Merrimack Toll Revolt Day

[Rochelle]

There are some good points about people from Massachussetts coming here to shop, etc, and that toll money won't just be used for maintaining the roads, but still the point remains: if tolls are bad, how would you rather fund roads? Through taxes, that only those of us who live in NH and not necessarily those who use the roads would pay? I'm for a user pay system, and while it is most ideal under a private road system, it's better than brunt taxation. A border location would be ideal for this. I sincerely doubt it would decrease the number of people who travel that route because in all likelihood it wouldn't be more than the tolls that already exist--$0.75 each way. That beats paying sales tax on everything they buy back home. And it's not just targeting out of staters--it's targeting those who use the roads. I just like the out of stater angle because it irritates me being in a sea of cars from Massachusetts everytime I go southbound on 93 on Sunday evening

The prohibitions against states levying taxes or duties on each other's citizens in Article I, Section IX of the Constitution would also probably be interpreted to prevent this.

--And that's why I abandoned that one, aside from the fact that it's wholly unpractical--would we have to carry IDs around? A toll for those using roads is far more practical.
Btw, how the heck do surrounding states get off taxing the income of those who live in other states, but work in their states?

[Nat F]

But if they said they needed tolls for X number of years to pay for the road and that has passed, that means this is just going into some more general revenue. That means the tolls aren't going particular toward that road. Anyone know where it's going? This happened here in GA too. They have a toll road and it was supposed to only collect the toll for a few years to pay for itself and of course once they have a source of revenue, they don't want to give it up.

As a resident of Merrimack I've only recently heard that the tolls have supposedly been paid off, and I don't know if it's true.  The Merrimack tolls generate over $2.5 million in gross revenue, but have an overhead of about 50%, earning only about $1.25 million in net revenue.  This revenue is not earmarked to pay off any Merrimack toll specific bond, but instead is general revenue for the NH DOT.  I'm sure the DOT could come up with any number of reasons to say the toll installation hasn't been paid for, not the least of which is the over $11 million they say it will take to remove the tolls and rebuild the ramps.  I always thought it was just a simple matter of shutting down the booths, but as we know the government can't do anything simply.

-Nat

[J’raxis 270145]

Why should Merrimackers get to use the road for free, when they can easily use DW to get to local destinations?  Route 3 was built as a highway for travel over longer distances, primarily for tourists and commuters, not as a local road.  That Merrimack residents find it convenient is not my problem.  Maybe residents of Nashua, Manchester and Bedford should all get two free passes too!

I'm sorry, but I can't get behind this "revolt" that would simply shift the cost of maintaining the highway to other state residents.

I say make 93, 293 and 101 into toll roads too, and then it would all be "fair".

Toll booths just cause unnecessary delays and traffic jams—I like the idea of the roads being funded through user fees, but it'd be more efficient to do it through something like gasoline taxes, and drivers license and registration fees.

[J’raxis 270145]

There are some good points about people from Massachussetts coming here to shop, etc, and that toll money won't just be used for maintaining the roads, but still the point remains: if tolls are bad, how would you rather fund roads? Through taxes, that only those of us who live in NH and not necessarily those who use the roads would pay? I'm for a user pay system, and while it is most ideal under a private road system, it's better than brunt taxation.

I think the user fee idea is best, but see my other post—you could do this through gas taxes instead of tolls. Not only are tollbooths disruptive to traffic, but you can't put toll booths on all the roads, and those roads need funding, too. Since a gas tax would be proportional to the amount of gas used, it also means people who are using the roads more are paying more, and those less, less.

I think that taxing gas is acceptable—more so than other forms of tax such as income and property tax—because it's only hitting people who are going to be using the roads—if you're not driving, you're not paying the tax.

Btw, how the heck do surrounding states get off taxing the income of those who live in other states, but work in their states?

Probably the same way the federal government gets to tax both anyone within its borders, and anyone outside its borders who is still a U.S. citizen—because they're bastards looking for any excuse to suck money from people?

[Dreepa]

50% overhead.... aye carumba!!!!!!!!!!
Although one of the toll takers had a tool shirt on the other day and I handed him an FTL flyer... (Thanks Denis!) (always good to have some in the car!)

[Recumbent ReCycler]

If the state weren't misappropriating highway funds (in violation of Article 6-a of the NH constitution), we could probably eliminate all the tolls and still have plenty of money for highway maintenance.  Tolls are a terribly inefficient way to collect revenue, and with all the gas wasted sitting in traffic waiting for your turn to go through the toll booths, you would probably save money by paying just a tiny bit more in fuel taxes and eliminating the tolls.  Also, there seem to be a lot more accidents near toll booths than on open highway.

[dalebert]

I love how we fight about the proper way for them to steal our money.

[J’raxis 270145]

I love how we fight about the proper way for them to steal our money.

It's not stealing your money because it's being used to directly pay for something you're voluntarily using, namely, the highway. I think that's sort of what we're debating here—how to fund highways without resorting to theft such as general taxation.

[error]

I have no problem with tolls on a private turnpike.

But I can guarantee you that tolls on a private turnpike would operate in no way like the tolls currently operate on Route 3/93.

P.S. A "turnpike" is that gate that rises out of your way when you pay the toll.

[lildog]

I think the user fee idea is best, but see my other post—you could do this through gas taxes instead of tolls. Not only are tollbooths disruptive to traffic, but you can't put toll booths on all the roads, and those roads need funding, too. Since a gas tax would be proportional to the amount of gas used, it also means people who are using the roads more are paying more, and those less, less.

Exactly!

Not to mention by forcing cars to slow down and pay tolls it causes gas to be wasted and the emissions from idling cars damage the environment.

[lildog]

And yes Nat is correct half to two thirds of the money collect by the tolls simply goes toward running the tolls themselves.  If that isn't government for the sake of government I don't know what is.

If they are going to tax us the least they can do is look for efficient ways to go about doing it so half to two thirds of the money being collected isn't going into the method of collection.

[Rosie the Riveter]

More money needed to fix NH highways, lawmakers told

By TOM FAHEY
State House Bureau Chief
13 hours, 32 minutes ago

CONCORD – Gasoline tax hikes and higher tolls are on a list of proposed fixes to the state Highway Fund that acting Transportation Commissioner Charles O'Leary recommended to lawmakers yesterday.

Even if the state cuts $1.1 billion in proposed highway work, the state will need an extra 22 cents a gallon in gas taxes over the next 20 years for the state to stay even.

O'Leary has said the current Ten-Year Highway Plan is really a 35-year, $4.5 billion plan. He has proposed cutting the list to $3.4 billion, which would take 22 years to finish.

Even with the cuts, he said, the state has to find more money for maintenance because the state Highway Fund balance is shrinking. He expects an average operating deficit of $74 million a year over the next 10 years if nothing changes.

O'Leary told a special committee studying the Ten-Year plan that it should also consider increasing tolls across the board, or selectively to pay for turnpike projects. He also suggested a new toll booth on the F.E. Everett Turnpike in Nashua, where one was designed but never built.

Lawmakers said they will study O'Leary's ideas this fall and introduce a complete bill on highway plans, tolls and taxes in January.

Rep. Candace Bouchard, D-Concord, who chairs the House Public Works and Highways Committee, said she asked for a full list of ideas for shoring up the Highway Fund.

His list included sale or lease of toll roads, an idea that Bouchard gave scant chance of passing.

O'Leary provided figures that show New Hampshire's gasoline tax -- at 20.6 cents a gallon -- is the second-lowest in the New England, behind Vermont, and 7 cents below the U.S. average of 27.4 cents per gallon. It was last raised in 1992. Bouchard admitted that a gas tax increase could be politically risky.

"We're elected to be leaders, and sometimes you have to take steps that are politically awkward," she said.

"The hot potato item is the Nashua Toll Booth," she added.

The Nashua plaza would produce roughly $10 million a year, enough to cover a $130 million 30-year bond. O'Leary also suggested moving a Dover toll plaza to Newington to raise an extra $5 million a year.

O'Leary said cutting the E-ZPass discount from 30 percent to 15 percent would raise $7.5 million a year. Eliminating it would raise $15 million. Roughly 53 percent of turnpike revenues come from E-ZPass users.

He said the state should stop using highway funds on turnpikes. The ten-year plan calls for $300 million in federal aid to be spent on turnpikes through 2016.

"The turnpike system is supposed to be self-funded, but it is not," Rep. David Campbell, D-Nashua, said. He chairs a committee studying toll roads this fall and plans to coordinate with Bouchard plan on a highway bill this fall.

He noted that O'Leary's economic forecast assumes a somewhat rosy future. The numbers include modest increases in gasoline sales, steady funding from the federal government, where steep cuts are being proposed, and construction inflation at 3 percent a year, compared to 45 percent over the past three years.

Campbell said he thinks some kind of highway revenue boost is in the future.

"We can't build and pave roads or repair and maintain our bridges without cold, hard cash," he said.

[Rochelle]

, but see my other post—you could do this through gas taxes instead of tolls. Not only are tollbooths disruptive to traffic, but you can't put toll booths on all the roads, and those roads need funding, too.

I agree with toll booths being disruptive to traffic--that is the downside in regards to them. But I can't see raising a tax for everyone in order to pay for some roads, that is, highways. If you don't use highways, then you shouldn't have to pay for them.

If the state weren't misappropriating highway funds (in violation of Article 6-a of the NH constitution), we could probably eliminate all the tolls and still have plenty of money for highway maintenance.  Tolls are a terribly inefficient way to collect revenue, and with all the gas wasted sitting in traffic waiting for your turn to go through the toll booths, you would probably save money by paying just a tiny bit more in fuel taxes and eliminating the tolls.

This is also very true--like everything else it does, government is misappropriating money. No one doubts that we could spend waaaay less on education if the vast majority of funding didn't go to administration. The same is probably true here.
But since privatizing the highways (seen here as the ideal), raising the gas tax is a tax on everyone, and not just a fee for users, and tolls are woefully inefficient (though they do get the users to pay!), how should highways be funded? How would highways be funded if they were private. Would you pay in advance for a permit to go onto the highway and then a scanner similar to the easy pass would scan the permit as you're on the on-ramp? What about violators?

[J’raxis 270145]

, but see my other post—you could do this through gas taxes instead of tolls. Not only are tollbooths disruptive to traffic, but you can't put toll booths on all the roads, and those roads need funding, too.

I agree with toll booths being disruptive to traffic--that is the downside in regards to them. But I can't see raising a tax for everyone in order to pay for some roads, that is, highways. If you don't use highways, then you shouldn't have to pay for them.

I was proposing using the gas tax/user fee to fund all the roads, which anyone with a car—and therefore the vast majority of people buying gasoline—use. Thinking about this further, the small number of people buying gasoline for farm equipment could be exempted at the pump somehow, or file for a rebate at the end of the year, or something similar.

[JonM]

There's a report that EZPass is screwing people by overcharging them, and the customer support has been trained to deny their requests for refunds.
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2007/07/millions-of-dri.html

Luckily NH doesn't have distance based tolls - yet, but watch for this if they do.