Tolls or Taxes? How To Fund Transportation Infrastructure
by Hugh McQuaid | Jan 20, 2012 5:00pm
(12) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: State Budget, Transportation
A legislative panel weighed implementing tolls and increasing the sales tax as a way to fund future investments in the state’s transportation infrastructure Friday at a forum sponsored by the CT Fund for the Environment.
The panel’s moderator, Joe McGee of the Business Council of Fairfield County, said that with federal transportation funding in doubt, the state faces a revenue problem in finding money for its transportation infrastructure.
Lawmakers on the six-person panel were asked to consider some unpopular options to increase revenue. McGee immediately raised putting toll booths back on the state’s highways.
Sen. Toni Boucher, R- Wilton, said tolls needed to be considered only one of many options available. Tolls are deeply unpopular with the public, she said.
“There is a visceral reaction from the public, not just from the voters, but also from businesses and chambers of commerce particularly in cities like Danbury where 40 percent of mall business comes from New York state,” she said.
If the state considers putting tolls on its borders, it must also consider the inequity of who will pay those tolls, she said.
Sen. Gary LeBeau, D- East Hartford, said border tolls are a regional issue, much like the Sunday sales of alcohol. However, he said the legislature should consider what is best for the entire state, not just specific regions. He suggested the state could find a way to reimburse residents of border towns.
LeBeau said adding tolls would bring Connecticut more in line with its neighboring states.
“The greatest inequity right now is that the state of Connecticut is being tromped on by out-of-state drivers who go through this state and pay nothing,” he said.
Tens of thousands of cars pass through the state every day and because the gas tax is so high they don’t buy gas here, he said. Connecticut residents pay for the roads but out of state drivers pay no user fee, he said.
Sen. Andrew Maynard, D- Stonington, said tolls might be one of the less regressive ways to address the issue. Some of the reasons for the public aversion to tolls have been mitigated by technology, he said.
“We have to get out of the mindset that it’s the old fashioned quarter in the basket. I think too often we ask people what they think about bringing back tolls and they’re thinking ‘Okay, every 10 miles we’re going to have to stop and there will be a line,’” he said.
Rep. Kim Fawcett, D- Fairfield, said in order to support tolls, lawmakers in Fairfield County would have have to be able to assure their constituents the money generated would be used to support mass transit in their area.
Tolls encourage commuters to use mass transit but the rail system in Fairfield County is not equipped to handle additional people, she said.
Rep. Tony Guerrera, D- Rocky Hill, said toll revenue could pay for transportation investments and help reduce the state’s high gas tax. He said over a five year period the tax could be reduced by 50 percent.
“Isn’t it a lot cheaper for you to go through an electronic toll than paying that gas tax?” he asked.
After the panel, Guerrera said he was planning on proposing a bill during the legislative session to implement border tolls.
However, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he won’t be proposing any highway tolls this legislation session and doesn’t believe the legislature will be able to get him legislation on the issue this year. He did sign legislation last year that allowed for tolls to help pay for the completion of Route 11.
Considering the political barrier to bringing tolls back, McGee asked if increasing the state sales tax by a half a point and dedicating it to transportation was a reasonable alternative.
“I would say yes except that no one would believe for an instant that that’s going to last for more than one session,” Maynard said, implying that the revenue would wind up being used for other things.
Guerrera agreed, saying Connecticut used to have a lock on transportation funding and at that time had one of the best transportation infrastructure systems in the country.
“What happened? When things got bad, they raided that lock box. Therefore, our infrastructure started going down,” he said.
Again, Malloy has said he would not endorse any new taxes so it would be a tough vote for lawmakers, who last year passed the largest tax increase in recent history. He suggested the state could look to public-private partnerships to fund its transportation infrastructure.
The jobs bill passed during the special legislative session in October included a limited provision allowing the governor to approve not more than five such projects. Transportation infrastructure is one of the areas the bill authorizes Malloy to approve the partnerships.
But the projects were capped at five because public-private partnerships were a contentious issue that pitted the governor and Republicans against the legislature’s Democratic majority.
Democrats sided with the state employee unions who said they were concerned that the partnerships, “however well-intentioned, reduce transparency, accountability, and oversight of public services.”
On Friday, McGee said greater use of the partnerships could be a game-changer on an issue the state really can’t afford to ignore.
“If all things stay the same, our $20 billion deficit in transportation will be a $20 billion deficit in transportation. And some bridge will fall, someone will die and Connecticut will go, ‘Oh my God.’ And some governor will want to shoot himself in the head if that happens when he’s governor,” he said.
Tags: transportation infrastructure, tolerance, sales tax, panel, tolls, Hugh McQuaid
(12) Comments
posted by: perturbed | January 20, 2012 8:49pm
“He [Malloy] suggested the state could look to public-private partnerships to fund its transportation infrastructure.
Public-private partnerships? To “fund” transportation infrastructure? Has Malloy lost his freakin’ mind?
How does dolling out public transportation funds to private entities under the guise of “economic development” or now it’s twin ruse “public-private partnerships” do anything but squander the scarce resources available for the essential maintenance of our infrastructure?
—perturbed
posted by: Jay | January 20, 2012 9:21pm
Tolls are out of the question. First, I have a hard time paying twice for federal highways. As taxpayers we pay for those roads already. Why should be pay a usage fee. Second, the toll booths are a HAZZARD. This is why they took them out in 1983. And traffic has INCREASED in 25 years. There is a reason why CT is the busiest section of I95. And it does not improve until one gets past New London. So if one wants to consider changes. I think we need to look to other things.
posted by: Noteworthy | January 21, 2012 10:26am
Let’s be honest - this state has been raiding its transportation fund for years to fund everything but transportation. Hundreds of millions of dollars each year are diverted from the double taxation we pay. Since this has been going on - billions have been stolen.
Before any discusssion of more tolls and taxes - 100% of the current gas taxes should be used for bonified transportation needs.
As for the idea that tolls would offset gas taxes - great idea and a snowball’s chance of actually happening. What will happen is that we will get socked with the tolls and gas taxes will not go down because the minders in Hartford will decide they need the money for something else. We are ruled by idiots and nitwits, most of whom are fundamentally dishonest when it comes to these discussions. Their history is a great predicator of future behavior.
posted by: Fisherman | January 21, 2012 10:50am
What the #!*& is CFE’s angle for “sponsoring” a discussion on Tolls vs. Taxes?
posted by: Reasonable | January 21, 2012 1:46pm
If it’s a choice between “Taxes or Tolls”—Gov. Malloy and his rubber-stamp Democratic General Assembly—will go with a no-brainer for them, which is taxes! Even though Malloy “promises no more taxes”—I feel, the majority of the people do not believe our “forked-tongued-Governor.”
Restoring tolls on our highways would be a difficult task to achieve, and very unlikely—especially with Gov. Malloy taking so many junkets out of state, and out of the country—it’s a wonder that Donnel has a chance to read his business mail…and definately no time, to work on restoring tolls!
Don’t bet on Malloy not returning to his achieved title of “Gov.Dan,the Tax Man.”
posted by: eastrivertype | January 21, 2012 2:20pm
Haven’t we heard all of this before. LeBeau says take the money from the border communities and then redistribute it back. Easy for the guy from East Hartford to say. Can you say more bureaucracy and do you really think that the border communities who will be affected most will get their fair share? How is that ECS formula working out? Everybody shares equally right?
There will be a grab to send the money to the places with the most votes. Absurd.
As for Guerrerra’s comment that it would be cheaper to pay a toll than the higher gas tax, sure it is if you don’t have to use the toll on a daily or regular basis. Easy for the guy from Rocky Hill to say.
Lets continue this “make someone else pay” approach and see if we can drive even more people out of this state.
And the rocket scientist who suggests another half per cent on the sales tax to pay for stuff! Great idea. Lets keep increasing the taxes even more. The sky should be the limit. The cost of living in CT should be driven even higher, which means more people will need assistance and that means more taxes. Really good economics behind that idea.
The reality is that we can’t pay for our roads and bridges because we spend more than we take in. The size and cost of our state government is ridiculous. But lets not even think of that. Lets just find more ways to take money out of someone’s pocket.
posted by: lkulmann | January 22, 2012 6:09pm
How about thinking outside of the box for a minute. I think we can all agree that the DSS needs reorganization. How about we slowly dismantle the ‘organization’ and allow the federal government to administer social service programs. I would think that would be a huge savings immediately. Think of all the infrastructure money you could borrow.
The amount of fraud would be cause for termination of State employees, no layoffs necessary here. The article posted below very nicely explains how we can lower taxes and afford healthcare once we cut out the middleman (Connecticut) and let the federal government take charge of healthcare. There are just too many hands in the CT pot of federal monies. Does anyone really trust CT with money anymore??
http://pgionfriddo.blogspot.com/2012/01/dimes-worth-of-difference-in-2012.html
posted by: Honest1 | January 23, 2012 11:36am
We should bring back the CT tolls. All CT residents should receive a preloaded ezpass, this would allow CT residents to be free of paying tolls. It’s not fair people from other states get to ride CT highways on the backs CT tax payers.
posted by: robn | January 23, 2012 2:17pm
How about if our congressional delegation starts playing as much procedural hardball as possible so we can get back some of our federal tax dollars ???? instead of routinely donating them to recipient states, that are, more often than not, hypocritically conservative states.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/ftsbs-large.jpg
posted by: Vance_NewC | January 23, 2012 4:09pm
Let’s think about this:
In the 1980’s, Wall Street said, “leveraged buyouts are good for the country - trust us!” As a result, companies were destroyed, unions were broken, and millions of people were left unemployed. S&L Corp. also declared bankruptcy, leaving millions without their life savings.
In the 1990’s, Wall Street said, “our ratings on these dot-com companies are completely accurate - trust us!” As a reuslt, the US IPO market still hasn’t recovered.
Over the past decade, Wall Street said, “These bonds backed by sub-prime mortgages are worth their weight in gold - trust us!” Well, we all know what happened there.
Now, Wall Street is saying “We can manage public assets better than the government can - trust us!”
Does the old adage, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” ring a bell with our government officials? Or are they all too busy raking in campaign contributions?
If you want to know about public-private partnerships, just google the words “South Bay Expressway,” “Las Vegas Monorail,” or “Parking meter rates in Chicago”. Seriously, Google them, read, and ask yourself if Wall Street firms really are willing to take on all of the risk when it comes to owning and operating public assets.
posted by: denny wally | January 24, 2012 4:02am
Put in the tolls. Right now drivers pay with their time. I-95 in Stamford is a joke at rush hour. Anyone trying to get home at a decent hour waits in line for an hour. I’d rather pay the toll and be home for dinner with my family. worth!
Here is a suggestion for Fairfield County: Contract a private company to build an express lane in both directions on I-95 bypassing Fairfield County, and then make it a toll lane that only those who pay the toll can use. The private company would keep the money from the toll lane until it recovers the cost of building the lane plus a fair return on its investment.