Return to the VTRC Home Page
Click here to print the printer friendly version of this page.
Page Title: VTRC Report Detail

The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Commonwealth Transportation Board, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Any inclusion of manufacturer names, trade names, or trademarks is for identification purposes only and is not to be considered an endorsement.


The Geographic Distribution of HMOF and TTF Revenues and Allocations in Virginia: FY 93 Update
Brian L. Smith
Year: 1993
VTRC No.: 94-TAR3
Abstract: This report is an update of the report, The Geographic Distribution of HMOF and TTF Revenues and Allocations in Virginia From FY 88 through FY 92. As such, it describes the current structure of transportation finance in the Commonwealth. The financial structure is made up of estimated revenues and recommended allocations. Comparisons of the shares of state and federal transportation revenues and allocations for each of the nine VDOT construction districts are presented for a six-year period from FY 88 through FY 93. The analysis includes all state and federal funds that flow through both the Highway Maintenance and Operating Fund (HMOF) and the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF). We present the estimates in three sections. In the first section, we examine the geographic distribution of transportation allocations for each of VDOT's four primary activities: construction, maintenance, nonhighway modes (mass transit, ports, and airports), and administration and overhead and for the aggregate transportation program. In the second section, we estimate the geographic distribution of transportation revenues for the four primary activities listed above and for the aggregate program. Finally, for the same activities and for the aggregate, we present the ratio of the share of total allocations to the share of total revenues for each construction district.