating, sharing information, developing the same view of the world.
I find it interesting, for example, states will do analyses of traffic simultaneously, major companies, major carriers are doing analyses of their own her that relate to traffic.
There is not much sharing of that kind of information in order to guarantee that people are working in roughly the same world.
Does your organization recognize the importance of freight transportation needs?
The answers there were just overwhelming.
Somewhat and yes being virtually a 100%.
That is to say, freight is within the state DOTs.
What is the most significant obstacle to collaborating with the NPOs?
It might be said that this refers not only to the NPOs but other possible partners.
Communication, funding and staffing.
Not enough sharing of information, not enough money, and not enough expertise to do with the job.
When people were asked, how do you want to get training and professional development, technical assistance, as Tony and said, what people are most interested in is contact with other people.
And not other words, courses, workshops, peer to peer exchange.
I am imagining that for most people this is not just talking to other people like themselves, but to talking to people that are in the business of freight transportation as well.
The top training needs include engaging with the freight and stakeholders, freight 101 general education, financing, engaging the private sector, that and performance measures.
For those that want more detail on what was on the survey, due can go to the archives for the webinar that was done towards the end of last year.
You will find the full state DOT survey.
I want to mention a couple of other things that AASHTO is doing that relate to today's conversation and to the future.
First, this webinar today, which is linked to a large group in Philadelphia where the Tony is at the Delaware Regional Planning Commission, and to a large group in Tulsa, Oklahoma.,
where AASHTO put's Water Conservation Committee is meeting and as I understand it about 65 people on the line,
what this tells us is there is a rather large nationwide network that is involved in the freight business in both the public and private sectors.
This is probably considerably different from the case five years ago.
I have mentioned a couple of other things.
Tomorrow and Friday, Tony and I and others in Philadelphia and Oklahoma will be in the Philadelphia for a two day session for states and freight,
which is the combination of a NCHRP project that has been looking at how states are organized and how they can best organize to carry out freight programs.
On Monday and Tuesday of next week, we will be involved in a vision meeting, which is part of a larger transportation visiting process.
This will be on a future mission for its freight Transportation in the global economy.
We are also in the process of producing the AASHTO freight Transportation bottom-line report.
Part of the agenda for the water meeting in Oklahoma was a final review of the ports and waterways report within that comprehensive report.
There are three others which will be issued in about two months.
With that, I think I said more than I needed to say.
Probably, most importantly, I would be interested in hearing what others who participated in Natches, or who responded to the survey, or, simply on this webinar have to say or what questions they might have to ask.
Thank you, Leo.
Many of you notice there was some issues with some of the slides not showing.
The working version of the presentation will be on the freight Planning Web site, and I will let everyone know when that becomes available.
We do not have any questions in the chat area.
Let me give you some time to think about questions.
I will bring up the slide on the freight peer to peer program.
Let me get it up here.
I encourage you to look at the peer to peer website.
It is a great way for the public sector and transportation professionals to share information.
If it provides free a short-term technical assistance regarding freight Planning and assistance.
If you go to the Web site, you will find more information.
You can send an e-mail to set up an exchange.
We will open the telephone lines.
If there was anyone who was at the freight partnership conference, I encourage you to give those thoughts over the telephone.
If you do not have any questions but want to share feedback or thoughts on the meeting, feel free to do so.
If you can give instructions on how to ask a question over the telephone.
We are ready to begin the question and answer session.
If you would like to ask a question or make a comment, please press the three and say your name.
If you would like to ask a question or make a comment, please press star 1 and record your name.
One moment for the first question.
Once again, and if you would like to ask a question or make a comment, please press star 1 and record your name.
At this time, we do not have any questions.
If we do not have any questions, we will go ahead and close out.
This is Tony.
We have someone in the audience to ask a question.
I should have asked that.
Please go ahead.
This is Calvin.
In talking about champions and leadership, do you think the fact that we are in essentially having to talk about raising money through taxes
or other sources of revenue to pay for these programs is in keeping political leaders away from championing project because they are accused of raising taxes?
I think Butch Brown is a department head and freight champion --
Said this is Butch Brown.
Trent Lott, not to keep using his name time and time again, also a senator Cochran, both of them have been strong champions, using that word again for transportation and transportation and the structure.
Both of them are very, very conservative Republicans.
In the context of saying what champions, and might be a little less apt to step forward based on conservative taxation policy, I think at least in our case in Mississippi is a misnomer.
The see the need for transportation and for structure.
I do not say highway and the structure, transportation and the structure, particularly in our state and [indiscernible].
And what they understand the necessary of white education, that being transportation infrastructure.
I do not see that as a reason that an elected official could not or should not be a champion for what we are trying to do here.
I would go back to what Butch said earlier about the importance of education.
I think that people have to have a reason for wanting to do something and for needing to raise money to do it.
If they do not have a compelling reason, they are not going to do it.
I heard John Mica a couple of weeks ago at the gate weighs coalition, he is a conservative Florida member of Congress, a senior member of the T&I committee.
He said if we are serious about the future of transportation, we need to think big.
Thinking big impulse multi trillions.
For someone like Mica to say that is surprising to me.
Again, the point is to not start out with telling people they are going to have to raise taxes, but to start telling them that we are all going to pay if we do not do something about freight Transportation.
Having made that sale, then the conversation is, how do you do it?
As we are going to that question, a question was tied in.
Is a question to all presenters.
As was noted in Leo's comments, and private sector freight planning.
There is also a strong desire to establish public / private partnerships.
In what areas can we achieve private sector buy in from mutual Public / Private benefits.
Leo, we will start with you.
[ LAUGHING ]
Well, what I have to say will be a generalization.
We have some people on this call will have on the ground experience in dealing with private sector carriers and shippers in doing public / private partnerships.
The time line disconnect is simply a fact and the two sides need to understand that and need to be able to talk the game that is topped by the other side.
As I said earlier, I think, at least for a private company, they are interested in Mac and investment that has an adequate rate of return.
Where there is the opportunity for them to participate with the government, the public sector in such projects, then you have the basis for a conversation.
I was assembling some material earlier today, including material on the corridor and the Shellpot bridge.
These are two projects where the public sector used its capacity to do the upfront financing and the private sector generated, as a result of the infrastructure investments made,
a stream of revenue that made it possible for them to pay C per car and to retire the debt.
A debt that the railroads could not take on, but a debt that they could retire out of operating revenue.
Those are simple examples of cases in which you can see both the public benefit and the Private benefits.
They were able, though not easy or quickly to come to an agreement on the financing that took advantage of the capacities of both sectors and met the mutual needs.
I think, by the way, the subject of estimating the benefits is one that is important at Natches and the survey, it is one that people brought up, that if you are a government
and are going to be investing money to produce a benefit for a private company or private companies, you are going to have to do a pretty good job of demonstrating that it is a public benefit Project.
There has been a lot of work done in the last couple of years on the subject of calculating public benefit, and then proportionating benefit to the costs and developing financing packages to that take those things into account.
One thing that I'd like to ad, this is Tony.
In the past, the private sector explained that they would work around problems and then realized how long it would take them to get a project move forward.
Those days are behind us.
The work arounds have been [indiscernible].
This is the way that things move in the public-sector.
We can probably accelerate some of the things that we do and move forward a little more quickly.
The other talks about ITS where we might find mutual benefits quickly.
I have seen some of the discussions we have had in NPOs were we not bring the truckers in and have them talk about what is happening in their respective geographic region.
You can make changes quickly.
I wonder, a Jennifer, if I can ask a question?
It has to do with the people that I work for, but also the NPOs.
In state DOTs, most of the freight people that I work with our people that are responsible for one or more of the freight modes, trucking, regulation.
When we hold meetings like the Natches meeting, we have some of those people attending, but we also have a variety of other people.
Principally, out of the planning area, where you will have someone or a unit that will be responsible for incorporating freight into the state wide multi modal plan.
It has seemed to me that to advance freight transportation within a state DOTs, you needed to get the modal and interests integrated into the broader functions like planning, finance, a project developments within the state DOTs.
I am wondering if there were people on the line that could speak to that?
Why don't we go ahead.
If anyone wants to answer that that is on the line, go ahead.
I believe it is star 1 to answer the question, is that correct?
It is star 1.
If you have any thoughts on that dial in.
We do have a question.
I will let him announce himself.
[SPEAKER/AUDIO NOT CLEAR]
The truck parking facilities program, Section 1305, if you go to our Web site, you can find more information about it.
It is not designed to conduct research in long-term parking, but to improve capacity and availability of long-term parking for commercial vehicles on the NHS.
A full to download of the program and what we are looking for is on the FHWA freight Web site.
If you have any other questions beyond that, there are points of contact for the program.
You can contact Bill on my staff or Mike.
I will go ahead and type in the website.
Do we have anyone else on at the website?
This is Richard from the California DOT.
In regards to the previous question, a couple of thoughts.
In many cases, the planning offices in various states has been the champion of freight issues.
coming from the long-range planning works, the changes that are occurring on the network.
Many times they are being driven by not only the growth on that network but also the changes in the network in terms of changes in mode, growth of impacts, etc..
That process has to extend out.
Part of the work of the East champions, in various DOTs is to build up connections that say whether it be either planning, programming or development side
or some of the modal divisions that the Department of Transportation can say how can we work together to achieve common objectives?
How, for example, if you are in an environment where you have a passenger program, how can we work together to achieve both, a better handling of freight on the rail system as well as to achieve also a rail system that passengers better?
I am looking for some common ground that is based on a foundation of understanding the issues, both from a policy standpoint, and issued discretion standpoint and a factoid standpoint
and lay that out in terms of how do we respond to this from a project way, from an operations standpoint to bring about the changes that reduce congestion so that we improved mobility
and out about greater environmental improvements at so that we can bring about the right kind of outcome that ultimately leads to systems that work better, both for the public side and the private side, ultimately in that process,
we better serve the citizens that we have the responsibility to serve?
Do we have anyone else on the telephone line?
At this time we show no one.
There are a few more questions type in.
Leo there is a question from New.
Can you embellish your comment about class one access?
Last week, the service transportation for held a hearing on rail capacity.
AASHTO had a witness, the state of Maryland submitted a statement.
In that statement, the point was made at a national rail system is not simply a rail system that can move something from Los Angeles to Chicago to New York.
It is a rail system that enables the old parts of the country to avail themselves of the rail services.
Obviously, the evolution of the rail system today has caused people to think that the class one railroads constitute the national system and that the short lines and regionals are simply local roads.
Our point of view is that given that the class one shed more than half of the system that they own back in the '30's, we need to be rethinking what national means for rail service.
Obviously, the short lines in regionals are an important part of the national rail system today, or certainly should be.
When we are doing analyses and developing programs and looking at the evolution of the class of one service, hundred card unit trains, long haul, that if rail service is important for particular industries and the to give their places
and do not fit into that service paradigm, we need to be working to make the adjustments necessary.
The next question is will there be a training session on how to calculate public benefits of a private project?
Leo, any thoughts on that?
Jennifer, if you want me to, I will tackle that one.
That was an element put in the program that you can [indiscernible].
It is something that we have been contemplating within the freight office.
As we put together the [indiscernible], it was a question that we had in our proposed rulemaking comments.
We ask for comments.
We have not come up with all of the metrics yet.
It is still a work in progress.
If there are any sites in that regard, contact the office and we will be more than happy to talk to you about it.
The answer is that we have not figured out how to do that.
When we do, we will engage with everyone.
Let me make a comment on that.
I said in my remarks that this is an area that there is a lot of interest in and a lot of activity.
People on the line may know that the TRB, in the last year has purchased a couple of pieces of work that are useful.
One, on the public benefits from freight, rail investment.
It was done by David Hunt of Cambridge systematics.
Another is rail projects to relieve highway congestion.
It is, obviously, one of the benefits that was done by-the lead was Joe Bryant.
We did a workshop with our rail committee focused on that.
We are proceeding with the researchers to see if we can, in this case, interestingly, we thought that the results of that work, rail projects to relieve congestion would be most helpful to DOT rail staffs.
When we did the workshop, the conclusion of the real people is that they would find it most useful to take it into their departments and be able to do some sort of an information or Development session with their highway planning
and finance people.
The real people were not the ones that needed to be convinced that you could be doing rail projects that would have a benefit for the highway.
It was the other people.
Other people have done, and it is most particularly in the rail area, but Florida has a real program.
I think it is fairly simple, but routine cost / benefit test that they run.
I know that Pa., for its rail program has a set of benefits that it calculates for a binding decision for a program.
I am assuming that there are other states that do as well.
We do not have such a training session scheduled.
If our members tell us that we should, then we will.
The last question is, is there any initiative to send the results from the Natches directly to state DOT executives from AASHTO?
Tony or Leo, pots on not?
We did that with the Columbus freight partnership meeting.
Let me, by the way make a point.
This is the AASHTO Federal Highway Administration freight partnership.
Part of this is now two meetings.
We think it is the banner under which we collaborate on freight on a continuing basis and not simply to hold an occasional meeting.
We did do a distribution to the AASHTO for of members with a half letter from Tom Norton who then chaired our committee to bring this to their attention.
I got enough reaction and response to think that was a useful thing to do.
What the question implies and what the conversation that preceded it implies is that we ought to do a little better job of packaging and communicating, not simply sending a 40 page report with a letter on top,
but may be producing a useful two page or four page for an executive level decision maker, which is partly what we intend to do with the state and freight project that takes place in Philadelphia tomorrow and Friday.
We are putting together such a result to sent to all of our division administrators.
I should mention that the proceeding report is currently in draft format.
We are working on completing that.
We will have that on line as soon as it is available for all of you.
That is all of the questions that we have.
It is about 2:30.
We will close out now.
If you think of additional questions, I have the Bill addresses for Tony and Leo.
I have the freight web site address and you can send questions for all members to respond to.
I want to thank all presenters for the three great presentations.
Thanks everyone in attendance.
The recorded version as well as the powerpoint and transcript will be available within the next few weeks on the freight Planning Web site.
I will send an e-mail to everyone to let you know when it is available.
The next seminar is on May 16.
If you have not done so already, I encourage you to see the web site.
The address that you can do so is on the screen.
With that, we will close it out.
Thank you again everyone and enjoy the rest of your day.