Stimulus won't alter project prioritization
Toolbox
By Louis Porter Vermont Press Bureau - Published: February 19, 2009
MONTPELIER — Legislative leaders and state officials seem inclined to allocate federal stimulus money for infrastructure projects – roads, bridges, water systems and more — through the state's existing priority setting process.
Of the half-dozen or more lists of possible projects competing for a share of the federal funds, those already in the state queue are more likely to be built.
Such process decisions will have a big influence on which roads, bridges and safe drinking water projects will be built with the money. With nearly every group or association gathering possible lists of projects that could use stimulus money, the demand will likely be much greater than the amount made available to the state.
Exactly how much money will be available for infrastructure from energy to schools to roads to anti-pollution projects over the next two federal fiscal years (which coincide with three state fiscal years) is not entirely clear, but it will likely be measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars in Vermont.
In all, including tax breaks, Vermont and its residents are expected to receive more than $1 billion. Close to $300 million will come in forms that can be used to help fill state budget gaps.
Lawmakers and officials in the administration of Gov. James Douglas met Wednesday to talk about how the money for infrastructure projects will be spent.
Secretary of Administration Neale Lunderville said the state's prioritization system, which evaluates what road projects should be built first based on use, condition and other factors, should be used to determine what projects get federal stimulus money.
"It is working well," Lunderville said.
Lawmakers didn't entirely agree.
"In my experience the local communities are able to get projects started, get them ready and build them faster and cheaper than we are," Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin said.
But there seemed to be general agreement that the road and bridge money — more than $120 million — should be allocated using the state's existing system, they said.
Two specific projects, a Richmond bridge and the next stage of the Bennington Bypass, were mentioned as potential beneficiaries of the stimulus money.
Both Bartlett and administration officials said it is vitally important that the federal money be used for one-time projects, not to build the base spending of state government.
"Maybe we can use this to give us some time to make structural changes," Bartlett said.
Officials and lawmakers said the remaining stimulus infrastructure money for drinking water, storm water control and other projects, should be funneled through the process the administration and the Legislature uses to fund the annual capital spending bill.
Lunderville said this process should not create a conflict between the state and municipalities. Some projects on the municipal list compiled by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, which totals more than $1 billion in possible spending, will not qualify for the federal money. Other projects are not yet ready to go. Still others are near the top of the list and are likely to be funded in any case.
"There are a lot of local priorities that do win out in the state prioritization system," said Steven Jeffrey, executive director of the league.
The use of the federal funds for state projects may ultimately free up more state money for municipal projects, he added. For instance, the state could put more into the "Class 2" road and bridge repairs. Last year that fund received $3 million and had $13 million in requests, Jeffrey said.
State officials have also compiled a list of possible drinking water projects that total $180,000; pollution control projects totaling $336,000; and highway projects totaling $247,000.
That list does not yet include the league's suggested projects, or others circulating among lawmakers.
For instance, Paul Bruhn, executive director of the Preservation Trust of Vermont, has compiled a list of $27 million in possible historic preservation projects, including the town hall in Worcester, the Putney General Store and the Town Hall in Pawlet.
"One of the big advantages of historic preservation work is that it is 20 percent to 40 percent more labor intensive than new construction," Bruhn said, meaning more people would be put to work per dollar spent. "They are all projects that will produce short-term and long-term benefits that are important for their communities."