By Joseph A. Curtatone

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

Governor-elect Charlie Baker faces a huge challenge on the first day he takes office—how to maintain an aging transportation system that is the backbone our economic strength. Last year, the Legislature passed the first gas tax increase in 22 years and, in doing so, also linked the tax to inflation rates. On Election Day this year, Massachusetts chose to roll back that provision linking the gas tax to inflation, which will cost the state $1 billion over the next decade in transportation funding. This is a challenge for Gov. Baker and all our state legislators, but it’s also an opportunity to address the inadequacies in our transportation funding. If we’re going to stay economically competitive as a region and a state, we must explore bold and innovative ways to fund the strong transportation system we need if our economy is to thrive.

Tying the gas tax to inflation was never a panacea for funding our transportation system. Even with that link, it wasn’t enough to bring in the revenue we need to maintain our current system, never mind improve and expand it. Last year’s gas tax increase raised our state gas tax by 3 cents, bringing it to 24 cents, to a total of 44.9 cents of tax per gallon of fuel – still five cents below the national average. If the gas tax had kept up with inflation since 1991; the tax would actually be 36 cents a gallon.

Linking the gas tax was, despite the best intentions of the Legislature, a half-measure at best. A 2007 state commission report estimated that Massachusetts needs $1 billion simply to maintain our current and, in some spots, still antiquated transportation systems. Gov. Deval Patrick took the bold step last year to address this problem in his “Way Forward” plan that would have raised $1.2 billion in transportation funding. Unfortunately, despite the proven need for this level of revenue, the compromise bill that ultimately passed the Legislature only provided $800 million.

So with the gas tax no longer tied to inflation, further decreasing the funding for an already inadequate plan, the question is: Now what do we do? Whether voters supported Question 1 or not, everyone will likely be howling in protest when a bridge is closed because it’s unsafe, or when they get stuck with a big car repair bill because of poorly maintained roads, or when the T breaks down in the cold of winter.

And we’ll all be looking for answers if faced with revenue shortfalls that lead to budget cuts because our economy is lagging, at least partially, due to a deteriorating transportation system that fails to support our businesses and industries. This is true for the Commonwealth and for the nation. During the last decade, the country’s roads fell from 7th to 18th in the World Economic Forum’s rankings. Our country’s investment in transportation lags behind our economy’s growth, according to the Council of Economic Advisers and National Economic Council. While other countries are pouring money into complete streets that service cars and bikes alike, expanded public transportation, high-speed rail and more, we continue to try and get by with what we have. At some point, this will catch up with us—and other countries will catch up with our economic might.

We must explore bold and innovative ways to fund a strong transportation system, and this is not a concept that divides along traditional party lines. Voters in Texas approved a ballot question that amends the state constitution and redirects billions in oil and gas production revenues from the state’s rainy day fund to road projects. Oregon and California are both piloting a vehicle miles driven tax, where drivers would pay their gasoline taxes not based on how many gallons they use but on how many miles they travel. Washington, Virginia and Illinois all have regional transit taxes that directly fund public transportation, and Oklahoma is now exploring a similar system. Kentucky and North Carolina link their gas tax rates to the wholesale price of gasoline. Wyoming passed a gas tax increase last year.

We can debate whether vehicle miles driven taxes, regional transit taxes and other ways of generating revenue are right for Massachusetts, but there’s no debate—whether in red states or blue states—that a well-funded transportation system is critical to the economic and financial health of their states. Gov. Patrick put forth a strong proposal last year to truly address the magnitude of the problem we face. We fell short in matching that vision. With the gas tax inflation link repealed, we have no choice but to revisit how we’re funding our transportation systems. We have an opportunity to get it right this time.