Regional planner urges Caroline County to prepare projects two years ahead to compete for state and federal transportation funds

Ian, a representative of the Fredericksburg Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (FAMPO), told Caroline County officials that transportation funding is a continuous, multiyear process and urged the county to prepare projects well in advance to be competitive for state and federal grants.

“Funding transportation projects is a multiyear endeavor... it's a cycle, and it never stops,” Ian said, explaining that most funding programs require prior planning studies, engineering work and up-to-date cost estimates before an agency will accept an application.

Ian walked attendees through the three main funding streams: federal, state and local. On federal funding he noted the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (commonly called IIJA) remains the most recent reauthorization but expires Sept. 30; a new multiyear surface-transportation reauthorization bill is in development in Congress and will require separate annual appropriations before funds can be spent. “A new law... if you don't know the system. There is still an annual appropriations bill in congress that takes 1 year of funding,” Ian said, stressing that authorization alone does not guarantee available cash in any single fiscal year.

He emphasized competitive federal grants such as the BUILD program as particularly useful for rural counties because they can relieve the local match burden: “The BUILD grant requires no local match.” Ian also noted a per-project cap for those grants, saying “there is a cap per project of 25,000,000 per grant per round,” and encouraged jurisdictions to consider phased, year-by-year applications for large projects (planning one year, land acquisition in another, construction later).

On state funding, Ian described Virginia’s SmartScale program as an objective, data-driven process that combines state and some federal funds; applications are ranked by score and the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) makes final funding decisions. He advised jurisdictions to align project details with the scoring methodology and warned that changes to the methodology or CTB priorities can alter which projects receive funding.

Ian also described a variety of smaller and targeted programs—such as the Transportation Alternatives Program for sidewalks and bike facilities, state revenue-sharing programs that typically require a 50% local match, and other location-specific financing tools (TIFs, CDAs, business improvement districts). He cautioned that dedicated rural planning funds have not been increased for decades and that limited staff time and inflation have reduced the region’s capacity to prepare competitive applications.

Locally, Ian said a STAR study is underway for the intersection area near I‑95 and Ladysmith Road in Caroline County and called that a concrete planning pipeline: “We have a STAR study on the go... around about the intersection of I 95 and Ladysmith Road,” he said, noting recommendations from the study could become SmartScale or other grant projects.

Ian laid out the practical timeline counties must follow: prescreening and readiness in even years (pre-applications starting in March), full applications due in July or August, VDOT and the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment score projects with results typically released the following January or February, and the CTB typically adopts funded projects in midyear. “The key thing here that I want you to take away is this 2 year cycle rolls on forever,” he said, urging Caroline County to have one or two projects in the pipeline for each cycle.

During the question-and-answer period attendees pressed on near-term policy direction, revenue-sharing rules and how much of locally collected commuter-rail gas tax might be returned to jurisdictions. Ian said federal and state priorities currently can point in different directions—federal programs he described as less transit-focused while Virginia’s incoming administration was described as more interested in transit—so the balance of funding for roads versus transit may shift depending on how reauthorization and state budgeting proceed.

Votes at a glance: Brad Robinson (planning department) moved to approve the minutes for the Oct. 1, 2025 and Dec. 3, 2025 meetings; a voice vote was taken and the chair declared the minutes approved. A motion to adjourn was made, seconded and carried.

Ian said he would circulate the slide deck after the meeting so officials would have the detailed lists and examples he referenced. The presentation was followed by a short round of county business and adjournment.