Clark County's draft 20-year transportation capital plan estimates $1.6 billion in projects and a roughly $580 million funding gap

County staff told the Clark County Council the transportation capital facilities plan (Appendix A) includes a preliminary total project list cost of about $1.6 billion (in 2026 dollars) and that current revenue projections generate a multi-decade funding gap the county must address.

Harrison Houston, a transportation planner, told councilors the preliminary CFP project list carries a total estimated cost of approximately $1,600,000,000 and said staff based the financial analysis on conservative assumptions, including a 2.5% assumed growth rate for levy-related revenues. "So right now, we're assuming about 25% of the costs will be recovered through grants, and about 30% of the cost will be recovered through impact fees," Houston said.

Using those assumptions and the county's revenue projections, staff presented a baseline shortfall estimate of about $580,000,000 over the 20-year planning horizon, which staff said represents roughly 36% of projected capital costs. Harrison warned the figures are preliminary and subject to revision before the hearing.

Jeremy Provenzola, the county engineer for Public Works, described long-term trends in the county road fund and said multiple model runs show the road fund trending toward a structural deficit. "In every iteration that we ran, the trend was the same, and that is that the road fund is trending towards a structural deficit," Provenzola said, noting the model run in the presentation showed the fund crossing into negative territory in the late 2030s under current assumptions. He urged earlier action to avoid larger maintenance and operations impacts later.

Staff outlined three primary revenue options the council could direct staff to pursue after plan adoption:

- A councilmanic 1% annual increase to the county road levy (staff estimated a 1% lift would yield roughly $460,000 in the near term and compound over time).

- A countywide local-option gas tax (a county may impose a tax of up to 10% of the state rate; given a state rate of about 56.5 cents per gallon, the countywide rate would be about 5 cents per gallon); staff estimated the regional revenue potential at roughly $12.7 million and the county's share at about $7 million annually, but noted any local gas-tax requires voter approval and that growing EV adoption affects gas-tax revenue over time.

- Creation of a Transportation Benefit District (TBD), which can be funded by vehicle-registration fees, a sales-tax increment (up to 0.3%), or a combination; staff gave examples such as a $20 vehicle-registration fee or a 0.1% sales-tax that each could generate millions annually in the unincorporated area and be combined if the council chooses.

Staff emphasized these are policy choices for council; they will prepare more detailed analyses of whichever option(s) the council directs post-adoption. Oliver Ojekka said staff will return with traffic-impact-fee recalculations and additional appendix materials at the July 29 work session.

Why this matters: the shortfall signals a structural funding challenge for both capital projects and operations and maintenance; the options staff presented carry different legal, political and distributional consequences (some are councilmanic, others require voter approval or interjurisdictional revenue-sharing). The council did not adopt any revenue measures during the work session; staff asked for direction on which options staff should explore further after the comprehensive-plan adoption process.