When it comes to the $9 billion project backlog that faces Colorado’s state highways, state legislators agree on one thing: There’s an urgent need to raise more money to chip away at it.

But concern about a slowing economy as well as competing priorities during the legislative session have resulted in little clarity for some big outstanding questions, even as legislators prepare to unveil the roughly $32 billion state budget next week.

Legislators from both parties say it’s likely they will set aside extra money for transportation from the excess revenue predicted Friday by two varying budget forecasts. It would be on top of about $200 million that’s already been promised in prior sessions for the coming budget year — but how much to add is still under debate. That’s especially so as new Gov. Jared Polis seeks $227 million to pay for the first year of his proposed universal full-day kindergarten initiative.

But transportation advocates don’t want the condition of the state’s roads to get lost in the discussion.

“Whether they are driving on crumbling sections of Highway 96 in Kiowa County, in bumper-to-bumper traffic on I-25 near Fort Collins, or stuck on a gridlocked I-70 trying to get home from the mountains on a Sunday evening, Coloradans have had enough and expect action from this legislature,” said Sandra Hagen Solin, who represents a coalition called Fix Colorado Roads. It includes statewide business groups and chambers of commerce in several cities, predominantly along the Front Range.

UPDATE: Colorado Senate strikes deal for extra $106 million for transportation

Beyond the budget, transportation-focused discussions in the Democratic-majority legislature also have focused on potential ideas to relax taxpayer refund rules and to create new revenue sources for transportation, including a work-around for a gas tax hike.

It’s still unclear, though, whether any of those will move forward this session, which ends in early May.

One key question for lawmakers is whether to allow a $2.3 billion bonding measure for roads and transit to go forward in the November election. That ballot question was teed up a year ago as a backup plan in a bipartisan compromise — and was triggered by voters’ overwhelming rejection of an outside sales tax initiative and a different borrowing measure last fall.

Democrats in the House and Senate are locked in negotiations with Polis’ lobbyists over the budget questions. And voters’ reluctance to approve the large transportation ballot measures last fall have added extra uncertainty to the other matters, since tax-raising ideas are seen as losers at the ballot box.

“There are so many competing priorities that we need to get a clear picture of where the budget stands right now,” said Sen. Dominick Moreno, the Democrat who chairs the Joint Budget Committee, adding that he is urging caution on setting aside too much for transportation.

In recent years, lawmakers have begun to make headway on the $9 billion backlog. In the last two sessions, bipartisan agreements resulted in plans to raise about $2.5 billion for transportation via state-approved borrowing and one-time set-asides, with the bulk for roads and smaller amounts for local governments and transit projects.

But lawmakers from both parties say more needs to be done this year.

Four possible destinations on the road map

Discussions about transportation funding in the Capitol this session have fallen into four main categories, according to interviews with legislators and lobbyists:

Annual budget boost

The idea: Democratic and Republican leaders both have supported additional money in the state budget for the 2019-20 fiscal year, which begins July 1, and they have urged Polis’ team to sign on. Republican Minority Leader Chris Holbert has pushed for $136 million on top of the $200 million or so in carry-over commitments — which together would match the $336 million he’s seeking for schools — and he says the governor’s team has been open to the idea.

The outlook: The majority Democrats say they want to add transportation money to the budget, too — but Moreno questions whether the revenue forecasts will support Holbert’s figure. (Update: The budget committee recommended $30 million in additional transportation money on March 19, and an additional $106 million was added — matching Holbert’s total request — during the Senate floor debate March 27. Those decisions still need review by the state House.)

Borrowing question on ballot

The idea: Republicans are united in wanting to leave the $2.3 billion bonding question for voters in November, but some Democrats have questioned if it’s worthwhile, given last fall’s election results. An added complication is that approval would result in only about $840 million in new money for transportation, since the law triggering the ballot measure requires the cancellation of $1.5 billion in existing borrowing plans authorized in prior legislation; the ballot measure also would delay the next $500 million installment, even if it ends up failing.

The outlook: Whether to cancel the ballot question — and potentially replace it with another plan — remains unresolved.

Using refunds for transportation

The idea: Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires the state to refund revenue collected beyond a cap imposed by the constitutional amendment, and in the next two fiscal years that could total hundreds of millions of dollars. House Speaker KC Becker is working on a potential referred question for voters this year or in 2020 that would ask them to allow the state to keep the money. Approval would free up significant amounts for transportation, education and other needs.

The outlook: Many Republicans oppose the idea, but some Democrats see it as a potential replacement for the bonding question. (Update: Becker unveiled two proposed bills on March 20.)

New fees or other revenue

The idea: Fix Colorado Roads is working with some Democratic lawmakers to hash out ways to raise new revenue, but party leaders are wary of the need to seek voter approval for any new taxes, limiting the options. Instead, the focus has been on ideas that might not have to go to voters. One is a potential fuel-consumption fee that would be charged on gas purchases, separate from the existing gas tax. Others include road-usage charges that could target electric vehicles and autonomous vehicles when those become fixtures on the road.

The outlook: Fees are controversial and could face legal challenges, but House transportation committee Chair Matt Gray, D-Broomfield, says these conversations are unlikely to result in legislation this year.

More will become clear soon

Discussions are ramping up this week on the budget committee, since the deadline to file the budget in the Senate is Monday; its decisions could mark a target for new transportation spending. And Becker is expected to announce her TABOR cap-related plans in coming weeks.

“Coloradans are tired of sitting in traffic and dealing with a lack of transit options,” she said in a statement provided by a spokesperson. “We need to make responsible investments in infrastructure to help our workers, businesses and economy. We have made important investments over the past couple of years, but there is still more to be done. One way where we can at least, in the short term, and at a modest amount, address this is by de-Brucing” — a term inspired by TABOR author Douglas Bruce that means relaxing TABOR spending restrictions.

Solin, from Fix Colorado Roads, said her group supports the potential for any new budget allocation as well as the search for additional money outside the budget.

Holbert, the Republican minority leader, says he’s hopeful there will be room in the budget to deal with both Polis’ kindergarten plan and more spending on roads on an annual basis. As a general rule, Republicans have favored plans to set aside money in the state budget over Democrats’ calls for new sources of revenue for transportation. Their new minority status in both chambers would give them only the power of building public pressure against any Democratic plans to seek tax or fee increases, however.

“It’s important that voters hold the legislature accountable for what many is the top priority,” Holbert said about road projects. “We have the opportunity to address both” in the budget.