RTC outlines $4.6 billion, 107‑project plan and floats advisory EV fee for November ballot

Paul Nelson, government affairs officer at the Regional Transportation Commission, told the meeting the agency’s 20‑year Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) includes 107 projects with an estimated cost of about $4.6 billion and that RTC’s current annual revenues are roughly $290 million against expenses of about $329 million.

Nelson said the RTC’s largest revenue source is the fuel tax and that sales of taxable gallons have declined since a 2019 peak — a trend driven by improved fuel efficiency and rising numbers of hybrids and electric vehicles in Washoe County. “If you look at EV registrations in Washoe County, they’ve risen just in those five years 562%,” Nelson said, and added that the growth in EVs is reducing fuel‑tax receipts used to pay for roads.

To address the revenue gap, Nelson said the RTC is proposing an agenda item for the May 26 Board of Commissioners meeting that would ask the board to approve an advisory question on the November ballot asking voters whether they support imposing an annual fee on electric vehicles. He described the advisory question as nonbinding and intended to inform the state legislature, not to implement a local charge directly. “If it passes in November, it doesn’t implement that fee,” Nelson said. “It would just say … state legislature, Washoe County residents want this to be part of the legislation.”

Nelson cited a Gwynn Center study and local polling that presented several fee options; the study’s market research produced suggested amounts of $150, $200 or $250 and “64% of the people were in favor of a fee,” Nelson said, noting the $250 option was the most preferred in the survey. He emphasized that any actual fee would require state legislation and could be structured statewide or with local carve‑outs.

Nelson reviewed near‑term projects that RTC expects to fund or support, including Military Road capacity improvements, a Buck Drive circulation project (a new signal and an eastbound right‑turn lane), and the Lemon Drive resiliency project, which received a $25 million RAISE grant for flood‑mitigation work and a multiuse path. He said the agency has about $290 million in revenues this year and uses a mix of fuel tax, federal formula dollars and discretionary grants to fund projects.

On pavement preservation, Nelson said RTC’s annual program is “somewhere in the range of $20,000,000 plus” to treat about 150–200 lane miles per year and that preventive maintenance is far less costly than waiting for complete rehabilitation. He noted that RTC indexed a local fuel tax to a 10‑year rolling average of producer price index values to partially keep up with rising construction costs.

Nelson also described longer‑range ideas under study, including a Northeast Connector to link the Tahoe‑Reno Industrial Center with Spanish Springs (initial corridor scores and very preliminary cost estimates ranged in the hundreds of millions and the concept is unfunded), and a commuter‑rail study that depends on Union Pacific right‑of‑way and would face significant cost and operational barriers.

Nelson’s presentation drew questions from residents and meeting participants about signal timing at Lehi Drive, whether connectors would spur new development, and how developer road impact fees are collected and used. On partnerships, he said RTC contracts with the University of Nevada, Reno for signal‑timing work (about $677,000) and noted that many projects are built in cooperation with cities and the county because RTC does not own local roads.

The RTC briefing did not produce any formal action at the meeting; Nelson encouraged attendees to follow upcoming board agendas for formal decisions, including the May 26 agenda item on the advisory EV question.