A 22-page report released Thursday outlines numerous reasons for Missourians to support increasing the money available for building and maintaining the state's nearly 34,000-mile highway system.
The report - "Missouri Transportation By the Numbers: Meeting the State's Need for Safe and Efficient Mobility" - finds:
• 22 percent of Missouri's major roads are in poor condition, with another 48 percent rated at mediocre or fair condition. That leaves only 30 percent in good condition.
• 23 percent of all bridges 20 feet or longer - both locally and state-maintained - are rated as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
Traffic congestion is increasing statewide, but especially in the urban areas.
And, although fatalities have been falling over the last few years, the accident death rate on Missouri's "non-Interstate rural roads" is nearly three times the fatality rate "on all other roads and highways in the state."
The report came from TRIP, a Washington, D.C.-based transportation research group, and is based on reliable statistics, Carolyn Bonifas Kelly, TRIP's research and communications associate director, said.
"All of the data that's in our report comes from credible, federal sources" or from Missouri's Transportation department, Kelly told reporters Thursday, "and there's no two ways to interpret this data.
"What we're saying is that the condition of Missouri's transportation system is already deteriorated - and we're looking at more deterioration in the future, if that's not addressed."
The report looks at both statewide and regional information - including the Jefferson City area comprised of Cole, Callaway, Moniteau and Osage counties. The compilation doesn't include Columbia and Boone County or the Lake of the Ozarks region as parts of separate regions.
• Pavement conditions in Jefferson City are listed as 32 percent poor, 34 percent mediocre, 12 percent fair and only 22 percent good.
"When roads are in poor condition - which may include potholes, rutting or rough surfaces - the costs to operate and maintain a vehicle increases," the TRIP report explained.
Those poor roads, the report said, mean Jefferson City area motorists spend $685 a year in additional vehicle operating costs - the highest of the state's four regions listed in the report.
St. Louis was second, at $596 a year; Kansas City third, at $545; and the Springfield area fourth, at $455.
• Poor safety conditions cost Jefferson City area drivers an additional $221 a year (third out of the four areas).
• Congested conditions cost an additional $410 a year in the Jefferson City region, least of the four regions.
Statewide, the report said, those three problem areas cost Jefferson City area drivers $1,316 extra a year, third smallest of the four regions studied.
St. Louis had the highest overall cost, at $1,511 a year. Kansas City was next at $1,327. And Springfield was lowest, at $1,134 additional dollars a year.
"The efficiency and condition of Missouri's transportation system, particularly its highways, is critical to the health of the state's economy," the report noted.
"Annually, $226 billion in goods are shipped from sites in Missouri and another $234 billion in goods shipped to sites in Missouri, mostly by truck."
Kelly said the Federal Highway Administration estimates "for every $1 spent on road and bridge improvements, that results in an average economic benefit of $5.20."
Missouri voters last August rejected a proposed 3/4-cent increase in the sales tax, for a 10-year period, to help pay for transportation improvements.
The state Senate last week approved a 1.5-cent increase in the state's 17 cents-a-gallon tax on gasoline, and a 3.5-cent per gallon increase in diesel fuel sold.
The measure needs one more Senate vote before the issue can go to the House - and the Legislature has only two weeks left in this year's session.
Roberta Broeker, MoDOT's chief financial officer and, as of last Friday, the interim department director, said: "The gas tax itself is not a growing source of revenue, because people drive less than they used to and drive more fuel-efficient vehicles than they used to.
"We've talked about a lot of different sources of revenue," including increases in fuel taxes, sales taxes or license fees.
But Americans For Prosperity-Missouri (AFP), a group that promotes "every individual's right to economic freedom and opportunity," said Friday the Legislature's proposed tax increase was a "big government solution" when they should have looked for other options.
"For years, Missourians have been getting nickeled and dimed everywhere they turn," Patrick Werner, AFP's state director, said in a news release. "Do you mean to tell me that the Legislature couldn't find the money for roads in the $26 billion budget they just passed?"
Werner told the News Tribune in a follow-up email that AFP is "not disputing the specific claims MoDOT is making one way or the other. Their job is to maintain and build our transportation system - most would argue that roads and bridges are a priority and a core government function.
"I think the point we are trying to make is that if roads and bridges are indeed a priority and more resources are needed, then it should have been a priority during the budget process."
But, he added, "Instead of asking the taxpayers to fix this problem by digging deeper into their own pockets, policy makers should instead prioritize state spending and find the money that has already been taken from their paychecks, at the cash register, at the pump, on their property, etc.
"Until Missouri creates a stable economic environment that is built around long-term job growth we will continue to fight over the pennies left in the table."
Broeker said Thursday, "The system of (Missouri's) roads that we built is the sixth or seventh largest in the nation.
"But Missouri is 46th in terms of revenue per mile to maintain that system. Other states around the country are recognizing the situation they're in and, really, have been stepping up."
One example, she said, is Iowa, which just this year raised its fuel taxes by 10 cents a gallon, "and they have a system of roads that is about a third the size of Missouri's. If the people of Missouri decide that they're happy with what they have - and they're happy with a system of roads that, over time, will continue to deteriorate - we'll do what we can.
"But you cannot maintain the system that we have, in the condition that it is today, indefinitely on a declining source of revenues."