Estimating a Statewide Transportation Funding Shortfall in Florida

425 views
378 views

Published on

This presentation (with minor changes) was made at both the 2009 AMPO Annual Conference and the 2010 ITE Technical Conference. It discusses the methodology and results of an study estimating a transportation funding shortfall in Florida. The results are not promising-- a metropolitan 20-year shortfall of $62.5 billion is predicted.

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
425
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Varying effective dates, base years, and revenue reporting standards Some MPOs include O+M of roadways and transit Varying definition of “needs” Some MPOs have no transit shortfall Some MPOs used boxed funds
  • Estimating a Statewide Transportation Funding Shortfall in Florida

    1. 1. Estimating a Statewide Funding Shortfall Using MPO Long Range Plans Alex Bond, AICP University of South Florida March 16, 2010
    2. 2. What is an MPO? <ul><li>A regional transportation planning agency </li></ul><ul><li>Plans and prioritizes transportation improvements </li></ul><ul><li>Funded by a 1.25% takedown from highway programs </li></ul><ul><li>Required in all areas with more than 50,000 people </li></ul><ul><li>Must exist to receive Federal money </li></ul>
    3. 3. Documents Adopted by MPOs <ul><li>Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>At least 20 years in length </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Revenue estimation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost feasible projects list </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Four to five years in length </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>List of projects to be built </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Draws from LRTP pool </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Budget and workflow document </li></ul></ul>
    4. 4. The Theory <ul><li>MPO plans cover all urbanized areas of the state, plus a little extra </li></ul><ul><li>Therefore, urban needs are listed in most MPO plans AND all funds destined for urban areas are estimated </li></ul><ul><li>Simple calculations yield the shortfall in transportation revenue at that MPO </li></ul><ul><li>Repeat the shortfall calculation for each MPO in the state </li></ul>
    5. 5. About the Review <ul><li>Includes plans adopted between 2003 and 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Project began October 2007 </li></ul><ul><li>Report released November 2008 </li></ul>
    6. 7. General Methodology <ul><li>Collected hard copies of all 25 LRTPs </li></ul><ul><li>Reviewed each plan and supporting documentation </li></ul><ul><li>Extracted financial data for shortfall estimate </li></ul><ul><li>Followed-up with each MPO </li></ul><ul><li>Compared with results from similar projects in 1997 and 2002 </li></ul>
    7. 8. “ Needs Plan” <ul><li>Pool of projects that would meet the region’s needs regardless of cost </li></ul><ul><li>Not required by Federal law, but most LRTPs contain a needs plan in some form </li></ul><ul><li>Based on state policies, local priorities, and future demand </li></ul>
    8. 9. Shortfall Methodology
    9. 10. Adjusting to Common Year <ul><li>Plans varied in base year from 2000 to 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>All shortfalls adjusted into 2005 dollars, since it was the most common base year </li></ul><ul><li>Consumer Price Index- all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) was used for adjustments </li></ul>
    10. 11. Standardizing and Annualizing <ul><li>Plans varied in horizon years from 2025 to 2030 </li></ul><ul><li>Some plans begin after the TIP ends </li></ul><ul><li>The shortfall was divided by the number of effective years of the plan </li></ul><ul><li>The annualized shortfall was multiplied by 20 </li></ul>
    11. 12. TWENTY-YEAR STATEWIDE FUNDING SHORTFALL CURRENT YEAR FDOT WORK PROGRAM
    12. 13. Shortfall Details <ul><li>$62.5 billion over twenty years </li></ul><ul><li>$3.1 billion per year </li></ul><ul><li>Shortfall is accelerating…fast </li></ul>
    13. 14. Limitations and Conditions <ul><li>Surface transportation only </li></ul><ul><li>Capital and operating only </li></ul><ul><li>Few attempts to incorporate toll/HOV </li></ul><ul><li>Transit shortfall is probably underestimated due to prevailing programming methods </li></ul><ul><li>Use of “boxed funds” results in zero shortfall </li></ul><ul><li>Disagreement on what is a “need” </li></ul>
    14. 15. Shortfalls Varied Considerably Larger shortfalls in new, high-growth areas Smaller shortfalls in older, lower-growth areas One area had no shortfall at all! MPO 20-year Shortfall (millions) Percent Shortfall Okaloosa-Walton $6,399.2 85.3% Gainesville $359.1 84.4% Lee $4,668.6 63.5% Brevard $935.4 57.4% Pasco $1,644.4 51.4% First Coast $3,166.8 47.2% Collier $2,103.2 41.4% Capital Region $1,066.5 38.8% Sarasota/Manatee $983.9 26.6% Broward $2,245.0 24.2% Miami-Dade $3,260.6 14.3% METROPLAN Orlando $1,244.5 12.7% Pinellas $741.1 9.4% Indian River -$19.8 -2.3% Total $62,472.5 42.9%
    15. 16. Risk Factors for a Shortfall <ul><li>High growth rate </li></ul><ul><li>Outsized needs plan </li></ul><ul><li>State-mandated corridors and modal facilities </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of local sources of funding: sales taxes, impact fees, local option gas taxes </li></ul>
    16. 17. Alex Bond, AICP ALBond@cutr.usf.edu (813) 974-9779 Report available from www.mpoac.org/documents

    ×