19.06.2014 Views

SACOG Conformity Determination

SACOG Conformity Determination

SACOG Conformity Determination

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

seek more local funding to take care of the road rehabilitation need, in small counties with limited<br />

tax bases.<br />

Another critical funding squeeze effectively puts a cap on transit service in Sacramento<br />

County. Sacramento Regional Transit (RT) forecasts a need for more than $3 billion to continue<br />

operating the bus and light rail system it has now through 2027. Fare revenues will provide only 30<br />

percent of this amount, and another 30 percent currently comes from Sacramento County's 1/2<br />

percent sales tax for transportation (one-third of which supports RT operations). Even with the<br />

renewal of Measure A at 1/2 percent through 2039, RT may only be able to afford to build and<br />

operate two light rail extensions and expand its bus service by about 50 percent by 2027. This falls<br />

far short of RT's 20-Year Vision in the MTP 2025, under which RT's 23-year operating cost would<br />

rise to nearly $5 billion. The region again confronts a difficult choice: if it wants more transit<br />

service in urban Sacramento, voters must agree to increase the sales tax by another 1/4 percent,<br />

with all of that going to transit, or find about $40 million per year from some other source. The<br />

2006 MTP assumes that the voters who approved a continuation of the 1/2 percent sales tax for<br />

transportation in Sacramento County in 2004 will agree to an additional 1/4 percent increase by<br />

2016.<br />

This discussion points out an important trend: looking ahead to 2027, sales taxes become the<br />

key source of transportation funding, instead of gasoline taxes. Sales tax revenues increase with<br />

both economic growth and inflation. On the other hand, gasoline taxes are pegged in cents per<br />

gallon, and will inevitably decline, as autos generally become more fuel efficient, and hybrid and<br />

alternate fuel cars become more common. In urban counties at least, voters have historically proven<br />

willing to approve sales taxes for transportation, while the Legislature has proven unwilling, for at<br />

least the past thirty years, to raise the local share of gas taxes to keep up with road maintenance and<br />

rehabilitation costs. Sales taxes already play a leading role in supporting the region's two most<br />

critical needs, covering more than half the cost of transit operations in this region, and rivaling the<br />

gas tax as a funding source for road maintenance.<br />

WHO DECIDES HOW TO SPEND THE $27.5 BILLION?<br />

Of the $27.5 billion, roughly 18 percent comes to the region, 21 percent belongs to Caltrans,<br />

and the remaining 61 percent is available to local agencies (counties, cities, and transit<br />

districts). Federal law (both TEA-21 in 2002 and now SAFETEA-LU) requires urban<br />

transportation plans to be financially constrained, which limited what the MTP 2025 could include<br />

to revenues reasonably expected to be available. The 2006 MTP again commits the projected<br />

revenues to a proposed list of projects, essentially the same list as in the MTP 2025 except for<br />

projects completed during the years 2002-2006.<br />

Most regional funds come to <strong>SACOG</strong>, but a portion goes to two other regional agencies: Placer<br />

County Transportation Planning Agency and El Dorado County Transportation Commission. Table<br />

7 shows revenues by year and Table 8 estimates how the region would use the funds.<br />

47

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!