Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumblePrivatization in toll-lane plan not sitting well with legislators
Thursday, April 9, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Reader poll
Enlargeable graphic
Sun Archives
- $1 billion arises during talks on budget, toll lanes (4-3-2009)
- Lawyers: U.S. 95 toll lanes run afoul of construction (3-19-2009)
- Lawmakers seek limits on toll road projects (3-14-2009)
- Clark County left out of first transportation projects (3-12-2009)
- This time, Clark County tops state list for road projects (3-12-2009)
- Expect help, not public works monuments (3-10-2009)
- NDOT to hold open house on I-15, U.S. 95 toll lanes (3-5-2009)
- NDOT list gives greater share to Clark County (3-4-2009)
- NDOT reboots after stimulus plans leaked (2-28-2009)
- Leaked project list shorts Southern Nevada (2-26-2009)
Beyond the Sun
The state’s plan to introduce Nevadans to privately operated toll lanes is being sold as a way to create a high-speed path along Las Vegas’ most congested corridors without taxpayers footing the bill.
Much of the project, however, would take miles of existing lanes on U.S. 95 and Interstate 15 and turn them over to a private company that would charge tolls to use the lanes and special off-ramps built at the company’s expense.
As the Nevada Transportation Department makes a last-ditch push this week for its $1 billion Pioneer Program, department Director Susan Martinovich has glossed over the proposed surrender of lanes built with tax dollars to a private company, according to a number of lobbyists and legislators. Left unsaid during Martinovich’s testimony before lawmakers is that four lanes of I-15 between the Las Vegas Beltway and the Spaghetti Bowl would be toll lanes, the lobbyists and legislators said.
Martinovich defended the proposal, saying it will provide desperately needed funding for transportation without a tax hike and benefit the public by providing motorists and transit riders with more options.
“Those who are willing to pay will free up congestion on the general purpose road,” she said. “You, as a taxpayer, can make a choice.”
The project has met stiff resistance from lawmakers, who have been particularly concerned about its call for existing lanes to be turned over to a private developer.
“Roads paid for by the taxpayer need to be left for the taxpayer,” said Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas. “If we paid for the road, a private developer can’t come in and feed at the trough and charge people to ride on it.”
Lanes under construction on I-15 — one in each direction between the Las Vegas Beltway and the Spaghetti Bowl — would eventually be turned into privately run toll lanes along with an existing lane in each direction. When the lanes being built open this fall, drivers would be able to use them free at first. Martinovich acknowledged that under the Pioneer Program, two free lanes in each direction would become toll lanes. But through restriping and taking away some shoulder, a free lane in each direction would be restored, she said.
The legislation needed for the project to move forward faces an uncertain future.
Martinovich said she hopes to have the bill heard today. Friday is the deadline for most policy bills to pass out of committee.
Sen. John Lee, D-North Las Vegas, has a bill that would set parameters for toll projects in Nevada, including a prohibition on existing lanes being converted to toll lanes. The Transportation Department and some lobbyists pushed for an amendment to exempt the Pioneer Program from the prohibition, but the Senate deleted the amendment last week.
The transfer of existing lanes from public to private hands hasn’t been the only concern. Legislators and some road advocates note that such public-private partnerships have resulted in long-term agreements that left taxpayers holding the bag while private companies charged huge tolls and profited handsomely.
“My concerns aren’t with the (Pioneer) project on its face,” said Paul Enos, president of the Nevada Truckers Association. “My concern is that public-private partnerships have been structured to the detriment of states.”
The private company that would partner with the state hasn’t been determined, officials said. The state has awarded nearly $6 million in contracts with consultants to advise the department on engineering, financial and legal matters related to the project.
During a hearing last week Senate Transportation Committee members were curious about the potential ties of Dan Musgrove, a lobbyist with the McDonald Carano Wilson law firm, who testified in support of the Pioneer Program. The firm has extensive links with the Gibbons administration. It hired Mike Dayton, the governor’s former chief of staff, last year, and attorneys at the firm have helped Gibbons during his campaign and with his legal defense fund.
Musgrove originally identified himself as representing the Southern Nevada chapter of a commercial development association. Under questions from lawmakers, he also acknowledged that he had worked for Transurban Group, a toll road developer.
After the meeting, Musgrove said he helped facilitate meetings between Transurban, the Transportation Department and governor’s office. But he said Transurban is not currently a client of the law firm.
To address concerns about the transparency of such agreements, Assembly Democrats have a bill that would require the treasurer to hire an independent financial firm to study such partnerships, as well as other financial agreements the state enters into with private entities. Agreements would have to be approved by the state Board of Finance.
Martinovich acknowledged that other states have been taken advantage of in public-private partnerships. But, she said, “we have learned from other states’ mistakes.”
Martinovich also argues that the private partner would assume the risk if the project doesn’t work out. And the state Transportation Board, which meets in public, would serve as a check to make sure taxpayers aren’t being taken advantage of, she said.
Toll costs and other details would be set by the board.
During last week’s Senate transportation hearing, Sen. Dennis Nolan, R-Las Vegas, defended the toll project as the best alternative to alleviate congestion given the state’s fiscal crisis.
“If we don’t fund highways, we sit in gridlock. It’s what we need to do,” he said. The alternative is a huge increase in the gas tax to pay for $4 billion in unfunded road projects in Nevada.
Sen. Maggie Carlton, D-Las Vegas, disagreed.
“The ground that belongs to the state is going to be sublet to these public-private partnerships,” she said. “People of the state of Nevada are going to get charged for using it.”
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Joe Pesci remembers his own honeymoon in Vegas -- meeting the Rat Pack (1 Comment)
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
NO, NO, NO!
Hey all. We're talking with Nevada Department of Transportation Director Susan Martinovich on Face to Face with Jon Ralston this Friday, April 10 on Las Vegas ONE, Cox Cable Channel 19.
Bring back the Mob. The state officials are just too crooked for me. Can't these state officials be prosecuted under the Reeco Laws?
What a rip off. I pay for the lanes and then get charged for them again. What kind of kickback is the Governor getting out of this? Another bimbo?
Might turning the 15 into a private enterprise create huge problems on the streets that now act as alternatives to the 15?
There is no better way to relieve congestion and build new roads that using privatized toll roads. At least a toll lane would be a start on traffic management.
http://npri.org/publications/a-more-reas...
Drew Carey on toll roads: http://reason.tv/video/show/6.html
(good video)
Patton, you got to pay for very expensive roads, using companies that have no incentive to build them well or build them quickly, then you have to continually pay for their upkeep. Tolls pay for the upkeep - worst case scenario is that you don't pay for the upkeep unless you use the road, overall it is cheaper for Nevada.
"Roads paid for by the taxpayer need to be left for the taxpayer," said Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas. "If we paid for the road, a private developer can't come in and feed at the trough and charge people to ride on it."
Answer: Make the company the road from the people.
With the loss of jobs and visitors to the area we just need to wait. It doesn't look like we will need the lanes we have.
Tollways are fine.
No privatization of public roadways under any circumstance! If there is to be operational profit, let the tax payers benefit, not some corporation. Privatization is theft.
This proposal is a ruse.
I don't buy the notion that traffic congestion (the purpose) is alleviated by building roads that motorists will avoid paying to travel upon since the purpose of building additional roads that alleviate traffic congestion are those that invite motorist usage, not impede them with additional costs.
What is really being proposed here as the 'details' are unfolded is to ultimately charge motorists more to travel, not relieve traffic congestion.
There are other 'details' which Director Susan Martinovich has previously mentioned that were conveniently omitted from this article such as how tolls will be collected.
As a means of collecting tolls, Martinovich has plans to require motorists to install GPS tracking devices upon their vehicles (their private property) that would not only allow assessing motorists with toll fees but also allow the State to track the specific location of motorist's vehicles at any time.
Again, this proposal is a ruse because its stated purpose would have limited results while its real intent would be to charge motorist more while tracking them through their vehicle's location.
On another note with regard to relieving traffic congestion a proposal should be adapted that would prohibit simultaneous construction and/or repairs on parallel adjacent roadways e.g. I-15 and MLK, Tropicana and Flamingo, etc. Repairing only one roadway at a time parallel and adjacent to another is not only a logical solution in reducing traffic congestion but also safer for motorists.
Westvegas,
Corporations already profit. The companies that build the roads without any worry that they actually have to complete the project on time and under budget for example...
how about the trucking companies which pay nothing for the roads and do lots of damage to them?
Harley,
It would be cheaper to do this than our current road system. Our current highway system is socialism it doesn't work. Injecting some market forces will not only free up congestion (especially if we allow private companies to build more toll roads not just buy up existing roads) while lowering our total cost. Remember, once completed we still keep paying on our socialized roads.
I hate to agree with Patrick but "Toll Lanes," where you choose to use them or not, make sense if the profits are used to improve roads and highways in the state. The highways in the state are in horrible condition and if a few select toll lanes (Make sure some are in Reno, also.) are in operation to fund highway improvements in the state, that would be money into the highway fund without raising taxes.
I dont see how turning existing lanes into toll lanes will ease traffic congestion.There will be the same number of cars using the same number of lanes.If 20 people share a 4 bedroom house and decide that by doubling the rent each can have their own bedroom,then at most 3 people will be more comfortable but 17 will be less comfortable.This is pretty basic stuff Ms Martinovich but logic dosen't seem to cloud your thought process.
without tax payers footing the bill??? except everytime they drive. I say NO WAY! Keep corporate scum out of our pockets.
Antigov,
It seems to work in other places. Its called congestion pricing. Same reason why free marketeers protest socialized medicine - when something is free people use a lot of it even when they don't need too.
Nick,
You only pay for the toll lane if you use the toll lane. That is a more fair system than forcing everyone to pay. Furthermore, the gas tax can't keep up as cars get more fuel efficient we can drive more and pay less. This means they have to take money from else where like property or sales taxes. And once again, the corporate "scum" are making a bigger profit by building and maintaining our roads.
They have no incentive to finish the roads on time and underbudget since their revenue (and profit) is tied to how much the government can take from all of us. Toll roads would be a cheaper way to go.
I can see in the end these will turn into something that it was not suppose to be, 1 Rate for cars 1 Rate for trucks another for Car pooling. also we do not have enough Highways = miles travel by each of us to grind out a profit, Back east you are charge not so much by the mile but which exit you get on and get off, I 15 and RT 95 are to short on Distant. Those 2 highways are not the pennsylvania turnpike or the garden state parkway in new jersey.
If the toll roads were to work as well as the HOV lanes, then we'd be in real trouble! Most drivers in the HOV lane are single occupant vehicles who view the HOV lane as their private raceway.
We need to finish at least ONE road project before we even contemplate taking on another project. There is not a road in this town that is not torn up, and getting around is now a real chore. Please! Stop the madness!
some1 getting kick back
The biggest mistake Nevada could ever make...the money NEVER gets to the departments that should get it to offset expenses...NEVER.