Green Valley Road Repair Forum Carmine DeBonis Jr. Deputy County - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Green Valley Road Repair Forum Carmine DeBonis Jr. Deputy County - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Green Valley Road Repair Forum Carmine DeBonis Jr. Deputy County Administrator Public Works September 25, 2017 Todays Topics How Transportation Services are Funded Classification of Roadways Summary of Road Conditions
Today’s Topics
- How Transportation Services are Funded
- Classification of Roadways
- Summary of Road Conditions
- Overview of Regional Local Road Repair Program
- Future Funding Considerations
- Questions
Transportation Funding Sources
- Highway User Revenue Funds (gas tax)
- Vehicle License Tax
Portion dedicated to Transportation General Fund for general government purposes
- Other (Impact Fees, License & Permit Fees, etc.)
Primary Funding Sources - HURF
Highway User Revenue Funds
- 18-cents per gallon since 1990
- Allocated by location of fuel sales & population
Maricopa receives 3x per person than Pima County
- Impacts to funds received by County
State diversion of HURF funds for other purposes
Lower sales due to Recession and fuel efficient vehicles
Reduced buying-power due to inflation
- If indexed to CPI since 1990, it would be 30 cents per gallon
- County FY 2016/17 share would have been $10.1 million more
- Arizona gas tax
is 6th lowest in U.S.
- Twenty-three
states increased gas tax between 2013 and 2017
- Thirty states
increased gas related taxes 50 times between 1997 and 2017
Primary Funding Sources - VLT
Vehicle License Tax
- Enacted in 1940 for general government purposes and
local school districts
- 1970’s: change distribution of schools funds to the State
General Fund
- 1980’s: dedicate portion for transportation purposes
History of VLT funds for general government purposes
Currently 31.5 percent of VLT for transportation
Road Maintenance
Grading dirt roads Pothole repair Street sweeping Clearing weeds and trees in
right-of-way and medians
Shoulder and sidewalk repair
Debt Service on 1997 Road Bonds Pavement Preservation
Arterial and collector roads Local roads
Installation and maintenance of traffic control devices
Signing Pavement Markings Electrical Services Streetlights and traffic signals
Administering construction of road improvements
Planning Engineering Permitting Inspection
Use of HURF & VLT for Transportation
HURF for 1997 Bond Program
- County-wide vote for $350 million
Included roadways in County, cities & towns
- To date, $276.6 million of HURF bonds issued
250 lane miles of capacity improvements 90 safety improvement projects
- FY 2017/18: 38 percent ($18.6 million) of HURF
revenues to pay this debt
- Sizeable decrease in 2022/23 - $6 million less than current
- 10 years from now $12 million less; $15 million less in 15 years
Arterial / Collector Roadways
- Arterial: major road
- Collector: moves traffic from local streets to arterial roads
- Pavement Preservation funded with HURF
Current year: $6 million and 59 miles to be treated
Roadway Classifications
Local Roadways
- Neighborhood or subdivision streets
- Regional Local Road Pavement Preservation Program enables
repair of local roads
Roadway Classifications
- $313.1 million for all 1,866 miles of paved roads
- $296.1 million for 794 miles of Poor or Failed local roads
- 60% of unincorporated roads are in Poor or Failed condition
Cost to Treat Unincorporated Pima County Roads to at Least Fair Condition
Condition Arterial Collector Local Total Treatment Type Cost per Mile Cost Unrated 2 2 62 66 Failed 8 109 212 329 Rehabilitation $246,400 $81,065,600 Poor 90 201 582 873 Rehabilitation $246,400 $215,107,200 Fair 16 28 119 163 Major Seal Coat $70,400 $11,475,200 Good 47 60 102 208 Minor Seal Coat $26,400 $5,491,200 Very Good 37 32 158 227 Nothing $0 $0 200 432 1,235 1,866 $313,139,200
# Miles # Miles # Miles # Miles # Miles # Miles Very Good Good Fair Poor Failed Unrated BOS1 25 24 50 264 77 10 BOS2 13 12 3 25 11 3 BOS3 52 18 23 138 45 32 BOS4 62 34 29 103 59 17 BOS5 7 14 13 52 20 1 50 100 150 200 250 300
Road Condition Miles by Supervisor District
BOS1 BOS2 BOS3 BOS4 BOS5
Regional Local Road Repair Program
- Property tax enacted for FY 2017/18
25-cents per $100 assessed value Applies to County, cities & town residents Proposed for 5 years, but requires annual approval
- Generates roughly $19.5 million annually
- Distributed to jurisdictions by assessed valuation
- Road repair recommendations by 13-member
Transportation Advisory Committee
Total Miles Treatable in Unincorporated Pima County Condition1 Local Road Miles Improvement Cost Total2 Year 1 Disbursement3 Total Miles Treatable Good 102 $5,491,200 $8,190,296 102 (G) + 38 (FR) = 140 Fair 119 $8,307,200 116 (FR) Poor 582 $215,107,200 33 (PR) Failed 212 $52,236,800 33 (FL)
1 Good (G), Fair (FR), Poor (PR), Failed (FL) 2 Cost for each Treatment (per mile): G‐$26,400; FR‐$70,400; PR‐$246,400; FL‐$246,400 3 Year 1 disbursement for unincorporated area prior to financing and insurance fees
Examples of Local Road Repair Options
- TAC to decide method and prioritization for repairing roads
- It would take 35 years to repair unincorporated local roads using
property tax
Transportation Advisory Committee Input
Consideration of Future Funding Options
- County Sales Tax - $70 million shared with cities & towns
- Reallocate unscheduled 1997 bonds to road repair - $16
million
- County General Fund
Past allocations of $5 to $10 million
Would require cuts to core services
- Ten-Cent Statewide Gas Tax Increase
Additional $18.7 million for Pima County and cities & towns; $8.4 million unincorporated share
Consideration of Future Funding Options (cont.)
- Ten-Cent Local Gas Tax on fuel sales in Pima County
$39 million; unincorporated share $13.9 million
- Sales Tax on Gas at Pump or Variable Tax on Wholesale
5 percent local gas sales tax in Pima County would generate $42.4 million; unincorporated share $15.1 million
- General Obligation Bonds – rejected in 2015
- Additional Regional Transportation Authority Tax Half-
Cent Sales Tax