11 Things We Learned at W.T.F. Summer School 2026

This summer, CALCOG's held its webinar series, named "Where's the Funding". Most attendees jokingly referred to as W.T.F. Summer School. But there is nothing funny about how we fund transportation. Through three sessions, the school covered the many difficulties that come with finding and procuring these finds. The real answer is not that these difficulties just arise from money running out, but from the complicated way the system is set up.

Here is what we learned.

1. What's Driving the Narrative? The central debate remains unresolved: is more driving good or bad? UCLA's Brian Taylor opened Session Two with a challenge based on the current debate relating to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Some say it's an indicator of economic success; others use it for climate policy failure. "The people who work on it cannot even agree on whether their principal output, travel, is a good thing or a bad thing." Every question in this series, gas tax versus sales tax, highway versus transit, traces back to that question.
   
2. Matchmaking Funds. Money gets earmarked before it ever reaches a region. Caltrans' famous Chart C (a poster-sized flowchart in 8-point font) is so dense because each dollar is tied by statute to a program before anyone decides what the regional projects should be. Formula funds buy predictability for decades-long projects; competitive funds buy the state's leverage over priorities. Most local and regional funding agencies have to play matchmaker with multiple different funding sources to deliver a project..
   
3. Running Toward Empty. The federal gas tax isn't just declining because of electric vehicles (EVs). The problem is structural: the tax is a flat per-gallon charge that was never indexed to inflation. STV's Kris Strickler, who pulled Oregon's Department of Transportation back from its own fiscal cliff, put a number to the problem: personnel and service costs rise 6 to 8 percent a year, while funding capacity only rises 1.5 to 2 percent. The math never worked. His fix for how agencies address this gap? Stop calling transportation "an entitlement" and start calling it "a service," and put the tradeoffs on the table honestly.
   
4. We Keep Kicking the Can Down the Road. Deferred maintenance is the most expensive loan you'll ever take out. Professor Taylor likened it to fixing a house foundation: you spend real money and end up with a house that looks the same. Voters fund ribbon cuttings instead. Skip the maintenance and the bill comes due at loan-shark rates: "You're not paying 15%; you're paying 60% interest, 80% interest," he said.
   
5. Flooding the Zone is Not the Best Strategy. Aaron Hake of the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) noted that sometimes it takes a flood to fund a bridge. After the 2019 Coachella Valley flood and 2023 Hurricane Hillary washed out roads, local public opinion on maintenance funding "switch on a dime." The window to fund resilience projects suddenly opened, at least briefly. But that's hardly a sustainable way to fund a transportation system.
   
6. When We Find the Will, There is a Way. The effectiveness of road usage charges is already proven; the holdup is political will, not technology. Kris Strickler ran road use charge pilots for years at Oregon DOT and testified to Congress about it: "The technology's proven, the capability is there," he said, "the public acceptance and the political conversation has to evolve" before it spreads past a handful of states.
   
7. Roundabout Logic. Transportation agencies fund the consequences of land-use decisions they don't make. Aaron Hake's agency spent $250 million upgrading a rail line expecting transit-supportive development to follow the stations. It didn't, and ridership still lags. "At no point in the process was transportation agencies consulted," he said. During Session Three, SACOG's James Corless described the same gap in reverse: infill housing stalls not on permits, but on the unfunded water and sewer lines.
   
8. Building a bridge Between Transit and Housing. Regional agencies can use formula allocated funds. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) leverages its federal dollars to complete streets checklists, transit-oriented development compliance, and ramp metering. "We do like to put strings on those monies… to help steer our investments," said MTC's Kenneth Kao. In Session Three, SCAG's Kate Kigongo described Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) working the same way.
   
9. Limited Capital Sharpens Focus. Smaller agencies often have to build creative capital stacks. Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) financed a bus facility with a TIFIA rural-carve-out loan, a private solar power-purchase agreement, a backup credit line, and state housing dollars. "You need to really create your own version of Chart C" just to track it all, said NVTA's Rebecca Schenck.
   
10. An Incremental Approach. California has tools to fund transit off rising land values, but it barely uses them. UCLA's Juan Matute named three that don't need voter approval: impact fees, tax-increment financing districts, and joint development. But he warns that value creation "is essentially the same thing that gentrification looks like," so tenant protections have to be locked in before values rise, not after. Find more information on our Cal Matters article.
    
11. A Simple Success Formula. Everyone who spoke during the summer school sessions agrees on the fix: predictable, flexible, multi-year money over earmarked, and single-cycle bursts. To be sure, strict standards and thresholds should be placed on the funds, so there are assurances that the funding is used as intended. James Corless (SACOG) calls it patient capital; Kate Kigongo (SCAG) wants a permanently funded REAP program; Susan Shaheen (UC Berkeley/ARB Board member) summed up the series: what's missing is "a predictable share of funding" that treats housing and transportation as one system.

Three sessions, one consistent verdict: less scrambling for one-time grants, more patient, flexible, outcome-driven money, and more honesty about what the money is supposed to accomplish. As road usage changes, land-value tools, and housing-linked funding programs mature across the state, that verdict is likely to shape how every regional agency in California argues for its next dollar.

Meet the Faculty:

Session One: From Dollars to Delivery, How Transportation Funding Actually Works
Moderated by Maura Twomey, Executive Director, AMBAG

• Frank Jimenez, Legislative Analyst's Office
• Keith Duncan, Budget, Caltrans
• Kenneth Kao, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
• Sarkes Khachek, Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)
• Rebecca Schenck, Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA)
• Panel introduced by Ryan Bissegger, Mark Thomas

Session Two: Beyond the Gas Tax, Transportation Funding's Next Chapter
Moderated by Sabrina Bradbury, CALCOG

• Dr. Brian Taylor, UCLA

• Kris Strickler, STV; former Director, Oregon Department of Transportation

• Aaron Hake, Riverside County Transportation Commission

Session Three: Infrastructure for Infill, Funding the Next Generation of Redevelopment
Moderated by Sabrina Bradbury, CALCOG

• James Corless, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG)

• Kate Kigongo, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)

• Susan Shaheen, UC Berkeley; Transportation Sustainability Research Center

• Juan Matute, UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies

Recordings, session handouts, and other resources are on our website. This Fall, join us for our next webinar series: the CALCOG Housing Law and Policy Update webinar series.