Make I-70 a toll road? (Branson, Reeds Spring: to buy, price, move)

[flynavyj]

I'd agree Bluff, not that our taxes are necessarily low and that's preventing good roads. Personally, I think I-70 is in pretty decent shape, and with the exception of lake traffic, or jams getting into and out of the major cities, the road works pretty well. If a tax is going to be imposed, it needs to have limits on it, which expire once the road improvements have been paid for. My neighbors voted down a recent proposal to repave or resurface all roads within the municipality for a small tax increase of $0.xx /yr because there was no limit on when the tax would expire...needless to say, residents weren't excited about it.

[Bluff_Dweller]

Originally Posted by aragx6

We have the 44th lowest gas tax in the country. Until it's in line with other states our size, I will never support a toll.

But if you're coming from this argument with "all taxes are bad" then there's little use for dialogue because I don't believe that to be the case.

Clearly we went to college in different era's so dialogue should be necessary. If the 44th lowest tax were true, it tells me that MODOT is doing a better job than our neighbor states and should commended and supported for their inovative work proceedures.

I will admit that I am probably more skeptical than you but more taxes to me means more waste, corruption and as one poster stated more "corporate welfare".

I am not against taxes "PROPERLY USED".

I admit that I was surprised how many washboardy dirt roads in upstate Harrison County and neighboring counties had compared to our lower state paved roads. I would say that those counties could need some management help. It definately helps to live in a tourist area.

[Bluff_Dweller]

Originally Posted by flynavyj

I'd agree Bluff, not that our taxes are necessarily low and that's preventing good roads. Personally, I think I-70 is in pretty decent shape, and with the exception of lake traffic, or jams getting into and out of the major cities, the road works pretty well. If a tax is going to be imposed, it needs to have limits on it, which expire once the road improvements have been paid for. My neighbors voted down a recent proposal to repave or resurface all roads within the municipality for a small tax increase of $0.xx /yr because there was no limit on when the tax would expire...needless to say, residents weren't excited about it.

Accountiability seems to be necessary, especially during "hard times". Too many people have never lived in hard times. IMHO

[mike0421]

Originally Posted by flynavyj

I'd agree Bluff, not that our taxes are necessarily low and that's preventing good roads. Personally, I think I-70 is in pretty decent shape, and with the exception of lake traffic, or jams getting into and out of the major cities, the road works pretty well. If a tax is going to be imposed, it needs to have limits on it, which expire once the road improvements have been paid for. My neighbors voted down a recent proposal to repave or resurface all roads within the municipality for a small tax increase of $0.xx /yr because there was no limit on when the tax would expire...needless to say, residents weren't excited about it.

I come from New Jersey. I can tell you firsthand once the tolls are constructed, they never go away. The NJ Turnpike, in 1951, was to have tolls for 3 years, and in 1954, once bonds were fully obligated, the tolls were to be removed. It never happened.

Tolls cause traffic jams, and are an environmental nuisance. If we must generate revenue, let it be through a state gasoline tax increase. That said, I still have a problem with the state paying maintenance on an interstate, or federal road. My impression is that is what the federal tax on a gallon of gas is intended for, interstate highway maintenance.

[Bluff_Dweller]

Originally Posted by mike0421

I come from New Jersey. I can tell you firsthand once the tolls are constructed, they never go away. The NJ Turnpike, in 1951, was to have tolls for 3 years, and in 1954, once bonds were fully obligated, the tolls were to be removed. It never happened.

Tolls cause traffic jams, and are an environmental nuisance. If we must generate revenue, let it be through a state gasoline tax increase. That said, I still have a problem with the state paying maintenance on an interstate, or federal road. My impression is that is what the federal tax on a gallon of gas is intended for, interstate highway maintenance.

It seems to me that we should try to determine which is to be the least harmful to society as a whole. Oh yeah, thats why we are having this discussion, isn't it?

[aragx6]

Originally Posted by Bluff_Dweller

Accountiability seems to be necessary, especially during "hard times". Too many people have never lived in hard times. IMHO

I graduated from college at the beginning of the worst recession since the great depression. My SO was unemployed for two years. We had some help from his parents, but I assure you I've been through tough times.

I-70 is a major highway that cuts across the state, and I think that -- like Mike said if it's not going to paid for by the feds (and, at this point, it's simply not) -- then all Missourians should be on the hook for the maintenance, not only those who use it every day. Why? Because of exactly what you touched upon, bluff dweller -- I-70 brings us all goods. Even those of us who live at Table Rock Lake or in Hannibal or in Cape.

If Missouri already had gas taxes in line with other states and a rebuild was necessary, it's unlikely we could get away without a toll, but that's not the case. Tolls should be a last resort revenue generation source.

Again, this whole argument really surrounds whether an I-70 rebuild is necessary. Like others, I'm unconvinced of that (and I drive it pretty regularly all the way across the state). But, for the purposes of this thread, assuming a rebuild will be coming, I think a toll is essentially the most unfair way to pay for it.

edit: I wanted to add that if MO had the 44th lowest gas tax and the best roads, I'd say they're doing something right. As it is, you get what you pay for, and that's the crux of this argument -- taxes are the way to pay for roads, not tolls.

[flynavyj]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I graduated from college at the beginning of the worst recession since the great depression. My SO was unemployed for two years. We had some help from his parents, but I assure you I've been through tough times.

I-70 is a major highway that cuts across the state, and I think that -- like Mike said if it's not going to paid for by the feds (and, at this point, it's simply not) -- then all Missourians should be on the hook for the maintenance, not only those who use it every day. Why? Because of exactly what you touched upon, bluff dweller -- I-70 brings us all goods. Even those of us who live at Table Rock Lake or in Hannibal or in Cape.

If Missouri already had gas taxes in line with other states and a rebuild was necessary, it's unlikely we could get away without a toll, but that's not the case. Tolls should be a last resort revenue generation source.

Again, this whole argument really surrounds whether an I-70 rebuild is necessary. Like others, I'm unconvinced of that (and I drive it pretty regularly all the way across the state). But, for the purposes of this thread, assuming a rebuild will be coming, I think a toll is essentially the most unfair way to pay for it.

edit: I wanted to add that if MO had the 44th lowest gas tax and the best roads, I'd say they're doing something right. As it is, you get what you pay for, and that's the crux of this argument -- taxes are the way to pay for roads, not tolls.

^ I'm with you. I do disdain tax increases though, but understand that they are necessary for services. What i'd want to see is the allocation of current state fuel taxes, and even more important federal fuel taxes...If the state and the feds are using up all their available $$ generated by the fuel tax on road/highway related upkeep and safety then I might understand the need for the extra tax. If they're blowing the cash on who knows what, then they can take their tax and shove it!

[Bluff_Dweller]

Originally Posted by flynavyj

^ I'm with you. I do disdain tax increases though, but understand that they are necessary for services. What i'd want to see is the allocation of current state fuel taxes, and even more important federal fuel taxes...If the state and the feds are using up all their available $$ generated by the fuel tax on road/highway related upkeep and safety then I might understand the need for the extra tax. If they're blowing the cash on who knows what, then they can take their tax and shove it!

Due to our lower fuel prices and lower tax, the truckers wait to refuel in Missouri. Due to Missouri's fuel consumption we receive almost double fed $ for road work. 2007 numbers Iowa 434.243, KS 422,865, MO 707,331, Neb 293,271.

This allows us retiree's and all Missourians a lower fuel cost as well.

I paid tolls in OK & TX when I was in a hurry for 40 years.

[flynavyj]

And if we're receiving higher revenue, where's the money going? I'm sure IA, KS, and NE are repaving, widening, their roads when necessary...if we need to make improvements to I-70, then lets do it...but someone needs to properly allocate the current Missouri state taxes.

[Bluff_Dweller]

Originally Posted by flynavyj

And if we're receiving higher revenue, where's the money going? I'm sure IA, KS, and NE are repaving, widening, their roads when necessary...if we need to make improvements to I-70, then lets do it...but someone needs to properly allocate the current Missouri state taxes.

The allocation chart I didn't look up. Was watching the tornado's that hit around us last night.

We had no damage but our neighbor's in kimberling City and Branson got hit. They think there was possibly 5 of them. So far only 0ne death.