The Interstate 80 tolling saga took another turn last week with the announcement by state Rep. Scott Hutchinson, R-Venango, that he would be introducing a bill within two weeks aimed at repealing the state's Act 44 transportation package.

That transportation package, which was enacted last July during the state's prolonged budget ordeal, would, with a tolled I-80 as its centerpiece, provide about $800 million a year for highway and bridge projects and mass transit systems.

Meanwhile, on the national front, it will be wait-and-see how a bill banning interstate tolling proposed by U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, will fare.

And, U.S. Reps. Phil English, R-3rd, and John Peterson, R-5th, are continuing to push forward in their opposition to the proposed tolling. Last Monday, the two congressmen met with about 60 business owners and development leaders at the AC Industrial Park at Emlenton to discuss the negative impacts that the tolling would have on businesses and trucking companies.

English and Peterson have sponsored a provision in the federal transportation funding bill that would prohibit the use of federal funds to plan or construct toll booths along I-80.

The prospect of tolling I-80, which is not a new idea but which was not seriously pushed until Act 44, always has evoked considerable opposition. But increasingly crucial highway- and bridge-repair needs in the commonwealth have made I-80 much more attractive in terms of its potential revenue-generating capacity.

What's troubling is that while the war of words continues to be waged over tolling I-80, none of the principal figures in that war has exhibited the kind of leadership needed to resolve the dispute.

Specifically, the leadership issue revolves around setting up face-to-face meetings between the competing interests, of which there apparently has been none.

What's needed is a "summit meeting" consisting of people like Gov. Ed Rendell; English; Peterson; Hutchinson; Joseph G. Brimmeier, chief executive officer of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, which is part of the I-80 toll picture; and top General Assembly leaders. They should sit down and not only discuss the facts and issues surrounding the dispute, but consider possible alternatives to the tolling proposal, if tolling can't be achieved.

Hutchinson's plan to scrap Act 44 in its entirety is too radical.

Obviously, finding funding alternatives wouldn't be easy, with I-80 tolls projected to raise more than $1 billion over 10 years, starting in 2010.

Nevertheless, the current lack of face-to-face talks and reliance on verbal salvos either in support of, or in opposition to, the tolling proposal is accomplishing little toward finding a solution to highway funding.

Thursday afternoon, Julia Wanzco, English's press secretary, confirmed that the congressman had not met with the governor to discuss I-80 tolling, but she said the governor had not made a request for a meeting with the congressman either.

She also noted the lack of forums "by Harrisburg" to collect public input on the proposal.

In August, during a visit to the Butler Eagle, Brimmeier said he would attempt to arrange a meeting with English regarding I-80, but there has been no such meeting.

Wanzco said Brimmeier had called in August to request a meeting with the congressman and was told by an English aide to get in touch with Annette Carr, the congressman's chief of staff, to arrange the meeting. According to Wanzco, Brimmeier has not called Carr.

On Friday, Brimmeier's secretary in Harrisburg, Marsha Wagner, said she had made two calls in August to English's Washington office in regard to setting up a Brimmeier-English meeting, the first time leaving a message for Vanessa Kermick, an English aide, and the second time actually speaking with Kermick.

According to Wagner, Kermick told her that the meeting would have to be arranged through Carr and that Carr would return Wagner's call after Carr returned from vacation.

Wagner said Friday that Carr never returned the call and, as of Friday, Wagner hadn't made another attempt to reach Carr.

Meanwhile, English last Monday reiterated that his problem with the I-80 tolling was the state's plan to use some of the money generated by the tolls for bolstering the finances of mass transit systems, such as those in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

But Brimmeier, during his meeting with an Eagle editor and writers in August, emphatically denied that any I-80 toll revenue would be used to fund mass transit systems.

Brimmeier on Friday told the Butler Eagle that a 50-year lease that is being drawn up between the Turnpike Commission and state Department of Transportation, which would make I-80 a part of the turnpike system, would contain the written stipulation that no toll revenue from I-80 could be used for mass transit.

Rendell has yet to reassure I-80 tolling opponents that he concurs with that stipulation, although the availability of all of the toll revenue for highway and bridge work would allow the state to allocate other money, previously earmarked for highway and bridge repairs, to the public transit agencies.

It's clear that much needs to happen regarding whether or not I-80 is tolled, but it's not going to happen with the various interests steering clear of one another.

At this juncture, a summit meeting in which all parties sit down with an open mind is the best alternative.