Measures Would Make State Pay for Upkeep of Toll Roads

Despite opposition from San Francisco Bay Area lawmakers who charged that Orange County was being given an unfair advantage, state Sen. John Seymour (R-Anaheim) on Monday moved the county’s proposed toll roads one step closer to construction.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved two measures that would declare the Foothill and Eastern toll road routes state highways, ensuring that the state’s taxpayers would pay for their maintenance after they are built with toll revenues.

Seymour fought off proposed amendments to the measures by senators who said they wanted the state to give the same treatment to existing toll bridges that Seymour wants to give the county’s toll roads.

Bridges Should Be Eligible

Sen. Barry Keene (D-Benicia) said toll bridges in the Bay Area and San Diego, most of which are now maintained by toll revenues, should be eligible for taxpayer-financed upkeep.

Of the state’s nine toll bridges, five are maintained with toll revenues and four from state funds, according to the California Department of Transportation.

Under Seymour’s bill, Keene said, “Orange County gets to decide which highways are built and when, and the public then gets to operate them and maintain them and pay the costs of those indefinitely down the line.

“What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If we’re going to do it here, we ought to do it everyplace.”

But Seymour said Orange County’s toll roads would be different because current law requires that the tolls be lifted once construction is paid for. He said Orange County motorists would be doing state taxpayers a favor by paying for construction of the roads out of their own pockets. It is only fair, he said, that the state agree to maintain the thoroughfares.

Feared a Veto

Seymour said he would support a separate move by Keene and Sens. Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) and Quentin L. Kopp (I-San Francisco) to provide for taxpayer-supported maintenance of all toll bridges. But he wanted to keep such language out of his bill because he feared that Gov. George Deukmejian might veto the bill because of the extra maintenance costs--estimated to start at $5 million annually.

“They are trying to leverage my bills with hostile amendments that may well conclude in my bills being vetoed,” Seymour said. “That’s unfair.”

Seymour was able to remove an amendment Keene had earlier inserted in one of the bills and defeat identical language Keene proposed for the second measure. Then he won easy committee approval--on votes of 8 to 2 and 8 to 3--to send the bills to the full Senate, where Seymour intends to take them up later this month.

One of the bills would designate the Eastern route, from the Riverside Freeway in Yorba Linda to the Santa Ana Freeway in Irvine, as California 241. The other would designate the Foothill route, from the Eastern Transportation Corridor east of Irvine to Interstate 5 near San Clemente, as California 7.

Both bills prohibit the use of state highway funds on the planning, development or construction of the roads.