Senator responds to column on tolls
State Sen. Nancy Jacobs obviously read this morning's Getting There column in The Sun, in which I contended that the Maryland Transportation Authority's current toll increase proposal was at least fair because it applied to all toll facilities and didn't play favorites.
Jacobs, a Republican who represents Harford and Cecil counties, fired off a reply that I am happy to run in this space:
The toll increase proposal for the Hatem Bridge is “Cruel” but it is not “Fair”. You have not done enough research for your column and taken into consideration factors that make a rise in tolls at the Hatem honestly difficult for a number of families there.
The Hatem Bridge divides two communities where there are many low income earners, retirees and Veterans who use Perry Point VA Hospital. They will not just have to come up with 36 dollars the first year of a toll hike as you say, but 100 dollars to first buy in to EZ Pass’ Hatem Plan. Most people we speak with in Cecil County do not own an EZ-Pass now.
My Senate office has received an overwhelming amount of mail from people who say this will be hard to afford. It’s not because they feel “entitled” as you say, but because they honestly don’t have the money. One single mother in North East says she works the night shift across the Hatem Bridge in Aberdeen and cares for a disabled son. She fears eviction if she is forced to give up her job because she can’t afford the expense.
Another retiree from Perryville says she must take care of her elderly brothers and sisters who frequently are admitted to Harford Memorial Hospital over the bridge. She gets teary on the phone talking about barely making it now on Social Security especially without a COLA increase.At my News Conference last week in Perryville you would have heard from people like this but you didn’t attend.
There are economic issues of concern for Cecil and Harford Counties as well. Fishermen, horse owners, and owners of campers will be charged huge amounts because they have three axles. A Harford County resident who wants to go fishing will have to pay 36 dollars to get to Cecil County waterways for the day and get back home.The MdTA Board should not lump this group in with commercial trucks. It’s not good for our tourism industry to discourage this recreational activity. The hike will also affect the positive growth at Aberdeen Proving Ground under BRAC and businesses anywhere near the bridge will suffer. You can already see at the Perryville Outlets there are a lot of vacant storefronts since the toll went from $2.50 to 5 dollars.
Sincerely,
Senator Nancy Jacobs
Minority Leader (R-Cecil/Harford)
Readers may notice that the senator said nothing to refute the proposition that the toll system needs an infusion of revenue. She is simply arguing that users of one facility, the Hatem Bridge, should get special treatment because they are somehow more disadvantaged than others.
There are low-income people who live in southeastern Baltimore County and work at BWI who depend on the Harbor Tunnel, where tolls would also go up. There are businesses that must use the McHenry Tunnel. Are they no less worthy than the folks up in Harford and Cecil counties? If you look at which facilities have been soaking up the money lately, it's the Hatem Bridge at the top of the list. Meanwhile the McHenry Tunnel is a money-maker.
I admire the way Jacobs and her colleague, Sen. E. J. Pipkin, are representing their constituents. They are more than ready to make the case that the facilities used by their voters deserve a dispensation from the tolls city dwellers must contend with. Baltimore's lawmakers could learn a thing or two from them and push back against proposals to give special treatment to users of the facilities farther from Baltimore.
Jacobs does make a good point about the trailers. The authority ought to come up with a way to distinguish them from full-sized trucks. They should pay a toll that more accurately reflects the wear they put on the facilities.
Categories: Maryland toll facilities
Comments
If it's a problem, then her office should have plenty of maps to hand out that show them how to take the Conowingo bypass -one that is free of charge
Posted by: Anonymous | June 13, 2011 3:54 PM
I think Maryland drivers should pick a day and avoid all toll facilities to protest the increases. I am most upset about having to pay additional tolls on I-95 to help pay for the ICC which serves some of the wealthiest counties in the US. Double or triple the tolls on the ICC which is a road of convenience not a bridge or tunnel that is hard to avoid.
I will continue to protest any gas tax or toll increase until the State of Maryland eliminates prevailing wages and MBE/DBE/WBE contracting requirements which cost taxpayers anywhere from 15 to 20 per cent on every construction project.
Posted by: Mark | June 13, 2011 4:13 PM
OR they could ALL learn something from the DC area legislators who got their first toll (I don't count the Nice Bridge as 'DC-area') this spring for the ICC. Residents of that are frequently utilize two big bridges including one that cost Maryland over $1 billion. Politically raising tolls makes sense--most Baltimore City residents aren't using the tolls on a regular basis nor are residents of Montgomery or Prince Georges Counties hence you're not hitting your base voters hard.
Posted by: Gee Golly Whiz | June 13, 2011 4:44 PM
The MdTA needs to raise tolls or it will fail to the convents to its bonds. I'll still grit my teeth everytime I pay the higher toll.s
Posted by: Bill | June 13, 2011 5:54 PM
While I disagree with you on the fairness of the across the board toll increases I must fully agree with the last sentence of the article. If users are to pay a toll which "more accurately reflects the wear they put on the facilities" then motorcyclists should pay less than all other users not the same as cars and pickup trucks.
That would be fair since motorcycles are the lightest vehicles on the road and cause less damage than other vehicles. Would you agree Mr. Dresser?
COMMENT: I do agree that it would be fair to give a break to motorcyclists if you're going to impose a greater burden on trucks. But bear in mind, a break to one group may have to be offset by a higher toll on another. One way or another, the authority needs money to pay its bonds and continue essential maintenance.
Posted by: Steven Strohmier | June 13, 2011 9:49 PM
Consider the quote, " senator said nothing to refute the proposition that the toll system needs an infusion of revenue."
Has the Maryland Transportation Authority sufficently made the case for why this increase is needed and the steps they will be taking to carefully spend the requested increase. Has there been a careful examination of all expenses to look for ways to cut costs. The citizens of the stae must demand a clear explaination of the Maryland Transportation Authority's revenues and expenses presented in clear language (rather than terms that obfuscate the facts.)
Senator Jacobs does show in her letter that the Maryland Transportation Authority made this proposal without consideration for the people that pay the fees. Any other monopoly that trying to push increases this steep would face far more scrutiny than the state agency.
Posted by: Brian McCormack | June 14, 2011 9:40 AM
I don't get out into the counties much. Is there nowhere to put a boat into the water in Harford? Even in scenic Havre de Grace? Also, can't they go over the Conowingo Dam? It does add a few miles' travel, I admit.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 14, 2011 11:50 AM
Also if you knew your toll history of both the hatem and tydings bridges over the susquehanna, in the past the were raised to $2 both directions while the other facilities were $1. Then they changed to collecting in only one direction and raised the toll to $4, which I believe was to make things more convient for commuters but to actually allow them to reduce staff and get more out of the toll dollar. Then when ever one other facility was raised a dollar on the last toll hike, these bridges were also then raised to $5. These bridges have been making money for the system for awhile- so a little break for the local residents is not that bad an idea
Posted by: Geoffrey | June 14, 2011 3:23 PM
Mr. Dresser, your failing to realize a couple key points.
1. I just did this, so you go try it. Go to Google Maps and pick a point in Essex or Dundalk and map a route to BWI that excludes tolls. You find out that the alternate route through the city takes a little longer (10-15 minutes), but that route time is marginally different, and is exactly the same miles, about 16. Then try the same with a route from Aberdeen to Perryville. The time goes from 10 minutes, to 40 minutes, and miles go from 10 to 25 miles. Does that seem fair to you?
2. You fail to acknowledge the fact that there is almost no public transportation in Harford and Cecil County, and (currently) not transit between them at all, so a car is the only way people can get from place to place in almost all cases. That is not the same as Baltimore where someone could even drive downtown and choose to take light rail to BWI.
Walk a mile my friend. Or 25.
Posted by: noble | June 15, 2011 9:29 AM
Mike,
I think it's very hard to justify raising the Hatem bridge fees again if you consider these factors:
Up until 2-3 years ago, the Hatem Bridge decal was only $5. So, regular users have already been hit with a recent drastic increase in charges (compared to Bay Bridge and Tunnel users). Also, I think it's a safe assumption to predict usage (and therefore revenue) will increase becuase of APG's BRAC gains.
The state really is asking Cecil and Harford county users to pay for the ICC; a road most of us will never use. That isn't right.
Posted by: Jim | June 20, 2011 11:31 AM