Published: July 13, 2007 10:05 am      

More for turnpike tolls? Maybe much more?

Oklahomans need to be appraised of a possible move to the long-term lease of a significant part of our state infrastructure. The most likely candidate for leasing might be part or all of our turnpike system. Would that be good or bad for the users of highways in Oklahoma?

In several other states there has been a move in the past few years for entities to enter into a public-private-partnership with a state where a company either secures a long-term lease on an existing road or perhaps builds a completely new road. Usually the state retains ownership and grants a 50- to 99-year lease to a private entity for the operation and maintenance of the road.

Of course, the company isn’t providing that service for a pat on the back. With control of the tolls they intend to recoup their investment and make a healthy profit off their efforts. Generally speaking, the companies have been foreign-owned, either from Spain or Australia.

I believe there is consideration for such an idea in Oklahoma. About two and a half years ago a group known as Better Roads and Bridges sponsored the circulation of a petition for a statewide vote to raise the fuel fees on gasoline and diesel.

The group largely was made up of road and bridge contractors as well as concrete and asphalt companies. In light of rapidly rising fuel prices as well as state legislation just passed to better fund our roads and bridges, the measure went down in flames to a lopsided defeat.

Since that defeat, many of those same supporters have come together to form the organization Transportation Revenues Used Strictly for Transportation. Four of the key principles they stand for are: Protecting and growing dedicated funds for Oklahoma’s transportation system; supporting leaders who are committed to transportation as a priority of state government; use of high-quality materials in building and maintaining roads and bridges; and efficiency and accountability within the Oklahoma Legislature and Department of Transportation.

All of these principles are worthy but the real question is how to best accomplish them? I believe TRUST, along with ODOT, are considering whether or not they could lease out our turnpike system for some up-front money that could then be used by ODOT for our non-turnpike roads and bridges.

In May, TRUST, along with Speaker Lance Cargill’s “100 Ideas Campaign,” sponsored a lecture featuring Robert Pool, director of transportation studies with the Reason Foundation.

Poole pitched a glowing case for the public-private partnerships as a new way to finance and build roads in cash-strapped states. His main point was that the partnerships represented a large new source of highway investment. He described the new source mostly as bank financing, equity markets and institutional investors. Another main point was “fairness” as this would be a “user pay” system.

My objection to the idea is Oklahoma’s turnpike system already is based on fairness as only the users currently pay. In addition, if our turnpike authority were going to build a new turnpike, it would float bonds, probably using some of the same financial sources Poole suggested. So what’s the difference?

Our current turnpike system has no operational profit motive involved. Some of the entities involved in the partnerships are looking for an 18 percent annual profit margin. Therefore, it is my contention the tolls will have to be considerably higher if we go with the partnerships rather than stay with our current system.

Oklahomans better watch this closely or we consumers will pay much more to travel our roads so private parties can profit. I believe our current turnpike system can be made more economical and the tolls lowered. We also must work to reclaim funds for ODOT, funds that should be going for roads that currently are diverted to other uses. These are the better ideas to improve our roads and bridges rather than leasing out our infrastructure.



CHARLIE MEADOWS is chairman of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee.