AUGUSTA, Maine — A Democratic senator from Lewiston wants the Legislature’s investigative arm to look into the Maine Turnpike Authority’s pending proposal to raise tolls on the 109-mile Maine Turnpike, saying the toll hikes would disproportionately fall on the backs of residents of the Lewiston-Auburn area and western Maine.
Sen. Margaret Craven on Friday will request that the Legislature’s Office of Program Evaluation and Accountability, or OPEGA, probe the authority’s proposal for toll hikes designed to raise an additional $26 million in revenue annually.
“I’m hoping that they will look at the disparity and look at the burden it places on people going to work or shopping from this region,” said Craven, a member of the Legislature’s Government Oversight Committee. “Is that fair?”
She also wants the independent examination to look into why the toll hike needs to take place this year. The Maine Turnpike Authority board could vote as soon as July 19 on a toll hike, and the authority is proposing that the changes take effect Nov. 1.
“To me, I don’t see the urgency,” Craven said. “If there was a plan [for paying off the bonds], that should be followed.”
The request for an investigation into the turnpike toll hikes is the latest in a series of complaints from residents of the Lewiston-Auburn area, who say the toll hike proposal favored by turnpike authority staff disproportionately affects their region. One Lewiston legislator, Democratic Rep. Michael Carey, is collecting signatures in an effort to stop the toll hike and have any toll hike considered by the Legislature.
“Whether we’re going north or south, we’re paying constantly,” Craven said. “It costs me $7 round trip to go to Portland.”
The current proposal would hike tolls by $1 at the toll plaza in York, 75 cents at tolls in New Gloucester and West Gardiner, and 50 cents at tolls in Wells and Gray. The proposal also would raise the per-mile rate for users of the E-ZPass toll transponder to 8 cents from the current 6.7-cent rate.
Peter Mills, executive director of the turnpike authority, has suggested to drivers concerned about inequitable tolling at certain turnpike exits that they purchase E-ZPass transponders and pay a per-mile rate for using the highway.
Mills says the Maine Turnpike Authority needs to generate $26 million annually in additional revenue to fund $113 million in bridge repairs on northern sections of the 109-mile highway over the next five years, pay for $82 million in paving and other road improvements, and pay off debt from a highway widening project completed in 2004.
Revenue growth for the turnpike has largely leveled off, he says, and the turnpike needs to take in a certain amount of revenue in order to comply with the terms of its debt and avoid a default. The turnpike authority takes in about $103 million annually from tolls and another $3 million each year from operating its service plazas.
If Craven’s request for an OPEGA investigation into the toll increases is approved, it would be the second OPEGA investigation into the Maine Turnpike Authority in recent years. An examination by the agency in 2010 turned up more than $200,000 in authority spending that could not be accounted for. That finding ultimately led to a theft conviction and prison sentence for the authority’s then-executive director, Paul Violette.
It seems reasonable that a investigative review should be done.
26 million over 5 years is 130 million. Minus the 113 million for the bridge repairs and 80 million for upkeep? That is 193 million, a 63 million shortfall. Interesting planning
the turnpike brings in $106 million every year currently. The tolls represent an additional $26 million, for a total of $132 million per year. Five year income would be $660 million. That’s one expensive highway. $660 million for 109 miles. How do we justify this expense??
someone’s gotta pay for violette’s continued pension.
I don’t normally agree with Democrats, but this Senator is spot on.
Downeasta: The Maine Turnpike operates on a 30-year maintenance and operations plan. The amounts you are referencing are for the next 5 years only. Due to a decline in traffic revenue in 2008, the payoff schedule for debt payments and ongoing maintenance and operations costs was not going to be met under original revenue assumptions. Traffic is currently below 2003 levels. Updated traffic projections show a $378 million total loss from 2010 through 2025 from previous projections.
Don’t trust LePage’s folks to tell the truth. I’ll support your toll hike when you return my Maine pension.
I’ll play the devil’s advocate. Lots of Mainers don’t pay tolls as they live nowhere close to 95. However- the damage done to their vehicles by some of the poorly maintained rural roads that they travel on a daily basis constitute a toll in some manner. Northern Mainers also have no convenient access to rail travel that is available from southern Maine down into Boston.
Nothing you said is related to the article. The MTA has nothing to do with roads away from the pike. Where you choose to live is your business and I am sure you love it there sans railroad.
You would think the mta would have forseen paying back the loan. They must have been busy watching violette instead if figuring out how to pay back their bills……oh yea, opega caught that. Not the ones hired to notice those things.
Violette isn’t there now, remember? The bills still have to be paid.
Yes but a few violette era managers are there still, and were that blind under violette why should we be so trusting that this toll increase is necessary?
Part of the problem was that those who *should have* been watching Violette weren’t. In reality, Violette’s pilfering caused only a small part of the current problem. The current problem is that revenues are down, and balanced against projected fixed costs of maintenance and previously planned construction there isn’t enough in the till without raising revenues by raising tolls.
Agreed, the bills need to be paid however I think its a valid question to ask mta why is it that those hired to watch the beans under violette either dropped the ball and were incompetent or turned a blind eye. Either way is bad, and yet they are still counting the beans over there. At least some of them there now are asking for a toll increase.
Come on Miss Lewiston. GEt a life! The investigation should then be sure to include why Lewiston and Auburn drivers can go back and forth without charge while the rest of us pay to go 3 miles.
The free travel you talk about was thrown to that area in an attempt to make it look like they got something in return for the new barrier tolls and since no one traveled between the exits there anyway the MTA lost nothing. No one still does this even when its free because the Auburn exit might as well be in Poland or New Gloucester. The Lewiston exit is not quite as bad, but is still away from the main part of the city. The only way to get rid of the inequity in the tolls is for MTA to build a barrier toll between exits 36 and 42, and proportion the side tolls as varying amounts based on distance.
I feel there is one big way to fix this whole thing, and not raise tolls. Do away with the tool gate in New Glouster, and add back tools in Auburn and Lewiston. I travel north on the pike about once a month, and I go up 202 to Auburn to by pass the tool booth in New Glouster. And I have a friend who does the same on a daily basis. So how many others do this? And why do the residents of LA get a free ride, while those in the Portland, Westbrook, South Portland area have to pay to travel a couple of miles? Yes, myself and any others who travel north would have to pay in Gray or Auburn, but at least the other tolls in the state would not increase.
The other issue I have, is the repaving of roads that definately do not need it. It seems every summer, a section of the Pike from Lewiston North is being repaved. This road is hardly used, and the traffic flow is far less than 295, which had cement slabs for years and years.
The free travel you talk about was thrown to that area in an attempt to make it look like they got something in return for the new barrier tolls and since no one traveled between the exits there anyway the MTA lost nothing. No one still does this even when its free because the Auburn exit might as well be in Poland or New Gloucester. The Lewiston exit is not quite as bad, but is still away from the main part of the city. Your idea would not raise toll revenues. The only way to get rid of the inequity in the tolls is for MTA to build a barrier toll between exits 36 and 42, and proportion the side tolls as varying amounts based on distance.
I must respectively disagree with you. The Auburn exit gets MAJOR use, especially from the trucking industry coming out of the Industrial Parks south of Auburn. Every time I go by it, or use it, there are numerous vehicles getting on it. And maybe folks didn’t use it to get from Lewiston to Auburn, but LA is a major metropolis in Maine and the population there, using the Pike, would contribute more. On top of this, Rte 202 from Gray to Auburn is a cluster because people have the ability to skip the toll in New Gloucester when heading north of Augusta. If they did away with the New Gloucester toll, and added tolls in LA, and in Lisbon, then this would prevent people from skipping this toll, and it would remove the traffic congestion from Rte 202.
And it still isn’t right that a person from Lisbon Falls can get on in Lisbon, and use the pike for free to Auburn, while a person in Westbrook has to pay a dollar to travel between the two exits 1/2 mile apart there. Not that anybody would ever do that, mind you. But they still have to.
The Auburn exit gets major use yes…but not by people from Lewiston. 99.9% of those people you see at the Auburn exit paid a toll either in New Gloucester or West Gardiner. Anyone who values his time at more than $1.25 doesn’t take 202 from Gray to Auburn and then get on the turnpike to go to Lewiston. And going out to the new turnpike exit to get from Lisbon to Auburn would take you miles out of the way. Lisbon Falls to Auburn…I would cross the river and go up 136. People rarely ever traveled between exits 75 and 80, that’s why MTA did what they did. People still don’t do it so they are not losing anything. Adding a barrier toll just north of Saco would mean some of the Portland side tolls would be eliminated or reduced. Oh and please take photos of the congestion on 202. I’ve never seen it.
I guess your wallet is full of money to waste $1.25 on a toll to save at best 10 minutes. I travel to the WTVL area frequently from Sebago Lake area, and I NEVER use the Pike from the Gray exit. I refuse to hand over a 1.25, especially heading south. And I have a good friend who is a teacher in Auburn, has a Transpass, and still travels 202 instead of wasting the money on the toll. And I guess you don’t use 202 often enough, because you would rather pay the 1.25 and save your time, so you don’t see the traffic. And excuse me for the Lisbon Falls example, let’s try Sabbatus instead. My example was more to show the free ride from the Rte 9 interchange, than the town from which they travel.
And you will never see a toll booth north of Saco. That is the most heavily traveled section of the Pike and traffic is atrocious enough. Can you imagine having to stop for a toll?
It sounds more to me that you live in the area and like not having to pay a toll, so you don’t want toll booths put back up.
No I don’t live there and even if I did I wouldn’t travel between the free exits just like NO ONE does now. That is the point you refuse to see. 99.9% of the people who enter the turnpike in this area end up paying a toll at one of the barriers…they don’t get back off until after going through one. Taking down the New Gloucester barrier and putting the booths back in at exits 75 and 80 would simply collect the same revenue in a different place. And don’t be shocked if a barrier toll shows up in Saco…with open road tolling and most people using e-z pass the objections raised to this idea in the past become moot. As far as spending the toll goes, actually the money is well spent because you are also buying a safer and less stressful ride with no need to watch for crossing traffic, pets, children, and all the other things that are on 202.
And what you don’t seem to understand is the waste of a toll that New Gloucester is. Anyone traveling from Gray/NG, Sebago Lake area, or Rte 100 area, are skipping the toll and traveling to Auburn. Trust me, I see it all the time. I rarely see people going North at the Gray exit when I pass it, nor do I see people getting off at the soutbound exit. And what about someone traveling from say Westbrook? They pay a dollar at Westbrook, and then pay again in New Gloucester. How fair is that? I wonder how many of those travelers get off in Gray and travel 202?
And the addition of a toll where yuou suggest will not happen anytime soon, if ever. They need the money now, and construction of said toll would take a few years. On top of that, construction of said toll would cost many more millions than the MTA has at this point. Can you imagine the mass reconstruction that would have to happen to set up a toll booth similar to the one in Hampton, NH? Especially a tool booth that doesn’t even exsist at this point. And look at the fight the MTA is having with the locals in York. They can’t get approval to improve that toll, how are they going to get the folks of Saco/Scarborough to approve the purchase of many acres of land to have enough room for a massive tool booth? The toll in Hampton must be 300 yards wide at this point. A toll in Saco would have to be similar to keep traffic flowing.
Adding tolls at Auburn, LA, and north at Gray would increase tolls with limited costs.
You said “They pay a dollar at Westbrook, and then pay again in New Gloucester. How fair is that?” Just as fair as paying a dollar in Kennebunk then paying again in York. For a barrier toll system to work properly you need the barriers equally spaced and the side tolls need to vary (increasing by distance so bigger users pay more) to make the tolls fair for everyone. A barrier toll in Saco has been on the table before but quashed by a legislator in Saco or Biddeford who was afraid her tolls would go up. Back then traffic was a consideration but open road tolling was unheard of. This concept makes the barrier toll take up much less room as well. The plaza in Hampton could actually be shrunk now. Your idea would not increase revenue…there is already a toll when entering south from LA and north at Gray…you just pay it at the NG barrier instead of before you get on. When going north from LA you pay in West Gardiner. The leakage (exiting before a barrier) is so small it’s not worth the expense of trying to get it. MTA realized this when they removed the LA entrance tolls.
It makes sense that the people who use the road the most – the ones who wear it out – should bear the greater portion of the cost of keeping it in repair.
would make sense if it applied to all highways in the state.. but why just this area? fund it from the fuel tax. drive more.. pay more. very fair.
If the argument is that its taxing out-of-state visitors.. fine.. but end the turnpike just south of portland and give residents in that area a rebate.
arrest the crooks at the mta, fold the turnpike into the dot, and cut the tolls!
the people cannot be squeezed for any more.