Financing infrastructure is always a challenge – and nowhere more than in Portland where we are in front-row seats to a slugfest led by Mayor Charlie Hales and City Councilman Steve Novick.

The challenges that are being dealt with by the interested parties demonstrate that this issue is not a slam dunk. The inability to quickly pass an additional source of revenue for repair of infrastructure that everybody uses tells us that Portlanders don’t see this as an issue worthy of significant public support.

This additional funding request is not a particularly forward-thinking concept. It is needed to take care of matters of immediate concern, such as sidewalks on busy streets to be sure that our children can get safely to school. Walking is, after all, a legitimate form of transportation.

The contradiction between providing for fundamental maintenance of an existing infrastructure system and the spending of additional dollars for new systems is glaring. The Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project is a multibillion-dollar investment in forward-thinking transportation planning. Once built, however, will it fall victim to a similar attitude on maintenance and capital reinvestment as the street system has? Will it also not be upgraded in the future when new planning strategies suggest that the existing system does not meet the contemporary requirements of its future day?

After all, that is exactly what the street fee issue is all about. It is about upgrading a system put in place perhaps a half a century ago to meet the lifestyle and economic requirements of 2015.

The history of the construction of major projects has always been that projects are permanent. It may be, however, that this premise is itself obsolete. Systems and projects may not decay or wear out, but become functionally obsolete. They simply don’t suit people in the way that they choose to live today. Furthermore, the one-size-fits-all approach is not capable of meeting the diverse needs of today’s Oregonians.

The mindset deriving from the difficult economic conditions of the past several years has appropriately conditioned Portlanders to examine expenditures more carefully and to demand accountability from those who are in charge. Recent economic trends, however, indicate that the national economy is on a significant recovery trajectory. The challenges of the last few years must not be forgotten, but put in context.

The very nature of our technological advances has disrupted the funding source that has traditionally been a reliable foundation for infrastructure maintenance. As technology reduces gasoline consumption, a significant revenue source will no longer be able to provide the support it has. While tolls are not acceptable as a revenue source to this local population, the current conversation about fees is no different. The questions are the same: how much must be paid, what will be spent, how much will be spent and who will look over the expenditures.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: The difficulty of paying for infrastructure appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

For the past several months and years there has been a debate about coal export from the state of Oregon. In the proposed model, coal would be shipped via rail from Wyoming to Oregon, and then down the Columbia River for export to China.

There has been a lot of debate on this issue, both pro and con. It has often been framed as jobs vs. environment. It seems that it was an either/or conversation, with little room for compromise.

However, world events often conspire to take hold and change the nature of a debate in the blink of an eye. China is apparently no longer interested in coal from the United States. According to recent news reports, the company that was developing this project has divested itself of its coal interests.

The Chinese coal producers have not been resting on their laurels. While Oregonians (and Washingtonians) have been debating whether to approve these facilities, it seems that Chinese infrastructure has caught up with its own needs. An increased ability to move coal around China coupled with a potential drop in domestic consumption has shown the Chinese that there is no need for imported coal.

At first blush it would seem that Oregon environmentalists should be cheering for an apparent success. However, a closer look indicates that the concern that has always been raised – i.e., that the Chinese would obtain coal, just from a different source if Oregon chose not to provide it – has indeed come to pass. The Chinese apparently will be mining their own coal to whatever standards they internally impose upon themselves. Thus Oregon and other states have lost the opportunity to safely and economically develop a resource.

However, from the perspective of a coal consumer, it makes sense to secure one’s own sources when overseas sources are unreliable. The debate within Oregon about whether to permit coal export was likely perceived overseas as a symptom of an unreliable source.

Just as the fracking business has provided this country with a reliable energy source not subject to the vagaries of foreign governments, so has coal provided China with a similar one. In one sense, this decision relieves Oregonians of a divisive debate. On the other hand, Oregon has seen an economic opportunity – one that could have been developed in an environmentally sensitive manner – disappear. Not only do we fail to benefit economically, but we also fail to develop a contemporary, environmentally sensitive method of natural resource extraction.

While many Oregonians make their living in a clean environment behind a computer screen, many others rely on heavy industry to achieve a reasonable standard of living. The debates about economic prosperity must be fair and equitable. They must accommodate both of these groups.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: Balancing industrial and environmental concerns appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Recently there have been several eye-catching headlines related to the movement of raw materials and finished goods. One says that ships are waiting 10 to 15 days at Southern California ports to unload due to a lack of trucks and the inability to move containers out of port areas. Another says that it is taking about 10 days to get a freight car to ship grain from this year’s harvest to ports for export.

It appears that the nation’s infrastructure is creaking under this business expansion. This is despite the fact that at least one of the major Class I railroads is owned by a pretty savvy business leader.

The growth of infrastructure in this country has not kept pace with its economic expansion. And not only the physical infrastructure, but the human capital as well. The average truck driver is 55. The just-in-time inventory business model that many major corporations have adopted requires a fluid and efficient mechanism to move raw materials to manufacturing plants. Then the imported finished products must be moved to distribution centers for eventual sale to customers.

While everyone appears to bemoan the insufficient infrastructure, there has also been a distinct lack of enthusiasm to raise funds for infrastructure. This policy discussion has been ongoing at the national level for some time. It may be that the public financing of infrastructure has reached a new methodology: that of a biennial infusion of funding. This of course presupposes that the federal government, or for that matter government in general, is responsible for infrastructure development.

There may be other solutions, however. One suggests that business concludes that infrastructure financing through government is too bureaucratic and the results not sufficient to support the manufacturing models currently in place. Will industry step up and privately finance infrastructure that allows the current business model to continue?

Another suggests a readjustment of the current business model. This model is based on the unfettered global movement of raw materials to any place in the world for the production of final goods that are then subsequently moved any place in the world for eventual sale to customers. This back-and-forth model may no longer be viable in the realities of today’s infrastructure. Those industries able to remove one of the two transportation lanes may find themselves more competitive. Manufacturing enterprises may need to be located closer to their raw materials, or closer to their customers.

Although the nation’s population is continuing to grow, only a fixed amount of space is available for transportation infrastructure. Efficiencies in traffic management may resolve some bottlenecks, but the unbridled offshoring of this country’s manufacturing has perhaps reached its zenith.

There is evidence of manufacturing returning. The panacea of low-priced offshore production is in some cases no longer as profitable as when it was first conceived. All of this suggests that the next generation may see a need for skill sets in engineering, manufacturing and skilled labor.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: Infrastructure not keeping pace with economy appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Manufacturing is on an upturn in Oregon. Vigor Industrial and Oregon Iron Works, an Oregon business icon, have merged. A huge, world-class drydock is now in Portland. Companies like Erickson Air Crane are building heavy lift helicopters in Oregon. In Redmond a company has set up an operation to build aerial tankers to help deal with the forest fire problem. Precision Castparts is on a roll and Greenbrier has a great backlog. There are many other great stories as well.

These companies are building real, tangible items – things you can touch and see. But they are experiencing a labor problem: insufficient skilled Oregonians who can do the work. So, in some cases they end up training employees in the basic skills required of metal workers and other trades. That is a drag not only on their bottom line, but also their production.

It seems that our public schools are not taking this game-changing shift in the Oregon economy to heart. Vocational programs are still getting short shrift.

Recently, a Portland Public Schools high school set up a vocational program for the culinary arts. Three hundred students signed up, but they needed to raise their own money to make it work.

The local public education industry seems to be bent on preparing kids only for further institutional education at costs that must be borne by the individual. But as we are now finding out, these costs are not sustainable. Students are voting with their feet, and young Oregonians are not obtaining completion certificates.

When the construction industry determined that more skill building was needed, professionals first went to public education, but were turned down. As a result they set up their own academy. Even a dismal graduation rate does not seem to be enough to redirect the inertia on North Dixon Street.

All Oregonians lose. Those who do graduate from high school cannot get jobs without additional training because they have no real job skills. Many don’t see that through and end up at minimum wage jobs or worse and become part of the social welfare bureaucracy.

But aside from refocusing public schools on educating our young people with job skills, Oregon needs to rediscover manufacturing jobs. It is clear that the economy is there to support this attitude. Oregon needs to convince its young people that these jobs are good jobs and a great way to launch a career. Life is not all about peering into a computer screen.

Oregon also must hustle and invest in its infrastructure to meet this manufacturing uptick. In this year’s legislative session HB 4111 set up a commission to look at new strategies for developing infrastructure. The first meeting has yet to take place.

Business is beginning to feel the constraints of this second-class infrastructure, be it delays receiving raw materials, delays delivering to customers or delayed employee arrivals to workplaces.

We no longer build the world’s greatest projects; they are in China or elsewhere. This, however, might just be the moment that a critical mass comes to Oregon’s infrastructure table.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: Skill development lagging in Oregon appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The city of Portland in the next election season is facing some interesting choices in regard to infrastructure. On the one hand, the bond measure for park improvements is expected to be on the ballot. On the other hand, additional funding for roads and streets likely won’t be resolved.

Portlanders will voice their opinions as to what is needed and what would be nice to have. Do parks fall into the nice-to-have category? Is infrastructure really needed?

Many people will argue that parks are an essential part our daily lives and enhance our day-to-day existence. That argument will resonate with those in the urban areas where mobility is primarily public transit, walking or bicycles.

While a large number of fortunate individuals can manage their day-to-day lives with these modes, a large number of Portland residents still are unable to find work close to where they live and have no choice but to commute longer distances. These longer-distance commutes require adequate infrastructure.

As the economy has improved, traffic has gotten consistently worse. The Oregon Department of Transportation reports that traffic counts have increased, and anecdotal evidence indicates that commutes into and out of town are taking longer. For those who live on the north side of town, they know that commuting to North Portland in the late afternoon has become a difficult proposition.

But infrastructure is more than just a people mover. Good roadway infrastructure provides freight mobility to allow products to be moved around the area. Many jobs are still dependent on the physical movement of goods and services around the metropolitan area. In fact, the latest economic indicators are showing the manufacturing sector making gains in the Portland area. Employment in the manufacturing sector provides good wages and forms a solid base for an improved economy.

We also know that abundant recreational opportunities, including community centers, make for a more satisfied population as well as provide alternative activities for those who may not otherwise have the opportunities to engage in them.

In the short run the question will be how to finance both of these necessary services. For all to appreciate the value of the services, none should be exempt from the additional costs involved.

Fundraising should be based on participation and not on property ownership. The arts tax, which has been challenged in many areas, may be the germ of a more equitable seed in which everybody provides financial support for something that benefits everyone. The payment should connect the fee payer to the benefit. Severe cases should be accommodated in the contribution calculations; however, exceptions should be limited to those truly in need.

By making a direct connection between the benefit and the fee payer, the administrative entities executing these programs should feel a greater need to be more efficient in the way in which they carry out their parts of these programs. At the end of the day, however, adequate financial strategies must be developed to carry both of these efforts forward on a sustainable basis.

It is difficult to make long-range capital project plans without a consistent financial base. The dilemma with the degradation of both parks and infrastructure is that it happens slowly, and the user becomes gradually used to the deteriorated condition. It is only when there is a catastrophic event that attention is suddenly focused on the need.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: As parks and roads suffer, tough choices loom appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

College debt accumulated by recent graduates is continuing to affect those graduates and the economy. Graduates are living in the basements of their parents’ homes with debt loads in excess of $50,000. These are not medical students, but rather graduates of liberal arts and other colleges. Beginning a professional life with a significant debt load is a personal disadvantage for these individuals, a professional problem for industries and a consumer problem for businesses.

There is an old saying that says history is the most important subject because if you don’t know where you’ve been, then you don’t know where you’re going. Most senior professionals acquired their college educations for amounts consistent with the earning power of minimum wage jobs, summer jobs and modest lifestyles.

College buildings were relatively modest affairs, and athletic departments were not separate, stand-alone, billion-dollar businesses but part of academic programs. The menu didn’t include $50,000 bonuses for coaches for showing up at games. Buildings were modest affairs and the minimal necessary housing was provided to students.

Today’s college buildings are sumptuous affairs that look like Class A office buildings rather than educational institutions. Athletic departments have become de facto minor league sports teams that feed their top athletes to the majors for multimillion-dollar contracts. Education executives are making comfortable mid six-digit incomes.

The modern education complex has morphed into a business. Its income is based on loans that students take out to pay for these lavish buildings and lifestyles. Tuition has skyrocketed beyond the ability of students to pay as they go, and therefore education is limited to those who are willing to take out loans or those whose family or economic situation provides the financing. This modern education complex focuses on teenagers whose ability to understand the implications of this debt load has not yet fully developed.

While the institutions bear a substantial amount of the responsibility for this, the students themselves cannot be entirely excused. The affluence of the last decade has to a significant extent been made possible by the accumulation of debt in exchange for material goods. This generation of college students has grown up in that environment – one in which the accumulation of debt is not something avoided, but used as leverage for an affluent lifestyle.

It is never possible to turn the clock back to the good old days, and oftentimes the good old days really weren’t that good. It’s essential to understand that a college education is useful, but it’s not the only option to a better life. While it is clear that a college education is an asset, there are many success stories of people without college degrees (see Bill Gates).

Students need to assess whether the accumulation of significant debt is a fair trade-off for a college education. The education complex must reassess its business model. When the debt capacity of the student (their market) is exhausted, there will be a painful retrenchment.

There is no question that a highly skilled workforce is essential to a vibrant economy. Leadership in either government or industry is often evidenced by academic prowess. The institutions of higher learning must refocus themselves on meeting the educational needs of our young adults and our economy. Our young adults must be counseled to be more discriminating in their choice and purchase of educational products, much as they are discriminating in their purchase of other consumer goods.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: College debt is the elephant in the room appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Three years ago the Oregon section of the American Society of Civil Engineers created an independent assessment of the state’s infrastructure. In that report, currently still available online, urban streets were identified as a significant area needing attention. The report analyzed information provided by a wide variety of sources and concluded that urban streets had been neglected – primarily because of a lack of funding to cover the cost of much needed maintenance.

The city of Portland is now contemplating a fee to provide the financing necessary to maintain this important piece of infrastructure. While one might argue about the assessment of property owners as opposed to the assessment of households, the need for the fee is unquestioned.

Recent newcomers to Portland might suggest that the fee is unnecessary. However, the infrastructure that Portland has elected to pursue over the last decade has strapped existing revenue sources to their limits.

In their original incarnation, meter fees and other surface transportation violation fees were intended to pay for repavement and maintenance of city streets. However, the elected city officials, with the knowledge and approval of Portlanders, spent these dollars to provide for an expanded variety of infrastructure investment. The Portland Streetcar is an example. Therefore, the revenue sources that at one time provided for maintenance of Portland’s streets in a first-class condition are no longer available.

As this measure makes its way through the City Council, many vocal opponents have suggested that it is moving too fast. I’ll argue it’s moving too slow.

Everyone benefits from adequate streets; business owners especially, but property owners and tenants too. Even those who don’t own or use cars benefit. The surface street network is the artery through which cable, water, sewer and electric services are often provided. Garbage service, emergency medical service, police service, deliveries, pickups, mail and so forth all are provided by a healthy service street network.

While a healthy debate about costs is useful and will wring potential waste out of this program, it should not be a reason to delay. Our streets have been decaying for decades, and even at the rate at which the revenues will be generated by this fee, years will pass before they are brought up to a standard that mirrors the high level of real estate development that is going on in our town.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: It’s time to invest in surface street maintenance appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The American Society of Civil Engineers’ Oregon section recently celebrated its 100th anniversary. The weekend was marked by a reception at OMSI as well as an engineering competition sponsored by Portland State University. Civil engineering students from 14 schools around the Pacific Northwest, including British Columbia, competed in a variety of engineering-related activities. Those included building bridges, constructing a concrete canoe, surveying and presenting papers. The event concluded with a dinner for the 370 students who participated.

The profession is in good hands for the future. The student engineers who participated in this event will be the leaders of tomorrow. These engineers exhibited creativity and intelligence as well as a knowledge of the engineering profession. Some of the students explained their budding professional activities in ways that are far beyond their years. Some of the local schools’ students acquitted themselves quite well. Some went up to the stage to get awards more than once.

This dinner was a peek into the future of the engineering profession. Criticism of the younger generation often is a topic of conversation among the profession’s more senior members. Yet none of that criticism would be well placed at this event. The challenges that are facing these future professionals will be challenges of environment, societal support of projects as well as financing. But expertise will not be lacking.

The civil engineers of the future will be dealing with issues that the current crop of engineers can only begin to understand. These are issues such as limited resources and projects with a much higher degree of sensitivity to the environment.

In addition, the general population is much more involved in making decisions on projects nowadays than in the past. The previous generations of engineers had the luxury of carrying reputations as experts who understood social needs and constructed the projects. This generation will have to operate in a consensual environment that requires more work on the social and public involvement side than their forefathers ever faced.

In Oregon in particular, engineers will have to gauge the appetite of residents for signature projects. If the recent past is any indication, then this indeed will be a tall challenge for these professionals to tackle. Arguments will have to be made to engage the population before major infrastructure replacement projects are built. Oregonians have not shown that they have the appetite for the level of infrastructure investment that their forefathers and grandfathers had.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: Engineering profession will be in good hands appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Meetings and presentations continue to address the challenge of seismic resilience in Oregon. The apostles of this effort convey the message that the sky is falling. The message is shrill – the Cascadia earthquake will render fuel, power, water, business and transportation resources inoperable, and buildings will collapse.

While the sky might be falling, and the predictions of the experts are accurate, the message is clearly not getting through to the public. Recent examples such as the Vernonia School rebuild and the Portland Public Schools bond measure indicate that the public is not willing to spend the additional dollars necessary to make these facilities earthquake-proof. And these facilities house our most precious resource: our children. While schools will be upgraded to code requirements, they will not be functional or available for reuse after the predicted earthquake.

Those proselytizing the resilience message should take a lesson from the sustainability conversation, which is now a mature one. Many of the advantages of sustainability have been monetized and are a routine part of projects. Schools, hospitals, government buildings and private developments tout their Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design accreditation. Indeed, LEED accreditation allows project owners to charge premiums for their facilities.

The sustainability conversation has matured and become mainstream. It is now time for the resilience conversation to rise to the same level.

The current resilience message is so daunting that the public has difficulty grasping it. It has not been monetized the same way that the sustainability conversation has been. The challenge for monetizing resilience is that the costs incorporated have a much longer return on investment. Incorporating sustainability has an immediate return; it can increase revenue streams for projects. The costs of incorporating resilience will be seen only after a major event demonstrates its value.

The resilience message must also rely on success stories from other countries. Chile is an excellent example of a country that anticipated a seismic event. After the last significant event, the country mobilized its resources and was able to carry on after a relatively short period of time. It makes resilience part of the day-to-day conversation.

Domestic success stories such as Home Depot’s already exist, and should be made part of the resilience conversation. Many high-tech companies realize that their ability to continue to exist as a business depend not only on their incorporation of resilience protections in their facilities, but also utilities. For example, without water or roads many high-tech businesses’ facilities would not be operable or accessible to employees.

The challenge for structural engineers and others is to devise resilience measures that have lower initial costs and are easier to incorporate. New materials and techniques must be developed.

The concept of incorporating resilience should be broken down into small pieces that individuals can control themselves. For example, demonstrating how residences can be improved puts average citizens in control of their own destiny.

While experts in the field fully grasp the importance of this issue, it is the communication outward that will be critical to ensuring that Oregon as a whole faces this challenge.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure. Contact him at cfs@carpengrs@.com.

The post OP-ED: Conversation about seismic resilience needs to mature appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

There is an old saying that doctors save lives one at a time and civil engineers save them a thousand at a time. The newspapers today are full of stories of civil engineering. They include massive cranes being towed to New York to build a new bridge, a tunnel boring machine stuck in Seattle, a water crisis in Iran, and droughts in Southern California.

While a lot of high-tech consumer gadgets garner a lot of attention, the fundamental things of life are more essential. If you can’t get to where you’re going, the products will never get to you. While we can live without the gadgets, we can’t live without water for more than a couple of days. And the future these days is about those fundamental kinds of things.

Civil engineering is the oldest engineering profession – all you have to do is look at the Roman aqueducts in Europe. The evolution of this practice has changed enormously in the last century.

Civil engineers 100 years ago were charged with opening up the country, and in our case a forest-covered state, to the influx of migration from Europe. The engineers of that day, such as Conde McCullough, took on that task and built the first phase of our infrastructure. But those engineers had a different view of the world than we have today. Their view was to quickly construct the projects to allow for economic development of the state.

Today’s challenges are different. We can get almost everywhere we need to, so the critical fundamentals have been pretty much taken care of. The challenge for today’s engineers is how to continue to provide for the needs of today’s society while taking into account the much more significant impact that we have on our environment.

The dramatic changes in the civil engineering profession are evident in both the projects that are built as well as the tools that are used to engineer these projects. From high-precision mechanical devices such as the theodolites and chains, the profession has evolved into a sophisticated computer-based practice that requires a high level of knowledge. The Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers is celebrating its 100th anniversary and is holding a reception on April 25 to note this milestone.

But it’s not just Oregon engineers who are critical to our future. Civil engineers in the Middle East, Asia and Africa will make a bigger difference in this planet’s future. For it is there that a population is exploding and evolving from a subsistence to a 21st century lifestyle in just a generation. These people lack a grasp of their impact on the environment. They are concerned with their own material advancement, just as we were 100 years ago.

We in Oregon had our challenges in the last century. People in developing regions have their challenges in this century – and our world inextricably ties us to what they choose to do.

Christian Steinbrecher is president of Columbia River Port Engineers Inc. and the immediate past president of the Oregon Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers. He is the editor of ASCE Oregon’s Report Card on Oregon’s Infrastructure.

The post OP-ED: Civil engineers continue to play big roles appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.