[JayCT]

Originally Posted by skeddy

and just hope MA, RI, and NY don't do the same thing.

Exactly. It was considered but the Federal Highway Administration will not allow border tolls. We’d lose billions in federal money if we tried to do that. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by riffwraith

That's a good point. But those states have tolls - tolls that we CT drivers have to pay if we are in a certain area. For ex, if I want to go see my mom in Queens, I have to pay 4 tolls (round trip). If I want to drive into NYC, same thing.

And if I want enter NJ? Gotta pay that toll. Well, technically, it's when leaving, I think.



I don't see how that would be unconstitutional. I am not exactly an expert in the Commerce Clause either, but it seems as tho the CC is there to give Congress power to regulate commerce from state to state. I don't think it would prohibit a state requiring out-of-state visitors to pay a toll.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause

That’s the whole point. Every other state on the east coast has tolls. When Connecticut drivers use those roads we must pay their tolls. When out of state drivers use our roads they use them for free. How is that fair?

What’s even more stupid about opposing tolls is that a LOT of money will be generated by tolls but not from Connecticut residents pockets. I believe the amount calculated was $400 million a year. That’s $400 million that Connecticut taxpayers won’t have to pay. Why would we not want that? Jay

[robr2]

Originally Posted by JayCT

That’s the whole point. Every other state on the east coast has tolls. When Connecticut drivers use those roads we must pay their tolls. When out of state drivers use our roads they use them for free. How is that fair?

What’s even more stupid about opposing tolls is that a LOT of money will be generated by tolls but not from Connecticut residents pockets. I believe the amount calculated was $400 million a year. That’s $400 million that Connecticut taxpayers won’t have to pay. Why would we not want that? Jay

Keep in mind that those toll roads receive no federal funding for maintenance or expansion. You can add tolls but CT residents will have to pay them as well as losing federal funding and returning any federal funding received.

[riffwraith]

Originally Posted by JayCT

That’s the whole point. Every other state on the east coast has tolls. When Connecticut drivers use those roads we must pay their tolls. When out of state drivers use our roads they use them for free. How is that fair?

What’s even more stupid about opposing tolls is that a LOT of money will be generated by tolls but not from Connecticut residents pockets. I believe the amount calculated was $400 million a year. That’s $400 million that Connecticut taxpayers won’t have to pay. Why would we not want that? Jay

It is estimated that 70% of the revenue will come from CT drivers. I don't see tolls as a method to stop out of state drivers from using roads for free, as you do. Or maybe better yet, to get out of state drivers to contribute $. I see it as a tax on the people who live in that state.

[riffwraith]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Exactly. It was considered but the Federal Highway Administration will not allow border tolls. We’d lose billions in federal money if we tried to do that. Jay

So, what about NJ? I searched new jersey border toll federal funding, but couldn't come up with anything.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by robr2

Keep in mind that those toll roads receive no federal funding for maintenance or expansion. You can add tolls but CT residents will have to pay them as well as losing federal funding and returning any federal funding received.

I thought as long as the tolls aren’t near a border the fed funding remains. For instance in Mass, you’ll never see a toll close to a state border.

[robr2]

Originally Posted by Stylo

I thought as long as the tolls aren’t near a border the fed funding remains. For instance in Mass, you’ll never see a toll close to a state border.

My understanding is that tolls can be implemented if a new highway is built or major improvement is made to an existing highway. But the Feds have to approve it and the money generated can only be used to maintain that road.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/fact_sh..._programs.aspx

[1000fc]

Originally Posted by robr2

My understanding is that tolls can be implemented if a new highway is built or major improvement is made to an existing highway. But the Feds have to approve it and the money generated can only be used to maintain that road.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/fact_sh..._programs.aspx

From that link: "reconstruction or replacement of bridges or tunnels"

Tolls should have been put in norwalk when they redid the bridge over the Norwalk River, or the bridge in Greenwich over Mianus river.

I'm sure i'm missing other bridges that been reconstructed that would have been good options as well

on the fantasy side of things, I would easily pay a toll for an elevated highway that had no onramps or exits in stamford

[robr2]

Originally Posted by 1000fc

From that link: "reconstruction or replacement of bridges or tunnels"

Tolls should have been put in norwalk when they redid the bridge over the Norwalk River, or the bridge in Greenwich over Mianus river.

I'm sure i'm missing other bridges that been reconstructed that would have been good options as well

on the fantasy side of things, I would easily pay a toll for an elevated highway that had no onramps or exits in stamford

I'm guessing the project wasn't big enough to look at tolls. It was an under $15 million project. Let's say they charged a $2 toll, it would take 500,000 trips to pay for it. That bridge has 150,000 vehicles a day, so it would be paid for in 50 days.

It wouldn't make any sense.

[JP Nutmegger]

Originally Posted by riffwraith

So, what about NJ? I searched new jersey border toll federal funding, but couldn't come up with anything.

Those are all bridge crossings that just happen to be on a state border, and many are not part of the Interstate Highway System. Those that are (the GWB, Goethals, Delaware Memorial) all predate the IHS and are grandfathered in. Plus they are parts of separate agencies (PANYNJ and DRBA)