Wisconsin notes

[SEWIGuy]

Maybe what mgk920 is getting at is making the gas tax a percentage tax like sales tax, instead of a flat per gallon tax?

Oh I see.  But doesn't that make it more volatile and price sensitive?

[GeekJedi]

All I can say is that there's no way that I'd go for sales tax on fuel going to the general fund and then paying for roads out of that. There's nothing to stop the Governor and legislature from taking (or perpetually borrowing) monies from "gas sales tax" to prop up other things. It leaves them to determine the best use of the funds, and I don't believe that's a smart idea.

Now, if that money collected goes into a segregated transportation fund to be used only for that, I can work with that.

[tchafe1978]

I believe the state passed a constitutional amendment stating that taxes collected for transportation can only be used for transportation, so that shouldn't be an issue.

LGL56VL

[JREwing78]

I believe the state passed a constitutional amendment stating that taxes collected for transportation can only be used for transportation, so that shouldn't be an issue.

IIRC, they did that about 2-3 years ago.

[WISFreeways]

Construction has begun on stage 2 of the Verona Road project, extending south from Raymond Road to County Highway PD (McKee). A drive on the road the other day revealed orange cones, raised power lines at the 151/PD intersection (ostensibly to accomodate for the future diamond interchange), and frontage road closures.

[US71]

If paying an extra 10-20 cents per gallon at the pump would genuinely cause you a hardship, you're not in the middle class.

People don't have to LIKE paying it. That's perfectly acceptable. But the amount of drama over a gas tax hike of 10-20 cents is blown way out of proportion to the actual harm to your wallet.

It has become a buzzword, IMO.

[DaBigE]

We were talking about the funding situation a bit at work over lunch today. What came out of it: Tack on a % increase to the sales tax and segregate the funds to infrastructure maintenance. IIRC from the discussion, areas of Georgia have a similar type of sales tax system of varying amounts that funds road improvements. Right now, GDOT is swimming in road funding. Yeah, I know it's still/another tax, but at least it comes a bit closer to spreading out the pain (even amongst our toll-happy tourists from south of the border). Whatever widget you're buying had to use the road system somehow to reach you, even if you walked/biked/drove your electric car to pick it up. We've done it before for "lesser" things...Lambeau...cough...Miller Park...cough, cough.

[mgk920]

We were talking about the funding situation a bit at work over lunch today. What came out of it: Tack on a % increase to the sales tax and segregate the funds to infrastructure maintenance. IIRC from the discussion, areas of Georgia have a similar type of sales tax system of varying amounts that funds road improvements. Right now, GDOT is swimming in road funding. Yeah, I know it's still/another tax, but at least it comes a bit closer to spreading out the pain (even amongst our toll-happy tourists from south of the border). Whatever widget you're buying had to use the road system somehow to reach you, even if you walked/biked/drove your electric car to pick it up. We've done it before for "lesser" things...Lambeau...cough...Miller Park...cough, cough.

This thought is nearly identical to my musings from a few days upthread.

Howabout putting transport on the general fund?  Eliminate the fuel tax, instead make it subject to the sales tax, adjust the rate to be revenue neutral.

Rationale?  The overall level of one's taxable economic activity is very directly proportionate to the utility that one receives, both directly and indirectly, from the transport system.

Mike

[GeekJedi]

We were talking about the funding situation a bit at work over lunch today. What came out of it: Tack on a % increase to the sales tax and segregate the funds to infrastructure maintenance. IIRC from the discussion, areas of Georgia have a similar type of sales tax system of varying amounts that funds road improvements. Right now, GDOT is swimming in road funding. Yeah, I know it's still/another tax, but at least it comes a bit closer to spreading out the pain (even amongst our toll-happy tourists from south of the border). Whatever widget you're buying had to use the road system somehow to reach you, even if you walked/biked/drove your electric car to pick it up. We've done it before for "lesser" things...Lambeau...cough...Miller Park...cough, cough.

This thought is nearly identical to my musings from a few days upthread.

Howabout putting transport on the general fund?  Eliminate the fuel tax, instead make it subject to the sales tax, adjust the rate to be revenue neutral.

Rationale?  The overall level of one's taxable economic activity is very directly proportionate to the utility that one receives, both directly and indirectly, from the transport system.

Mike

Except E makes a very important distinction: Segregate the funds.

I don't believe for a minute that the current administration (much like the last) would have any problem playing fast and loose with those funds in order to "cover up" shortfalls coming from other tax breaks, etc.

I get that the current rules are set up that way. That needs to be made very clear that it would continue with any change that would earmark sales tax for infrastructure.

[dvferyance]

I just found out that there will be a 2017 publication of the state map coming out next month. This was a shocker to me with how broke the DOT I would think this would be their last priority. Another area money could have been saved. There was no 2011 edition so it's not like there has to be a new publication every 2 years. A few states aren't even publishing state maps at all anymore.

[DaBigE]

I just found out that there will be a 2017 publication of the state map coming out next month. This was a shocker to me with how broke the DOT I would think this would be their last priority. Another area money could have been saved. There was no 2011 edition so it's not like there has to be a new publication every 2 years. A few states aren't even publishing state maps at all anymore.

They're already out, as it was pointed out elsewhere in these forums. IIRC, they're a joint venture between the DOT and the Dept of Tourism.

[GeekJedi]

I just found out that there will be a 2017 publication of the state map coming out next month. This was a shocker to me with how broke the DOT I would think this would be their last priority. Another area money could have been saved. There was no 2011 edition so it's not like there has to be a new publication every 2 years. A few states aren't even publishing state maps at all anymore.

*if* the DOT foots the bill, they're paying $150,000 year. Not exactly a huge deal - especially if it aids travelers. This is based on the 2015 numbers of 1 million maps at a cost of $0.15 each.

[SSOWorld]

BGSs were just replaced on US 151 in Grant County - albeit with Platteville getting 3d US 151 "BUS" shields and - in general - distant control cities (Lancaster for US 61 in Dickeyville and WIS 80/81 in PVille (on the WB ramp) and Darlington on the EB ramp to WIS 80/81) being removed. The 80/81 signs did get a replacement - Cuba City.

On the bright side, the replacement finally corrected a mistake made a Kieler where H and HHH were reversed in both direction (the one marked "TO" was the actual designation the ramp met.)

[dvferyance]

BGSs were just replaced on US 151 in Grant County - albeit with Platteville getting 3d US 151 "BUS" shields and - in general - distant control cities (Lancaster for US 61 in Dickeyville and WIS 80/81 in PVille (on the WB ramp) and Darlington on the EB ramp to WIS 80/81) being removed. The 80/81 signs did get a replacement - Cuba City.

On the bright side, the replacement finally corrected a mistake made a Kieler where H and HHH were reversed in both direction (the one marked "TO" was the actual designation the ramp met.)

I always thought it was more logical to use Cuba City as a control city of that exit instead of Lancaster. Because it was the closest city in the opposite direction of Platteville.To get to Lancaster you would have to get through Platteville first. Typically they use the 2 closest cities in each direction for the control cities which makes the most sense.

[Roadguy]

Rumblings coming out the woodwork have said Wisconsin is heading down the future of maintenance only mode.  Maintaining what exists will be the main focus is what is coming down from higher up in the DOT.  Future reconstruction projects will be scaled back and future expansion projects will be all but eliminated (If the project is already going it will be completed).  There will be a refocus on funding repairs on the roadway system that exists today versus building brand new or expanding that system.

[SEWIGuy]

Rumblings coming out the woodwork have said Wisconsin is heading down the future of maintenance only mode.  Maintaining what exists will be the main focus is what is coming down from higher up in the DOT.  Future reconstruction projects will be scaled back and future expansion projects will be all but eliminated (If the project is already going it will be completed).  There will be a refocus on funding repairs on the roadway system that exists today versus building brand new or expanding that system.

That seems like a very good decision to make in the short run.  I am assuming they would still complete the three laning of I-39/90 to the IL line? 

[The Ghostbuster]

A maintenance-only mentality is fine, but that doesn't mean expansion of certain roads should be out of the question. Projects where expansion may be warranted will likely face increased scrutiny under the new plan. I still think new forms of funding should be explored for financing road improvements.

[Roadguy]

That seems like a very good decision to make in the short run.  I am assuming they would still complete the three laning of I-39/90 to the IL line?

Yes, the project is already being built so the plan is to complete it.  That goes as well for the Zoo Interchange, 94 North-South, 441, Verona Road, etc although the time frames for completion may get extended out the intention baring any major reduction in funding would be to complete them since shovels are already in the ground.

[dvferyance]

I think this is a good plan. Most road projects that are planned but haven't started aren't vitally needed anyways. Though I am sure many will disagree with me on this. The one exception is I-43 on the north shore but let's face it that should have been done back in the 90's anyways. WisDOT incompetence for putting it off so long.

[peterj920]

I think this is a good plan. Most road projects that are planned but haven;t started aren't vitally needed anyways. Though I am sure many will disagree with me on this. The one exception is I-43 on the north shore but let's face it that should have been done back in the 90's anyways. WisDOT incompetence for putting it off so long.

There was a moratorium on state law that prevented I-43 from being expanded that was placed in state law by Mordecali Lee, who was a state senator at the time.  He is now an urban planning professor at UW Milwaukee. 

If you want to complain to him, here's his contact according to his UWM profile.

Email:mordecai@uwm.edu
Phone: 414-227-3282

If you're upset about I-43 not being expanded on the Nortg Shore air your grievances at him. 

[colinstu]

where's that law?

[dzlsabe]

My WI buddy tells me there is this gigantic bridge that nobody uses in Milwaukee that requires continual maintenance. Could that possibly be true? Say it aint so. Why IS Milwaukee the "gateway to WI" anyway?

[SEWIGuy]

I think this is a good plan. Most road projects that are planned but haven;t started aren't vitally needed anyways. Though I am sure many will disagree with me on this. The one exception is I-43 on the north shore but let's face it that should have been done back in the 90's anyways. WisDOT incompetence for putting it off so long.

There was a moratorium on state law that prevented I-43 from being expanded that was placed in state law by Mordecali Lee, who was a state senator at the time.  He is now an urban planning professor at UW Milwaukee. 

If you want to complain to him, here's his contact according to his UWM profile.

Email:mordecai@uwm.edu
Phone: 414-227-3282

If you're upset about I-43 not being expanded on the Nortg Shore air your grievances at him. 

So you are posting the guy's email and phone number in a public forum because he sponsored a bill that was enacted 25-30 years ago?  Newsflash, if this bill actually exists, the state legislature can simply repeal it.  Lee has nothing to do with that.

[peterj920]

http://wisconsinhighways.org/milwaukee/northsouth.html

The moratorium was repealed when the Silver Spring Dr Interchange was rebuilt.  Can see the article above on the moratorium being implemented by the now professor.  The email and phone were listed on the UWM website and is his business contact. 

[SEWIGuy]

http://wisconsinhighways.org/milwaukee/northsouth.html

The moratorium was repealed when the Silver Spring Dr Interchange was rebuilt.  Can see the article above on the moratorium being implemented by the now professor.  The email and phone were listed on the UWM website and is his business contact. 

What is the point of putting that contact information out there when he is no longer in the legislature and the moratorium is gone anyway?