age, equally-funded program for city streets, and providing revenue growth for these programs through indexing to the Arkansas Highway Construction Cost Index.


Other Recommended Legislation Requiring annual reporting and the use of


City and County turnback funds: Greater ac- countability, similar to what is required for the State Aid program, is needed regarding the use of these funds. Requiring a county minimum tax effort be-


fore a county or cities within that county can receive additional highway turnback funds: Tis would require counties to levy a minimum road tax on themselves before being allowed to share in the growth of highway turn back funds paid by others. Referring a Constitutional Amendment


to allow counties to raise the 3-mill limit on their road tax by a vote of the people: Coun- ties should be allowed to levy a road tax greater than 3 mills (which is the current cap) if the voters of that county approve it; this requires a Constitutional Amendment. Modifying current laws for Regional Mo-


bility Authorities and Multi-County Taxing Authorities: Counties within a Regional Mo- bility Authority need more latitude in their abil- ity to generate revenue for local projects.


Other Study Recommendations


Heavy Truck Cost Allocations Study: A study should be conducted to compare the rev- enue generated by and damage caused by heavy trucks to that of other vehicles to determine if all vehicle classes are paying their fair share. Vehicle Registration and License Fee Study: A study should be conducted to see how Arkan- sas compares to other states on this; is our system outdated and should it be simplified? State Highway System Reduction Study: A study should be conducted to determine if the State Highway System contains highways that should be turned over to local, either city or county. Study the possible creation of Regional


Transportation Districts: An interim study should be conducted to see what other states are doing on this, and to see if their creation may be applicable or beneficial in Arkansas.


Further Monitoring and/or Studies Needed


Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Tax: Tis rev- enue source based on miles traveled may become


COUNTY LINES, WINTER 2011


Johnny Bolin, Director of the Arkansas Good Roads Transportation Council and a member of the panel, offers comments. AAC Director Chris Villines (right) welcomed the commissioners and Gov. Beebe to AAC facilities, where the meeting was held.


the predominant revenue generator in the future when the technology is fully developed and na- tional standards are established. Public-Private Partnerships and Tolling:


Arkansas should continue to monitor these fi- nancing tools and utilize when and where ap- plicable.


Included in this list are at least five items that


directly affect county government. Te one with most significance if enacted, in my opinion, would be the minimum tax effort on the county level to have at least 2.5 mills of property tax lev- ied or an amount equal to that in some other form, dedicated to roads to be able to receive any additional road funding. Tis will certainly be deemed a tax increase and will put local of- ficials (Quorum Court members) at odds with their citizens, if made by legislation to do so to share in the increased funding. Te legislature is, however, trying to have more equitable funding from county to county and this is the goal of this recommendation. Followed by changes to the state aid road system and the additional reporting of how the current system of road monies is being spent. Tese two items could prove to be problematic to counties, one costing dollars to do the report- ing the other jeopardizing an already successful and stable funding source for counties. Te modifying of current laws concerning


Regional Mobility Authorities has drawn some attention due to the fact this could mean ‘taxa-


tion without representa- tion” in some people’s opinion, and from the county perspective those local dollars are needed to provide essential services mandated by state and federal laws. If RMA’s are allowed to pass taxing ef- forts, counties could find passage of local options to be much harder.


Te last option that is


directly aimed at counties is a constitutional amend- ment to raise the current 3 mill road tax, by a local vote of the county, on a county by county basis. Tis could be an addi- tional funding source if local citizens want to vote a local option to do so. Since the final report came out, Gov.


Beebe


has voiced his opposition to the transfer of sales tax


dollars from the general fund. I can somewhat relate to the Governor’s concerns. We are a small state that must provide essential services such as education, prisons and health and welfare. Tese three alone take over 90 percent of the state’s tax dollars, leaving little for the many other man- dated services the state must provide. I am able to relate because having been a judge


from a small county, it takes a larger portion of our budget to provide the mandated services counties must provide before funding those that you would like to. Simply put, in Arkansas or in a small county, there are fewer people to spread out the cost of providing these services. If we are to have a better highway system we will most likely have to pay more per person. Te fact we have the 12th largest highway system in the na- tion but rank in the bottom as far as population means we will be asked to pay more – or have less than adequate in the terms of the condition of our highway system. During the time I spent serving on this com- mittee, I tried to voice the concerns of counties and for the most part was given great consider- ation of our concerns. Where the recommenda- tions go from here, I believe, will be left to the people and what they communicate to their leg- islators and the Governor. Given the current po- litical climate this can be accomplished, but will take an even greater effort of those concerned.


33


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60