E-ZPass on the Mackinac Bridge?

[bessertc]

The trolls are never going to give up on this.  They are either bots or bullies.  They aren't going to give in or give up until the moderators lock this thread.  It's ultimately what they want.

Wow.  First "tyrants" and now "trolls".  What noun starting with T will you guys think of next?  Why is it so hard for you guys to believe that what we want is exactly what we say we want and nothing more - to move closer to meeting the interoperability mandate Congress placed in MAP-21?  We were supposed to have it so that every transponder would work on ever road with electronic tolling across the country by October 2016.  If only Congress had put in place penalties for non-compliance...

That said, mods feel free to split this discussion into its own thread.

Up to now, I haven't jumped into this fray... mostly because I didn't necessarily think it was worthy of much discussion. But let me just add my 2¢ because: a) I'm in my fifth decade of being a Michigander, b) I've walked the Mackinac Bridge every year ('cept '20) since 1992, c) I am MichiganHighways.org, d) The Mackinac Bridge is one of the two bridges I've "claimed" (note quotes... for "legal" reasons) as being "my" bridges... the Cut River Bridge is "my" other bridge... hands off!, e) I can recite all four seasons' of Mark Howell's recorded bridge messages along with him (AND the high-wind warning, too!) while listening to AM 530 approaching the Bridge, and f) I've been to the top of the South Tower of the Mackinac Bridge. If that doesn't give me a little stree... er... bridge cred, I don't know what will. Anyway, here's those 2¢:

• I cross the Mackinac Bridge multiple times every year. As often as I can find a "reason" to do so.
• I possess an I-PASS from the ISTHA, compatible with E-ZPASS.
• I have absolutely no problem forking over the four singles every time I cross the bridge, even though I have an E-ZPASS-compatible I-PASS already in my vehicle. Honestly, I think I'm a typical Michigander in that regard, like some of the other Michiganders on this forum that some of the out-of-staters can't seem to comprehend. Whereas I wouldn't probably actively campaign against the implementation of an E-ZPASS compatible transponder system at the Straits, I'm perfectly fine if it never happens. And I'm one who can't wait for additional toll roads in (at least) the eastern half of the continent to be added, ESPECIALLY the 407ETR around Greater Toronto... not that I'd use it a lot, but it would make my life a lot easier than getting billed in the mail from toll-by-plate four months later.
  

Anyway, that's me. And probably a lot of us Michiganders, too. Hence, the reason why things are the way they are. Thankfully, not every part of this country is exactly like every other part in every way yet. Some places are unique and have their quirks. This may well be one of ours. If it is, maybe people can respect it, as illogical as it might be? Just throwin' it out there.

[Rothman]

I can see not caring about E-ZPass being implemented, but the anger directed towards it that has been shown on here by other users is still beyond some sort of real reason to me.

[Flint1979]

I can see not caring about E-ZPass being implemented, but the anger directed towards it that has been shown on here by other users is still beyond some sort of real reason to me.

I'm not angry about it and I really don't care one way or the other. The MBA operates how it operates and I'd never want to do much of their work in my life so I'm not going to complain about them not accepting EZ pass. I've thought about getting it a few times myself but then I figured it wasn't worth it because where I generally travel there aren't any toll roads and in areas where there are toll roads I shunpike the very rare time that I'm going to be on one just isn't worth having it. As I've said I cross the bridge probably 6-8 times a year and I know the toll is $4 and I know exactly what to do so having EZ pass just isn't worth it and I'm sure that there are several Michiganians that feel the same way.

[hotdogPi]

What about the people who go cross into Canada from Michigan and re-enter the US in/near Buffalo (and the reverse direction)? That alone should justify E-ZPass for the border crossings.

Thread split, please.

[renegade]

What about the people who go cross into Canada from Michigan and re-enter the US in/near Buffalo (and the reverse direction)? That alone should justify E-ZPass for the border crossings.

Thread split, please.

The Mackinac Bridge does not go into Canada.

If it did, you would still have to stop at Customs.  No EZPass is going to avoid that.

I can see not caring about E-ZPass being implemented, but the anger directed towards it that has been shown on here by other users is still beyond some sort of real reason to me.

No anger is directed toward it ... it's just stupid to put it there.  You must be madly in love with me, because you won't leave it alone.  (Sorry, I've been happily married for over 35 years.  I am old enough to identify BS when I see it.)  Why not go pester the 'Alaska Notes' thread and tell them how desperately it's needed it there?

Wow.  First "tyrants" and now "trolls".  What noun starting with T will you guys think of next?  Why is it so hard for you guys to believe that what we want is exactly what we say we want and nothing more - to move closer to meeting the interoperability mandate Congress placed in MAP-21?  We were supposed to have it so that every transponder would work on ever road with electronic tolling across the country by October 2016.  If only Congress had put in place penalties for non-compliance...

That said, mods feel free to split this discussion into its own thread.

I never used the word 'tyrant.'  'Troll' is a word used to describe anyone who lives 'below the bridge.'  If you knew anything at all about the Bridge, you would already know that.  What you want is what YOU want, whether anyone else does or not.  Textbook definition of a bully.

"We're here from the Government and we're here to help."  I'm old enough to know exactly what that means, too.

Mods:  thread lock please ... it's now irretrievable.  Thanks, guys, for ruining it for others.
[Your request has been declined. -S.]

[hotdogPi]

This is basically a thread that can't be locked – it's a general state thread. There are several options available (thread split, delete the last few pages, moderator note not to post anything more related to the topic), but it's useful to have a catch-all state-specific thread.

[vdeane]

I can see not caring about E-ZPass being implemented, but the anger directed towards it that has been shown on here by other users is still beyond some sort of real reason to me.

I'm not angry about it and I really don't care one way or the other. The MBA operates how it operates and I'd never want to do much of their work in my life so I'm not going to complain about them not accepting EZ pass. I've thought about getting it a few times myself but then I figured it wasn't worth it because where I generally travel there aren't any toll roads and in areas where there are toll roads I shunpike the very rare time that I'm going to be on one just isn't worth having it. As I've said I cross the bridge probably 6-8 times a year and I know the toll is $4 and I know exactly what to do so having EZ pass just isn't worth it and I'm sure that there are several Michiganians that feel the same way.

I honestly never cared much back when I thought Michigan was a no-transponder state.  Cash-only toll facilities exist in NY too.  It's annoying, but it's not like they're hindering interoperability or anything.  What gets me is that the bridge upgraded their commuter pass into a sticker transponder recently and yet didn't bother to become interoperable, despite there being an interoperability mandate in federal law.

At least they still take cash.  I can't stand places with all-electronic tolling that isn't interoperable with E-ZPass as I don't do bill by mail (don't trust it and don't like the fees), so those are mandatory shunpike situations for me.

What about the people who go cross into Canada from Michigan and re-enter the US in/near Buffalo (and the reverse direction)? That alone should justify E-ZPass for the border crossings.

Thread split, please.

The Mackinac Bridge does not go into Canada.

If it did, you would still have to stop at Customs.  No EZPass is going to avoid that.

I believe he was talking about the Blue Water Bridge, Detroit-Windsor Tunnel, Ambassador Bridge, and DRIC in that comment.  That said, I-75 (which the Mackinac Bridge is on) does go to Canada, though not a part of Canada on that corridor.

I can see not caring about E-ZPass being implemented, but the anger directed towards it that has been shown on here by other users is still beyond some sort of real reason to me.

No anger is directed toward it ... it's just stupid to put it there.  You must be madly in love with me, because you won't leave it alone.  (Sorry, I've been happily married for over 35 years.  I am old enough to identify BS when I see it.)  Why not go pester the 'Alaska Notes' thread and tell them how desperately it's needed it there?

1. Does Alaska even have toll roads?
2. Even if they do, I've never heard of them having their own transponder (then again, I thought the same of Michigan until recently).
3. Alaska is far from E-ZPass territory, whereas Michigan is as close to surrounded as a border state can be (Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois all use it, Wisconsin doesn't have tolls as far as I'm aware, and Minnesota is joining soon).

Wow.  First "tyrants" and now "trolls".  What noun starting with T will you guys think of next?  Why is it so hard for you guys to believe that what we want is exactly what we say we want and nothing more - to move closer to meeting the interoperability mandate Congress placed in MAP-21?  We were supposed to have it so that every transponder would work on ever road with electronic tolling across the country by October 2016.  If only Congress had put in place penalties for non-compliance...

That said, mods feel free to split this discussion into its own thread.

I never used the word 'tyrant.'  'Troll' is a word used to describe anyone who lives 'below the bridge.'  If you knew anything at all about the Bridge, you would already know that.  What you want is what YOU want, whether anyone else does or not.  Textbook definition of a bully.

"We're here from the Government and we're here to help."  I'm old enough to know exactly what that means, too.

Mods:  thread lock please ... it's now irretrievable.  Thanks, guys, for ruining it for others.

You didn't use "tyrant", but Terry Shea did.

I guess you'd call Congress a bully too, for legislating the interoperability mandate in the first place.

The mods are free to split the interoperability discussion into its own thread.  No need for a lock, on this thread or a split thread for that matter.  Just because you'd personally rather not discuss something doesn't mean a thread should be locked.

The "troll" and "local vs. out of state (or even lower peninsula)" sentiments remind me of a comment I read on Reddit where someone mentioned that in the subreddits for urban areas, if someone posted that they were moving to an area, they were quickly welcomed with replies giving recommendations on where to live and things to do.  In rural areas, however, a similar thread would be met with replies ranging from "don't you try to change the area, you better like it the way it is" and "it's your responsibility to 'fit in'" to "get out and go back where you came from".  I guess the rural nature of the UP has led to some "why should we change something that we feel works fine to accommodate people from outside the area?" sentiment.

[Max Rockatansky]

As someone who is a former Michigan resident I can definitely say there is not a need nor really a local desire for EZpass on the Mackinac Bridge.  The traffic count over the bridge is so low that it isn't a big deal to deal with the toll facilities.  I do think a lot of you guys who live in the northeast tend to over estimate how much the rest of the country actually cares about EZpass and it's inter-agency operability.  I wouldn't be opposed to an EZpass lane on the Mackinac Bridge but it does seem like a lot of effort to make happen just to placate users from a different region of the country.

[Duke87]

1. Does Alaska even have toll roads?
2. Even if they do, I've never heard of them having their own transponder (then again, I thought the same of Michigan until

1. Yes, the Whittier Tunnel is tolled
2. No, they don't have a transponder. The nature of the tunnel makes it such that you will very probably need to stop and wait for some amount of time before being able to enter, anyway.

[Terry Shea]

You didn't use "tyrant", but Terry Shea did.

Ok.  You out of staters are right.  Put E-Z Pass on the Mackinac Bridge.  Take over Lansing and make it happen.  Then venture up to the straits and do the work yourself.  Hey, here's an idea.  While you're there, why not build a twin bridge that could be E-Z Pass only?

No need to go to Lansing...the MBA's in St. Ignace...know thy own state...

But the state capital is in Lansing.  Or are the tyrants going to move that too?

Which part of the smiley faces did you not understand?  Or are you going to try to ban humor from taking place in our state too?   SMH!

[hotdogPi]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

[Rothman]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

[renegade]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Okay.  You guys have convinced me.  We need EZPASS in Michigan, and we need it now!  Sign me up!

Next time I go to the neighborhood "gentlemen's club," instead of tucking a couple singles into the dancer's garter, I'll just hold up my EZPass.  It'll go over well.  I'll keep you informed (in great detail) how that goes.

[vdeane]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Especially since, when they made MacPass a sticker transponder recently, I would think they could have just purchased multi-protocol readers and gone through whatever bureaucratic steps necessary to make everything talk to each other.  Or maybe they did/are and don't want to announce anything until it's ready.  Who knows.  I just don't get why some people seem to be so against interoperability.  It's not like the transponder-only lanes aren't already there.  It's not as if this hobby forum has anything to do with official government policy, even.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I don't think anyone is against E-ZPass on the Mac. The question of "is it necessary" doesn't necessarily mean opposition.

The debate seems to boil down to one side saying "no E-ZPass is not a big deal" and the other side saying "yes, it is in fact a big deal".

Of course it wouldn't hurt anyone or anything to install it. But I also don't see the big deal either. It's one toll booth on one bridge in a part of the country that takes time and effort to get to.

[renegade]

I don't think anyone is against E-ZPass on the Mac. The question of "is it necessary" doesn't necessarily mean opposition.

The debate seems to boil down to one side saying "no E-ZPass is not a big deal" and the other side saying "yes, it is in fact a big deal".

Of course it wouldn't hurt anyone or anything to install it. But I also don't see the big deal either. It's one toll booth on one bridge in a part of the country that takes time and effort to get to.

I've been saying that for weeks, but my pleas have fallen upon deaf ears time and time again.

Anyone who is somehow "inconvenienced" by the lack of EZPass is certainly free to drive around Lake Michigan if they don't want to roll the window down and hand four bucks out of it.

At 11,000 vehicles per day, I would be surprised if five percent of drivers would use it.  550 vehicles per day would probably not justify the cost, no matter how low that would be.  Installation, operation and maintenance would most likely not be free..

I also like how those who insist we need this have not bothered to reach out to the MBA to see what they think.  Someone threw MAP-21 into the argument.  Since the Bridge is self-sustaining and not Federally funded in any way, that will certainly not apply here.  Congress has no say in any operations anywhere between Jamet St. in Mackinaw City and US-2 in St. Ignace.

I wish discussion of this whole topic to cease.  Those who want this should move here and run for office.  I can pretty much tell which side of the ballot they would actually be on.

[rhen_var]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Even the idea of tolls in Michigan in general is nonpolitical.  The toll roads study bill was sponsored by a Republican, passed the Republican-controlled state house and senate, was supported by Democrats, and signed into law by the Democratic governor.  It seems to me that it's not a partisan issue in any way.  I don't understand why people are trying to make it out to be.

[Terry Shea]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Even the idea of tolls in Michigan in general is nonpolitical.  The toll roads study bill was sponsored by a Republican, passed the Republican-controlled state house and senate, was supported by Democrats, and signed into law by the Democratic governor.  It seems to me that it's not a partisan issue in any way.  I don't understand why people are trying to make it out to be.

I don't understand why we're still discussing this stupid idea that is totally out of all of our hands.

[Papa Emeritus]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Okay.  You guys have convinced me.  We need EZPASS in Michigan, and we need it now!  Sign me up!

Next time I go to the neighborhood "gentlemen's club," instead of tucking a couple singles into the dancer's garter, I'll just hold up my EZPass.  It'll go over well.  I'll keep you informed (in great detail) how that goes.

Please do that, and keep us posted.

I'll take my EZPass transponder to Don's Dogmeat Diner, and use it for a big order of rotisserie retriever, with a side order of siracha springer spaniel. For dessert, I'll have a mouthwatering terrine of terrier. I'll let you know if the dogmeat diner accepts EZPass, and I'll also provide updates about how delicious my food order is.

[vdeane]

While the debate appears to be Michigan vs. non-Michigan, I'm seeing an ideological split instead. SEWIGuy, Rothman, vdeane, and I are all on the left, while it appears that our Michigan members are all on the right (by coincidence).

And yet, simply adding E-ZPass compatibility to an already tolled facility would seem to be a non-political topic in terms of ideology.

Even the idea of tolls in Michigan in general is nonpolitical.  The toll roads study bill was sponsored by a Republican, passed the Republican-controlled state house and senate, was supported by Democrats, and signed into law by the Democratic governor.  It seems to me that it's not a partisan issue in any way.  I don't understand why people are trying to make it out to be.

I don't understand why we're still discussing this stupid idea that is totally out of all of our hands.

We're roadgeeks.  Discussing our opinions on things is how we'd like things to be is what we do.  If discussion was limited to convincing decision makers to change things, this forum would be dead, because it's a hobby forum, not a government comment board reviewed by decision makers.

And quite frankly, there is a world of difference between "well, maybe it would have been something to do when they made MacPass a transponder, but they didn't, and I doubt they will because it's not a pressing issue and people can just pay cash" and "that's a stupid idea and I hate it and you can take your E-ZPass elsewhere" - especially when combined with ridiculous arguments like talking about reconstructing toll barriers or not wanting to be forced to get one, neither of which anyone proposed, here or elsewhere.  If you guys had said the former, the discussion would have likely ended and been left in the past.  But it wasn't.  Instead we got a very strong reaction backed with arguments about reconstructing toll barriers to add ORT lanes and forcing you to get an E-ZPass even though you want to pay cash, neither of which anyone was talking about until the people on your side of the argument brought them up.

[Rothman]

Got the below from the Bridge Director at the Mackinac Bridge.  Copied and pasted it right out of the e-mail I got, so the typos and other issues are all their own.  Looks like they've done a study or two on what tags people already have in their cars and have determined it's not worth the $1m to make the system compatible with E-ZPass.

That said, what's interesting to me is their insistence that there isn't an "E-ZPass hub."  That's not true, since there is the Interagency Group (IAG) that facilitates the coordination between the member agencies/authorities, so perhaps their estimate that more staff would need to be required is bloated.

"Thank you for your question.  We have done toll studies here where we read what other kinds of toll tags our customers have. We have found that only approximately 5% of our patrons have any other kind of toll tag.   Many of these patrons also have MacPass if they spend much time in our area, like our summer residents.    To integrate with EzPass, we would be required to have daily communications with the 22 EzPass agencies that maintain EzPass accounts.  There is no one EzPass hub.  We would have to know which of the 54 million EzPass tags were going on the Mackinac Bridge and whether their accounts were good or not each day.  There is also the toll reconciliation between the 22 agencies of the usage for the month.  The cost to integrate ourselves with the Ipass or EZpass or similar and add the back office staff to process the transactions would be prohibitive for this small amount of usage.   This integration is estimated at $.75 to $1.25 Million  and 1-2 additional staff positions.  Right now, the EZPass system does not use the sticker transponder system that MacPass uses.  They use an older system of transponder boxes that are more expensive.  MacPass would be taking a step backwards to convert to the EZpass transponder boxes instead of our current sticker transponders.  We will continue to assess it for future toll enhancement projects.   



Hope this is helpful for you.



Sincerely,



Kim

Kim Nowack, PE

Bridge Director

Mackinac Bridge Authority

'Spread Hope, Get Vaccinated, Save Michigan Lives'"

[JREwing78]

That's about the response I expected. It at least puts some numbers into our assumptions about the economics of making EZ-Pass work. I'm not surprised EZ-Pass holders were in the single digits.

I'd be curious to see if this situation changes down the road. At some point, EZ-Pass will likely implement tags over transponders.

SM-G991U

[Rothman]

Got a short follow-up:

"There is talk of an Ezpass hub in the future so the agencies don't all have to share their account data in 22 directions every day.  And talk of modernizing the EZpass transponders to the newer technology.   We are quite far from the nearest EZpass facility too."

So, there is hope.

[Joe The Dragon]

they list I-pass like it's own thing?

also ez-pass does not take tags?? Don't they take FL sticker tags now?

[vdeane]

Odd about the no central hub thing.  If so, that explains why transponder discrimination is so rampant, but also what then does the IAG actually do?  I wonder if building a central hub would give the IAG leverage to finally begin rolling back the tide on transponder discrimination.

I'd hardly call sticker transponders "more advanced" or "better" than hard case transponders.  Newer, sure, but "more advanced" and/or "better"?  Show me a sticker that can be transferred between multiple cars if you own more than one, or get a new one, or need a new windshield.  They also can't do that thing that hard case transponders do where the entry plaza is written onto the transponder's memory and then transmitted back at the exit plaza, though it seems like AET systems eschew doing that.  Maybe that's why virtual ticket system tolls on the Thruway take forever to process.

they list I-pass like it's own thing?

also ez-pass does not take tags?? Don't they take FL sticker tags now?

Nope.  The sticker systems use multi-protocol readers to accept both types of transponders.  The older systems in the Northeast and Midwest tend to lack those.  Florida, North Carolina, and Kentucky all issue had case transponders (for a fairly decent fee) for those who want to use their SunPass/QuickPass/RiverLink outside of their native territory (though SunPass and QuickPass stickers are compatible with each other and Peach Pass, which will be joining next year).  Which, come to think of it, might be a reason MacPass isn't interoperable - they might not be interested in issuing hard case transponders, though the idea that they couldn't use stickers any more isn't true.  Given their situation and this thread, I'm not sure there would be much demand for them, though; they could theoretically offer them for a decent fee to appease the IAG knowing they'd almost never have to actually do it in practice.

I have no idea if a River Link would work in Florida or if a SunPass would work in Kentucky.  It's never been said that it can be done, so I'm guessing it can't.  Might be part of that no central hub thing.