HB111: Highway systems; revenue-sharing funds therefor in certain counties, cities, and towns.

Chief Patron

Ed Scott (R-30)
Culpeper, VA
Served: 2004–

Progress

	Introduced
	Passed Committee
	Passed House
	Passed Senate
	Signed by Governor
	Became Law

Status

03/14/2008: failed senate

View Entire History

12/17/2007 Committee
12/17/2007 Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/09/08 088135716
12/17/2007 Referred to Committee on Appropriations
01/15/2008 Assigned App. sub: Transportation (May)
01/16/2008 Impact statement from DPB (HB111)
01/21/2008 Referred from Appropriations
01/21/2008 Referred to Committee on Transportation
01/25/2008 Assigned Transportation sub: 4
02/05/2008 Reported from Transportation with substitute (17-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/06/2008 Committee substitute printed 083837716-H1
02/07/2008 Read first time
02/08/2008 Read second time
02/08/2008 Committee substitute agreed to 083837716-H1
02/08/2008 Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB111H1
02/11/2008 Read third time and passed House BLOCK VOTE (96-Y 0-N)
02/11/2008 VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (96-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/11/2008 Reconsideration of passage agreed to by House
02/11/2008 Passed House BLOCK VOTE (98-Y 0-N)
02/11/2008 VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE #2 (98-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/11/2008 Communicated to Senate
02/12/2008 Constitutional reading dispensed
02/12/2008 Referred to Committee on Transportation
02/13/2008 Impact statement from DPB (HB111H1)
02/21/2008 Rereferred from Transportation (15-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/21/2008 Rereferred to Finance
02/26/2008 Reported from Finance with amendment (16-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/27/2008 Constitutional reading dispensed (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
02/28/2008 Read third time
02/28/2008 Passed by for the day
02/29/2008 Passed by for the day
02/29/2008 Floor substitute printed 082966348-S1 (Lucas)
03/03/2008 Read third time
03/03/2008 Reading of amendment waived
03/03/2008 Committee amendment rejected
03/03/2008 Reading of substitute waived
03/03/2008 Passed by for the day
03/04/2008 Read third time
03/04/2008 Reading of substitute waived
03/04/2008 Substitute by Senator Lucas agreed to 082966348-S1
03/04/2008 Engrossed by Senate - floor substitute HB111S1
03/04/2008 Passed Senate with substitute (35-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
03/05/2008 Placed on Calendar
03/05/2008 Speaker ruled Senate substitute not germane
03/06/2008 Chair ruled bill not properly before Senate
03/14/2008 No further action taken
03/14/2008 Failed to pass in Senate

Summary

"Revenue-sharing" funds for highway systems in certain counties, cities, and towns. Provides that, from additional revenues made available by the General Assembly after January 1, 2008, and appropriated for the improvement, construction, or reconstruction of the systems of state highways, the Commonwealth Transportation Board must make an equivalent matching allocation to any county, city, or town for designations by the governing body of up to $1 million in county, city, or town general funds for use by the county, city, or town to construct or improve the highway systems within such county, city, or town. After adopting a resolution supporting the action, the governing body may request revenue-sharing funds to construct or improve a highway system located in another locality, between two or more localities, or to bring subdivision streets, used as such prior to July 1, 1992, up to standards sufficient to qualify them for inclusion in the state primary and secondary system of highways. All requests for funding shall be accompanied by a prioritized listing of specific projects. In allocating these funds, the Board must give priority (i) first when such project is administered by the county, city, or town, either directly or by contract with another entity, (ii) second when such county, city, or town commits more local funding than the amount of revenue-sharing funding requested, and (iii) third when the allocation will accelerate an existing project in the Six-Year Improvement Program or the locality's capital plans. Any funds remaining may be applied to any other project that requires an equivalent matching allocation from the governing body.

View Full Text »