Transcript Presentation - 15th TRB National Transportation Planning

An Innovative Approach to
Communicating Complex Funding Issues
Chad Edwards & Elizabeth Whitaker
May 18, 2009
TRB National Transportation Planning Applications
Conference
Houston, Texas
Background: Regional Perspective
4th Largest Metropolitan Area
in the US
– Larger than 9 states in land
area
12th Largest Metropolitan
Economy in the World
– Represents 34% of state’s
economy
6.5 Million Persons in 2008
– Larger than 34 states in
population
May 2009
– Expected to increase to 9
million persons by 2030
2
Background: Transit Service
Serviced by 3 Transit Authorities
– Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART)
– Denton County Transportation Authority (DCTA)
– The Fort Worth Transportation Authority (the T)
Service Area Gaps
NOT Serviced
by Transit
2008
2030
(Projected)
44%
56%
– Includes largest city in US not
serviced by public transportation:
Arlington, TX Population 360,000+
May 2009
3
Background: Transit Initiatives
2003-2005 Effort
– “Regional Rail Corridor Study” (RRCS)
– Survey of transit acceptance with 75% of respondents supporting
an increase in sales tax for transit purposes
2006-2007 Effort
– “Regional Transit Initiative” (RTI)
– Bills introduced during legislative session that would increase sales
tax for transit purposes
– Bills failed to pass
2008-2009 Effort
– “Rail North Texas” (RNT)
– Interested parties across the region focused efforts, identified new
corridors, revenue sources, and potential implementation strategies
– The Texas Local Option Transportation Act (TLOTA) was introduced
during the legislative session
May 2009
4
Capital
O&M
Total
Total Cost
(2008$)
$4,700
$875
$5,575
Total Cost
(Over Time)
$8,163
$1,430
$9,593
Annualized
Cost
$389
$68
$457
May 2009
5
How Do We Pay for It?
Previous efforts only focused on sales tax at 0.5% and 1.0%
During 2008-2009 effort, a variety of sources and rates were
considered by local elected officials
– Sales Tax
– Property Tax
– Gas Sales Tax
– Drivers License Fee
– Vehicle Registration Fee
– 4a/4b Retirement
– Local Option Gas Tax
– TIF Districts
– VMT Tax
– Toll Concession Payments
– New Resident Impact Fee
– Gas Well Revenues
– Motor Vehicle Sales Tax
– Parking Fees
– Federal Funds
– Public Private Partnership
May 2009
ALL SOURCES WERE CONSIDERED!
6
Evolution of Revenue Tool
First effort provided elected officials with staff
developed “test” scenarios of funding options
The NEED
The OUTCOME
– Policy officials needed order
of magnitude for various
revenue sources
– A user friendly tool that could
quickly evaluate numerous
funding options
– A better way to test scenarios
and produce results was
needed
– A revenue tool that married
cost and revenue aspects and
also provided an interactive
platform to test scenarios
– Evaluate numerous requests
– Provide ability to replicate
tests quickly
May 2009
7
Evolution of Revenue Tool: The Basics
Developed in Microsoft Excel 2003
Utilized data that is widely available
Examples of Data Types
Example of Sources
Population
Census, Statewide Data Center, MPO, COG, etc.
Motor Fuel Consumption
FHWA State Highway Statistics
Registered Vehicles
State DOT, FHWA
Sales Tax Revenues
State Comptroller
Property Tax Revenues/Values
State Comptroller; Local Appraisal District
Inflation
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Utilized basic calculations using fixed base data
Separate files were used to generate cost and revenue
estimates
Planning Tool that functions like a financial model
UTILIZED SOFTWARE EVERYONE HAS
May 2009
& DATA ANYONE CAN GET
8
Evolution of Revenue Tool
Developed
Basic
Tool
Manually
Calculate
Revenue
by County
Add
Cost
Calculation
Combine
all County
Files into
One
Expand
Timeline
from 20
to 40 yrs
Functions Added to
Revenue Tool
Determined
Incremental
Rates
Explore
Staging
Scenarios
Add Debt
Service
Calculation
Functions that
will Enhance Revenue Tool
May 2009
Option for
O&M vs.
Capital
Costs
Create
Tables and
Graphs
Charted
Revenue
and
Staging
Add
Clarifying
Comments
Add
Interest
Calculation
Add
Collection
Geography
Add
Trigger
for Sale
of Bonds
9
Revenue Tool Process
User Defined:
1. Collection
Geography
by Region
by County
by Corridor
2. Revenue 3. Revenue
Sources
Rates
9 Revenue
Sources
Dollars &
Percentages
Assumptions &
Calculations
Worksheet Administrators Can Easily
Test Alternative Cost & Baseline
Assumption Scenarios – This Ability
is Not Given to End Users
Results
Potential Revenue for Rail North Texas
Potential Revenue for the Transportation
Infrastructure Fund
Total Potential Revenue
Results Do Not Represent Actual Revenue
Tool Used to Show an Order of Magnitude
May 2009
Results Do Not Account for Diversions,
Commitments, or Administrative Costs
10
Demonstration
May 2009
www.nctcog.org/RNT
11
Demonstration Results
Sales
Tax
Gas Sales
Tax
Motor
Vehicle
Sales Tax
Vehicle
Reg. Fee
Local
Option
Gas Tax
VMT Tax
New
Resident
Impact
Fee
Rate
1/2
cent
$20
$100
% to
Capital
82%
100%
100%
% to O&M
18%
0%
0%
Transportation
Property Tax
Local
Subsidy
Option
Annual Revenue Target: $457
Rail North Texas Revenue: $458
Transportation Infrastructure Fund: $477
Total: $935
May 2009
12
Other Potential Uses for Tool
– Gauge revenue streams at planning level
– Determine voter sensitivity for additional funding sources
– Basic Metropolitan Transportation Plan financial
planning/forecasting
– Teaching tool
May 2009
13
Lessons Learned
1. Communication is good
2. Don’t underestimate the resourcefulness of your staff
3. A little goes a long way
4. Innovation leads to success
5. Put it all out there
May 2009
14
Questions?
Chad Edwards
Program Manager
[email protected]
817.608.2358
Elizabeth Whitaker
Transportation Planner III
[email protected]
817.608.2324
www.nctcog.org/RNT
May 2009
15