Mileage-Based User Fee: A Financial Evaluation Case Study for the State of Florida

Al-Deek, Haitham; Moradi, Massoud

doi:10.1080/15568318.2012.753493

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For roads, which can be assumed public and spillover goods, the higher share of property tax funding may make sense, but if a mechanism is available for allocating users to road segments or charging by usage, then a shift to a user fee model would be more effective. The idea of shifting to a mileage-based fee has been explored in previous research (38,39). For both the auto and transit modes, the low contribution of user fees to their current funding suggests that a shift to a water-style funding model could greatly increase the outof-pocket cost of using either of these modes (last row of Table 2).…”

Section: Revenue Transparency and Equity Analysis Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin Revenue Sources for Infrastructure Funding

Terry

Casello

Bachmann

2017

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cities require well-funded public infrastructure to function efficiently, but knowledge of public finance mechanisms among residents and decision makers may be deficient. This paper presents a thorough investigation of infrastructure funding flows to increase understanding, to catalyze further investigation in other jurisdictions, and to identify best practices. By using data from Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, funding was mapped for the four tiers of government—federal, provincial, regional, and municipal—contributing to infrastructure. The results demonstrate that significant opacity exists around municipal reserve funds and intergovernmental transfers because insufficient recording is associated with the origin revenues of these funds: where moneys first enter the government cycle. To compare across infrastructure systems, funding from each tier was used to find an average revenue share and estimated per capita funding per source for the water system and three transportation systems: auto, transit, and active transportation. Water infrastructure was funded through six origin revenue sources, with user fees and development charges funding 95% of expenditures. For transportation infrastructure, the auto system was funded through 16 origin revenue sources, transit through 13, and active transportation through seven. The auto and active transportation systems were 75% funded through mixtures of property tax, user fees, and development charges. The transit system received significant contributions from nonregional revenue sources because of capital projects developed in the study period. Active transportation, water, and parking expenditures are shown to use effective revenue sources, while transit and other auto expenditures used less effective sources because of the wide range of origin revenue sources.

show abstract

Section: Revenue Transparency and Equity Analysis Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Origin Revenue Sources for Infrastructure Funding

Terry

Casello

Bachmann

2017

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the U.S., for example, in addition to traditional fuel taxes and permit fees, the states of Kentucky, New Mexico, New York, and Oregon charge heavy vehicles a weight-distance tax for pavement "consumption" (Alison and Walton, 2009 (FHWA, 2010;Lindsey, 2010). A recent study in the U.S. touted other benefits of distance-based highway usage fees, namely, controlling urban sprawl and potentially reducing the need for highway capacity expansion (Al-Deek and Moradi, 2013).…”

Section: The States Of Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Highway-user fees for overweight trucks: Consequences of deviations from the fourth-power law

Ahmed

Lavrenz

Labi

2015

International Journal of Sustainable Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In updating road-user fees, highway agencies are motivated by the twin objectives of equity and efficiency. The concepts of marginal pavement consumption cost (MPCC) and the fourth-power law have been used in past research in a bid to establish efficient and equitable user fees. Over the past few decades, the use of the fourth-power law has faced some criticism that the actual power of the relationship between loading and pavement deterioration deviates significantly from 4.0. In addressing this issue, this paper presents a methodology that investigates the consequences of the power variations to the estimated MPCC and the distributional (equity) impacts of road-user fees for overweight (OW) trucks. The methodology incorporates practical schedules of highway maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The analysis suggests that there are extremely small differences between the MPCC values that result from using different values of the exponent in the power law. On the other hand, different values of the exponent in the power law result in significantly different equity impacts. This paper demonstrates that Downloaded by [University of Tasmania] at 15:15 01 October 20152 the equity impacts are moderate in the case of OW trucks whose individual axles are loaded close to standard axle weights. For OW trucks that are loaded within 10% of the maximum permissible weight, this paper estimates that variation of the power value from 3.0 to 5.0 results in a 1%-10% surplus or deficit of their road-user charges.

show abstract

Effectiveness and monetary impact of Milan's road charge, one year after implementation

Beria

2015

International Journal of Sustainable Transportation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In early 2008, a pollution charge was introduced in the central Area of Milan. Although initially it positively affected traffic volume, after some years its effect wore off due to the replacement of older vehicles with newer and exempt vehicles. As effectiveness decreased, in June 2011 the Milan citizens voted in a referendum on whether to extend the charge to all vehicles. The result was clearly in favor of the redesign and extension of the toll. In January 2012 the new policy was put in force under the name of “Area C.” The new pricing uses the same technological infrastructure and encompasses the same Area but evolves into congestion pricing aimed at reducing traffic in the compact and crowded central city. The present article discusses the history of the Milan road-pricing case and presents some quantitative analyses of the overall effectiveness of the measure, based on official data. In addition, we calculate, using cordon data, the distribution of entrances per vehicle category and the related yearly cost paid by users. The analyses show the measure's effectiveness, in line with expectations, and calculate the economic impact of the pricing on different user groups. Such impact appears quite limited, as the vast majority of users cross the cordon occasionally, and the most affected user groups (e.g., residents) are granted with more favorable conditions

show abstract

Mileage-Based User Fee: A Financial Evaluation Case Study for the State of Florida

Cited by 3 publications

References 11 publications

Origin Revenue Sources for Infrastructure Funding

Origin Revenue Sources for Infrastructure Funding

Highway-user fees for overweight trucks: Consequences of deviations from the fourth-power law

Effectiveness and monetary impact of Milan's road charge, one year after implementation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About