MATC Fall Lecture Series: Paul Hanley
•Descargar como PPT, PDF•
0 recomendaciones•601 vistas
MATC 2012 Fall Lecture Series
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (11)
Similar a MATC Fall Lecture Series: Paul Hanley
Similar a MATC Fall Lecture Series: Paul Hanley (20)
Más de Mid-America Transportation Center
Más de Mid-America Transportation Center (20)
MATC Fall Lecture Series: Paul Hanley
- 1. Current & Future Alternative Funding for Surface Transportation Paul F Hanley Associate Professor, Civil & Environmental Engineering Director of Transportation Policy Research Mid-America Transportation Center Fall 2012 Lecture Series Sponsored in part by Union Pacific September 7, 2012
- 2. How do we pay for roads and mass transit in our nation?
- 3. Video Clipped from Winning MATC sponsored Student Video Competition: Allie Reiter, “Road Scholars”
- 4. Taxes Excise Sales Tolls Property Fuel Tires Registration Title/License Real Estate
- 5. Funding Revenue Finance
- 6. Taxes Excise Sales Tolls Property Fuel Tires Registration Title/License Real Estate
- 7. Federal Fuel Excise Tires Tolls State Registration Property Title/License General Funds Sales Local Property Real Estate
- 8. Federal Fuel Strong tie to Excise system usage Tires Tolls State Registration Property Title/License General Funds Weak tie to Sales Local system Property Real Estate usage
- 9. Iowa Revenue
- 10. Video Clipped from Winning MATC sponsored Student Video Competition: Allie Reiter, “Road Scholars”
- 11. • Audience question 1 Would you be in favor of raising the fuel tax?
- 12. Video Clipped from Winning MATC sponsored Student Video Competition: Allie Reiter, “Road Scholars”
- 13. • Audience question 2 What if you knew you paid $250 per year ($25 per month)?
- 14. • Audience question 3 What if the money by law could only be spent on roads?
- 15. • Audience question 4 What if some money was spent on transit?
- 16. Total % in favor Fuel Tax Yes No Yes Increase Fuel Tax? 60% 29% 29% n= 1,659 What if you knew you paid Yes No Yes $250 per year ($25 per 15% 72% 38% month)? What if the money by law could Yes No Yes only be spent on roads? 47% 41% 49% What if some money was spent on Yes No Yes transit? 10% 73% 51%
- 17. Changing Emphasis on existing taxes
- 18. Alternatives Taxes Excise Sales Tolls Property Fuel Tires Registration Title/License Real Estate
- 19. States with Local Option Sales Taxes
- 20. • Audience question 5 Increase Sales Tax?
- 21. California’s Experience 25 year history Voters in 20 counties approved Generate $2.5 billion per year Four features Specify the improvements to be financed Require direct voter approval Spent within the counties that enact them Automatically expire
- 22. Sales Tax Total % in favor Increase Sales Tax? Yes No Yes n= 1,614 18% 78% 18% Yes No Yes What if the money by law could only be 20% 72% 34% spent on roads?
- 23. • Audience question 6 Create New Tolls?
- 24. • Audience question 7 Increase existing tolls where they exist?
- 26. Non-Interstate Bridge & Tunnel Tolls
- 30. Tolling Interstates • Yesterday... • Long standing prohibition on new tolls for existing Interstate Highways • Today.... • MAP-21 opens the door for tolling both Interstate and Non-Interstate Highways • Section 129 general toll program • Section 166 high occupancy toll program
- 31. Tolling Interstates & Non-Interstate Highways • Section 129 general toll program • Allows toll on all new capacity added to the National Highway System • Revenue used for • Debt service, • Private invest return, • Operations and maintenance, • P3 payments, • Other 23 programs • Needs annual audits • No toll agreements between USDOT and State & Local Gov
- 32. Tolling Interstates & Non-Interstate Highways • Section 166 high occupancy toll program • Allows toll on all new capacity added to the National Highway System • Revenue used for • Same as Section 129 • Must include • Enforcement, • automatic tolling, • tolls vary by congestion, • Interoperable between systems • Needs annual audits • No toll agreements between USDOT and State & Local Gov
- 33. I-394 in Minneapolis, Minnesota (HOT lanes)
- 34. Total % in Tolls favor Increase Existing Tolls? Yes No Yes n= 965 31% 63% 31% Yes No Yes What if the money by law could only be 30% 62% 50% spent on roads? Total % in favor Create New Tolls? Yes No Yes n= 638 32% 61% 32%
- 35. Property Taxes
- 36. • Audience question 8 Increase Registration Fees?
- 37. Registration Fees Total % in favor Increase Fees? Yes No Yes n= 1,623 31% 63% 31% Yes No Yes What if the money by law could only be 34% 57% 53% spent on roads?
- 39. New Taxes/Fees
- 41. • Audience question 9 Adopt a mileage based user charge?
- 42. Cellular Data Network $ Billing & Dispersal Vehicle w/ OBU Center Participants
- 44. Participants Over 81,000 eligible candidates volunteered Enrolled 2,653 Completed 2,511 Dropped out 5.4% Matched National Demographics Gender, Age, Education, Income, Commute Travel Time, Self-identified Political Affiliation
- 45. Vehicle Miles Traveled • Total 22,000,000 miles (8,400 mi/veh)
- 46. GPS Accuracy GPS Outage Percent of Total VMT Miles Total 21,566,000 1,626,000 7.54%
- 48. Technically feasible using currently mature technologies. • Reliably assigned VMT to federal, state, and local jurisdictions – 99.4% accountability – No detectable urban or natural canyon effects – No significant data loss using commercial cellular data – Mature Technology used o designed and manufactured in the 2005-06 timeframe
- 49. Installation equipment into existing vehicles posed a daunting challenge. • Complex process Trained, professional installers, required an average of 90 minutes to complete 25% required a follow-up visit 8% directly related to installation 1.3% had vehicle incompatibility issues *OBU connected into electrical system and on-board diagnostic bus
- 51. Perception was positively impacted by experience and exposure • Initial perception – 42% favorable – 17% negative • Final perception (10 month exposure) – 70% favorable – 19% negative
- 52. Privacy was a significant issue but is not an insurmountable barrier • 60% believe – Government will track their travel • 34% want – Minimal travel detail collected • Still, > 70% stated – The system was reliable, accurate, and fair – Viable replacement of the fuel tax
- 53. The ability to audit the accuracy of charges outweighed privacy concerns. • 66% favored – Summary of VMT by jurisdiction, and – Indifferent to o Daily summary, or o Monthly summary • Strong desire to audit the system for accuracy
- 54. VMT Fee In favor of a VMT fee? Yes No 32% 68% n= 1,589 Total % in favor What if the vmt fee was tied Yes No Yes to your mpg? 19% 81% 45% Yes 45% Total % in favor Would you still be in Yes No Yes favor if GPS was used ? 57% 43% 26% n= 715
- 55. • Thank you for your attention!