Following a debate and party-line vote (16-8) on April 10, Branford's Republican majority governing body, the Representative Town Meeting (RTM), is sending a message to Hartford: No Tolls.

The contentious plan, which has become a Democrat vs. Republican item in Hartford, calls for raising $800 million from tolling, based on a proposal made by Gov. Ned Lamont. The proposal raises the idea of installing more than fifty tolls on all major highways across the state. A November, 2018 Connecticut Dept. of Transportation Tolling Options Evaulation Study lists potential toll rates for CT residents (with an EZ-pass and 20 percent commuter discount) averaging 4.4 cents per mile during peak hours and 3.5 cents during off peak hours (see the full study here). At present, the state's legislature is addressing several toll implementation bills. 

The Branford RTM's resolution in opposition to installing tolls on local and state roads was brought by Republican RTM member Marc Riccio (District 6). It states the RTM believes secondary roads in Branford will be dramatically impacted by vehicles attempting to bypass tolls in the area, especially commercial vehicles and tractor trailers.

The resolution lists negative effects on Branford including: impacts on residents' quality of life and the scenic character and atmosphere of the Town; increased maintenance costs borne by the Town and taxpayers due to road damage; crowding of secondary roads; increased traffic accidents; disruption to pedestrians; increased traffic congestion and related safety concerns such as delayed emergency response time to accidents; and discouraging retail establishments as well as shopping at local businesses, creating a competitive disadvantage, increased costs and decreased convenience to residents.

Although the political side of the argument wasn't raised in the language of the resolution, it was raised during discussion and debate by the RTM ahead of the vote.

"This is a hot topic right now in the state of Connecticut," said Riccio, in comments to the RTM on April 10.

"One billion in revenue goes into Connecticut annually – where is it?" asked Riccio. "Money is being diverted, and not going toward the highway system. [The] solution is we need to reduce the overhead and the size of Connecticut government, and make safety and infrastructure the state's priority; not by charging more taxes."

Instead of tolls, Republican legislators in Hartford have proposed borrowing $700 million from the state's General Fund, instead of increasing taxation, to fund highway repair and infrastructure needs. Democrats are opposed to the idea, saying too much has already been borrowed for building and other projects.

Riccio also questioned how the state can guarantee the proposed toll revenue would in fact be used for highways when the state can't deliver on promises to use lottery and casino revenue to fund education needs.

"We have seen this movie played before," said Riccio. "Where's the money? [Hartford] has siphoned off the people's money for 40 years. This sends a message to Hartford that we've had enough."

Riccio also asked and answered some questions he felt citizens might ask of those opposing tolls, including "...why should Connecticut allow non-residents to drive through our state free of charge?"

He said studies show non-residents only compromise 30 percent of traffic state highway traffic, leaving 70 percent of collected toll charges on residents.  Other hypotheticals answered by Ricco noted it's against federal law to toll only non-residents at state entry points, and also against federal law to limit tolling to only tractor trailers traveling state highways.

Leading the RTM Democratic opposition to the resolution was a letter read into the record from RTM Democratic Minority Leader Chris Sullivan (District 6), who couldn't attend the April 10 meeting due to work-related travel. Sullivan urged the RTM to vote against supporting the resolution.

"I do not believe implementing [tolls] would generate more traffic on secondary highways in Branford," stated Sullivan, asking if that assumption in the proposed resolution was based on traffic studies or speculation.  He noted studies show the state's roads, bridges and rails need significant investment, with CT roads rated at a D+ by the CT Society of Civil Engineers.

With projected costs showing the state needs to come up with $800 million for needed transportation repairs and upgrades, "...tolls is the only logical way to bridge this gap," Sullivan wrote.

Sullivan said that bonding to improve state highways will create a burden of cost that will be "paid 100 percent by Connecticut residents."

In other areas, Sullivan also cited a traffic study (CDM Smith, Boston MA) showing 40 percent of CT traffic is out-of-state vehicles. Additionally, he pointed out neighboring states all have tolls. 

Sullivan also characterized the proposed resolution as an act of "irresponsible governance." On April 10, RTM Democrat Peter Hentschel (District 2) further reiterated the Democratic members' feeling that sending the resolution to the state was "inappropriate." Hentschel said that, instead, citizens and the RTM should lobby the town's state representatives to have opinions carried to the state.

"We discussed this in caucus and we feel this is a state issue, with very many complex facets [and] most of those facets have not been clarified...there's been very little research that's been presented to us to be able to evaluate them," said Hentschel. "And we feel that it's inappropriate for the RTM to deliberate on this type of a resolution at this time. We're not voting to the issue of tolls, to the issue of traffic, to the issue of traffic --we're voting 'no' on a precedent that this resolution sets. I think it would be the beginning of a slippery slope. There are innumerable statewide issues that will be coming up that people on the RTM may feel some interest in, but to use the RTM to make statements to the state is an inappropriate use of our RTM time."

RTM Republican Majority leader Ray Ingraham (District 5) disagreed with Hentschel, saying he felt it is the job of the RTM to make sure the state is aware of the town's position on important state issues.

"I feel the opposite – this is our job. We bring things to the RTM to discuss. We do enormous actions – we spent months and months on a fracking ordinance, which [was the town] directing the state to make state laws on fracking. We're doing the same thing with plastic bags; we're pushing the state to make laws," said Ingraham.

The RTM is currently reviewing a proposed ordinance restricting the use of plastic bags in town; on April 10, the item was re-referred to be discussed at the next RTM meeting.

Several RTM members on both of the aisle rose to make further statements, with Republicans speaking in support and Democrats in opposition. Both sides agreed that not enough information has been available from the state on how instituting tolling along I-95 will impact towns, taxpayers and traffic. However, no RTM member made a motion on April 10 calling for the RTM to wait for more information before taking a vote on the resolution.

Following the April 10 RTM roll call vote in support of the resolution, it will be submitted to Governor Ned Lamont and the Connecticut State Legislature, including Branford's state representatives, Sean Scanlon (D, District 98), Robin Comey (D, District 102) and senator Christine Cohen (D, District 12), Ingraham told Zip06/The Sound.

First Selectman Jamie Cosgrove, who attended the April 10 RTM meeting, told Zip06/The Sound while he recognizes the state "needs to do something" to address highway infrastructure needs; he felt the night's debate showed both sides need more information on the toll proposal; and that the state needs to provide it.

Cosgrove said he has concerns about "congestion tolling" (peak hour rate charges).

"People need have predictability and stability in their own financial planning; and if you introduce congestion tolling, there's that uncertainty when they commute to work," said Cosgrove. "That's different from someone just cutting through state when, all of the sudden, a congestion toll is $10 to get through that gantry -- that's not going to probably impact their decision to do that.  But when you're talking about someone relying on their commute to work, that's where I have some concerns."

Roll Call Vote Results

RTM members in attendance on April 10 voted on party lines, with Republicans for the resolution and Democrats against.

RTM Republicans voting in favor of the resolution on April 10 were Anthony Alfone (District 6), Tricia Anderson (District 7), Peter Black (District 3), Donald Conklin (District 5), Joseph Gordon (District 1), Lindsay Greenberg (District 1), Kevin Healy (District 7), Ray Ingraham (District 5), Darren Lawler (District 4), John Leonard (District 5), Ed Prete (District 6), Marc Riccio (District 6), James Stepanek (District 4), Frank Twohill (District 1), James Walker (District 2) and George Wells (District 1).

RTM Democrats voting against the resolution on April 10 were Tom Brockett (District 7), Ray Dunbar (District 2), Jessica Everlith (District 1), Peter Hentschel (District 2), Peter Jackson (District 3), Cynthia Lombardi (District 4), Shahida Soomro (District 4), Kathi Traugh (District 5).