BRIDGE FINANCING

The governor wisely waited until after the state budget gap was closed before endorsing a plan to spend $160 million repairing and rebuilding bridges around the state. The reason for such big-ticket spending, even in the midst of an economic downturn which has lowered tax revenues to a trickle, is that Maine can’t wait.

Rusting steel beams, crumbling concrete pillars and cracking asphalt cannot be persuaded to wait for a sunnier financial forecast. And when bridges fail, or are in danger of failing, entire transportation corridors are closed. If that happens, the Maine economy might as well put up a “closed” sign.

The plan, sponsored by Sen. Dennis Damon, D-Trenton, and Rep. Boyd Marley, D-Portland, who are co-chairmen of the Legislature’s Transportation Committee, would have the state borrow $40 million in each of the next four years. Those revenue bonds do not have to be approved by voters. To raise money to repay the bonds, the plan calls for raising the annual vehicle registration fee from $25 to $35; vehicle title fees from $23 to $33; and vanity plate renewal fees from $15 to $25.

With the additional money, the Department of Transportation would take on 246 bridge improvement and replacement projects. Bridges came under scrutiny last summer when a bridge carrying an interstate highway across a river in Minneapolis collapsed.

For more than two years, DOT officials have been sounding the alarm on how Maine and other states have fallen behind in road and bridge maintenance. The trouble began when construction bids for road and bridge projects came in significantly higher than budgets, a reflection of the spike in the cost of steel and other construction material, which in turn is blamed on the demand for those products in Asia. Higher petroleum costs are also blamed. And less federal money coming to states is also part of the problem.

This move by the governor and Legislature to invest in transportation infrastructure should not be misread as a sign that they are giving up their budget diets. It’s just that deferring such work has serious safety ramifications and will cost more to complete later.

The three $10 fee increases seem like a small revenue stream to repay $160 million in borrowing, but state officials claim the numbers work. A possible way to tweak the plan would be to spread a larger share of the tax burden to truckers, whose vehicles do more damage to roads and bridges. While truckers have been hard hit with the high cost of diesel fuel, it seems fair that commercial transportation bear more of the repayment burden.

Transportation advocates say if the state continues to fix and replace bridges at the current rate, the number of bridges which are 80 years or older – the end of their life expectancy – will double in 10 years. Transportation planners have worked to find the perfect plan to fund necessary maintenance work, and come up short. This plan, like others that have been floated, may not be perfect, but it is necessary.