Legislature(2025 - 2026)BARNES 124
01/23/2025 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Overview of Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation Improvement Program | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
January 23, 2025
1:02 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Ashley Carrick, Co-Chair
Representative Ted Eischeid, Co-Chair
Representative Genevieve Mina
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Elexie Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Kevin McCabe
Representative Cathy Tilton
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: OVERVIEW OF METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS
AND UPDATES ON STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
JACKSON FOX, Executive Director
Fairbanks Area Surface Transportation
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the Overview of Metropolitan
Planning Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program presentation, offered a PowerPoint, titled
"STIP Perspective & 2025 Outlook."
AARON JONGENELEN, Transportation Planning Manager/MPO
Coordinator
Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the Overview of Metropolitan
Planning Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program presentation, offered a PowerPoint, titled
"2024-2027 STIP."
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:02:29 PM
CO-CHAIR ASHLEY CARRICK called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:02 p.m. Representatives Mina,
Stutes, Moore, Eischeid, and Carrick were present at the call to
order.
[In response to an invitation from Co-Chair Carrick, committee
member introductions were made, including key points of focus
projected for the committee.]
^PRESENTATION: Overview of Metropolitan Planning Organizations
and Updates on Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
PRESENTATION: Overview of Metropolitan Planning Organizations
and Updates on Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
1:07:13 PM
CO-CHAIR ASHLEY CARRICK announced that the first order of
business would be the Overview of Metropolitan Planning
Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program presentation.
1:09:02 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1:09 p.m. to 1:13 p.m.
1:13:46 PM
JACKSON FOX, Executive Director, Fairbanks Area Surface
Transportation, as part of the Overview of Metropolitan Planning
Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program presentation, offered a PowerPoint, titled
"STIP Perspective & 2025 Outlook" [hard copy included in the
committee packet.] He preceded the slides by sharing that he
had been invited by Co-Chair Carrick to talk about the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) from the perspective
of a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and the outlook
for 2025. As a disclaimer, he specified that the information
presented is from his observations from working daily with
Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) staff,
official written correspondence, and discussion and dialogue in
meetings; he is not a state employee and did not working on
STIP; and FAST planning, an independent 501(c)(3) non-profit
organization, manages its own transportation improvement program
(TIP), which is part of STIP.
1:16:07 PM
MR. FOX directed attention to slide 3, titled "MPOs - Who we are
& What we do," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization
Urbanized Areas with 50,000+ population
- In Alaska -> Anchorage, Fairbanks, & MatSu
Federally mandated and funded
Carries out Transportation Planning Process under 23
CFR 450, Subpart C, to develop the region's Long- and
Short-Range Transportation Plans
Empowers local governments in the transportation
decision-making process
Continuously engages the public in transportation
planning and projects
MR. FOX moved to slide 4, which is a map of the Fairbanks and
North Pole area with an overlay of the boundary of the Fairbanks
MPO, and explained the boundaries of the Fairbanks MPO.
1:18:25 PM
MR. FOX continued to slide 5, "The STIP," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
STIP: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
- Most important document that DOT produces
- Reflects the funding decisions for how Alaska's
Federal highway funding apportionments ($700+ million
annually) will be spent throughout the State
- These are our gas and diesel taxes paid at the pump
- general funds coming back to the State of Alaska for
investment in our transportation infrastructure
MR. FOX moved to slide 6, "STIP: 4-year Funding Plan," which read
as follows [original punctuation provided]:
The last STIP (FFY 2020-23) was set to expire on
September 30, 2023 (4th year)
Planning for this deadline, work should begin 1-1/2
years prior (mid-2022)
- May take staff up to a year to develop a new STIP
to:
- Consult with stakeholders Statewide to identify,
evaluate, and prioritize project needs
- Carry out 45-day public comment period, resolve
comments, and make corresponding revisions
- Submit for review by Federal partners, resolve
comments, and finalize STIP
- Ideally you want to target having an approved STIP
six months in advance of your deadline in case there
are any unforeseen issues/delays or significant
revision triggers the need for a second public comment
opportunity
Development of the STIP has historically been managed
by DOT Planning & Program Development Division staff
1:21:49 PM
MR. FOX, in response to a question from Co-Chair Carrick,
explained it was normal for the STIP to receive multiple
amendments through its four-year life alongside administrative
modifications. He stated that the original STIP was partially
approved in March 2024, the first amendment was released in July
2024, and the expected release for the second amendment was
January 7, 2025, which had already passed. He offered his
understanding that the preliminary review draft of the second
amendment has been provided to the federal review partners.
1:24:24 PM
MR. FOX continued the presentation on slide 7, "Development of
the new FFY2024-27 STIP," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Development of the new STIP by DOT staff began on
schedule (mid-2022)
By spring 2023, however, a Draft had not been released
for the 45-day public comment period? ideally, should
have been at latest March
At this time, Commissioner's Office took over
development of the STIP
- Don't know the status of completeness of the STIP at
this time, nor reasons why the STIP was moved to the
Commissioner's Office
Draft STIP released at the end of July? making it
challenging to get approved before expiration of the
FFY2020-23 STIP (September 30th)
1:26:51 PM
MR. FOX, in response to questions from various committee
members, clarified that the FAST Planning's TIP is a four-year
plan that is in sync with STIP and was completed March 2023,
which provided adequate time to be incorporated into STIP. He
stated that FAST Planning had a collaborative relationship with
DOT&PF on the previous STIP but had not received any preliminary
drafts for the most recent STIP. He added that projects within
FAST Planning's boundary had been well coordinated. He was not
aware of the DOT&PF Office of the Commissioner taking over
development of STIP before, which caused anxiety with FAST
Planning's technical board. He had heard that it may have
additionally caused discord in DOT&PF which saw an exodus of
staff at that time.
1:31:48 PM
MR. FOX continued the presentation on slide 8, "Public Review
Draft? Early Concerns," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Lack of coordination with MPOs, regional planning
organizations, local government officials, and tribal
entities as required by regulation
Lack of information provided on how new projects were
scored and selected for inclusion in the STIP
New projects were added to the STIP inside the
boundaries of the MPOs that were not planned or
included in our long- and short- range transportation
plans as required by regulation
- For Fairbanks, these were the bridge replacement
projects (controversial w/ community)
MR. FOX, in response to a question from Co-Chair Carrick, opined
that the bridge replacement projects were within the boundary of
the MPO and needed to have been in the local TIP per the
regulations.
1:36:11 PM
MR. FOX moved to slide 9, "Early Concerns (cont'd)? Financial
Analysis," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
The funding shown in the STIP appeared to be
overprogrammed and fiscal constraint was not
demonstrated as required by regulation
Payback of ACC balance (funds borrowed from future
years) was not shown
Projects programmed with certain types of Funding not
eligible for that use
New Programs were added to the STIP (Waysides,
Waterways, Rural Community Connections, Housing Roads,
Frontier Roads, Sustainable Transportation, Light Up
the Highways, etc.), but no projects were identified
and/or if there was a community project nomination
process
Funding tables in STIP not consistent with each other
and contained calculation errors
1:39:47 PM
MR. FOX, in response to questions from Co-Chair Eischeid, agreed
that the mistakes in STIP were fundamental budgetary mistakes
but did not wish to speculate on the causes. He clarified that
both STIP and TIP must demonstrate fiscal constraint, which
requires tables to show spending not exceeding revenue.
1:41:27 PM
MR. FOX continued to slide 10, "Early Concerns (cont'd)? Plan
Alignment," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) funds were
programmed for projects that were not included in the
State's Freight Investment Plan (adopted January 2023)
as required by regulation
Project priorities in the STIP were supposed to be
linked the State's adopted Performance Measures as
required by regulation, but projects were instead
linked to the Commissioner Office's new vision for
'Strategic Investment Areas'
1:44:11 PM
MR. FOX transitioned to slide 11, "Looming Deadline & an
Extension," [which mentions the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA)]. Slide 11 read
as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Based on the review by FHWA and FTA the new STIP was
not approvable, and they asked DOT to request a 6-month
extension
- Required concurrence of the MPOs
New Drafts of the STIP were produced and submitted to
FHWA and FTA in November 2023 and January 2024,
however, the main deficiencies were yet to be
addressed
- Commissioner Office's was challenging findings,
rather than working with Federal funding partners to
address the deficiencies
MR. FOX continued to slide 12, "Draft STIP Resubmittals," which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
In February FHWA and FTA issued a 26-page letter
stating the STIP cannot be approved and outlined
Planning Findings and Corrective Actions that must be
addressed as conditions of approval
A new Draft of the STIP was submitted in March 2024,
addressing some but not all the deficiencies
In late March FHWA and FTA issued a new 30-page letter
of Planning Findings and Corrective Actions with only
a partial approval of the STIP
1:46:59 PM
MR. FOX moved to slide 13, "STIP Amendment 1," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
FHWA and FTA asked the Planning Findings and
Corrective Actions be addressed with STIP Amendment 1
to achieve full approval
STIP Amendment 1 released for public comment in early
July 2024
- Some deficiencies addressed, some still not
- FHWA and FTA again issued only a partial approval in
a new 16-page letter with outstanding Planning Findings
and Corrective Actions
- FHWA and FTA requested monthly meetings with DOT and
for them to develop a "STIP Action Plan"
MR. FOX continued to slide 14, "STIP Amendment 1 (cont'd),"
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
In October DOT submitted a letter contesting nearly
all the Planning Findings and Corrective Actions
DOT&PF contests all five findings, six of the eight
corrective actions, all ten recommendations, and seven
narrative statements. In general, we dispute the
narrative sections, which contain unsubstantiated
claims that are vague and lack sufficient evidence or
support. Below is a summary of the specific findings
being contested.
Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner then flew to
Washington DC to meet with FHWA Headquarters to try to
get them overturned
One Corrective Action was overturned, but all other
Corrective Actions remain unchanged and must be
resolved with STIP Amendment 2
- See December 5, 2024 joint letter from FHWA and FTA
1:49:56 PM
MR. FOX moved to slide 15, "How did 2024 go?," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
Experienced less construction work in Fairbanks and
Anchorage compared to previous years
Through all this, not all FFY2024 funding was
obligated
- ~$170 million shortfall on FFY2024 obligations
- Most/all of this funding can hopefully be carried
forward to FFY2025
- ~$100 million used as ACC (payback of funds borrowed
from future years)
- This information is from November 5th Roads &
Highways Advisory Board meeting
August Redistribution
- Of $71.4 million available to Alaska, DOT was only
able to secure $19 million for obligation-ready
projects
MR. FOX, in response to questions from various committee
members, related that Alaska has received up to $100 million
from August redistributions and Alaska only receiving $19
million out of the requested $71.4 million is unusual. He
clarified that the $170 million shortfall on obligations could
possibly be carried forward due to the period of availability of
the funds.
1:54:28 PM
MR. FOX returned to the presentation on slide 16, "STIP
Amendment 2," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Commissioner's Office has indicated it will be
released this month (January)
FHWA has asked for a preliminary review Draft two
weeks prior to release
MPOs have asked to preview a summary of changes for
the Amendment
Unclear if Planning Findings and Corrective Actions
will be addressed
MR. FOX continued on slide 17, "What's the outlook for 2025?,"
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Conformity Freeze for Fairbanks may be lifted in
coming months, which could get some large highway
projects previously paused back on track
Looking at current DOT bid calendar, however, less
construction work again in Fairbanks compared to
previous years
- Estimated $25-30 million in 2025
- Historical average has been $50 million annually
Some projects in Fairbanks have slipped construction
year from 2025 to 2026 or 2027
Some 2025 projects may be cancelled due to a school
closure and the new Presidential Executive Order
signed (i.e. electric vehicle charging stations)
Largest construction project in State (Cooper Landing
Bypass, $1 billion) has half of its funding pushed out
to Post-2027 in STIP
1:58:33 PM
MR. FOX moved to slide 18, "Things to Watch for?," which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
How will the new Presidential Executive Order, which
eliminates the "electric vehicle mandate," affect the
State's NEVI funds ($52 million)?
Will the State's NHFP funds ($90 million) be fully
programmed in the STIP in
coordination with the State's Freight Investment Plan?
Will the State's PROTECT funds ($93 million) be fully
programmed in the STIP?
Will the ~$170 million carryforward in unobligated
FFY2024 funds be programmed in Amendment 2 to be fully
obligated in addition to the FFY2025 funds?
How is DOT positioning itself to maximize the
opportunity for August Redistribution this year?
2:00:56 PM
MR. FOX, in response to a question from Co-Chair Eischeid,
opined that the lack of organization will reduce construction
and possibly cause workers to leave the community from lack of
employment.
2:02:59 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 2:02 p.m. to 2:07 p.m.
2:07:20 PM
AARON JONGENELEN, Transportation Planning Manager/MPO
Coordinator, Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation
Solutions, as part of the Overview of Metropolitan Planning
Organizations and Updates on Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program presentation, offered a PowerPoint, titled
"2024-2027 STIP" [hard copy included in the committee packet.]
He began the presentation on slide 2 and outlined the boundary
of Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions (AMATS).
Referring to slide 3, he described the responsibilities of AMATS
and clarified that it is both an MPO and transportation
management area (TMA) due to having a population larger than
200,000. To slide 4, he stated that AMATS had submitted two
letters to DOT&PF on the original STIP and first amendment, as
well as a letter in support for an extension. To slide 5, he
stated the biggest concern from AMATS was the lack of
coordination from DOT&PF.
2:11:54 PM
MR. JONGENELEN, in response to a question from Co-Chair
Eischeid, clarified that the coordination between AMATS and
DOT&PF is usually sparse but the lack of outreach about the
development of STIP was unusual.
2:14:18 PM
MR. JONGENELEN continued the presentation on slide 6, titled
"Projects in the STIP not in the MTP and TIP," and stated that
there were multiple projects in the STIP that were missing in
the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) and TIP due to the
lack of coordination. To slide 7, he discussed the technical
errors in the STIP and emphasized the issue of the total project
costs not matching the amounts provided in tables, which caused
confusion about which total was used for fiscal constraint.
2:17:20 PM
MR. JONGENELEN, in response to a question from Co-Chair
Eischeid, opined that if DOT&PF had coordinated with the
different MPOs, the issues with fiscal constraint would have
been caught prior to public review.
2:17:58 PM
MR. JONGENELEN, referring to slide 8, discussed the technical
errors in the first amendment to STIP, which more directly
affected AMATS and did not correct the inconsistency in project
cost totals. To slide 9, he stated that AMATS was concerned
about the amount of advanced construction funds used in the STIP
and the lack of coding for conversions in future years. He
moved to slide 10 and stated that there was no information being
provided to the MPOs about several Tier II corrective actions
that need to be addressed. To slide 11, he asserted that the
six corrective actions provided to AMATS were all addressed with
the help of regional DOT&PF. He moved to slide 12 and stated
that the in the response from DOT&PF to the comment on the first
STIP amendment from AMATS, it did not address the raised
concerns and instead raised novel concerns on the second AMATS
TIP amendment. To slide 13, he commended DOT&PF for its
drafting of a "3C Process Document," setting up a peer exchange
to discuss corrective action toward concerns, and the increased
coordination between DOT&PF and MPO staff. Following with slide
14, he expressed concern about the lack of formal communication
on the continuing development of STIP and the perception of
AMATS being a hinderance instead of a benefit.
2:27:43 PM
MR. JONGENELEN, in response to questions from various committee
members, stated that past STIP development was managed by DOT&PF
Planning & Programming Development but changed to the Office of
the Commissioner, and that AMATS had received comments from
DOT&PF during meetings about the length of time it takes for
public testimony and incorporation of TIP hindering the
development of STIP. He stated that the match rate varies but
Alaska typically receives a 90.97 percent match rate from the
Federal Government, where Alaska only pays 9.03 percent of a
project's cost.
2:31:06 PM
MR. FOX, in response to questions from various committee
members, stated that there is an example of the Idaho
Transportation Department having its special match rate being
threatened when it didn't align with its federal partners. He
expressed concern that the state's share of project costs would
increase if the federal partners decreased the federal match
rate. He opined that the root cause for the issues with STIP
development stemmed from moving the project to the DOT&PF Office
of the Commissioner.
2:32:51 PM
MR. JONGENELEN, in response to a question from Co-Chair
Eischeid, offered his understanding that DOT&PF disagreed with
the process of STIP development.
2:34:44 PM
MR. FOX, in response to a question from Co-Chair Carrick,
provided his understanding that between the original STIP and
the first amendment, more outreach had occurred between DOT&PF
and tribal entities.
2:37:28 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:37
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| FAST Planning Presentation 01.23.25.pdf |
HTRA 1/23/2025 1:00:00 PM |
|
| AMATS Presentation 01.23.25.pdf |
HTRA 1/23/2025 1:00:00 PM |