Draft Transportation Funding - Jan2254 55GuiDiNG PRiNCiPLeS GuiDiNG PRiNCiPLeS
PLACE HOLDER FOR INFOGRAPHIC
Transportation Funding
56 57TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG
State Recreational Trails Program (SRT):
Established to create recreational trails in
Iowa for the use, enjoyment and participation
of the public.
Revitalize Iowa’s Sound Economy (RISE):
Promotes economic development in Iowa
through the construction or improvement of
roads.
Transportation Safety Improvement Pro-
gram (TSIP): Funds roadway safety improve-
ments, research, studies or public information
initiatives aimed to increase safety on public
roads.
Primary Road Fund (PRF): Funds the estab-
lishment, construction, and maintenance of
DOT facilities, state institutional roads, state
park roads, and restoration of secondary
roads and municipal streets used as primary
road detours.
Future Transportation Funding
Financial Planning overview
A sound financial plan demonstrating how the unified vision for our regional transportation
system can be achieved is a critical element of the Future Forward 2050 Plan. While this long
range transportation plan is not a programming document, FHWA regulations require that the
plan be ‘fiscally constrained’. To accomplish this, an analysis of fiscal constraint was undertaken
for the life of the Plan (2022-2050). This analysis fulfills the requirements of the current Federal
transportation legislation ‘FAST Act’ outlined in 23 CFR 450.322 (10).
Financial Planning overview
Following are brief descriptions of the primary funding sources used to forecast future funding
targets. While there are many additional State and Federal funding sources available, this list
includes only those that the MPOJC urbanized area has been successful in obtaining through
competitive grant processes.
LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES
In addition to road use tax revenue, a municipality’s general fund is often the primary funding
source for operations and maintenance costs. Funding for capital improvements on public
roads typically comes from the sale of bonds. General operating funds typically support pub-
lic transit capital and operations. Other local funding sources that help fund transportation
improvements include Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district revenues, fare or user fees and
assessments, transit levies, and property tax revenue.
STATE FUNDING SOURCES
Fiscal constraint is a required
component of long-range
planning. Transportation
expenditures included in this
plan should not exceed rev-
enue estimates during the
life of the plan. Simply put,
this plan includes only those
transportation improvements
that can be realistically com-
pleted based on anticipated
revenues.
$
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20
MPoJC Formula Funding by Program
2006-2020
STP Funding
TAP/FLEX Funding
7%
26.3%
66.7%
STBG Project by Type (FY2012-2022)
7% New Construction
Reconstruction/
Maintenance
Capacity
improvements
Financial Forecast
To forecast future state and federal dollars available for Future Forward 2050
projects and programs, we establish a 10-year historic average of funding programs
and apply a 4% inflation rate recommended by the FHWA for each fiscal year cov-
ered by this plan. (2022-2050)
FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES
National Highway Performance Program
(NHPP): Funding for resurfacing, restoring,
and rehabilitating, routes on the Eisenhower
National System of Interstate and Defense
Highways.
DOT Surface Transportation Block Grant
(STBG): Funds improvements to any roadway
or bridge on the federal-aid system, transit
capital projects, bicycle and pedestrian facil-
ities, enhancement projects, environmental
restoration, and the establishment of native
species.
Regional Surface Transportation Block
Grant (STBG): Funds improvements to any
roadway or bridge on the federal-aid system,
transit capital projects, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, enhancement projects, environ-
mental restoration, and the establishment
of native species. Regional STBG funds are
formula funds that are provided to MPOJC
and programed by the Urbanized Area Policy
Board using a competitive grant process. See
page 59 for description of allocation process.
Regional Transportation Alternatives
Program (TAP): Funds enhancement activi-
ties that have a direct relationship to surface
transportation facilities including: facilities for
bicycles and pedestrians (including safety and
educational activities), landscaping and other
scenic beautification, historic preservation,
and the preservation of abandoned railway
corridors for bicycle and pedestrian uses.
Regional TAP funds are formula funds that are
provided to MPOJC and programed by the Ur-
banized Area Policy Board using a competitive
grant process.
Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Im-
provement (CMAQ): Flexible funding for
transportation projects and programs tasked
with helping to meet the requirements of
the Clean Air Act. These projects can include
those that reduce congestion and improve air
quality.
Federal Recreational Trails Program (FRT):
Funding for public recreational trails. The
recipient must use funding for trail projects
that are part of a local, regional, or statewide
trails plan.
FiSCAL YeARDoLLARS
58 59TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG TRANSPoRTATioN FuNDiNG
How much funding has each MPO entity received?
Will there be sufficient funding for all our transportation infrastructure needs?
Funding is not allocated based on population. Please see following page for more details on the fudning allocation process.
4% inflation rate; year of expenditures considered to the the mid-year of funding period. Historically a 40% match is typcial for projects that receive state and federal funding. For
more information on state and federal funding see Supporting Documents.
Funding Allocation Process for Surface Transportation Block Grant and Alternatives Funds
Project Identification
and Submission
Each MPO community/entity
identifies local transportation
projects that are appropri-
ate for funding through the
MPO. These projects are
usually selected from estab-
lished local community or
development plans. Funding
applications are then submit-
ted to the MPO. Applications
include the timing for design
and construction, anticipat-
ed local funding as well as
desired federal funding, and
a general description of the
elements that will be includ-
ed in the project.
Qualification and Scoring
MPO staff review the sub-
mitted projects to verify that
each meets federal eligibility
guidelines. Staff then use
pre-approved criteria to score
projects. These criteria corre-
spond to the Guiding Princi-
ples described on pages X-XX
and are shown on page XX of
the appendix. The criteria and
scores help ensure the MPO is
funding projects that meet the
diverse goals of the organiza-
tion.
Recommendation and Selection
The Transportation Technical Advisory Committee,
(TTAC)—which includes engineers, transit, and other
staff from all five MPO communities, the County, and
the University—work together to provide recommen-
dations for which projects should be selected and
what amount of funding each project should receive.
The Urbanized Area Policy Board, which includes
elected officials and other representatives, makes the
final selections and allocations based on the recom-
mendations and priorities of the TTAC.
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
Selected projects are programmed in order to set a schedule for the
availability and release of federal funds. The TIP is a short-range plan
that lists all transportation projects that have been selected to receive
federal transportation funding within at least a four-year horizon.
MPOJC entities work cooperatively through committees
and the Urbanized Area Policy Board to decide which
transportation projects will receive funding.
A list of projects and descrip-
tions may be found at the end
of the Road and Bridge, Bicycle
and Pedestrian, and Transit
chapters of this plan. Projects
that are included in the current
TIP are identified within the
2022-2030 timeline.
Municipality Population 2010 Population 2020 Population Change
MPOJC STBG
Funds
MPOJC STBG
Funds per
capita
MPOJC TAP
Funds
MPOJC TAP
Funds per
capita
Coralville 18,907 22,318 3,411 16,146,900$ 723$ 1,612,599$ 72$
Iowa City 67,862 74,828 6,966 36,121,419$ 483$ 2,318,000$ 31$
North Liberty 13,374 20,479 7,105 7,847,000$ 383$ 1,015,118$ 50$
Tiffin 1,947 4,512 2,565 2,020,000$ 448$ 592,000$ 131$
University Heights 1,051 1,228 177 1,265,440$ 1,030$ 215,000$ 175$
Johnson Co.*-6,679 -1,055,000$ 158$ 195,000$ 29$
Anticipated Funding & Needs (2022 - 2050)
Short-Term (FY22-30)*$8,157,692 $6,179,840 $93,240,028 $85,844,040 $101,397,720 $92,023,880 $9,373,840
Mid-Term (FY31-40)*$12,033,378 $16,180,826 $137,537,972 $144,736,650 $149,571,350 $160,917,476 -$11,346,126
Long-Term (FY41-50)*$15,158,930 $35,052,902 $173,262,121 $247,347,763 $188,421,051 $282,400,665 -$93,979,614
TOTAL $35,350,000 $57,413,568 $404,040,121 $477,928,453 $439,390,121 $535,342,021 -$95,951,900
Total Funding Total Needs Revenue Shortfall
2022-2050Cost Band / Funding Period Bike & Ped
Funding
Bike & Ped
Needs
Road & Bridge
Funding
Road & Bridge
Needs