statewide transportation funding at risk your name or agency date
DESCRIPTION
Statewide Transportation Funding At Risk Your Name or Agency Date. RTPA RCTF. March 2010 Transportation Tax Swap Revenues in Jeopardy. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Statewide Transportation Funding At Risk
Your Name or AgencyDate
RTPARCTF
March 2010 Transportation Tax Swap Revenues in Jeopardy
• Proposition 26 has potentially severe negative implications for existing transportation funding in California and the Swap complicated Proposition 22 implementation.
• Prop. 22 restricts the State from using gasoline excise taxes (Highway User Tax Account or HUTA) for general fund relief and bond debt service, part of the March 2010 Transportation Tax Swap.
• Prop. 26 invalidates the 17.3-cent replacement excise tax enacted when the State eliminated the sales tax on gasoline (Prop. 42) under the Transportation Tax Swap.
• Unless the Legislature and Governor take immediate and comprehensive action, $2.5-$3.5 billion in annual transportation funding and 45,000-63,000 jobs will be lost.
• The 2010 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment Update demonstrates that not only must the State act to save the existing bare bones transportation funding streams, there is a significant unfunded backlog on the local street and road system.
2010 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment Update
• What is the condition of California’s system of local streets and roads?
• What will it cost to bring them up to a Best Management Practices (BMP) condition, which is most cost effective to maintain?
• What will it cost to maintain them in the BMP condition? • Considering existing revenues, is there a funding
shortfall? If so, what is it?• What are the potential solutions policy makers can
consider?• What are the impacts to the local transportation network
of different funding scenarios?
Local Streets & Roads are Huge Part of State Network
82% of California’s pavements are owned by cities and counties!
It’s Not Just Pavements …• Sidewalks
• ADA ramps
• Curb & gutter
• Storm drains
• Lighting
Data Collection
• 474 responses• Covers 97% miles!• 56 no responses
– 50 have popn < 50,000– 47 have < 100 miles
No responses 191
344 responses(64%)Data rec'd (2010)
91%
Data rec'd(2008 But Not
2010)6%
No data3%
Pavement Condition Index
0
100
70
50
25 Faile
d
Poor
At Risk
Good - Excellent
Statewide Average PCI = 66
Why is 66 Critical?
66
$2- 4/sy
$15-40/sy
$40-70/sy
$60- 100/sy
Condition of City of (BLANK) Local Roads
• City of ______ has an average PCI of _____.
• This is up/down from _____ in 2008.
• Other City specific details on condition of your local system.
Pavement Revenues*Revenues
($M) 2008/09 2009/10 Future% of
total
Federal** $ 167 $ 390 $ 68 6%
State $ 1,032 $ 819 $ 698 61%
Local $ 458 $ 453 $ 674 33%
Total $ 1,658 $ 1,663 $ 1,140 100%
* Based on 300 responses** ARRA accounted for $343 million ($50 m in 2008/09, $293 m in 2009/10)
Critical Revenues• Gas Tax (Highway Users Tax Account or
HUTA): Cities and Counties will receive approximately $1.629 billion FY 2010-11.– $1 billion in “old” HUTA– $629 million in “new” HUTA (Prop 42
replacement revenues under the Transportation Tax Swap)
– City of _____ receives _____ of this amount.
What Happens If We Don’t Get More Funding?
66
54
2010 2020
PC
I
Bac
klo
g (
$ b
illio
n)
$39B
$63.6B
Existing Funding ($1.42B/year)
$39$42
$45$51 $53 $55
$58$61 $64
$50
64 63 60 59 58 57 55 5466
62
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$9020
11
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Year
Bac
klog
($ b
illio
n)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
PC
I
Funding Shortfall
2011-2020 ($ billions)
Component Needs Funding Shortfall
Pavements $ 70.5 $ 14.2 $ 56.3
Essential Components $ 29.1 $ 6.8 $ 22.3
Bridges $ 3.3 $ 3 $ 0.3
Totals $ 102.9 $ 24 $ 78.9
2008 Results $ 99.7 $ 28.3 $ 71.453 cents/gallon!
Funding Shortfall for City of BLANK
• City of _____ has a funding shortfall of _____.
• City of _____ has a backlog of _____.
• This is up/down by ______ since 2008.
• Other city specific details on the financial needs of the system.
Summary– Data received represents 97% of local system– PCI = 66 is an “at risk” category & drops to 54 by
2020 with existing funding– The funding shortfall considering all existing revenues
is $78.9 billion over the next 10 years– Need to more than double existing funding to maintain
transportation assets– The Legislature & Governor must take immediate and
comprehensive action to save billions in transportation funding
Questions?