Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board

1
Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board
2
Making the Case.

• 1995 Freight community educated
• legislators - developed champions
• 1996 - Creation of Freight Mobility
• Advisory Committee (FMAC)
• 1997 Freight Mobility Project Priority
• Committee (FMPPC)
• Lessons from the Alameda Corridor

3
Partnering.getting buy-in

• FMSIB viewed as partners agency
• Policies and investments steered by private
  sector
• Projects suggested by public partners
• Equal voice decisions by consensus
• Leveraged dollar

4
The Legislature Gets It

• 1998 Creation of Freight Mobility Strategic
• Investment Board (FMSIB)
• Funding of nearly 100M per biennium
• Motor Vehicle Excise Tax
• Project list (33 projects)
• 1999 Hired staff and opened an office
• I-695 Elimination of MVET

5
Clearing the Hurdles

• 2000 Legislature funds many key projects
• PSRC and others help fill funding gaps
• Holding Private Partnerships together
• 2001 2004 Project by Project funding
• Proposed consolidations, eliminations
• Strong support by private partners
• Local Government support

6
More Champions Emerge

• 2005 Legislature Passes Significant
• Transportation Budget
• Freight recognized as critical to economy
• Legislative advocates push for freight mobility
  needs
• Dedicated account created
• Requested 50M a biennium
• Received 12M a biennium local projects plus
  additional targeted dollars for first four years
  (102.5M)
• State DOT freight projects additional 625M
• Three additional special projects 6.9 M

7
Whats Next

• Federal Discretionary Funding
• Future State Revenue Package
• Keeping Projects On Schedule keeping promises
• Frequent communication with legislature

8
Whats Next

• Communication with Congressional delegation
• Ground Breakings Ribbon Cuttings
• Outreach to public explain why freight matters
• Keep developing Champions

9
Holding It Together

• Private Partner Participation in Decisions
• Identifying Next Phase of Projects
• Keeping Partners working together
• Consensus Approach
• No trucks vs. rail rhetoric
• Unified message and goals
• Dedicated Funding Working for More
• Elected Leader Freight Champions
• Public Partners leveraging money
• Advocacy for projects help with partnerships
• Success brings renewed enthusiasm

10
Project Selection

• Must be on a Strategic Freight Corridor
• 4 Million Tons Roadway
• 5 Million Tons Railway
• 2.5 Million Tons Waterway
• Must be part of a state or regional plan

11
Project Scoring Criteria

• Freight Mobility for Project Area
• Freight Mobility for the Region, State Nation
• General Mobility
• Safety
• Freight Economic Value
• Environment
• Partnership
• Consistency with Regional State Plans
• Cost benefit
• Special Issues

12
Project Scoring

• Technical Team Cities, Counties, WSDOT, Ports,
  Railroads and Truckers
• Board Project Selection Committee also scores
  every 11 page application submitted
• Both scores are compiled in a matrix
• Selection Committee reviews projects scores
• Project Meetings held to answer remaining
  questions

13
Full day review with projects

• Re-evaluations with modal representatives
• Determining the ratio of freight benefit and
  general mobility benefit for funding
• Recommendations to full board for adoption
• Final recommendations given to the legislature
• Funding requested

14
Legislative Decision

• Funding for projects requested
• Global freight projects
• State sponsored projects
• Local sponsored projects
• Projects required to enter construction within 12
  months of FMSIB funding award
• 100 of funded projects are under construction
  or completed.