If tolls are coming, Connecticut needs a plan

With the state facing tens of billions of dollars in unfunded transportation needs and a new governor and General Assembly preparing to take office, the prospects for a return of tolls to Connecticut highways are increasing. But many decisions must be made first, starting with what type of toll system to adopt.

A recently released report prepared by a consulting firm for the state Department of Transportation [Nov. 15, courant.com, “State study predicts tolls on Connecticut highways could raise $1 billion a year”] describes what might be called the maximum system, extensively tolling limited access highways across the state. The authors project that it would generate income of about $1 billion a year.

During the recent gubernatorial campaign, Gov.-elect Ned Lamont advocated a more limited plan, which tolls only “big tractor-trailer trucks.” It is unclear how much revenue the plan, which is based on the truck toll system now being implemented in Rhode Island, would generate and whether it would meet the state’s needs. He estimated that the tolls would generate $250 million a year “when fully implemented.”

There are several details about the plan that remain to be determined, including which roads would be tolled and the toll rates. Those questions start with the constitutionality of the plan. In Rhode Island, a number of organizations have gone to court claiming that the truck-only system discriminates against out-of-state truckers in violation of the commerce clause of the federal Constitution. That’s the same provision that effectively prohibits the state from placing tolls only at its borders.

Establishing or reestablishing tolls on interstate highways requires the approval of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which is part of the U.S. Department of Transportation. In order to obtain that approval, the state will have to assemble a detailed operating plan that specifies, among other things, where the tolls will be located, how much they will charge and how the money will be used.

During that approval process, the Governor-elect’s plan to use at least part of the toll revenue for expanded transit services could be problematic. The FHWA generally requires that, with a few limited exceptions, toll revenues be spent on the roads tolled.

If the state is going to collect another quarter of a billion dollars or more in new revenue through tolls, there are a few safeguards that, while not legally required, should be in place.

First, all of the revenue and expenses should pass through the Special Transportation Fund (STF), since only money in the fund is subject to the lockbox provisions of the state Constitution, which the voters adopted in November. It’s a loophole that could be exploited and should be closed.

Second, all toll spending and revenue, including operating expenses, should be part of the regular budget process — no side deals, slush funds or off-budget accounts, such as those included in some earlier toll legislation. Everything should be handled and accounted for like any other state expenditures. Detailed annual audits wouldn’t be a bad idea either.

Third, there needs to be a detailed strategic transportation plan, developed with public input and legislative approval. If the public is going to have confidence in the plan — and the spending — it needs to be more than a DOT wish list. It needs to be prioritized, based on reliable cost estimates and reflect the funding that is actually available.

Fourth, DOT needs to improve and enhance its project planning and cost estimation systems as well as the way it manages projects and controls costs. Too often in the past, DOT projects have come in late and/or over budget, as the result of flawed estimates, design errors or lack of adequate cost controls. When that happens, funding has to be diverted from other projects in order to meet increased costs.

Fifth, these are public improvements, and the public, the General Assembly and other state agencies have a role to play in the selection and oversight of transportation projects. Under Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission, the Transportation Strategy Board and many state transportation planning requirements were eliminated, usually at the behest of DOT. That type of planning and oversight needs to be restored.

The bottom line is pretty simple. Tolls may be coming to Connecticut, but they must come with a clear plan, a public process, independent oversight and agreement about how the money generated by the tolls will be used. Connecticut taxpayers, motorists and transit users deserve no less.

Philip L. Smith of Bridgeport is a member of The Courant’s Voices board. He was an undersecretary of the state’s Office of Policy and Management from 2003 to 2010 under Govs. John G. Rowland and M. Jodi Rell.