Skip to main content

Gov. Easley makes his own Highway Trust Transfer proposal

With the short session of the North Carolina Legislature just underway, Governor Mike Easley proposed some changes in the annual transfer of funds from the Highway Trust Fund to the General Fund.

The governor's proposal - reduce the transfer of $172.6 million by $25 million. The ultimate goal is to reduce the transfer in its entirety. The governor did not mention how many years it would take to complete phase out the funds transfer.

Where would the $25 million go? As the gap funding for the Triangle Expressway. The change in the transfer of funds would ultimately need to be approved by the legislature.

Story: Triangle Business Journal

Commentary:

Where should I begin on this one. First, I am sure Sue Myrick, Pat McCrory, and others will enjoy this one. Myrick and McCrory, both from Charlotte, will certainly not like the fact that Raleigh would get funding to build another piece of 540 while I-485 gets delayed.

The opponents of tolling 540 will not like this because it pretty much seals the deal on building the toll road. Of course, if approved it will.

Other areas considered for tolling or behind in projects will also be unhappy about the $25 million going to a project in the capital's backyard.

Plus, we have yet to see the 21st Century Transportation Commission's final report on this. the committee had suggested eliminating the transfer completely with some of the $172 million going towards issuing a large bond issue to help fund highway projects throughout the state. The Governor made no mention of that today. This also will be a sticking point for opponents of toll projects throughout the state. (See the recent entry on the Cape Fear Skyway)

My personal opinion. I am glad to see various proposals made to end the annual transfer of the Highway Trust Funds. This is a great step forward. Personally, I am in favor of eliminating the transfer in its entirety as soon as possible (now preferably). I would be in support of a bond issue to help finance projects throughout the state. I would also have no issue on some of the money being used for 'gap funding' on toll projects. However, if it is only for one project when there are quite a few other toll projects just as important that can use the toll funding also, I can't support that. Especially when the NCTA can't even get an estimated cost narrowed down correctly.

This will be an interesting short session of the legislature on the highway front. The 21st Century Transportation Commission should formally present their findings soon.

Comments

Bob Malme said…
Quite coincidentally, the Committee released their results this morning. They call for a bond of at least $1 billion to be approved by the voters and to be paid back by ending the annual transfer of money to the general fund from the transportation fund.
See: http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/2873975/

Comment: This is what Gov. Easley ought to have said, that he'd abide by what the 21st Century Committee endorsed and work with the legislature in the remainder of his term to make it happen. I agree with Adam that his idea of a gradual reduction in the transfer would only have pitted one region against another over the amount of released monies meaning probable legislative stalemate and little getting done.

Now the fun begins. Getting the legislature to decide how much the bond will be and to allow the measure to be put on the November ballot.

Popular posts from this blog

Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge - Maine

  Spanning over the Ossipee River on the border between Porter in Oxford County, Maine and Parsonsfield in York County, Maine is the 152 foot long Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge. The Porter-Parsonsfield Bridge is built in a Paddleford truss design, which is commonly found among covered bridges in the New England states. The covered bridge is the third bridge located at this site, with the first two bridges built in 1800 and 1808. However, there seems to be some dispute for when the covered bridge was built. There is a plaque on the bridge that states that the bridge may have been built in 1876, but in my research, I have found that this bridge may have been built in 1859 instead. That may check out since a number of covered bridges in northern New England were built or replaced around 1859 after a really icy winter. The year that the Porter-Parsonsfield Covered Bridge was built was not the only controversy surrounding its construction. There was a dispute over building and maintain

Route 75 Tunnel - Ironton, Ohio

In the Ohio River community of Ironton, Ohio, there is a former road tunnel that has a haunted legend to it. This tunnel was formerly numbered OH 75 (hence the name Route 75 Tunnel), which was renumbered as OH 93 due to I-75 being built in the state. Built in 1866, it is 165 feet long and once served as the northern entrance into Ironton, originally for horses and buggies and later for cars. As the tunnel predated the motor vehicle era, it was too narrow for cars to be traveling in both directions. But once US 52 was built in the area, OH 93 was realigned to go around the tunnel instead of through the tunnel, so the tunnel was closed to traffic in 1960. The legend of the haunted tunnel states that since there were so many accidents that took place inside the tunnel's narrow walls, the tunnel was cursed. The haunted legend states that there was an accident between a tanker truck and a school bus coming home after a high school football game on a cold, foggy Halloween night in 1

US Route 299 and modern California State Route 299

US Route 299 connected US Route 101 near Arcata of Humboldt County east across the northern mountain ranges of California to US Route 395 in Alturas of Modoc County.  US Route 299 was the longest child route of US Route 99 and is the only major east/west highway across the northern counties of California.  US Route 299 was conceptualized as the earliest iteration of what is known as the Winnemucca-to-the-Sea Highway.  The legacy of US Route 299 lives on today in the form of the 307 mile long California State Route 299.   Featured as the cover of this blog is the interchange of US Route 101 and US Route 299 north of Arcata which was completed as a segment of the Burns Freeway during 1956.   Part 1; the history of US Route 299 and California State Route 299 The development of the State Highways which comprised US Route 299 ("US 299") and later California State Route 299 ("CA 299") began with 1903 Legislative Chapter 366 which defined the general corridor of the Trinit