Highway Program Financing July 2011. Michigan Allocations Federal Law + State Law + Michigan Policy = MDOT & Local Allocations of Federal Apportionment.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TRE ANNUAL MEETING Grant Levi, NDDOT Director November 26,
Advertisements

Tribal Consultations. Topics FY12 Extensions and IRR Program Funding MAP-21 Programs and Funding.
Infrastructure Planning and Funding MID-REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS MID-REGION METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION MARCH 19, 2015 NAIOP-NEW MEXICO CHAPTER.
January 18, 2011 Genesee County Road Commission Non-motorized Project Coordination Non-motorized Project Coordination with the Genesee County Road Commission.
FINANCIAL PLAN AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINT FOR FTIPS AND FSTIP FINANCIAL PLAN AND REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS 2013 FTIP/FSTIP WORKSHOP January 17, 2012 Wade Hobbs,
MAP-21 Overview and Programmatic Impacts February 4, 2013 Serge Phillips MnDOT Federal Relations Koryn Zewers.
1 Transportation Update. 2 Overview Pre-legislative effort The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) – Highway – Transit – Discretionary.
Federal and other funding programs. Introduction We live in the age of acronyms SAFETEA-LU FHWA FTA TIP STIP.
Ohio Department of Transportation Office of Transit Urban Roundtable September 30,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users P. L SAFETEA-LU.
© 2015 AMPO 444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 345 Washington, DC tel: fax: Washington Update MAP-21 Reauthorization, Highway.
MAP-21: Bridges and Structures Moderated By Joey Hartmann Team Leader, Office of Bridge Technology Federal Highway Administration HIBT Webinar on MAP-21.
Minnesota Department of Transportation ARRA, Greater Minnesota Transit, Airport Program Status, & Local Bridge Bonding Update House Transportation Finance.
Federal MAP-21 Programs 1 Module 7 Safety Analysis in a Data-limited, Local Agency Environment July 22, Boise, Idaho.
Performance Measurement Requirements Notice of Proposed Rule Making.
Funding Levels Similar funding levels to the Transportation Enhancement Activities under SAFETEA-LU: FY 2013: $808,760,000 FY 2014: $819,900,000 Total.
Statewide Local Agency Project Delivery Conference SAFETEA-LU: Earmarks and Federal Programs Relating to Local Agencies Travis Brouwer ODOT Federal Affairs.
Fiscal Years Outlook Preliminary Six-Year Financial Plan and Six-Year Improvement Plan Strategy John W. Lawson, Chief Financial Officer Reta.
State and Federal Funding Programs for Local Agency Projects Alan Lively Local Government Section Project Delivery Specialist.
SAFETEA-LU Highlights Roger Petzold Office of Interstate and Border Planning Federal Highway Administration Transportation Border Working Group Nov. 9,
East-West Gateway Council of Governments February 25, 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Transportation Elements.
FY 2012 President’s Budget Released February 14, 2011.
Distribution Guided by State Law Surface Transportation Program (STP) Surface Transportation Program (STP) Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Improvement.
The Regional Forum for Transportation Planning. Southwestern Pennsylvania 10 Counties >7,000 square miles 2.66 million citizens 548 municipalities 132.
Ron Hall Tribal Technical Assistance Program Colorado State University
Module X: Cooperative Revenue Forecasting. Federal Requirements “For the purpose of developing the metropolitan transportation plan, the MPO, public transportation.
© 2010 AMPO 1029 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 710 Washington, DC tel: fax: Washington Update AMPO Management & Operations Work.
Division of Budgets August 22, 2012 Tab 15 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century (MAP-21)
MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21 ST CENTURY MAP-21 Volusia TPO TCC & CAC Presentation – August 21, 2012.
Energy Law, Fall 2010 Natashia Holmes
MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21 ST CENTURY MAP-21 Volusia TPO Board Presentation September 25, 2012.
Financial Planning Session E-1 The Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process.
MDOT Office of Economic Development Michael B. Kapp, Administrator Grant Programs Overview Transportation Solutions for Vibrant Communities Upper Peninsula.
INTRODUCTION TO FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDING AND ELIGIBILITY Steve Baumann Financial Specialist (503) Mike Morrow(Field Operations Engineer) Mike.
Transit Funding 101. Exciting  Management issue? Service levels Wages/benefits Safety Layoffs Why Care About Transit Funding?
Module Funding Sources, Requirements, and Opportunities Identify, access, and share funding to support road safety initiatives.
Nelson Castellanos Federal Highway Administration March 12, 2013.
Highway Program Structure Highway Recommendations Neil Pedersen Chair, ASC Highway Legislative Team Vice Chair, AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways Administrator,
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 CAPITAL REGION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY.
Greater Minnesota Transit. Greater MN Transit Service (2010) 59 transit agencies –6 Large Urban (more than 50,000 population) –13 Small Urban –40 Rural.
Local Pots of Gold Local Pots of Gold Maintaining Fiscal Constraint for Local Funds in the TIP Srikalyani Srinivasan Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
MAP-21 Performance-Based Planning: A Focus on Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Presentation to the Transportation.
Freight Project Financing Challenges, Questions and Options presented by Michael P. Huerta Cambridge Systematics, Inc. April 30, 2001.
HIGHWAY TRUST FUND. HOW ARE PUBLIC PROJECTS FUNDED? General Fund Generated by general revenues Bonds Usually by referenda User Fees Pay as you go.
Who Does What Susan Handy TTP282 October Players Government Industry Citizens/ Consumers.
Action 2020 Training Local Context August 15, 2012.
Julie Skallman State Aid Division Director & State Aid Engineer.
Implementation of the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 FHWA Georgia Division February 25, 2009.
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TEA-21 Prepared by Iowa Department of Transportation September 1998.
November 8, MAP-21 themes 2 Strengthens America’s highway and public transportation systems Creates jobs and supports economic growth Supports the.
Funding Target Formula 32.50% Total VMT (on and off State Hwy System) 22.19% Population 16.88% Lane miles (on System) 14.06% VMT (trucks only) 6.88% Percent.
Leveraging Financial Resources Federal Highway Administration Funding Shana V. Baker Office of Metropolitan Planning Federal Highway Administration
Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST Act) Association of MPOs 444 N Capitol St., NW Suite345 Washington, DC
Association for Commuter Transportation Best Work Places for Commuters
Federal-Aid Funding County Highway Accountants Conference May 10, 2007 zpowerpoint/ProjManagersCriticalIssuesBOB Feb07.ppt.
LPA Certification Riverton, WY November 20, 2014.
Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST Act) April 7, 2016.
FAST, What does the new transportation bill mean to you April 6, 2016.
MAP-21 Formula Briefing Preliminary DRAFT. Moving Ahead for Progress into the 21 st Century (MAP-21) MAP-21 was passed by Congress and signed by the President.
Partnering for Strong Economies: Regional Councils and Walkable Communities National Association of Regional Councils Celebrating 50 Years of Collaboration.
FUNDING AVAILABILITY & SAFETY PROGRAMS 3//21/2013.
Virginia House Bill 2 – Funding the Right Projects Intelligent Transportation System Activities May 19, 2016.
Developed from a summary prepared for the New York State Association of MPOs 1.
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Financial Planning and Fiscal Constraint Requirement MAG Regional Council February 24, 2010.
Central Minnesota Area Transportation Partnership Primer Welcome
Regional Transit Formula Fund Policies Section 5307/5340 – Urbanized Formula Fund Section 5337 – State of Good Repair Section 5339 – Bus and Bus Facilities.
Txdot’s transportation program, 2018 Txapa annual membership meeting
TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
About the Transportation planning board
Presentation transcript:

Highway Program Financing July 2011

Michigan Allocations Federal Law + State Law + Michigan Policy = MDOT & Local Allocations of Federal Apportionment and Allocations

Federal Perspective The Federal Highway Program Focuses on  Federal Functional Classification …NOT jurisdiction  Urbanized/Non-urbanized Areas...NOT cities, villages, and counties

Michigan Law Equity Bonus TEDF-CTEDF-D TEDF Set Aside Excluding CMAQ, Enhancements, Earmarks, and Bridge 31.5% of EB to TEDF 15% to Cat. C 16.5% to Cat. D Rail Crossing Mandate 30%<MDOT<50% Rail Crossing Funds

Allocation Process Assigning Federal Highway Program Apportionments and Allocations to MDOT and Local Programs

Transportation Management Area Program FY $88.3 million Equals Federal Suballocation to Areas Over 200K (policy decision) Suballocated proportionately to MPOs based on population Local Roads in MPOs of Urbanized Areas Over 200,000

Transportation Econ. Dev. Fund- Category C FY $9.2 Million Equity Bonus (Minimum Guarantee) set aside required by state law Suballocated to counties by fixed statutory percentage Congestion Relief on Roads in the 5 Urban Counties

Transportation Econ. Dev. Fund- Category D FY $10.1Million Equity Bonus (Minimum Guarantee) set aside required by state law Suballocated to counties by share of rural county primary mileage System of All-season Roads in the 78 Rural Counties

Metropolitan Planning FY $10.8 Million Equals Federal Apportionment (Federal Law) Suballocated to MPOs by base and population MPO Process for Urbanized Areas

“Fixed” Allocations TMA Program $88.3 TEDF-C $9.2 TEDF-D $10.1 Metro Planning $10.8 ================= Subtotal $ % Target $ Subtotal $118.4 ================= Remaining $70.7 $70.7 million distributed proportionately to remaining programs Compared to 25 Percent Target

Small Metropolitan Planning Organization Program FY $21.2 Million Proportional share of $70.7 million (policy decision) Suballocated proportionately to MPOs based on population Local Roads in MPOs of UZAs from 50,000 to 200,000

Small Urban Program FY $9.2 Million Proportional share of $70.7million (policy decision) Granted to Urban Areas by application Local Roads in Urban Areas 5,000 to 50,000

Rural STP Program FY $28.0 Million Proportional share of $70.7 million (policy decision) Suballocated to counties by FAS formula (area, miles, population) County Roads Outside Large UZAs

Safety Programs FY $26.6 Million Proportional share of $70.7 million (policy decision) Granted to Local Agencies by application Local Road Safety, Rail Crossings, and Safe Routes to School

“Non-75/25” Programs Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Total FY $78.4 Million Allocation determined by project selection process Transportation Enhancements Total FY $28.6 Million Allocation determined by project selection MDOT and Local Allocations

“Non-75/25” Programs Bridge Funds Total FY $134.0 Million 15% or $20.1 to Local Bridge Program Earmarks Allocation determined by Congress. No Earmarks in FY 2011 Discretionary Funds 2011 is the first year in a long time that we had a full discretionary program MDOT and Local Allocations

Obligation Authority Associate apportionments with corresponding obligation authority Exclude “Non-75/25” Set aside amount of ceilings associated with “Fixed” Allocations Distribute the remaining ceiling Determine apportionments for other programs based on authority amount Allocations by Obligation Authority, NOT Apportionments

Local Projects When a project is submitted by one of the hundreds of local agencies we ask: Is the project in the S/TIP? Does the agency have apportionment? Is there local obligation authority? If all answers are “Yes” we request obligation of funds

Local Program Rules Individual counties and MPOs may submit projects using their entire allocation balance if the projects are in the S/STIP Obligation Authority amounts are available on a “First-come, First serve” basis Local apportionments/allocations and obligation authority amounts are carried forward from one fiscal year to the next

Important Reminder Differences in estimated and actual costs and changes that occur throughout the financial life of a project increase or decrease balances of apportionment / allocations and obligation authority.

MDOT Program MDOT 5 Year Road and Bridge Program Also STIP and TIP’s Uses the MDOT Funding “Template” Repair and Rebuild Bridge New Roads Maintenance Etc.

MDOT Projects When a project is submitted by a System Manager we ask: Is the project in the S/TIP? Is it Federal-aid eligible? Do we have eligible apportionment? Is there MDOT obligation authority? Depending on the answers, we can obligate federal funds, request “AC authorization, or use State funds