Saturday, January 18, 2014

Share the Cost of Bridge Work Equally


Sentinel Editorial
Share the cost of bridge work equally

Posted: Friday, January 17, 2014 12:00 pm


Let’s make a deal.
The Vermont Agency of Transportation recently made the N.H. Department of Transportation an offer. Vermont’s agency would pay the entire cost of rehabilitating the Vilas Bridge, which connects Route 12 in Walpole to downtown Bellows Falls. But then, New Hampshire would pay Vermont’s portion of all future repairs to bridges spanning the Connecticut River until the $4-6 million is repaid.
The motivation for the offer isn’t hard to discern. Since the bridge was closed by the N.H. DOT in 2009, merchants in Bellows Falls have complained their business is off by about 30 percent. That certainly provides some incentive on the river’s west bank to reopen the 84-year-old bridge.
But there are a lot of bridges – and other projects – on New Hampshire’s transportation to-do list, and there has apparently been little furor about lost revenue in Walpole. New Hampshire’s explanation for pushing off work to reopen the Vilas Bridge has centered around the fact that there are two other bridges spanning the river nearby, including the New Arch Bridge, which also leads into Bellows Falls.
At first blush, Vermont’s offer seems like a windfall. The bridge work gets done sooner. New Hampshire doesn’t have to pay immediately. Everyone is happy. However, a spokesman says the N.H. DOT is unlikely to accept, and the reasoning is sound. If the only goal is to reopen this particular bridge, the deal is good.
But that’s not the financial reality. There are 30 bridges spanning the Connecticut River, and New Hampshire is on the hook for nearly all the cost of maintaining or replacing each of them. In the case of the Vilas Bridge, for example, the Granite State is responsible for 93 percent of the cost of any work, while Vermont must pay for 7 percent.
That’s because way back in 1764 King George II of England set the boundary between the states ((SINCE THEY WERE COLONIES THEN, SUGGEST REPLACING "THE STATES" EITHER WITH "NEW HAMPSHIRE AND VERMONT" OR "THE TWO-THEN COLONIES")) as the western shore of the river. Now, George was a lame-duck monarch at that point as far as the American colonies went, but still, the U.S. Supreme Court re-affirmed this boundary in 1934.
Somehow, along the way, this fact led to New Hampshire being stuck with almost the entire tab for any bridge work, even though, as far as we know, none of the 30 Connecticut River Bridges is one-way. No, each of them carries cars both from the Granite State to Vermont, and from the Green Mountain State to New Hampshire. Thus, the benefits of the bridges would appear to be equal for each state.
There may be some instances where a town or city on one side has clearly benefitted from the existence of a particular bridge. In the case of Vilas, that community would appear to be Bellows Falls.
Thus, we find ourselves more intrigued by another deal, this one proposed from this side of the river. Five Cheshire County lawmakers have put forth a bill this session calling((??)) limiting the amount New Hampshire would pay for the overhaul of the bridge to 50 percent, assuming someone else would pay the remaining 50 percent.
Of course, the N.H. Legislature can’t force Vermont to pay more for a bridge repair than it would normally under the two states’ existing agreement. But it would seem in the case of a bridge New Hampshire considers a low priority and Vermont is clearly more eager to see reopened, there might just be some incentive there. In fact, we think the two states should revisit the idea of who’s responsible ((. . . SHOULD REVISIT THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY)) for all bridge work along the border ((TO BETTER REFLECT THE MUTUAL BENEFIT THEY ENJOY)).
The history of the Vilas Bridge is an interesting one. Where it now spans, the very first bridge across the river went up in 1785. And in 1930, when the current bridge was opened, it was dedicated as a “Symbol of Friendship” between New Hampshire and Vermont.
Friends don’t let friends pay 93 percent.

No comments: