Several major bridges are presently under construction around America, including a new East Span on the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge in California, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge Second Span in Washington, the Driscoll Bridge on the Garden State Parkway in New Jersey and the Woodrow Wilson Bridge in Washington, DC. Only the last is being funded by taxpayer revenues because the District manages to get special federal dispensation. The other three are all being financed with toll revenues. Major bridge projects in planning are the replacement of the Goethals Bridge in New Jersey-New York and the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson River in New York. Both of these will be financed with tolls, probably as toll concessions.
The vast majority of great river crossings in the U.S. and around the world are toll financed because they are too expensive to be funded by motorist taxes. The annual money from gas taxes, whether at the federal or state level, almost never generates the funds to pay for such bridges or tunnels. Whereas a road can be built incrementally as money becomes available, a great bridge has to be built in one hit.
The realistic choice, then, that faces the St. Louis region is between using toll financing and deferring indefinitely construction on the bridge. Tolling could be done by a collaborative arrangement between the two states or it could be done under Missouri jurisdiction on Missouri territory.
There are, therefore, four logical options for toll financing:
(1) Bi-state toll bridge commission
(2) Missouri toll bridge commission or DOT toll division
(3) Bi-state call for private sector proposals for a toll concession
(4) Missouri call for private sector proposals for a toll concession
The first could require formation of a bi-state agency or use of a current agency with similar powers. It would require complementary legislation in each state. As an interstate compact, it most likely would require the U.S. Congress to grant it Constitutional standing through U.S. legislation, as well.
The second option is for Missouri to toll traffic of the new bridge on its side of the river by forming a Missouri Toll Bridge Authority, or even as a Toll District within Missouri DOT. Any of these public entities could issue bonds based on the prospective toll revenues.
Other options are to call for investor proposals to finance, build and operate a toll concession, sometimes referred to as a Public-Private Partnership (PPP). Again, this could be done on a bi-state basis (Option 3) or unilaterally by Missouri for toll collection strictly on Missouri territory (Option 4).
It would be more desirable for the concession to be done cooperatively by the two states. This would give Illinois a formal say in the terms of the concession and ensure representation of Illinois interests. It would also emphasize the regional character of the bridge. As a bi-state toll concession, both states would be represented on the selection panel and have a formal role in setting the terms of the concession contract. Moreover, Illinois residents have legitimate concerns about tolling that need to be addressed. The scope of this study did not include legal consultation on matters relating to variable tolling.