New York Thruway toll increase reaches far beyond the roadway itself
By Aaron Ladage
Land Line staff
Jim Schreiner hasn’t paid an extra penny since the New York Thruway increased its tolls on trucks by more than 35 percent.
In fact, his toll costs have actually dropped to nothing – since the hike went into effect on May 15, the Farmington, NY, resident and OOIDA member has completely stopped using the 641-mile Thruway system.
Instead, he’s taking the back roads – stretches of state and county highway that throttle his speed and shave his fuel mileage. This is more than a few extra minutes tacked onto his workday. Instead of a four-hour jaunt from Rochester to Albany, he’s spending six and a half hours – more than two extra hours a day – on the road.
“Even at a standard 35 percent increase across the board, that’s going to cost me an extra $2,000 a year,” Schreiner said. “It’s a tradeoff. We run slower, and the fuel mileage doesn’t vary that much … but it’s still cheaper than running on the toll road.”
Schreiner said the number of extra trucks he started seeing on side roads, just weeks after the increase, was noticeable. And he’s not alone.
Michael Rosen, vice president of government relations for the Food Industry Alliance of New York, said the high daily demands and low profit margins of grocers could push more trucks off the Thruway.
“We understand that the Thruway has a capital program they want to pursue, but nonetheless, it will affect business, and some businesses will respond by driving on alternate routes,” Rosen said.
Rosen said the end result of trucks and companies using alternate routes could be higher prices for consumers.
“I think retailers are going to start looking at what it costs to transport those products in, and it very well could have an inflationary impact,” Rosen said. “We already have the high cost of motor fuel, so this added to the already increased cost is going to have to be reflected somewhere.”
Indeed, some retailers are looking into moving their entire operations off the Thruway.
David Barth, transportation team leader for Wegmans Food Markets, which operates 51 stores in New York, said his company would consider alternate routes for all of its drivers.
“We will look at other opportunities should the rates go through as proposed,” said Barth at a public hearing for the toll increase held in Rochester on April 21. “As a rule, we don’t pass additional charges on to our customers. But we feel very strongly with the amount of increase of the tolls, the amount of trucks that we run on the Thruway on a daily basis, will probably force us to use alternate routes.”
Barth said Wegmans has about 65 to 75 drivers pulling tandem 48-foot trailers – a length only allowed on the Thruway – each day through New York. If the grocery chain does decide to use alternate routes, each of these tandem trucks would have to be broken down into single rigs, doubling the number of drivers needed to approximately 150.
And still, it’s an option that might be cheaper than paying higher tolls on the Thruway.
Even though Schreiner is part of the crowd moving off the Thruway, he’s aware of the dent it will make on the more rural parts of his state.
“The impact isn’t just on the trucking industry and the people that use the Thruway,” Schreiner said. “The real impact is on the little towns – those people don’t even know where the Thruway is. They live 50 or 60 miles away, and they’re the ones who are going to suffer.”
By Aaron Ladage
Staff Writer
A bill that would have changed the requirements of legal consent for police searches of vehicles in Texas has been vetoed by the governor.
On June 17, Gov. Rick Perry vetoed SB1195, which would have required officers to have either probable cause or obtain written or recorded oral consent before they could search a vehicle. The bill was passed in the state House May 25, and cleared the Senate in April.
Currently, the criminal procedure code in Texas only states that people should not be subjected to unreasonable searches.
According to The Victoria Advocate, the bill, which was introduced by Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, D-McAllen, was not expected to but did pass in the legislature, only to be struck down by the governor’s veto power.
In a veto statement, Perry said he believes the state’s constitution and case law already provide sufficient protection from unreasonable searches.
“There is insufficient information now to determine whether signed or taped consent requirements place too onerous a burden on law enforcement or provide additional protections to the public,” Perry said in the statement.
Maine considers adding truck parking along Turnpike
By Mark H. Reddig
associate editor
Maine is considering adding a new rest area – with truck parking – that would serve both the turnpike – which carries Interstate 95 – as well as I-295.
A state official said that one of the chief reasons the state is looking the idea over is the need for more truck parking in the area.
The plan is in the very preliminary stages. However, the state is considering a site already owned by the Maine Turnpike Authority about six miles south of the state capital of Augusta.
The site – about 40 acres – is at mile marker 51 on I-295, and near mile marker 103 on the Turnpike, Bruce Pelletier, a public affairs assistant with the Maine Turnpike Authority, told Land Line. If it is built, the rest area would be accessible from both highways.
“Ideally, that’s where we would want to have it,” Pelletier said.
“It depends on if the financing comes together; and if we can’t secure all the financing for the full project, then there might be an alternative proposal put forth.”
Pelletier is not certain how much truck parking would be included in the rest area. Truck parking in state rest areas is “fairly limited,” Pelletier said, which is “part of the reason why we are looking at building this site, is to accommodate some truck parking.”
Many truckers who work along the East Coast have expressed concerns about the lack of truck parking along the I-95 corridor.
“We are aware that there is a need,” Pelletier said. “If there are people interested in supplying us some information on their view of what the need is, we’d be happy to hear from them.”
Many, if not most, of the design specifics have yet to be worked out – even whether the rest area would be accessible to both north and southbound traffic, he said, although that is likely.
At press time, there is no opposition to building the rest area, but Pelletier said the public in the area has only recently become aware of the project, after a story ran in The Kennebec Journal, the newspaper in Augusta.
“We’ve had contact with some abutting land owners,” he said. “There’s a question as to whether or not it would be built at all. So we haven’t had any vocal opposition to it.”
The rest area plan is just the latest of a series of highway improvements in that area. The state just finished upgrading the southern section of the Turnpike, including widening a 30-mile section and upgrading interchanges and bridges. Upgrading service plazas is the next logical step.
Turnpike officials are trying to work out a financing package that would involve the state’s Department of Transportation and others. If it does move forward, it may not be in operation anytime soon.
“By the time you get to your environmental permits, and you get your design put in, and you get plans done and you secure the financing, it could be two years, it could be seven or eight years; it’s hard to say,” Pelletier said.
If you want to share your view with the Maine Turnpike Authority or tell them about truck parking needs in the area, you can write them at:
MTA
430 Riverside St.
Portland, ME 04103
Or you can write the Maine DOT at:
16 Statehouse Station
Augusta, ME 04333 LL
