The danger of delaying road projects
GOVERNOR PATRICK'S $3.8 billion proposal to fix deteriorating bridges across the state is a dramatic break with the 17-year practice of underfunding infrastructure, and it merits the support it is receiving from House Speaker Sal DiMasi and Senate President Therese Murray.
For too long, phrases like "no new taxes" or "fix it first" have served as substitutes for action. This sugarcoating sounded nicer than the truth: passing a growing burden to the next generation and stunting economic growth in the state. Postponement of needed transit and roadwork projects has led to a backlog of $20 billion to $30 billion in projects necessary for economic growth and public safety.The practice of deliberately underfunding infrastructure investments, in the name of "balancing" budgets, has been fiscally imprudent for four reasons:
First, construction costs rise faster than the overall rate of inflation. Replacing a bridge now that should have been replaced 10 years ago means paying $20 million for a bridge that would have cost $10 million if done when first needed.
Second, timely repairs can arrest the rapid deterioration that occurs when road salt and heavy traffic worsen physical defects, turning minor problems into major ones. In fact, failure to quickly repair damage from Boston winters adds costs to motorists whose autos are damaged by spring potholes.
Third, if a crucial bridge fails, even if there is no injury or loss of life, it causes huge damage to the economy. For example, if the Longfellow Bridge were to fail, it could simultaneously close the Red Line, the backbone of the regional transit system, eliminate a major access route for ambulances and the public to Mass. General, and disrupt the fragile balance of the morning and evening commutes on all the Charles River crossings.
Fourth, in two years there will almost certainly be a new Federal Transportation Authorization Bill, providing 80 percent in federal funding to those states that have completed the engineering and have work ready for construction. But in Massachusetts, budgets in past years have dramatically reduced engineering personnel. Massachusetts will not be ready for federal funding, unless decisive action is taken now.
Secretary of Administration and Finance Leslie Kirwan should be commended for taking a big-picture view of the cost of neglecting infrastructure, and documenting that bonding with interest rates below the rate of construction inflation is fiscally prudent.
Secretary of Transportation Bernard Cohen will have a major challenge getting transportation agencies ready to deal with the huge backlogs. The availability of finance alone won't get the job done. More engineers, more consultants, and new techniques such as Design-Build-Maintain contracts are needed. Cohen's authority over transportation agencies, including Massport and the bridges and roadways of the Department of Conservation and Recreation, should be strengthened, both to facilitate access to federal funding and to get results.
But what about the larger finance question? Some say it would be better to increase gasoline taxes to pay for maintenance and reconstruction, instead of borrowing. If the economy were healthy, and gasoline prices were stable, this might indeed be both better policy and politically feasible.
But gas prices are at an all-time high, and the economy still tenuous. Instead of a gas tax increase, it may be time to look at a major public agency whose assets have dramatically increased in value due to transportation investments.
The I-90 Extension greatly benefited Massport's South Boston real estate assets, the Seaport, and Logan Airport - and represents roughly half of the $15 billion spent on the Big Dig (not to mention the half-billion Silver Line to Logan). Massport receives windfall revenues from the high parking charges at Logan. Before asking motorists to pay increased gasoline taxes, isn't it appropriate to first ask Massport to take responsibility for these costs and ease Commonwealth debt?
Hopefully the Legislature will take a comprehensive approach that strengthens Cohen's management tools, prioritizes completion of environmental and engineering work to maximize federal funds, and secures a fair contribution of revenue and bonding capacity from Massport. But the process should be driven by the central theme of the governor's proposal: with construction costs for needed investment rising faster than the interest rate, the worst choice is to postpone the investment. Increased bonding is better than delay.
Fred Salvucci is a former Massachusetts transportation secretary.
