TRANSPORTATION PLAN DRAWS MIXED REVIEW

A transportation plan prepared by a consultant for the Missouri Highway and Transportation Department is drawing both strong praise and strong criticism from some local officials.

Allan Maki, executive director of the Southeast Missouri Regional Port Authority, likes the plan because it places a strong focus on a transportation network involving various methods of transportation, and a greater emphasis on port authorities.

Gene Huckstep, presiding commissioner of the Cape Girardeau County Commission, hates the plan because it suggests turning responsibility for many roads and bridges now in the state system to county governments. Such an action could leave counties devastated financially.

Maki said the recommendations concerning ports "are very positive. It specifically addresses port authorities as an important part of the transportation network of the state of Missouri, as well as the importance of rail connections."

Maki stressed that the trend now is toward inter-modal transportation, which is the ability to move products from one mode of transportation to another in order to find the most efficient network. At a public hearing, Maki said he plans to "address the importance of inter-modal transportation and how the SEMO Port Authority is well situated to participate in such inter-modal activities because of its connection to the primary modes of transportation, river, rail, and road."

But Huckstep has no kind words for the plan because of statements that the state highway system is too large and handling roads that are responsibilities of local governments in other states. It recommends turning these roads back over to local governments over a period of time.

That recommendation has upset Huckstep and Cape County Associate Commissioner Leonard Sander. They said the plan has county officials all over stirred up. They said they expect county officials will turn out in force for a public hearing on the plan Oct. 8 at Drury Lodge.

"It would be an understatement to say the fireworks are brewing," declared Huckstep. "If I can crawl, I'll be there (at the hearing). It's going to be a battle; I don't know how serious they are about this, but we're sure going to find out."

Sander, who oversees roads and bridges for Cape County, added, "This thing is definitely a nightmare. I can feel any way but good about it. As news sifts in about this over time it doesn't get any better for us."

Huckstep said that monthly Southeast Missouri commissioners meetings at Piedmont in August and at Festus on Wednesday have drawn large crowds. Even counties who have not participated for years are coming out to hear about the plan.

"We've never had the kind of attendance we had today," remarked Huckstep.

The highway department's transportation plan was prepared by the consulting firm of Wilbur Smith Associates in January. The report has 34 specific recommendations, which are designed to assist the highway department in its future planning. Comments on the plan are now being sought in public hearings around Missouri.

Both Sander and Huckstep are concerned that the highway department might be further along with its plan to turn roads back over to local governments than many local officials realize.

"This is something that just can't happen," said Huckstep. "There must be some type of funding formula attached to it, but I doubt it will be enough to cover the costs.

"From what I have heard," said Huckstep, "I perceive they don't think this is a big problem for county governments."

Sander said, "It will take a tremendous amount of effort to get them to back down ... undoubtedly this is further down the road than we realize."

John Oliver, a member of the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission from Cape Girardeau, will participate in the hearing Oct. 8. But Oliver said no decisions have been made on what recommendations will be followed and stressed that is one reason for the hearings.

"We will take a look at the suggestions and objections and try to mold a final plan," said Oliver. "It is sort of a utopian thing. We hope to mold a final plan, laced with a little bit of political reality."

Oliver explained that the purpose of commissioning the study was to have an independent outside group look at the total transportation needs of the state, and then make recommendations about ways Missouri could meet those needs.

"The result is a suggestion for a completely integrated plan, some of which is quite workable and some of which never will work in Missouri," said Oliver. Some of the recommendations are not possible because of state constitution prohibitions, he said.

"The bottom line is Missouri has a unique opportunity to be the transportation leader by developing its inter-modal resources, which in fact is the wave of the future. Missouri is uniquely situated to be a major port for containerized arrivals from international markets, which would be redistributed in the United States."

Oliver said having the Mississippi and Missouri rivers, and rail lines running in all directions, it is natural for all this to come together in Missouri.

Maki likes the sound of that. "The highway department has always been focused on roads, but have now realized that transportation in its entirety is a vital aspect of economic development, not only for this part of the state but for the country at large," said Maki.

"To that end, we are now trying to focus on alternative modes of transportation in addition to highway traffic; this holds the potential for the re-emergence of rail and river traffic as major factors in solving Missouri's transportation problems."

The recommendations suggest the state should spend more money on port authorities, especially to help with capital improvements. Now, Missouri provides a total of $327,000 in administrative grants to the 15 ports in the state.

Maki said no funds have been available in recent years for capital improvements from the state. By contrast, he noted, the state of Indiana spends $70 million a year on port development.

But Sander and Huckstep maintained there is a major flaw in the plan.

They pointed out that it calls for shifting all lettered highways from the state system to local governments. In Cape County that would amount to about 100 to 125 miles of road, all blacktop, heavily traveled, and with many bridges.

"There is nothing more costly to keep up than blacktop roads," said Sander. "We'd have to expand our work force by three times and buy equipment we don't have at this time for the blacktop roads," he observed.

"The feds have also cut down the off-system road money to build bridges, and to have to take a load like this with a lot of other bridges being obsolete, it would be hard to know where to start."

Sander said if the roads were shifted to counties, county governments would have to know how much money the state was going to pay for upkeep and then decide how much to raise local road taxes.

"I don't see any way where we wouldn't have to triple it," said Sander, in reference to the county's 23-cent tax levy for roads and bridges. He believes many major roads would be returned to gravel by counties.

Huckstep lamented, "We're probably better off than 90 percent of the other counties in the state financially, and this would do us in.

"I think this is just an attempt by the state to force the counties to get people to vote for higher taxes," added Sander. "I am interested in doing what is best for people in Cape County and all over our area. This doesn't do us any good at all."