Samuel D. Zurier: Bridging the State’s Differences on Tolls

Samuel D. Zurier, GoLocalProv Guest MINDSETTER™

Samuel D. Zurier: Bridging the State’s Differences on Tolls

The controversy in the State House concerning whether to charge tolls on the Sakonnet River Bridge presents a classic division on local lines. There is no single policy argument that will solve this dispute; therefore, I recommend that the two sides find a broader agenda they can work together on that can solve several local issues at the same time.

The background to the controversy is as follows. Last Spring, the State completed construction on the new Sakonnet River Bridge, a $163 million project to be managed by the Rhode Island Turnpike and Bridge Authority (“RITBA”), which also has responsibility to maintain the Newport, Jamestown and Mount Hope Bridges. RITBA developed a $20 million revenue budget for the new bridge, setting tolls at up to $1.50 for Rhode Island residents and $3.75 for out-of-state drivers. The proposal drew extensive protests from the East Bay community, leading the General Assembly to reduce the toll to $.10 and create a study commission to consider the issues further.

Arguments for and against

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

The Commission to Study East Bay Bridge Funding presented a 62-page report on January 15. While the Report is thoroughly researched and informative, it does not offer any clear solutions to the question of whether the State should charge a toll for the new Sakonnet River Bridge. Instead, the basic arguments for and against a toll remain.

The argument for a toll is that “user fees” control the tax burden by charging those who benefit from a government service the cost of providing it. Many people living in the Providence metropolitan area use the East Bay bridges rarely if at all; therefore, they see no direct benefit from paying taxes to maintain these bridges. Because a number of out-of-state (particularly Massachusetts) drivers use the Sakonnet River Bridge, this allows at least a portion of this State program to be funded without placing a burden on Rhode Island citizens.

The argument against a toll is that the old bridge did not have one, and the proposed toll could cost Rhode Island drivers using the new bridge twice a day more than $1,000 per year. Toll opponents also note that major highway bridges elsewhere in Rhode Island (such a those on Routes 95 and 195) do not have tolls, raising a fairness issue. For toll opponents, the State’s transportation budget should be viewed as a single, Statewide program supported equally by all Rhode Islanders. For them, the State should not charge a toll on the new bridge because a localized population would be singled out to pay a portion of the cost of a Statewide program.

Put in these terms, it is clear that each side makes a case the other side will not accept. Where one stands on the toll controversy depends crucially on where one sits - if you live on the East Bay, you are anti-toll, and if you live elsewhere you are indifferent or pro-toll. Because only a minority of Rhode Islanders either live on Aquidneck Island or travel there on a daily or near-daily basis, it follows that the case for tolls would win a simple majority vote, albeit with a very upset opposition.

In my view, there are opportunities for the toll opponents to gain a broad Statewide mandate for their view, provided that they are willing to build a coalition with other State groups on other issues. Such a broad-based coalition could rest on either a shared, broader understanding of which issues are Statewide issues, or by combining different local issues into a package. We consider each in turn, beginning with two Statewide issues the East Bay could embrace.

Nonprofit agencies provide jobs and income tax revenues, which benefit the State, but also consume local government services without paying property tax. The State’s PILOT program (payment in lieu of taxes) reimburses local communities for around 23% of the property tax revenue lost from this arrangement, but local communities are saddled with the balance. This is a statewide issue that has a larger impact on the urban core than on the East Bay; therefore, one way for the East Bay to gain broader support for a toll-free Sakonnet River Bridge would be to agree to increase State funding for the PILOT program.

In a similar way, the State’s population of children learning the English language is skewed towards the urban core and away from the East Bay. The State’s current education funding formula is one of the few in the country that does not fund the extra cost of educating these children, and the East Bay’s support for a broader funding formula could help gain supporters for its favored, broader view of bridge maintenance as a Statewide issue.

The Providence Water Supply Board, as an example

An example of a local issue outside the East Bay is the Providence Water Supply Board. In the view of the capital city’s residents, the Providence Water supply system was developed and maintained by City funds until the State mandated that the Providence water system submit to regulation by the State’s Public Utilities Commission. Since that time, Providence residents have protested that the City’s asset was appropriated by the State without just compensation, and the City has been forced to subsidize cheap water for the rest of the State. A deal between the East Bay and Providence to free the Providence Water Supply from State jurisdiction would pave the way for a majority to support keeping the Sakonnet River Bridge toll-free. This deal would have the added advantage of having no fiscal impact on the State or its taxpayers. Other local coalitions could produce majority support for the non-toll alternative.

To conclude, the opponents of tolls on the Sakonnet River Bridge likely do not have Statewide support for their position, and they do not have a clear argument to support it that will produce agreement with those who support a toll. To achieve their goal, the East Bay residents and their representatives could benefit from forming a coalition with fellow Rhode Islanders elsewhere in the State, either through a broader shared understanding about the importance of other Statewide issues, or by packaging a solution to the toll issue with assistance for other local issues from across the State.

Sam Zurier currently serves as on the Providence City Council, representing Ward 2. Zurier is an attorney and has been engaged in the private practice of law in Rhode Island since 1990. He works as counsel to Oliverio & Marcaccio LLP.

13 Biggest Blunders in Rhode Island of 2013

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.