1 / 31

The Future of California Transportation Finance Martin Wachs University of California, Berkeley

The Future of California Transportation Finance Martin Wachs University of California, Berkeley. A Quiet Revolution. The nature of transportation finance is changing fundamentally & on a large scale The change is happening gradually, without much public notice or broad discussion

paul2
Télécharger la présentation

The Future of California Transportation Finance Martin Wachs University of California, Berkeley

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Future of California Transportation Finance Martin WachsUniversity of California, Berkeley

  2. A Quiet Revolution • The nature of transportation finance is changing fundamentally & on a large scale • The change is happening gradually, without much public notice or broad discussion • Question: Is the current direction of change desirable or not? • Implication…I think the answer may well be “NO”

  3. Local Streets & County Roads • Financed largely by property taxes on residential and commercial land….and ought to be ….. • Most benefits come from “access” to property: postal delivery, ambulance, fire, police, water, sewer, telephone service. • Access gives value to property & value should be “recouped” • Local streets & county roads carry tiny % of all traffic

  4. History of Transportation Finance • Local Streets and County Roads: Transportation Finance: 90%++ of System • State Highways Bankrupting States in 1915-25 period; Fastest Growth of Autos and Roads Ever….Led to innovation of “User Fees.” • Tolls most Desirable User Fee in Principle • Motor Fuel Taxes and Various “Car Taxes” adopted as “Second Best” but Workable

  5. History of Transportation Finance • Motor fuel taxes enormously popular • Supported by wide variety of constituencies • Adopted in every state by 1940 • Federal motor fuel tax in thirties • Fundamental finance mechanism for Interstate System in fifties

  6. History of Transportation Finance • User fees in USA became associated with “trust funds” and non-diversion constitutional provisions in many states; Article XIX in California • Elastic definition of user fees allowed expansion to transit and to environmental mitigation in many states • “Hypothecation” not common worldwide

  7. Motor Fuel Taxes • Usually expressed as “Cents per Gallon” • Must be raised by act of legislature • Revenue does not rise automatically with inflation as does income tax or sales tax • Improving Fuel Economy lowers revenue per mile of driving • Revenue declining precipitously in relation to VMT

  8. Quiet Revolution Under WayNationally…..and in California • State legislatures reluctant to raise user fees • Increasingly reluctant to directly raise fees or taxes at all • Putting measures on ballot for voters to enact instead of taking action in legislatures

  9. Fuel Tax Changes, 1957-2002 • Average of Fifty States • State Fuel Tax in 1957: 5.7¢/gal • If adjusted for Inflation in 2002: 31.0¢/gal • Actual Current Fuel Tax: 20.3¢/gal • Difference 10.7¢/gal

  10. Survey of Fifty States • Number of states granting authority to local governments…..All since 1970 • 15 States: Local motor fuel taxes • 33 States: Local vehicle license/registration fees • 33 States: Local option sales taxes • 15 States: Local income/payroll taxes • A few others….severance taxes; impact fees; real estate transfer taxes, mortgage recording taxes

  11. Change is happening quickly • 44 Transportation Finance Ballot Measures in US in 2002 • 32 Local/Regional in Nature • 9 Statewide • 20 Dealt with sales taxes • 5 Property taxes • 1 Gasoline tax 9 Bond issues

  12. Changes in State & Local Transportation Revenue,1995-99 (National Totals) Billion$/Year % Change State User Fees 36.2-42.7 +18% Local Property Taxes 5.2-6.4 +22% Local General Funds 12.3-15.9 +29% Other State Taxes 6.6-8.6 +30% Other Local Taxes 4.5-7.1 +58% State Borrowing 4.3-8.3 +92%

  13. California’s Situation Not Terribly Different from National Trends….But it’s a BIG State

  14. California’s Population

  15. VMT in California(billions of miles)

  16. California’s Gas Tax 199418¢ Summary of Gas Tax Increases 199014¢ 19839¢ 19637¢ 19536¢ 1947 4.5¢ 1923 2¢ 1927 3¢

  17. Percent Change in Self-Help Taxes Compared to Gas Tax

  18. State Transportation Improvement Program

  19. Local Option Sales Taxes • Most popular and fastest growing • National survey and detailed study of California (18 Counties; 80% of Population) • Read ballot measures • Interviewed proponents/opponents/administrators • Examined projects built and not built, studied budgets and costs

  20. Major Features of LOSTSMajority vote or supermajorityProject lists/categoriesSunset dates/reauthorizationImplemented by local govts.

  21. Issues Raised by LOSTs • Move away from user fee philosophy • Sales Tax is broad based tax • Regressive • Consistency with Regional Transportation Plans • Project delivery • Local authority and responsibility • Flexibility versus specificity • Salience of issue of “trust”

  22. Trust of Politicians is Big Issue • California Poll by Balldassare: • “Do you think people in state government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don’t waste much of it? 52% A Lot 5% Not Much 41% Some 2% Don’t know

  23. Comments from Citizens….. • “The whole system is a mess” • “Officials don’t listen to us” • “We don’t know where our tax money goes” • “I’d like to vote on everything so they don’t make decisions for us” • “Politicians fix only what gets them elected” • “I don’t trust where the money will go.” I just don’t think it will do any good.”

  24. Issues Raised by LOSTS • Christmas tree measures • Pay to play measures may be even worse (California Proposition 51) • Dissociation between projects and efficiency of management of system

  25. Broader Questions Worth Asking • Why won’t politicians act directly? Revenue is just revenue User fees are not understood Term limits are an issue

  26. Broader Questions Worth Asking Is user fee concept still valid and appropriate? • User fees provide incentives to efficiency • Motor fuel taxes were second best, and may be declining • Technology to the rescue/ A new era of tolls • Attitudes changing toward tolls, if you get what you pay for • But realistically, there is a long way to go

  27. Long-Term Future • Replacement of Petroleum Fuels • Use of Pricing as Incentive to Change Type of Fuel • Charge for Use of Particular Road at Particular Time • GPSS Monitoring • Privacy Issues • Experiments Under Way

  28. The Transition is Underway, but Difficult to Understand • GPSS Truck Use Charges in Europe • Fuel Tax Still Valid for Decades in USA • Issue of Double Taxation if Tolls are Charged on Existing Roads • Probability of Tolls on NEW CAPACITY • Shift is Already Happening

  29. California Needs to • Realize that the shift to local option transportation taxes is a short-term interim measure; • In the reasonably short term there may be a need to raise taxes and tolls; • In the longer term – 20+ years – we need to change the entire basis of user fees; • I believe that electronic toll collection is where we are heading, but I am not completely certain of that.

  30. THANK YOU! ITS TIME FOR YOUR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS.

More Related