Help put a lock on transportation funds

State legislators should be able to keep their hands out of the cookie jar on their own. But when the cupboard is bare at budget time, the Special Transportation Fund is too tempting to leave untouched. For years, through Democratic and Republican administrations, the transportation fund has been raided to the point auditors warn it could become insolvent in a few years.

The proposed solution is to put the state money for transportation in a lockbox — through a Constitutional amendment — where it can’t be touched for other purposes.

Residents will get to vote on the proposal, one of two questions on the Nov. 6 election ballot. The other would require a public hearing before the state could transfer ownership of public property to a private entity. We encourage a ‘yes’ vote on both.

We long have supported a lockbox for the STF. Though the question is dryly worded, the consequences are essential.

Many of the state’s bridges are in disrepair, highways are congested and Metro-North trains take longer to get to Grand Central than they did 30 years ago.

Established in 1984, the STF was dedicated for investment in the state’s transportation network. The gasoline tax, motor vehicle related fines, a portion of the state sales tax and other sources of revenue fuel this fund. But it is estimated as much as $650 million has been diverted for other purposes in recent years. A Constitutional lockbox would prevent those revenues from going elsewhere.

As common sense as this is, the lockbox is controversial.

Republicans argue there are holes in the box and money can be tapped anyway; some members of both parties worry the amendment is a step toward tolls.

Critics say funds can be diverted before they get to the lockbox. For example, legislators can send less of the sales tax to the STF. This could be fixed with tighter wording; we believe it is better to have some protection now than none later.

The concern about tolls is understandable. Gov. Dannel Malloy said early in his administration he would not consider tolls unless the public had assurances the revenue would go solely for improving transportation. It was not an easy sell.

Proposed in a special 2015 legislative session, the lockbox question didn’t gain approval in both chambers until 2017, which allowed it to go on this year’s ballot.

Whether Connecticut should reinstitute highway tolls is a complicated — and combustible — proposition. There will be great debate in the next legislative session, no doubt.

A transportation lockbox does not necessarily lead to tolls.

A bipartisan coalition of more than 30 organizations — business, labor and environmental groups among them — support the lockbox.

Connecticut desperately needs to invest in its failing bridges, congested highways, commuter rail lines and other transportation projects for a better economy and quality of life.

Help put a lock on that cookie jar.