Read the Announcement

JEFFERSON CITY – A proposal to increase the Missouri sales tax by 1-cent to fund highway construction died on the final day of the Missouri legislative session after a Republican-led filibuster succeeded, Sen. Mike Kehoe, R-Jefferson City, told colleagues.

Kehoe’s proposal, which would have been placed on the November 2014 ballot, was withdrawn from consideration Friday. Voters would have decided on the sales tax to fund $8 billion in transportation projects.

Joe Carmichael, Chairman of the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission, said the bill had plenty of support, but was killed by a filibuster by a few lawmakers.

“Denying the people a right to vote is not the way to go,” said Joe Carmichael. Major projects such as the 60 and 65 interchanges are not going to occur any time soon as MoDOT has had to cut nearly 20 percent of its workforce since 2011 due to low funding. “Those kinds of projects will not happen in the future because there’s simply not the money there to do it. We’ve gone to a situation in this state where we are maintaining the system. We are in a maintenance only mode,” Carmichael said.

Officials in an Arizona County say the state gas tax needs to be increased, and they will be taking their case to the Legislature in the next session. The Pima County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 in favor of new ways to bolster the county’s transportation budget, including pushing the Legislature to pass a statewide 10-cent-per-gallon gasoline tax hike.

“You need to cast a very wide net when you approach the Legislature … proposing a dedicated funding stream on transportation,” said Supervisor Ray Carroll, adding that the county has tried every possibility to raise funding to fix its aging streets. “You never know what will hit a responsive chord.”

County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry said the county has a growing backlog of street maintenance and the county needs to increase taxes to pay for the work. A recent county report found that one of the primary funding sources – the state Highway User Revenue Fund – hit a 13-year low in revenue during the last fiscal cycle.

Two counties in California, one in Arizona and the list grows of local governments that see federal prospects for money being slim and insufficient state money to meet their needs. Watch this trend continue to grow. TW

State legislators have determined the rate for a new road usage fee for highly fuel efficient vehicles, allowing the measure to move on to the next committee.

House Bill 2453 requires drivers whose vehicles get 55 miles per gallon of gasoline or better to pay a tax after 2015. If drivers do not want to track their miles, they could opt to pay a flat amount annually. The flat rate would be $542.50 annually, compared to 1.55 cents per mile otherwise, as determined by the House Revenue Committee.

Since creating a task force in 2001, lawmakers have been looking to establish a new revenue system to offset the declines in gas tax revenue due to more fuel efficient vehicles and alternative fuel sources. The new per-mile tax would bring money to state roads.

The state’s gas tax is currently 30 cents per gallon, but vehicles such as electric cars avoid paying that because they don’t use gasoline.

The measure advanced from the House Revenue Committee with a 6-3 vote amid opposition from some House Republicans.

“The folks of Oregon are not willing to accept the responsibility of paying for that which they use absent an incredibly clear case,” said Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, who voted against the bill because he said the concept was not ready to move forward.

Under a pilot program for the per-mile charge, participants were able to track their miles through a smartphone application, GPS, or other non-GPS reporting devices.

By 2021, there will be an estimated 69,618 vehicles affected by the new road usage fee.

The head of transportation in Illinois is trying to keep speeds down in the state, as a bill making its way through the General Assembly would raise speeds from 65 to 70 mph through most interstate highways and tollways in the state 65 to 70 mph.

Illinois Department of Transportation Secretary Anne Schneider is doing her best to stop lawmakers from approving the faster speed limit.

“The higher the speed limit, the more likely you are to be in a crash,” she said. “And if you’re in a crash, the more likely you are to be killed.”

Schneider said she’ll continue pushing lawmakers to reject the proposal.

“We just want to make our roads as safe as possible. We don’t want to see our fatality rates go up, and so we think it’s important enough that we have worked against raising the speed limit to 70 miles per hour,” she said.

Eight counties would have the ability to opt out of the increased speed limit.

State legislators have determined the rate for a new road usage fee for highly fuel efficient vehicles, allowing the measure to move on to the next committee.

House Bill 2453 requires drivers whose vehicles get 55 miles per gallon of gasoline or better to pay a tax after 2015. If drivers do not want to track their miles, they could opt to pay a flat amount annually. The flat rate would be $542.50 annually, compared to 1.55 cents per mile otherwise, as determined by the House Revenue Committee.

Since creating a task force in 2001, lawmakers have been looking to establish a new revenue system to offset the declines in gas tax revenue due to more fuel efficient vehicles and alternative fuel sources. The new per-mile tax would bring money to state roads.

The state’s gas tax is currently 30 cents per gallon, but vehicles such as electric cars avoid paying that because they don’t use gasoline.

The measure advanced from the House Revenue Committee with a 6-3 vote amid opposition from some House Republicans.

“The folks of Oregon are not willing to accept the responsibility of paying for that which they use absent an incredibly clear case,” said Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario, who voted against the bill because he said the concept was not ready to move forward.

Under a pilot program for the per-mile charge, participants were able to track their miles through a smartphone application, GPS, or other non-GPS reporting devices.

By 2021, there will be an estimated 69,618 vehicles affected by the new road usage fee.

RICHMOND – The tense final days of Virginia’s legislative session have led to a landmark $6 billion transportation funding bill, which was signed this week by Gov. Bob McDonnell.

The governor praised the measure as a bipartisan effort 27 years in the making – as the last time state lawmakers put a major investment toward roads was in 1986. In the bill, lawmakers decided to find a new way to finance transportation in the state by converting the 17.5-cent gas tax into a wholesale tax, raising the state sales tax to 5.3 percent and committing more existing revenue to be spent on road needs. To that end, the car title tax will be raised and transportation will also get money from anticipated internet sales tax revenue.

The measure will generate separate funding in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads to pay for priority projects in those areas.

In response to criticism from fiscal conservatives, McDonnell said frustration is commonplace with any such compromise. “There will be something in this bill that everyone does not like.”

Sales tax is much more responsive to the ups and downs of the economy. This is a good transition for Virginia and a major milestone for a state that has struggled putting a package together for a long, long time. TW

PORTSMOUTH – A judge has ruled that Virginia’s $2.1 billion public-private Midtown Tunnel deal is unconstitutional, elating local residents against the project that is several months into construction. Dozens of residents organized over a year ago to kill the project that they believe is unfair and punitive for local businesses and commuters.

The state intends to appeal the decision from Circuit Judge James A. Cales Jr., who said in his ruling that the General Assembly does not have authority to grant the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) “unfettered power” to set toll rates under the 1995 Public-Private Transportation Act. The ruling was a big blow to Gov. Bob McDonnell, who has touted the projected as critical for the region. The governor’s office said that the state deems its position is legally correct, and if the ruling stood, it could jeopardize the state’s ability to use public private partnerships to build major projects, an increasingly common method in Virginia and other states.

Cales said the free alternative routes presented by the state’s private partner, Elizabeth River Crossings, were not reasonable for someone like himself, if he were to commute from his house in Portsmouth to Norfolk. “They’re not really reasonable alternatives,” Cales said. “You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that.”

An attorney for Elizabeth River Crossings, which took over operations of the tunnels last July, countered that legally, convenience does not mater, and what might not be reasonable for one person may be for someone else. Under the deal with VDOT, Elizabeth River Crossings will maintain and operated the tunnels for 58 years. The company is also overseeing construction of a second Midtown tunnel, renovations of the existing tunnels, and an extension of the Martin Luther King Jr. Freeway to I-264.

Electronic toll collection is scheduled to begin Feb. 1, 2014 on the tunnels, and on the freeway extension when it is complete. The project is funded by private equity, more than $400 million in state funding, federal loan and bonds. Elizabeth River Crossings had spent $348 million as of March 31 on the project, and said it remains committed to delivering the project on schedule, in spite of the uncertainty the judge’ s ruling casts over the project.

SALT LAKE CITY – Carlos Braceras has been named as the new executive director of the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT). The appointment follows a nationwide search to replace retired former executive director John Njord. The former UDOT deputy director for 12 years, Braceras is responsible for UDOT’s 1,800 employees and the design, construction, and maintenance of Utah’s 6,000-mile system of roads and highways.

Braceras joined UDOT in 1986. Prior to his post as deputy director, Braceras served as the director of UDOT’s Region Three Office, chief geotechnical engineer, chief value engineer, a member of the Legacy Parkway/I-15 North Project team and as a roadway design engineer.

Named the “1998 State of Utah Governor’s Manager of the Year,” Braceras was also the 1998 recipient of the “UDOT Leader of the Year” Award. Prior to joining UDOT, Braceras worked as a well-site geologist doing oil and gas exploration and development. He also worked for Snowbird Ski Resort. Braceras received an undergraduate degree in Geology from the University of Vermont and an undergraduate degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Utah. He is a registered professional engineer.

Braceras is the AASHTO Secretary/Treasurer and also serves as the chair of the Subcommittee on Maintenance, chair of the Advisory Board for the Center of Environmental Excellence, serves as a member of the Standing Committee on Highways (SCOH), and is vice-chair of the Operations Council of SCOH.

Carlos is an exceptional individual and will do well in following John Njord in leading UDOT to even greater achievements. When I left UDOT in 2001 the governor came to our offices and announced John Njord as my replacement. John then took the podium and announced that Carlos would be his deputy director. The spontaneous applause from the employees and its volume were sure evidence of the regard with which they hold him. Congratulations to Carlos for his well-deserved appointment. TW

“As our nation’s population continues to grow, so will its traffic troubles if we don’t address the long-term decline of the gas tax,” said Jim Ely, HNTB vice chair toll services. The confluence of shrinking traditional transportation funding, increasing congestion and advancements in tolling technology is opening up vast opportunities for market-driven and choice-based user financed transportation.”

In fact, more than 3 in 5 (63 percent) of Americans feel the nation can no longer build its way out of traffic congestion. And more than 7 in 10 (71 percent) drivers would be willing to pay a higher toll fare on a road or highway in order to save travel time. And, when presented with a choice between tolls and other forms of transportation funding, such as higher gas taxes, property and sales taxes over the next 10 years, more than 4 in 10 (43 percent) Americans would be most willing to back more tolls rather than these other forms of additional funding to maintain existing roads, bridges and tunnels in their area, as well as build new ones.

Among the nation’s drivers, more than 8 in 10 (86 percent) are willing to pay tolls. With that price of admission comes an expectation of better driving conditions. In fact, more than 9 in 10 Americans (93 percent) expect tolled roads to be better than non-tolled roads.

Seven in 10 Americans (70 percent) believe their state department of transportation should have the option to add tolls to major structures to keep them in good shape. In addition, 8 in 10 Americans (80 percent) agree their state department of transportation should have the option to enter into agreements with private companies and investors to provide additional long-term funding to build, expand, operate and maintain needed roads, bridges and tunnels. Ely said there will need to be enabling legislation created in many states as well as additional changes at the federal level for tolling and public-private partnerships to grow to the extent needed.

This is very interesting information and worth noting. Such public predispositions cannot be ignored. HNTB did us all a service here. That said, the numbers at the general or high level often belie the true feelings of people when it comes to personal choices. We see this in the overall dismal ratings of Congress but people generally like their member. People like tolls but you continue to have lawsuits and legislation that attempt to prevent their imposition such as what is happening in Norfolk and Missouri. I recall when we polled people about their support of transit during the I-15 project in 1997 that there was overwhelming support at 75% or so for transit during construction. However, when asked if they would actually use it only 5% said they would. They supported transit for the “other guy” so that they could have free use of the restricted lanes on I-15 during construction. It goes along with the Yogi Bera quote, “The only difference between theory and practice is practice.” The difference between any funding mechanism in theory and me paying the bill is how I feel about paying the bill. Another point worth noting: The former Chairman of the Utah State Transportation Commission, Glen Brown (who was also a former Speaker of the Utah House) said to me once, “It’s always easier to tax the man you don’t know.” TW

Read the Newsletter

The letter report provides advice on the future administration of data now being collected as part of SHRP 2’s safety research program. The report highlights the importance of an effective and rapid transition from data collection to widespread data use by researchers, and includes recommendations related to transition planning in anticipation of the time when SHRP 2 comes to an end in 2015.

The committee that produced the report recommends a phased approach to the administration of the data, rather than entering into long-term agreements at this time based on insufficient information. The report discusses ownership, governance, and operation of the data during a first phase lasting about five years. As part of phase 1 planning and implementation to gain practical experience to inform long-term decision making, the committee recommends that potential user groups be identified, that rigorous estimates of cost elements for long-term implementation be obtained, and that evaluation criteria and a process for collecting lessons learned be established in ways that are not overly burdensome.

Read the Letter Report

This training includes the following topics.
- The use of a TAMP in transportation agencies
- The typical content of a TAMP (including a comparison with requirements in MAP-21)
- Key components, including performance projections and the financial summary
- Examples of TAMPs at various levels of maturity
- Existing and anticipated use of a TAMP in state highway agencies
- The expected involvement of agency personnel in developing and updating a TAMP

This training includes audio clips from leaders in state highway agencies that convey the anticipated benefits from the development of a TAMP and the way they expect to use their TAMP. In addition, the WBT highlights the use of existing documentation to develop the TAMP and plans for enhancing the content of future TAMPs.

This training also serves as a prerequisite for NHI-131106B “Developing a Transportation Asset Management Plan”, which describes the role of a TAMP in a transportation agency and explores in some detail three important components: strategic performance management, risk assessment and management, and financial management.

Read the Announcement

The course focuses on three primary components to the TAMP, including strategic performance measurement, risk assessment, and financial management. It also provides templates and guidelines for use in developing a TAMP. The course is 1.5-days in length.

Prior to attending the first day of class, participants must complete the online, 1-hour training module NHI-131106C “Introduction to a Transportation Asset Management Plan.” Information on how participants access this training is provided to the host by the instructor once the session is confirmed.

Read the Announcement

The Transportation Asset Management course introduces a strategic approach to managing physical transportation infrastructure. This 1 ½-day course covers the principles of asset management and introduces the five core questions every agency should be able to answer about its assets. The course contains modules on the following topics: asset management principles, performance measures, long-term financial planning, risk assessment, and implementation. Through a series of workshops, the course material introduces the participants to the application of asset management principles in real life situations. It also provides a review of a self-assessment that can be used to identify agency gaps between the desired and actual use of these principles. The course concludes with recommendations for advancing the implementation of asset management practices within the agency.

This course is the first in a series and serves as a prerequisite for 131106B “Development of a Transportation Asset Management Plan.” The other course in the series is 131106C “Introduction to Transportation Asset Management Plans”, which is Web-based.

Read the Announcement

The Transportation Asset Management course introduces a strategic approach to managing physical transportation infrastructure. This 1-day course covers the principles of asset management and introduces the five core questions every agency should be able to answer about its assets. The course contains modules on the following topics: asset management principles, performance measures, long-term financial planning, and risk assessment. Through a series of workshops, the course material introduces the participants to the application of asset management principles in real life situations.

This course is the first in a series. The other courses in this series are 131106B “Development of a Transportation Asset Management Plan” and 131106C “Introduction to Transportation Asset Management Plans”, which is Web-based.

Read the Announcement

A proposal may make it easier to increase sales taxes for two California counties for transportation work. Democratic Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, Fremont, introduced the measure that would allow Alameda and Contra Costa counties to let voters decide whether to boost funding for local road and bridge projects.

“This bill will give both counties the ability and flexibility to put critical transportation infrastructure projects before voters,” Wieckowski said in a news release.

Alameda County officials are hoping to make another attempt at getting voter approval to double the local transportation sales tax to repair local roads and expand public transit. A permanent increase for the local tax from one-half cent to one cent lost in November even though it received 66.53 percent approval, because it did not make the 66.67 required approval threshold.

The last time Contra Costa County voters approved renewing their half-cent sales tax was over ten years ago.

County officials cannot include the transportation sales tax measures on their ballots without an exemption from state lawmakers. This regulation is to prevent cities from going above a sales tax cap set by the state. If voters approve an increase by Dec. 31, 2020, AB210 would grant counties the authority to exceed to cap.

California counties have a long history of raising billions of dollars for their transportation needs. The voters recognize the need and vote accordingly. My prediction is these measures will pass if voters are given a say. TW

Officials with the Illinois Tollway are planning to charge extra to Indiana drivers who use E-ZPass transponders to access the Illinois system. A spokesperson for the Illinois Tollway Authority’s said the fee would help the Illinois-based agency pay to process I-Pass transactions on the privately operated Indiana Toll Road and Chicago Skyway.

The Indiana Toll Road Concession Co. (ITRCC), which leased the Indiana Toll Road and Chicago Skyway in 2006 and 2005, respectively, currently lets the Illinois Tollway Authority determine how to process I-Pass transactions.

“Despite the introduction of i-Zoom (now Indiana E-ZPass), the predominant transponder used on the Indiana Toll Road and Skyway is still I-Pass. In fact, in 2012, 59 percent of all electronic transactions on the Indiana Toll Road and Skyway were I-Pass transactions,” according to a statement by the Illinois Tollway Authority.

“Because I-Pass customers are the principle users of the Indiana and Skyway roadways, Illinois, in effect, provides a large portion of the customer service costs for ITRCC operations.” The statement goes on to say that while most tolling agencies in the U.S. absorb the customer service costs and cover them with toll revenues, the Illinois agency has chosen to instead pass these costs on to users.

The Tollway Authority Board of Directors’ customer service committee will vote on the transaction fee in May after they have determined the legality of adding the fee, and how to implement it, if so.

Separating different classes of users always seems easy and logical on the surface but is always fraught with complications and collateral actions. If one group feels they are unfairly treated they typically find ways to get around it such as registering a vehicle or airplane in an adjacent county or state. In the end the outcomes are rarely what they are intended to be. TW

Vermont’s governor signed a transportation budget bill into law this week that will raise $630 million per year, with the included fuel tax rate increases. Gov. Peter Shumlin’s approval means the state’s 19-cent excise tax on gasoline will go up May 1, by 5.9 cents per gallon.

The measure will add a 2 percent sales tax to the cost of gas, and the cost per-gallon tax drops by about one cent. The change is designed to make up for declining gas sales that result in less funding for road work.

Vermont’s excise tax on diesel is currently 29 cents, and is scheduled to increase by 2 cents on July 1. The rates for diesel will rise by another penny in one year.

House and Senate lawmakers agreed to the H510 funding bill after previously disputing whether truckers should pay higher taxes. Without the bill, the state would have lost out on nearly $60 million for roads and bridges.