FINAL 2008-2011 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IIviPROVEMENT PROGRAM <br />Modernization <br />The Modernization Program funds capital <br />construction projects that add capacity to the <br />highway system, either by adding lanes or <br />building new highways or investing in other <br />system improvements that result in added <br />highway system capacity. The program is <br />one of the largest sources of funding for im- <br />plementing long-range transportation plans. <br />The process for deciding which projects to <br />fund for the Modernization Program is the <br />most complex of any program in the STIP. <br />The reason is that needs far exceed available <br />resources and the decision whether or not to <br />improve a state highway facility requires <br />cooperation from local governments. <br />Funding for the Modernization Program <br />comes from state and federal sources and <br />indirectly from local governments that <br />match state/federal funds. State dollars pri- <br />marily come from the State Highway Fund, <br />which is supported by the state gas tax. Ore- <br />gon law (ORS 366.507) requires ODOT to <br />dedicate the equivalent of its share of two <br />cents per dollar of State Highway Fund <br />revenues for highway modernization work. <br />This share can be funded with either federal <br />or state revenues. <br />While the project selection for many ODOT <br />programs is centralized, particularly those <br />using management systems, the opposite is <br />true for Modernization. Project selection is <br />decentralized and managed by ODOT re- <br />gions. Each of ODOT's five regions has <br />their own process. While all of the regions <br />use similar steps in the project selection <br />process, there are significant differences be- <br />tween them. Common steps include the use <br />of adopted long-range plans as source <br />documents for projects, the use of region <br />technical service centers to scope and pre- <br />pare cost estimates for candidate projects, <br />the use of the Project Eligibility Criteria and <br />Prioritization Factors to screen projects, the <br />use of advisory committees to prioritize pro- <br />jects, and a public comment process on the <br />draft program in each region. In regions <br />with MPOs, the process is made more com- <br />plex by the need to integrate the Moderniza- <br />tion Program for the MPO into the STIP. <br />An extremely important constituency in the <br />project selection process is the local advi- <br />sory committees that work with each ODOT <br />region to recommend which projects should <br />be funded. ACTS serve this role in Regions <br />2, 3, 4, and 5. ACTS are chartered by the <br />OTC according to its Policy on Formation <br />and Operation of ACTs, which specifies a <br />range of membership to participate in the <br />ACTS' primary function of advising the <br />OTC about transportation priorities in their <br />area. ACTs are usually formed to include <br />several counties and most regions have two <br />or three ACTs. Exceptions are Region 1 and <br />Lane County. In Region 1, the MPO <br />(Metro) and several local coordinating <br />committees serve this advisory function. In <br />Hood River County (Region 1) and Lane <br />County (Region 2), the County Board of <br />Commissioners serves the advisory function. <br />Each region manages the modernization pro- <br />ject selection process differently. The proc- <br />ess is too complex to review here, but de- <br />tailed information on the Modernization <br />Program in each region is available in the <br />STIP Users' Guide. Modernization projects <br />are identified, selected, and prioritized using <br />the Project Eligibility Criteria and Prioritiza- <br />tion Factors approved by the OTC for the <br />STIP cycle in which they are programmed. <br />The criteria are listed on page 348 of this <br />document. ACTS may adopt other criteria <br />and factors to help prioritize projects, such <br />as safety, economic development impacts, <br />land use impacts, multimodal and intermo- <br />dal integration, congestion, environmental <br />impacts, cost effectiveness, public support <br />and matching funds, but they must not con- <br />flict with statewide criteria. <br />Page 17 <br />