Casper Star-Tribune Online

Advanced Search

Wyoming considers tolls on I-80

Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:

trib.popular

Sunday, September 14, 2008 2:05 AM MDT

CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) -- The co-chairman of the Wyoming legislative committee that considers highway funding says the state is continuing to consider tolls for motorists who use I-80.

The Federal Highway Administration announced Thursday that it has rejected an application from Pennsylvania highway agencies to impose tolls on I-80 in that state.

"It will not affect what we are doing," Sen. Michael Von Flatern, R-Gillette, said of the decision on the Pennsylvania application.

Von Flatern is co-chairman of the Legislature's Joint Transportation, Highways and Military Affairs Interim Committee. The committee has been discussing ways to fund maintenance and improvements on the more than 400 miles of I-80 that run across southern Wyoming.

Officials with the Wyoming Department of Transportation say current funding levels are insufficient to pay for required future maintenance of I-80. Keeping the interstate as it is now would cost more than $2 billion over 30 years, without accounting for inflation.

With conservative inflation of 6 percent, WYDOT says the cost to maintain I-80 over the next 30 years will swell to $6.4 billion. Construction inflation recently has been much higher.

Federal funding for interstate highways has been declining. Congress this week voted to increase funding by $8 billion to make up for lost gasoline tax revenues. High gas prices are forcing people to drive less, and that's resulting in less funding for highway projects.

The Federal Highway Administration said Pennsylvania's plan failed to meet federal requirements.

"It doesn't affect our policies on tolling," said Nancy Singer, a Highway Administration spokeswoman. "Each application is unique. In fact it's something we encourage if it works for the states."

Singer said the Highway Administration wants states to look for creative ways to keep up with skyrocketing construction and maintenance costs.

The Pennsylvania application had called for that state's Turnpike Commission to use toll revenue to pay annual lease payments to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. While federal rules require the amount of such payments to be based on objective market valuation, Singer said the application lacked that information.

Dave Kingham, spokesman for WYDOT, said the agency is looking at all its options for I-80.

"We're studying everything," Kingham said, including imposing tolls only on trucks, only requiring tolls on certain segments of the highway or requiring tolls for all vehicles.

Kingham said Pennsylvania's experience will help Wyoming prepare its application if the state decides it needs to impose tolls.

Wyoming's Transportation Committee began discussing a study on the feasibility of tolling at its July meeting and hopes to have a completed study by its October meeting, Von Flatern said.

Even if the Legislature passes enabling legislation, Von Flatern said that wouldn't mean tolls are inevitable. The state is considering options including public/private partnerships and trying to increase federal funding by having the highway, which was closed 30 days in different areas last winter, designated as a critical freight corridor.

While Von Flatern said some Pennsylvania residents and truck drivers were celebrating the federal rejection, he said the decision means taxpayers in that state will facing higher taxes while continuing to subsidize out-of-state highway users or letting the highway deteriorate.


Loggers see competition in woodsman skills		wyoming briefs

Article Rating

Reader Comments

There are 56 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

John wrote on Sep 14, 2008 7:12 AM:

" This is the most ridiculous thing they have come up with yet. Maybe they need to take some of those millins that we have and set some of it aside to prepare for this. "

flounder wrote on Sep 14, 2008 9:22 AM:

" This has been a great idea floating around forever. Lobbyists and the Republicans they own haven't been so hot on it though. Like most conservatives, they'd rather have someone else pay their way. "

i have gas wrote on Sep 14, 2008 10:02 AM:

" Why don't we go ahead and jack the price of gas up a couple more dollars while we're at it? "

Wyo Boy wrote on Sep 14, 2008 1:33 PM:

" These legislators would be wise to look at other states using toll roads. Usually toll revenues simply replace other monies that are, in turn, diverted to other government programs and, in the end, people pay to drive on perpetually crappy roads. Toll revenues, when coupled with bureaucratic oversight, have also been linked to government corruption and organized crime on numerous occasions.

A few words of advice to the Wyoming Legislature: STAY AWAY FROM TOLLS AND THE BUREAUCRACIES THAT ARE CREATED TO ADMINISTER THESE PROJECTS, YOU WILL REGRET IT. IF LEGALLY POSSIBLE, LOOK INSTEAD AT FULLY PRIVATIZING I-80. IF PRIVATIZATION IS POSSIBLE, REQUIRE THE COMPANY TO HIRE WYOMING CITIZENS, PRIVATELY BANK ITS REVENUES IN WYOMING, AND USE WYOMING CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES TO MAINTAIN THE ROAD. ALSO, REQUIRE TIGHT PRIVATE SECTOR ADMINISTERED INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTING AND REVIEW STANDARDS TO ASSURE CORRUPTION DOES NOT GAIN A "TOE HOLD."

Wyoming has a great opportunity to prove that privatization of transportation infrastructure will work. The jobs and financial infusion would also be a great way to help diversify the economy. Let's not blow this opportunity by involving state government and, in turn, inviting bureaucratic disaster. "

Common Sense Economics wrote on Sep 15, 2008 10:09 AM:

" Good. Toll the trucks. They are the ones tearing up the highway. If they have to pass those costs on to customers, that's good too. Charge people in Iowa and Chicago more for their Chinese-made underwear and iPods. I don't really care. If they don't like it, they should make their own or move closer to China. "

Jim wrote on Sep 15, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Toll the trucks, it makes sense. Leave the passeger cars out, they pay their fair share of taxes. It isn't the cars tearing up the interstate.

If you privatize the road, we still pay transportation taxes, and how would they make money off of this, oh yeah by imposing a toll. "

Pay for Use wrote on Sep 15, 2008 2:25 PM:

" The more you internalize the external costs of freight transportation, the more the price of affected goods reflects their true cost of production and distribution. Therefore, it makes sense to toll freight trucks, from a free-market perspective, in order to cover the cost of their damage to highways. Anything less is socialized retail. Toll the stupid trucks. Pass the costs on to the exact customers benefitting from the trucks. Get on with it. "

For Whom The Bell Tolls wrote on Sep 15, 2008 3:05 PM:

" This is a no-brainer for anyone who knows anything at all about how capitalism works. Toll the trucks. Make them pay for the maintenance costs associated with heavy vehicle highway traffic. There are no free lunches in this world. Then the trucks can pass those costs on to their customers, who are the final end-users. It's not rocket science. "

Uinta wrote on Sep 15, 2008 3:16 PM:

" I have not seen a sound economic argument against implementing a freight toll on I-80. Currently the tax bill for this work is being shifted more and more from the feds (who are going broke) to the States. Therefore, unless we want property taxes or business taxes to go up here, we need to make these out-of-state trucking firms (who are the primary I-80 users) pay for the damage they do to the highway. A toll on weight or axles is the simplest and fairest way to do that. What the trucks do in terms of passing that cost on to their customers is up to them. But one thing we should not be doing is continuing a 500 million dollar per year interstate maintenance tax burden for Wyoming, just to ensure cheap delivery of goods from the West Coast to the upper midwest population centers like Chicago, St. Louis, Des Moines. Those people can pay their own way, and pay the real cost of receiving their imported goods. "

Rawlins wrote on Sep 15, 2008 4:15 PM:

" Maintenance cost for railroads is paid privately, and passed on to the customers who get their freight from railroads. Why should highways be any different? WYDOT engineers estimate that on average, a freight truck results in 2,000 - 4,000 times the road damage than a passenger vehicle, per pass. Therefore, the cause of this bloated highway maintenance tax bill is obvious. It's the trucks. And it is a fact that 84% if the freight on I-80 neither originates nor terminates in Wyoming. They are just passing through, using our highway that we pay to fix. So what they don't pay to fix their mess.... we pay in taxes. Make the trucks pay for it, and pass the cost on to their customers. This will keep taxes down, and the charges directed more appropriately at the import consumers, depending on how much they consume. Only a truck lobby or a total idiot could see it any other way. "

Simple wrote on Sep 15, 2008 5:28 PM:

" Ten cents per mile for through commercial trucks. Trucks going to or from Wyoming with at least 50% of their freight are exempt. "

WoundedinPA wrote on Sep 15, 2008 5:32 PM:

" Dear Legislators

Good luck convincing your constituents this is a good idea, we have been getting our butts kicked in PA for trying the same thing. "

Older Than Dirt wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:30 AM:

" I am old enough to remember when certain outfitters said....'If the State charges more for out-of-state deer and elk licenses, people from out-of-state will quit coming here.' Nowadays, that sounds idiotic. Of course they still come here. We just make more revenue off of them when they do. The same applies to out-of-state University tuition, and the same should apply to out-of-state trucking outfits. Toll them for the use. They can pay the premium, or take a hike. A truck that fuels up in Sidney, NE and drives straight through to Salt Lake City adds absolutely nothing to our local economy anyway. But they still put wear and tear on our highway. And they still require enforcement and clean-up when they wreck. All costs to us. "

Olson wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:33 AM:

" I like Simple's idea. What he said in two sentences, the trucking lobbyists will surely combat with 20,000 pages of 'Why it can't work' and 'why the taxpayers owe us a free ride.' Moral to that story: Quit listening to lobbyists and use some common sense for once. "

F. Scott Parker wrote on Sep 16, 2008 10:57 AM:

" Utilizing the existing weight stations (it's been a few years, but I think you folks have them at/near the state entrances to I-80) to collect weight-based tariffs from trucks is a reasonably good idea; start out with relatively reasonable rates and link them to inflation. General tolling is a concept that generally will function for precisely one electoral cycle until reversed. "

Return Value Not Equal To Rocket Science wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:39 PM:

" Then let's get started on this. Toll the trucks. No one needed a study when they raised the price of home heating from 200 a month 300 a month. That happened pretty quick. Or eggs from 99 cents to 3.50 / dozen. Not a lot of calculus on that one either. The industries are already passing on costs to us anyway. We might as well pass some back on to them. This legislature needs to grow a pair. "

Hamm wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:50 PM:

" ...and who will really pay the toll?

Not the trucks.

You and I will pay the toll at the cash register.

Fire all current elected officials reelecting NONE OF THEM.

Let's start fresh.

If the new group fails us, fire them too and try until we find honest, smart civil servants that care about the people that they SERVE. "

trucker wrote on Sep 16, 2008 1:53 PM:

" All you are not thinking. The truckers will just bypass I80 and start using the smaller roads. And all we will have then is alot of torn up small roads. Any way you do it people will find a way around it. "

Toll Solution wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:16 PM:

" I vote Simple for House Speaker. Time to get something done on this, and quit talking about it. "

Martin wrote on Sep 16, 2008 2:36 PM:

" WyoBoy, what are you talking about? You think there's a company out there with enough money to buy I-80 and maintain it? Are you stoned, kiddo? That highway is over 400 miles long, and four lanes wide. A simple forty-dollar freight toll will suffice under the current system. But if you go selling the highway to a private outfit, they'd need to charge $400 per truck, just to get their money back out of it. It does not appear you've actually thought this through. "

McMurray wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:24 PM:

" If out-of-state trucking outfits are the primary source of damage to I-80, then those out-of-state trucking outfits should pay for that damage. Unless someone has a better idea than weight tolls, I don't really see what the big deal is. "

Casper Resident wrote on Sep 16, 2008 3:50 PM:

" Here's an idea: if we are short of highway funds because of the price of gas being so high that people are driving less; let's re-regulate the energy industry, bring the price of gas back down, and then people will drive again and the highway taxes will begin rolling in again. Seriously, a freight toll imposed at the port of entries as each truck enters our state to pay for their use of our highways seems quite appropriate. Keep in mind though that as freight costs rise so do the costs of everything else. "

Go Simple wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:06 PM:

" Simple has the right solution. Write your elected officials and get that idea where it will do some good. "

Other Trucker wrote on Sep 16, 2008 4:32 PM:

" Trucker, the smaller highways have ports of entry also. It's not that complicated. A toll is a toll. Also, no through-bound trucks on I-80 are going to dodge clear up to Casper, over to Lander, down to Kemmerer, to avoid a forty dollar toll on I-80. You're talking about spending an extra $200 on fuel and an extra five hours on the road in Wyoming.... to avoid a forty dollar toll. Ain't gonna happen. I'd rather pay the toll, and add it on to the delivery charge. "

Transport wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:10 PM:

" I've done market research for three different counties on the I-80 corridor, over the past 10 years. 80% of truck trips across Wyoming on I-80 do not result in any commercial stops, where money changes hands. They origninate outside of Wyoming, and are destined for locations outside of Wyoming. And those 80% are not even stopping here for a hamburger. So that has to be factored in when considering the wear and tear they put on our highway, and who should be paying for that use. From that perspective, a frieght toll on such haulers does make some sense. Far more sense than putting the tax burden on to the locals each year. "

Accounting Trick wrote on Sep 16, 2008 5:24 PM:

" We should just let I-80 go back to dirt. Then it will take the truckers three days to get across Wyoming.... and they will HAVE to stop and use our services. Plus we won't have a highway maintenance deficit..... because we won't have any highway to maintain. We can then send that money back to the taxpayers each year, for more pressing expenditures, such as beer and football tickets. "

RLA wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:01 PM:

" If they don't charge a toll, then the very least, the speed limit for trucks, (semi's) should be lowered to 60MPH. Montana and many other states have lower speed limits for trucks. Wyoming needs lower speeds on all highways for trucks! "

Wyo Boy wrote on Sep 17, 2008 7:44 AM:

" Martin, Economic economists estimate there is $500 to $600 billion in capital looking for these types of investments - these are considered very good stable investments. A lot of mutual and income funds invest in these types of projects. Longer privately held toll roads will work, especially on Wyoming I-80, one of only four really viable coast-to-coast interstate corridors across the entire county.

I wasn't clear in the earlier post. Tolls would be require, although revenues wouldn't be flowing into wasteful government general fund accounts where they are at the mercy of politicians, they would be held privately. "

Sandstorm Unit wrote on Sep 17, 2008 9:40 AM:

" WyoBoy, if the highway has to make a profit for private investors, it will cost more to use. The government only has to break even on it, to make it work. Not make a profit. That's the difference. So by converting a public asset to private.... you are adding an unnecessary layer of overhead. Those schemes always cost more in the long run. I was in Iraq for two years, and one of the reasons our operation costs are so bloated there is because of the private 'logistics providers' such as KBR, being paid very large sums of money to do things the military is already able to do on its own, such as cook, set up tents, and deliver supplies. In all past major wars, the U.S. military did this on its own, at a much lower cost to taxpayers. Now the military pays twice. In its normal budget, and through 'supplementals' to cover the middle-men contractors and sub-contractors. In WWII, we didn't even have sub-contractors overseas in the operations theater. We had our military, and that was it. This new privatization scheme only looks good on the surface. What it's really doing is driving new deficits. "

Electronic FastPass wrote on Sep 17, 2008 10:06 AM:

" I have not seen any logical arguments yet for why a simple freight toll would not work on I-80. It puts money back into highway mainenance each year, from the users that are doing the most damage to the highway. We already have the Ports of Entry set up. Pretty much a no-brainer at this point. "

Worth The Ticket Price wrote on Sep 17, 2008 3:49 PM:

" Don't think of it as a toll. Think of it as a cover charge for getting to see the tattooed methamphetamine toothless freak show that is.... Rock Springs. When you think of it that way..... it's money well spent. "

Uinta wrote on Sep 17, 2008 5:36 PM:

" To Worth-The-Ticket-Price: That is the most obnoxious characterization of Rock Springs I have heard yet. You people don't get it. There are quite a few of the toothless meth addicts in Rock Springs who don't even have tattoos. "

WYOTRUCKER wrote on Sep 18, 2008 7:46 AM:

" I see alot of people know very little about economics, road taxes, or what trucks pay for the use of roads. They won't just toll trucks, no other state does that, even if it's presented that way. Also, unlike passenger cars, trucks pay road tax based on the number of miles they drive in a state, not on where they buy fuel. And the guy was right who said the trucks will just go on other roads to get around the toll roads. How many of you spouters have ever been to Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, or any number of other states that have lots of toll roads? Do you think they're living in Utopia? It will end up costing all of us more money, these goods don't get delivered for free, and people in Wyoming pay alot more than those back east to get their goods. "

Other Trucker wrote on Sep 18, 2008 9:02 AM:

" Wyotrucker, you're not thinking clearly. What WYDOT and the Highway Administration are saying is that those taxes the trucking outfits are paying are not even close to being enough for the damage trucks cause to highways. So a toll put directly on the trucks is a way to cover the gap. As for using alternate routes..... this ain't Oklahoma. Last I checked, we don't have a grid of little paved county roads every mile across this state. You tell me an alternate route you'd take to get across Southern Wyoming, just to dodge a $40 toll. You can't cross Southern Wyoming without touching I-80. This ain't Oakie farm country, boy. It's the open desert. Pull your head out of Oz. "

sweetwater wrote on Sep 18, 2008 9:17 AM:

" Put a toll on I-80, but not on I-90 or I-25? It's geography and politics. The republican dominated legislature sees no problem paving roads anywhere except the mostly democratic counties of southern Wyoming. Spend the money equally. "

Priorities wrote on Sep 18, 2008 1:00 PM:

" Sweetwater, I-80 gets five times the truck traffic that I-25 and I-90 get through Wyoming. And costs at least that much more to maintain, according to WYDOT. Starting on I-80 with a toll makes sense. "

George M. wrote on Sep 18, 2008 6:34 PM:

" It seems probable that transcontinental truck traffic, particularly that headed to or from southern California would just displace to I-76/I-70 through Colorado. any headed to the Pacific NW would chose I-90. The route of choice would depend on whether the toll was more or less than the fuel for a longer alternate route.

There could be problems getting Federal approval for this since the Interstates were sited and built largely with Federal money. "

snowbound wrote on Sep 18, 2008 8:09 PM:

" If the tolls are implemented will they be able to keep I-80 open when it snows? "

Elk Mountain wrote on Sep 19, 2008 9:52 AM:

" To Snowbound: It certainly can't get any worse. Tolls would be for maintenance money. Snow plows and driver hours are maintenance. There you go. "

ebmfck wrote on Sep 20, 2008 9:01 PM:

" George M. - We don't get any S Cal. traffic here - that goes down to I-40 and then down to I-10. I have to use I-80 every day and 90% of the traffic is trucks and they think they own the road. If they want to own it, make them buy it. $40 isn't unreasonable, just make sure that loads originating in Wyoming going to a Wyoming destination aren't subject to the toll. "

Sheridan wrote on Sep 21, 2008 12:04 PM:

" Of course the real problem is that the fed gas tax hasen't been adjusted for inflation since 1992. That tax funds the federal highway trust fund which helps funds all federal roads. Because it is a flat rate tax, and gas usage has fallen off due to high cost, the fund has a 8 billion shortfall, the first shortfall in it's history. To make the fund solvent we need to change the gas tax. we can adjust the flat rate higher to keep up with inflation, or make the gas tax a percentage like the sales tax. "

Sans Results wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:07 AM:

" George M, As long as the truck drivers are wearing helmets and do not have any open containers in the cab the Fed's may turn a blind eye to this. Symbolism is always more important than substance in today's PC government. "

Hope for Change wrote on Sep 22, 2008 9:12 AM:

" We've got to get Charley Rangel right on this to determine where money can be made and who should be paying it in. This will ensure that we get park benches and new educational billboards along the route and that they elderly, poor and unemployed are properly taxed to pay for it all (no improvements to the road surface itself of course). "

WY-CO cooperation wrote on Sep 22, 2008 11:38 AM:

" I think Wyoming should collaborate with Colorado and should implement the same toll on both I-80 and I-70. Don't tell me CO is not in the same boat as us with not being able to foot the bill for their maintenance costs. That would cover nearly half of the width of the US and trucker would have less tendency to drop south to I 70 to cut through the Rockies. Truckers should foot the bill for the extra ESALs (Equivilant Single axel Loads) that our on the roads. "

Do It wrote on Sep 22, 2008 1:10 PM:

" A freight toll is the clear economic solution to an economic problem. "

Llyod wrote on Sep 22, 2008 4:08 PM:

" Put the frieght on rail.

Rail is the fastest and safest way to move high volumn cargo.

Trucks should only be used for local distribution, they just waste to much fuel. "

Breaking It Down wrote on Sep 22, 2008 4:57 PM:

" Lloyd is right. We pay for trucks twice:

1) Through our taxes to cover increased road maintenance (WYDOT estimates a semi truck does 2,000 times the road damage of a passenger vehicle); and

2) Through the increased fuel prices that result from all the demand placed on our fuel supply by long-haul trucks driving essentially the same routes that trains could go. Per ton hauled, the Commerce Department estimates that a freight train is 72 X more efficient than trucks, over the same distance. That's 7,200%. Definite room for improvement there.

Trucks should be used primarily for short hauls to go from train warehouses to stores. Other countries already do that. The only reason we've had the long-haul truck industry grow up like it has over the past 40 years, is the enormous government subsidy in highway spending. Long haul trucks over routes such as I-80 (that parallell the train tracks almost exactly), should be tolled to cover the above impacts. "

Shelly wrote on Sep 22, 2008 8:51 PM:

" I find this absurd! We have millions of dollars, lack affordable housing and are told that our natural gas prices will go up 70 percent ! And, now they want to toll our highways? Stop this nonsense! Allow us to play the lottery, say no to natural gas going up again and start paying us dividends like Alaska. Time to share the weath guys. Wages are low, rent is high. You trying to run the rest of us out of Wyoming? I smell corruption. "

Lewiston wrote on Sep 22, 2008 10:09 PM:

" Toll the trucks. Save taxpayers big bucks. "

bridgebuilder wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:26 AM:

" Having built numerous projects for WYDOT I have an idea, cut WYDOT's work force. I was rehabing some bridges on I-80 with a six man crew, but I had 8 WYDOT inspectors watching our work, most of the time out of their pickups, which there were 8 of those also. Talking with the WYDOT Resident Engineer I was told he was short handed, hmmm. WYDOT needs to catch to up with technology, after having worked in other states WYDOT is ten years behind in technology, I kept gettng the response "Thats how we have always done things", WYDOT's way of building roads is out dated, so thier idea is to tax the traveling public who is already paying for the up keep of the road system. Go figure, I never could figure WYDOT out. God help the people of Wyoming. "

Wamsutter Whole Foods wrote on Sep 23, 2008 10:06 AM:

" Shelly, we're talking about tollling freight trucks in order to lighten the general tax burden on regular citizens. Most highway maintenance costs are due to damage from trucks. So what we're talking about is a toll for freight trucks. I agree 100% with your other rants though. I like a little Powerball myself. The sooner the better. And natural gas prices are far too heavily manipulated by outside middle men. God bless the malcontents. If it wasn't for them, we'd still be British. "

Devon wrote on Sep 23, 2008 1:42 PM:

" Rail is the answer people. Lloyd is on the money. Over the road trucking may be fast and flexible but it is costly and raises the danger level on the roads for the rest of us in cars that weigh only one tenth of what a big rig does. "

seventh horseman wrote on Sep 23, 2008 7:22 PM:

" Tolls are the root of all evil. Few things in the universe are less Wyoming than a toll road...an arbitrary barrier in the middle of the road that shakes down people for money. Please tell me the West is still alive. "

Blue Collar Scholar wrote on Sep 23, 2008 10:37 PM:

" Seventh Horseman, the verdict is in. I-80 costs three times more to maintain, than we have money for in the budget. It's going to be tolls on trucks, or higher property taxes and sales tax for everyone else. So toll them.

And to answer your question, shakedowns are VERY Western. For an interesting bit of history on this, see ferry crossings at Casper (1850's), Jack Morrow wagon diversion trench (leading to his house) in Sweetwater County (1860's), and current private 'access fees' and 'outfitter fees' for various landlocked public lands in the West (2008). "

pat wrote on Jun 8, 2009 5:43 PM:

" I am very concerned if they toll wyoming i-80 . we live in hard economic times those who live along this highway. we will just be sending all those tourist and truckers who spend money in hotels truck stops and stores down some other rought . their is always a way around and if it is free they will take it.we need all the travel i think our state offers allot and if we toll then this will be devistating to wyoming .plus when us who are in small towns with little shopping opertunity we have to travel to larime or rocksprings or so on i dont want to have to pay to go do that . why pay triple fees when thay cant build the road right the first time. "

toll em wrote on Jun 16, 2009 6:35 PM:

" Toll the trucks all ya want...heck charge em $100, but as a driver myself, I can pretty much guarantee every penny I pay will by paid by you eventually. Just another expense passed down the line.
And "Devon"..trucks aren't your safety issue. If you do your research you'll find that over 77% of accidents involving bigs rigs n cars the 4 wheeler is the one at fault. Do the speed limit ( the one posted for the area you're in), don't work all day and be Mr. Macho by trying to drive 1000 mls afterwards nonstop, and leave the beer at home. Pretty much guarantee again...you cut off a train at 80 mph and mis-judge, you're going to end up just as dead as when it happens with a semi ( and it does everyday). "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.

Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.