Prior 2005 Proposition K Strategic Plan

The prior Prop K Strategic Plan was approved by the Authority Board on March 22, 2005. The 2005 Prop K Strategic Plan delivers the half-cent transportation sales tax to the categories of transportation needs in the Expenditure Plan authorized by voters in November 2003. While the Expenditure Plan established eligible programs and projects, it did not provide any guidance as to the timing of allocation of those revenues over the 30-year life of the Expenditure Plan. The Strategic Plan reconciles the need for funds, resulting from sponsor-generated project schedules, with the expected timing of availability of revenues. It does so by taking into account the schedule for availability of state, federal and other funds beyond Prop K; the Authority's debt issuance capacity; the Authority's own assessment of the deliverability schedule for proposed projects; and by balancing the costs associated with project escalation versus debt financing. The Strategic Plan also sets policy and provides guidance for the administration of the program, ensuring prudent stewardship of the funds. The Plan recommends a strategy that delivers the voter-mandated Prop K Expenditure Plan early on in its lifespan by significantly expanding the current debt program, but it also lays out a responsible, fiscally constrained road map that retires all debt during the 30-year duration of the Expenditure Plan, while minimizing the cost of funds, ensuring accountability and oversight, exercising solid financial controls and optimizing leveraging of other funds.

Download PDFs for the 2005 Prop K Strategic Plan (does not include tables and appendices)

A Project Delivery Snapshot was intended to inform the 2009 updates of the 5YPPs and Strategic Plan. The Project Delivery Snapshot provided the following information for all of the 5YPPs from Prop K inception (April 2004) through February 2009:

  • Allocations versus Allocation Capacity (e.g. how much of the total sales tax funds available for allocation were allocated, how much was not allocated)
  • Percent complete of the scope of work for all allocations (e.g. project delivery)

An analysis of this data revealed a variety of findings. There were a number of 5YPPs where the sponsors requested and received allocation of all the funds available from Fiscal Year 2003/04 through Fiscal Year 2008/09, and also delivered the projects in a timely fashion such as curb ramps and street resurfacing. In other 5YPP categories, significant amounts of funds remained unallocated (e.g. Transit Enhancements, Guideways—Muni, Facilities—Muni). There were also categories that had allocated most or all of their available funds, but appeared to be experiencing project delivery issues (e.g. delays). One of the most compelling findings was that over $165 million (44% of available allocation capacity) for 5YPP categories remained unallocated. A major focus of the 2009 5YPP and Strategic Plan updates was to work with sponsors to better forecast programming needs and evaluate project readiness so that we were not leaving Prop K funds idle, nor unnecessarily incurring financing costs (e.g. if projects are not moving in a timely fashion), but rather maximizing the efficiency of Prop K funds in order to fully deliver the Expenditure Plan.

Information in the Project Delivery Snapshot was incorporated into the 2009 5YPP and Strategic Plan updates, and was used to evaluate the reasonableness of requested programming, particularly helping to determine whether the project sponsor was likely be able to deliver a project consistent with the proposed schedule.