Danbury Letter: Gas Tax Should Be Used For Road Repairs

  • Comments (1)
State Representative David A. Scribner (R-Brookfield)
State Representative David A. Scribner (R-Brookfield) Photo Credit: File Photo

DANBURY, Conn. -- The Danbury Daily Voice accepts signed letters to the editor. Send letters to danbury@dailyvoice.com.

To The Editor: 

Earlier this year, Connecticut motorists received unwelcome news as majority party legislators increased one of the state’s two taxes on gasoline by 16 percent as part of their two-year state budget.

This brought the combined local, state and federal gas taxes to a total of 63.4 cents per gallon in Connecticut – the highest in New England, and more than 14 cents per gallon above the national average.

Truck drivers haven’t fared much better in recent years, as Connecticut has more than doubled the diesel fuel tax rate from 26 cents per gallon in 2004 to 54.9 cents today (Hartford Business Journal) – driving up the cost of business and consumer goods.

Gas and diesel taxes are intended for the state’s Special Transportation Fund (STF) – a pool of money used to maintain transportation infrastructure, such as repairs to our roads, bridges and rails. The continued investment of these funds into transit improvements is critical as many of our structures deteriorate and pose a serious threat to safety.

With gasoline and diesel taxes increasing drastically in recent years, the Special Transportation Fund is growing by leaps and bounds; in the last five years, the total funding rose 18.3 percent to $1.2 billion (Hartford Business Journal).

However, many Connecticut transportation systems continue to languish in disrepair.

Inspectors recently classified 49 state bridges as “structurally deficient” and “fracture-critical;” those bridges experience an average daily traffic of 1.8 million vehicles (Associated Press). Moreover, 73 percent of Connecticut roads are classified as being in “poor” or “mediocre” condition (American Society of Civil Engineers).

The condition of our roads and bridges continue to go downhill despite skyrocketing revenues because majority party legislators aren’t using the funds for their designated purpose.

In fact, this year the General Assembly and Governor passed through legislation to funnel $118 million from the Special Transportation Fund into General Fund coffers, to be used for unrelated services and programs.

I was a vocal opponent of this measure because the revenue is not being used for infrastructure improvement, as designed, but to balance the bloated state budget – which saw a colossal 10 percent spending increase this year.

In order to prevent this fiscal gimmick, I introduced legislation that would restrict the use of STF money for transportation purposes only. This would ensure that gasoline taxes are used only to mend our suffering transportation infrastructure, helping to make the state safer for commuters and curtailing the rising cost of transportation.

My original proposal would have gone into effective immediately upon passage; however, legislative leaders opted to change it at the last minute so that the rule applied starting in 2015 – allowing them to snatch STF funds this year before prohibiting it down the road.

The legislation (PA 13-277) was passed by near-unanimous margins in the Transportation Committee; Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and both chambers of the General Assembly, in addition to being signed into law by the Governor.

I am pleased this policy will improve safety for commuters, as well as boost transparency and prevent state government from using slight-of-hand fiscal maneuvers to balance the budget.

However, I remain disappointed that more than $100 million of your tax dollars, levied specifically under the guise of “infrastructure repairs,” was used to feed our ever-growing state government.

Moving forward, I am hopeful that we can take more steps to reduce the cost of living and commuting in Connecticut, while keeping folks safe as they travel throughout our state.

State Rep. David A. Scribner


  • 1

Comments (1)

I am OK with this but it will generate additional discussion between motorists and bicyclists/non-motorists. Based upon my conversations, many, if not all motorists, already thought their gas tax was going to better road infrastructure. An argument they often use to claim the roads as theirs. I hope you and other members of the State are preparing to implement and defend a Complete Streets program with the use of these funds. As you know, nearly all cyclist and pedestrians drive at some point contributing tax dollars. The damage cyclists/pedestrians do to the road/environment is greatly reduced which means not as much money is required for remediation. Given your leadership on transportation, you must know about these issues. I hope your goal is to use these funds for a Complete Streets program so all street users benefit.