A per-mile highway toll? It's being studied for the Bay Area.

[Auggie]

Bay Area transportation planners predict that by 2050, the region’s highways will be overwhelmed by miserable traffic congestion, with the skies clouded by the attendant pollution.

To avoid that grim future, planners are in the middle of a two-year study examining what, they say, could be a potential solution: charging people a per-mile fee to drive on Bay Area highways and, possibly, surrounding arterial roads, starting in 2035.

The study led by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the region’s transportation planning body, has not determined specifics, such as price points and which highways or surrounding arterials motorists would pay to drive on. Still in its early stages, an actual recommendation won’t come to light until winter 2024.

SNIP

(Two) strategies involve “all-lane” tolling on highways with “existing or planned regional rail or frequent express bus service.” The proposals highlight most major Bay Area highways, such as Interstates 880, 680, 580, 280 and 80, and Highway 101 as potential tolling candidates. Enacting tolls on most or all of those highways would make it highly unlikely motorists would avoid paying a fee to get around the region by car.

LINK (paywall): https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/bay-area-traffic-highway-tolls-17827746.php

Other strategies (according to the link):

• All-lane highway tolling to include “major parallel arterials to limit diversion” (such as San Pablo Avenue in the East Bay, which runs next to Interstates 580 and 80).

• Cordon pricing that charges drivers to enter the downtowns of San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose.

----------------------

The story mentions that any scenario is going to face strong protest if there aren't adequate public transit alternatives. While I support public transit (and depended on it for decades), it doesn't work for everyone and doesn't go everywhere. To suggest otherwise is folly.

[Scrivener7]

1. NJ Turnpike is sort of like that.

[TheBlackAdder]

2. As a former frequent driver on it, I'd pay tolls and gasoline tax, when 80% of mileage was on it.

Last edited Sun Mar 19, 2023, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)

.

So, while this is one way to catch those with electric vehicles, it really does screw gas drivers.

They should just transponder EVs and let the gas tax that is to fund roadways cover the conventional vehicles.

====

As they always would say about ther NJTPK, once the toll got in place it would never go away because there would be a whole administration and bonding structure put in place that would never go away. With the NJTPK, its toll system was to have been short lived once the bonds were paid off. So, what do they do? They just float more bonds so they never expire.

This is going to build a whole roadway administration and maintenance system, as once it becomes a toll road, gasoline tax from the feds disappears. People with gasoline cars will essentially get double taxed.

.

[Scrivener7]

3. I read this as more of a congestion issue than an EV issue. But I couldn't get the

rest of the article, so I'll defer to your reading of the whole thing.

[TheBlackAdder]

4. Oh, I didn't read it. It's just one of the excuses toll road proponents use to justify the fleecing.

.

There will be the following:

1) An administrations board who will be paid six to seven figures each.
2) Multi-million dollar bond contracts to chosen financial institutions to manage the bonds.
3) Employees to work toll and maintenance, along with the provisioned equipment.
4) Contracts to gasoline and rest stop companies and food merchants.
5) Purchase of toll scanners and cameras to capture toll evaders and the firm processing those issues.
6) Bid contracts to towing companies, as AAA and other car clubs will not be allowed on it.

And a whole bunch of other things.

People will still drive, whether there is a toll road or not. That excuse they give to reduce traffic is very weak and does not pan out with the scores of other toll systems across the USA. People have to drive to work, and can't afford hours on a bus or relocation.

.

[Scrivener7]

5. Lol! Yep! I bet you're right!

[TheBlackAdder]

6. I was one of those that fought former Gov. Jon Corzine's toll road scam he was trying to implement.

.

I voted for the fucking guy and I was a daily turnpike driver. He wanted to float and additional $30 Billion bond and have half the money go to the turnpike and half go to balance his budget. That one time shot would have resulted in $120B by the time it was paid off in 75 years, with a possible (and you know probable) 15-year extension. He wanted to choose a politically chosen company to manage the bond for tens of millions. It would have jacked up an Exit 7A - 14C commute to almost $70 a day! He wanted people getting on at Exit 1 and riding the full length to pay $100 each way! Needless to say, not many people could absorb paying that much money, especially when there aren't really any open roadways that takes you up there easily.

This had me research all about how the NJTPK is nothing but a political patronage pit.

I forgot, he also wanted to create a separate board for this too, where the board's salary would be in the multi-millions per year. Over that 75 year period the board's salary alone would have been in the billions.

.

[Auggie]

9. Thanks for your posts

[SWBTATTReg]

18. Not that I'm knocking your article, but in most states, don't they already have admin. boards

to admin. bonds, other state-related financial instruments, bank accounts, etc.?

-employees already maintaining roads, other related infrastructure, etc.,

-contracts let out for perhaps for some out-of-the-way or locations located in the least desirable portion of state highways (if there's not a town nearby), as well as towing services (if needed) at these locations too. But usually supply and demand arises to the challenge, that is, if 50 cars/trucks need help every week or so, then a business will probably end up opening to capture that business.

-Cameras? Depends on the location I guess, a lot of inner cities have them, to highlight trouble spots so the state can send the appropriate transportation vehicles to resolve any spotted issues.

-and this is usually all paid for by higher gasoline taxes for the most part...

And a bonus, I guess, is that the highways under toll are supposed in better shape.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

[TheBlackAdder]

21. It depends on how the charter is written. It won't use the standard State DOT commission.

.

If there already is a toll road commission, they could just merge the roadway system with it, but more than likely, they will create a new Bay Area Turnpike Commission. After all, how can you plug in your patronage friends and political appointees to high-paying administrative jobs? Some will go to both parties so they can get the project passed, and then comes the selection of candidates.

Then the financial and other contracts will be handled separately. This way, they will be in control of their own domain and not answerable to any other wider commission.

.

[Auggie]

8. It's a congestion and carbon emissions story

[JohnSJ]

7. They kind of do that with the express lane. They better have adequate affordable mass transit if

they do that, or it isn’t fair. It won’t stop those with means from paying it, but discriminate against those who can’t afford it.

Perhaps some of this can be dealt with by allowing more people to work from home

[usonian]

10. The rich have helicopters.

That said, a luxury vehicle would undoubtedly pay the same as a beater driven by someone making minimum wage. And tolls are flat, not graduated, nor a percentage, so the economic impact hits the poorest most.

Look for this to get voted down, unless MTC is one of those authorities that has divine right.

WFH works a lot better. Companies could pay per cubby, BUT THAT WOULD BE TAXING THE WEALTHY.
And by the way, attacking the symptom does not attack the underlying cause, the highly prized concentration of jobs.

FWIW, I commuted for almost 10 years on BART to jobs.
But those were in Berkeley and SF, extremely handy to BART.
The rest weren't.

And use the archive.
https://archive.ph/ROvEd

Go to archive.ph and paste the URL.
For reasons probably having to do with my long list of browser extensions, it was not blocked for me.
Try clearing cookies now and then.

[MichMan]

11. The jobs that the poor are concentrated in are not able to WFH

[Auggie]

13. Exactly. Additionally, most have been priced out of the Bay Area ...

and commute from cities like Vacaville and Tracy.

[MichMan]

12. Why would the "skies be clouded by attendant pollution" ?

Since 99% of the vehicle traffic will be EV?

[lambchopp59]

14. Public transit conundrum

My college career was facilitated well, riding BART non-commute hours. It provided me those few valuable minutes of study time each day. Typical city resident: did relatively well without a vehicle. My other half and I used rent-a-wreck (affordable alternative in those days) for weekend Big Sur and other camping excursions.
Then there was the maddening aspect of "WTF" up with 5 MUNI buses all coming in a row after an hour of none... plenty of steamed passengers.
Coming full circle I realize my retirement will be best accomplished mostly surrendering "the car keys" except for short grocery market trips. I'll still be depending on BART to the doctor. Bay area remains the most transit served area in the entire western U.S.
But I'll stay off the damn freeways. Drivers are generally way too crazy for me to contend with anymore.

[Mr.Bill]

15. These "Bay Area transportation planners" must be new to the area.

The entire Bay Area was "overwhelmed with miserable traffic congestion" in the 80s. That's why I left.

[Auggie]

16. It got worse. Especially in the North Bay.

[Mr.Bill]

17. I'm sure it did.

I spent 30 years in the south bay and the peninsula. '61 to '91.

[Midnight Writer]

19. Again, TFG is way ahead of us. Flying cars! Who needs roads?

[The Mouth]

22. Great. Grind down the working man/woman

Just like the A-holes celebrating high gas prices. What the hell has become of the left.

People need to drive to get work done. The more expensive you make it, the more EVERYTHING costs.

Want to control inflation- get gasoline down where it should be, a buck or two a gallon. Want to make everything insanely expensive? Make it cost even MORE for every plumber, electrician, gardener and other WORKING person to go about their business.

My sympathies are with my friends; we're Democrats, sure. And we drive big-ass trucks because we do your plumbing, your roof, your lawn. Government should have as its priority making things as inexpensive and supportive for the WORKING PEOPLE as possible. The people that matter to ME, those of us who sweat, get dirty, build and maintain stuff. We need cheap gas, fast freeways, copious parking, low taxes and to be as much of a priority as anyone cranking out code or marching for social justice.

The Democratic party should be the party of the WORKERS. And the workers often drive trucks and we all live one place and work another.

[Auggie]

23. It's just an idea for now

[The Mouth]

24. A stupid, elitist, anti-working class one

May anyone supporting it NEVER be able to find an honest, competent tradesman or anything other than the most expensive eggs, milk, furniture or clothing on the planet.

Heartless and brainless, a sop to those who loath and despise hard working men and women.