Road Funding Approach Summary
- Increase our emphasis on preventative road maintenance practices.
- Utilize road “reclaim and repave” practices instead of road reconstruction whenever possible.
- If there is a need for additional money to fund road improvements, we must inform residents about the need and then put forth a request in the form of a referendum. This approach keeps residents in charge of their government. Voters are then able to approve or reject the referendum request.
Facts:
The Town Board stopped collecting financially harmful special assessment proceeds in 2021. Yet, we have been able to successfully maintain our roads these past three years:
- Without raising property taxes
- Without adding to our level of long-term debt, and
- Without sacrificing road quality.
The Town Board was able to eliminate the use of special assessments for funding road improvement work without raising taxes primarily by stopping the practice of automatically urbanizing all roads when they were reconstructed.
Instead, the needs of each road were analyzed. Those roads that were determined to need urbanization were urbanized. Others were not urbanized. The practice of keeping ditches and swales for roadside drainage is not only more cost effective, it is also better for the environment. Fewer pollutants flow into state waterways. Downstream flooding is reduced. Fewer costly stormwater retention ponds are needed, and system maintenance costs are lower.
Road Funding Focus:
Looking ahead, I believe our focus needs to include:
- Increased preventative maintenance. We need to begin road maintenance sooner than has been the practice in the past. This primarily involves coating road surfaces in order to prevent water from infiltrating the road surface. This practice will help delay the formation of surface cracks and potholes. The old adage that says “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is wise advice for many facets of life, including road upkeep.
- Increased use of “reclaiming and repaving” road surfaces. Too often in the past we have overlooked reclaiming and repaving road surfaces, and instead made the extremely costly decision to rebuild road bases that still had good life left in them.
If a road base is truly deteriorated, the base needs to be replaced. However, it is my observation that at times, decisions have been made to replace road bases sooner than necessary, and without analyzing and considering all of the available options. This costly practice is not taxpayer friendly.
The difference in cost between “reclaiming and repaving” a road versus reconstructing it can be enormous. For example, the cost to reconstruct a half-mile section of N. Gillett Street was estimated to be $1,330,000. The Board instead decided to “reclaim and repave” the road, because it was believed the road base was still in good condition. The estimated cost to reclaim and repave was $195,000. The difference is a savings of $1.1 million. If maintained properly, this road should last 25-30 years.
The practice of reclaiming and repaving roads is a great value. Even if a reclaimed and repaved road would only last 15 years, instead of 25-30 years, the cost difference over a 60-year period is still tremendous.
Even after a road is reconstructed, it will still need to be reclaimed and repaved in about 30 years. Using the example of N. Gillett Street as our model, the total cost over 60 years to maintain the road would be more than $1.5 million. The cost to reclaim and repave the road over the same period is only $800,000. (Note: This cost calculation conservatively assumes that reclaim and repave road projects will only last 15 years, instead of 25-30 years.) When inflation is figured in, the cost difference between reclaim and repave projects and reconstruction projects is even greater. Reclaiming and repaving is a practice we need to consider whenever possible.
There are also other road maintenance approaches that need greater consideration than has been the case in the past. For example, making use of a product called “geo-grid” can help extend the life of a roadway. Geo-grid is a product that has been gaining in popularity in some municipalities. Research is needed to see if, how and where we can benefit from its use.
Future Road Funding:
Undoubtedly, at some point in the future, it may be necessary to consider a general tax levy increase in order to fund our roads, especially if inflation continues to cause prices to rise.
When that day comes, the proper approach for a Town Board to take is not to bring back unfair and financially harmful special assessments. Rather, the right action for a Town Board to take is to inform residents about the road-funding need, and then to bring the matter to a public referendum in order to keep our residents in a proper position of leadership. Residents should determine how their tax dollars should be spent.
If residents want the Town board to spend more money on road improvements, they will approve the referendum. Conversely, if residents do not want a tax increase, they will not approve the referendum and instruct the Board to make necessary management decisions to prioritize Town spending within the parameter provided. This approach to future road funding reflects the leadership role of our residents in our Town government.