Letters

Why truck tolls make sense

Posted 2/16/16

To the Editor:

I read with great interest the letter to the editor by Camille Vella-Wilkinson (Too many unanswered questions on truck tolls, Tuesday, Feb. 9).

I have researched RhodeWorks, …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
Letters

Why truck tolls make sense

Posted

To the Editor:

I read with great interest the letter to the editor by Camille Vella-Wilkinson (Too many unanswered questions on truck tolls, Tuesday, Feb. 9).

I have researched RhodeWorks, talked with neighbors, listened to numerous hours of testimony in committee and seven hours of debate in the House Chamber. Ultimately, I voted for legislation to fix our crumbling infrastructure. Most importantly, the legislation improves our public safety, creates jobs and protects Warwick’s middle class.

Everyone agrees – Democrats and Republicans – that Rhode Island’s bridges, ranked worst in the nation, are a crisis that needs to be immediately fixed. The dispute is over how to pay for it. Opponents of the plan have loudly argued that we should raise the gas tax 8 to 10 cents. This tax would impact everyone – from the college student filling up their car to the landscaping company filling up their equipment to an auto dealership filling up their cars. Warwick’s property taxes have been raised several times over the past several years. Why would we continue to raise taxes on the middle class?

The answer is that we shouldn’t – especially when there is a better alternative. The better alternative is to have the big trucks that cause 70 percent of the damage to our bridges to help pay for them to be fixed.

The proposal to add truck tolls affects only large trucks, such as 18-wheelers. Unfortunately, 18-wheelers cause significant damage to our roads. A 40-ton truck causes as much damage as 9,600 cars. Without this truck toll, we are paying the consequences for this damage.

It is estimated that about 60 percent of trucks paying tolls will be from out of state, which means they are not otherwise supporting our infrastructure through taxes. For these reasons, almost every other state on the eastern seaboard already charges trucks tolls. Connecticut is the only other East Coast state that does not and our neighbor is currently considering tolls for both cars and trucks.

As you may be aware, Rhode Island’s roads and bridges have been ranked the worst in the country in terms of disrepair. This proposal allows us to fix them without putting the burden on the general public by raising the gas tax, the diesel tax, the sales tax, the income tax or any other tax or fee. And if those taxes had increased – 60 percent of the trucks causing the damage – would not be paying those taxes.

Now, the main contention of this opinion was the assertion that the RhodeWorks legislation was cobbled together quickly, that the bill was shoved down legislators’ throats and lawmakers exercised no diligence or caution in studying the economic and societal ramifications of this proposal.

This legislation was initially discussed a year ago by the governor. The reason it wasn’t passed last year was because my colleagues in the House of Representatives and I wanted more time to digest the proposal and study its ramifications. That’s exactly what we did. And that’s exactly why we made so many changes to the original plan.

Our first and biggest concern was what was on everybody’s mind: that commercial truck tolls were just a start – that cars would be next. We responded by writing legislation that specifically prohibits tolls on cars. We even added another layer of protection, stipulating that any toll expansion would have to be approved by Rhode Island voters. 

Secondly, we were uncomfortable with the thought of bonds being backed by anticipated toll revenue. Now that our Congressional delegation has secured more federal transportation funding for Rhode Island, we can use GARVEE bonds instead. Using GARVEE bonds, which stands for “Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle,” means that the bonds used to fix our roads and bridges will be guaranteed by federal funds instead of tolls. That means we will not be in a situation where we have to expand tolls if the revenue falls short of projections.

Thirdly, because we’re doing that, it drastically lowers our total borrowing. That’s $300 million instead of $600 million. That saves a ton of money over time. The interest is reduced by 65 percent, from $578 million to $204 million. And now they’re 15-year bonds instead of 30-year bonds.

Keep in mind, the tolling only affects large trucks, such as 18-wheelers. These trucks pass through the state with a tremendous impact on our roads and bridges, yet do nothing to support our infrastructure through taxes.

In short, this legislation will let us fix our roads and bridges – the worst in the country – without putting the burden of paying for it on the general public. We don’t have to raise the gas tax, the diesel tax, the income tax, the sales tax or any other tax.

Over 10 years, we’ll be spending $183.64 million in the city of Warwick alone. This city is the transportation hub of the state, and I don’t have to tell anyone who lives here what the benefit is to having repairs and resurfacing on the Interstates, the Route 37 connector, or the many bridges over the winding Pawtuxet River.

With those repairs and replacements, go safety improvements to intersections and interchanges.

While significantly improving our transportation infrastructure over the next ten years, this legislation creates over 6,000 jobs, contributing to our tax revenue, buoying our economy and helping working families. This is a good plan for public safety, for business and for our economy. Other proposals called for raising various taxes or borrowing more money. I believe that RhodeWorks was the fairest proposal and I strongly believe that we could not ignore our deteriorating roads any longer.

Rep. Eileen Naughton

District 21

Warwick

Comments

14 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • davebarry109

    Eileen, you are old enough that you will be gone when tolls on cars will be enacted. There is no such thing as a temporary tax or toll. Cars will be tolled in the future. RI will never improve if our GA members, yourself included, cannot manage to find good solutions to our problems instead of a knee jerk reaction of raising taxes, implementing tolls, etc. Some of us are old enough to know that the state sales tax was raised 'temporarily' to the highest in the country. Our income taxes now are higher than what used to be called 'taxachusetts'. I could go on and on but you won't listen. Just this final thing. You've been in the GA for decades. What did you do to keep our roads from being such a disgrace? Were you blind to the DOT budget for maintenance? Do you feel any culpability?

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • DannyHall82

    Eileen how can you even defend that vote? What was the States fuel tax meant for? So instead of looking for money already in the budget we are going to borrow and pay tons of tax payers money on interest. You are no leader...

    Have fun knocking on doors trying to defend this to the voters come the summer time!

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • Justanidiot

    100% of the damage should have been repaired already with money that was raised with the fuel tax and with the millions of dollars passed by voters in all those bond issues. Plus, this money was supposed to be leveraged with federal funds too. I think that some official has a gold plated driveway that is plowed at the first hint of snow by a fleet of DOT trucks.

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • Ken B

    Because of its location and size, Rhode Island should fund the repair of its bridges and roads by reducing its tax on gasoline and diesel fuel to 20 cents per gallon. Every RI driver, (private and business), would save 16 cents per gallon. Many vehicles that now pass through RI would stop and buy their fuel in RI because RI would have the lowest fuel prices in New England. Local truck stops and gas stations, located near Interstate highway ramps, would expand and improve their facilities to attract customers. Employment at RI’s fueling stations would increase. The cost of goods and services in RI would be reduced. The number of gallons of fuel sold in RI each year would more than double. Last year, 439 million gallons of fuel was sold in Rhode Island which produced $140.6 million in fuel taxes. 878 million gallons at 20 cents per gallon would produce $176 million in fuel taxes each year which is more than enough to repair Rhode Island’s roads and bridges. Repairing RI’s bridges could begin immediately. There would no waiting for the gantries or congressional approval.

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • Thecaptain

    I find this letter completely disingenuous and offense. The same letter word for word, except for the city, was circulated by all of the reps and senators. Maybe Eileen can fool the LIW (low intellect voter) but for people that pay attention, this is a disgrace. It is also very unfortunate that Eileen seldom if ever answers any of her constituent phone calls. Neither Rep. Naughton or any other Warwick Rep. engaged in any dialogue with concerned citizens. The Warwick delegation is bought and paid for by the speaker. I am thouroughly disappointed in my Rep. Joe Sekarchi who is clearly beholden to the speaker and the governor. Just take a look at his campaign donations and see who he is aligned with.

    It is shameful that none of these REPRESENTATIVES actually represent anyone but union labor. In particular, they have very limited knowledge of subject matter that they vote on and if you have ever testified before them, they ask no questions and clearly don't understand the issues at hand. Case and point - car taxes.

    Also, please don't be fooled by the charlatan Camile Wilkinson who who panders at each and every opportunity available. She has already stated that she will be running agains Naughton next year. Just what we need at Smith Hill, another Liberal with an agenda. Its time that the Warwick delegation is issues an enema rapidly.

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • TruePatriot

    Let me preface my remarks by saying that I am in complete agreement, as I believe are most Rhode Islanders, that we need an equitable financing model to pay for maintaining our highway infrastructure. Let me add that I also have an understanding that our workforce, in particular blue collar labor, need work and that public sector jobs projects is a legitimate form of employment although not the primary or most sustainable source of long term employment, that remains the private sector and small businesses in particular. One problem I have with this Governor's approach to remedying our fiscal ills is  the divisive nature of it. The truck toll plan pits one segment of labor against another (tradesmen/construction vs truck drivers and warehousemen) and targets one segment (class 8 vehicles) of one industry (trucking) against others. 

    Everyone uses our highways and everyone should pay their fair share not one segment of one industry.  Imagine if you proposed a new fee for all attorneys in the state but then said it will only apply to defense attorneys! The many state legislators who are defense attorneys would cry foul and the other attorneys would know that it was just a matter of time before they too would incur this fee.  Of course this attorney fee would never happen because the legislature is weighted in favor of that profession but this example highlights the inequity of this truck toll plan.

    The notion that this approach will target those "free-loading" out of state truckers who use our highways and bridges without paying anything for them is mis-guided as the diesel tax is based on miles driven in the state. A truck does not have to physically buy their diesel in Rhode Island for them to be responsible to pay Rhode Island the diesel fuel tax. It is based on the number of miles they drive in the state, it is called apportionment. If these trucks by-pass our state and go around us, you are correct that they will not put wear and tear on our roads but they also will not be paying us any diesel fuel tax. Diversion will be a loss to our apportionment of the IFTA tax.

    Finding other approaches other than truck tolls would produce $70 million savings (projected, could be much higher) of purchasing and erecting the toll gantries not to mention the huge traffic delays and lost productivity during the gantry construction phase. We will also save the interest costs of floating bonds for this tolling project if we use other revenue streams.

    Trucks and 18-wheeler trucks especially are not the cause of our poor road and bridge infrastructure despite what the DOT Director would have you believe. Certainly smaller dump trucks, which would not pay any tolls under this proposal, carry payloads much heavier than 18-wheeler tractor trailers (100,000+ lbs vs 45,000 lbs maximum legal weight for 18 wheelers) and their weight is more concentrated on less axles. These construction vehicles put more stress on our bridges than tractor trailers yet this current proposal does not toll them. The real culprit for our current condition is poor maintenance and failure to remove winter salt and sand from bridges and roadways in a timely manner (if at all). The rebar and cement of our bridges were corroded over many years of neglect not due to truck use. 

    It is unfortunate that this legislation was fast-tracked through the legislative process so you and your colleagues could have had the necessary time to hear the legitimate concerns of those most unfairly impacted by this tolling approach. Despite what the Governor and Speaker said, the review process was not sufficient and having the Speaker and the DOT Director refer to the legitimate business concerns of Rhode Islanders as "scare tactics" did not serve the public or add to the democratic dialog of our legislative process.

    As a life long Rhode Islander I am concerned that the adverse economic impact of this new tolling plan will undermine our state's economy for years to come and ultimately be far worse than the negative impact of the 38 Studios debacle.

    Sincerely,

    True Patriot

    Tuesday, February 16, 2016 Report this

  • RISchadenfreude

    When I saw the title, I had to read it; should have known it would be party-line drivel, especially when I saw who the author was...

    Wednesday, February 17, 2016 Report this

  • JohnStark

    Ms. Naughton: It's really as simple as this: We do not trust RI's politicians with money. You have given us ample reason for such cynicism. Rhode Islanders already pay some of the most confiscatory taxes in the country in exchange for some of the most deplorable public services. The problem is not the AMOUNT of money you receive from us, but rather the EFFICIENT USE of that money by a One-Party System. In 1947, the state implemented a 1% income tax that was to be a panacea for funding public education. Nearly 70 years later, our schools are falling apart, our children are failing, and that tax rate has increased by 600%! The RI GA abdicated any semblance of fiscal responsibility decades ago. The rationalization you espouse for your vote on tolls, while not surprising, further exemplifies the fiscal recklessness that you so embrace.

    Wednesday, February 17, 2016 Report this

  • PaulHuff

    Mrs Naughton,

    Remember this bill that you helped to jam down our throats.

    You lost a lot of supporters when you chose to ignore your constituents and toe the party line.

    It is time to vote out the incumbents.

    Wednesday, February 17, 2016 Report this

  • wheelchairman

    How can you lie like? We spend the most money per mile of road and we are ranked last for quality of those roads. WTG Rhode Island were first at wasting money! How about you pass a bill that would find saving in the RIDOT rather just raise more money and waste it....Oops too late you just hired 14 new supervisors to watch the other supervisors to watch the foreman watch the 1 guy actually working.

    I do have Faith that MRs. Wilkinson will do a much more responsible job then this women has. She has a great record with Veterans, a firm Supporter of 2nd admendments rights, and Loves this city. You might not agree with her, but. I trust her to do right by this city. Seriously she would be a major upgrade over Eileen "waste your tax dollar" Naughton.

    Dean Johnson

    Wednesday, February 17, 2016 Report this

  • Thecaptain

    Oh please Dean, get a grip. Have you ever actually spent one minute in the city council chamber listening to Wilkinson. While I agree Naughton and several others need to go, Wilkinson is not the choice. Not even for dog catcher. She bloviates until people fall asleep and she will pander to any special interest group. Here's a quiz Dean. Can you name one success that Wilkinson has had in the last 2 terms? (Besides the pie eating contest). I trust that you have been paying close enough attention to the finance and budget hearings to realize that she has voted 5 consecutive times to raise your property taxes and automobile taxes. You have been paying attention right? See Dean, this is the paramount problem in R.I. People cast votes for those individuals that they know nothing about. That's why we are in last place.

    Thursday, February 18, 2016 Report this

  • Reality

    What a joke. Vella-Wilkinson a watchdog for Warwick. Maybe if Wilkinson spent more time taking her responsibilities on the city council more seriously the city would be in a better place. Wilkinson was in charge in finding a new location for Winslow Park ballfields and what did we get.....a ballfield within 200 yds of an active runway. Wilkinson didn't even do a health study so now are children are at risk. Airport Rd. is now more dangerous to drive because of the ballfield location. As Council Finance chair Wilkinson votes for a different healthcare provider that is contrary to the recommendations a healthcare consultant paid for the city recommends.

    Wilkinson votes for tax increases every year she is on the council. Wilkinson is a fraud.

    Friday, February 19, 2016 Report this

  • wheelchairman

    Why I value your opinion Captain, while I disagree with some of them, I do believe the personal attacks you made are uncalled for. The "winner of the pie eating contest" is nothing but a low blow and below you. So if I disagree with you will you make in fun of me for being in a wheelchair?

    Now to your questions , yes I have only recently started going to the city council meetings. I plan on attending every meeting I can so I can try and make a difference. I also plan on running again for school Committee again this coming election cycle. Two of the thing I have like what Mrs Wilkinson is the work on the Concel carry permit and her continued support of veterans with the leave bill. I know you will counter the leave bill will cost tax payers money, but I believe as a tax payer its money well spent.

    Now I will agree I do not like everything Mrs Wilkinson has voted for. The tax increase is one of them. I rather find savings everytime before raising taxes. Saying that I do believe that she will do a much better job for Warwick then Mrs. Naughton at the statehouse. Would you rather have Mrs. Naughton or someone who is a United State Veteran, an NRA memeber who will stand up for our 2nd amendment rights, and someone who I believe will fight tooth and nail for Warwick. If you ever wanna sit down with a cup of coffee I would love to talk about this and anything else that you believe would make Warwick better. This is something we can agree on , Warwick deserves the best.

    Respectfully yours

    Dean Johnson

    Friday, February 19, 2016 Report this

  • Thecaptain

    Dean,

    I would certainly enjoy a coffee with you anytime. As far as the personal attacks let me offer this so you can determine who drew first blood. In 2011 when I began the fight over the car taxes, prior to having any knowledge of Wilkinson, and never having met her, she was upset with a local store that allowed me to put signs in the window. She entered that store telling the owner that he needed to remove the signs as she was in favor of raising the tax. When he did not comply, she contacted the building dept. and made false allegations about his parking lot not being up to code. He then was visited by the building inspector. Naturally nothing came of it because it was all political threatening.

    While I was in front of city hall on the night that we were having the first car tax hearing, Mrs. Wilkinson had her friend Deb Schusterman, (who had just dropped her off at city hall) call 6:30 WPRO to the Matt Allen show and claim that I had just run Wilkinson's son off the road with my truck. By the way, WPRO was kind enough to copy the the content and deliver it to me on disc. I can let you hear it any time.

    Wilkinson then wrote a letter to the editor in this newspaper claiming the same. Due to these slanderous allegations, I filed a slander suit against her and subpoenaed all of her e-mails. In fact, when I received her e-mails from the court I found numerous e-mails that she circulated through the city council and to other departments stating that I was a convicted felon and that I plead nolo to "numerous felony charges". Naturally none of this was true. Interestingly enough, one of her e-mails states that all of the people that attend the council meetings about the car tax issues are A** Holes. Her words, I have the e-mails that I can show you.

    Does that sound like a person of character to you? A veteran? How many veterans do you know that have taken numerous steps to sequester the first amendment right of a resident? I can go in to great detail about what she has done that is detrimental to this community, but I wont bore you on this blog. However, Wilkinson panders to any special interest that she can squeeze a sympathy vote from. NRA, LGBT community, Veterans, etc... The fact of the matter is that as finance chair she has presided over huge plunders that no businessman would be a part of. Bear in mind, this city has an unfunded liability of 800 million, but Wilkinson was the architect of the "bait and switch" that took place last year preventing the taxpayers from questioning the actuaries.

    This woman is a fraud and a danger to the first amendment and exemplifies everything that is wrong politically in our state and city. Having attended 90% of the council meetings in the last 6 years I can assure you that this woman is rotten to the core, cares nothing about anyone but herself interests, and will do anything or say anything to squeeze a vote. Just look at the time wasted and nonsense that she pulled with her on the table off the table legislation about a city wide forensic audit.

    Im ready for that coffee, (or beer) whenever you are, and we can speak in detail.

    Rob Cote

    Tuesday, February 23, 2016 Report this