Ohio River Bridges Project

The Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority is an independent, bi-state governmental agency organized by the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the State of Indiana for the purpose of financing and constructing the Ohio River Bridges Project. The authority’s primary task at present is to develop a financial plan for the project. The authority operates in consultation with, but separately from, the project’s bi-state management team. The authority is not charged with changing the project’s scope, which has already been established in a Federal Highways Record of Decision. The 2003 Record of Decision calls for building two bridges in the Louisville-Southern Indiana metro area and reconstructing the Kennedy Interchange (a.k.a. Spaghetti Junction) where interstates 64, 65 and 71 merge near downtown Louisville. The authority consists of 14 members from Indiana and Kentucky, as well as an executive director.

The Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority is an independent, bi-state governmental agency organized by Kentucky and Indiana for the purpose of financing and constructing the Ohio River Bridges Project. The primary role of the authority at present is to develop a financial plan for the project.

The authority is comprised of Indiana and Kentucky citizens from various professional backgrounds who have demonstrated leadership and community service. There are 14 members: seven appointed by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, three appointed by Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear and four appointed by Louisville Mayor Jerry Abramson.

The Louisville-Southern Indiana Ohio River Bridges Project is a "priority" national transportation project which addresses long-term, cross-river transportation needs in Louisville, Kentucky and Southern Indiana. It is one of the largest transportation projects in the country and will result in safer travel, less congestion and improved access to destinations in the region.

To learn more information about the project, please feel free to link to one of these sites:

Spurred by safety, economics ...

1SI's stance on bridges reflects harsh realities

The Kennedy Bridge was designed to accommodate 80,000 vehicles a day. Today it is carrying 120,000 to 130,000, accelerating the aging process as the structure nears the final third of its estimated life.

Such harsh realities, the gap between available money and cost, and hearsay have fueled misunderstandings and angst among citizens about the Ohio River Bridges Project, which has spanned decades of public discussion and proposals. The critical need now, two generations later, is for all citizens to be well informed about its facts, urgency, and benefits, according to the board of directors of One Southern Indiana.

This morning the chamber of commerce and economic development entity serving Clark and Floyd counties approved the recommendation of its Public Policy Council articulating 1SI's stance on the project. The new statement reflects changes in the bridges project itself since 1SI last released its position in December of 2009.

"One Southern Indiana supports the entire Ohio River Bridges Project," said Matt Hall, vice president of economic development and interim CEO, defining it as the construction of two bridges and the modernization of the I-64, I-65, and I-71 interchanges.

"It is imperative that our citizens understand the facts behind this support," he said. "Like it or not, we have no choice but to build the bridges now for safety reasons and to advance the quality of life and economy here." The new bridges will encourage investment, create and sustain jobs, and enhance mobility in the region, he said.

POINTS OF SUPPORT

Specifically, 1SI supports:

--The combined effort of the Bridges Authority, the State of Indiana, and the Commonwealth of Kentucky to begin construction in 2012.

--Innovative financing, construction, and operational solutions to reduce the total project cost.

--No increase in taxes, but fair tolls/user fees and variable pricing for frequent users of the Kennedy Bridge only. Governors of both states and Louisville's mayor have asked that any financing plan exempt the Clark Memorial (Second St.) Bridge and the Sherman Minton (I-64) Bridge from tolls. That is a major clarification, Hall said, because most people have assumed they would pay tolls on all bridges.

1SI has worked closely with the Bridges Coalition, a group of 15 business professionals and civic leaders on both sides of the river, to digest public ideas while facing realities about the urgent need for the project itself.

In addition to Hall and Tonya Fischer, 1SI's vice president of investor and government relations, Southern Indiana members of the Bridges Coalition are Chris Coyle of McCauley Nicolas, Bob Lanum of Stites & Harbison and the Ogle Foundation, and Dale Orem of Your Community Bank.

FACT VS. MYTH

1SI Board Chair Vaughan Scott, also a financial advisor serving small businesses and individuals throughout the region, pointed out that the federal gasoline tax cannot take care of all highway needs, because it is not indexed for inflation. It is the primary source of revenue for federal transportation projects, but since 1993, it has remained at 18.4 cents a gallon, while construction and maintenance costs have continued to escalate.

Toll booths are a thing of the past, Scott noted, such as those for the Second Street Bridge from its opening in 1929 to 1946 when bonds used for its construction were paid off. Today's electronic, open-road tolling prevents bottlenecks and does not require traffic to slow down. It also is able to offer special rates for frequent users, senior citizens, students who commute, residents in low-income areas, and other special cases.

Scott has compiled a list of facts dispelling common myths about the Ohio River Bridges Project, and it is available to the public at 1SI, 4100 Charlestown Road at I-265 in New Albany.

At One Southern Indiana, we are always committed to educating our members when it comes to pro-business issues. The Ohio River Bridges Project is no exception. As this decades-old project finally moves forward, we want to take this opportunity to clarify our position on the Project.

We recognize and respect that there are varying opinions and concerns with tolls as it relates to this project. No one wants to pay tolls – but One Southern Indiana recognizes tolls may be necessary in order to bring this project to reality. If tolls are necessary to get the Project completed, we are open to a fair and reasonable tolling scenario. We also understand that tolling will not occur on the 2nd Street Bridge or the I-64 Bridge. This gives commuters the option of paying NO TOLL whatsoever.

We are confident the Bridges Authority, which includes both Indiana and Kentucky citizens, will find the most logical, fair, and inexpensive alternative for both states. In fact, the Bridges Authority has keenly focused on making sure the Project is fair, sound, and doable and will serve the greater good of our entire community. To that end, we remain very supportive of the Bridges Authority and the important work they are doing.

Below is our official stance on the Project as stated in our Legislative Agenda:

We support the entire Ohio River Bridges Project (two bridges and the redevelopment of the I-65, I-71 and I-64 interchange in Louisville) and support the continued work of the Louisville – Southern Indiana Bridges Authority.

We understand that under current fiscal constraints, tolls will be needed to complete the Project. Nobody wants to pay tolls. However, if, after maximizing federal and state funding, including high-speed electronic tolling and it is the only way to fund the Project and get it built in a timely manner, then we will accept a funding solution that includes tolling and incorporates a “lesser-rate” local commuter toll. We encourage continued efforts to find cost savings through “value engineering”, design-build and other innovations.

There are numerous reasons to support the Project such as traffic congestion, pollution, and the fact that our bridges are literally falling apart beneath us. As a matter of fact, the following statements are summarized on The Bridges Coalition website:

- The Kennedy Bridge already carries more traffic than it was designed to handle, and is rated “structurally deficient.”
- Both the Kennedy and Clark Memorial bridges’ shoulder lanes have been converted for traffic during the last decade, leaving both bridges with more traffic lanes than they were designed to hold, and making emergency access more difficult.
- In Spaghetti Junction, crashes occur twice a day on average. There are two fatalities per year on average.
- In the fast-growing eastern region, there is a five-mile gap between cross-river highway links. As a result, all traffic is forced downtown.

We are attaching two documents that should answer some of your questions. Thank you for this opportunity to address any concerns you may have about the Project and the position that One Southern Indiana is taking. Together, we can finally move this community forward.

MATTHEWS: Take a deep breath about bridges

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Bridges. I have purposely stayed out of the fray about the Bridges project for several reasons. First, no matter which side you take, you are going to make someone unhappy. Second, there is very little I could add to the arguments for and against the project that someone else wasn't already saying.

Recently, I was invited by a friend to the New Albany Rotary to listen to teams from Indiana and Kentucky explain the project. I heard some new information I had not heard before and rethought some of my views about the project. I took notes as fast as I could and thought, “I really need to share this information with others so they can better understand a subject that has definitely raised the passion level of our community.”

I think I would probably suggest it might be time for all of us to take a big, deep breath. You know, the kind of breath that occasionally helps us to see that maybe the world really isn’t coming to an end quite yet. I am still not ready to try to tell anyone what they should think. Surprisingly though, as the briefing progressed, I found myself writing down numbers I hadn’t heard before which seemed to make the bridges more understandable, even if it might not yet be palatable. So, I’ll give you the numbers. You decide if it helps or not.

• 14 PERCENT: Transportation experts used cameras and tracking technology to study traffic crossing the Kennedy Bridge and found that only 14 percent of the traffic is “passing through.” The rest, or 86 percent of the traffic using that bridge, is us — locals who are either starting or ending their journey right here. I was surprised.

• 10 YEARS: Structural engineers estimate the Kennedy Bridge will be functionally and structurally deficient in 10 years or less. I know most of us agree that it is pretty functionally deficient right now, largely because of how it was designed.

• 80,000: The Kennedy Bridge was designed for 80,000 vehicles a day, assuming they would be mostly cars. The traffic count is in the range of 130,000 per day, and nearly a quarter of that is heavy trucks and commercial traffic.

• 160,000: The amount of traffic projected to be crossing the Kennedy Bridge by project's completion. Eighteen percent of that traffic would be diverted to the east end bridge still leaving 13,000 for Kennedy. The new northbound bridge will cut that in half, reducing the flow on the current bridge to 65,000 vehicles a day, extending its life and ensuring a steady and safe traffic flow.

• 3RD: This project is the third largest construction project under consideration in the entire United States at this time.

• $800 MILLION: This is the amount of inflation built into the current project. The longer it takes, the more we’ll spend, the more we’ll have to finance in private capital, and the higher the tolls to pay that debt off. That is why it is projected that we lose $10 million every month the project is delayed.

• 5 YEARS: The planned time to build the east end bridge, once construction begins in August 2012.

• $1: The “targeted toll” rate for frequent users the Authority and the states are aiming for…and both states are committed to reducing project costs further and investigating the best means of financing the project.

• NO ONE, ZERO, NONE: The number of people who want tolls. However, any reasonable person can see by the way we have been spending money as a nation that the kind of funds needed to build a project of this size won't come from what we are already paying in taxes.

Everyone agrees that we need another bridge. No one thinks that what we have now can meet the needs of the future. Efforts are being made to keep the project as financially reasonable as possible. The numbers kind of helped make the project seem more understandable to me. I don't know whether the above information makes you madder or gladder. I would suggest, however, that a better understanding of the data might just be enough to help you take that big, deep breath I mentioned earlier.

Dave Matthews is chairman of the Floyd County Republican Party.

Governors, Mayor announce cost-cutting plans for Ohio River Bridges Project

INDIANAPOLIS (January 4, 2011) – Governor Mitch Daniels, Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear and Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer today announced plans to explore options that could reduce the cost of the Ohio River Bridges Project by more than $500 million and still keep the entire two-bridge construction plan on track.

The leaders also signaled their desire to keep the Sherman Minton Bridge (I-64) and Clark Memorial Bridge (US 31) toll free.

The major cost savings for the project, which currently has an estimated price tag of $4 billion, could come from changes in these key areas:

* Rebuilding Spaghetti Junction in the existing location rather than move it south
* Reducing the East End bridge, roadway and tunnel from six lanes to four lanes, with the option to add two lanes later if traffic demand warrants
* Completing the Big Four Bridge pedestrian walkway and bike path as an alternative to including pedestrian and bike paths on the new downtown bridge

In addition, the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority will explore other cost-saving solutions in design, construction and financing by soliciting private-sector ideas at an industry innovation forum next month.

“The key to our success moving forward is a lean design that meets our needs at the lowest cost,” said Daniels. “Our ability to move with creativity and innovation will reduce costs and, ultimately, the tolls to make this project happen. It’s time to unleash the power of the private sector.”

“Now is the time to dig deeper and move faster to make it a reality,” said Beshear. “We are firmly committed to getting the job done and done right. Let’s start the new year with a firm commitment to reduce the costs of the project.”

“Time is money,” said Fischer. “One estimate suggests that every month of delay costs $10 million. The faster and smarter we move forward, the more we can make those checks payable to ourselves.”

The cost-cutting plans are the result of a continuing commitment by both states and the Bridges Authority to complete the project in the most financially responsible way. The two governors have challenged their transportation staffs and consultants to find ways to reduce the project’s cost and accelerate its progress.

The plans will require further study and consultation with federal officials. But the leaders believe the changes will reduce the overall environmental impact of the project, meet the established Purpose and Need and avoid any additional delay.

Industry Innovation Forum Planned for February

The industry innovation forum is the key next step in the cost-savings process. The two governors have asked the Bridges Authority, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and Indiana Department of Transportation to co-host a conference in February for the design, construction and finance industries to pursue the most modern and cost-effective means of completing the project.

“We will bring together the best minds in the transportation world to provide the types of ideas we’ve been exploring to drive down costs and get the project completed as quickly as possible,” said Bridges Authority Chairman Charles Buddeke.

Authority Co-Chair Kerry Stemler said, “The forum will also provide a venue for the local construction industry, disadvantaged business enterprises and labor leaders to connect with major companies in transportation infrastructure to discuss future partnerships and employment needs on this important project.”

Goal to Keep Sherman Minton, Clark Memorial Bridges Toll-Free

Along with further exploration of cost savings, the leaders said they favor a financing plan that would not require tolls on the Sherman Minton and Clark Memorial bridges. Any tolling should be linked to the project’s improvements in cross-river mobility from the expanded Kennedy Bridge downtown and the new East End bridge, the leaders said.

Daniels, Beshear, and Fischer also said they support the Authority’s targets for minimizing tolls and starting construction in August 2012.

The three leaders praised the Kentucky General Assembly’s leadership for passing legislation that led to the creation of the Bridges Authority and the members and staff of the Bridges Authority for making more progress in 10 months than this project has achieved in the past 10 years.

“The Bridges Authority has shown exceptional leadership in its work to find new and creative ways to advance the project, which is so important to this region and to our two states,” said Daniels. “We are truly united in this endeavor, and the Authority exemplifies our spirit of partnership.”

“These outstanding citizens who volunteer their time are working to chart a course that will make a difference for the region for generations to come,” Beshear said.

Ed Clere: Delay is Taking a Toll

We’ve been here before.

“… [A] controversy erupted over whether the bridge should be funded entirely from tax levies and operated without tolls or financed with revenue bonds, which would be retired through toll collections. …”

Sound familiar? Although the quotation easily could have appeared in any recent newspaper, it didn’t. It’s from the Encyclopedia of Louisville and refers to debate over construction of the Clark Memorial Bridge.

The article continues: “After studying numerous financial, engineering, and site proposals for seven months, the committee issued a report calling for construction of a highway toll bridge to be financed through a $5 million bond issue and managed by a five-member bridge commission. The report set off an eighteen-month period of public debate between backers of a toll bridge and those who favored a free bridge. In the winter of 1926 the Kentucky General Assembly enacted and Gov. William J. Fields signed legislation authorizing construction of a toll bridge and creating a Louisville Bridge Commission. But free-bridge forces, spearheaded by some of Louisville’s most prominent business leaders, appeared to gain the upper hand when they persuaded the city’s general council to submit the issue to voters. However, [in] October 1926 the Kentucky attorney general announced that the Kentucky Highway Commission lacked authority to expend money to maintain a free bridge. On election day the voters decisively defeated the free bridge proposal.”

The bridge opened in October 1929, two days after the stock market crash and the start of the Great Depression. The toll was 35 cents. In today’s dollars, that would be $4.48, according to the inflation calculator on the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics website. In 1937, the toll was reduced to 25 cents – equivalent to $3.20 today.

According to the encyclopedia article, “the bonds were paid off several years early because of heavy wartime traffic to the Indiana Ordinance Works near Charlestown.” The sentence suggests two important points. First, tolls went away when the bridge was paid off. Second, jobs in Southern Indiana were an important part of the equation.

Jobs in Southern Indiana are still an important part of the equation. The Indiana Ordinance Works – also known as the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant – is no more. Now it’s the River Ridge Commerce Center, and instead of making bombs, it’s creating jobs. New bridges would create many more.

Now we just have to figure out how to pay for them. If we do, construction on the East End bridge could start next year.

Like many others in our community, I was pleased last week when the governors of Indiana and Kentucky and the new mayor of Louisville announced cost-cutting plans for the Ohio River Bridges Project.

Several changes would reduce the project’s estimated $4 billion price tag by approximately $500 million:

• Rebuild Spaghetti Junction in the existing location instead of moving it south.
• Reduce the East End bridge, roadway and tunnel from six lanes to four, with the option of adding two lanes later as traffic demand warrants.
• Complete the Big Four Bridge pedestrian walkway and bike path as an alternative to including pedestrian and bike paths on the new downtown bridge.

The governors and the mayor also signaled their desire to keep the Sherman Minton and Clark Memorial bridges toll free.

In addition, the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority will explore other cost-saving solutions for design, construction and financing by soliciting private-sector ideas at an industry innovation forum next month.

Business owners, commuters and other bridge users have played an important role in the recent debate over the bridges project. Even with last week's announcement, I know they still have many unanswered questions and concerns, and so do I.

Some of the biggest questions will be answered when a “time of day” model is completed around April 1. It will provide a comprehensive analysis of traffic and usage patterns and will be the basis for a funding proposal based on real numbers. Until then, everything is just a guess.

One thing, however, is for sure. The new bridges will be financed in a much different way than the last two bridges.

Ninety percent of the cost of the Kennedy and Sherman Minton Bridges was paid by the federal government as part of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, with Kentucky and Indiana picking up the remaining 10 percent of each bridge, respectively.

Those bridges opened almost 50 years ago, and much has changed. Needless to say, as we approach the federal debt ceiling, Uncle Sam will be lucky if he can afford to pay a toll to cross the new bridges, let alone finance their construction. Indiana has a portion of the funding available now, but it won't be there for long. If we delay, other areas of the state would probably be more than willing to find other uses for money that could help build bridges here.

Generations of community leaders have worked to build bridges – both literal and figurative – between Louisville and Southern Indiana. Now the responsibility is ours.

As I said, there remain many questions, and the coming months should provide answers. The sooner, the better. Last week’s announcement included the assertion that each month of delay adds $10 million to the project’s cost. That’s an unacceptable toll.

Sen. Ron Grooms (R-Jeffersonville) said today he was supportive of plans by Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear to explore ways of reducing the cost of the Ohio River Bridges Project so tolls wouldn't be needed on the Sherman Minton and Clark Memorial bridges.

"Today's announcement of no tolls on existing bridges is great news for motorists who drive them on a regular basis," Grooms said. "I fully support a scaled-back plan that is fiscally responsible, while also keeping the project on schedule and fulfilling the needs of all the communities involved. I thank Gov. Daniels and Gov. Beshear, the mayors and members of the Bridge Authority for their hard work and dedication to building these new bridges."

Grooms said the cost savings for the project, which are estimated at more than $500 million, could come by making these slight adjustments to the existing plans:

Rebuilding Spaghetti Junction in the existing location rather than moving it south; Reducing the East End bridge, roadway and tunnel from six lanes to four lanes, with the option to add two lanes in the future; and Completing the Big Four Bridge pedestrian walkway and bike path as an alternative to including pedestrian and bike paths on the new downtown bridge.

Grooms said he also looked forward to reviewing further cost-saving ideas from the upcoming industry innovation forum in February. The forum - which is being co-hosted by the Bridge Authority, the Indiana Department of Transportation and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet - will bring together transportation industry leaders to discuss ways to pursue the most modern and cost-effective means of completing this project.

As we begin 2011, there are many conservatives that need to see more leadership and proactive stances from our elected representatives on the issues that are most important to our local communities. The November elections were a huge win for republicans and it should have sent a very strong and clear message to all the candidates that were fortunate enough retain their office or win a new office.

The message is this; less government, less intrusion into our businesses and control spending to get the national debt and deficit under control.

For us locally, job creation is important. But by far, the most important issue for many of us is the bridge project and potential tolls. I find it very difficult to understand why conservatives in public office like you are not adamantly opposed to the current proposal to place tolls on existing bridges.

This will absolutely kill small businesses on both sides of the river and place another tax on all of us who choose to cross state lines. There is not a single rational explanation that can be given to conservatives to explain this new tax.

If we cannot afford the project; than it needs to be altered or cancelled. Gov. Chris Christie had the courage and fortitude to cancel the 10 billion dollar tunnel project in his state because they couldn’t afford to continue. We need to do the same.

The argument of “we have to build both bridges or none” is a straw man fallacy that doesn’t stand up to logical reasoning. If all we can afford is one bridge, than build one bridge. Everyone I talk to believes the East end bridge needs to be built and virtually no one thinks a downtown bridge is necessary. The traffic patterns that original assumptions were made for the downtown bridge have not held up to scrutiny.

If our elected representatives allow these unelected and unaccountable individuals on the Bridge commission to dictate what happens to our community; the next election will have a very different outcome locally.

Mr. Baylor and I don’t agree on many issues, but this is one he is absolutely on the right side. He understands clearly how this tax/toll will impact small businesses and further stagnate growth in Southern Indiana. He understands from his patrons that they have a choice and if there is a toll, people will choose not to cross over either to or from Louisville. I concur with this assessment and most other small business owners do as well.

As 2011 progresses, I plan to be much more vocal and supportive of any endeavor to halt new taxes, tolls or spending that we cannot afford; especially when it comes to this bridge project.

There are many of us who will be watching closely how our elected representatives respond to this issue. I am hopeful that we will see and hear from you as you take a stand either for or against. If you are undecided, I’d suggest you begin polling your constituents or have open town hall forums to really hear from those you represent. Not taking a stand on the issue will be unacceptable.

Respectfully,
Dan Eichenberger MD

JEFFERSONVILLE — On Thursday, the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority voted unanimously to finance the $4.1 billion Bridges Project using a tolling scheme to cover more than $2.2 billion of the cost. Regrettably, this does not come as a surprise.

From its beginning, the authority has not been straightforward with information and the procedure through which its members came up with their lackluster financial plan was flawed in a variety of ways. Most notably, there should have been an open and constant dialogue with residents, businesses and local elected officials during the process.

The authority’s creation stemmed from an executive order in Indiana and in Kentucky from a bill which said “no financial plan shall be submitted or approved which contains expected appropriations by the General Assembly beyond those appropriated in the most recently enacted biennial highway construction plan.”

So while there are other means of raising revenue, this stipulation complicated the authority’s job as it permitted few alternatives to tolling to raise money. And even though Kentucky’s bill did say the financial plan would specify “the amount and duration of per-vehicle tolls,” the authority also served as a convenient way for state lawmakers to avoid bearing the responsibility of proposing tolls.

A significant defect in the authority’s mission is its inability to modify the bridge plan to come up with a project Indiana and Kentucky can actually afford. The authority was organized for “the purpose of financing and constructing” the Ohio River Bridges Project based on the Record of Decision by the Federal Highway Administration in 2003.

However, seven years ago when the Record of Decision was issued, the project was expected to cost $2.5 billion. Now that price tag is $4.1 billion and likely will go higher.

Over the course of the authority’s first 10 months, its members regularly denied tolls would be a major source of revenue. They maintained that all options were being considered. It was only in October that they announced tolling was going to be the foundation of their plan.

Unfortunately, any reliable data on tolling has been scarce. The authority has yet to form a uniform plan on the details — such as what bridges will be tolled, how high the tolls will be and how long tolls will be in place.

There are several possible reasons we are confronted with this vague tolling scheme. Perhaps because authority members don’t have any experience in financing public works projects; maybe it is an attempt to keep the public in the dark to curb debate; or quite possibly they simply just don’t know.

Public input on the project has been limited because of a lack of information and a lack of a forum. The plans displayed on the authority’s website are minimal and offer nothing about alternative options.

So-called “public meetings” so far have not addressed the need for an open discourse on people’s concerns. Instead, they have been merely presentations of the authority’s decisions; presentations that often contain contradictory or ever-changing numbers on tolling dates and proposed fees.

Authority members talk about the need to upgrade infrastructure in order stay competitive with cities such as Cincinnati, Nashville, Columbus and Indianapolis. But none of our sister cities have implemented a toll scheme that erects an obstacle between communities or threatens their economies.

Despite the authority’s continued declarations that the entire $4.1 billion project is the only way to alleviate traffic and safety concerns, numerous studies and reports have proved this to be false. What’s more, in the seven years since the Record of Decision was issued, Louisville’s traffic congestion, originally predicted to increase by 25 percent, has actually declined.

The authority’s tenure has been characterized by misdirection and misinformation. Its activity has been difficult to follow and understand.

What we do know is the authority’s message seems to change constantly. Even those that have followed this issue closely don’t know all the facts. It’s disappointing that the culmination of the authority’s work is an incomplete plan that raises more questions than answers.

While new bridges have been contemplated for the last 50 years, it seems silly to now be picking an arbitrary date to jam this square peg through a round hole. It’s time to take a deep breath, step back and figure out how we can address transportation needs — without imposing tolls that will only penalize our businesses, our communities and our families.

— Paul Fetter is general manager of Clark County Auto Auction and cofounder of No2BridgeTolls.org

Daniels: East-end bridge could be downsized

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels hosted an end-of-the-year conference call with several media outlets Monday afternoon. Topics of discussion ranged from infrastructure projects, to school funding and the expectations for the upcoming General Assembly session.

One topic germane to Southern Indiana residents was a possible change in the Ohio River Bridges Project that could reduce the number of lanes on the proposed east-end bridge from six to four, and still require local residents to pay tolls to cover a gap in funding.

Ohio River Bridges Project

While Daniels said everybody agrees they would like the lowest tolls possible to help fund the Ohio River Bridges Project — the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority has set a target rate of $1 for frequent commuters — finding ways to rescope the project to reduce the cost was a topic of discussion when he met with Gov. Steve Beshear, D-Ky., last week to discuss the plan.

Indiana has already earmarked more than $1.1 billion toward the project — which is coming from Major Moves funding by leasing the Northern Indiana Toll Road — for the $4.1 billion project to construct an east-end bridge, downtown bridge and reconstruct Spaghetti Junction in Louisville.

Combined with Kentucky’s funding and federal dollars that are already in place, an estimated budget shortfall of $2.2 billion exists and will be covered by tolling vehicles crossing the new structures, the bridges authority proposes.

To likely lessen the amount being paid in tolls, and the overall cost of the project, Daniels said a couple of the changes would be on the Kentucky side of the project, but included the discussion of a cost-cutting measure that would reduce the number of lanes planned for the east-end bridge. The original plan for the project called for a six-lane bridge and approach — three lanes in each direction — but it could be reduced to a four-lane bridge.

No decision has been made on officially changing the project and Daniels said he is “very sensitive” to the concerns that have been brought up by the residents of Southern Indiana in relation to the bistate bridge project.

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Dear Gov. Daniels,

Hi. How are you? Locally, we have some problems with this whole Ohio River Bridges Project thing, and, with all due respect, it appears you’re on the wrong side of the issue.

You know I like you. Governors — and presidents, by the way and hint, hint — should be smart and keep a sharp eye on the pocketbook. I totally got your back on the whole reforming of education and local governments stuff. For the most part, I figure we’re lucky to have you.

As I reached into the paper box for my copy of The Evening News last Tuesday, I got excited at a headline. It read: “Daniels: Bridge could be downsized.”

I’d gotten so used to talk about a bridges project rather than just a bridge, I got my hopes up, read it wrong and thought you agreed with most of us locals that the whole monstrous, expensive project should be downsized.

As the paper box door slammed shut, I got to the subheadline: “Governor says in media call that east-end span could go from six lanes to four.”

Crash! That was your pedestal. Sir, the one bridge we actually need and want should be the last thing that gets downsized.

Here’s the thing: Many aren’t convinced we need two bridges, and many of us on this side of the river — the important side — couldn’t give a flying, er, frog whether Spaghetti Junction in Louisville gets reworked or falls down.

Either case will be a pain while they’re working on it, but if there’s an east-end bridge, we can go around it.

To my knowledge, there has only been one recent credible poll on this subject, conducted by cn/2. It polled 502 Louisville residents. The results showed that a full 85.5 percent of respondents were opposed to the project as currently conceived. I strongly suspect that opposition is even stronger in Southern Indiana.

Support for an east-end bridge, however, was found among more that 50 percent of those polled, and I’m quite sure the support for the east-end bridge is significantly higher among those in Southern Indiana as many travel to Louisville to work.

Tolls are a good concept. Those who use something should pay for it, and, given the environmental issues involved with driving and the economic and security issues influenced by increased demand for oil, I like that tolls discourage unnecessary driving.

Yet, frankly, those actively opposing tolls locally have done a fine job making their case and have convinced me that, in this instance, it’s the wrong way to go, particularly to toll the bridges for which we’ve already paid.

I highly recommend checking out their arguments as well as the arguments many local government entities have used or accepted in passing their own resolutions opposing tolls.

I also recommend visiting Jeffersonville’s 10th Street and checking out the signage at businesses to see what folks around here think about tolls. I’ve been at meetings and heard the passionate comments by those organizing in opposition. It would be impossible to overstate how unpopular tolls are here.

A scaled-down project would eliminate the need for such an unpopular policy.

There’s suspicion about who will get rich off of this. There’s no way an unelected board should be able to go so blatantly against the will of the local people with the scope of this project and the funding mechanism. They have said it is what they were formed to do — to find a way to fund the project, and that’s it.

We the people will, one way or another, be paying for whatever public project is constructed. It will be constructed in our community. We’ll be the ones driving on it. Why don’t our opinions seem to matter?

No one should be forced to sell or lose the use of their property, but it’s going to happen. It’s clear one less bridge would require significantly less violation of property rights.

Property in the east-end is much less densely populated in comparison to downtown Louisville and Jeffersonville, which further lessens the number of individuals affected.

Then there’s the tax money. It would be great if a private investor negotiated with property owners, built a bridge or two, then charged tolls to recoup his costs plus a profit. We both know that isn’t going to happen.

It seems obvious, however, that one bridge rather than a colossal project will cost less and, therefore, require less tax money.

In the case of our state, it’s my understanding we still have $1.1 billion stashed away from your Major Brilliant Move of leasing a toll road to a private investor. I can’t help but wonder how much perfectly functional east-end bridge we could buy for $1.1 billion while leaving this controversy over tolls behind us.

We’ve been told it’s too late to dramatically change the project. We know that’s a crock. It’s been done elsewhere. We’ve been told the whole “three-legged stool” of two bridges and the Spaghetti Junction rework is in all of our best interests. We’re not buying it. We’re convinced the project as currently conceived and being pursued is only in the interest of a handful of elites that don’t value our opinions.

We only need, want and can afford the east-end bridge. Please tell us you get it and are on our side and on the side of common sense, property rights and saving money.

Thanks, Kelley

EVENING NEWS EDITORIAL: Leave tolls off existing bridges, roads

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — Members of the Louisville and Southern Indiana Bridges Authority have repeatedly said it is their task to find funding for two new bridges across the Ohio River and a rebuild of Spaghetti Junction, not to re-examine the project itself.

The problem with that logic is that you shouldn’t buy what you can’t really pay for.

With a vote looming Thursday morning on an update to a financial plan for the project, voices in Southern Indiana are becoming louder and the speakers more well-funded, saying: Don’t place tolls on existing bridges or roadways.

Those against tolls are mobilizing with billboards, websites and the old-fashioned way — word of mouth and attending public meetings.

The tolls — tentatively planned for $1 each trip across the river for frequent commuters — are designed to bridge the funding gap for the bridges project. That’s expected to be at least $2.2 billion more than the anticipated $1.9 billion in state and federal funding available, according to figures presented to the authority, and that’s too much of a burden to place on people traveling from Southern Indiana to Kentucky and vice-versa.

To get that $2.2 billion or more needed for the project, tolls likely will be placed on the two new bridges and one or more existing bridges connecting the two states here, according to paperwork from the authority and The Bridges Coalition.

It’s wrong to ask Hoosiers and Kentuckians to essentially again pay for roads and bridges that have been constructed. It’s wrong for locals to be asked to pay more than half of the estimated price tag in tolls.

More than anything, it’s wrong to ask them to pay tolls when so many questions remain. Those include:

• What will the actual tolls be? The $1 per trip for frequent commuters is still not concrete nor is what others might pay. And, the question of how soon toll rates might be raised from the initial figure has not been answered.

• How much state and federal funding will be provided? It’s unclear, said Ed Crooks, managing director of KPMG’s infrastructure advisory — which presented the financial plan update to the bridges authority.

“Federal funding for the project is really up in the air,” he said in a recent Evening News article, also calling the $1.9 billion assumption “fairly prudent and conservative.”

• What would tolling actually mean financially? At a Monday public hearing, Kerry Stemler, a Southern Indiana businessman and authority co-chairman, said that more data on who uses the bridges, how often they do so and why is needed before determining how different types of commuters or through traffic might pay different toll rates. A study to that effect is expected by spring.

Our question to that is how can the authority vote to approve a financing plan when it is lacking critical information?

The answer — it shouldn’t.

The bridges authority, state and federal governments should instead look to build what can be constructed without tolling existing bridges and roadways, like, perhaps, the east end bridge.

JimGrayIN wrote:

The authors pose the question '… is how can the authority vote to approve a financing plan when it is lacking critical information?' I guess if you believe that that the Authorities purpose was to find the best financial solution possible, that would be a great question. But what anyone who has been paying attention would realize is that the only purpose of the Authority was to play this discussion of tolls out in public; to insulate the very politicians who created the authority; to push tolls as the only solution; to legitimize tolls; to rename tolls as user fees and finally; to ridicule anyone who disagrees with tolls as part of a minority fringe in the community. Why would the Authority care if they have all the facts or information they need to find a truly impartial finance plan, they have already succeeded in their goal.

Jeff Gillenwater wrote:

The projections used to justify this project in its current form are not accurate. Population, job, and traffic growth rates are lower than predicted.

There are regional mobility solutions that are cheaper, safer, more conducive to economic investment, that will create more jobs, and are environmentally much more responsible. That none of them have been seriously considered in direct comparison to ORBP is a disservice to the region and the nation, creating a false 'all-this-or-nothing' dichotomy and necessitating rancorous dissent where reasonable discourse would have better served had initial, well researched public input efforts been responded to in kind.

What the Authority seeks is for the regional community to spend the next several decades paying more than necessary for a project it neither wants (except the East End Bridge) nor best serves its long-term transportation needs.

The conflicts of interest, both real and perceived, that led to this untenable juncture should be disclosed and reviewed right alongside readily available alternatives to this project.

According to their own estimates, all that can be accomplished while the East End Bridge is being constructed utilizing traditional state and federal funding with no new sources of revenue - tolls, private investment or others - needed.

Jeff resident wrote:

As a long time resident of Jeff if the Tolls do hit I will be moving to Louisville. This is where I work and will not be able to afford a Toll on a bridge and put food on my table for my kids. we use the bridge at least 6 times a day if not more and at a dollar a pop just cant happen. So my family will come first before this city Bye Bye Jeff. I am sure many more are with me on this one

Mark Cassidy wrote:

If, as the BridgeS Authority claims, they cannot fundamentally change the project, then would at least one member do the right thing and submit a resignation letter to Gov. Daniels? That letter could state, very politely, that under the current economic conditions there is not a viable way to finance this project as it currently stands.

Anyone brave enough to be a hero for the citizens of Southern Indiana?

The bridges toll for thee

> SOUTHERN INDIANA — There's a lot to debate and decide about bridges for the River City.

Should it be the massive "Ohio Rivers Bridges Project", a single East-End bridge, or no additional bridges for the foreseeable future?

Beyond that, if we're going to build a bridge or two, how should we pay for it? To what extent should it be financed by Kentucky and Indiana — as opposed to taxpayers elsewhere in the country? And to the extent that it's financed by our two states, should it be financed through general revenues, by an increase in a particular tax, or with a “user fee” — i.e., tolls?

In terms of both equity (“fairness”) and efficiency, user fees are attractive since the burden falls on those who use it. It is generally considered “fair” that those who use something should be the ones to pay for it. And a user fee lines up incentives nicely. People will use it as they value it. In contrast, a price of zero encourages “too much” use.

Economists also like user fees because the cost of government activity is far more transparent. When taxation is more subtle, people are often fooled into imagining a free lunch from the government.

But user fees can also have a disproportionate impact on those with lower-incomes. Of course, a user fee is "proportionate" per trip; everyone pays the same toll. But it will be "regressive" if it imposes a larger percentage burden on those with lower incomes.

In practice, a user fee on bridges is probably "U-shaped"— with the largest impact on the middle class and smaller (percentage) burdens on the poor and the wealthy. Many of the poor don't cross the river that often — and the wealthy don't cross it much more often than those in the middle class.

The impact on those in various income classes is an important consideration. But again, a user fee should be viewed in light of the alternative taxes. Are tolls more painful than a sales tax, a higher tax on income, or higher taxes on property? Proponents of a bridge or two should be clear about both the benefits of building and the costs of funding. And opponents of one funding mechanism should consider whether the alternatives are better.

All that said, the most surprising part of the debate has been the points of contention raised by some self-styled "liberals".

For example, they have complained about the potentially regressive impact of tolls. But I don't hear them complain very often about federal payroll taxes on income — 15.3% of every dollar earned by the working poor (more than $3,000 from someone supporting a family at the poverty line).

I also don't remember much applause for former Governor Ernie Fletcher who worked with the legislature to change the state income tax in Kentucky. The Commonwealth had been the worst in the nation in this category, but they no longer tax the earnings of the working poor.

At least in Indiana, some liberals are complaining about the impact of such a tax on the business community. This is unusual. But I’m excited to see them recognize the negative impact of taxation on microeconomic incentives and macroeconomic growth—at least in this one case.

I'm also glad to see these people promoting "free trade" between Indiana and Kentucky. In many other contexts, they work to restrict trade with those in other countries. Likewise, this is a bit surprising, since many of them promote "buy local" campaigns — and a toll would certainly encourage people to stay in their own states to make purchases.

Finally, many liberals would like us to reduce driving, traffic, and air pollution—to help the environment. Tolls would do that—and would promote carpooling, mass transit, and bike-riding too. Why don’t they consider tolls to be a wonderful idea?

There are legitimate reasons to oppose multiple bridges and tolling as a funding mechanism. But it’d be nice to see more consistency from those who oppose these ideas.

BAYLOR: Bridges Authority has no clothes

I’m the co-owner of an independent Hoosier small business. Teaching, selling and living better beer are my workday preferences, and admittedly other “minor” details occasionally elude me. However, after two decades in the food and beer business, pristine clarity periodically emerges from the gloaming.

Based on samplings of my experience, permit me to submit the following propositions.

1. We’ve always tended to our Southern Indiana backyards, but as an independent, niche-oriented small business, we’ve found that an aggressive focus on marketing to potential customers in Louisville is necessary for survival and growth.

2. Basic metropolitan area demographics justify this approach. Better beer costs more, but it resonates with a specific (and happily, ever expanding) demographic. Large numbers of our target demographic — higher incomes, better education, more extensive travel and life experience — live in more populous Louisville.

3. Marketing to a Louisville demographic never is easy, owing primarily to ancestral assumptions and clannish prejudices of the sort common along borders. Although those not engaged in bricks and mortar retailing might dismiss such intangibles as apocryphal, they’re far from imaginary to those who actually occupy the independent small business trenches.

4. I’ve accumulated sufficient knowledge about NABC’s consumer base to know that an important segment of it comes from Louisville. I am vindicated by knowing that a plan patiently pursued over a long period of years has proven worthy. Looking around, I can see that we’re not alone, and similar strategies are working for other independent Hoosier small businesses nearby.

5. Tolls on existing Ohio River bridges absolutely would alter this playing field to the detriment of independent Hoosier small businesses. Whether a quarter or $3 each way, the sum would constitute an increase on the price of Hoosier goods and services for Louisville consumers. Hoosiers crossing the Ohio to work would have no choice except to pay tolls (and have less money to spend at home), while Louisvillians would have the option to remain at home and spend discretionary monies in Kentucky.

6. Tolling burdens absolutely are tantamount to the erection of a physical barrier to interstate commerce. Furthermore, it is quite likely that even now, the mere mention of tolling is having a measurable influence on the decision making process of Louisville consumers. Clearly, I can see how tolling will damage my independent Hoosier small business, and I can plausibly infer that it will hurt my brethren just as badly.

Why, then, are Hoosiers acting against the interests of Hoosiers?

•••

Numerous Southern Indiana businesses just like mine have done exactly what the reigning experts at organizations like One Southern Indiana endlessly preach at their costly seminars: To gather information, know the customer, plan strategies, and over time, nurture these strategies in pursuit of success.

We’ve all done so, and we’ve all learned from these many years of experience, but suddenly, overnight, what we’ve learned apparently no longer matters. It’s a commandment-level article of 1si faith that business owners know what’s best for them — except now, when those among us daring to demand evidence are ignored, muzzled, and dismissed as vitriolic cranks with hidden agendas and Communist leanings.

Most ironic of all: Ever since objections have arisen and evidence has been presented as to why tolls will negatively impact independent Hoosier small businesses, certain tolling advocates with no evidence … who have not spent two decades marketing their businesses as destinations Louisville customers … who are not engaged in bricks and mortar retail … who’ve never, ever been engaged in any semblance of independent small business … haughtily roll their eyes, gazing loftily at the clouds whenever it is suggested that maybe, just maybe, independent Hoosier small business owners actually know perfectly well that tolls on existing bridges will be catastrophic for them, destroying decades of outreach to Kentucky in one, huge $4 billion swoop.

Here’s the rub: You can believe the lessons of my business experience, or you can delete them, but throughout it all, amid high-handed imperiousness and ham-fisted diversionary tactics, not once has the Bridges Authority actually offered answers to these questions, as asked by independent Hoosier small business owners.

No economic impact study has been cited. No outside information has been referenced. Pins drop, crickets chirp, and the Bridges Authority can only mumble mantras about inevitability, accuse sincere questioners of spreading myths, and when rattled, hide behind St. Daniels’ billowing robes.

And so it is my contention, borne of experience, that the imposition of tolls by an unelected body with nary an independent small business owner seated on it will have the undeniably harmful effect of indirectly taxing independent Hoosier small businesses, burdening their Louisville and Greater Kentucky customers price hikes, denying needed sales tax revenue to Indiana, and isolating a sizeable market that we’ve finally come so close to capturing in recent years.

Because the Bridges Authority refuses to answer legitimate questions, we must conclude that as an entity, quasi-evangelical construction zeal is trumping every other human concern, and that independent Hoosier small businesses soon will be expected to meekly surrender, patronizingly receive pat on their heads, ceremoniously bow to their betters, and take the full brunt of the financial hit — for the greater “good” offered us by 1si’s gospel of economic elitism and St. Daniels’ future D.C. job prospects.

There’s neither myth nor negativity in any of this, because after all, I have my evidence.

Where on earth is theirs?