Editorial: Minnesota roads at a crossroad

When trucks from 3M, HTI and other manufacturers get stuck in traffic, companies pay. What is the extra fuel, time and delayed product shipments worth?

According to the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, “Businesses rely on the transportation system to move freight efficiently and to get employees to work in a timely and safe manner. Growing congestion in the Twin Cities area as well as safety issues on Greater Minnesota roads (70 percent of highway deaths happen in rural areas) has created a significant problem for Minnesota businesses.”

If road conditions and congestion are consistently at the top of frustration and safety concerns of drivers and hurting business, why have roads been neglected? Bill Blazer from the Minnesota Chamber recently spoke to a group of local business leaders at a gathering in Litchfield. He said the state has “mismanaged” roads by not keeping up during the past 20 years.

Minnesota Chamber polling reveals, “Both the Business Barometer Poll and Minnesota Chamber Poll show an increasing number of companies believe the transportation system is a major issue and believe that the declining transportation system is hurting their business. Businesses cannot afford to have workers stuck in traffic. The state’s economy is dependent upon our ability to move people and goods; thus transportation investments have a direct impact on the state’s economic well-being.”

We’ve waited too long
Lagging roads need from $750 million to $2 billion per year each of the next 10 years to catch up. Inaction during the past two decades has created a staggering cost now. In retrospect, it was inexcusable to not even come close to keeping up. Private business would never operate this way.

Politicians have fought to the point of stalemate since 1988. Minnesota’s fuel tax, which is wholly dedicated to road projects, has remained at 20 cents per gallon during the past 20 years. Wisconsin indexes its fuel tax to inflation. It collects 32.9 cents per gallon. The average among all states is 28.5 cents.

Minnesota Chamber President David Olson wrote a commentary piece published in the Leader last May. He said, “Once again, politics threatens to take priority over progress at the Legislature.” And, it did. Lawmakers including Rep. Dean Urdahl, R-Grove City, and Sen. Steve Dille, R-Dassel, voted for versions of a gas tax increase last year. Rep. Ron Shimanski, R-Silver Lake, did not.

Despite an opportunity, legislative leaders and the governor didn’t compromise, and went home without passing any transportation bill.

The Minnesota Chamber agreed to up to a 5-cent increase last year. The Itasca Project, made up of CEOs of Minnesota’s biggest companies including 3M and Wells Fargo, believes transportation investment is a top priority, and has lobbied since 2004 for an increase. The time has come to listen to Minnesota businesses.

The Chamber’s plan
The Minnesota Chamber remains opposed to general tax increases but is “committed to increased funding for Minnesota’s transportation infrastructure.” Its draft plan is an artful compromise and deserves serious consideration by lawmakers of both parties this year. It calls for:

— A 5-cent fuel tax increase that will raise $160 million per year

— Vehicle tab rates for new cars will not decrease as quickly as the car ages. The Chamber recommends slowing these decreases to raise $115 million per year. All existing cars stay on the old schedule, so this effects new cars purchased after the law passes.

— Bonding or borrowing for bridge improvements

— Trunk highway bonding or borrowing to speed up completion of statewide projects to raise about $500 million per year

— Up to 2.5 cents per gallon increase in fuel tax to pay debt on trunk highway borrowing above, or about $80 million per year. We believe borrowing fits bridges but not roads.

— Capture up to $100 million per year from metro taxpayers for light rail and other transit needs. Increases in property and sales tax receipts are one way to collect these taxes in the metro area only.

Elections this fall create a rare environment in St. Paul now. Lawmakers want to show progress to voters. Democrats should not go for the “all or nothing” 10-cents per gallon increase. Republicans should not refuse to raise the fuel tax – a user tax – to help Minnesota catch up on the road projects that move its people and products.

For two editorial writers who prefer progress to politics, we believe this year just might be the right year for progress. Nineteen years of politics followed by one year of progress. Yahoo.

What do you think? We’d like to know.

Gas tax by state:

Alabama 20.2
Alaska 8.0
Arizona 19.0
Arkansas 21.8
California 44.4
Colorado 22.0
Connecticut 43.9
Delaware 23.0
D.C. 20.0
Florida 32.6
Georgia 26.5
Hawaii 32.6
Idaho 25.0
Illinois 40.6
Indiana 31.6
Iowa 21.7
Kansas 25.0
Kentucky 18.5
Louisiana 20.0
Maryland 23.5
Massachusetts 23.5
Michigan 36.2
Minnesota 20.0
Mississippi 18.8
Missouri 17.6
Montana 27.8
Nebraska 27.9
Nevada 32.5
New Hampshire 19.6
New Jersey 14.5
New Mexico 18.0
New York 40.9
North Carolina 30.0
North Dakota 23.0
Ohio 28.0
Oklahoma 17.0
Oregon 25.0
Pennsylvania 32.3
Rhode Island 31.0
South Carolina 16.8
South Dakota 24.0
Tennessee 21.4
Texas 20.0
Utah 24.5
Vermont 20.0
Virginia 19.6
Washington 36.0
West Virginia 31.5
Wisconsin 32.9
Wyoming 14.0
U.S. Average 28.5
Source: American Petroleum Institute