New Draft Spending Plan Increases Highway Dollars

Yesterday, the Bottleneck Blog reported on the breakdown of highway expenditures that Metro is proposing if the proposed half cent sales tax increase is successful in this fall’s election. Snoble was most likely trying to counter some of the spin coming out of the San Gabriel Valley that they are getting less than their fare share of the sales tax dollars. In addition to funds for the Gold Line extension to Azusa, the San Gabriel Valley will also see a $1.7 billion investment in expanding its highway system.

But for transportation reformers, the news was bad. If Metro moves forward with this new budget, the amount spent on highway projects will be increased from 15% to 20% of the entire tax. Presumably the money will come from the "Local Return" budget line, further reducing the amount of funds available for bicycle and pedestrian projects. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no discussion of setting aside any of the budget for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

To read the full text of Snoble’s letter, read on after the jump. For a breakdown of the highway expenditures by region, check out the Bottleneck Blog.

Attached is a draft proposal for the highway portion of the new sales tax developed in response to the subregional equity concerns raised after the "discussion draft" Expenditure Plan was released on June 26, 2008. Overall, the new draft highway proposal assumes that 20% ofthe proposed new sales tax, as opposed to 15%, will be available for highway projects. The proposed highway program places a high priority on a geographic balance. As I indicated in my correspondence earlier today, we understand that you will ultimately require the transit capital projects to gain a complete picture of the geographic balance we are to recommend, but I cannot yet release that information due to the sensitivity ofthe negotiations now underway.

Subregional areas whose percentage share of the project specific portions ofthe sales tax that would be less than their population and employment burdens were granted a heavier highway investment to compensate for the potential geographic inequity. To develop the proposal, Metro staff relied upon comments made by Councils of Government in response to the draft 2008 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), particularly those comments pertaining to projects included in the strategic or unfunded portion of the LRTP.

With a couple of exceptions for grade separation and interchange projects, the geographic focus ofthe proposal means that many highway projects will require substantial additional investment from other fund sources, such as public private partnerships, state, and/or federal funds. In many cases, the new sales tax funds would be used to develop the environmental and design portions of the projects.

Per AB 2321 (Feuer), the proposed highway expenditure plan also reflects mandatory sales tax funds for projects that already have full funding from Metro’s draft 2008 Long Range Transportation Plan. For this set ofprojects, subregional areas can expect to receive a like commitment offunds for alternative projects as required by AB 2321. We understand that a consensus sales tax proposal is crucial to our ultimate success and we look forward to engaging in a full discussion ofthe proposed sales tax soon.

  • Joe Linton

    The breakdown that was on the handout from Metro was 15-20% local return AND 15-20% funding set-aside for highways, grade separations, freeway soundwalls. So… depending on how the cities spend their local return, something like 40% of the money could go to ever more facilities for cars cars cars and more cars.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Metro Board Passes Sales Tax Proposal

|
Asm. Mike Feuer and Boardmember Richard Katz Chat With the Press After Tax Proposal Passes After hours of debate, the Metro Board passed a virtually unchanged proposal to add a half cent sales tax increase, dedicated to a specific project list, to the fall ballot.  Only Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and Duarte City […]

A Wonky Debate Over Metro Regional vs. Sub-Regional Funding

|
There is an item that was bounced around at the Metro Board last month regarding freeway projects and whether they are “regional” or “subregional” facilities. Lakewood City Councilmember and Metro Boardmember Diane DuBois is pushing for L.A. freeway-widening projects to be classified as “regional” rather than “subregional” projects. Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin raised some issues […]

Metro’s $40 Billion Plan

|
Metro’s Plans Are Big on Expansion, Not So Big on Increasing Bike/Ped. Access to Their Stations Before Metro can place a half cent sales tax increase on the fall ballot, it needs to tell us how it’s going to spend the $40 billion the increase would raise over the next thirty years.  At last week’s […]

Five Reasons Why People Who Bike Should Vote Yes On Measure M

|
Streetsblog L.A. endorsed Measure M, Metro’s proposed sales tax to fund transportation infrastructure and programs throughout L.A. County. Voters will decide the fate of Measure M next Tuesday. If you get around on bike, here are five reasons you will want to vote yes on Measure M. 1. A Local Funding Stream For Bicycling: Two Percent […]