The Ferguson Group Blog

TFG Offices Currently Without Power, E-mail and Phones

Due to a major water main break this morning near our offices, and subsequent flooding in our building, The Ferguson Group is without power at this time.  The TFG team does not have access to e-mail or telephones and at this point we are unable to predict when power will be restored.    If you need to reach a member of the TFG team, please contact [email protected] for assistance.

Water Infrastructure, an Unmet Challenge

America’s water infrastructure continues to deteriorate at a pace that far surpasses the resources available to meet current and future needs.  The estimates in the gap between available resources and the needed investments in the nation’s water and wastewater systems vary greatly, but it is no less than $300 billion, according to EPA, and probably closer to $500 billion over the next 20 years.

The funding needs for drinking water infrastructure alone are staggering.  According to a report released in March 2012 by the American Water Works Association, “Buried No Longer: Confronting America’s Water Infrastructure Challenge,” it will cost no less than $1 trillion over the next 25 years to restore the nation’s existing drinking water systems as they reach the end of their useful lives and expand them to serve a growing population. And, although the nation spends billions on drinking water investments each year, drinking water systems face an annual shortfall of at least $11 billion in funding, according to a 2009 report from the American Society of Civil Engineers, to replace aging facilities that are near the end of their useful life and to comply with existing and future federal water regulations.

In the past, between 1972 and 1987, Congress approved more than $60 billion in grants to help local governments make investments in wastewater treatment facilities.  The waste water grants were replaced in the late 1980s by the State Revolving Loan Fund low interest loans and in 1996, Congress established the same opportunity to help communities finance safe drinking water facilities.  Today, the clean water and drinking water SRFs support approximately $5 billion in low-interest loans annually, far short of the annual investment needs. 

What do shortfalls in water and wastewater funding mean for communities and the nation as a whole?  Failing to keep pace with these essential investments puts the quality, safety and security of the nation’s water resources at risk and that in turn puts the public health, our economy and the environment in jeopardy. 

Is your community facing water and wastewater funding needs that you cannot finance given the current tools in the water infrastructure toolbox?  If so, share your challenges and the impact delaying these investments will have on your community. 

You can always reach me at [email protected].

Will Earmarks Make A Comeback?

Note: This is the second in a series of entries that will examine the state of play in the ongoing debate over earmarked spending.

As months pass and legislation such as the reauthorization of the highway bill have stalled, whispers about the earmark ban have turned into rumblings. During a closed meeting of the House Republican caucus, Congressman Mike Rogers (R-AL) )  brought up the subject of bringing back earmarks as a way to move through the legislative impasse. Rogers was quoted as saying that he received “a lot of applause” from his fellow Republican in response to his idea.

Many Democrats also want to return to earmarking. Congressman Nick Rahall (D-WV), the Ranking Member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee recently asked House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman John Mica (R-FL) to join him in asking House Speaker Boehner to restore earmarks to the transportation bill. As early as November of 2011, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA) wrote a letter to House Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader Pelosi asking leadership to redefine “earmarks” to allow for fully vetted projects to move forward because the current policy is  “having profound detrimental effects on activities that create jobs, promote economic development and provide public safety benefits.”

Former members of congress are also calling for a return to earmarks. Former Senator Robert Bennett (R-UT) recently wrote an op-ed entitled It's time to reinstate earmarks In his editorial, Senator Bennett states: 

In fact, as the dictionary makes clear, "to earmark" does not mean "to add." It means "to designate or set aside." The top spending limit for a cabinet department is set by the budget resolution, and an earmark does not add to or raise that top number at all. A congressional earmark designates which programs should be funded within the limits of the overall budget. Absent such earmarks, the administration is free to spend the money on the projects it likes. And even Tea Party Members that were critical of the earmarking process have come to understand that a total ban on earmarks does not seem to be the right answer.

Congressman Bobby Schilling (R-IL), who was against earmarks during his campaign for Congress, said recently that he would have rather not banned earmarks entirely. "I did not want the earmarks banned, because I truly believe that there is such a thing as a good earmark," Schilling told the audience.

I’m following this debate closely and will update you as this continues. Please feel free to comment below or contact me at [email protected]

Are Earmarks Truly Dead?

Note:  This is the first in a series of entries that will examine the state of play in the ongoing debate over earmarked spending.

The whispers began months ago as Congress struggled with its self imposed two-year moratorium on earmarks.   Important legislation has stalled and gridlock seems to have become the new norm on Capitol Hill.

After having struggled through the first year of the earmark ban, a growing number of Republicans were beginning to discuss the possibility of reconsidering the ban after the 2012 elections.  The argument for bringing back earmarks ranged from ceding control of all spending to the Obama administration, to not having the ability to help fund worthy projects back home. 

These arguments were not new.  In January of 2011, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had this to say after President Obama’s state of the union speech when the President announced he would veto bills that included earmarks:  “The money is going to be spent anyway,” said Reid. “The difference is the White House is going to be directed [sic] where its spent, not us. That’s our obligation. This does not save any money.”  Added a visibly frustrated Reid, "I have a constitutional obligation to do congressionally-directed spending. I know much more what's needed in Elko, Nevada . . . than some bureaucrat does back here."

A report from the Heritage Foundation seems to back up the Majority Leader’s January 2011 claim that the Administration was the one now doing the earmarking. The report says that the Obama administration directed federal spending to Democrats to help get them to vote for controversial bills such as cap and trade, financial regulation reform and Obamacare.  Fox News reported:

"Numbers from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service show that the value of administration earmarks under President Obama increased by a 126 percent in his first two years in office and the actual number of administrative earmarks increased by 54 percent.

Those are dramatic increases that are 11 times more than Congress itself increased earmarks, which the White House did not explain today. 

It also does not square with statements the President is against earmarks, which he and his administration appear to have used to great effect and with increasing frequency."

 

I’m following this debate closely and will update you as this continues.  Please feel free to comment below or contact me at [email protected]

(Hurricanes) Beryl, Chris, Debby, Ernesto – I hope we never meet you….

Tropical Storm Alberto seems not to have checked the calendar before deciding to make its way up our Atlantic coast this week.  This first storm of the season, appearing on radar more than a week before the official June 1 start of hurricane season, is a good wake up call for local governments that may find reason to work with FEMA in response to a natural disaster in the coming months.  While we can never be fully prepared to respond to an event like this,  now is the time to get up to speed on the latest : 

Click here to sign up for FEMA Mitigation Planning E-mail Alerts.

Read Coverage of the Recently-Named Director of the National Hurricane Center here.

View the latest preparedness videos on FEMA’s YouTube Channel.

And check out this list of 2012 Hurricane Names here.

Do you have any go-to resources for disaster preparation that you’d like to share with other local government leaders?   Please share by posting comments below.

Amanda Wood 

Reach me at [email protected]

House Approves Violence Against Women Act

The House of Representatives just approved its bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, H.R. 4970, during National Women’s Health Week, by a vote of 222-205, while the Senate approved its VAWA bill, S. 1925, by a vote of 68-31 during April - Sexual Assault Awareness Month. House floor debate has been very partisan, with both sides denying political rhetoric in an election year and keeping the focus on valuing and protecting the lives of ALL women and children, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, or geography. More than 325 diverse organizations opposed the House bill, but it is now time to focus on the House-Senate conference committee and produce a bill that will have bipartisan support. First enacted 18 years ago, VAWA has been nothing short of life-saving for millions of women and children across the nation, providing a comprehensive, streamlined and national response to the crimes of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking. Both law enforcement and advocates need new and expanded resources, based on years of experience in local communities, to make our neighborhoods safer and strengthen protections for all victims of violence.

Violence Against Women Act Bill Heads to House Floor Next Week

Earlier this week, the House Judiciary Committee approved H.R. 4970, the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization, sponsored by Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL), a survivor of domestic violence and a former law enforcement official.  In a near party-line 17-15 vote, the bill was approved with one Republican Member, Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) a former judge, joining the Democrats to oppose the measure.  The National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women, a coalition representing thousands of organizations, service providers, researchers, educators, religious leaders, law enforcement, advocacy groups, and victims all across the nation, continues to have serious concerns about this legislation because it excludes vulnerable communities such as Native women, LGBT victims and immigrant victims. Additionally, it strikes mandatory minimum sentencing, which deters victims from coming forward to report the crimes of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.    

The U.S. Conference of Mayors and many other local and statewide organizations are preparing letters to call upon the House to instead pass the Senate version, S. 1925, that supports provisions to establish a uniform nondiscrimination provision for VAWA grant programs, maintain protections for victims who are not citizens so that they are not afraid to come forward to report crimes, and expand the capacity of tribal governments to investigate and prosecute these crimes.

Next Steps:  House Leadership plans to bring H.R. 4970 to the floor next Wednesday, May 16.  

 

Finally, some relief for local governments

Yesterday, May 10, 2012, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced that the Department of Transportation is eliminating certain across-the-board deadlines for sign replacement. The DOT’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices requires state and local governments to replace regulatory, warning and ground-mounted guide signs by January 2015, and overhead guide signs and street name signs by January 2018 to meet a minimum retroreflectivity standard.  These across-the-board deadlines placed an enormous financial burden on state and local governments at a time when local economies are struggling.  For example, Spring Valley Township, OH, has a population of 2,600 and is responsible for 34 miles of road. The estimated cost to retrofit all traffic signs is $25,000.  By comparison, compliance costs for New York City were estimated at $27.5 million.  Now, while all new signs must meet the minimum retroreflectivity standard, they do not have to be replaced until they reach the end of the useful life. 

DOT did retain 12 deadlines for sign upgrades that are critical to public safety. They include installing ONE WAY signs at intersections with divided highways or one-way streets, and requiring STOP or YIELD signs to be added at all railroad crossings that don’t have train-activated automatic gates or flashing lights.

The National Association of Towns and Townships - managed by TFG - has worked for years to get these costly deadlines eliminated.

DATA Act: Unintended Consequences and an Unfunded Mandate

We can all agree that good government benefits from increased transparency,  but folks in Washington might just be going about it the wrong way. 

Earlier this month, the House passed the DATA Act, which would extend the new data reporting requirements that came with stimulus spending across all federal contracts, grants and loans, a huge data management burden for the state and local governments that benefit from these federal resources.   While my colleagues in state and local government generally support the goals of the legislation – ensuring that federal funds aren’t subject to fraud or waste – many are frustrated that the DATA Act doesn’t provide money to help them comply with these requirements.

As I work with my clients and others to ensure that the voice of local governments is heard in this debate, we are coming up against a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cost estimate that suggests that implementation will not require your governments to commit additional time and staff resources to comply.  Were the stimulus reporting requirements burdensome to your community?  Do you have a sense of how much the new requirement would cost your government?  Thanks for sharing this information with us so that we can bring the local government perspective to decision makers on the Hill. 

State and local governments are still struggling financially.  When it comes to the DATA Act,  I’d suggest that Congress needs to look before they leap!

For more information, you can contact me at [email protected].

VAWA Advocacy Pays Off with Overwhelming Senate Support

What a great vote in the Senate last week for the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization, with 68 Senators supporting and only 31 opposed. Congratulations to the thousands of advocates who contacted their Senators in support of the bill, S. 1925. Over a two year time period, recommendations to improve the programs were developed by service providers, advocates and law enforcement.  Meetings with members of Congress were held in Washington and in the states, phone calls and letters were sent, and every form of social medial was used to urge a vote during April – Sexual Assault Awareness Month.  These programs will provide local law enforcement and service providers the funding and resources to make our communities and college campuses safer.     

In December 2011, the CDC released the results of the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey indicating what we all knew - that the rate of sexual and domestic violence in the United States is endemic.  One in five: that’s how many women will be raped in their lifetime. One in six: that’s how many women will be victims of stalking in their lifetime. Twenty-four people per minute are victims of sexual assault, physical violence or stalking by an intimate partner in the United States, and women are disproportionately affected by these crimes. This is a national crisis.

What’s next:  the House Judiciary Committee plans a markup on May 8 and the House bill will likely be on the floor the week of May 14.

Keep up the good work and congratulations to TFG client, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, and the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women.