No. 28274 (New Rule): R926-8. Public Partnering

DAR File No.: 28274
Filed: 10/04/2005, 02:35
Received by: NL

 

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

In 2004, the legislature enacted a law requiring this rule, Section 72-2-123 (S.B. 11). It is needed to establish a process by which local governments can propose state transportation projects. (DAR NOTE: S.B. 11 (2004) is found at UT L 2004 Ch 8, and was effective 05/03/2004.)

 

Summary of the rule or change:

The rule establishes guidelines by which local governments can propose state transportation projects.

 

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

Section 72-2-123

 

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

There will be some cost to the department and the commission from responding to partnering requests and carrying out the analyzes required. It is impossible to know how much this will amount to.

 

local governments:

Local governments will incur costs in developing proposals should they choose to do so, but the rule will not impose any involuntary costs on local governments.

 

other persons:

No other individuals will see an increase in costs from this rule.

 

Compliance costs for affected persons:

There are no costs of compliance except those that local governments may incur in voluntarily proposing a project.

 

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

This rule has no fiscal impact on business. John R. Njord, Executive Director

 

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Transportation
Program Development
CALVIN L RAMPTON COMPLEX
4501 S 2700 W
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84119-5998

 

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

James Beadles at the above address, by phone at 801-965-4168, by FAX at 801-965-4796, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

 

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

12/01/2005

 

This rule may become effective on:

12/02/2005

 

Authorized by:

John R. Njord, Executive Director

 

 

RULE TEXT

R926. Transportation, Program Development.

R926-8. Public Partnering.

R926-8-1. Guidelines for Partnering with Local Governments - Purpose.

Pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 72-2-123 (2004), this rule is issued in order to increase the ability to carry out improvements on State highways by allowing counties and municipalities to provide local matching dollars or participate through other methods, such as providing right-of-way.

 

R926-8-2. Process for Approving or Denying Proposals.

(1) If a county or municipality wishes to participate in a State highway improvement program, it shall notify the department and the Transportation Commission, in writing, at the earliest available opportunity and provide the information listed in Paragraphs (a) through (e). The county or municipality is encouraged to work with the department in formulating and developing the necessary information.

(a) the specific improvement;

(b) whether the improvement has already been programmed into the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and, if not, whether it is in the Long-Range Plan and the phase of the Long-Range Plan;

(c) a textual description of the improvement, along with any engineering or technical information that may have been prepared;

(d) whether any environmental or other federal clearances or permits will be necessary and, if so, the status of any federal applications;

(e) the type of local participation being proposed and the source of any funding; and

(f) a textual description of the benefit that the improvement will bring to the State highway system and the county or municipality along with its costs.

(2) Proposals for participation with local matching dollars will be accepted only if:

(a) environmental clearances are completed or highly probable; and

(b) the improvement is already programmed in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP); or

(c) the improvement is part of the Long-Range Plan and the Transportation Commission determines that advancing the project will not defer other projects that are already prioritized and programmed in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

(d) The Transportation Commission may not consider local matching dollars, as provided under Utah Code Ann. Section 72-2-123, unless the statute provides an equal opportunity to raise local matching dollars for state highway improvements within each county, as directed by Senate Bill 25, 2005 General Session.

(3) Local matching dollars cannot be funded by federal funds, except with:

(a) Federal transportation (highway) formula funds normally programmed by local entities; or

(b) Federal discretionary funds with prior joint agreement by UDOT and the local entity. Nevertheless, earmarks in transportation authorizing legislation cannot be used for local match.

(4) Private sources or contributions may be considered part of local matching dollars if they pass through the local government.

(5) Upon receiving a partnering proposal, the Transportation Commission will be notified in a forthcoming public meeting. The department shall evaluate the proposal and all accompanying information to see whether it complies with these rules, is complete, and feasible. The department shall also calculate an independent cost estimate.

(6) The department shall review the proposal and make a recommendation to the Transportation Commission at a public meeting along with the reasons for recommending denial or approval using the criteria listed in these rules for its review.

(7) At anytime in this process, the department may contact the county or municipality for additional information and may incorporate amendments requested by the county or municipality in its evaluation.

(8) The department shall notify the county or municipality of the date, time, and location of the Transportation Commission meeting that will hear the proposal. The department shall provide the county or municipality with at least 30 days written notice.

 

R926-8-3. Factors Used to Consider Proposals.

(1) In deciding whether to approve a county's or municipality's request for partnering, the Transportation Commission shall evaluate the proposal with the following factors in mind:

(a) whether the requested improvement is part of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), or the Long-Range Plan and, if part of the Long-Range Plan, will not delay any of the projects already included in the STIP;

(b) the benefits of the improvement to the State highway system and the county or municipality as well as the costs;

(c) level of local commitment, based on the amount or percentage of funding proposed;

(d) whether the proposed improvement was subject to a local planning initiative;

(e) whether the improvement will alleviate significant existing or future congestion or hazards to the traveling public or provide other substantial improvements to the transportation system;

(f) whether the proposal has the potential to extend department resources to other needs; and

(g) fulfills a need widely recognized by the public, elected officials, and transportation planners.

(2)(a) If a proposed improvement is to a surface street that approaches an interchange or ramp or for a new interchange or ramp and is being undertaken for economic development, the county or municipality shall provide at least a fifty percent (50%) local match. The match can include private contributions that are administered through the local entity.

(b) If a proposed improvement is to a surface street that approaches an interchange or ramp or for a new interchange or ramp and is being undertaken to relieve traffic congestion or safety, the local match, if any, may be determined based on the benefit derived by the local entity.

 

R926-8-4. Record of Proposal and Interlocal Agreements.

(1) The department shall maintain a record on each partnering proposal. Except for individual records in the file that may be classified private or protected, the contents of the file shall otherwise be public.

(2) If the Transportation Commission agrees to the partnering proposal, the department shall develop an interlocal agreement with the county or municipality that will set forth the proposal, the method of participation, the work that will be done, and projected timelines.

 

KEY: transportation, local governments, partnering, highways

2005

72-2-123