Funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs can be found at all levels of government as well as in the private sector. To the right you'll find the funding subtopics that are discussed on this website. A click will take you to more detail about that subtopic and provide additional resources and links to other websites for further information.
Prior to the 1990's only a few million dollars a year of federal funds were being invested in bicycle or pedestrian facilities. While the energy crisis of the early 1970's had spawned new interest and some modest government initiatives to make improvements for bicycling, very little money from government at any level was invested in bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Likewise, the outdoor recreation industry and business community in general provided very little funding for facilities, planning, programs or organizational development. Throughout the late 1970's and 1980's the largest amounts of funds for bicycling and walking were invested by state and local parks agencies building multi-use trails, however even these levels of investment were very small compared to what is happening today.


Background:

	• Capital improvement projects are usually construction activities or other physical modifications of the built or natural environment that improve conditions for bicycling and/or walking. Typically, they require a significant level of design and engineering work, and may include land acquisition as well. They can range in cost from $50,000 to many millions. These projects are usually construction activities or other physical modifications of the built or natural environment that improve conditions for bicycling and/or walking. Typically, they require a significant level of design and engineering work, and may include land acquisition as well. They can range in cost from $50,000 to many millions. These projects are usually funded by government entities, however matching funds are often required and it is not uncommon for 5%-50% of such projects to be funded with non-government monies. Small scale projects, and projects where land acquisition is the primary cost, are frequently funded 90-100% with non-government sources.
	• Bicycle and pedestrian planning or research activities usually do not involve any construction or land acquisition costs. Projects typically range from $25,000 to $500,000, or may be up to a million for a very large city that has decided to do a very comprehensive plan. Planning, again, is usually funded by governments, however in cases where governments have not made bicycle and pedestrian planning a priority, private funds have been used to conduct community-based planning efforts and/or publish planning documents for whole areas or particular facilities, as a means of attracting the attention of elected officials and government agencies. In the past, very little research related to bicycle and pedestrian planning and traffic operations has been conducted at the regional (Metropolitan Planning Organization -- MPO) or state level, however increasingly state and local governments are funding applied research in the area of traffic modeling, facility design, and testing of innovative road treatments, materials and equipment that serve bicyclists and pedestrians.
	• Bicycle and pedestrian safety/education programs can include a wide range of programmatic activities, such as child bicyclist safety training, ongoing bike helmet give-aways, training for traffic engineering or planning professionals, traffic safety campaigns, start-up and training costs for police-on-bike programs, campaigns to increase rates of bicycling or walking such as bike-to-work days, publication of maps and brochures, maintenance of websites, or other on-going programs. Program costs frequently include staff time, consultants, publishing costs, travel, or equipment purchase, but do not involve capital improvements or planning activities. Program costs typically range from $5,000 to $250,000 and are as frequently funded by non-government sources as by government. • Funding for public interest advocacy organizations working on bicycling and walking initiatives is usually not provided by government funding programs, however it is increasingly common for state or local public interest groups to receive government funding to implement particular projects, programs or planning tasks, on a contract for services basis. However, to fund basic, or start-up operational costs, non-governmental organizations typically use community fundraising schemes, membership fees and/or foundation grants.

Government Sources:
Federal: Transportation

Leading the way in government funding sources is federal funding through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, or "TEA-21." This six-year funding bill (FY 1998 - FY 2003) authorizes $217 billion in Federal gas-tax revenue and other federal funds for all modes of surface transportation, including highways, bus and rail transit, bicycling and walking. More than half of these funds are made available through programs for which bicycling and walking activities are eligible expenditures, however, none of these funds are dedicated solely for bicycle or pedestrian facilities or programs.

TEA-21 is the successor to "ISTEA," the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, which provided federal funding for the years 1992-1997. ISTEA is now viewed as the federal Act that initiated a major policy shift in federal funding priorities making federal funds much more accessible for state and local bicycling and walking facilities and programs. TEA-21 continues and strengthens this new emphasis on improving conditions for bicycling and walking.

Click on these links to learn more:
The ABC's of Federal Transportation Dollars
Federal Transportation Funding Programs
Choosing the Federal Program that is Right for the Project
Additional Resources


Federal: Non-Transportation

Outside of the federal transportation programs there are a wide range of other federal funds that can be used for bicycling and walking facilities. Some of the most common include funds through the federal land agencies such as the National Forest Service, National Park Service or Bureau of Land Management, however these funds are primarily for trails and must be on federal lands. Community Development Block Grants through HUD, the Department of Housing and Urban Development are a likely source of funds for community-based projects, such as commercial district streetscape improvements, sidewalk improvements, safe routes to school, or other neighborhood-based bicycling and walking facilities that improve local transportation options or help revitalize neighborhoods. The National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse has prepared a useful Technical Brief: Financing and Funding for Trails that sites over thirty federal and national funding sources that could be used to help fund bicycling and walking facilities and/or programs, especially trails: www.enhancements.org


State: Transportation

Every state raises revenue for highway and transportation infrastructure through a state motor-vehicle fuel tax. Some states also raise funds through vehicle licensing fees. In many states, the laws governing how these funds can be spent would make most bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs eligible for these funds, however in other states, use of the funds may be limited to providing paved highway shoulders on state owned and operated roads. The following are some examples of dedicated funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects from state transportation revenues:

• By constitutional amendment, Oregon dedicates 1 percent of state gas-tax revenue to providing improvements for bicycling and walking on state-managed highways. Michigan also has a 1 percent law.

• Illinois has a long-standing, annual dedication of $1.50 out of the car title transfer tax, for trail and bicycle pedestrian improvements in local communities; raising up to $5 million annually.

• California dedicates $1 million from the State Highway Account (gas tax-based), for bicycle transportation improvements, and the amount is scheduled to grow to $2 million in 2001 2002, to $3 million in 2003 and to $5 million in 2004. Maximum grants are $250,000.

• The California state legislature also created the Transportation Development Act, which dedicates .25 percent from the statewide 7.75 percent sales tax to public transit support. The funds are returned to the county of origin where the regional transportation planning agency (often the MPO) may set-aside 2% of the funds for bicycle and pedestrian projects. In San Diego County, where this set-aside has been established, funding levels amount to about $1.7 million per year.

• New Jersey has created a bicycle and pedestrian facility set-aside in its local-aid program by Gubernatorial directive. Municipalities and counties can apply for these funds for local projects. The money comes from the NJ Transportation Trust Fund (mostly state gas taxes and highway toll revenue). Because actual spending of the funds has lagged, and local requests exceed actual awards for projects by several times, advocates are currently pushing for a provision in the Trust Fund reauthorization bill that would require the NJ Department of Transportation to implement 200 miles of bikeways per year during the 4-year life of the new Trust Fund.

• California passed a new state law in 1999 that allocated 1/3 of the federal Hazard Elimination monies (a portion of the 10 percent Safety Set-Aside of Surface Transportation Program funds) to projects that encourage kids to walk and bicycle to school. This amounts to about $20 million annually for the next two years. While this example does not primarily involve use of state revenue, it is a notable state action to further dedicate federal funds.

• Likewise, New York State DOT is in the process of creating a grant program for traffic calming projects on Long Island. Towns and villages will apply for the money with specific traffic calming project proposals. The first year of the program will use $3 million of the same federal Hazard Elimination funds.

• In Indiana, drivers are paying extra for special license plates that benefit greenways, open space, parks and trails. In 1995 about $1.9 million was netted from sale of 75,740 plates. The plates cost an additional $35, of which $25 goes to the Indiana Heritage Trust. Maine and Florida use similar license plate fee add-ons for conservation, parks and bicycle and pedestrian program funding.

Maryland uses ½ of 1% of a real estate transfer tax to fund Program Open Space, which is used to acquire land for greenways and trails

A growing number of states are providing funds from non-transportation related revenue streams. However, these funds are not always eligible for the full range of bicycle and pedestrian activities. Some examples include the following:

• By referendum, Colorado dedicates a portion of its lottery proceeds to trail building.

• Maryland uses a real estate transfer tax (tax on the sale of residential and commercial property) to raise money for open space acquisition and trail building.

• The Pennsylvania and Florida state legislatures were among the first to create state funding programs for trail building and open space preservation, and make much of the funding available for local community-sponsored projects, in addition to projects of statewide interest. Many other states have and are following suit.

• The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (DEM) runs a Greenways and Trails Small Grants Program to award small amounts of funding to local communities with innovative greenway and trail protection projects.

• San Diego County residents voted to impose a 1/2-cent sales tax for transportation purposes. Out of those funds ($171 million in year 2000), $1 million is set aside for bicycle projects. The tax is administered by the San Diego Association of Governments and is scheduled to expire in 2008.

• The City of Albuquerque, New Mexico, and Bernalillo County, both have a 5% set-aside of street bond funds which go to trails and bikeways. For the City, this has amounted to approximately $1.2 million every two years for these facilities. The City voters last year passed a 1/4 cent gross receipts tax for transportation which includes approximately $1 million per year for the next ten years for trail development. In addition, many of the on-street facilities are being developed as a part of other road projects and are incorporating the bike facilities in the roadway budget for new roads, or when a resurfacing project is planned.

• Pinellas County, Florida built much of the Pinellas Trail system with a portion of a one cent sales tax increase voted for by county residents.

• Seattle, Washington, and King County voters approved a $100 million bond issue to protect open space in the urban area; $33 million was set-aside for trail development. The Seattle Department of Public Works used about $6 million per annum for the City's bike program.

• Denver, Colorado also invested $5 million in its emerging trail network with a bond issue, which also funded the city's bike planner for a number of years.

• Eagle County, Colorado (which includes Vail) voters passed a transportation tax that earmarks 10% for trails, about $300,000 a year.

• In Colorado Springs, Colorado, 20 percent of the new open space sales tax is designated for trail acquisition and development; about $5-6 million per year.

• In Evansville, Indiana a boardwalk is being built with Corporate donations from Indiana Power and Light Co. and the Wal-Mart Foundation.


• In Arizona, trail directional and interpretive signs are being provided by the Salt River Project a local utility. Other corporate sponsors of the Arizona Trail are the Hughes Missile Systems, BHP Cooper and Pace American, Inc.

• Recreational Equipment, Inc. has long been a financial supporter of local trail and conservation projects.

• The Kodak Company now supports the American Greenways Awards program of The Conservation Fund, which was started in partnership with the Dupont company. This annual awards program provides grants of up to $2500 to local greenway projects for any activities related to greenway advocacy, planning, design or development.