A long-overdue constitutional amendment for transportation funding will come before the Connecticut General Assembly this year and it deserves strong bi-partisan support.
The proposed amendment would create a “lockbox” for protecting transportation funding and bar the General Assembly from raiding it to help fill whatever holes emerge in future bi-annual budgets.
Gov. Dannel Malloy is urging legislators create a lockbox for the Special Transportation Fund, a fund that is drawn from state gasoline taxes and half a percent of the 6.35 percent sales tax.
Malloy has pledged to reintroduce a constitutional amendment when the General Assembly session starts Feb. 3. Malloy’s action follows the House of Representatives failing in December to get the three-quarters vote needed to put the proposal on the ballot in November.
The House approved the amendment, but didn’t get the 114 votes required to meet that threshold needed for a constitutional amendment. The Senate backed it unanimously. The proposal could make the November ballot if it’s approved by super majorities in the state House and Senate during the coming session. If the proposed amendment only gains a simple majority again as it did in December, it would have to be ratified by the 2017 General Assembly and would be put on the 2018 ballot.
State legislators can’t vote twice on the exact same amendment if it is to get on the ballot in November so Malloy has proposed slightly different wording. But whatever the language, state legislators need to approve an amendment that will help protect funding that will ensure the safety of state roads and highways for years to come.
The revised amendment appears to address at least one of the Republican legislators’ concerns: defining the source of funding for the transportation lockbox. Another potential revenue-generator for the lockbox that is frequently raised as a concern is electronic tolls. But such a fear is not well-founded, given the cost of installing tolls and a strong likelihood that voters would defeat any proposed constitutional amendment containing them as a revenue source.
The amendment also needs to address concerns about the potential for diverting funds from the lockbox. Along these lines, House Republicans in December also suggested amending the proposal to enable Connecticut residents to challenge in court any removal of money from the lockbox.
Yet, regardless of the final shape of the amendment, there is little doubt a lockbox needs to be established. Such a mechanism will be critical as Malloy seeks to gain support for a $100 billion, 30-year transportation improvement plan. There also is little doubt the proposal needs to contain language that is clear and concise. That’s because the General Assembly in the past has failed to complete all the important steps needed to implement constitutional amendments.
A constitutional amendment calling for a spending cap was passed in 1992. But the definition of key terms was left up to the General Assembly. The terms of the amendment were never defined leaving it unenforceable. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen this time around when the well-being of the state’s transportation system is at stake.
The Ridgefield Democratic Town Committee provides this column.