What & Why? The Current State of California’s Transportation Funding Therese W. McMillan Deputy...
-
Upload
rosamond-randall -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
2
Transcript of What & Why? The Current State of California’s Transportation Funding Therese W. McMillan Deputy...
What & Why? The Current State of California’s Transportation Funding
Therese W. McMillanDeputy Director, PolicyMetropolitan Transportation Commission
Transportation/Land Use/Environment Symposium University of California Los AngelesOctober 19-21, 2003 · Lake Arrowhead, California
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Total Federal Total State
FHWA Funding$2.53
FTA Funding$1.00
State Fuel Taxes
$2.10
Weight Fees$0.70
FY 2003-03 California Federal and State Transportation Funding
(in $ billions)
What is the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)? State’s spending plan for state and federal funding. Comprised of 75% Regional Transportation
Improvement Program (RTIP) and 25% Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP).
Approved biennially and covers a five-year period.
State Funding
2 .25% M in im umIn terc ity R ail
12 .75% M axim umIR R S O u ts ideU rban A reas
15% of S TIP 10% of S TIP
I T I PIn terregional Transportation Im provem en t P rogram
40% N orthern C oun ties 60% S ou thern C oun ties
R T IPR egional Transportation Im provem en t P rogram
S T IP F unds25%
N/S Split
County Share Calculation:
75% county population
25% state highway mileage
CaltransRTPAs (i.e. MTC)
75%
State FundingSTIP Fund Allocation
The Current State Crisis
The state’s fuel tax has lost one-third of its value since 1964, adjusted for inflation.
State Transportation Improvement Program Also at Risk State Highway Account: Going, Going, Gone?
The Current State Crisis
2000-01 Governor Davis proposes TCRP/AB 2928 signed into law:$6.8 billion total statewide / $4.9 billion in projects$1.7 billion in San Francisco Bay Area
2001-02 Majority of funding for TCRP immediately deferred for two years: from FY 2001-02 until FY 2003-04
March 2002 Proposition 42 passed by voters; to protect and extend funding for TCRP projects, local streets and roads and transit elements
January 2003
Governor’s proposed budget proposes significant TCRP program reductions: TOTAL: $1.6 Billion Statewide
July 2003 Final Budget suspends majority of Prop 42 funds in FY 2003-04. Program losses statewide:•$489 million for TCRP projects•$187 million for local streets and roads•$187 million for the State Transportation Improvement Program•$93 million for public transitTOTAL: Almost $1 Billion
Traffic Congestion Relief Program: A Promise DeferredThe Current State Crisis
TEA-21(in billions)
SAFETEA-Administration
Proposal(in billions)
% change from TEA-21
Highways $ 171.1 $ 192.5 12.5%
Transit $ 41.0 $ 45.8 11.7%
Other $ 5.8 $ 9.1 56.9%
Total $217.9 $247.4 13.5%
Feds to the Rescue?Federal Reauthorization: Sparklers, Not Fireworks
Compare: ISTEA to TEA-21 = 40%
Erosion of the Purchasing Power of the Federal Excise Tax on Gasoline Due to Inflation
Feds to the Rescue?
Bay Area’s Local Response:
Maintenance vs. Expansion Commitment
State/Federal vs. Local Funding
The Regional Transportation Plan Funding Distribution: $87.4 billion
In each of the five Bay Area
counties with a special
transportation sales tax in
place, the proceeds from
this levy exceed the county’s
share of funds from the
State Transportation
Improvement Program
(STIP).
Bay Area’s Local Response:Sales Taxes Outstrip the STIP
The Economy Strikes Back…
FY 2000-01(millions)
FY 2001-02(millions)
Percent Change
Alameda $113.2 $101.0 -10.8%
Contra Costa
$ 64.7 $ 65.6 1.4%
San Francisco
$ 77.5 $ 63.9 -17.5%
San Mateo $ 68.7 $ 58.6 -14.7%
Santa Clara $190.0 $149.9 -21.1%
Bay Area County ½ -Cent Transportation Sales Tax Receipts
…Maybe…
FY 2000-01(millions)
FY 2001-02(millions)
Percent Change
Los Angeles $1069.0 $1052.4 -1.6%
Orange $ 214.8 $ 209.1 -2.7%
Riverside $ 89.5 $ 94.4 5.5%
San Bernardino
$ 90.0 $ 94.5 5.0%
San Diego $ 189.8 $ 193.1 1.7%
Southern California ½ -Cent Transportation Sales Tax Receipts
FY 2000-01(millions)
FY 2001-02(millions)
Percent Change
Fresno $41.1 $41.6 1.2%
Sacramento $85.1 $85.6 0.6%
San Joaquin $32.7 $34.3 4.9%
Central Valley ½ -Cent Transportation Sales Tax Receipts
…Not?
1. Index State and Federal Fuel Taxes
Loss of purchasing power for the backbone of state and federal transportation funding has eroded its financial foundation—indexing or some
proxy is one way of restoring it.
2. Shed the Shackles of the Ballot Box:
Almost every state transportation revenue measure since 1990 has been subject to voter approval instead of direct legislative action. This
uncertainty severely hinders long range transportation investment planning and implementation.
3. Lower the voter threshold for special transportation taxes
Barring legislators making the tough decisions, at least let a simple majority of the electorate bring about difficult, but needed change.
4. Maintain and increase Funding Flexibility to respond to changing circumstances
- Rigid expenditure plans, particularly those that leave major projects partially funded, are particularly vulnerable to economic downturns
- Complex urban areas with their related diverse mobility challenges, need the ability to mix and match funds to different modes and different
functions.
5. Capital Investment must be matched with Operating Capacity
- Project capital planning must recognize attendant operating and maintaince requirements, and explicit provide the financial resources to meet
those needs.
The “Fix-It” Wish List: Stability and Accountability
3. Lower the Voter Threshold for Special
Transportation Taxes
Barring direct legislative action to enhance
transportation funding, at least let a simple
majority of the electorate bring about difficult, but
needed change.
The “Fix-It” Wish List: Stability and Accountability (contd.)
4. Maintain and Increase Funding Flexibility
- Rigid expenditure plans, particularly those that
leave major projects partially funded, are
particularly vulnerable to economic downturns.
- Complex urban areas, with their associated
diverse mobility challenges, need the ability to
mix and match funds to different modes and
different functions.
- Flexible federal and state funds have provided
that “packaging” capacity.
The “Fix-It” Wish List: Stability and Accountability (contd.)
5. Operating Capacity to Match Capital Investment
- Project capital planning must recognize attendant
operating and maintenance requirements, and explicitly
provide the financial resources to meet those needs.
6. Make Room for Innovation
-As demand for infrastructure increases, traditional
revenue sources can’t keep pace. Tolling and other
pricing mechanisms may have a future…
The “Fix-It” Wish List: Stability and Accountability (contd.)