Transcript Highlights:

• Whether they should be on that road or not, but also whether they should be on that road at certain times
• This is just a road-facing camera. Road-facing camera.
• That is, the funding for the roads should come from those that actually use the roads for several reasons
• That have nothing at all to do with road use or costs imposed on the roads.
• amount of actual road use.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> first up on the agenda is the local road first up on the agenda is the local road assistance<00:
• </c> which the roads were already completed. which the roads were already completed.
• access roads.
• We're good at building roads.
• fund formula and road form uh our road fund formula and our<01:32:28.239><c> road</c><01:32:28.560><

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee approved the October 15 minutes and observed a moment of silence for the victims of the UPS Worldport plane crash. The main presentation was from Transportation Cabinet Commissioner Bobby Joe Lewis on the Local Assistance Road Program/County Priority Projects Program (LAARP/CPP), which was implemented under House Bill 546 and now requires rehabilitation projects to restore roads to original condition, cap funding at $500,000 per project, use a new scoring matrix, include a local match, and submit one photograph per 300 feet of project length. He reported that the 2026-2027 cycle ran from June 1 to October 1 and drew 1,215 project applications from 107 counties and 106 cities, with total submitted project costs of about $121.1 million and about $102.3 million requested after local match. He also said 30% of submissions scored 10s and 22% scored 9s, and that the list of requests and required photos had been submitted to the General Assembly and LRC. Members asked about how scores change over time, whether roads can move from lower scores to 10s, and whether the new process gives a better picture of local needs. Lewis said scores can change based on weather and road conditions, but the new system provides more information and a more standardized evaluation than before. Several members raised concerns about the volume and size of required photographs, suggesting drone footage or video as an alternative; Lewis said the photo requirement has caused confusion and large file uploads, and he was open to considering easier ways to document conditions. Members also discussed continuity in scoring across districts, and Lewis explained that district staff appointed by chief district engineers use a handbook and scoring matrix, with the scores entered into a computer system so evaluators do not see the final score while scoring. The committee also discussed funding levels and carry-forward balances for the program. Lewis said the program began with $20 million authorized in HR92, noted underruns from completed projects, and reported a carry-forward amount that had grown to $355,432.42 available for reauthorization as of October 13. In response to questions, he said the current process concentrates applications into a short window, with 63% of applications arriving in the last few days and 417 on October 1, which created a heavy workload but was completed on time. The meeting then moved to multimodal funding priorities, with Jennifer Kersner of Kentuckians for Better Transportation introducing herself and offering condolences for the UPS aviation incident before beginning her remarks.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> roads, I will ask, is it a private road roads, I will ask, is it a private road or<00:17:38.720>
• </c><00:24:03.440><c> and</c> private road and it's a gravel road and private road and it's a gravel
• Private roads are private. It's not a municipal road.
• We also have a road in through roads.
• </c> as state roads. as state roads.

Committee: House Public Works and Highways

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 6 road, if the road you build on a class 6 road, if the road washes<00:04:39.520><c> out,</c><00:04:
• We have had discussions private road, class 6 road, coach road and other antiquated terms that are in
• We have had discussions private road, class 6 road, coach road and other antiquated terms that are in
• We have had discussions private road, class 6 road, coach road and other antiquated terms that are in
• class 6 road, coach road private road, class 6 road, coach road and<00:11:12.000><c> other</c><00:11

Committee: Senate Commerce

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• a 25-year road.
• a 25-year road.
• We're building roads. We're building roads better.
• We're building roads. We're building roads better.
• and bridges, our local wetlands, our local roads and bridges, our county roads and the state road construction

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• One of them is pavement road conditions; overall road conditions, the other is bridge conditions.
• costs of road construction.
• We all want better roads.
• That mostly go to roads, what if they just all went to roads?
• it back in the road fund.

Committee: House Revenue Stabilization & Tax Policy Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• They're just taking that road.
• They're just taking that road.
• We have Albuhrer's Road rehabilitation.
• We have Albuhrer's Road rehabilitation.
• or transportation, but not for local roads.

Summary: The committee first heard HB 299, a bill to support the Highway 180 project between Deming and Silver City. The sponsors described it as a three-phase road expansion that is already partly complete, but they emphasized rising construction costs, frequent accidents, heavy mining traffic, and the importance of the route to the local economy, tourism, and access to Silver City. A DOT engineer confirmed the project’s phases and cost increases, and the bill drew support from a former DOT official and others. The committee voted do pass, 6-0. The committee then heard HB 325, which would create a railroad crossing safety fund to help improve crossings statewide with lights, gates, overpasses, and other safety measures. Sponsors said the fund would be seeded with a modest amount and could leverage local, federal, and possibly public-private funding, with DOT setting rules and priorities. Railroad lobbyists from Union Pacific and BNSF supported the bill, saying it would help address a major public safety issue, especially for smaller communities. The committee voted do pass. Next, SB 73 was presented to require driver education schools to include at least three hours of instruction on vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. Supporters said the bill would improve awareness and safety at low cost, and public testimony included a bicyclist and a parent who lost a daughter in a crash involving a vulnerable road user. Some members asked how the requirement would apply to first-time or older drivers, and sponsors said it would be part of driver education curriculum developed by MVD and DOT. The committee voted do pass, with one member explaining a vote to note the bill should be read as applying to any first-time driver, not just young drivers. The committee also heard SB 111, which would align the Motor Vehicle Division’s confidentiality rules with last session’s SB 36 by protecting personal information such as sex, gender identity, immigration status, and national origin from public disclosure. The Taxation and Revenue Department said the change was meant to close a gap in the law and prevent release of sensitive data in response to public records requests, while still allowing disclosure for law enforcement and other legally required purposes. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote, with one member voting no and saying he was frustrated by last-minute efforts to fix problems he did not see as existing. The meeting concluded with lengthy DOT district presentations from District 1 and District 6, covering budgets, completed and ongoing projects, local road and bridge work, equipment needs, and unfunded priorities. Members asked about specific projects, freight routes, cattle guards, dust and weather issues, striping contractors, and how projects are prioritized under the state’s asset management scoring system. DOT officials said many projects were complete or underway, that some major projects would be funded through Senate Bill 2 or other appropriations, and that equipment and recurring maintenance funding remain major concerns. The committee adjourned after thanking DOT staff and members for their work.

Transcript Highlights:

• and on paved roads?
• So if you register your off-road unit, you can register VLT 100% on road.
• and on paved roads?
• So if you register your off-road unit, you can register VLT 100% on road.
• Because when you register your off-road unit, you can register VLT 100% on road.

Committee: Joint Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Study Committee

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• People dying on our roads.
• road.
• We're building roads. We're building roads better.
• Maintaining our roads and bridges, our local wetlands, our local roads and bridges, our county roads,
• For those who build our roads, the workers that build our roads, this is House File 2438.

Transcript Highlights:

• and, you know, causing the damage to the roads.
• It introduced the Hawaii public to what a road usage charge is and showed how a road usage charge would
• As the fourth state to adopt a road usage charge, Hawaii's road usage charge legislation closely follows
• It allows EV drivers a choice between paying a per-mile road usage charge and a $50 flat annual road
• The road usage... The flat annual road usage charge of $50.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee first took up three highway naming resolutions on its consent calendar: ACR 109, SCR 78, and SCR 90. The committee approved the consent calendar with 11 aye votes and no no votes, then adjourned the bill-hearing portion. Members also recognized committee science fellow AJ Mendeola for his service, noting his contributions to bill analysis and staff support. The committee then held an informational hearing on alternatives to the gas tax, focused on the projected decline in fuel-tax revenue and the need for a more sustainable transportation funding model. The chair and invited experts described how inflation, improved fuel efficiency, and growth in electric and other alternative-fuel vehicles are eroding gas-tax revenues. Presenters from the National Conference of State Legislatures and the University of California discussed state options such as higher or indexed gas taxes, EV registration fees, road usage charges, delivery fees, public EV charging fees, transportation network company fees, and managed lanes, emphasizing tradeoffs among revenue adequacy, fairness, administrative cost, and public acceptance. Committee members raised concerns that mileage-based fees or EV fees could function as new taxes on commuters and lower-income drivers, especially if the gas tax is not repealed. Presenters responded that road usage charges are generally intended as replacements for the gas tax, not additions, and argued that mileage-based systems better preserve the user-pays principle while being less tied to vehicle fuel efficiency. They also noted that flat EV registration fees are easy to administer but can be less equitable because they are not linked to actual road use. Officials from Hawaii, Utah, and Oregon described their state programs and policy choices. Hawaii said its new road usage charge began July 1, 2025, for EVs, offers a choice between a per-mile charge and a flat annual fee through 2028, and will transition to mandatory EV participation before expanding to all light-duty vehicles by 2033. Utah described its voluntary EV road usage charge program, quarterly reporting, privacy protections, and legislative scenarios for removing the cap or making participation mandatory. Oregon outlined its constitutional cost-responsibility framework and broader transportation funding challenges, including reliance on user fees and limited use of general-fund support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pricing road usage is the only known way to actually reduce congestion.
• Those special interests who want toll roads. A toll road that is on to that is on the road already.
• city streets or rural roads.
• So I respectfully urge you to not lock the term frontage roads into law.
• road bonds where they said it was for roads, but all but 3 of the projects were to actually tear up streets

Committee: House S/C on Transportation Funding

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> limits for all road users. limits for all road users.
• </c> roads at all now? roads at all now?
• </c> private on their roads? private on their roads?
• road.
• roads? roads?

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: House Transportation opened public hearings on three Senate bills and discussed a fourth scheduling issue. On SB 499, which would change Traffic Safety Commission reporting requirements, the sponsor’s representative said the bill would require annual aggregated data on the causes of traffic collisions in New Hampshire and recommendations to address them. Members asked about the added Trauma Medical Review Committee seat, and a representative explained that it is a longstanding state board of emergency and trauma professionals; the bill had already been amended and passed unanimously earlier in the process. On SB 500, concerning restroom access for certain commercial motor vehicle operators, the sponsor and trucking-industry supporters said the measure arose from concerns raised by female truck drivers and was intended to require larger commercial facilities with available public or employee restrooms to allow truck drivers to use them when there are no public safety concerns. Supporters from the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association said driver shortages make it important to recruit and retain women, and that lack of bathroom access is a significant barrier. Committee members asked about the scope of the problem and whether the issue affected male and female drivers differently. The committee then heard SB 559, which would reduce the minimum allowable speed limit on locally controlled roads. Supporters, including bicyclists and the Bike-Walk Alliance, testified that lower speeds improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers, citing personal crash experiences and national guidance supporting lower urban speed limits where warranted by traffic or engineering studies. They emphasized the bill would not mandate lower limits statewide but would give towns local discretion. Members questioned whether the group would support 15 mph limits and how congestion and travel-time concerns were weighed. A Department of Transportation official testified neutrally, saying the agency had no formal position but had concerns about public perception and possible spillover to unnumbered state roads. The chair also noted an earlier scheduling problem that prevented immediate executive action on a bill until later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do know our road.
• I mean, what do you want us to build a road, right? You want us to expand this road? Absolutely.
• so we can maintain roads.
• Why would we want to have people be on that road and just probably veer off the road and crash?
• Why would we want to have people be on that road and just probably veer off the road and crash?

Summary: The committee heard and advanced six measures. SB 1118, as amended, appropriates $3 million to the Department of Health Services for a grant program to help rural hospitals install enhanced radiation protection systems in cardiac catheterization rooms; testimony from an interventional cardiologist emphasized worker safety, reduced radiation exposure, and recruitment/retention of physicians, and the bill passed 10-0. SB 1154 provides $500,000 to ADOT for a traffic and safety study on SR 64 between Williams and the Grand Canyon; local officials, law enforcement, and fire personnel described heavy tourism, rising crashes, and the need for broader roadway improvements, and it passed 6-4. SB 1063 appropriates $10.4 million for safety improvements on U.S. 70 in the San Carlos Apache area; tribal leaders and law enforcement cited high fatality and injury rates, dangerous design features, and limited federal funding, and it also passed 6-4. The committee then approved SB 1153, which creates a Grand Canyon National Park specialty license plate and fund; the Grand Canyon Conservancy supported the measure as a way to generate dedicated revenue for park programs, and it passed 10-0. SCM 1001, as amended, urges naming SR 260 the Donald J. Trump Highway through the State Board on Geographic and Historic Names rather than ADOT; the memorial drew sharply divided testimony and debate, but it passed 6-4. Finally, SB 1209 exempts homeless individuals and those using shelter addresses from non-operating ID fees and extends the validity period for those IDs to eight years; advocates said the change would help people obtain housing, jobs, and services, and it passed 9-0.

Transcript Highlights:

• The other, the rest of those are—oh, Sirius Road.
• The other, the rest of those are, oh, Sirios Road.
• However, the industry does still feel that that is a negative impact to road projects, road costs, and
• These are an annual road fund program.
• These are an annual road fund program.

Summary: The committee first received a detailed New Mexico DOT District 5 presentation from Rhonda Lopez. She reviewed District 5’s budget, staffing vacancies, completed and ongoing special appropriations from 2020 through 2025, active construction projects, maintenance work, STIP and local government funding, and equipment needs. Members asked about a guardrail issue near U.S. 64, the status of the 5% local match for Transportation Project Fund projects, and the New Mexico 371/Navajo Route 36 intersection; DOT said the match agreements were in place or waived where eligible, and that the Navajo Nation funding agreement was nearly finalized. The chair then moved the agenda to bills before finishing the remaining presentations later. House Bill 270, dealing with contributions to apprenticeship and training programs on public works projects, was presented by Rep. Borrego as a follow-up to the 2024 workforce development and apprenticeship trust fund law. The bill would remove an exclusion for street, highway, bridge, road, utility, and maintenance contracts and require contributions unless a trade classification has no approved apprenticeship program. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association opposed the bill, arguing it would raise road project costs and duplicate existing training programs. Members raised concerns about notice, added costs, and whether contractors with existing programs would be paying twice. A motion to table failed on a tie vote, and a later motion to pass also failed on a tie vote, leaving the bill in committee and available for reconsideration. Ranking Member Brown then presented House Bill 322, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund, with a planned distribution beginning in 2029, including a 5% use for federal matching funds. The bill would also dedicate a portion of the gross receipts tax on electricity and redirect part of the motor vehicle excise tax to grow the fund. Associated Contractors and the Asphalt Pavement Association supported the concept, saying it would help sustain DOT and address the state’s road maintenance gap. Members questioned the electricity tax component, its effect on ratepayers and data centers, the interaction with SB 2 and bond financing, and how projects would be prioritized. A motion to pass failed on a tie vote, and the ranking member suggested the bill could be reconsidered with an amendment removing the electricity portion. The committee then heard a District 4 DOT presentation from assistant district engineer Cruz Sudoste, covering the district’s geography, budget, staffing, completed and active projects, STIP and local government programs, and equipment replacement needs. Members asked about school district uses of transportation project funds and the impact of aging equipment on repair costs. The presentation concluded without any vote or other action on the district report.

Transcript Highlights:

• Out of the road fund, out of the general fund, directly going into the road fund.
• Madam Chair, Senator, the transportation road fund is for local road projects.
• It's used by local governments for their roads. Whereas the State road fund is for state roads.
• So when you say state roads, are you talking about roads or is it?
• So I guess what I'm asking is: the road fund, does that just mean roads?

Committee: Senate Senate Tax, Business & Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• And you know what, if we had a road budget, if we had a permanent road fund, we'd be able to keep those
• for road infrastructure.
• Are their fuel taxes for roads staying for roads, or is it going? To the general fund, Mr.
• But without roads, this state is nothing, and it's fundamental government to build roads.
• for the road fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• of each road.
• of each road.
• </c> the original condition of the road. the original condition of the road.
• </c> we build roads, not sidewalks. we build roads, not sidewalks.
• </c> trying to get them in the road plan. trying to get them in the road plan.

Keywords: 00:05 Call to Order and Roll Call 01:55 Bridge Improvement Program 18:56 County Priority Projects Program 38:10 Transportation Alternative Program 51:47 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for the first interim meeting of the 2025 Budget Review Committee on Transportation and heard from Bobby Jo Lewis, commissioner of Rural and Municipal Aid at the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. She reviewed the new County City Bridge Improvement Program, created in the 2024 regular session, reporting that phases one and two are complete, 45 bridges have been funded so far, and about $18.45 million has been authorized. She said roughly $6.549 million remains for phase three in the current fiscal year, with about $26.445 million in bridge applications still pending. For fiscal year 2026, the program will again have $25 million and will use four application phases. She also described a training resource, Local Bridges 101, and said a new executive advisor, Greg Meredith, has been brought in to help with the bridge program. Members asked how rollover applications would be handled, whether they would be re-evaluated with new applications, how the program would account for bridge longevity and load posting, and how isolated communities would be prioritized. Lewis said applicants not funded in FY25 would be contacted and could choose to roll their applications into FY26, and all applications would be evaluated together at the end of each phase. She said preservation projects are assessed for how much they extend a bridge’s life, and isolated community access bridges or closed bridges with no detour access receive priority. She also said the department aims for equitable distribution across regions and plans to produce a map showing where funds have been awarded. Lewis then turned to the County Priority Projects Program and the Local Assistance Road Program established in House Bill 546 and related resolutions. She said the application cycle opened June 1 and closes October 1, with 106 memoranda of agreement being prepared for awards in House Joint Resolution 46. She described updated application and reporting forms, a scoring matrix, and a County City Pavement Evaluation Manual used to rate projects based on preservation of assets, average daily traffic, recent improvements, safety, cost, and district priority. She said projects must be rehabilitation projects designed to restore the original condition of the road, cannot exceed $500,000, and must use local match percentages tied to the economic development grant program formula. She also reported on funding status for prior road projects, including completed, partially completed, pending, and underrun amounts that may be reauthorized. Committee members asked about photo documentation, online access to project materials, how to measure whether projects truly restore roads to original condition, and what happens when project costs exceed estimates. Lewis said the department is still working on how best to store and share the large volume of photos, and that projects are certified through district offices and local sign-off after completion. She said overages are the responsibility of the applicant because the state does not have additional money beyond the awarded amount. No formal votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, just based on, you know, I travel that road. I have videos of the road.
• They're using this road. There are heavy loads. It's a two-lane road in areas, the edges crumbled.
• So, centerline mile of a road, a two-lane road, it's just the distance from Santa Fe to Albuquerque.
• Do you call that a one-lane road or a two-lane road? Mr.
• So there was a one-lane road. So a two-lane road, yeah.

Transcript Highlights:

• Plow the roads. But the them, okay? Plow the roads.
• a road hard road to time to read a hard a road hard road to travel<04:00:55.520><c> 199</c><04:00:56.000
• All roads are under the town public roads, not private roads. Okay.
• All roads are under the town public roads, not private roads. Okay.
• <c> we</c> class road, a class 6 road that now we class road, a class 6 road that now we just<04:13:45.680

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we produce a lot of what's needed to do roads, and I'm very proud of that.
• Highway 491, and New Mexico State Road 371 are in. My district.
• And so I was able to replace my tires and go back on the road safely.
• comes into play, the road fund doesn't go away, correct?
• Chairman, is lose all the state road fund to this bonding project.

Keywords: 996, all