At a fork in the rough road

Lawmakers could take knife to other areas or spoon more taxes out of pockets – or voters can sit at table

A decade ago, then-gov. Bill Ritter assembled a bipartisan commission to study an issue of growing concern to state leaders: transportation.

They called it the “quiet crisis.” Colorado’s roadsweren’t yet in terrible shape. But it was clear what was on the horizon: Declining revenues coupled with booming population growth had put the state’s motorists on a collision course with potholes and congestion.

“It is a crisiswe can no longer ignore,” the commission concluded in its final report, published in January 2008. And the bipartisan group urged lawmakers to doublewhat the state spends on infrastructure.

But a decade later, Colorado spends even less than it did then.

And after a legislative session that saw top lawmakers promise — and fail — to find a long-term solution, pressure is building outside thecapitol to bypass the state’s elected officials entirely and go straight to the voters with a ballot initiative.

“We all figured if we were going to get it done (through the legislature), thiswas the year to do it ,” said Tony Milo, executive director of the colorado contractors as so ci- ation.

Now, he added, “we know we’re going to have to go” to the ballot.

Nowhere near enough?

The clearest sign that the transportation fight isn’t over came just a day after the 2017 legislative session ended.

Lawmakers a day earlier had secured $1.9 billion for transportation projects — the largest infusion of road money since 2009, when the state hiked vehicle fees by $200 million a year through the FASTER program. But even as he called it “the most productive session” of his tenure, Gov. John Hickenlooper said hewas considering calling lawmakers back to the Capitol to do more.

“I still don’t see how, anyway we look at it, that is enough resources to do the kind of transportation (work) we need,” said Hickenlooper, a Democrat. “We’re not even going to have enough money to fix I-25 north and south and I-70, let alone all the projects that have been identified across the state in counties and municipalities.”

On Friday, Hickenlooper put the speculation to rest — no special session this year. And with election-year politics clouding

hopes for a major transportation bill in 2018, that will only give transportation advocates more reason to go to the voters on their own.

The needs, according to the Colorado Department of Transportation, are staggering. The state faces $9 billion in unfunded highway projects over the next decade, on top of unmet needs at the local level. The state’s roads have deteriorated from a B rating in 2007 to a C- today. At current maintenance levels, the pavement’s on a trajectory to get worse.

And that’s not all. CDOT officials say the $1.9 billion generated frommortgaging a number of state buildings won’t go as far as some think. CDOT will have to chip in $1 billion of its own money over 20 years to repay the leases, cutting into the department’s already inadequate maintenance budget.

Amy Ford, a CDOT spokeswoman, likened it to a $20,000 down-payment on a $200,000 house with a leaky roof. “And with our house, wewill be using dollars that we otherwise would have used to repair the roof or furnace and instead spend them on putting in a new addition,” she wrote in an email.

“Not this legislature”

When Hickenlooper floated the idea of a special session, Democrats were receptive— if skeptical that it would actually happen.

But Republicans scoffed. If lawmakers couldn’t reach a deal in the 120-day legislative session, what made the governor think a few more weeks would break the impasse?

“If he wants a tax hike, is there a legislature that’s going to put that on the ballot for him now?” said Senate President Kevin Grantham, R-cañoncity. “Not this legislature, as we’ve already seen.”

Formuch of the session, it looked like House Bill 1242 was the grand bargain that transportation advocates had been waiting for. It would have increased the statewide sales tax to 3.52 percent from 2.9 percent in order to finance a $3.5 billion bond, while cutting fees and redirecting some existing revenue to roads. It had key sponsors — Grantham and Democratic House Speaker Crisanta Duran, along with the transportation chairs in either chamber, Republican Sen. Randy Baumgartner and Democratic Rep. Diane Mitsch Busch. And it had the votes to pass a floor vote in both chambers.

But ultimately, the measure couldn’t make it out of the Senate Finance Committee due to conservative opposition.

Both sides agree that more money is needed for roads. The sticking point: To what extent should new taxes be a part of the equation? Republicans say the state should cut spending in other areas and prioritize transportation within the state’s existing $26.8 billion budget. Democrats argue there’s nothing left to cut, and new revenue is needed.

The Utah model

A comparison to neighboring Utah — a favorite talking point of Hickenlooper’s — suggests that both sides have cases to make.

With 2.4 million fewer people and two-thirds of the lane miles to maintain, Utah’s transportation department spent $1.3 billion to CDOT’S $1.4 billion this year.

And the resulting differences in road quality are stark. Utah’s pavement condition ranks second nationally, to Colorado’s 32nd, according to Federal Highway Administration statistics. And the typical Denver-ar- ea commuter spends an extra 12 hours a year— 33 percent longer— in rush-hour traffic than a Salt Lake City motorist, according to the Texasa&mtransportation Institute.

So does Utah do it through higher taxes or a state budget that’s leaner in other areas?

Arguably, it’s a mix of both. At 29 cents per gallon, Utah’s gas tax is 31 percent higher thancolorado’s 22-cent tax — last raised in 1991. Colorado has higher vehicle registration fees, but it’s more than offset by Utah’s 1 cent sales tax for roads, which generates $550 million a year. Colorado has no such tax.

As for other state spending, 8.6 percent of Utah’s budget goes toward transportation. CDOT’S budget share is about 5 percent.

“It is very fair to say that transportation has not been a priority, has not been the focus of this state for several years,” said Sandra Hagen Solin, a consultant who works with the Fix Colorado Roads coalition.

A ballot solution

With the legislature at an impasse, advocates across the political spectrum are nowlooking to ballot initiatives to fund the state’s roads. But it’s a costly endeavor thatwill require signature gathering and a well-funded campaign to generate support from voters.

It’s also a politically risky one. Without the legislature’s endorsement, advocates believe it will be a tougher sell. And if it fails, it could be a long time before there’s political will to try again.

Milo, with the Colorado Contractors Association, said transportation advocates will be doing polling and deciding over the next fewweekswhether to take a tax hike to voters in November or in 2018. Conservatives, meanwhile, are pushing ahead with a competing ballot measure of their own to boost road funding through budget cuts.

“If there’s going to be a tax increase on the ballot, the people will most definitely have the option of doing it without one,” said Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, which is backing the colorfully named “Fix Our Damn Roads” initiative.

A decade later, Ritter’s transportation study is mostly collecting dust. Just one of the five recommendations was adopted, and that one at less than half the suggested funding level. Since that time, CDOT’S annual budget dropped from $1.7 billion to $1.4 billion — a far cry from the $1.5 billion increase in taxes and fees the panel had sought.

But at least one thing has changed since 2007.

“I think it’s beyond a ‘quiet crisis,’ ” Solin said. “Our polling and the polling that has been done of late demonstrates that our citizens are very frustrated.”

Brian Eason: 303-954-3051, brianeason @denverpost.com