We're going to be talking a lot about how to pay for Wisconsin
roads and highways in the coming months because road funding in
the state faces a nearly $1 billion shortfall.
This week the assembly transportation committee heard
from DOT Secretary Mark Gottlieb whose two-year budget proposal
calls for borrowing a half billion dollars for highway
projects without increasing the gas tax or vehicle registration
fees.
This would mean continued delays of major projects.
Gottlieb laid out some realities for lawmakers, including the
percentage of highways which would be in poor condition going
forward ten years if funding stays the same.
He started by comparing 2018 to the year 2027.
- The total system in fiscal '18, 21% in poor condition.
In fiscal '27, that would be 42%.
With regard to the 3R system which is essentially all the
state highway system that is not backbone, that'd be 26% poor in
fiscal '18, 49% poor in fiscal '27.
- Bottom line, if there's no change in funding for state
highways, nearly half would be in poor condition in a decade.
It's even worse by the U.S.
Department of Transportation metric, which says that right
now 71% of roads in Wisconsin are in poor or mediocre
condition.
- I never even thought of the difference.
- Putting a finer point on the issue, this week Republican
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos released a video of himself
taking a ride in the back of an ambulance to highlight the rough
ride over rough roads.
Notwithstanding the bumpy ride ahead in the face of road
funding shortfalls, Transportation Secretary
Gottlieb's proposed budget is in keeping with Governor Scott
Walker's pledge on the matter.
- That's why I was pleased that with this budget recommendation
by our state Department of Transportation, they met the
challenge.
A challenge I gave when I spoke to the voters two years ago when
I asked for your support in my re-election in 2014.
I said explicitly when talking about transportation that I
would not support an increase in the gas tax or the vehicle
registration fee without a corresponding decrease in some
other tax.
- Now, the governor said this week that if the assembly
leadership's plan is to raise taxes, they should make their
plan public so the people understand exactly how much it
will cost them.
Now, this represents a rare split between leadership and the
administration.
We turn to Joint Finance Chair Republican Representative John
Nygren to ask him how much taxes need to increase and thanks very
much for being here.
- Good to be with you.
- So as to the governor's question, and my own, how much
do taxes need to increase to fix this shortfall and move forward?
- I don't think we're there yet.
Honestly this is more of a dialogue with the people of the
state of Wisconsin.
It's a dialogue we began back in July when we made public our
concerns about transportation funding in our state.
You know, my colleagues in the senate are throwing out numbers
like a 28 cent gas tax.
Nobody is looking for anything anywhere near that.
We began a dialogue and an honest conversation with the
people of the state of Wisconsin.
I would point out in my district I got more votes than I've ever
gotten before so I do think the people do understand the
challenge and they also understand we're elected to
solve problems.
- So no specifics then on the increase amount, but what is on
the table?
- Well, first of all, first and foremost I think it's reasonable
to have a conversation about what type of reforms could we
implement.
Are there cost saving measures?
That's why we asked for the audit
of the Department of Transportation.
We're going to wait on that.
Are there reforms such as prevailing wage reforms that
could be implemented to save dollars?
I do believe that there are.
But to look at a billion dollar shortfall and believe that
reforms and cost saving measures are going to be able to make up
for that deficit, I don't think that's realistic.
That's why we said let's look at all our options.
Let's not eliminate anything from the discussion with the
people of the state of Wisconsin.
- What are all your options?
- Well, as I mentioned, the reforms.
Could we reduce, could we cut some of the projects that are
currently on the docket?
You know, the Secretary talked about 70-year delay in the
southeast mega projects.
And 30 years before we could look at any more projects
out-state.
So I think we need to have the conversation about what are our
priorities?
What priorities are going to help us maintain an efficient
and safe system in our state and what's going to help us drive
our economy?
Secretary Gottlieb, when he testified, he admitted that the
budget the governor put forward would make congestion worse in
our state.
It would reduce safety and it would hamper our economic
development opportunities.
- Now, four years ago a bipartisan commission that
included Secretary Gottlieb recommended raising taxes and
fees, but the majority, including yourself, rejected
those recommendations then.
Why pick up with them now?
- Well, first of all, I think it was a different time and
place then.
Four years ago, I think we all know where we were as a state,
where we were as a nation.
The economy has recovered.
It's not recovering at a rapid rate.
Growth is fairly soft here.
Not only here but throughout the country.
So we're not looking for major changes today, but we're in a
much better position than we were four years ago to have that
conversation, to do a complete top to bottom evaluation and
decide how we are going to fund our transportation system for
the next generation.
- Do you favor not bonding at all in the upcoming budget?
- No.
I think that has to be part of the discussion as well.
However, we're at a position where under the Doyle
administration and the Walker administration, the amount of
dollars, bonding that we've committed to fund transportation
has gone up exponentially.
Under the governor's proposal, we will be pushing 23 cents of
every dollar that comes in from our registration and our gas tax
will be pledged just to pay off debt.
Bonding are at a very low rate, so that is a reasonable
conversation, but if we don't find a way to reduce that
overall debt, it's going to continue to eat up at the buying
power moving forward.
- Now, if you can't go to gas taxes or registration fees or
tolling or some of the other things that might be on the
table, would you consider transferring money out of the
general fund into the transportation fund?
- I don't believe that's a reasonable option.
I think that's one of our concerns.
We believe-- hey, the people of the state of Wisconsin a couple
years back made a very pointed-- gave us a very pointed
direction to say that the dollars raised for
transportation should be used for transportation
and no other purposes.
Those dollars should be segregated.
I believe that we also should be utilizing the dollars for - or
GPR dollars for education and other priorities of our state.
That's why we need to have this conversation today.
- Now, the governor did say he doesn't support gas tax or
registration fee increases without corresponding decreases
in other state taxes.
What other state tax decreases would you entertain to get these
road hikes?
- I think that'll be part of the conversation as we head
through the budget.
I mean are there opportunities for us to reduce our income tax
in our state?
Are there opportunities for us to reduce our property taxes?
You know, we are a very high-tax state in the grand scheme of
things, so we'd be in favor of finding ways to reduce our
overall tax burden.
But let's be honest here.
So we're talking about a 5 cent gas tax increase would relate to
about a $25 for the average driver
in the state of Wisconsin.
We could look at a registration fee increase of $25 and, you
know, that would only be paid by Wisconsin drivers.
A gas tax would be paid by people who travel into our state
as well.
So, you know, we're not going to limit anything from the table.
Whether we can find the revenues to be able to pay for a tax cut
in another way, that is the big question.
- All right. We need to leave it there.
John Nygren, thanks very much.
- Thank you very much for having me.