Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative Status Report December 2006

This report is submitted as required per Code of Iowa section 327J.3(5), "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service." The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI) is a nine-state effort to develop an implementation plan for a 3,000-mile, high-speed rail system hubbed in Chicago. Studies done since 1996 have concluded that such a regional system, including a line from Chicago to Omaha through Davenport, Iowa City and Des Moines, is viable. Most of the system would be upgraded to allow 110 mile-per-hour service. Some low volume lines, including the Iowa portions, would be upgraded for 79 mile-per-hour service. The nine-state coalition released an updated 2004 executive report for the system. As reported, the updated cost estimate for the Chicago to Omaha corridor, which includes a branch to Quincy, Ill., is $638 million for infrastructure and $167 million for rolling stock. These costs are higher than first estimated in 1998 and are given in 2002 dollars, (not adjusted for the cost of inflation). Operating subsidies would be required during an extended start-up phase. The allocation of these subsidy costs among the various states has not been determined, and is still a subject for analysis and negotiation. Little progress on implementation is expected unless a federal funding package is passed for passenger rail initiatives. Continued congressional discussion on policy directions relative to Amtrak clouds the issue of passenger rail funding. However, Congress is expected to address passenger rail issues and funding in 2007. Participation of the Iowa Department of Transportation in the MWRRI is authorized under Iowa Code section 327J.3.

Iowa Department of Transportation report on funds received from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund, the State Recreational Trails Fund, the Health Restricted Capitals and the Rail Revolving Loan and Grant Program in fiscal year 2007

House file 2782 (2007 Infrastructure Appropriations Act) requires state agencies that receive appropriations from specific funds to report that information. The Iowa Department of Transportation received funds from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund, the State Recreational Trails Fund, the Health Restricted Capitals, and the Rail Revolving Loan and Grant Program in FY 2007. These are the status reports for those funds and the status of the FY2006 funds received from the State Recreational Trails Fund, the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and the Tobacco Settlement Trust Fund.

Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative and Passenger Rail Service in Iowa Status Report

This report is submitted as required per Iowa Code section 327J.3(5), "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service."

Status Report Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative and Passenger Rail Service in Iowa, February 1, 2009

This report is submitted as required per Code of Iowa section 327J.3(5), "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service."

Currently Registered Flex Fuel Vehicles as of Jan. 27, 2009

House File 2754 requires by Feb. 1 of each year the Iowa Department of Transportation shall deliver a report to the governor and legislative services agency regarding flexible fuel vehicles registered in Iowa. This report reflects the flexible fuel vehicles registered in Iowa as of Jan. 27, 2009.

Blue Light, What Should I do? Red Light, 2002

The Iowa State Patrol appreciates your assistance and compliance with these guidelines and laws to ensure the safety of the public and Iowa law enforcement.

Status Report Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative and Passenger Rail Service in Iowa February 1, 2010

This report fulfills the requirements of the following Code of Iowa sections: Section 327J.3(1): “The director may expend moneys from the fund to pay the costs associated with the initiation, operation, and maintenance of rail passenger service. The director shall report by February 1 of each year to the legislative services agency concerning the status of the fund including anticipated expenditures for the following fiscal year.” Section 327J.3(5): "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service."

2009 Registered Flex Fuel Vehicles

House File 2754 requires by February 1 of each year the Iowa Department of Transportation shall deliver a report to the governor and legislative services agency regarding flexible fuel vehicles registered in Iowa.

Study Regarding Implementation of a Uniform Statewide System to Allow for Electronic Transactions for the Registration and Titling of Motor Vehicles

LEGISLATIVE STUDY – The 83rd General Assembly of the Iowa Legislature, in Senate File 2273, directed the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) to conduct a study of how to implement a uniform statewide system to allow for electronic transactions for the registration and titling of motor vehicles. PARTICIPANTS IN STUDY – As directed by Senate File 2273, the DOT formed a working group to conduct the study that included representatives from the Consumer Protection Division of the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Revenue, the Iowa State County Treasurer’s Association, the Iowa Automobile Dealers Association, and the Iowa Independent Automobile Dealers Association. CONDUCT OF THE STUDY – The working group met eight times between June 17, 2010, and October 1, 2010. The group discussed the costs and benefits of electronic titling from the perspectives of new and used motor vehicle dealers, county treasurers, the DOT, lending institutions, consumers and consumer protection, and law enforcement. Security concerns, legislative implications, and implementation timelines were also considered. In the course of the meetings the group: 1. Reviewed the specific goals of S.F. 2273, and viewed a demonstration of Iowa’s current vehicle registration and titling system so participants that were not users of the system could gain an understanding of its current functionality and capabilities. 2. Reviewed the results of a survey of county treasurers conducted by the DOT to determine the extent to which county treasurers had processing backlogs and the extent to which county treasurers limited the number of dealer registration and titling transactions that they would process in a single day and while the dealer waited. Only eight reported placing a limit on the number of dealer transactions that would be processed while the dealer waited (with the number ranging from one to four), and only 11 reported a backlog in processing registration and titling transactions as of June 11, 2010, with most backlogs being reported in the range of one to three days. 3. Conducted conference calls with representatives of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) and representatives of three states -- Kansas, which has an electronic lien and titling (ELT) program, and Wisconsin and Florida, each of which have both an ELT program and an electronic registration and titling (ERT) program – to assess current and best practices for electronic transactions. In addition, the DOT (through AAMVA) submitted a survey to all U.S. jurisdictions to determine how, if at all, other states implemented electronic transactions for the registration and titling of motor vehicles. Twenty-eight states responded to the survey; of the 28 states that responded, only 13 allowed liens to be added or released electronically, and only five indicated allowing applications for registration and titling to be submitted electronically. DOT staff also heard a presentation from South Dakota on its ERT system at an AAMVA regional meeting. ELT information that emerged suggests a multi-vendor approach, in which vendors that meet state specifications for participation are authorized to interface with the state’s system to serve as a portal between lenders and the state system, will facilitate electronic lien releases and additions by offering lenders more choices and the opportunity to use the same vendor in multiple states. The ERT information that emerged indicates a multi-interface approach that offers an interface with existing dealer management software (DMS) systems and through a separate internet site will facilitate ERT by offering access that meets a variety of business needs and models. In both instances, information that emerged indicates that, in the long-term, adoption rates are positively affected by making participation above a certain minimum threshold mandatory. 4. To assess and compare functions or services that might be offered by or through a vendor, the group heard presentations from vendors that offer products or services that facilitate some aspect of ELT or ERT. 5. To assess the concerns, needs and interest of Iowa motor vehicle dealers, the group surveyed dealers to assess registration and titling difficulties experienced by dealers, the types of DMS systems (if any) used by dealers, and the dealers’ interest and preference in using an electronic interface to submit applications for registration and titling. Overall, 40% of the dealers that responded indicated interest and 57% indicated no interest, but interest was pronounced among new car dealers (75% were interested) and dealers with a high number of monthly transactions (85% of dealers averaging more than 50 sales per month were interested). The majority of dealers responding to the dealer survey ranked delays in processing and problems with daily limits on transaction as ―minor difficulty or ―no difficulty. RECOMMENDATIONS -- At the conclusion of the meetings, the working group discussed possible approaches for implementation of electronic transactions in Iowa and reached a consensus that a phased implementation of electronic titling that addressed first electronic lien and title transactions (ELT) and electronic fund transfers (EFT), and then electronic applications for registration and titling (ERT) is recommended. The recommendation of a phased implementation is based upon recognition that aspects of ELT and EFT are foundational to ERT, and that ELT and EFT solutions are more readily and easily attained than the ERT solution, which will take longer and be somewhat more difficult to develop and will require federal approval of an electronic odometer statement to fully implement. ELT – A multi-vendor approach is proposed for ELT. No direct costs to the state, counties, consumers, or dealers are anticipated under this approach. The vendor charges participating lenders user or transaction fees for the service, and it appears the lenders typically absorb those costs due to the savings offered by ELT. Existing staff can complete the programming necessary to interface the state system with vendors’ systems. The estimated time to implement ELT is six to nine months. Mandatory participation is not recommended initially, but should be considered after ELT has been implemented and a suitable number of vendors have enrolled to provide a fair assessment of participation rates and opportunities. EFT – A previous attempt to implement ELT and EFT was terminated due to concern that it would negatively impact county revenues by reducing interest income earned on state funds collected by the county and held until the monthly transfer to the state. To avoid that problem in this implementation, the EFT solution should remain revenue neutral to the counties, by allowing fees submitted by EFT to be immediately directed to the proper county account. Because ARTS was designed and has the capacity to accommodate EFT, a vendor is not needed to implement EFT. The estimated time to implement EFT is six to nine months. It is expected that EFT development will overlap ELT development. ERT – ERT itself must be developed in phases. It will not be possible to quickly implement a fully functioning, paperless ERT system, because federal law requires that transfer of title be accompanied by a written odometer statement unless approval for an alternate electronic statement is granted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). It is expected that it will take as much as a year or more to obtain NHTSA approval, and that NHTSA approval will require design of a system that requires the seller to electronically confirm the seller’s identity, make the required disclosure to the buyer, and then transfer the disclosure to the buyer, who must also electronically confirm the buyer’s identity and electronically review and accept the disclosure to complete and submit the transaction. Given the time that it will take to develop and gain approval for this solution, initial ERT implementation will focus on completing and submitting applications and issuing registration applied for cards electronically, with the understanding that this process will still require submission of paper documents until an electronic odometer solution is developed. Because continued submission of paper documents undermines the efficiencies sought, ―full‖ ERT – that is, all documents necessary for registration and titling should be capable of approval and/or acceptance by all parties, and should be capable of submission without transmittal or delivery of duplicate paper documents .– should remain the ultimate goal. ERT is not recommended as a means to eliminate review and approval of registration and titling transactions by the county treasurers, or to place registration and titling approval in the hands of the dealers, as county treasurers perform an important role in deterring fraud and promoting accuracy by determining the genuineness and regularity of each application. Authorizing dealers to act as registration agents that approve registration and title applications, issue registration receipts, and maintain and deliver permanent metal license plates is not recommended. Although distribution of permanent plates by dealers is not recommended, it is recommended that dealers participating in ERT generate and print registration applied for cards electronically. Unlike the manually-issued cards currently in use, cards issued in this fashion may be queried by law enforcement and are less susceptible to misuse by customers and dealers. The estimated time to implement the electronic application and registration applied for cards is 12 to 18 months, to begin after ELT and EFT have been implemented. It is recommended that focus during this time be on facilitating transfers through motor vehicle dealers, with initial deployment focused on higher-volume dealers that use DMS systems. In the long term an internet option for access to ERT must also be developed and maintained to allow participation for lower-volume dealers that do not use a DMS system. This option will also lay the ground work for an ERT option for sales between private individuals. Mandatory participation in Iowa is not recommended initially. As with ELT, it is recommended that mandatory participation be considered after at least an initial phase of ERT has been implemented and a suitable number of dealers have enrolled to provide a fair assessment of participation rates and opportunities. The use of vendors to facilitate ERT is not initially proposed because 1) DOT IT support staff is capable of developing a system that will interact with DMS systems and will still have to develop a dealer and public interface regardless of whether a vendor acts as intermediary between the DMS systems, and 2) there is concern that the cost of the vendor-based system, which is funded by transaction-based payments from the dealer to the vendor, will be passed to the consumer in the form of additional documentation or conveyance fees. However, the DOT recommends flexibility on this point, as development and pilot of the system may indicate that a multi-vendor approach similar to that recommended for ELT may increase the adoption rate by larger dealers and may ultimately decrease the user management to be exercised by DOT staff. If vendors are used in the process, additional legislation or administrative rules may be needed to control the fees that may be passed to the consumer. No direct cost to the DOT or county treasurers is expected, as the DOT expects that it may complete necessary programming with existing staff. Use of vendors to facilitate ERT transactions by dealers using DMS systems would result in transaction fees that may ultimately be passed to consumers. LEGISLATION – As a result of the changes implemented in 2004 under Senate File 2070, the only changes to Iowa statutes proposed are to section 321.69 of the Iowa Code, ―Damage disclosure statement,and section 321.71, ―Odometer requirements.‖ In each instance, authority to execute these statements by electronic means would be clarified by authorizing language similar to that used in section 321.20, subsections ―2‖ and ―3,‖ which allows for electronic applications and directs the department to ―adopt rules on the method for providing signatures for applications made by electronic means.‖ In these sections, the authorizing language might read as follows: Notwithstanding contrary provisions of this section, the department may develop and implement a program to allow for any statement required by this section to be made electronically. The department shall adopt rules on the method for providing signatures for statements made by electronic means. Some changes to DOT administrative rules will be useful but only to enable changes to work processes that would be desirable in the long term. Examples of long term work processes that would be enabled by rule changes include allowing for signatures created through electronic means and electronic odometer certifications. The DOT rules, as currently written, do not hinder the ability to proceed with ELT, EFT, and ERT.

Status report-Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative and Passenger Rail Service in Iowa, February 1, 2011

This report fulfills the requirements of the following Code of Iowa sections: Section 327J.3(1): “The director may expend moneys from the fund to pay the costs associated with the initiation, operation, and maintenance of rail passenger service. The director shall report by February 1 of each year to the legislative services agency concerning the status of the fund including anticipated expenditures for the following fiscal year.” Section 327J.3(5): "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service."

Chicago to Iowa City Passenger Rail Service, January 12, 2011

Iowa’s investment in the Chicago to Iowa City passenger rail service will produce more ongoing benefits than costs for Iowa residents and taxpayers over the next 30 years. An Iowa investment of $20.6 million will match a federal investment of $86.8 million for the capital costs of the Iowa segment of the Chicago to Iowa City service. Iowa’s share of the expected gap between revenues and operating and maintenance expense is estimated at $3 million annually. The economic analysis included in this document demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of the Iowa investments in the Chicago to Iowa City service and details the benefits that Iowa can expect from Iowa’s expenditures.

2009 Iowa’s Rail System Background Prepared by the Office of Systems Planning December 2010

Iowa’s Rail Environment Iowa’s rail transportation system provides both freight and passenger service. Rail serves a variety of trips, including those within Iowa and those to other states as well as to foreign markets. While rail competes with other modes, it also cooperates with those modes to provide intermodal services to Iowans. In 2009 Iowa’s rail transportation system could be described as follows: Freight Iowa’s 130,000-mile freight transportation system includes an extensive railroad network, a well-developed highway system, two bordering navigable waterways, and a pipeline network as well as air cargo facilities. While rail accounts for only 3 percent of the freight network, it carries 43 percent of Iowa’s freight tonnage. A great variety of commodities ranging from fresh fish to textiles to optical products are moved by rail. However, most of the Iowa rail shipments consist of bulk commodities, including grain, grain products, coal, ethanol, and fertilizers. The railroad network performs an important role in moving bulk commodities produced and consumed in the state to local processors, livestock feeders, river terminals and ports for foreign export. The railroad’s ability to haul large volumes, long distances at low costs will continue to be a major factor in moving freight and improving the economy of Iowa. Key 2008 Facts • 3,945 miles of track • 18 railroads • 49.5 million tons shipped • 39.7 million tons received • 2 Amtrak routes • 6 Amtrak stations • 66,286 rail passenger rides Key Rail Trends • slightly fewer miles being operated; • railroads serving Iowa has remained the same; • more rail freight traffic; • more tons hauled per car; • higher average rail rates per ton-mile since 2002; • more car and tons hauled per locomotive; and • more ton miles per gallon of fuel consumed. Iowa’s rail system and service has been evolving over time relative to its size, financial conditions, and competition from other modes.

Infrastructure Annual Status Report, January 2012

Per legislative requirement, attached is the Iowa Department of Transportation’s summary of project status for infrastructure projects that have been appropriated revenue from various funds including Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure, Health Restricted Capitals, Bridge Safety, Revenue Bonds Capitals, and Revenue Bonds Capitals II. In addition, we have included status reports for the FY11 passenger rail appropriation from the Underground Storage Tank Fund and the FY2010 Commercial Service Vertical Infrastructure appropriation from the General Fund.

Status Report Midwest Regional Rail Passenger Initiative and Passenger Rail Service in Iowa, February 1, 2012

This report fulfills the requirements of the following Code of Iowa Sections: Section 327J.3(1): “The director may expend moneys from the fund to pay the costs associated with the initiation, operation, and maintenance of rail passenger service. The director shall report by February 1 of each year to the legislative services agency concerning the status of the fund including anticipated expenditures for the following fiscal year.” Section 327J.3(5): "The director shall report annually to the general assembly concerning the development and operation of the midwest regional rail system and the state's passenger rail service."

Infrastructure Annual Status Report, January 2010

Per legislative requirement, attached is the Iowa Department of Transportation’s summary of project status for infrastructure projects that have been appropriated revenue from various funds including Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure, Health Restricted Capitals, Bridge Safety, Revenue Bonds Capitals, and Revenue Bonds Capitals II. In addition, we have included status reports for the FY11 passenger rail appropriation from the Underground Storage Tank Fund and the FY2010 Commercial Service Vertical Infrastructure appropriation from the General Fund.