Free Daily Headlines :

  • COVID-19
  • Vaccine Info
  • Money
  • Politics
  • Education
  • Health
  • Justice
  • More
    • Environment
    • Economic Development
    • Gaming
    • Investigations
    • Social Services
    • TRANSPORTATION
  • Opinion
    • CT Viewpoints
    • CT Artpoints
DONATE
Reflecting Connecticut’s Reality.
    COVID-19
    Vaccine Info
    Money
    Politics
    Education
    Health
    Justice
    More
    Environment
    Economic Development
    Gaming
    Investigations
    Social Services
    TRANSPORTATION
    Opinion
    CT Viewpoints
    CT Artpoints

LET�S GET SOCIAL

Show your love for great stories and out standing journalism
CT VIEWPOINTS -- opinions from around Connecticut

Should Connecticut re-instate tolls on its major highways?

  • CT Viewpoints
  • by HB 6818 Witnesses
  • May 12, 2015
  • View as "Clean Read" "Exit Clean Read"

The Connecticut legislature is considering a bill (HB 6818) that would order the transportation commissioner to establish a toll-collection system on the state’s major highways at its borders. The bill would also set up “safeguards to ensure that any toll revenue is deposited in the Special Transportation Fund (STF) and used only for transportation purposes.”

Witnesses — many from the state’s border communities — submitted testimony in opposition to the idea. A few were in favor. Here is an excerpted sampling of both. The full list of witnesses and their written testimony can be found here. 

MAYBEJill Kelly and Carol Leighton
Co-Chairs, CT Citizens Transportation Lobby

The Connecticut Citizens Transportation Lobby is an organization of concerned citizens from around the state who came together in 2003 to advocate for safer highways and increased mass transit in Connecticut.

The CT-CTL has always strongly supported congestion mitigation on our Connecticut Interstates, the Merritt Parkway and Wilber Cross Highway.  While we are pleased that the Transportation Committee is introducing legislation that would bring electronic tolling to Connecticut, we do not support H.B. 6818 as written — a proposal that would limit installation of tolls to state borders.

Such a restriction would not only be inadequate to help finance our highway system, but would be unfair to residents living near the borders or commuting to work across state lines.

We recommend that Connecticut install gantries on all interstates, the Merritt Parkway and Wilber Cross to help mitigate congestion on our roads.

Further, factor for time-of-day pricing should be included, with travel at peak times more expensive than during off peak hours.  This will allow revenues to be used for general congestion-mitigation purposes such as mass transit alternatives.

yea

Joan Krenn 
Burlington

I am in favor of border tolls.  Although they are taxes, we Connecticut residents pay them in other states thus helping their state’s economy.  Why shouldn’t out-of-staters have to do the same for our state and help us pay our road repair bills, roads that they are putting wear and tear on?

Border residents who chose to spend their money across the border in another state do it by choice. There are plenty of businesses in our state who could use their support.

Help your state and everyone in it!

NAY

Michael J. Riley
President, Motor Transport Association of Connecticut

MTAC, a statewide trade association, represents around 800 companies that operate commercial motor vehicles in and through the state of Connecticut. Our membership includes freight haulers, movers of household goods, construction companies, distributors, tank truck operators and hundreds of companies that use trucks in their business and firms that provide goods and services to truck owners.

There are limited circumstances in which tolling may be an appropriate option for funding new construction, such as the addition of new lanes without reducing current lane capacity. In any case, only the new lanes should be tolled and drivers should always be left with an alternate, equitable toll-free road.

TOLLING OF EXISTING INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS IS SIMPLY WRONG.

Turning existing highways into cash cows for individual states is unfair to the highway users who have paid for the construction and maintenance of these roads through the payment of fuel taxes. Fuel taxes have been the preferred funding method of the Interstate Highway System since its establishment in 1956. Subjecting users to additional tolls represents double taxation. Tolling on existing highways is nothing more than an ill-conceived quick fix for transportation funding shortfalls. Often toll revenue doesn’t even end up funding highway projects.

It’s often said that some states around Connecticut have had highway and bridge tolls for many years. In those states, over time, tolls have steadily increased and the funds that were raised were often used for non highway projects.

Once the tolling mechanism is in place, it’s a matter of time before it becomes another steady stream of revenue to be used by governments, rejecting the tie between user fees and how those fees are used. There is no reason why the people of  Connecticut should expect anything different….

BORDER TOLLS ARE UNFAIR AND MAY BE ILLEGAL

If tolls are established, their burden should be spread across the state and not be borne disproportionately by citizens who live along the borders with neighboring states.

Additionally, border tolls charge everyone who enters the state the same amount. People who get off at the first exit in Greenwich, should not pay the same as people who travel I-95 all the way to Rhode Island.

Furthermore, border tolls likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause, since placement of tolls at or close to a state border has the explicit intent of imposing a greater burden on interstate travelers than intrastate travelers. It is unlikely that such a scheme would survive a court challenge. I am confident there are certain national organizations opposed to tolling interstates that stand ready to file such a legal challenge.

yeaMTAC SUPPORTS RESOLUTIONS PROPOSING CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS TO PROTECT THE SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION FUND

The Motor Transport Association of Connecticut is fully supportive of the Governor’s proposal to amend the Connecticut Constitution, creating a mechanism that protects transportation funds from being pilfered and spent on non-transportation projects.

For years, funds generated by highway users – gasoline and diesel fuel taxes, gross earnings tax on petroleum products, license and registration revenue, fees, fines, fares, permits, and sales taxes on motor vehicles, have been transferred to the general fund to pay for non-transportation related expenses.  We cannot finance a first in class transportation system in this state if the special Transportation Fund is used as a piggy bank to be broken into for any reason.

yea

Michael J. Treadwell
Westport

I think tolls should be implemented again. The primary reason they were discontinued back in 1986 is because it was an election year and Gov. William O’Neill wanted to get reelected. Gov. O’Neill was not a bad guy. he just wanted to win reelection and getting rid of the tolls was a great way for him to do it. …

I know this is not politically popular for the politicians to bring back the tolls. And most politicians will oppose it to keep their job. However, the state roads and bridges are falling to pieces. Do we need another bridge to collapse like the Mianus River bridge did in 1983 in Greenwich?

Fixing the roads and bridges will require money. The tolls can bring in money for that purpose as long as the toll money is only used to fix the roads and bridges and not anything else.

Tolls are an opportunity to collect money from people just passing through the state who are not Connecticut residents. Why shouldn’t we charge these outsiders? And the revenue from trucks alone should be fairly large. They are using the roads and wearing them down, so toll them. That is what other states do.

Are other states afraid to use tolls? No they are not. Many other states have tolls. Nothing new about that. In New Jersey you can’t even exit the NJ Turnpike without paying a toll.

NAY

Paul J. Pugliese
President, Greenwich Land Company, Inc.

I am writing to express my extreme opposition to tolls in Southwestern CT. The tolls have, in the past, caused an unreasonable amount of traffic on our local streets which are already congested even more than they were prior to the removal of the old tolls at Exit 3.

I-95 brings goods and services to all of New England and serves as one of three crossing points to Port Chester NY. Local travelers and people trying to avoid the tolls using current GPS technologies will further impact our local residents and businesses.

We already have the burden of having I-95 bisecting the town. We should not be faced with the congestion pollution and disruption that tolls would cause. In addition, my business is between exit 2 and 5. While I try to avoid 95, it is convenient to go from 2 to 5 without paying a toll.

NAY

David Arconti, Jr.
State Representative, 109th District

Some of us agree that tolls are a bad idea for various reasons including traffic congestion, the potential loss of federal funding and the negative impact on our economy, just to name a few.

However, for Danbury, as one of the border towns being considered, the proposal could be devastating. Our city provides a large portion of revenue to Connecticut’s coffers through the sales tax, earning us a prominent spot within the top ten municipalities contributing the most to Connecticut’s economy through taxes.

Our economy thrives on Danbury’s 1.3 million square foot mall and a robust downtown business district, which is patronized by neighboring towns and many out of state consumers.

An added toll would turn many of these valued consumers elsewhere. Many other bordering towns will have to deal with this same concern. Therefore, by implementing these tolls, we will be decreasing the growth of many of our high contributing municipalities.

I have heard about the potential for millions of dollars in generated revenue because of border tolls and its beneficial financial impact on our transportation infrastructure. While I am in favor of supporting revenue generators to help erase our budget deficit, I do not agree it should be done on the backs of commuters, including Connecticut drivers.

Sign up for CT Mirror's free daily news summary.

Free to Read. Not Free to Produce.

The Connecticut Mirror is a nonprofit newsroom. 90% of our revenue comes from people like you. If you value our reporting please consider making a donation. You'll enjoy reading CT Mirror even more knowing you helped make it happen.

YES, I'LL DONATE TODAY

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

SEE WHAT READERS SAID

RELATED STORIES
Playing politics with people’s healthcare is always wrong
by Jody Barr, Jan Hochadel, Jeff Leake, Dave Glidden, Carl Chism and Mike Holmes

For the past decade, towns, school boards and cities throughout the state have been able to provide their employees high-quality healthcare through the Connecticut Partnership […]

A pandemic lesson for CSCU leaders: affordable, accessible childcare is critical
by Brandy Sellitto

If there can be anything good that has come from the last year and the horrors of living through this pandemic, perhaps it is the renewed focus on the need for affordable and accessible childcare. As a teen mom, I know first-hand the need for access to safe, reliable, and developmentally appropriate childcare at an affordable price.

Children’s mental health needs continue to soar: The second pandemic lawmakers must address
by Gabriella Izzo

“She was my happy kid,” a parent told me when I cared for her child who was experiencing a mental health crisis. My patient recovered medically within a few days, however, she remained in the hospital for over a week waiting for placement at a psychiatric rehabilitation facility. We must improve our mental health system and you can be a critical part of making that happen.

H.B. 6620 — A closer reading of a flawed legislative proposal
by Ann M Mulready

The Connecticut Association for Reading Research (CARR) is deeply concerned regarding H.B. 6620, An Act Concerning the Right to Read and Addressing Certain Opportunity Gaps. It is based on a concept that is seriously problematic in that it subordinates comprehension to fluency.

One step Connecticut can take to address our maternal mortality crisis
by Myechia Minter-Jordan, MD

Uncertainty. Fear. Worry. These are just a few of the thoughts and emotions that run through the minds of almost every expecting parent. And for many expecting Black parents, those feelings can be more acute. That’s because for far too many, having a child is a life and death struggle.

Support Our Work

Show your love for great stories and outstanding journalism.

$
Select One
  • Monthly
  • Yearly
  • Once
Artpoint painter
CT ViewpointsCT Artpoints
Opinion Playing politics with people’s healthcare is always wrong
by Jody Barr, Jan Hochadel, Jeff Leake, Dave Glidden, Carl Chism and Mike Holmes

For the past decade, towns, school boards and cities throughout the state have been able to provide their employees high-quality healthcare through the Connecticut Partnership […]

Opinion A pandemic lesson for CSCU leaders: affordable, accessible childcare is critical
by Brandy Sellitto

If there can be anything good that has come from the last year and the horrors of living through this pandemic, perhaps it is the renewed focus on the need for affordable and accessible childcare. As a teen mom, I know first-hand the need for access to safe, reliable, and developmentally appropriate childcare at an affordable price.

Opinion Children’s mental health needs continue to soar: The second pandemic lawmakers must address
by Gabriella Izzo

“She was my happy kid,” a parent told me when I cared for her child who was experiencing a mental health crisis. My patient recovered medically within a few days, however, she remained in the hospital for over a week waiting for placement at a psychiatric rehabilitation facility. We must improve our mental health system and you can be a critical part of making that happen.

Opinion H.B. 6620 — A closer reading of a flawed legislative proposal
by Ann M Mulready

The Connecticut Association for Reading Research (CARR) is deeply concerned regarding H.B. 6620, An Act Concerning the Right to Read and Addressing Certain Opportunity Gaps. It is based on a concept that is seriously problematic in that it subordinates comprehension to fluency.

Artwork Grand guidance
by Anne:Gogh

In a world of systemic oppression aimed towards those of darker skintones – representation matters. We are more than our equity elusive environments, more than […]

Artwork Shea
by Anthony Valentine

Shea is a story about race and social inequalities that plague America. It is a narrative that prompts the question, “Do you know what it’s […]

Artwork The Declaration of Human Rights
by Andres Chaparro

Through my artwork I strive to create an example of ideas that reflect my desire to raise social consciousness, and cultural awareness. Jazz music is […]

Artwork ‘A thing of beauty. Destroy it forever’
by Richard DiCarlo | Derby

During times like these it’s often fun to revisit something familiar and approach things with a different slant. I have been taking some Pop culture […]

Twitter Feed
A Twitter List by CTMirror

Engage

  • Reflections Tickets & Sponsorships
  • Events
  • Donate
  • Newsletter Sign-Up
  • Submit to Viewpoints
  • Submit to ArtPoints
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Commenting Guidelines
  • Legal Notices
  • Contact Us

About

  • About CT Mirror
  • Announcements
  • Board
  • Staff
  • Sponsors and Funders
  • Donors
  • Friends of CT Mirror
  • History
  • Financial
  • Policies
  • Strategic Plan

Opportunity

  • Advertising and Sponsorship
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Use of Photography
  • Work for Us

Go Deeper

  • Steady Habits Podcast
  • Economic Indicator Dashboard
  • Five Things

The Connecticut News Project, Inc. 1049 Asylum Avenue, Hartford, CT 06105. Phone: 860-218-6380

© Copyright 2021, The Connecticut News Project. All Rights Reserved. Website by Web Publisher PRO