News from Patrick Flynn

An acquaintance who resides well north of my hometown once observed that the difference between Fairbanks and Anchorage is that everybody from Fairbanks has been to Anchorage.  Point well taken – many Southcentral Alaskans never have, or take, the opportunity to experience other parts of our great state.  I consider myself fortunate that various aspects of my work have afforded me the opportunity to spend a fair amount of time in Southeast and Interior Alaska, and a little time in Southwest and Northwest Alaska.  Never been to Barrow, but I digress.

I like Fairbanks and enjoy reading their local paper, the News-Miner.  In doing so recently I came across an article about yet another vehicle breaking through the ice while crossing the Chena River near Pike’s Landing, which seems to happen every winter.  In explaining that the ice road is not the state’s responsibility DOT‘s northern region maintenance & operations director, Howard Thies, offered the following:

“We are the Department of Highways, Aviation and Public Facilities; there’s no rivers in there.  It’s not our problem.”

Recognizing the context of Mr. Thies’ statement I will concede his main point, that the ice road is not DOT’s responsibility, is correct.  Speaking more broadly, that statement struck me as an entirely too accurate description of DOT’s culture.  Note that it completely ignores non-motorized transit, mass transit, snow machines, ATV’s and even ferries, which are part of DOT as the Alaska Marine Highway (I can only imagine what my Southeast friends would say)!  There are plenty of good, thoughtful people working at DOT but, from many outsiders’ perspectives, all their agency seems to care about is roads, some airports and some buildings.  And it’s not unheard of for other transportation-related entities to get crosswise with their cousins at DOT; here’s a little story to illustrate another view.

In October of 2006 I was in Fairbanks for, among other things, a railroad board of directors meeting.  The then-former and now-current chairman, John Binkley, came by to visit and we had the opportunity to chat in the lobby during the board’s executive session.  As you may recall, Mr. Binkley had recently placed second in the Republican gubernatorial primary and was helping the Republican nominee, Sarah Palin, but also had supported the Democratic nominee, Tony Knowles, in the past.  Given that context, I asked if he had thought about what role he might want to play in the next administration; he demurred.  I pressed a bit further and noted his previous service as co-chair of the Senate Finance Committee, would he be interested in the job of Commissioner of the Department of Revenue?  No, he said, his real interest was transportation.  Incredulously I asked, “You’d consider running DOT?”  Mr. Binkley looked at me, thought carefully, and replied, “DOT is a mature bureaucracy.”  It’s no wonder people think so highly of him; that may have been the most diplomatic comment I’ve ever heard.

My point is this – roads, airports and buildings are important but if that’s all we focus on then we fail to serve the needs of thousands of Alaskans who don’t use a car or an airplane every day.  We owe it to ourselves and our neighbors to think about how our transportation planning can serve the needs of those who ride a bus or a bike, those who walk instead of drive and those who use some other conveyance.  This was part of the reason that I pushed, successfully, for a change that allows AMATS to allocate between 10 and 20 percent of its funding to transportation enhancements (like trails), up from the previous hard cap of 10%.

That’s enough for now, but rest assured I’ll continue to ask how proposed transportation projects account for needs beyond highways.  And if you haven’t been, please consider a visit to Fairbanks, Alaska’s “Golden Heart City.”

Regards,

Patrick