Transit Updates for FY 17 Lisa Guthrie; Executive Director of the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transit Updates for FY 17

Lisa Guthrie; Executive Director of the Virginia Transit Association lguthrie@lmg-llc.net With Special Thanks to Virginia Department

• f Rail and Public Transit

Public Transportation(transit, rail, subways, ferries and van or carpooling) is an integral part of a balanced transportation system. With adequate resources, transit can play a larger role in meeting Virginias mobility needs. Access gives people transportation

• ptions to get to work, go to school, visit friends, or go

to the doctor.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS BY THE NUMBERS: Public transportation is a $66 billion industry that puts people to workdirectly employing nearly 400,000 people and creating hundreds

• f thousands of private-sector jobs. Take a

look: $4 The economic return generated by every $1 invested in public transportation. 1.5 million The number of U.S. jobs that public transportation creates or sustains each year. 42% The increase in performance of property values located near high frequency public transportation service. $30 million The increase in business sales resulting from every $10 million in capital investment in public transportation. $9.5 billion The local, state, and federal tax revenue generated each year by public transportation.

Public transportation is a crucial part of the solution to the nations economic, energy, and environmental challengeshelping to bring a better quality of life. Every segment of American societyindividuals, families, communities, and businessesbenefits from it.

Did you know.. In 2014, Americans took 10.8 billion trips on public transportationthe highest in 58 years. Ridership is up 39%--outpacing population growth. Every $1 invested in public transportation generates approximately $4 in economic returns. A two-person household can save on average more than $10,174 a year by downsizing to one car.

Source: http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Documents/FactBook/2013-APTA-Fact-Book.pdf

Transit Use Is Growing Faster than the U.S. Population and VMT

Transit passenger miles U.S. population Highway VMT

Virginias Transit Revenues

• Primary Sources

Transportation Trust Fund (TTF) 1986 Session Recordation Taxes 2007 & 2015 Session Tax on Insurance Premiums 2007 Session Retail Sales and Use Tax (SUT) 2013 Session Sales Tax on Fuel (Dedicated) 2015 Session Various Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs

$149.8 , 31% $45.4 , 9% $110.0 , 23% $33.0 , 7% $77.3 , 16% $68.1 , 14%

FY 2017 Transit Revenues

$483.6 million

TTF - 1986 Recordation - 2007 & 2015 Insurance Premiums (Bonds) - 2007 Fuel Sales Tax - 2015 Retail SUT - 2013 Federal

Transportation Capital Projects Revenue (CPR) Bonds

FY 2017 - $110.0 M

Total bond authorization $3.0 billion (§ 33.2-365 - 2007) 1/3 of gross insurance premiums tax (2.25%) deposited into the Priority Transportation Fund to provide a revenue stream for the CPR bonds - §58.1-2531 A minimum of 20% of the bond proceeds for transit capital consistent with subdivision A 4 c of §58.1-638 - the Mass Transit Capital Fund DRPT/CTB elected to receive this funding over ten years - $60 million per year

Transportation CPR Bonds

Continued Other uses of the bonds include: match to federal funds, revenue sharing funding, statewide or regional projects

$50 million a year for 10 years to match WMATA PRIIA federal funds Dulles Metrorail also received bond funds from regional projects category

Over 45% of the CPR bonds have been allocated to transit initiatives

• $600 M transit minimum
• $500 M State of Good Repair for WMATA
• $225 M to the Dulles Metrorail Project
• $41 M to the fixed guideway initiatives

Marketplace Fairness Act Impacts

HB2313 - 2013 Session dedicated a portion of the estimated revenues from internet sales taxes to TTF

Transit share (14.7%) for FY 2017 was estimated to be $26M Required legislation at federal level Increase in sales tax on motor fuels if not passed, but all contingent revenues dedicated to highways

HB1887 - 2015 Session redirected a portion of the increase in the motor fuels tax to transit as well as recordation taxes previously allocated to the TTF If Marketplace Fairness Act passes, HB1887 revenues for transit are reversed

Net result is an approximate $22M decrease in transit revenues

Commonwealth Transit Revenues Six Year Forecast

Bond funding ends beginning in 2019 Retail SUT and the 1986 transportation trust fund revenues show some growth All other sources are relatively flat

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total 1986 Special Session (14.7%) - 1999 149.8 $ 150.5 $ 154.4 $ 158.2 $ 162.3 $ 165.4 $ 940.6 $ Retail Sales and Use Tax - 2013 77.3 82.6 86.0 89.1 92.3 99.6 526.9 Sales Tax on Fuel - 2015 33.0 33.5 33.9 34.5 35.1 35.5 205.5 Recordation Tax - 2007, 2015 45.4 45.4 45.4 45.4 45.4 45.4 272.4 Transportation CPR Bonds - 2007 110.0 110.0 77.3 50.0

• 347.3

Federal Transit Administration 68.1 67.6 67.6 67.6 68.1 68.5 407.5 Total 483.6 $ 489.6 $ 464.6 $ 444.8 $ 403.2 $ 414.4 $ 2,700.2 $

FY 2017 Transit Revenues by Program

• Loss of bond funds will result in a 44%

decrease in transit capital funding

Operating 224.0 $ Capital 250.7 Special 8.9 Total 483.6 $

Transit Capital Allocation Process

Once state revenues exceed $160 million in a year, 25% of that overage is allocated for capital purposes. Capital program currently uses a tiered prioritization process as defined by TSDAC. Tier 1 at 68% State Share

• Rolling stock for replacement or expansion and related items

Tier 2 at 34% State Share

• Infrastructure and facilities

Tier 3 at 17% State Share

• Support vehicles, shop equipment, spare parts, etc

Projected Transit Capital Revenues Impact of HB1887

2016 - HB 1359 (Patron: Del. Chris Peace; HD 97)

Principle Directives

• Examine the impacts of the revenue reduction caused by

the expiration of the 2007 Capital Project Revenue (CPR) bonds

• Identify possible sources of replacement revenue
• Develop methodologies for further prioritization of

transit capital funds

• Prioritization proposals for new and expansion projects

examined against HB 2 (now Smart Scale) criteria

• State of Good repair projects may have different methodology.

Must address asset condition at minimum.

17

HB 1359

Key Milestones

• Progress report due to General Assembly

January 1, 2017

• Proposals due to General Assembly August

1, 2017

• Ultimately informs how the GA can address

transit capital bond expiration before 2018

18

Membership and Organization

Seven appointees based upon transit stakeholder recommendations DRPT:

• Hon. Marty Williams (Richmond)

Jim Spore (Virginia Beach) VTA:

• Hon. Tom Rust (Herndon)
• Dr. James Toscano (Norfolk)

VML:

• Hon. Mary Katherine Greenlaw (Fredericksburg)

VACo:

• Hon. Jeff McKay (Fairfax County)

CTAV: Josh Baker (Lynchburg)

19

HB 1359 - Transit Capital Prioritization

Project-specific prioritization for both state-of-good repair and expansion transit asset needs based on an objective and quantifiable analysis For new or expansion transit projects, the following factors should be considered relative to the cost of the project:

congestion mitigation economic development accessibility safety environmental quality land use

Project Categories

State of Good Repair (SGR)

Rehabilitation and replacement projects such as purchase of replacement vehicles, facilities, shelters, fare payment, etc.

Capacity Expansion/Enhancement Projects

Expansion vehicles (bus, vans, and service vehicles) Significant new facilities and upgrades such as construction of second elevators, station entrances, and parking garages

System Expansion/Extension Projects

Virginia Beach Light Rail Transit (LRT) Extension; Richmond Bus Rapid Transit (BRT); Norfolk Naval Station Transit Extension; Route 1 BRT in Fairfax County; and Bus Construction Admin/Maintenance Facility in Lynchburg

Methodology Overview

State Transit Capital Funding

Other State/Federal (HB2 and FTA New Starts) Funding

How its planned How its prioritized How its funded

Transit Asset Inventory Future Growth / Plans & Studies State of Good Repair Needs Prioritization Capacity/ Enhancement Needs Prioritization System Expansion Needs Prioritization

Prioritized Transit Improvement Program

Prioritizing State of Good Repair Needs

Asset Condition using information

• n asset age,

condition, and life- cycle replacement Other potential relevant criteria: Ridership / users affected Service reliability Safety impacts Operating cost impacts

Prioritization Key Issues and Considerations

Selecting measures applicable statewide in different regions and for different size systems

Should urban and rural system needs be prioritized differently?

Balance of capital funding between State of Good Repair and capacity expansion needs Linkage with capital needs prioritization efforts at WMATA and

• ther large agencies

Prioritization - Next Steps

Develop list of potential prioritization criteria and identify measures

State-of-Good Repair projects using asset condition and other relevant criteria Capacity and enhancement projects based on 6 criteria identified in HB 1359

Finalize prioritization criteria and establish methodology for weighting and scoring of measures Demonstrate application of criteria to example capital project types

State Transit Capital Funding Tiers

Tier 1

Replacement and Expansion Vehicles 68% maximum state match

Tier 2

Infrastructure and Facilities 34% maximum state match

Tier 3

Other 17% maximum state match

26

$5.7 Billion Projected Statewide Transit

Capital Investments by Type ($000, FY17- FY26)

27

$2.1 billion State Transit Capital Funding Needs by Agency FY17-26

Total

28

$1.5 billion State Transit Capital Revenue

*Excludes federal funds disbursed by the State

29

$2.1 billion State Capital Funding Needs by Tier & $1.5 Billion Projected State Revenue FY17-26

*Excludes share of transit capital costs funded by federal revenues

30

Transit Capital Deficit/Surplus at Current State Match Rates

31

$0.1 $12.4 ($11.7) ($30.0) ($98.2) ($73.5) ($76.0) ($78.5) ($80.0) ($81.5)

$(120) $(100) $(80) $(60) $(40) $(20) $- $20 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Millions

Total Deficit at Base Case Cost Projection

68% 68% 68% 68% 30% 30% 30% 34% 28% 28% 28% 0% 0% 0% 17% 14% 14% 14% 0% 0% 0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3

State Match Rates to FY2023

Tier 1 Match Maintained at High Priority

32

32% 32% 32% 32% 70% 70% 70% 66% 72% 72% 72% 100% 100% 100% 83% 86% 86% 86% 100% 100% 100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3

Local Match Rates to FY2023

Tier 1 Match Maintained at High Priority

33

Note: Local contribution may be offset by federal or other funds

Implications of analysis

Funding deficit by FY2019 Significant drop in state funding participation rates 2021 onward More pronounced impact on projects without federal funding Maintaining the current state participation rate by agencies will require an average of $65 million annually FY2019-FY2026

34

Next Steps

Update analysis to reflect:

• FY17 SYIP
• Updated WMATA capital program
• Recently-approved Transit Development Plans

Identify new/existing revenue sources to address projected deficit (2018 General Assembly?) Develop grant prioritization strategy

35