An Innovative Approach to Communicating Complex Funding Issues Chad Edwards & Elizabeth Whitaker May...
15
An Innovative Approach to Communicating Complex Funding Issues Chad Edwards & Elizabeth Whitaker May 18, 2009 TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas
-
Upload
barnaby-bailey -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of An Innovative Approach to Communicating Complex Funding Issues Chad Edwards & Elizabeth Whitaker May...
An Innovative Approach to Communicating Complex Funding
IssuesChad Edwards & Elizabeth Whitaker
May 18, 2009TRB National Transportation Planning
Applications Conference Houston, Texas
May 2009 2
Background: Regional Perspective
4th Largest Metropolitan Area in the US
– Larger than 9 states in land area
12th Largest Metropolitan Economy in the World
– Represents 34% of state’s economy
6.5 Million Persons in 2008
– Larger than 34 states in population
– Expected to increase to 9 million persons by 2030
May 2009 3
Background: Transit Service
Serviced by 3 Transit Authorities
– Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART)
– Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA)
– The Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T)
Service Area Gaps
– Includes largest city in US not serviced by public transportation: Arlington, TX Population 360,000+
20082030
(Projected)
NOT Serviced by
Transit44% 56%
May 2009 4
Background: Transit Initiatives
2003-2005 Effort– “Regional Rail Corridor Study” (RRCS)– Survey of transit acceptance with 75% of respondents
supporting an increase in sales tax for transit purposes
2006-2007 Effort– “Regional Transit Initiative” (RTI)– Bills introduced during legislative session that would
increase sales tax for transit purposes– Bills failed to pass
2008-2009 Effort– “Rail North Texas” (RNT)– Interested parties across the region focused efforts,
identified new corridors, revenue sources, and potential implementation strategies
– The Texas Local Option Transportation Act (TLOTA) was introduced during the legislative session
May 2009 5
Capital O&M Total
Total Cost (2008$)
$4,700 $875 $5,575
Total Cost (Over Time)
$8,163 $1,430 $9,593
Annualized Cost
$389 $68 $457
May 2009 6
How Do We Pay for It?
Previous efforts only focused on sales tax at 0.5% and 1.0%
During 2008-2009 effort, a variety of sources and rates were considered by local elected officials
– Sales Tax
– Gas Sales Tax
– Vehicle Registration Fee
– Local Option Gas Tax
– VMT Tax
– New Resident Impact Fee
– Motor Vehicle Sales Tax
– Federal Funds
– Property Tax
– Drivers License Fee
– 4a/4b Retirement
– TIF Districts
– Toll Concession Payments
– Gas Well Revenues
– Parking Fees
– Public Private Partnership
ALL SOURCES WERE CONSIDERED!ALL SOURCES WERE CONSIDERED!
May 2009 7
Evolution of Revenue Tool
The NEED
– Policy officials needed order of magnitude for various revenue sources
– A better way to test scenarios and produce results was needed
– Evaluate numerous requests
– Provide ability to replicate tests quickly
The OUTCOME
– A user friendly tool that could quickly evaluate numerous funding options
– A revenue tool that married cost and revenue aspects and also provided an interactive platform to test scenarios
First effort provided elected officials with staff developed “test” scenarios of funding
options
May 2009 8
Evolution of Revenue Tool: The Basics
Developed in Microsoft Excel 2003
Utilized data that is widely available
Utilized basic calculations using fixed base data
Separate files were used to generate cost and revenue estimates
Planning Tool that functions like a financial model
UTILIZED SOFTWARE EVERYONE HAS& DATA ANYONE CAN GET
UTILIZED SOFTWARE EVERYONE HAS& DATA ANYONE CAN GET
Examples of Data Types Example of Sources
Population Census, Statewide Data Center, MPO, COG, etc.
Motor Fuel Consumption FHWA State Highway Statistics
Registered Vehicles State DOT, FHWA
Sales Tax Revenues State Comptroller
Property Tax Revenues/Values State Comptroller; Local Appraisal District
Inflation Bureau of Labor Statistics
May 2009 9
Evolution of Revenue Tool
AddTriggerfor Saleof Bonds
AddInterest
Calculation
ChartedRevenue
andStaging
Add DebtService
Calculation
ExploreStaging
Scenarios
ExpandTimelinefrom 20to 40 yrs
AddCost
Calculation
ManuallyCalculateRevenueby County
DevelopedBasicTool Combine
all CountyFiles into
One
DeterminedIncremental
Rates
Option forO&M vs.CapitalCosts
CreateTables and
GraphsAdd
ClarifyingComments
AddCollection
Geography
Functions Added to Revenue Tool
Functions that will Enhance Revenue Tool
May 2009 10
Revenue Tool Process
User Defined:
1. Collection Geography
2. Revenue Sources
3. Revenue Rates
Assumptions & Calculations
Results
Potential Revenue for Rail North Texas
Potential Revenue for the Transportation Infrastructure Fund
Total Potential Revenue
Results Do Not Represent Actual Revenue
Tool Used to Show an Order of Magnitude
Results Do Not Account for Diversions, Commitments, or Administrative Costs
Worksheet Administrators Can Easily Test Alternative Cost &
Baseline Assumption Scenarios – This Ability is Not Given to End
Users
9 Revenue Sources
Dollars & Percentages
by Regionby County by Corridor
May 2009 12
Annual Revenue Target: $457
Rail North Texas Revenue: $458
Transportation Infrastructure Fund: $477
Total: $935
Sales Tax
Gas Sales Tax
Motor Vehicle
Sales Tax
Vehicle Reg. Fee
Local Option Gas Tax
VMT Tax
New Resident Impact
Fee
Transportation Property
Tax
Local Subsidy Option
Rate1/2
cent$20 $100
% to Capital
82% 100% 100%
% to O&M
18% 0% 0%
Demonstration Results
May 2009 13
Other Potential Uses for Tool
– Gauge revenue streams at planning level
– Determine voter sensitivity for additional funding sources
– Basic Metropolitan Transportation Plan financial planning/forecasting
– Teaching tool
May 2009 14
Lessons Learned
1. Communication is good
2. Don’t underestimate the resourcefulness of your staff
3. A little goes a long way
4. Innovation leads to success
5. Put it all out there
May 2009 15
Questions?
Chad EdwardsProgram Manager
Elizabeth WhitakerTransportation Planner III
www.nctcog.org/RNT
