Change of pace: bond issues can be structured to improve the commercial freight infrastructure, as they were in New York State.

[Editor's Note: The following exclusive interview with a former New York State Department of Transportation commissioner looks at transportation issues affecting commercial shippers, including those handling recyclables and secondary commodities.]

The 2005 $2.9 billion Rebuild and Renew New York Transportation Bond Act came as the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) was designing its five-year Capital Construction Program and Transportation Master Plan.

The combination offered a unique opportunity to plan comprehensively for the state's transportation future through 2030 and craft the first long-range strategic plan in years.

WHOLESALE CHANGES. The attacks of 9/11 put the security of transportation assets, especially harbors and border crossings, in a whole new light. New environmental protocols had to be considered and met. And the world was globalizing at an accelerated pace, causing businesses to rely heavily on "just in time" delivery for the movement of freight and goods, increasing congestion and intensifying the need for mass transit solutions.

The important role of transportation planning and infrastructure investment was also becoming more pronounced in land use and economic development, and, to keep pace with competing states and nations, New York had to move ahead smartly.

New York State's vast, complex and aging transportation system required planning for the future that was smart, clear eyed and built around the premise that infrastructure is an asset, not a liability, and investing tactically and significantly in that asset will help shape New York's future.

Then-NYSDOT Commissioner Thomas J. Madison played a central role in identifying key bond act projects and traveled the state advocating for passage of the referendum.

The bond act represented a new way of thinking and planning for the state's transportation needs and an important part of mounting a successful campaign for its passage was creating a statewide dialogue. The interactions that ensued with hundreds of transportation customers and stakeholders began with a simple question: "What should New York State's transportation priorities be for the future?"

Madison helped synthesize the varying answers to that question into a strategic plan that blended bond act priorities with those of the state's five-year transporation capital program. Once a comprehensive transportation plan was developed, the process to educate and inform the public about the importance of New York's infrastructure and the critical need to pass the $2.9 billion bond initiative began.

Madison shares his thoughts on the process, the product and the new world in which transportation planning takes place.

Q Commissioner Madison, you have said that dialogue and education were key to the success of the 2005 Bond Act. Can you elaborate?

A We believed that dialogue and education were critically important. At the outset, we formed The New York State Advisory Panel on Transportation Policy for 2025 whose final report--"Trouble Ahead"--gave us important insights into how the planning process should proceed. As a result of the panel's valuable input and the out comes of state budget negotiations with the legislature, it was determined that a bond act would be necessary to supplement traditional transportation funding streams.

In an effort to promote the merits of the bond act and the broader theme of transportation investment, a diverse and influential coalition was formed, including representatives from the construction and engineering industries, state and local government, academia, civic and environmental groups and organized labor. This unique alliance of upstate, downstate, highway and transit interests--individual members of which are often at odds over planning and funding issues--became strongly united in pursuit of a more seamless, reliable system to better serve New York.

Q It sounds like the coalitions diversity was its strength.

A Yes it was. Historically the fierce competition for infrastructure dollars stems from the wide range of state transportation assets. Highway advocates, freight and passenger rail interests, small and large aviation facilities, ports and mass transit properties typically compete for their own parochial interests at the expense of one another. For the purposes of the bond act however, it was clear early on that locking horns regionally or modally wouldn't help secure the maximum possible investment across our entire infrastructure network, and we had to work in a collaborative way.

The bond act campaign put aside divisions between upstate and downstate, mass transit and highway interests and trucking and rail operators for the collective good, from a funding and a functional perspective.

Q You have said that this bond act "invested in" diverse projects that reflected present and future needs of the state. Can you give some examples?

A New York State's transportation imodes and their corresponding priorities are diverse, and the projects reflect that. We looked at our infrastructure spending not just as expenses or liabilities on a balance sheet, but as true investments in New York's economic competitiveness.

Remember, we were planning for the next two decades. Financing better roads and bridges, mass-transit properties, port and aviation facilities and passenger and freight rail lines, along with improved pedestrian and bicycling access and expanded scenic by-ways, are all investments that pay huge dividends to New Yorkers every day. We looked at project investment decisions through the prism of five "priority result areas" (PRAs) to determine their relative value to each other and the system as a whole. The PRAs include mobility and reliability, safety, security, environmental sustainability and economic competitiveness.

For example, improving our railways to enable bigger freight loads, hardening mass transit assets, boosting airport security and providing funding assistance for hundreds of clean fuel busses all make sense for reasons that transcend a singular transportation purpose. More specifically, creating an intermodal freight transloading facility on Long Island, continuing our financial commitment to Interstate 86 across the Southern Tier and Route 219 to the west, strengthening our international border crossings and improving road and rail access to Fort Drum--a key military installation in northern New York--are all projects with statewide and even national implications.

Q What about transportation as a function of the state's overall economic development profile?

A As the pace of business gets faster and we operate in a world of just in time" delivery, efficient and safe highways, reliable inter-modal rail and truck facilities, secure airports for business travel and cargo and ports that connect to the rest of the network are key factors in the eyes of business.

There is another way to measure the economic benefit of transportation. In addition to keeping businesses in New York and attracting new ones, the Federal Highway Administration maintains that every $1 billion invested in infrastructure will create or sustain 42,000 jobs, an obvious stimulus to our economy.

Thomas J. Madison Jr. is president of Spectra Subsurface Imaging LLC, an affiliate of Spectra Environmental Group Inc. (www.spectraenv.com). He is also V.P. of Spectra's Infrastructure Services division in Latham, N.Y.