KabirCares.org

MD State Approves Highway User Revenue Funds

Great news!
The representative of the Maryland Municipal League (MML) told us last Thursday that, the Maryland Senate voted unanimously to approve the State of Maryland Fiscal 2016 Budget (HB 70) which INCLUDES the $19 million set aside for MUNICIPAL transportation funding needs allocated through the HUR (Highway User Revenue) formula.
Cities and towns use the HUR funds to build and repair local roads and bridges. In recent years the funds have been reduced due to recession.
This is a $3 million increase over current year allocation. Since the Senate and House language in the budget bill  regarding the $19 million match, this item should NOT be in play during the upcoming Conference Committee discussions on the budget. This is VERY GOOD NEWS!
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
(Visited 8 times, 1 visits today)

7 Comments to “MD State Approves Highway User Revenue Funds”

  1. By DAK4Blizzard, March 31, 2015 @ 12:34 am

    That does sound great. Probably helps that 2014 was a good economic year. What potential projects is College Park looking to use the fund towards? Could any of it go towards reconstructing the south segment of Route 1, which as I understand is currently in the middle of engineering? (Granted, the amount would probably be a drop in the bucket compared to what’s required to fully fund construction.)

  2. By Fazlul Kabir, March 31, 2015 @ 12:20 pm

    Hi Dak4Blizzard, I don’t think the extra revenue will be used for the reconstruction of Route 1, as it’s a State road. I’m trying to get answers to your other questions. Thanks again.

  3. By DAK4Blizzard, March 31, 2015 @ 10:22 pm

    Okay, that makes sense. I did a little research and found this press release from a few years ago: http://www.mdmunicipal.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/311 It seems that although the $19 million is a significant step up from recent years, it’s still only about half of where the fund was in FY 2008 and 2009 — not accounting for inflation since then. Given that this fund is being shared among more than 150 municipalities, I don’t know how significant the $3 million increase will be. That works out to a $20,000 increase per town/city if shared equally.

    So with that said, I’ve got 2 follow-up questions:

    Do you know how the revenue is distributed among the municipalities? (Is it equally divided, weighted by population, allocated to where repairs are most needed, or a combination?)

    About how much is College Park expecting to receive from this fund? (Do you know how much College Park has been receiving for each of the years since 2008?)

    Thanks!

  4. By Fazlul Kabir, April 1, 2015 @ 7:18 am

    The FY16 supplemental HUR grant is estimated at $305,233 and that amount is included in the FY16 Highway User budget. We received a one-time HUR grant in FY15 of $257,038 which was not budgeted. The regular HUR allocation for FY15 and FY16 are about the same. So, the FY16 supplemental HUR grant is only $48,195 higher than the one-time grant in FY15. The FY16 requested budget includes additional funding for Pavement Management Plan. I will try to find out how the revenue is distributed among municipalities. Thanks again for asking.

  5. By Fazlul Kabir, April 2, 2015 @ 10:34 pm

    The amount received is based on road miles maintained by City in our case 51 miles of city streets and also number of vehicles registered to City households. Thanks.

  6. By DAK4Blizzard, April 2, 2015 @ 11:35 pm

    Okay, thanks. So it seems College Park is receiving significantly more ($300k) than the median amount ($19 million ÷ 156 municipalities = $122k). And it seems like a decent amount of money to cover maintenance of 51 miles in 1 year.

    Assuming College Park’s portion of the fund doesn’t change much ($300k ÷ $19 million = 1.6%), then it would be able to receive around $650k to $700k.

    Does number of vehicles registered to city households include apartments within the city limits?

  7. By Fazlul Kabir, April 6, 2015 @ 7:37 am

    Yes. City’s Finance department does a vehicle registration count each year in June, based on a print-out received from MVA for Maryland-registered vehicles whose primary owner resides in zip codes 20740, 20741 and 20742. Therefore, we are picking up all registered vehicles in the City, including apartments and dorms on the UMD campus. From that list, we have to exclude vehicles owned by registration-exempt UMD, M-NCPPC, CP and Branchville VFDs, City of CP, etc. and vehicles in 20740 at Seven Springs and Westchester Park (which are not in the City) and in the Town of Berwyn Heights (which share the 20740 zip code). The registration count is fairly consistent from year-to-year.