The day after our story ran on the Bay Bridge toll hikes we received a response from Jack Cahalan, spokesman for MDTA Chairman Beverley K. Swaim-Staley, who said the current rates charged for the Bay Bridge were too low for the year 2011. He echoed the talking points from the education video that ran at the beginning of Wednesday’s meeting. Maryland Delegate Jay Jacobs then responded to Cahalan.
“MDTA facilities, including the Bay Bridge require a constant infusion of dollars to operate, maintain and rehabilitate structures that are an average of 50 to 70 years. You can’t build them and forget them. And in many cases, it cost more to rehabilitate them than to build them. The Bay Bridge is an example. The westbound span opened in 1973 at a cost of $148 million while today it cost $172 million just to re-deck and re-paint. This kind of substantial rehabilitation work at all MDTA facilities is what is driving the need for a toll increase, not just the ICC.” Cahalan said. “The MDTA understands that there is never a good time to raise tolls, but the fact of the matter is that the base toll rate for a passenger vehicle crossing the Bay Bridge hasn’t been raised since 1975. In fact, it still costs less to cross the bridge today than the day it opened. Meanwhile, the cost of operating and maintaining the MDTA’s bridge, tunnels and turnpikes continues to rise. You can’t pay 2011 bills with 1975 tolls.”
Delegate Jacobs responded to Cahalan’s comments:
“In response to the toll not being raised since 1975, I would like to know the total monthly tolls collected in 1975 versus the total monthly tolls collected now,” Jacobs asked. “I would bet that the revenue collected now is much higher than in 1975. There is undoubtedly more traffic crossing these bridges daily. In this economy with record unemployment, record gas prices, and increases pretty much across the board on all goods because of higher fuel costs, now is not the time for these ridiculous increases in tolls.”
Andy says
What a well thought out response from Mr. Jacobs. I am a daily commuter to DC, so I pay the daily toll (I pay the full $2.50 because I have a DE ezpass, not the $1 you pay on the commuter plan). I do not have a problem paying the toll as the price is in exchange for the privilege of using that piece of state infrastructure. What I would like clarified is, will this money be used strictly for the maintainence of the bridge, or will a portion of it be put back in the general transportation fund? I have less of an issue with the increases if the increase is used soley for the maintainence of the bridge.
Bridge tolls should NOT be used for the general transportation fund. I am paying the toll to use the bridge and I pay the same taxes as everyone else (gas tax, state tax, ect.) that is meant to fund the general transportation fund. By using the bridge toll to fund general transporation a small percentatge of the people are shouldering a disproportionate amount of the cost.
I commuted to Philly from C-town for a few years and on Route on the daily toll was $1 Monday through Friday until noon. From Friday at noon until early Monday morning the toll was $2. Perhpas they could start with raising the weekend toll and revisit the issue at a later date??
I would just like to throw out there the idea of telecommuting. If people could telecommute a few days a week they wouldn’t have to cross the bridge and therefore would not have to pay the toll. I am continually astonishing at the number of employers who REFUSE to even consider it. But that is a rant for another day……
Steve Payne says
I’m with Andy. The MDTA says the tolls are only for the toll facilites. Does anyone know where an actual financial statement or P&L on these facilities can be found. The fairness of the allocation seems to be the main issue.
RearviewMirror says
Someone needs to call a special session of the state legislature. How can they do this with review from the Transportation Committee? Since when do agencies of government get to operate without oversight from our elected officials? We regulate commerce, people working hard to make a living. Why can’t we regulate toll increases.
On October 1 we should all drive only 10MPH over the bridge and bring it to a halt. Time for some civil disobedience!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MBTroup says
The westbound span opened in 1973 at a cost of $148 million while today it cost $172 million just to re-deck and re-paint. This kind of substantial rehabilitation work at all MDTA facilities is what is driving the need for a toll increase, not just the ICC.”
To echo Andy and Steve, let’s let this soak in and revisit Delegate Jay’s rebuttal. It costs $24 million more to redeck and paint the bridge 38 years later. Anyone want to do a CPI analysis on those figures? It cost $172 million 2010 dollars to refurbish the bridge that handles 2010 traffic. As the Delegate points out, the revenue should be commensurate with the expenditure. So we ask again, where is the EXCESS going? We get that the $172 million is necessary. What we don’t get is why the $5.50*x is necessary.
Another win for matching principle of accounting, and the fact that E&Y, Deloitte, et al would flunk these guys if held to GAAP standards.
Gren Whitman says
The Bay Bridge toll increase, as proposed, is an issue/problem that can unite people of all political persuasions on the Eastern Shore (and elsewhere), but there needs to be agreement on what we propose back to the MDTA.
I suggest:
1) Collect toll strictly as a user fee! Bay Bridge tolls should pay for ONLY what’s needed to maintain and operate the spans and not be used to pay for other transportation projects elsewhere (i.e., the Inter-County Connector);
2) MDTA should figure out how to reduce toll during off-peak hours;
3) MDTA should be 100% transparent re: expenses and toll collections; and
4) If a toll increase is actually needed, so be it, raise the toll.
I am glad that Delegate Jacobs has asked for financial information from MDTA and I hope he keeps on asking until MDTA give him a answer.
MBTroup says
@Gren – MDTA could take a field trip starting in Bear, DE and drive south to Dover. Then they could visit this company: http://www.transcore.com
Oh and this makes to things we agree upon. I’m gettin’ skeered!
John Seidel says
A user fee makes more and more sense, but only if you can keep the $ where they belong!
Something like $700 million has been shifted out of Maryland’s transportation fund over the past two fiscal years to help staunch the bleeding elsewhere in the budget, and the Gov. proposed shifting another $100 million out of the fund in FY 12.
In all, the tab is now about $1 billion. MDTA’s resulting debt service is projected to increase from $151 million in FY 2010 to $288 million in FY 2016 (worth a Bay Bridge “refurbish” every two or three years). Given this background, it’s hard to believe MDTA reps can cite their numbers with a straight face.
Cahalan says ” there is never a good time to raise tolls” – no kidding…but some times are sure worse than others, and right now is one of them.
Cynthia McGinnes says
Mike Smiegel said we are going to have to vote and think in terms of rural vs. urban, and not in terms of liberal/conservative or Democrat/Republican….this toll raise makes me believe him
Keith Thompson says
@Cynthia,
This is exactly why I try to not view politics as shades of black and white; liberal vs. conservative; Republicans vs. Democrats. In my case, I tend to be very conservative except for the issues that I’m very liberal on. Having a linear view of politics is very limiting and usually reduces people down to spouting talking points. Delegate Smigiel is right in that this is not a liberal/conservative issue, it’s regional warfare and the Eastern Shore is essentially being taxed without representation by Annapolis. The residents of the Eastern Shore have to fight this, especially since the one issue has finally hit that directly affects the pocketbook of just about everyone.
country girl says
just another good reason for me to stay on this side of the bay!
Jim astrach says
A special session of the legislature to discuss “taxes”. Now there’s a treacherous thought.
Gren Whitman says
Why is this being billed as just an “Eastern Shore issue?” Is it because the billionaire Koch Brothers and their “Americans For Prosperity” group are spending money to stir things up here (read Pipkin & Co.) and not elsewhere?
Lainey says
Because the Eastern Shore, especially Queen Annes county, has to commute the bridge to go to work. The Western Shore only crosses the bridge to go to OC. The eastern shore commuters are funding the ICC in Montgomery County. I dont cross the bridge much, self employed resident of QAC, so this wont affect me greatly, but I can tell you now, I doubt I will ever travel the ICC. ICC tolls should pay for the ICC and Bay bridge tolls should pay for the Bay Bridge. I will go to Dover instead of Annapolis now- bonus – no sales tax or bridge toll! Did you see the attendance numbers at the other hearings they did on the western shore, a few dozen folks at most attended. Kent Island had over 500 in attendance, AFP states 1000, but I dunno about that number, just like I dunno about most of what AFP says.
Keith Thompson says
@Gren,
It’s not an issue that affects the rural western counties near as much since their citizens rarely, if ever, use the bridge.