FUTURE OF HIGHWAYS IN MISSOURI HINGES ON FUNDING SOURCES

It was in 1987 that the Missouri Highways and Transportation Department began a new era for the state. That year saw voter passage of Proposition A, a four-cent fuel tax for roads and bridges. The department committed to Missouri voters that if they approved the measure, certain identified Prop A projects would be completed in a timely manner. With voter approval, the department had a bold, 15-year plan declaring how this money would be used for new construction through the year 2002.

Even after that tax increase, Missouri had one of the nation's lowest fuel taxes. One former highway commissioner called Prop A "a glorified resurfacing program." Still, it was a start.

A few years later, the General Assembly approved yet more funding by adopting a three-phase (2-cent, 2-cent, 2-cent) fuel tax increase over four years. This six-cent increase will be fully in place in 1996.

Road and bridge construction involves a complex mix of federal and state funds. The 15-year plan was heavily reliant on federal money. The federal government changed the rules with passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. Under this federal law, Missouri highway officials at first believed the state would receive substantially more federal tax money. It was on this basis that the ambitious projections were made for the 15-year plan.

Soon, though, Missouri highway officials discovered that federal funds would not flow as promised. Even more disconcerting, however, in recent months they announced that they were billions off, on the low side, in cost projections for finishing the plan. With a candor rare in government, commissioners owned up to their mistaken projections.

The commission regrouped by adopting a rolling, three-year construction program within the context of a 15-year plan. Given the vagaries of federal funding, this is probably the best that can be hoped for.

At the same time, the unrealistic goals for the old, 15-year plan and the advancement of Prop A projects have been revised. The original promises will be kept, and the high-priority projects, the commission now says, will be under contract by 1998.

Now, a new wrinkle enters the equation. Since 1928, Missouri has been a pay-as-you-go state for roads and bridges. Last year, the General Assembly passed legislation granting to the commission the authority to borrow up to $500 million by issuing bonds for road construction. The law also included a provision that lawmakers must approve any bonding plan exceeding $25 million. The commission's staff is recommending the issuance of bonds to finance much of this road construction and to allow swifter completion of projects, as is done in many other states.

The verdict is out on the wisdom of this strategy. The public desire seems to be to avoid debt and deficit financing. But the public cries out for faster completion of needed projects, and bonding would facilitate this goal. St. Louis needs a new bridge. The exploding Branson area's needs are sorely pressing. Here in Southeast Missouri, needs include the Nash Road project, the new Mississippi River bridge and the completed four-laning of Highway 60. The commission has merely approved the concept of bonding and has directed staff to provide a specific plan for repayment without excessively mortgaging the future. It is the viability of the payment plan that will decide the future of highway bonds in Missouri.

The commission should be commended for its candor in disclosing the embarrassing fact that its 15-year plan had to be abandoned. Missourians await with keen interest as the commission proceeds to review and possibly approve a bonding plan for building the highways of the 21st century.