Highway 156 Improvement Project Ad Hoc Committee

Similar documents
Interstate Tolling for Wisconsin: Why and How

Special Meeting Agenda

MOBILITY PARTNERSHIP AGENDA

Lorie Tudor, P.E. Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer. Alma Area Chamber of Commerce

6. HIGHWAY FUNDING Introduction Local Funding Sources Property Tax Revenues valuation County Transportation Excise Tax

Massachusetts Transportation Infrastructure Funding Gap: Revenue Alternatives - The Challenge and Potential Solutions

S E N A T E F I S C A L O F F I C E I S S U E B R I E F 2016-S RhodeWorks FEBRUARY 2, 2016

Finance Committee October 18, 2011

Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department. Jonesboro Exchange Club

Scott E. Bennett, P.E. Director. Arkansas Asphalt Pavement Association

NAPA COUNTY GRAND JURY

Transportation. Fiscal Research Division. March 24, Justification Review

2016 DOT Discretionary Grants

$5.2 Billion Transportation Funding Deal Announced, includes $1.5 Billion for Local Streets and Roads

The Future of the Federal Role in Transportation

FUNDING SOURCES. Appendix I. Funding Sources

Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) Route 3 South Managed Lanes Project DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY

San Francisco Transportation Task Force 2045

PROJECT DELIVERY MODELS ARKANSAS PLANNING RETREAT ON P3S. J. Douglas Koelemay, Director October 7, 2015

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN

Regional Measure 3. Citizens Advisory Committee Agenda Item 12. SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY February 14, 2017

Transportation Funding Terms and Acronyms Unraveling the Jargon

Proposition 6 Debunking the Myths

APPENDIX 5. Funding Plan

State Route 91 Corridor Improvement Project Update. State Route 91 Advisory Committee June 4, 2010

Transportation Needs and Funding Role of Impact Fees. January 6, 2015 BoCC Workshop

Central Florida Expressway Authority Multimodal Investment Assessment Status Report and Update

Uncompensated Care Provided by Minnesota s Emergency Medical Services

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement, I-495 & I-270 Managed

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY

CoStar News - Prologis Sees More Opportunities Amid Disruption in Gl...

MORPC Executive Committee Members. Joe Garrity, Senior Government Affairs Coordinator

This page left blank intentionally.

Innovative Infrastructure Financing (Click on section to go to article) 6.1 Private Toll Roads 6.2 Public-Private Partnerships 6.

SMALL CITY PROGRAM. ocuments/forms/allitems.

Shaping Investments for San Francisco s Transportation Future The 2017 San Francisco Transportation Plan (SFTP) Update

Economic Vitality and Quality of Life Unlocking Hampton Roads HRTAC Overview Kevin B. Page Executive Director

Transit Operations Funding Sources

notice of public hearing

VIRGINIA SAFE ROUTES to SCHOOL. Non-Infrastructure Grant GUIDELINES

CHAPTER House Bill No. 5013

Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board Legislative Program

Department of the Army TRADOC Memorandum 58-1 Headquarters, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command Fort Eustis, Virginia

2004 Transportation Expenditure Plan

If you are driving a rental car: you will need a valid driver's license, proof of liability insurance, and a copy of your rental agreement.

Department of Transportation Governor s FY 2015 and FY 2016 Recommendations. Department of Transportation

Telecommuting or doing work

November 4, 2013 Office of Transportation Public Private Partnerships

Update on Transportation Funding and Potential Sources for Additional Revenue. June 19, 2017

Financing Transit Projects with Traditional and Innovative Sources And Mechanisms

Metro. Board Report. File #: , File Type:Informational Report

WELCOME TO THE KALAMAZOO AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY

ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA. County Board Agenda Item Meeting of July 14, 2018

The Challenge Ahead. The Fiscal Challenge

Weekly Market Demand Index (MDI)

Local Taxes and Highway Tolls: The New Normal

Public-Private Partnerships for Transportation

CITY OF SAN JOSE CHARCOT AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER MEETING

County of Fairfax, Virginia

For additional information about ACT please contact: ACT National Headquarters phone: PO Box facsimile:

RESOLUTION NO. 18-XX RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

MERCATUS ON POLICY. How to Fix Roads and Bridges without Increasing the Fuel Tax: Reform Federal Highway Policy and Use the Savings for Roads

Urban Partnership Communications Plan

Public Works Financing

9. Positioning Ports for Grant Funding and Government Loan Programs

Legislative Study of State Funding for Local Road Improvements

I-605 CORRIDOR HOT SPOT INTERCHANGES

Build America Transportation Investment Center. Office of the Secretary U.S. Department of Transportation

San Francisco Sheriff s Department Presentation To Community Corrections Partnership

PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING

2013 Lien Conference on Public Administration Singapore

Yale University 2017 Transportation Survey Report February 2018

Rankings of the States 2017 and Estimates of School Statistics 2018

In developing the program, as directed by the Board (Attachment A), staff used the following framework:

Solano County Transit (SolTrans) Overall Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Goal FFY through FFY

Dealing for St. Johns Heritage Parkway

CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MEMORANDUM

School Siting and Transportation

Presentation to Roseville City Council April 15, 2015

2018 State of County Transportation Jim Hartnett, General Manager/CEO

Western Slope CIP and TIM Fee Update Workshop

San Mateo County Measure A Grade Separation Program

TENNESSEE TEXAS UTAH VERMONT VIRGINIA WASHINGTON WEST VIRGINIA WISCONSIN WYOMING ALABAMA ALASKA ARIZONA ARKANSAS

Re: Comments on the Draft Guidelines for the Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program

May 8-10, Northeast Pavement Preservation Partnership. Connecticut Delaware

The Training and Certification of Emergency Medical Services Personnel

Authority Board March 26, 2013

California Pacific Medical Center Hospital Rebuild

Regional Transit System Plan. Regional Task Force Meeting No. 1

Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program

Citizens Advisory Committee May 23, 2012

FINAL ACTIONS Planning Commission Meeting of January 22, 2013

FINANCING HIGHWAY IN MEXICO: CONCESSIONS (BOT) AND PUBLIC - PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS (PPP) ASPECTS, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Luis Rocha Chiu

APPENDIX B BUS RAPID TRANSIT

FP2 Inc. Update. Jim Moulthrop, PE Executive Director FP 2 Inc. North East Pavement Preservation Partnership April 29, 2015 Newark, DE

SUMMARY OF THE GROW AMERICA ACT As Submitted to Congress on April 29, 2014

Fiscal Research Center

Long-Term Funding for Highways and Transit Programs. Edward L. Mortimer. Executive Director, Transportation Infrastructure

Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce 2012 Legislative Policies

BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND URBAN TRAVEL

Transcription:

AGENDA Highway 156 Improvement Project Ad Hoc Committee Thursday, May 31, 2012; 3:30 pm Office of Supervisor Lou Calcagno 11140 Speegle Street; Castroville, CA 1. Welcome and Introductions. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT: Any member of the public may address the Committee on any item on the agenda. 3. RECEIVE results of Monterey Bay Aquarium visitor survey related to Highway 156 and tolling acceptability. Barbara Meister, Monterey Bay Aquarium 4. REVIEW and COMMENT on draft scope of work for Traffic and Revenue analysis, traffic counts and economic analysis for evaluation of the feasibility and impacts of tolling Highway 156 to pay for safety and capacity improvements. Hank Myers, TAMC 5. REVIEW and COMMENT on updated public outreach plan and tolling questions and answers. Sharon Gavin, TAMC 6. RECEIVE information on proposed schedule for evaluation of Highway 156 improvements funding and tolling study and required decision-making. Debbie Hale, TAMC 7. ADJOURN to next meeting. P:\Committees\156 ad hoc\156 ad hoc - May 2012.doc

Highway, bridge tolls higher for out-of-towners By JOAN LOWY, The Associated Press WASHINGTON Some tolling authorities have found a way to give local motorists a discount on tolls while charging out-of-towners a higher rate for using the same roads and bridges. The E-ZPass electronic toll reading system used by 24 tolling agencies in 14 states in the Northeast and Midwest is able to differentiate where motorists bought their passes and apply varying prices. Motorists traveling the full length of the New Jersey Turnpike during off-peak hours, for example, pay $10.40 if they bought their E-ZPass from the turnpike's operators. If they bought their E-ZPass from another tolling authority, or if they're paying cash, the charge is $13.85. Rhode Island residents with an E-ZPass can cross the Pell Bridge for 83 cents, but out-of-state passenger car drivers with E-ZPass pay $4 ($2 per axle), the same as drivers paying cash. New York City's Metropolitan Transportation Authority charges motorists who bought their E-ZPasses locally $4.80 to cross the Robert F. Kennedy, Bronx-Whitestone and Throgs Neck bridges and use the Brooklyn-Battery and Queens Midtown tunnels. Motorists with transponders purchased elsewhere, or who pay cash, are charged $6.50. Similar arrangements exist in New Hampshire, Maine and West Virginia, according to AAA, the nation's largest auto club. Unless out-of-town motorists peruse the tolling authority's website, they're unlikely to learn of the disparity, said Jeffrey Frediani, a legislative analyst with AAA's New York chapter. Many tolling authorities post only the cash price at tolling facilities, providing no clue that some motorists are getting a discount, he says. "There is no reason for one authority to charge some E-ZPass holders a higher toll except, unfortunately in our estimation, to take advantage of drivers who may be from out of state," AAA President Robert Darbelnet complained in a letter last month to the agency that coordinates the E-ZPass system. Each tolling authority makes its own rules. New York and New Jersey toll officials defend their pricing, saying decisions to eliminate discounts for E-ZPass holders who buy their passes out of state were made to raise money in tough economic times. The MTA was facing a $900 million deficit at the time. The Pell bridge discount is available only to Rhode Island residents. But anyone, no matter where they live, can buy an E-ZPass through the New Jersey Turnpike Authority or an office that services the MTA to get the discounts those jurisdictions offer, agency officials said. "That's typical bureaucratese," said New York state Assemblyman Alan Maisel, a Brooklyn Democrat who has introduced a bill to end the practice. "I think it's absurd." May 23, 2012 12:46 PM EDT Copyright 2012, The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Using Tolling to Finance a Highway Project 1. Why can t important projects be funded with the taxes I already pay? In the Monterey Bay Region, gasoline tax revenues are the primary source of funding for local road and highway projects. No road funding (in the three county area) comes from property taxes, sales taxes or motor vehicle fees. Gas tax revenues are insufficient to meet our transportation needs, primarily because gas taxes have not been raised since 1994 when gas prices were only about $1.11 cents per gallon. Because gas taxes are set per gallon, not as a percentage of the cost, rising gas prices do not result in more revenue for road projects. In fact, when the price of gasoline rises people drive less, so we collect less revenue per person as the price of gasoline has gone up over the past several years. There are other reasons why gas tax revenues do not meet our transportation needs. First, our cars are more fuel efficient now, so motorists are buying less gas to travel the same distance but they're causing the same wear and tear on roads. Second, due to inflation, construction projects cost about 50% more than they did in 1994. And that isn t counting the fact that there are more environmental regulations than there used to be the simple cost of doing business is higher. Conclusion: it costs more to build transportation projects than it used to, and we have less money to pay for them. 2. What are the advantages of using tolls to fund a project? The advantage of tolling is that it allows construction of a project much sooner than waiting for state or federal funds to become available. For instance, tolling will allow construction of the Highway 156 improvement project from 15 to 20 years sooner than waiting to save up scarce state and federal funds. In addition, tolls are basically a user fee for those who drive on the road. As a user fee, tolls more fairly charge the cost of the facility to those who benefit from it than other revenue options. 3. Will drivers have to stop and pay a toll? Wouldn t that cause more congestion? No, with today s modern technology there is no need for traditional toll booths. Tolls can be collected 100 percent electronically without vehicles stopping to pay. As is done on the San Francisco Bay Area bridges, electronic tolls can be collected with a transponder, about the size of a credit card. Drivers install the transponder on the inside of their car s windshield. On the tolled facility, an overhead antenna links the transponder to your account information, and deducts the correct toll from a prepaid account. In the Bay Area, approximately 60 percent of travellers have transponders. Vehicles without transponders would have their license plate photographed and they would receive a bill or could prepay the toll. Emergency responders (police, fire, ambulances, etc.) will have the ability to use the toll road without paying the toll.

Using Tolling to Finance a Highway Project Page 2 4. How much will the tolls be? The toll must be set to cover the costs of constructing, operating, maintaining and sometimes designing the project. In addition, administration costs for the toll must be covered. A preliminary study estimated that Phase 1 of the Highway 156 project (widening, frontage road, Castroville Boulevard interchange) could be constructed with tolls of approximately $2 per vehicle in each direction. Including all or part of Phase 2 (interchange reconstruction at Highway 101) would raise the cost of the toll, as would having the toll in one direction only and discounts for local residents and/or businesses. It is unlikely that visitors would be willing to pay a toll higher than they pay on San Francisco Bay Area bridges, about $5 one way, or slightly higher during peak travel periods. 5. Can there be a tolling discount for local residents and/or businesses? Yes, there could be a special discount pass that local residents and/or businesses could buy upon proof of residency that could substantially discount or eliminate their need to pay a toll. Discount passes would require a higher toll for those who do pay. 6. What other costs besides project construction could be included in a toll? The cost to design, operate, maintain a road project, plus the costs to administer a toll, could be included in the toll financing package. In some areas, other local road improvements or parallel transit service is also funded out of toll revenues. The decision on what to include in the tolling package can be made by the local and state governing agencies overseeing the project; in Monterey County that would be the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and Caltrans. 7. How do you keep people from using alternate routes to avoid the tolls? Experience elsewhere has shown that if travelers find the toll road saves them time and money, they will choose it over other parallel roads. In order to determine how much traffic would be diverted to other local roads or highways, and how much revenue the toll will raise, a traffic and revenue study must be conducted prior to receiving state approval to install a toll facility. 8. What is the process for implementing a toll road? California state law allows for the implementation of tolls under certain circumstances. The proposed toll project must improve traveler mobility, safety and operations, provide quantifiable air quality benefits, and address projected demand (essentially, be financially feasible). The desired steps are as follows: Conduct a traffic and revenue analysis to confirm financial feasibility Evaluate mobility, safety/operations, air quality benefits and environmental impacts Decide project and tolling characteristics, Present proposal and obtain approval from the California Transportation Commission Obtain approval from the local partner, i.e. Transportation Agency for Monterey County Issue a request for consultant team proposals Evaluate the proposals and select a consultant team. Approve an agreement between the consultants and public partners. Decisions can be made locally at several points in the process as to whether to continue, and what features to include in the project and the toll financing scenario. The preparation of the report was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) and facilitated by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Additional financial assistance was provided by the California State Department of Transportation.

Using Tolling to Finance a Highway Project Page 3 9. What other funding sources besides tolls could be used to pay for highway projects? Transportation projects throughout California are paid for primarily with fuel taxes, sales taxes, development impact fees and federal earmarks. Other ideas proposed locally include hotel tax increase, a business improvement district and an event tax. Transportation sales taxes (1/2 cents per dollar) have been proposed in the Monterey Bay Area in 2006 and 2008. In both instances, the required 2/3 voter approval was not achieved. Voters in 18 other counties have approved such sales taxes for transportation and are considered selfhelp counties. These local revenues allow these counties to leverage other state and federal matching funds that are not available to other counties. The twelve cities and the County of Monterey have approved regional traffic impact fees that are paid when new developments are built. The Fort Ord Reuse Authority also requires new developments to pay traffic fees to compensate for their impact on local roads and highways. A total of nearly $30 million has been budgeted from these impact fees for the Highway 156 improvement project, for instance, but due to the slow pace of development it is uncertain when these funds will be available. 10. Can tolls ever expire? Yes, it can. The toll agreement can be set up to allow tolls to be removed when the project is paid for. The decision to include a sunset date can be made as part of the final agreement on whether or not to toll the facility. 11. Who will oversee the administration of the toll over time? There are many governing structures that can be implemented as part of a toll facility. It can be overseen by a local public entity, such as the Transportation Agency for Monterey County, it can be overseen by Caltrans, it can be overseen by a private concessionaire, or there can be a publicprivate partnership that administers the facility. This governing structure would be established before the tolling agreement is approved. The preparation of the report was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) and facilitated by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Additional financial assistance was provided by the California State Department of Transportation.