Latest news with #TransportationCommittee
Ottawa Citizen
24-07-2025
- Politics
- Ottawa Citizen
Adam: Tim Tierney should know better than to mess with road pylons
Ottawa councillor Tim Tierney turned into a vigilante last week when he took the extraordinary step of tossing construction cones off city roads because they blocked traffic. Comrade-in-arms Coun. Matt Luloff was by his side in this escapade. Article content The two east-end Ottawa councillors took matters (law?) into their own hands out of frustration at unannounced road and ramp closures on Highway 174 that they say caused traffic chaos. Roads and ramps east of St. Laurent Boulevard on the 174 have been routinely closed during Stage 2 LRT east extension apparently without proper notice, and this has riled residents. The councillors claim the cones were left blocking roads even when construction was already completed. 'I know that brings a lot of discussion about (safety),' Teirney said of his action. 'If I can open up a lane of traffic seven or eight hours in advance of the next crew coming to move those cones, I'm just going to do it. It's sad when a councillor physically has to do it.' Article content Article content Article content So, what we've come to is that councillors can take it upon themselves to throw cones off roads if they feel the pylons don't belong there. And Luloff agrees: 'When they make these changes without any notice, there's very few viable routes for us to get into the core or move about the city. What are you supposed to do?' Article content Go rogue and throw cones off the roads, of course. Article content But then, what happens if there is a serious accident on the arbitrarily re-opened roads? Who takes the blame? The city, the contractor or the councillors who took matters into their own hands? Article content When I read the story in the Citizen, I wondered if you or I pulled that kind of stunt on a public road, would we find ourselves on the front page of the Citizen or in the back of a police cruiser being interrogated for, say, vandalism? But we are not Tierney and Luloff, are we? Article content Lane closures are happening all over the city as the construction season kicks into full gear. You'll find major roads closed, and often access to malls blocked. It can be frustrating, and it may well be that the extent of the problem in the east end is much worse. Commuters sitting in traffic for hours unnecessarily is not fun. The councillors are right to be frustrated at OC Transpo and the contractor, and right to demand better. Any contractor of a major road project should have the sensibility to understand the importance of putting up proper signs about road closures so commuters can plan their routes ahead of time. And if an LRT contractor is failing in its duty, OC Transpo should have stepped in much earlier to fix the problem. Article content Article content But if the closures were causing chaos, as the councillors say, it is surprising that the issue was not raised at Transportation Committee, Transit Commission or council itself for remedy. Article content OC Transpo general manager Renee Amilcar has apologized for a Montreal Road ramp closure that happened without proper notice, and the contractor has promised it won't happen again. Article content Tierney and Luloff are right to be frustrated and angry, but that is no license to arbitrarily remove cones because they feel the pylons shouldn't be there. They should know better. It sets a bad precedent. The summer months are a time for road construction, which comes with high frustration—from commuters who have to put up with detours to businesses that are losing customers. But we don't want other people to think they can also take matters into their own hands and start removing inconvenient pylons.
E&E News
12-06-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
House panel OKs water aid, river commissions bills
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee advanced two bills Wednesday that would scrutinize regional conservation commissions and an EPA water assistance program. The 'Mid-Atlantic River Basin Commissions Review Act,' H.R. 3428, from Rep. Robert Bresnahan (R-Pa.), and the 'Water Resources Technical Assistance Review Act,' H.R. 3427, from Rep. David Taylor (R-Ohio), both progressed out of committee with bipartisan support. The commissions review bill would direct the Government Accountability Office to review the activities, funding and transparency of the Delaware River Basin Commission, Susquehanna River Basin Commission and Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. Advertisement All three were set up by Congress decades ago to better manage those rivers and their tributaries, which millions depend on for their drinking water.
Boston Globe
01-06-2025
- Automotive
- Boston Globe
Connecticut reforms towing laws to protect drivers from predatory practices
The bill, which Advertisement 'It's reform that ensures transparency, it ensures fairness and accountability, but does all of this without undercutting the essential work that ethical and professional tow operators do each and every day for us, keeping our roads safe and our properties accessible,' said Transportation Committee Co-chair Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford. 'We've learned over the years, and particularly over the last year due to some investigative reporting, of some particularly egregious circumstances.' A spokesperson for Gov. Ned Lamont said the governor plans to sign the bill into law. Republican Sen. Tony Hwang, ranking member of the Transportation Committee, also spoke in favor of the bill. The bill got about a half hour of debate ahead of passage, and there were no comments in opposition. Hwang, who represents Fairfield, said the bill strikes the right balance between the interests of towers and consumers. Advertisement 'I want to acknowledge that our press had an important part to bring out transparency and some of the bad actions, and I think in this bill we address some of those issues,' Hwang said. 'We took measures to ensure that there is due process, and what has been discovered to have occurred in a criminal action, I believe, should never, ever happen again, to undermine the trust that we have to have in this process.' Connecticut's law allows tow companies to begin the process to sell vehicles after just 15 days. CT Mirror and ProPublica found that it is one of the shortest windows in the nation, and that the law has particularly impacted people with low incomes. Reporters spoke with people who said towing companies required them to pay in cash or wouldn't allow them to get personal belongings out of their vehicles. Many couldn't afford to get their towed vehicles back and lost transportation or jobs because of it. After weeks of negotiations, lawmakers said they came to a compromise with the towing industry. Two bills were merged to include massive reforms to towing procedures from private property and rate increases for highway tows that typically follow car accidents. The bill that passed and would take effect Oct. 1 requires tow companies to accept credit cards and doesn't allow them to tow vehicles immediately just because of an expired parking permit or registration. Vehicles can't be towed from private property without notice unless they're blocking traffic, fire hydrants or parked in an accessible spot. Under the bill, towing companies can still start the sales process for vehicles worth $1,500 or less after 15 days, but they would now have to take more steps to give the owner a chance to claim the vehicle. The Department of Motor Vehicles would be required to check whether the driver filed any complaints about the tow before approving the sale, and the tower would have to send a notice ahead of the sale to the registered owner and lienholders via certified mail, with receipts of delivery. Advertisement The actual sale couldn't go through until 30 days after the tow. The bill also requires that towers take at least two photos before they tow a vehicle — one of the violation that resulted in a tow and another of any damage to the vehicle. Cohen said this would help determine if vehicles had any missing parts before the tow, a seeming nod to the news organizations' story about a DMV employee who the agency's investigators found schemed with a towing company to The bill also establishes a working group to study how to handle proceeds from the sales of towed vehicles. State law requires that towing companies hold profits in escrow for a year in case the vehicle owner claims them, then remit that money to the state. But CT Mirror and ProPublica found Additionally, it calls for the DMV to work with the state's attorney general to develop a consumer bill of rights on towing. Advertisement Tow companies have to be available after hours and on weekends to allow people to get their vehicles or personal property. In a story published this month, CT Mirror and ProPublica reported that Under the new law, drivers will be allowed to retrieve their belongings from their vehicles, even if they haven't paid the towing fees. State regulations currently allow vehicle owners to retrieve only 'personal property which is essential to the health or welfare of any person.' Cohen listed many of the issues outlined in the news outlets' reporting as 'some of the worst abuses of predatory towing practices.' Timothy Vibert, president of Towing and Recovery Professionals of Connecticut, said the industry initially opposed the bill because towers believed it would impede their ability to tow cars and clear traffic. He also said towers weren't involved enough in the original draft. But they worked with lawmakers on the bill over several weeks, and he issued a statement in support this week. 'The people of Connecticut deserve safety, accountability and transparency when their cars are towed, and so do the people who work for Connecticut's towing companies who risk our lives every day to make our roads safe,' Vibert said. 'We all need clear, easy-to-follow rules.' DMV Commissioner Tony Guerrera commended the House and Senate. 'The DMV fully supports this initiative, as it not only enhances the framework for fair and equitable enforcement of towing laws but also provides a clear path forward for our agency to advance these efforts,' Guerrera said in a statement. Cohen said that the bill aims to 'fix a broken process,' and that lawmakers had worked on some aspects of it for years before the bill passed. Advertisement News of the bill's passage brought relief to Melissa Anderson, who was featured in a CT Mirror and ProPublica story after her car was towed and sold from her Hamden apartment because of an expired parking permit. The bill requires a 72-hour grace period before a car can be towed for an expired parking sticker to allow people time to get a new one. 'I'm glad we made a difference,' Anderson said. 'This is going to help a lot of people.' The bill next heads to Lamont's desk. 'The Governor appreciates all the work that went into this legislation, which provides greater protections for the public and their vehicles,' Lamont's spokesperson, Rob Blanchard, said in a text message. 'He plans on signing the legislation once it reaches his desk.'
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Effort to explore passenger train to Bangor derailed after senators leave bill in limbo
Passengers board an Amtrak train at the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania station. (Photo b y Peter Hall/Capital-Star) Despite the impassioned pleas of a handful of lawmakers, the Maine Legislature essentially killed a proposal to further explore extending passenger rail to Bangor. After multiple failed votes, the Senate decided Thursday to indefinitely postpone LD 487, which rail advocates rallied behind this session as a means to bring passenger trains beyond southern Maine. The House of Representatives rejected the proposal Tuesday with a 93-52 vote, but the upper chamber has been at an impasse since senators were divided over the measure. 'This has been indefinitely postponed for 20-plus years,' said Sen. Joe Baldacci (D-Penobscot) on the Senate floor Thursday, referring to the years-long effort to expand passenger rail in the state. This bill sought to have the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority apply for federal funding to identify a potential passenger rail corridor from Portland through Auburn, Lewiston, Waterville, Bangor and ending in Orono. Among the members of the Legislature's Transportation Committee, only one supported it with the other 12 in opposition. During the House debate, Rep. Lydia Crafts (D-Newcastle), who co-chairs the Transportation Committee, admitted there is public interest in expanding mass transit in the state, but said LD 487 doesn't align with the state's rail plan. She argued it wouldn't make financial sense for the state to invest in the line and eventually subsidize the cost of tickets because a propensity study indicated that the particular route would have low ridership. Rather, she said that study recommended the state invest in flexible, accessible bus service such as the two-year pilot project currently underway, which runs between Lewison and Portland. Sen. Brad Farrin (R-Somerset) made similar points on the Senate floor, saying that the state will continue to grow rail at a 'reasonable and responsible' rate if it follows the plan it has in place. However, Rep. Tavis Hasenfus (D-Readfield), the bill's sponsor, said the propensity study is a couple years old and doesn't account for improvements that have since been made to those tracks, which could reduce costs for the state. He also said it didn't account for all potential riders, only those who would have taken a car. But talking about what the state would have to spend is getting ahead of what LD 487 sought to do, Hasenfus argued. As he explained on the House floor, his proposal simply asked the Department of Transportation to apply for the federal funding to investigate whether a passenger rail line to northern Maine is feasible. The proposal specifically asks for the state to apply to the Federal Railroad Administration's corridor identification and development program, which is part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Meeting the deadline for this application cycle is vital because the $1.2 trillion law isn't guaranteed to be renewed, especially since President Donald Trump issued an executive order on his first day in office pausing the disbursement of funds under the law. 'The train is literally about to leave the station and if we don't get on board now, we may never have the opportunity in the future,' Hasenfus said Tuesday. Cost shouldn't be the barrier that some see it as, Baldacci said during Senate floor discussions earlier this week, because the state should have been making passenger rail investments gradually over time. He said the whole state deserves to be connected and has a right to transportation options that already exist in southern Maine. LD 487 doesn't call for a significant financial investment by the state at this point, he said, it just asks lawmakers to utilize the options available to move the process forward. Rep. Karen Montell (D-Gardiner) spoke in support of the bill, arguing that increased train options could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and road maintenance costs. She said that passenger rail could help build a Maine that is more 'future ready.' Rep. Laura Supica (D-Bangor) agreed, saying that central and northern Maine could use passenger rail infrastructure so people can have easier access to jobs and education. She said this is especially true for her community of Bangor, which can feel like 'a bit of a vortex' and disconnected from the rest of the state. Hasenfus also cited a study the Rail Passengers Association published earlier this month that found extending the Amtrak Downeaster service to Bangor could generate more than $60 million in annual economic benefits for all 16 counties and draw more than 260,000 in the first year of service. Having ridden it multiple times himself, Sen. James Libby (R-Cumberland) called the Downeaster a 'tremendous service.' Though he acknowledged it could ultimately cost money, he said he supported the measure as expanded rail service would be an asset for towns like Waterville, where he works as a professor at Thomas College. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' would kill tax incentive that's powered EV sales. What to know
President Donald Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' spans 1,116 pages. Some of those pages include serious cuts to clean energy incentives in a number of sectors such as transportation. In an effort to reduce emissions produced by gas-powered vehicles, the federal government began to offer Americans an electric vehicle tax credit of up to $7,500 during the Obama administration. This made pricey electric vehicles more affordable and accessible to average American drivers. Among Trump's and House Republicans' 'Big, Beautiful Bill' proposals is a measure to kill the tax credit over the next few years. Section 112002 on page 30 of the One Big, Beautiful Bill document is titled "Termination of clean vehicle credit." The credit was originally set to expire December 21, 2032. A provision in the bill "accelerates the expiration to December 31, 2025." Americans would lose the ability to claim the EV tax credit in 2026. The bill also targets EV and hybrid vehicle owners, under a proposal from the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that calls for annual fees, according to MarketWatch. Electric vehicle owners could be charged $250 annually and hybrid owners could be charged $100 annually if the bill is passed. So, why the attack on electric vehicles and what does this mean for car buyers? The President has been taking aim at EVs for years and openly expressed his disdain for former President Biden's mandate demanding automakers electrify a large percentage of their portfolios by 2030. Trump has said that Biden's , electric vehicle mandate would cause 40% of all U.S. auto jobs to disappear, a statement which a non-profit research website, found no evidence to back up. President Trump is not an electric vehicle advocate, despite his proximity to Tesla CEO and Senior Advisor Elon Musk. Instead, the President is a huge supporter of the oil and gas industry. His pledge to "drill, baby, drill" was one of the major talking points during his campaign trail. If the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' eventually gets passed it could be the end of an era for American car buyers who strategically used the tax credit to purchase vehicles. The tax credit made popular electric vehicles like the Tesla Model Y affordable for many drivers. Eliminating it could severely impact EV sales across the industry. If EVs are suddenly less affordable, they could become less desirable to many consumers. The Chevrolet Equinox EV is $26,100 with the tax incentive. Remove the incentive and its starting price is $33,600 before taxes and additional fees. The Ford F-150 Lightning electric pickup truck starts at $55,495 before taxes and fees with the EV tax credit. Without the incentive, its price is $62,995. The existence of the tax credit is a huge selling-point for many popular EVs. The passage of the bill as is would mean electric vehicles are about to get much more expensive. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump's Big, Beautiful Bill plans end to electric vehicle tax credit
