2017 Legislative Session: Summary of bills proposing solutions to Missouri transportation funding shortfall

Because all state funding for Missouri's transportation program is tied to the state fuel tax--last raised in the early 1990s--Missouri has been struggling to find some solutions to its current transportation funding pinch.

Capitol Day in Jefferson City is April 10th - please join us!

Although Missouri has no dedicated state funding for walking and bicycling, and less than $1 million annually for transit--compared with hundreds of millions to billions annually by our peer states--state leadership and MoDOT are currently focused solely on plugging the hole in state highway funding.

We believe that Missouri's dramatic underinvestment in transit, walking, and bicycling harms the ability of our communities, large and small, to compete in today's global marketplace. 

We must include funding for transit, walking, and walking as part of any transportation funding solution--yet not one solution introduced this year does so.

Summary of 2017 Missouri transportation funding bills

Below is a summary of all transportation funding proposals currently in play in the Missouri House and Senate. 

So far in 2017, we have not seen any major proposals to increase the fuel tax (which, unfortunately, is earmarked in the Missouri Constitution for road and street purposes only) or move forward with a General Revenue source that could be used for roads, transit, walking, bicycling, and other multi-modala transportation needs, as we saw with the $20 million Missouri Moves proposal in 2016.

Passing a tax increase--even a small one, and even one simply designed to stop the continual erosion in purchasing power of our per-gallon state fuel tax--is going to be a hard pull for our current General Assembly, many of whom ran on no-tax pledges. Most solutions proposed below can be classified as more creative nibbling around the edges of the problem than large-scale "final solutions." 

Nibbling around the edges may be the way we get to a solution in Missouri, however.

Bookmark this page--it will be continually updated as the 2017 Legislative Session progresses.

• SB 38 - Silvey - Creates a program to transfer supplementary (lettered) state highways to the county in which they are located
  Comment: Senator Silvey has championed this approach, which involves turning over thousands of miles of secondary state highways back to local control. The difficulty is that most local counties across Missouri have no funding, equipment, staff, or experience in maintaining these roads. Because of that difficult issue, most rural counties across Missouri strongly oppose the measure.
  The idea of returning local roads to local control is very attractive for many reasons. Our experience is that when transportation systems are under local control, local communities prioritize needed improvements for walking and bicycling. This proposal could be a positive step in that direction, increasing local control of local roads. On the other hand, Missouri counties have historically been the local level of government least responsive to the needs of citizens who depend on walking, bicycling, and public transportation. An improvement in this proposal would be ot increase the involvement of local cities and towns in setting priorities for funding.
  This proposal overcomes objections to previous versions of the proposal by including funding (1/3 of MoDOT's current budget) for ongoing maintenance and through other details.

• SJR 3 - Schaaf - Amends the Constitution to modify state highway maintenance by instituting a motor fuel tax of 1.5/3.5 cents and transferring secondary state highways to county control

  Comment: This proposal is similar to Senator Silvey's approach, but even more sweeping. After passage by a vote of the people, this Constitutional Amendment would increase the fuel tax slightly (1.5 cents/gallon gas and 3.5 cent/gallon diesel) and transfer all secondary state highways to the appropriate county.
  Counties would receive an annual amount from MoDOT to help with maintenance of these roads now under county control, equal to the average of MoDOT's past three years expenditures on them, on a per-county basis.
  This, like Senator Silvey's plan, is a sweeping proposal to give control of tens of thousands of miles of lettered routes across Missouri to counties. It has many of the same advantages and disadvantages of Silvey's proposal. One additional potential problem is that regular "maintenance" spending on secondary highways is often quite sporadic. Many roads go for 5, 10, 15, or even 20 years without major maintenance. Finally, long-delayed maintenance is required, which in one single year may surpass the amount spent in the previous 15 or 20 years. Probably a 20 or 30 year baseline for costs is more appropriate--and it needs to be adjusted by formula for inflation and other factors.
  Small counties are likely to be most affected by the sporadic nature of the maintenance requirements--and they are most likely to oppose a plan like this.

• HB579 - Redmon, Craig - Allows taxation of propane, electricity, and other motor vehicle fuels in a way similar to current gas and diesel taxes
  
  Comment: One of several problems with current reliance on gas and diesel taxes is the gradual shift towards other sources of power and fuel. This bill is one approach to addressing the funding shortfall.

• HB651 - Kolkmeyer, Glen - Requires municipalities to spend 90% of their collected highway fund taxes on road construction and less than 10% on street cleaning, policing, etc.
  
  Comment: The specifics of this proposal are unclear, as the bill refers both to 30(a) funds, which are fuel taxes collected by MoDOT and distributed in part to cities and counties, and to local excise or sales taxes, which are a completely different thing and not mentioned in Article IV, Section 30(a) of the Missouri Constitution.
  
  Nevertheless, the intent is clear: restrict the use of "road funds" to roads and streets only. The difficulty with this approach is that Missouri needs to move to more of a comprehensive approach to transportation planning and funding, and to more local control over funds and priorities. This bill seems to move in the opposite direction.

• HB155 - Corlew, Kevin (014) - Establishes the "Interstate 70 Public-Private Partnership Act"
  Comment: Proposals to privatize I-70 have circulated for years in Jefferson City. As a general rule, we feel uncomfortable with proposals to privatize vast amounts of our state transportation system. The concern is that private companies will have a profit motive, rather than the transportation and community priorities of citizens, at heart.
  
  Even though I-70 is an interstate freeway, any construction or projects along the corridor will have powerful impacts on accessibility for people who walk and bicycle in the communities it touches. Will a private company prioritize the needs of citizens who (for example) need to walk or bicycle through a new or updated freeway interchange, or who need to cross the freeway corridor to get from home to work, school, or shopping?
  
  Any proposed public/private partnership will need very strong protections for community values and priorities built into it.

Be part of the conversation! Our annual Bicycle & Pedestrian Day at the Capitol is April 10th, 2017.  Please plan to join us and talk with your own legislators about these issues and much more!

Working to create a world-class transportation system for walking and bicycling is a key goal of our Vision for Bicycling and Walking in Missouri. Ensuring that a fair share of funding for bicycling and walking is part of any Missouri transportation funding plan has been a key goal of our Legislative Platform for many years and is strongly supported by our membership.

Your ongoing membership and generous financial support help turn our Vision into reality!