Route 15 Corridor Plan

Financial and Institutional Strategy
Burlington-Essex Rail Project

The purpose of this report is to present the institutional and financial strategy for implementing the Rt. 15
Corridor Improvement Plan, including the Burlington to Essex Rail Project, and to address the larger
transit funding and institutional issues that are raised by the plan.

 

Key Findings

Currently there are five important transit providers in Chittenden County. The public providers include
the Chittenden County Transportation Authority (CCTA), the Vermont Transportation Author ity (VTA),
and the Special Service Transportation Agency (SSTA). The private providers include the Campus Area
Transportation Management Association (CATMA) and the Campus Area Transportation System
(CATS). Examination of services by these authorities have revealed that transit planning and service for
Chittenden County can be improved and made more efficient.

The Chittenden County Metropolitan Planning Organization (CCMPO) requested that a peer comparison
be conducted. The peer comparison analyzed CCTA’s public funding sources to other similar transit
systems. The comparison revealed that CCTA’s cost per capita is well below that of many of its peers.
CCTA spent $31 per capita for FY 2000 whereas spending ranged from $10 to $144 per capita among its
peers, with Madison (Wisconsin) spending the most. When local, state, and federal funding were
examined as a percentage of total public funds, CCTA ranked fourth in terms of local dependency, with very little state support. Of CCTA year 2000 public funds, local sources constituted 55 percent, with state
monies comprising 18 percent, and federal 27 percent. The state of Vermont spends very little on transit
per capita as compared to peer agencies. Of the total state and local assistance, on average, each peer
agency receives 62 percent from state sources. The average local contribution is approximately 38 percent
of the state and local total. CCTA is unique, with only 25 percent coming from the state and 75 percent
coming from local sources.

The consulting team also conducted over 24 stakeholder interviews, which revealed three main themes:
the need to have one transit authority in Chittenden County, the need to reform transit funding in
Chittenden County, and the priority of the Burlington-Essex commuter rail proposal. The need to reform
transit funding generated the most discussion. As a result, the consulting team included a discussion of
potential new revenue sources with several selected revenue estimates to provide Chittenden County a
variety of revenue choic es. The consulting team, however, believes that the sales tax and the gasoline tax
are the two most likely tax sources for new transit funding. Levying these taxes at the state level or at the
local level has both advantages and disadvantages.

An advantage of statewide taxation is that it creates fewer boundary competition problems and the
associated inequities at taxing boundaries arise. It also preserves the uniformity and potential of the state
funding capacity. Furthermore, a state tax could create greater potential income.

The advantage of the local option tax is that it facilitates local choice, control, and accountability. Given
that public services differ by area, one might argue that tax rates should also differ.

The Burlington to Essex Rail Project is dependent on federal aid for capital construction. The process to
acquire federal funds requires submittal of a sound financial plan. The local financial strategy for the
project calls for the Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) to manage the construction phase of the
commuter rail project. This phase would be funded by a combination of federal Section 5309 funds,
Vermont Transportation Fund appropriations, and use of the federal matching mechanism called toll
credits. The operations phase of the project would be executed by a single transit operating entity to be
created to provide all transit services in Chittenden County. The operations phase would be funded by
passenger revenues, other internal or external funds generated by the service, and the Vermont Public
Transportation Fund. The new entity should transition from the current base of local funding (property
tax) to a proposed sales or gas tax. A sales tax or a gas tax could be levied at the state level with local
dedication to roads/transit and/or at the local level as an optional tax for transit. Based on the current
transit structure, the consulting team proposes that the new entity be a regional entity authorized by the
state or a state entity with regional support and governance. Both the state and local governments will be
represented in the governance structure.

More information is available in the final report, which is available for download below as an Adobe Acrobat PDF file.

Route 15 Financial and Institutional Strategy Report
Complete Document	Financial and Institutional Strategy: Burlington-Essex Rail Project