Ritter backs $100 car fee hikes
By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published January 31, 2008 at 12:30 a.m.
Updated January 31, 2008 at 11:26 a.m.
Gov. Bill Ritter called on the legislature Wednesday to look at increasing auto registration fees to pay for a $500 million-a-year catch-up effort on Colorado's highway maintenance backlog.
But that "Fix It Now" proposal is only a third of the package his blue-ribbon panel on transportation funding recommended. Fees can be hiked by the legislature, but voters would have to approve a tax increase to cover the rest of the package, and Ritter said now is not the time to ask them.
"We probably haven't made the case yet to get that on the 2008 ballot," Ritter told a packed meeting of the legislature's transportation caucus at the Capitol.
Ritter released the panel's report, which recommended boosting state and local spending on transportation by $1.5 billion a year to catch up on maintenance and begin whittling down languishing lists of highway-safety and road-widening projects.
The panel packaged its recommendation with four annual funding thresholds from which to pick but concentrated on $1.5 billion as the most practical.
But the governor stopped short of submitting a specific proposal. His panel had determined that an average $100 annual increase in the auto registration fee, scaled lower or higher depending on vehicle weight, would generate $500 million a year.
Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, questioned Ritter critically for avoiding a detailed proposal.
"I'm not hearing strong direction from you about which direction we should go," he said.
Ritter replied that whatever is done needs to emerge from a broad process involving lawmakers and the public, not only from him. Part of the panel's package should be considered this year, he said.
"I've said all along that all these big-ticket issues are long term, marathon issues," Ritter said. "If we do anything at all, it is consistent with what we've said about having a building-block program."
flynnk@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5247
$500 million a year for highway maintenance
Gov. Ritter's panel outlined a basic half-billion-dollar program to catch up on backlogged maintenance.
Where funds would originate
Highway maintenance fee, average $100 a vehicle $500 million
Where funds would go
Resurfacing roads $222 million
Bridges $156 million
Pothole repairs, restriping, guardrail replacement, etc. $82 million
Local governments $40 million
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Broncos Game Action
Click for more game action photos from Invesco field.
-
2008 Race for the Cure
The 16th Annual Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on today's events.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
-
Presidential Elections
See how Colorado counties have voted through the years.
-
County election profiles
A look at how residents in each Colorado county may vote.
-
A Dozen on Denver
Connie Willis is the featured author this week in 'A Dozen on Denver'
-
Rocky Truth Patrol
Reporters Laura Frank and Katie Kerwin McCrimmon hunt for truth in politics.
-
Peak Picks
Submit your fall foliage photos to our contest and vote on other submissions.
January 31, 2008
4:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
cforevereyez writes:
Referendum C was passed to fund road construction and repair. It stated, "REQUIRING THE RETAINED EXCESS STATE
REVENUES TO BE USED TO PAY FOR EDUCATION; HEALTH CARE;
ROADS, BRIDGES, AND OTHER STRATEGIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS;
AND RETIREMENT PLANS FOR FIREFIGHTERS AND POLICE OFFICERS."
Why isn't this money being used to fix our roads? Why do we need ANOTHER tax increase when it was recently estimated that Referendum C will generate an additional $2 Billion over original estimates? Where is this money going, if not for road repair?
January 31, 2008
5:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
BillHalfmoon writes:
There are two problems concerning this issue. First, the Owens administration sold out their conservative base. One of the initial blows was in dropping Bob Schaefer for Pete Coors in the Senate race, thus assuring a bland and weak Ken Salazar in the post. Then it supported Referendum C, which further tore apart the party.
Second, the "idioectorate" of Colorado elected a social worker to be its Governor. Again, this was assisted by the internecine warfare in the Republican Party. Bob Beauprez was about as weak a candidate as possible. The Little Sisters of the Poor would have beat him.
So we have a social worker socialist as Governor; a man with no executive, administrative, or business experience. His lack of managerial experience is evidenced by all of the so-called Blue Ribbon panels he has appointed. He cannot lead. He can only appease his sychopantic base.
People wonder why we need a tax increse to fix roads. Look in the mirror. For whom did you vote? A Democrat Governor and a Democrat controlled legislature is a tried and true prescription for tax and spend solutions. Without proper checks and balances they will succeed.
January 31, 2008
5:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Rangerjoe1 writes:
I guess we we're lied to again by our politicians. Ref. C was a lie!
January 31, 2008
6:22 a.m.
Suggest removal
vudumom writes:
I knew this would happen.Who pays for these roads?The citizens.Not the illegals on our roads,with no licenses(they don't have to pay for one)no insurance,(we have to pay extra just to protect ourselves),and no tag fees because they buy junkers or get a family member that is legal,they get temporary tags and keep them forever or steal another one,(why else would there be a rash of stolen temp tags? ).
Some people will say ,How can you make this an illegal alien problem?Well it's because they use our roads but do not pay their way.It's stated in the reasons above.
Once again the citizens get hosed.
Did the people who voted for change actually think we were going to get change? That we were going to get someone looking out for us?Shame on you.
Let's not forget how many illegals packed into vans use Colorado roads to get here or somewhere else.Maybe Ritter will give them a discount.
January 31, 2008
6:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
glowrock writes:
Why discuss real road funding issues when we can turn this into another illegal immigrant rant session? Yay!
January 31, 2008
7:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
my3pugs writes:
Road funding would be a non-issue for if only the illegals using them would pay their fees? Maybe we could get them to pay for health care too!
January 31, 2008
7:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnsjohn writes:
...and a real issue is why the important points made here and questions asked are not being reported and pursued by our crack watch-dog news organizations. Where has all the tax money gone?
Is it that the Fourth Estate isn't doing its job?
January 31, 2008
7:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
This is complete Boolsheet.
Let’s go after the middle class again! We can ALWAYS get the money from them, can't we?
The greedy and the lazy will miss us terribly when we are finally gone, taxed and redistributed out of existence. Both groups will self-destruct without a benefactor to support them. It will fun to watch.
January 31, 2008
7:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
GeeTee writes:
Enough with the tax increases! I have lived in CO for four years and have not seen a single tax increase denied during that short span. CO should correct its spending habits and keep its hands out of our pockets. $100 more to register a vehicle for the privilege of driving in CO?! Oregon looks better every day!
January 31, 2008
7:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
denverinfidel writes:
Bill is exactly right. And don't forget how many times we were told Ref C is "not a tax increase". Right. And now our lovely govn'r is going to raise "fees", not "taxes".
You put crooked socialist lawyers in power and the results are always the same. The gov't will always spend every cent of your money, and given the opportunity, come back for more over and again.
Here's to hoping Ritter does something else really stupid (like the shady state ee union directive) and the recall talk gets louder.
January 31, 2008
8:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
cforevereyez and others:
You don't know what you voted on, do you.
Ref C's set-aside for roads was meant to pay off the bonds that would have been authorized in Ref D.
BUT...
You people voted in Ref C while voting DOWN Red D. Therefore, there are no road bonds for Ref C to pay for... not the fire and police pensions. YOU VOTED DOWN THE ROAD REPAIRS!
Now you're complaining that Ref C isn't fixing the roads... you stupid voters, youvoted road repairs down.
What a stupid electorate indeed. You vote things down then complain they aren't being done. Get educated before you comment in such an uninformed way.
January 31, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
Ritter never met a tax hike he didn't like.
January 31, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
my3pugs writes:
The road repairs suggested are not in the budget, the money has to come from taxpayers, there is no other place to get it from. You, through your Representatives can decide what to do. You can gnash your teeth and wail about how much the state already takes and spends, but most of you would likely complain that the state takes anything and spends all of it. No one likes everything the state spends money on, fact of life.
January 31, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
Time to recall Ritter.
It'll make a great slogan....."Recall Ritter"
January 31, 2008
9:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Bad day to talk about more money for CDOT when they really blew taking care of the roads for a little 2-3inch snow storm that ended - over 8 hours before the morning rush!
I think our state roads and hiways do need some attention, but let proportion that increase by the VALUE of the care too and not just weight.
Lets get those driving Escalades, and Lexuses, and BMW's to pay an average of well above $200 and the take that averavge for the rest of us back to something under 50.
and BTW where are out tax monies from gasoline going? I think colorado has one of the highest gas tax rates in the western US!!!
January 31, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
HankRearden writes:
Just wait for the CO2 tax that is surely coming. $25/ton. Average Xcel customer's annual tax bill will be $175. Under Ritter, the whole state is becoming one big Boulder.
January 31, 2008
10:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
farsidefan writes:
These road and bridge conditions are the legacy left behind by years of Gov Owens leadership.
Bottom line: bridges need work. If they fail, you will all scream about the lazy state inspectors not doing their jobs. " We pay the salaries of those worthless SOBS ! "
I find it interesting that Colorado has some of the highest speed limits of all the neighboring states, yet we have the poorest roads.
January 31, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Theoldguy writes:
Stop complaining and ask for the legislation to allow another 25% increase in you income tax rate. Eventually they will be able to solve very problem. If not then the only wise thing to do would be to increase the tax rate another 25%. Eventually the citizens will re-enter the work force as government employees, commit suicide or move. Problem solved. No more whiners. (Lessons learned from a Communist state)
January 31, 2008
10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
glowrock writes:
Colorado most certainly does NOT have one of the highest state gas tax rates in the western U.S... In fact here are the tax rates per gallon (note per GALLON, not per DOLLAR)
CO: 22 cents/gal
CA: 18 cents/gal (+ sales taxes, local taxes)
AZ: 18 cents/gal
KS: 24 cents/gal
MT: 27.75 cents/gal
NE: 25.4 cents/gal
NV: 23 cents/gal
NM: 17 cents/gal
OR: 24 cents/gal
TX: 20 cents/gal
WA: 28 cents/gal
WY: 14 cents/gal
Kinda looks like Colorado's near the middle of the pack, honestly. And no mention of gas taxes can go without registration costs, along with of course overall state and local tax rates. Highway funding comes from multiple sources, not just fuel taxes and registration fees.
Wyoming is a different animal, especially with the huge mineral royalties it receives every year. I think Colorado would do well to make mineral severance taxes more equal to the rest of the Intermountain West, and assign perhaps half of those increased taxes to highway construction/renovations.
January 31, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
my3pugs writes:
Recall Ritter takes 633,000 signatures, good luck. Probably need 750,000 to be sure you get enough valid ones. Inspectors should be allowed to red tag roads and bridges and start forcing closures, that would get some notice. As it is, looking at a bridge and seeing that it is going to need work "soon" is about as much as can be done, there is still not enough money for all the work that needs to be done.
January 31, 2008
10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
mexcellent writes:
Blame Canada!
January 31, 2008
10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
JustSayin writes:
AC, the RMN needs more intelligent and knowledgeable posters like you. It doesn't shut up the idiotic ranters, but it does gives some of us hope that flat world FoxNews dittoheads haven't (totally) taken over the world (or RMN postings!).
I particularly like the 'weight' idea of this - and I drive a truck, so this will cost me some extra. And I'd also like to see the gasoline tax change to a percentage rather than a flat per gallon fee - that'd would keep us up with inflation. I am part of the community and I don't mind paying my fair share.
January 31, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Glowrock - thanks for finding that good info! not as bad or high as I thought actually - where did you get the info? I have also heard in the past that our Vehicle Reg cost were high compared to other states? There is also a Federal component to the tax on gas, and think it is at lest another $.20/gal -how much of that do we get back from the fed that actually gets put toward roads and hiways (not RTD and light rail...)
January 31, 2008
10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
NICE ONE, mexcellent!!!!!!!
I needed a little chuckle.
January 31, 2008
11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Ther goes your $600.00 federal tax rebate.
January 31, 2008
11:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
Diff -- the federal gas tax is 18.4 cents a gallon, has been for a while. Note it's per-gallon, same as the state gas tax, not indexed to the price of gas. That's important because it means it doesn't keep pace with inflation. Gas tax in CO hasn't gone up since 1991. What's heavy construction industry inflation since then?? There's your dilemma right there.
Also, I don't know why people here seem to think RTD gets any of this. NONE of your Colorado gas taxes or vehicle registration fees goes to RTD -- none. Whatever small component of the federal gas tax goes to Federal Transit Admin, some trickles back to RTD, but most of the fed money goes to roads too.
It's funny that people here scream "I pay enough already to gold-plate the roads" without realizing they're actually paying crap, and reaping the results in potholes, poor paving, unsafe bridges, etc.
January 31, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Fireball writes:
It makes much more sense to fund roads & bridges with an increased gas tas. That way the gas guzzling SUV's and the illegals all pay their fair share and the added cost gives all of us incentive to save gas. I walk or ride my bike to a vanpool location to help the environment, reduce highway congestion and greatly save on my commuting expenses. My wife commutes by light rail. Why should I be charged an extra $100 registration for my car sitting in the garage? I also own two classic cars that see about 2000 miles per year. An extra $100 on each of these garage queens is extremely unfair. Give us a higher gas tax if needed, it is the only way to share equally among all road users.
January 31, 2008
11:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
anteup writes:
Why not look into where the money they already have is going. How can cdot give hundreds of thousands in grants for projects like "the beautification of main street" for little mountain towns if our bridges are in such dire need? Why do they always spend for "wants" then stick it to the taxpayer once again for "needs"? If this is such a big emergency that they have to up fees because they can't wait to ask the taxpayers (who may say no), why not use lottery money, I'm sure we can do without giving grants for pet park projects until our roads are safe enough to get to them. Why is it the feds say we need to get more money to the people while the local governments try to figure out how to take more? WAKE UP people, exactly where is your tax money going now? It is time to get Ritter out.
January 31, 2008
11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
LoFat writes:
When will people learn? When a politician says "This is not a tax" it has the same meaning as a used car salesman putting his hand on your shoulder and saying "Trust me".
It usually has the same results.
January 31, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Thanks AC,
Again tho I believe I have saw signs at gas pumps (not recently however) stating the price includes state and federal taxes of something like 50 odd cents per gallon? So the 22 and the 18.4 don't add up to that.
I was thinking too that some of the federal revenue sharing might indirectly come from the Federal gas tax? and that bounces back to us some via the federal monies that help to fund RTD. However it works I am not sure that we get a full 18.4 cents back for every gallon of gasoline sold in Colorado! (guess some years we could get more but I'd bet that is rare)
As far as the tax gas being made a percentage instead of per gallon; I'd have to disagree with that idea as a suggestion. It could make forecasting revenue from gas sales very tricky for the state, and we could end up short should gas prices drop for any significant length of time. It could also give the state an unfair premium when gas prices spike. The gallons sold per year would be a much easier and consistent way to look at revenues coming in, and tax those who use more to pay more...
One thing that keeps popping up here that is utterly none-sense is to to somehow blame our lack of revenue for roads on illegals?
How stupid is that?
January 31, 2008
12:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Awal writes:
Just wait also, because if this does pass, there will be an inevitable backlash of rural/mountain towns demanding a share of the dollars that well exceeds their contribution (based on # of cars or gals. of gasoline sold). This will become, in part, a wealth redistribution from the Denver area to the non-metro areas of Colorado.
For whatever reason, Ritter seems to have a knack for doing the exact wrong thing all of the time. He'd better be making plans for life after being a one-term governor.
January 31, 2008
1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
mrs_ollie writes:
Fireball I absolutely agree with you. Increasing the gasoline tax would unquestionably be the fairest way to place the burden of repairing the roads on those that use them most, thereby creating most of the damage. Having paid $700 last year for registration, I am nauseaus to think that that bill would be even higher this year. I drive 12 miles a day!!!
January 31, 2008
2:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
$700 just for the registration on your car - no sales taxes left unpaid when you bought?
That must be one of those Escalades or BMW's I was talking about.
?!?!?!?
January 31, 2008
2:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
What? Democrats and RINO's lied to everyone when they promoted Ref C?
Shocking to learn (again and again and again) that the tax loving Democrats and their RINO clones lied again.
January 31, 2008
2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
Hey, Diff and others, FYI here's a link to a table of gas taxes by state; fed rate is, as I noted, 18.4 cents. Don't know where you'd have seen a sticker saying 50 cents.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastax...
January 31, 2008
5:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
A while back when prices were on the rise and first headed upwards of $2.50/gal. I think it was 'marketing' to try and keep people from bit*hin at the store clerk about the gas prices, I should not have taken it as truth (from an oil company...)
Check out the DOE web site - This Week in Petroleum - good priceing info there as well - weekly report comes out and they email you a link. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twi...
Nite all!
have an Ice trip home