SB627

Three written submissions were received, two in support and one in opposition. Supporters describe the toll adjustment as a relatively painless way to fund needed infrastructure and cite public input at GACIT meetings favoring revenue increases, with one commenter noting a personal interest in expanded transportation options. The single opponent argues the highway program is already overfunded and driven by contractor and lobbyist influence.

• Low-pain way to fund needed infrastructureSupport1 of 3 · 33%

  A supporter states that the state's infrastructure needs repair and that this revenue mechanism is a relatively painless way to raise the money.

  • “We need to fix this infrastructure and this seems to be a pretty painless way to raise some money.”

    — Bonnie Hill, South Sutton · #659038 — read full submission →

• Public at GACIT meetings favored revenue increasesSupport1 of 3 · 33%

  A commenter reports attending multiple GACIT hearings on the ten-year plan and hearing near-unanimous willingness among attendees to raise tolls or the gas tax to fund projects.

• Small increase would fund the full ten-year planSupport1 of 3 · 33%

  A supporter cites DOT figures that each penny yields roughly $8 million and that a five-cent increase would cover all projects in the next decade.

  • “I have heard from several.D.O.T. officials that one penny would bring roughly $8 million of revenue, and that only a single nickel of increase in gas tax would be enough to pay for all projects in the next 10 years.”

    — Andrew Harmon, New Hampton · #659226 — read full submission →

• Non-driver with a disability urges transportation investmentSupport1 of 3 · 33%

  A commenter who cannot drive due to disability argues that any effort to expand transportation in the state should be pursued.

  • “As someone who lives with a disability, and is therefore unable to drive, any efforts to increase transportation in the state should be pursued.”

    — Andrew Harmon, New Hampton · #659226 — read full submission →

• Highway system already bloated and rebuilds adequate roadsOppose1 of 3 · 33%

  The opponent argues the highway system is financially bloated and repeatedly rebuilds infrastructure that is already satisfactory, so additional revenue is not warranted.

  • “The financially bloated highway system continuously seeks to rebuild what is satisfactory.”

    — Daniel Richardson, Nashua · #658628 — read full submission →

• Spending driven by contractors and lobbyistsOppose1 of 3 · 33%

  The opponent contends that actual needs are small relative to demands generated by highway contractors and lobbyists influencing politicians.

  • “The cost of what is needed is minuscule compared to the voracious appetite of highway contractors lobbyists whispering in the ears of politicians.”

    — Daniel Richardson, Nashua · #658628 — read full submission →