Contentious public-private U.S. 36 deal to get public airing this week (Denver: how much, school)

[davebarnes]

Gas tax rate flat since 1992ish.

What has happened in the interim? Significant improvements in average mileage.
Table 4-23: Average Fuel Efficiency of U.S. Light Duty Vehicles | Bureau of Transportation Statistics
Governments that were collecting 10¢ per mile are now just collecting 7.8¢. A drop of 22%!

What has happened in the interim?
Total miles are up since 1992, but down to flat in the last 6 years. Oops.
Further decreases in revenue.

[Mike from back east]

Dave, thanks for a great chart. Better fuel efficiency means even less revenue, a double whammy when the effect of 20 years worth of inflation is factored into the gas tax calculations.

[dude_reino]

Originally Posted by davidv

Low taxes have a consequence.

I, for one, would rather raise my taxes to pay for roads to keep them free, but the "starve the government until it is small enough to drown in the bathtub" crowd doesn't see things the same way.

Unfortunately, it looks like a done deal. They "want" input, but they won't change their minds.

I would accept a tax hike to repair and maintain roads as well. What I'm against is a tax hike to pay three times as many city workers as necessary to stand around in orange vests and smoke cigarettes all day.

Its the inefficiency of government that 'this crowd' has a problem with, not the need for it.

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by dude_reino

I would accept a tax hike to repair and maintain roads as well. What I'm against is a tax hike to pay three times as many city workers as necessary to stand around in orange vests and smoke cigarettes all day.

Its the inefficiency of government that 'this crowd' has a problem with, not the need for it.

I've seen that on government crews patching potholes, etc, but that's going away as the contracting out of such work progresses. I see it on utility crews too where there's a guy down in the ditch and several standing around looking, not sure why that is so, but it sure looks wasteful.

What I've seen here is that actual road building (especially bridge work) is done by corporate firms, not government. I did a whole photo thread in the COLO SPGS forum of some bridge and road building and the only govt type was the engineering staff (that I emailed with) who oversaw contractor work and performance. I was impressed by the entire effort, and never witnessed any inefficiencies. This was a state-funded job and the work was done by Kraemer and Sons who do work all over the state (and nation). IIRC it was Kramer who rebuilt US-40 over Berthoud Pass in 2005 and if you're familiar with the infamous Woodrow Wilson Bridge on the DC beltway, they are the group who did that amazing piece of engineering and construction to replace the aging bridge. I'm all in favor of contracting for highway work with corporate road and bridge firms, so long as the workers focus on safety, quality, and receive decent pay and benefits (i.e., nothing extravagant).

[Sobe Itsavized]

I thought I saw a thread for this discussions earlier on this forum but maybe I was thinking of another forum. If there isn't already a thread on this forum about this topic I'd be surprised.

Contentious public-private U.S. 36 deal to get public airing this week - Boulder Daily Camera

The public-private partnership, which is being overseen by CDOT's High-Performance Transportation Enterprise financing arm, also gives the firm maintenance responsibilities along Interstate 25, from U.S. 36 to downtown Denver.
Under the deal, Plenary Roads Denver would collect all revenues from the toll lanes currently being constructed in each direction of the turnpike.
The contract between Plenary and CDOT, which is expected to be finalized in the next couple of weeks, has raised howls of protests — including from a group of Colorado lawmakers who want time to review the agreement — about whose interests are being protected in the arrangement.
"Before any state highway is privatized, let's have a public discussion about the merits of privatization versus publicly funding the project," said Ken Beitel, spokesman for the Boulder-based alternative energy advocacy group Drive SunShine Institute. "We have no problem with well-written public-private agreements, but this particular deal poses an extreme risk to the Colorado taxpayer."
Worse still, he said, state lawmakers have so far been denied the opportunity to read the full 600-page contract. An online petition from the Drive SunShine Institute to slow down the process had gathered nearly 5,000 signatures as of Monday evening.
"It's an undemocratic and highly risky financial proposition that CDOT is moving full steam ahead with," Beitel said.

Firm responsibilities but we don't get an opportunity to read the full 600 (wow) page contract? Am I missing something here?

[McGowdog]

I could care less about the Denver Metro and Boulder areas so yeah, you must be in the wrong subforum or something.

[lurtsman]

This impacts all of us. CDOT is state level. I'm disturbed by this also, but I find whenever a group tries to force something through without allowing the other side to read it, it's a pile of ****.

[jim9251]

From what I saw on the news last night CDOT doesn't have the money to build these highways, so they contracted out to private companies. You won't be forced to drive on the new highway or pay a toll unless you want to. It's the whole "I want to drive as fast as I want to my ski resort with no one else on the road to bother me, and I want it free" mentality.

[Snikt]

If Russia can build a super-highway and rail system to it's mountain resorts for a winter Olympics, why can't we build something to ours for continuous use for years by millions of people?

[bluescreen73]

Originally Posted by McGowdog

I could care less about the Denver Metro and Boulder areas so yeah, you must be in the wrong subforum or something.

Think bigger picture. While this particular road may be Denver-Boulder, I guarantee you the state has already looked at expanding and tolling I-25 from Pueblo to Fort Collins.

Additionally, a fair portion of Highway 50 from Pueblo to Canon City is near freeway standard. There will come a time (probably within the next decade) where it becomes a toll facility as well.

My guess is they'll take roads like US-50 and do to it what the state of Texas did to SH121. Rebuild the road and add a continuous frontage road. The main lanes get a 75mph speed limit and tolls. The frontage road gets stoplights, a 55mph max speed limit, and stays free.

Originally Posted by jim9251

From what I saw on the news last night CDOT doesn't have the money to build these highways, so they contracted out to private companies. You won't be forced to drive on the new highway or pay a toll unless you want to. It's the whole "I want to drive as fast as I want to my ski resort with no one else on the road to bother me, and I want it free" mentality.

Only problem with that logic is that these toll lanes aren't self-contained. Taxpayer monies will be used to subsidize construction costs, and the state will have to compensate investors if the revenues fail to meet projections. That's you and I.