CTP & Governor's Proposal Outline

1	Legislative Information Sessions Kansas Department of Transportation January 2004
2	KDOT Information Sessions Transportation Spending Fuels the Economy State Highways: Kansas’ Economic Lifeline Building More Than Roads Today: Status of the Comprehensive Transportation Program (CTP)
3	CTP Status Background Current Program Construction Status Financial Status Governor’s Proposal
4	Highway Program History Significant deterioration of Kansas highways in late 1980s 1990-1997Comprehensive Highway Program (CHP) Several Legislative attempts Maintenance & repair 1998-1999Interim Plan 2000-2009Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
5	Comprehensive Transportation Program System Enhancement Projects
6	CTP and CHP Focused on Different Needs CTP: More reconstruction, less rehabilitation Better overall road conditions require lighter maintenance
7	Program Comparison of Miles and Bridges Substantial Maintenance Miles Major Modification Interstate miles Non-interstate miles Priority Bridges (No. of Bridges)
8	Key Differences Between CHP & CTP Reduced number of Major Modification miles planned for improvement Improved pavement conditions on the State Highway System More geometric and capacity improvements Increased unit prices for surfacing due to quality improvements in pavement design Lighter actions required for the Substantial Maintenance Program
9	Comprehensive Transportation Program $5.7 billion highway construction program More than $2 billion let to construction About $2 billion still to be let $1.5 billion over next 6 years for additional highway maintenance
10	Projects Currently Programmed for CTP
11	Highway Construction Update Overall spending tracks with cash-flow projections Bid prices are holding steady Complex projects still remain No room for add-ons or cost increases
12	City & County Partnerships Special City & County Highway Fund Economic Development & Geometric Improvement Programs Local rail-grade separation projects City Connecting Link maintenance payments Transportation Revolving Loan Fund Greater than required federal-aid sharing KDOT Partnership Project
13	CTP Other Modes Update Rail Aviation Public Transit
14	Financial Status of the CTP Core of the CTP – announced projects and maintenance – is not at risk Changes made last year to preserve program Governor’s proposal creates a more realistic and secure program
15	My Goals in January 2003 Maintain commitment to the core of the CTP Core of the CTP: “Red Map” System Enhancement projects Also maintain system
16	What I said… At the end of the 2003 session... $350 million operating deficit in FY09 Under consideration: Looking for improved efficiency Revisiting assumptions in cash flow projections Extending the program by one or two years Cutting funds not yet assigned to specific projects Reducing project scopes Implementing Transportation Revolving Fund with less collateralization
17	Changes Made Last Year to Preserve Program Remove construction reserve from ending balance Reduce Transportation Revolving Fund Adjust inflation and interest rates Adjust interest rate assumption on bonds Result of action: Negative $50 million ending cash balance in FY09
18	Governor’s Proposal Repay $95 million loan Restructure debt Savings from System Enhancement projects and Set-Aside adjustments Move KHP funding to Highway Fund Adjust sales tax transfer Issuance of General Fund-backed bonds
19	Repay $95 Million Loan $95 million loaned to General Fund in FY 2001 To be repaid in four equal installments in FY 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010
20	Restructure Debt Net present value savings: $3.9 million Debt service payments moved to FY 2010-2016 $161 million savings FY 2005-2009
21	Savings from System Enhancement Projects and Set-Aside Adjustments $253 million savings through FY 2009 System Enhancement savings $109 Reduce future funds allocated for: Set-aside projects $64 Rail-grade separation projects on state system $49 Pavement marking set-aside $31
22	System Enhancement Project Savings $109 million savings through FY 2009 Projects already let with some cost savings Projects withdrawn by sponsors Scopes and estimates revised through project development No room for project add-ons or cost increases
23	Reduce Future Funds Allocated for Set-Aside Projects $64 million savings through FY 2009 Affects 13 of 22 set-asides Doesn’t impact Local Partnership Program Reductions focused on unallocated future funds - no announced projects affected Generally proportional to size of fund
24	Reduce Future Funds Allocated for Set-Aside Projects $64 million savings through FY 2009 Pavement resurfacing $26 Contract maintenance $14 Interstate resurfacing $2 Intersection safety improvements $2 Emergency repair $1 Bridge repair $4 Signing $1 Highway lighting $3 Railroad crossing surfacing $1 ITS projects $3 Corridor Management $4 Bridge redeck $1 Culvert/Bridge $2
25	Reduce Future Funds Allocated for Rail-Grade Separation Projects on State System $49 million savings through FY 2009 Two rail programs (state system & local).Reduction in program for state highway system needs. Marysville rail project under construction No projects had to be cancelled
26	Reduce Future Funds Allocated for Pavement Marking Set-Aside $31 million savings through FY 2009 Carry over balance $11 Reduction of $4 million/year $20 for remainder of CTP
27	KHP Funding $32 million per year plus inflation From FY 2005 through life of the program (FY 2009) In addition to historical funding of motor carrier inspection
28	Adjust Sales Tax Transfer 0% in FY 2005 and 2006 3% in FY 2007 6% thereafter – more realistic and achievable
29	Sales Tax Transfer
30	Replacement Revenue $465 million in General Fund-backed bonds $100 million in bond proceeds in FY 2006 $150 million in bond proceeds in FY 2007 $215 million in bond proceeds in FY 2008 No tax increase
31	Replacement Revenue Governor’s proposal: Net positive to Highway Fund Savings from SE and set-asides $250 M Bonds from General Fund $465 M Debt restructure $161 M $876 M Net loss to Highway Fund Loss of sales tax transfer -$665 M KHP funding -$160 M Includes projected negative -$50 M balance June 2003 -$875 M
32	FY 2009 Ending Cash Balance End of 2003 Session: Negative $350 million June 2003: Negative $50 million January 2004 projected: Positive $5 million
33	Governor’s Proposal Protects the core of the CTP No announced projects impacted Commitment to maintaining the system remains No room for add-ons or cost increases Realistic, sustainable sales tax transfer General Fund-backed bonds provide certainty for program
34	Questions/Discussion