Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House transportation bill would shift money to formula programs, add EV fee
Summary
A House transportation proposal discussed for its implications would provide roughly $580 billion over five years, shift spending from discretionary grants to formula funding, create a new bridge program and an accelerator, and propose per‑vehicle fees on electric and hybrid cars, a county briefing said.
Brett Garson, a federal legislative presenter, told the Will County State & Federal Committee that the House Transportation Infrastructure Committee marked up and passed a surface transportation package that would provide roughly $580,000,000,000 over five years, with about $474,000,000,000 guaranteed.
Garson said the bill moves many discretionary programs into more formula distributions to states and metropolitan planning organizations rather than relying on competitive grants created under the IIJA. “The funding is roughly $580,000,000,000. Four hundred seventy‑four billion of that is guaranteed,” Garson said.
He highlighted several specific programmatic changes: a new bridge program estimated at about $9,200,000,000 over five years and an accelerator program roughly $2,500,000,000 annually that resembles past RAISE/BUILD programs. The change from discretionary to formula dollars, he said, is intended to speed larger, predictable flows of funds to states and transit agencies rather than smaller competitive grants.
A notable revenue provision, Garson said, is a per‑vehicle fee on electric and hybrid vehicles to offset program costs: “That goes for a $130 starting out in the first year for electric vehicles and $35 for hybrid electric vehicles and then ramps up over time,” he told the committee. The fee would be in addition to the existing user fees embedded in gasoline purchases.
Garson warned that some freight‑program components that previously had guaranteed funding could be directed to appropriators for annual decisions, which may complicate local planning for discretionary freight grants. He recommended county staff track both the House and upcoming Senate actions because the Senate has not yet finalized its version.
Why it matters: the bill’s shift toward formula funding could change how much money Will County and its regional partners can access through competitive grants; the EV fee and program mix also affect long‑term transportation revenue trajectories. Garson answered committee questions and offered to provide further detail to staff once the bill text and appropriations language are finalized.
The committee did not take a formal vote on policy related to the bill; Garson and staff committed to follow up with more detailed analyses for the county.
