Transcript TPB Hand-Out Item 9 Status Report on the Financial Analysis for the 2006 CLRP prepared for Transportation Planning Board presented by Arlee Reno Cambridge Systematics, Inc. in cooperation.

TPB Hand-Out Item 9
Status Report on the Financial
Analysis for the 2006 CLRP
prepared for
Transportation Planning Board
presented by
Arlee Reno
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
in cooperation with
K.T. Analytics
November 16, 2005
Purpose Of Financial Analysis
Project “reasonably available” transportation revenues
through 2030 from federal, state, local and private sources
Estimate annual costs to operate and maintain the existing
transportation system
Estimate capital and operating costs to build, operate and
maintain projects in the current CLRP
Identify funding available for additional projects
2
Changes Since 2003 Financial Analysis
Toll revenues a key funding source for major projects in the
plan (Dulles Rail, ICC, Beltway HOT lanes)
Federal revenues for region increased under SAFETEA-LU, but
not dramatically
Metro Matters funding committed, but transit ridership
constraint on Metrorail core capacity still applied beyond 2010
Davis Bill for funding Metro capacity and rehabilitation for
existing system introduced and moving forward
No other significant changes in current or new revenue
sources
3
Progress To Date on 2006 Financial Analysis
4

Revenue and expenditure forecasts by agencies are
expected to be synthesized for TPB Technical
Committee review in January 2006

Primary inputs have not changed significantly since the
2003 analysis

Major new expansion projects for 2006 CLRP will require
project-specific funding plans with identified revenues
National Picture
Financial analyses for the nation, states, and other
metropolitan areas show similar funding challenges to
those faced by this region
In addition, global market factors are driving rapid
increases in highway and transit construction costs
5
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Study: Future Highway
and Public Transportation Financing (Fall 2005)
Current transportation revenues at all levels of
government – Federal, state, and local – are not
sufficient to “maintain” or “improve” the nation’s
highway and transit systems
• Average annual gap to “maintain” highways and transit
systems through 2015 is $50 billion
• Average annual gap to “improve” highways and transit
systems through 2015 is $107 billion
6
U.S. Chamber Study
Federal Highway Trust Fund Faces Deficit
The Federal Highway Trust Fund Highway Account could
have a negative balance as early as 2008, well before the
end of the SAFETEA-LU authorization period
Funding gap due in part to gas tax revenues declining as
cars are more fuel efficient and/or rely on alternative
fuels
7
U.S. Chamber Study
Short-Term Solutions
The Federal government needs to take action soon to
narrow the revenue gap and prevent the Highway Trust
Fund from going into negative balance
• Indexing the Federal motor fuel taxes would have the most
immediate and substantial impact
Motor fuel taxes and other existing fees must be
increased at all levels of government
Other revenue measures, innovative financing tools, and
private participation would have more modest but
important additional impacts
8
U.S. Chamber Study
Long-Term Solutions Are Also Needed
A two-tier, mileage-based revenue system is needed to address
long-term needs
• Tier 1 - a state-based VMT (vehicle-miles-of-travel) fee; charged for
all miles driven in a state, and would replace the current motor fuel
tax
• Tier 2 - a regional or local-option VMT fee; charged for miles driven
on congested roadways, especially during peak periods, to manage
congestion
States should lead the initiative; VMT systems are already under
study and development at state level (Oregon)
Federal government should provide strong support
9