Reply With Quote
To elaborate as to not be flippant (my apologies), how is it any different than them using the tax money you already paid to buy buses that they then charge you to ride?
(Broader response to your other question forthcoming)
Uhhhh what?
We have a 1/4 cent sales tax dedicated to funding transportation projects.
We have already paid that tax.
Now, they use that money to build a road that we can't drive on unless we pay another tax (toll) to use it.
We pay once, then once again. We pay the tax to use the road twice.
Pretty simple math. Even Blake should be able to do it.
To elaborate as to not be flippant (my apologies), how is it any different than them using the tax money you already paid to buy buses that they then charge you to ride?
(Broader response to your other question forthcoming)
Because the minimal fee charged and low ridership has no chance in of paying for the bus and bus driver. If they raised the cost enough to pay for operating the buses then nobody would ride them. It is a tax funded self perpetuating bureaucracy.
The 100 million to build the road was taxes we already paid. The road is paid for now. Why charge us to use it?
VIA buses will get to use the facility for free, so essentially they're making an upfront down payment on a facility they'll get to use for free. I doubt that adds up to $100 million of value, but on any toll road project there's more than just the toll lanes being constructed. The money could be going to fund improvements along the free frontage roads, for example.
Also, a large factor in determining how toll rates get set is how much revenue is needed to repay the bonds that get sold to finance the project. VIA kicking in money up front lowers the amount that needs to be borrowed which allows for a lower toll rate.
There's not enough money to build free lanes.
Sure there is. They have 146.8 million of state money, add the 100 million VIA money and you can build a lot of damn road.
Tolling existing lanes is bad. Nuts to that. The toll roads here in Austin are a mixed bag. They are great where there were no roads before (1, 45), but getting stupid at places that should have been taken care of without tolls a long time ago (183/290 interchange). The Mopac toll plan might actually work a little, though the stupidest problems still remain.
But that's not what's happening. On 1604 there are 4 free lanes out there today. The plan is to add 4 more lanes and to just toll those new 4 lanes. The existing 4 lanes will still be free.
So there are two parts to a toll road discussion:
1) Why to build it
2) How to fund it
And this is that second part (I'll respond with my answer to the first part after this).
FUNDING A TOLL ROAD
Quite simply, that 1/4 cent sales tax doesn't buy all the groceries. Only 1/3 of TXDOT's revenue comes from taxes collected, and they are still running a budget deficit funded by bonds and the sale of capital assets. So, to say we are going to be charged to drive on a road we already paid for is anywhere from misleading to flat out false, for the following reasons:
1) The roads haven't been built yet
2) They haven't been funded yet
3) Tax revenue is only a part of the general transportation fund, so how can you say that your taxes paid for any road? Which roads were paid for with taxes and which ones with other revenue sources?
From a the perspective of how to fund, my personal opinion is that they should be funded in these manners (I haven't seen how this proposal will be funded, these are just my opinions of the ideal ways to fund).
A) a bond to cover the interim construction of the toll road, paid back through the toll, and then after the bond is paid off, the tolls are then used for maintenance or paid back into the general transportation fund
B) a private company funds, builds, and operates the toll road with oversight and jurisdiction from the state so that applicable transportation laws are applied, with the private company responsible for maintenance and able to keep the profits from the road
From a consumer perspective,allowing a natural monopoly (the state) to fund and operate as in option (A) would result in a lower toll as there would not have to be a private return on equity priced into the toll.
Response on "WHY A TOLL" coming up, then I need to get back to work
Expanding 1604 between I-10 and 281 is easily a $500 million dollar project. Maybe even closer to $750 depending on what you want to do with regards to the interchage at 1604/10.
It doesn't exist, so how can it have been paid for?
We already paid for those existing 4 lanes. We have ALREADY HAVE 200-300 million to build more free roads.
There is absolutely no justification for USING OUR TAX DOLLARS THEY ALREADY HAVE IN HAND to build toll roads.
Funny part about this is that had Hall just shut the up 9 years ago. This project would already be done along 281.....at about a 1/3 of what it will cost today.
The 100 million is taxes already collected and currently "sitting in the bank" waiting to be used on new transportation projects.
The justification is that they don't have enough money to complete the projects without the tolls paying for them.
Or they have a private company flip the bill (CINTRA/Zachry) and collect the tolls for a while.
Well, that will cover about a 1/6 of the cost. Where should we get the rest of the money?
much less to explain why they can fix loop 1604 for $25 million/mile compared to $37 million/mile on us 281.
lol
Is that money earmarked for 1604 or all new projects?
We have already paid for those existing 4 lanes to get constructed. There's still two problems. 1) Those 4 lanes aren't enough capacity and 2) it still costs money to operate and maintain those existing 4 lanes.
Also, when you're dealing with a major urban freeway, $200-$300 million doesn't get you nearly as much road as you think. I'm in this business and I hear the gossip. I promise you the dollars being talked about to improve both 281 and 1604 is well in excess of $200-$300 million.
As a benchmark, that same SH 130 toll road you're using to bypass Austin cost about $30 million a mile. And that was rural construction on a new facility that wasn't in the Edwards aquifer recharge zone. An urban reconstruction project under heavy traffic in the recharge zone will cost much, much more.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 06-26-2012 at 12:32 PM.
ATD sales tax generates 50 MILLION a year. We have the money to pay for it.
No, no we don't.
You're wrong.
WHY A TOLL ROAD
So, why would you want a toll road? Really, this case is just another example of the classic tragedy of the commons in which a dilemma arises from multiple individuals, each acting rationally in their own self-interest, deplete a shared limited resource even when it is in nobody's long-term rational self-interest to do so. In this case, so much congestion on the highway that it is no longer achieves what it was built to (get you from point A to point B faster). As Cosmic Cowboy stated earlier, he would rather drive all the way to Boerne to take 46 than to take 1604 between I-10 and 281 - a textbook example of the tragedy of the commons at work.
So, the problem we have is that we need to some way ration the use of the shared limit resource as to preserve it's original intent. One non-toll way of doing so is to give everyone rights as to when they can use the highway. Maybe if your SSN ends in an odd number you can drive during odd numbered hours. Something like that. You can see how this is not practical already.
There is one mechanism for rationing scarce resources that has proven ultimately effective at achieving the task at hand (rationing - that is the only goal the mechanism is concerned with) in every cir stance in which it has been applied: prices.
In economics, we learn early on that prices are a rationing mechanism, used to balance the dilemma between unlimited wants and limited resources. In the same vein, this is why you hear some folks saying we need HIGHER prices on thinks like oil, tobacco, etc. Because the goal is to ration their use.
Why not just build MORE HIGHWAYS?!?!? Well, to be fair, I admit that there is SOME capacity of highway space that will accommodate the total demand for highway use while not having congestion. But that highway is probably 30 lanes and will cost $10 trillion. Not practical. You might say, "if we only had ONE more lane!" but the truth is that one more lane will not alleviate traffic. When you open one more lane, all the people who have been avoiding the highway due to congestion will get on the highway and the supply and demand for highway usage will balance at the equilibrium: congested highways.
So, to sum up, toll roads allow you to use the only tried and true, proven mechanism for rationing scare resources: prices.
There is a third element to toll road discussions that I'll only touch on briefly: what to charge. I'll just say, it is important that the price be set at the level that clears demand while maintaining congestion-free flow. If you set the toll too low, then everyone will use it and it will be just like the other road, thus not achieving anything. If you set it too high, no one will use it and you won't find the toll road to be economically viable.
I'll probably read responses for a few more minutes then it's back to work, so sorry if I don't respond. I'll check back tonight.
But thats not what I asked. Also, someone who makes 50k a year can't necessarily afford a 50k car. There are other projects needed as well which is why I asked if the money was meant for 1604 or any new project.
BTW, this is the same economic foundation for things like Cap & Trade (which came from Republican think tanks in the 60s) and any other pricing models for negative externalities.
If you guys will just let us economists take care of things without lawsuits, we can get this figured out
But Manny, if we take that 50 million a year, plus the 100 million they already have, we could ignore every single other road project in San Antonio and construct 2.5 miles per year of new highway on 1604 and along 281.
We could realistically have a free, non toll new highway by the year 2050 or so.
Of course, since construction costs seem to be doubling and tripling every ten years or so......make it 2075.
Exactly how am I wrong? Less than half of the ATD revenue goes to support VIA...the rest could be used for highway improvements.
Are you claiming the cost of the project is 600 million?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
