Moving conversation: Latest Breakfast Series event drives point home on Idaho’s transportation needs

Getting to where we are going, in Idaho and in our cars, was the focus of the road traveled by a group of experts dissecting how the Gem State’s expanding population is creating a bottleneck for transportation improvements needed statewide.

Efforts to keep pace with growth took to the fast lane during a recent panel discussion hosted by Idaho Business Review at The Grove Hotel, June 12, the third of five Breakfast Series events scheduled for the year.

Creating a “balanced system” of transportation is key, according to Elaine Clegg, CEO of Valley Regional Transportation (VRT).

“If we’re going to have that in Idaho, we need state leadership to change some of our statutes and funding mechanisms,” said Clegg, who has tallied more than 25 years of experience in the sector.

“Then we can actually consider a broad range of solutions instead of just saying to Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) ‘go fix that.’”

Likewise, Clegg feels Idaho needs to speed up in order to catch up in the transportation arena.

“The state of Idaho has not really matured yet as a state in terms of dealing with the kind of transportation issues we face today,” she said. “But it’s time to get ahead of this and do some long-range planning.”

While the idea of long-range planning resonated strongly throughout the discussion, the convoluted issue of funding for improvement projects remains, whether it’s for projects to be added, or those that require major fixes.

“We want to be positive, but we need to be clear that there is much more needed to be done, and the funding is not there for the other improvements,” said Mollie McCarty, chief external affairs officer for ITD. “There are so many pieces, and we have a lot of work to be done.”

A 26-year veteran of the agency, McCarty fully understands that transportation needs must keep pace with growth, but the work must be completed without “getting ahead of ourselves.”

“We need to look at the whole approach to long-range planning,” she said, “and not be unrealistic by forgetting the things that must get done today.”

At the Ada County Highway District (ACHD), deputy director of projects, Dyan Bevins, emphasized the focus of her agency is to build safe and reliable infrastructure countywide.

She also talked about anticipating the locations of growth and the resulting needs in an expanding community. “It’s always about balancing our needs, but we don’t want to underestimate maintenance of our existing facilities. As infrastructure grows, so do your maintenance needs. Then you are competing for dollars for maintenance versus expansion.”

However, such balancing acts also entail a great deal of juggling.

“Every year we try to build what we can with the resources that we have,” she said. “It always feels as if there is more need than funding that is available.”
Panelist Sen. Ali Rabe, who represents District 16, and is a member of the state’s transportation committee since 2022, shared that when it comes to issues involving roads and highways, the legislative challenges focused on funding ultimately trickle down and create more challenges for residents.

“In the political climate that we are in, how we allocate funding for transportation is definitely more focused on making more and more cuts and not planning,” Rabe said. “It makes it hard to look forward to what is needed and the investments we need in the state.”

But Rabe also pointed out that specific road projects ideas don’t come directly from state legislators.

“The transportation board looks at all the funding that we have and projects to determine where those investments are going to be made,” she said. “There is a concern with that because a person from a certain area can go after funding that benefits their area and not necessarily the state as a whole.”

That’s a big reason why collaboration is key, the panelists stated. Strategically building partnerships and identifying opportunities for regional transportation alignment are just some of the many tasks for panel participant Bre Brush, a senior policy advisor for the City of Boise.

In her role, an increase in traffic, or ‘congestion’ as it is known, is the big problem impacting quality of life for residents in the City of Trees.

“Nobody wants to have a really long commute for work or have to drive 15 minutes to a grocery store because of traffic,” Brush said.

Meaning collaboration among agencies to help increase capacity, or even sometimes adding more lanes can help solve problems.

“That is a tool we have tried to use in Boise, by investing in Valley Regional routes, active transportation in partnership with ACHD,” she said. “But we’re running out of ways to address this problem with the tremendous growth we’re having.”

With Idaho classified as the only state without a dedicated funding source for transit, Clegg Strongly believe she has the solution to help alleviate congested roadways.

“In my perfect world view, there would be a dedicated funding source for VRT,” she said. “My pitch to the legislature is ‘please don’t treat us as special.’ Just treat us like everyone else and give us tax authority. I think it would be wise for the state to consider directing some state general fund monies to regional movement that is not roadways.”

Regardless of the funding sources, planning and issues resulting from the efforts can place a great deal of pressure on the work required of any project.

“A development comes in and your best laid plans go out the window,” Brush said. “You may have to upgrade utilities or relocate them to accommodate your development.”

The patience of commuters fed up with being stuck in their car for long stretches of time may also go out the window, with many not aware of the years it can take to plan, fund and complete a road improvement project.

“The users of the system, the general public, probably think the process takes longer than it should,” Bevins said. “But there are lots of reasons behind that.”

Scenarios such as acquiring land that is “not for sale” to complete a right-of-way, and relocating utility services can severely impact a project timeline.

“It’s one of those things that is unseen,” Bevins said. “Idaho Power, water and sewer, Intermountain Gas, your fiber companies. If they’re already set in a two-lane road, they would have to be moved. All that must happen before construction can begin which impacts the scheduling.”

Agencies and lawmakers teaming up can help keep projects on pace.

“Without collaboration it is difficult to get the big things done,” McCarty said. “If you’re talking about the really big, big picture, the big-ticket items, you need to have a governor who has the leadership and shares that vision, and we do. We’ve been able to see the benefits of that.”

Plus, when it comes to funding projects, there is always the question of maintenance versus safety.

“It’s easier for policy makers to get behind investments when it is something big and tangible to their constituents, like a safety capacity project,” she said. “About 30% of our workforce is maintenance. People want us out there filling potholes, filling the cracks, doing the things the public expects us to do.”

And sometimes the public may also not realize which agency is responsible for completing road work for a particular project.

“The transportation department has jurisdiction over the highways,” McCarty said. “Local agencies, such as ACHD, have jurisdiction over the local roads. It gets complicated. Sometimes we have to check to see whose road it is.”

As is the case with State Street, or State Highway 44, depending on which section of the road one travels. From downtown Boise to Glenwood, the thoroughfare is maintained by ACHD. But past Glenwood heading west, it is classified as a state highway and falls under the jurisdiction of ITD.

“If it is your jurisdiction, you are taking care of it; you are funding it” she said.

State Highway 16 is also governed under similar circumstances. The roadway is fully funded by the state, but the connections through it are funded locally.

Or as Clegg pointed out, “80% of the system” is local.

“I’ll call it a myth that driving is paid with user fees,” she said. “It really never was. The system never really was user-fees supported. We live with this myth that if you are a transportation agency, you should somehow be able to pay for your services with user fees. We’re in that position. Transit is not going to pay for itself.”

Except, she said, when you look at the resulting economic impact. “There is a three-to-one return on investment for transit, and for every dollar we invest, three dollars get created in the economy in our communities.”

Her main objective is to “grow with growth.”

“Our job is to figure out a way to create that steady, reliable, can-be-planned-for funding source that we can respond to growth as a constant rather than trying to patch together a system as we go,” Clegg said.