Item 1: Ordinance on Transplan and Metro Plan Amendments

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT J From: YEITER Kurt M Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 12:54 PM To: CARROLL Phillip (SMTP); MILLS Jeffery (SMTP); LAWLESS John (SMTP); HLEDIK Randy (SMTP); BEIERLE Heidi (SMTP); KNEELAND Ann (SMTP); DUNCAN Rick (SMTP) Cc: CABANISS Jan E; WEISS Carolyn J; GARDNER Lisa A; INERFELD Rob; BROTHERTON Kathryn (Harrang) Subject: RE: May 5 hearing: "Financially Constrained" list Phillip, In answer to your question about the term “Financially Constrained,” I’ll provide a short answer and, for those who want more info, a longer answer. I appreciate questions that make us think about terms we use in a daily, off-handed fashion. Shorter answer: The term “Financially Constrained” is one of several categories, or lists, required of projects by federal transportation planning rules. Financially Constrained project lists identify those portions of the full lists of identified needs in the long-range plan that can be funded with reasonably expected revenues over the plan horizon, which is typically 20 years. Thus, "financially constrained" simply means planning for that portion of the total need constrained to the reasonably expected financial resources. Projects on the “Financially Constrained” list typically represent a higher local or regional priority than those on the “Future” list, assuming that some funding would be available for those projects. Longer Answer (with thanks to LCOG staff): "Financially constrained" is a federal term, in this case a requirement of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in the development of federally-required Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) and Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Programs (MTIPs). Specifically, related to the RTP, it arises from this requirement: "Include [in the RTP] a financial plan that demonstrates the consistency of proposed transportation investments with already available and projected sources of revenue. The financial plan shall compare the estimated revenue from existing and proposed funding sources that can reasonably be expected to be available for transportation uses, and the estimated costs of constructing, maintaining and operating the total (existing plus planned) transportation system over the period of the plan. The estimated revenue by existing revenue source (local, State, and Federal and private) available for transportation projects shall be determined and any shortfalls identified. Proposed new revenues and/or revenue sources to cover shortfalls shall be identified, including strategies for ensuring their availability for proposed investments. Existing and proposed revenues shall cover all forecasted capital, operating, and maintenance costs. All cost and revenue projections shall be based on the data reflecting the existing situation and historical trends. For nonattainment and maintenance areas, the financial plan shall address the specific financial strategies required to ensure the implementation of projects and programs to reach air quality compliance." You may have noticed that the federal RTP uses the term “Illustrative List” for the same project list that TransPlan calls the “Future” list. As explained by LCOG staff: “The switch from "Future" to "Illustrative" is one of both reflecting a change in the predominant federal language, and for clarity. Back in the 1990s, RTP project list(s) reflecting the portion of the need that was beyond the Financially Constrained list(s) was generally referred to as the "Future" project list(s). This was supposed to confer the concept