Local Funding Options What is, or could be, within the power of the County. WISCONSIN COUNTY ASSOCIATION 77 TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE LA CROSSE

What is the challenge? A La Crosse County Perspective  Rapid increase in cost of materials and fuel over past 10 years (examples: Seal Oil 221%, Hot Mix 85%, Fuel 159%)  General Transportation Aids and tax levy for La Crosse County Highways are no longer sufficient to perform anything but maintenance (i.e. seal coating, crack sealing, patching, mowing, etc.)  All improvement work beyond maintenance is being paid for with grant money or borrowing ($2.5 - $3 million / year).  83% of Reconditioning & Rehabilitation cost on County Highways is paid by Property Taxes (“Who Pays for Roads in Wisconsin” UW research report) Payment is not related to use.

Funding Today and the Future  Property Tax Levy  Bonding  Vehicle Registration Fee  Sales Tax  Road Maintenance Agreements  Timber Sales  Recycling Sales  Cooperative Agreements Other Possibilities  Sales Tax Dedicated to Transportation  Special Assessments  Utility Work  Regional Transportation Authority

Property Tax Levy County road and bridge fund; tax levy. The county board shall annually levy a tax of not more than 2 mills on the dollar, in addition to all other taxes, and the proceeds shall be known as the "County Road and Bridge Fund". Expenditures from said fund shall be made only for the purposes of constructing and maintaining highways and bridges under this chapter and for purchasing, operating, renting and repairing machinery, quarries and gravel pits used in such construction and maintenance.

Bonding Wisconsin Stats Chapter 67 “Municipalities (including Counties) may borrow money and issue municipal obligations therefor only for the purposes and by the procedure specified in this chapter. The aggregate amount of indebtedness, including existing indebtedness, of any municipality shall not exceed 5% of the value of the taxable property located in the municipality as equalized for state purposes”. General Obligation & Revenue Bonds.

Sales Tax Adoption by county ordinance. Any county desiring to impose county sales and use taxes under this subchapter may do so by the adoption of an ordinance, stating its purpose and referring to this subchapter. The rate of the tax imposed under this section is 0.5 percent of the sales price or purchase price. The county sales and use taxes may be imposed only for the purpose of directly reducing the property tax levy and only in their entirety as provided in this subchapter. That ordinance shall be effective on the first day of January, the first day of April, the first day of July or the first day of October. A certified copy of that ordinance shall be delivered to the secretary of revenue at least 120 days prior to its effective date. The repeal of any such ordinance shall be effective on December 31. A certified copy of a repeal ordinance shall be delivered to the secretary of revenue at least 120 days before the effective date of the repeal. Several counties use this for CTH expenses.

Road maintenance Agreements (1)(c) authority to enter into contracts for the payment of maintenance, resurfacing, reconditioning, rehabilitation and reconstruction. These are called “Road Upgrade and Maintenance Agreements” or “Haul Road Agreements”. These agreements need to be based on good data and engineering practices. There are several counties currently using this arrangement, primarily with regards to frac sand but it can be used for any large traffic generator.

Vehicle Registration Fee Municipal or county vehicle registration fee. (1) ”The governing body of a municipality or county may enact an ordinance imposing an annual flat municipal or county registration fee on all motor vehicles registered in this state which are customarily kept in the municipality or county. A registration fee imposed under this section shall be in addition to state registration fees. Municipalities ​ Appleton (city; $20 beginning February 2015) Arena (township; $20 beginning April 2015) Beloit (city; ​​ $20 beginning February 2015) Gillett (city: $20 beginning July 2015) Janesville (city; $10) ​ Kaukauna (city: $10 beginning August 2015) Milwaukee (city; $20) ​ Counties Chippewa County ($10 beginning January 2015) Iowa County ($20 beginning February 2015) St. Croix County ($10) ​

Cooperative Agreements Cooperative Agreements with other municipalities are effective ways of defraying the cost of CTH improvement to a larger tax base. There are a number of things that can factor into this particular discussion. a) (2) ”The county trunk system shall be marked and maintained by the county. No county shall be responsible for the construction and maintenance of a city or village street on the county trunk highway system to a greater width than are those portions of such system outside the village or city and connecting with such street.”

Cooperative Agreements continued b) Special Assessments – Chapter 66 Sub-Chapter VII provides for special assessment authority to Towns Cities and Villages. They can use that power for the improvements of a CTH for which they are responsible. c) Utilities (Water/Sewer/Storm Water/Energy) – Improvements to utility infrastructure can be made at the same time as roadway improvements. Jointly executing projects between the utility and the County can benefit both entities by defraying costs associated with such work between both entities.

Jurisdictional Transfers  Trading roadways –  La Crosse Example trading CTH C for STH 108 plus $4.7 million from the WisDOT.  Transferring Roadways – Roadway ownership is a control issue and frequently it makes sense for a municipality to be in control of roadways within their boundaries.

Timber Sales Two Counties are either directly using the proceeds from timber sales from County Forests or they are offsetting Highway Levy with those proceeds such that the levy mirrors the timber sales revenue.

Recycling Sales Dodge County provided an innovative approach to CTH funding using recycling as a source of revenue. The money received for the sale of scrap culverts, bridge rail, beam guard etc. revenue can be as much as $50, / yr. in a good year.

Situational Recap  AVG. RECONSTRUCTION CYCLE YEARS  AVG. RESURFACING LIFE CYCLE – 56.2 YEARS  30 COUNTIES REPORTED NO RECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN PAST FIVE YEARS  83% of Reconditioning & Rehabilitation cost on County Highways is paid by Property Taxes  GTA and property tax levy are no longer sufficient to perform anything but maintenance in many Counties.  Massive inflationary cost increases in materials.

What does the future hold for CTH funding mechanisms? From the Federal, State and Local perspective, the cost and pain needs to be borne by all users of the transportation system in an equitable and sustainable fashion.  The possibility of a local Sales Tax Dedicated to Transportation and other possible fees and mechanisms that are locally controlled.  Increased local funding streams from the State and Federal Government resulting from efforts to increase overall transportation funding with a wide variety of sustainable mechanisms, i.e. VMT, increased fuel taxes, increased user fees, tolling, etc.

What does the future hold for CTH funding mechanisms? Cont’d  Legislative efforts for the removal of Transportation Funding from the State imposed levy caps.  Local decisions to support increased Transportation Funding.  Innovation o New ideas for transportation funding streams o Exploring innovative use of existing funding streams.

Thank you Ron Chamberlain La Crosse County Highway Commissioner