The Stimulus: What If We’re Not “Shovel Ready”?
Tuesday, April 14th, 2009We’ve been writing quite a bit about the $110-plus billion for clean energy in the stimulus bill. It’s great stuff, but it’s not perfect – which we’ve been writing about, too. One of the missing parts is funding for planning grants. Many communities that have the greatest infrastructure deficits and great need for stimulus dollars may be left out of the bonanza because they don’t have “shovel ready” plans. To ensure regional equity and no community is left behind in the economic recovery, these communities need special attention and support to get their projects off the ground within the two-year time frame.
Ruben Lizardo, the Associate Director of Policy Link, works with low income San Joaquin Valley unincorporated communities in California. Their focus is for water related infrastructure, which the stimulus package funds. He says, “[These] communities have asked for our help in pushing for the federal stimulus package to accommodate the fact that these communities would need money for planning in 2009, in order to get their projects “shovel ready” by 2010.” Lizardo wants the federal government to acknowledge these special needs. He says, “Encourage the states to provide the support needed for fast-track planning and approvals, and provide the states the flexibility to ensure the projects can start in 2010.”
It is possible that local groups could get creative with the stimulus package. For example, the Green Jobs Act includes $12.5 million for the State Labor Market Research, Information and Labor Exchange Research Program. This program offers competitive grants through the Department of Labor, which will funnel money to local workforce development agencies to do labor market research and coordinate information and planning. The stimulus package includes lots of money for administration and oversight. It is possible that money can be eked out from these pots for planning “shovel ready” projects. It is also possible that given the competitive nature of these grants that the money will go to other projects that don’t need planning and can start tomorrow. The former is kind of like trying to dress up a macintosh as a granny smith and compete on crispness. The mac’s at a disadvantage. Maybe it’ll compete against a mush granny, but most likely the bushel has plenty of crisp grannies to offer up.
It would be much better not to mix fruits and provide funding that will let communities that need planning grants to vie for planning grants and communities that have “shovel ready” projects compete for separate money. It’s too late for the recovery act, but there’s still time in the energy bill.
– Heidi Pickman