Toll road user's bill of rights

[Dr Frankenstein]

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

... and the tolling agency has to dissolve because it no longer has a source of revenue.  If that's the case, who is responsible for maintenance or improvements?  The state DOT?

That's how they've done it up here. All tolls were lifted on A-10, A-13, A-15, A-40, the Champlain and Jacques-Cartier Bridges, etc. a few decades after completion. In the OAQ's case, it was dissolved and taken over by the MTQ. In the JCCBI's case, it's still around but is entirely funded by the federal transportation ministry.

On the A25 bridge, the tolls should be lifted after about 30 years. I'm not sure what's the plan for A30Express, but I assume it's similar. I'm not sure what will happen with the two agencies that manage them.

[PHLBOS]

I fail to see the value of "a uniform way of posting toll rates", since it's not like the toll rates are secret. You can look them up on the agency's website, and so forth.

Due to the annual Act 44-related toll increases for the PA Turnpike; the PTC stopped listing its toll rates on its toll tickets it gives to non-EZ Pass users several years ago.  One needs to remember that not everybody that uses roads (even long-distance travelers) is savvy enough to check the toll information (either on-line or whereever) beforehand.  Occasional travelers aren't going to fork over the monthly/annual fee just to maintain an EZ Pass account for a facility that they may only use once a year.

I'm guessing that CP's comment/suggestion could be a reaction to how the PTC stopped lising its toll rates on tickets. 

Uniform dispute resolution... eh. Driving through an electronic toll lane without a transponder requires being either stupid or oblivious to your surroundings. I therefore have no sympathy for people who find themselves in this position, and no desire to see my tax dollars being spent on making it easier for them to atone for their stupidity.

You're preaching to the choir here.  Today, there are many drivers out there that just blindly follow their GPS' without realizing that conditions (toll lane openings/closings) can abruptly change either without or before the info. is transmitted to their GPS/Smartphone. 

As for the matter of using toll revenue to fund transit operations, it is unideal since it places an artificially large burden on certain links in the road network. But in large cities, public transit is important and vital to their continued function and the money to run said transit has to come from somewhere. In a sane world the revenue not gained from fares would simply come from general tax funds, but we don't live in a sane world, we live in a world where politicians love to take money away from transportation (transit and roads) to fund some other pet project or to balance the budge without raising taxes. So, at least in the MTA's, case, there is a very significant political benefit to them taking revenue from tolls: it's money Albany cannot easily take away from them, and it is a tax that can be hiked without elected officials worrying about losing their jobs over it. I don't like high bridge tolls but I'll gladly take high bridge tolls over a subway system that falls apart from lack of maintenance.

The comment/suggestion was likely directed towards many agencies diverting funds to non-road projects only to find themselves in a financial bind when it comes to funding construction/maintenance projects for their own roadways/bridges/tunnels.  The fore-mentioned PTC's Act 44 and the DRPA's near-20-year practice of using toll revenue to fund non-transportation-related economic development projects along the Delaware River waterfront are indeed poster childs of such raiding (aka Robbing Peter to Pay Paul).

[mrsman]

Public disclosure of diversions....why not? Transparency is good, right? FHWA on their new interstate tolling schemes requires that money only be spent in that corridor, and prohibits diversion away from that corridor. Meanwhile, older toll authorities do what they want with the money. I guess there is no way to prohibit them from doing that, but at least tell people that 60% of your toll to cross the Verrazano from Brooklyn to Staten Island goes to support subways connecting Brooklyn to Manhattan. I don't have issue with tolls supporting transit in that particular corridor (which is why I am not adamently opposed to MWAA's subsidizing the Silver Line with DTR tolls), but I am opposed to MTA/TBTA's diversion of bridge toll revenue to transit that serves a vastly different population and corridors. If they want to have money from Manhattan toll facilities go to support trains that bring people to Manhattan, fine, but they are charging people that generally are traveling between the outer boros where there is not very good transit.

Based on your comment, I would imagine that you're in favor of some of the fair tolling plans that have been espoused by Gridlock Sam Schwartz and others.  Basically, toll the East River bridges at the same rate as the Battery and Midtown Tunnels, but at the same time significantly reduce the tolls on the Triboro and non-Manhattan MTA crossings.  I would add that on top of such a system it would be great if all the toll crossings be either two directional or all the crossings be one-directional, to avoid toll shopping.  So if the Verrazano is going to charge Brooklyn to Staten Island, all of the crossings in Brooklyn/Queens should charge going away from Brooklyn/Queens.  Charge higher for the Manhattan crossings.

The idea is that by having every crossing charge something, you eliminate toll shopping for non-Manhattan trips.  Traffic is more evenly distributed.  And total MTA toll revenue will be the same, even though users of the Verrazano and Whitestone will pay a lot less than they do now.  Essentially, the trips that have a subway alternative would be more expensive than the trips that only have a bus alternative.

[mrsman]

The trouble I have with stepping in to stop transponder discrimination is that the cure may be worse than the disease. As things stand, everyone at least gets discounts on the toll facilities that they use most frequently, and only has to forego the discount when they travel to a different state. If you were to make a rule saying that you can't selectively apply discounts the result would not necessarily be that the existing discount now applies to everyone, since the agency would lose revenue by doing that. Most likely the discount for everyone would be cut, or even potentially eliminated. Indeed, if you are going to make noise about it being unfair to discriminate based on where your EZpass is from, there might then be pressure to say that it is also unfair to charge EZpass and cash different rates and you might see that regulated away as well. Which then means higher tolls for everyone.

I believe the idea of stopping transponder discrimination is that toll agencies can still offer commuter plans, except that they should not be based at all on which agency issued the transponder.

A driver who uses a toll crossing 5 times a week should get a higher per-use discount over someone who uses the crossing 3 times a year.

A driver who uses an E-Z pass off-peak should get an off-peak rate, regardless of which transponder they use.

A driver who lives in a place that is basically surrounded by tolls (and would have no way to escape without paying a toll) should get residency discounts (regardless of transponder) above those received by the general public.  Grand Island, NY and Staten Island, NY and residents of the Rockaways get these discounts.

But if we create a rule where there is no monthly fees on the transponders, then likely every EZ-Pass would be the same anyway.  And that is the ultimate goal, people should only pay for the tolls when they cross, not at other times.

And if we need to add more to the bill of rights, let's have the interoperable transponder should be a flex-transponder.  More and more HOT lanes are being built, so you need to have some way for HOV users to use it for free.

[cpzilliacus]

*fairness: transponder interoperability, knowledge of what a toll is before you enter (but how would this work? minimum to first exit? maximum to the end?)

Good question.  Why I wrote "within reason."

*desire to see the country without stopping: no "Breezewoods"

No, because Breezewoods are the scene of minor and sometimes pretty spectacular crashes, and are a source of wasteful and slow and stopped traffic, which usually means greater emissions (since you express concern about the environment below).

*your own personal dislike of rail transit and helping those less fortunate or who choose to pollute less

You will need to do better than that, Spui.  Rail transit patrons tend to be more wealthy than other users of the transportation system. 

Regarding "pollute less," tell me again where rail transit projects get their traction power from?  Hint: it probably needs to be from baseload generation, which quite possibly means coal-fired generation, at least in the East and South.

[cpzilliacus]

Re: nationwide toll transponder interoperability, etc: This is kind of draconian if you think about it. Toll roads, and especially bridges are (or can be) owned by private companies, and if not, states or multi-state partnerships. Why should Congress get to control how tolls are collected, especially if they receive no federal funding? Regional interoperability is coming about organically, without government control. I wish some of the smaller bridges in New Jersey (hear by Atlantic City) accepted EZ-Pass instead of something they cooked up, but tehy're private companies, so we can't really force them too.

It is actually already mandated to happen by federal law by 2016.

[Pete from Boston]

No, because Breezewoods are the scene of minor and sometimes pretty spectacular crashes, and are a source of wasteful and slow and stopped traffic, which usually means greater emissions (since you express concern about the environment below).

If you're going to pass laws for safety  and air quality, it's illogical to single out toll roads.  You should be pushing comprehensive road regulation.

Regarding "pollute less," tell me again where rail transit projects get their traction power from?  Hint: it probably needs to be from baseload generation, which quite possibly means coal-fired generation, at least in the East and South.

Finish the analogy: how does the per-person, per-mile pollution of that power generation compare to that of automobile commuters crawling along highways?

[cpzilliacus]

Your thoughts?

1 - No toll  $$ should be spent on the police.  When a new freeway opens, nobody frets about how to pay the random taxers for their "services".  Same should be for toll roads.  Whatever amount of "service" the random taxers wish to provide on the toll road should be funded out of their regular appropriations.

Given that some tolled segments of the highway network have greater needs for policing and motorist assistance patrols, I disagree with that.  And some toll agencies have their own police forces (two that come to mind (there are others) are the MdTA Police and the CBBT Police).   

2 - Obviously there should be one, continent-wide, toll transponder with one clearing house.  IMHO, the trucking industry should would gladly pay the tiny overhead costs.

I suspect they would want help from the four-wheelers and two-wheelers to pay for same.

3 - Tolls should be set at a financially sound basis to repay the bonds and then tolls ended.  No toll money should ever be spent on anything else.  People that like communal transit should pay for communal transit.  People who want to use tolls (or any other form of tax) to get people to drive less or whatever should be dismissed as the loons they are.

I disagree, for this reason - toll roads have to be maintained (and it is usually mandated in the trust agreement or trust indenture between the agency operating the toll road and the trustee representing the bondholders).  As for diversion to public transit, I do not agree with it, but plenty of states do it (New York and Pennsylvania probably being the largest in the U.S. in dollar terms).

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

Used to be the policy in Virginia.  But apparently not any longer.

5 - Other than the toll takers themselves, toll roads should have ZERO employees who are not found in a normal freeway highway district.  PR people, etc.

Toll agencies, even if they have an all-electronic toll collection system, could outsource the maintenance to the state highway agency, or to the private sector.  But most of them have large in-house maintenance forces.  An exception may be some toll roads in California.  I think that Caltrans provides maintenance on the TCA toll roads in Orange County. 

6 - Toll roads should not charge any additional $$ to exit and re-enter, (a much easier thing to do with transponders than previously) thus fostering PRIVATE FREE ENTERPRISE service providers at exits.

No disagreement, even if the toll agencies have on-toll road service plazas, as most of the older toll roads do. 

7 - No toll $$ should be spent on foolish boondoggles like Scamarack.

No disagreement, though I would like to stop there at some point, just to look at it (and based at least in part on some of your comments).

8 - No toll money should be "invested" in anything.  100% of the profit should be spent to retire bonds.

If you mean things like train lines (which is where the greatly increased toll dollars on the Dulles Toll Road are going), then I agree with you.  Some pretty expensive diversion of toll revenues to unrelated things (other than transit) have been done by the Delaware River Port Authority (bridges across the Delaware River near Philadelphia) [which also runs its own transit line], the New York State Thruway Authority [it runs most of the canal system in New York State], and the Delaware River & Bay Authority  (joint Delaware and New Jersey authority), which also runs airports.

[cpzilliacus]

No, because Breezewoods are the scene of minor and sometimes pretty spectacular crashes, and are a source of wasteful and slow and stopped traffic, which usually means greater emissions (since you express concern about the environment below).

If you're going to pass laws for safety  and air quality, it's illogical to single out toll roads.  You should be pushing comprehensive road regulation.

I agree, though it is mostly toll roads (and especially one toll road in Pennsylvania) that practices Breezewooding its patrons.

Regarding "pollute less," tell me again where rail transit projects get their traction power from?  Hint: it probably needs to be from baseload generation, which quite possibly means coal-fired generation, at least in the East and South.

Finish the analogy: how does the per-person, per-mile pollution of that power generation compare to that of automobile commuters crawling along highways?

It depends on many things, starting with the source of the energy that generates that electric power.  If it is nuclear, solar or wind, then the pollution is close to zero.  If it is coal or bunker fuel, then it is more.

[US81]

I want some accountability on the billing side for the toll road user's bill of rights.

+ Fees limited initially to some percentage of the actual toll. (My own experience in Austin: stated fee for pay-by-mail per the web site: $1.80. Actual bill: $9.95)

+ A billing system accessible by the consumer. (I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.  This lets them add late fees to the first generated bill.) 

+ A reasonable requirement to establish that a bill has been received (such as certified mail with return receipt) before escalating to the legal charges. 

[vdeane]

Except Kentucky highway district offices have PR people.

Every NYSDOT region has a public information officer as well.

The trouble I have with stepping in to stop transponder discrimination is that the cure may be worse than the disease. As things stand, everyone at least gets discounts on the toll facilities that they use most frequently, and only has to forego the discount when they travel to a different state. If you were to make a rule saying that you can't selectively apply discounts the result would not necessarily be that the existing discount now applies to everyone, since the agency would lose revenue by doing that. Most likely the discount for everyone would be cut, or even potentially eliminated. Indeed, if you are going to make noise about it being unfair to discriminate based on where your EZpass is from, there might then be pressure to say that it is also unfair to charge EZpass and cash different rates and you might see that regulated away as well. Which then means higher tolls for everyone.

I would say that discriminating agaisnt out of state transponders is unfair but that charging more for cash than transponder is fair since cash users require a toll taker (ditto for bill by mail), as long as the difference is reasonable (ie NOT like A-25 or ON 407).

God help us if IDOT had to ever take over the tollways.  They can barely maintain what they have and drag their feet whenever improvements are required.

Ditto for NYSDOT/NYSTA.  We've already seen it with I-84 - it now closes every winter because, for whatever reason, Region 8 can't seem to plow it properly.

[myosh_tino]

I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.

If you're going to be that proactive about paying your toll, why not set up an account and give them a method of payment like a credit card?

[vdeane]

I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.

If you're going to be that proactive about paying your toll, why not set up an account and give them a method of payment like a credit card?

If you're not from the area and not likely to be back, why should you need to set up an account for a one time charge?

[hbelkins]

1 - No toll  $$ should be spent on the police.  When a new freeway opens, nobody frets about how to pay the random taxers for their "services".  Same should be for toll roads.  Whatever amount of "service" the random taxers wish to provide on the toll road should be funded out of their regular appropriations. 

Then who is going to be doing toll enforcement?  In California, the tolling agencies contract out the toll enforcement to the California Highway Patrol and will use toll revenue to pay for it.  Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for the police to patrol a private company's toll road?

Toll enforcement or traffic law enforcement? They are two separate things. If it's toll enforcement you're worried about, that can be done by license plate photography. If you're worried about speed enforcement, then I'd argue that on a private toll road, there is or should be no such thing as a speed limit that the violation of which becomes a legal matter. I don't think it's against the law for me to drive 80 mph on my own property, even if the speed limit on public highways is no higher than 70 mph.

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

... and the tolling agency has to dissolve because it no longer has a source of revenue.  If that's the case, who is responsible for maintenance or improvements?  The state DOT?

That's what happened in Kentucky. The tolls were merely to pay off construction bonds. Maintenance was always the responsibility of the state DOT, if I recall correctly.

-- removed personal attack --sso

[jakeroot]

+ A billing system accessible by the consumer. (I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.  This lets them add late fees to the first generated bill.)

When I crossed the Port Mann Bridge outside Vancouver, BC (which is an electronic-only toll bridge), I was able to jump on the internet almost immediately and pay the toll. You entered in your state/province, and your license plate number, selected the vehicle type, and paid it. It doesn't check to see if that plate actually crossed the bridge, but rather archives the payment for later examination. When the system gets to processing your plate, it checks to see if the user has paid the toll, and (like in my case), when it saw my plate was already paid, it just tossed it aside.

As far as I can tell, this allows one to pay for their toll ahead of time, which is really helpful for people who are not from Canada.

[cpzilliacus]

The trouble I have with stepping in to stop transponder discrimination is that the cure may be worse than the disease. As things stand, everyone at least gets discounts on the toll facilities that they use most frequently, and only has to forego the discount when they travel to a different state. If you were to make a rule saying that you can't selectively apply discounts the result would not necessarily be that the existing discount now applies to everyone, since the agency would lose revenue by doing that. Most likely the discount for everyone would be cut, or even potentially eliminated. Indeed, if you are going to make noise about it being unfair to discriminate based on where your EZpass is from, there might then be pressure to say that it is also unfair to charge EZpass and cash different rates and you might see that regulated away as well. Which then means higher tolls for everyone.

But in some parts of the U.S., using more than one toll agency's toll road or toll crossing on one trip is quite possible and quite reasonable.  And I am not just speaking of long-distance over-the-road truckers either.

I don't like the idea of congress mandating interchanges be built. This sort of meddling is needless micromanagement.

It is in the national interest to have a seamless highway network.  Breezewooding is not that, and I while I do not believe Congress should tell Pennsylvania is remediate the Breezewood, I do believe it should tell them to remediate all of their Breezewoods, or face the loss of the federal tax advantages granted by Congress to the bonds issued by their turnpike agency.

I fail to see the value of "a uniform way of posting toll rates", since it's not like the toll rates are secret. You can look them up on the agency's website, and so forth.

I agree that the toll rates can be found online, but tough to do when driving. 

But some idea of what the toll will be before you enter (within reason) is a good idea.

Uniform dispute resolution... eh. Driving through an electronic toll lane without a transponder requires being either stupid or oblivious to your surroundings. I therefore have no sympathy for people who find themselves in this position, and no desire to see my tax dollars being spent on making it easier for them to atone for their stupidity.

And what about all-electronic toll roads like North Carolina's TriEx, Maryland's ICC and Ontario's 407?  Even the creaking Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission has said it is going to go all-electronic in the relatively near future.

Tolls must disappear when bonds are paid off... yeah, no. The problem I have with this is that it distorts traffic patterns in a counterproductive manner when you have a toll facility and then a parallel facility of similar utility that is free. For example if you are going to toll one bridge across a river, any other nearby bridges across the same river need to also be tolled in order to avoid driving large numbers of people to shunpike. NYC is the worst offender for this - Battery tunnel is $5.33 each way and no one uses it. Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges are free and frequently jammed with traffic, causing tons of traffic on the BQE in the process. Either all of these crossings should be tolled or none of them should be tolled. Whether the construction bonds for a facility have been paid off is, from the perspective of a motorist on the road, completely arbitrary.

Is that a justification for tolling the other East River crossings that are now "free?" 

But perhaps more to the point, could a state like New Jersey take over its Turnpike and Parkway if they were suddenly to become "free?"  As I understand it, the Garden State's Transportation Trust Fund is shaky now, and could not handle the addition of thousands of new lane-miles to have to maintain.

As for the matter of using toll revenue to fund transit operations, it is unideal since it places an artificially large burden on certain links in the road network. But in large cities, public transit is important and vital to their continued function and the money to run said transit has to come from somewhere. In a sane world the revenue not gained from fares would simply come from general tax funds, but we don't live in a sane world, we live in a world where politicians love to take money away from transportation (transit and roads) to fund some other pet project or to balance the budge without raising taxes. So, at least in the MTA's, case, there is a very significant political benefit to them taking revenue from tolls: it's money Albany cannot easily take away from them, and it is a tax that can be hiked without elected officials worrying about losing their jobs over it. I don't like high bridge tolls but I'll gladly take high bridge tolls over a subway system that falls apart from lack of maintenance.

My problem with diversion of bridge and tunnel and toll road toll revenues to transit is that it does not always have any benefit to the people and businesses paying the (usually higher) tolls.  Perhaps the most-egregious example being Pennsylvania's Act 44 (since diverting Turnpike toll revenues to SEPTA and the Port Authority of Allegheny County does not benefit Turnpike customers in any way), not the N.Y. MTA's Bridge and Tunnel giving millions to the MTA's transit properties, for the valid reasons you cite above.

[myosh_tino]

I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.

If you're going to be that proactive about paying your toll, why not set up an account and give them a method of payment like a credit card?

If you're not from the area and not likely to be back, why should you need to set up an account for a one time charge?

That's a good point.

In the S.F. Bay Area, toll "violations" are handled quite differently between the BATA (Bay Area Toll Authority) and the Golden Gate Bridge District.

If you cross a BATA bridge in a FasTrak lane but don't have an account, you will get a toll violation notice in the mail for the amount of the toll plus a $25 fine.  You will then have the option of opening a FasTrak account and have that $25 fine put into your account.

If you cross the Golden Gate Bridge, which switched to all electronic tolling earlier this year, without a FasTrak or Pay-by-Plate account, you have three options.  Pre-pay the toll up to 30 days in advance, pay the toll within 48-hours of crossing or wait for the district to send you a bill at which time you have 21 days to pay the toll with no penalty.

[NE2]

What would make sense to me: a parking area after the bridge so you can stop and pay the toll by phone, along with a kiosk for those without smartphones to do the same. If the kiosk is broken, any extra fees associated with pay-by-mail are waived.

[mtantillo]

+ A billing system accessible by the consumer. (I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.  This lets them add late fees to the first generated bill.)

When I crossed the Port Mann Bridge outside Vancouver, BC (which is an electronic-only toll bridge), I was able to jump on the internet almost immediately and pay the toll. You entered in your state/province, and your license plate number, selected the vehicle type, and paid it. It doesn't check to see if that plate actually crossed the bridge, but rather archives the payment for later examination. When the system gets to processing your plate, it checks to see if the user has paid the toll, and (like in my case), when it saw my plate was already paid, it just tossed it aside.

As far as I can tell, this allows one to pay for their toll ahead of time, which is really helpful for people who are not from Canada.

Yeah. Some agencies will literally not let you pay until an invoice is generated. At that point it is too late to avoid excessive rental car fees, etc. If I am in an unfamiliar area, I might not realize I'm going to use a toll facility. At least, after I discover that I have used a facility, I should be able to settle up online before a bill goes out.

[mtantillo]

I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.

If you're going to be that proactive about paying your toll, why not set up an account and give them a method of payment like a credit card?

Because some agencies will not process "video tolls"...they make you get a transponder, or will send you a bill. Or what if someone doesn't realize they are going to use a toll road until after they pass the gantry...but they are adament about not getting a bill sent to the owner and want to settle up on their own (for example, a rental car customer who might be subject to $25 fines per toll transaction).

[cpzilliacus]

What would make sense to me: a parking area after the bridge so you can stop and pay the toll by phone, along with a kiosk for those without smartphones to do the same. If the kiosk is broken, any extra fees associated with pay-by-mail are waived.

Spui, where room is available, that is a good idea.

For toll roads with service plazas, there should be a provision for the toll to be paid for the entire journey at any toll plaza "inside the gates" of the toll road.

I suppose on I-95 in New Hampshire, that means stopping at the liquor store to pay the toll.

[cpzilliacus]

Toll enforcement or traffic law enforcement? They are two separate things. If it's toll enforcement you're worried about, that can be done by license plate photography. If you're worried about speed enforcement, then I'd argue that on a private toll road, there is or should be no such thing as a speed limit that the violation of which becomes a legal matter. I don't think it's against the law for me to drive 80 mph on my own property, even if the speed limit on public highways is no higher than 70 mph.

On private toll roads in Virginia, you can definitely get a summons from the VSP for speeding.  Happened to a friend on the Dulles Greenway (Va. 267) some years ago.

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

... and the tolling agency has to dissolve because it no longer has a source of revenue.  If that's the case, who is responsible for maintenance or improvements?  The state DOT?

That's what happened in Kentucky. The tolls were merely to pay off construction bonds. Maintenance was always the responsibility of the state DOT, if I recall correctly.

At one time, VDOT used to maintain most toll crossings and toll roads in the Commonwealth, a notable exception was the CBBT, which has always been tolled and maintained and policed by its "own" agency, the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel District.

Now most of those toll roads have been turned-over to other entities, though the VSP still enforces traffic laws on some of them (not on the Dulles Toll Road, also Va. 267, where traffic laws are now enforced by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Police).

[cpzilliacus]

+ A billing system accessible by the consumer. (I should be able to look up my license plate and pay. I shouldn't have to wait on the billing system to generate a bill to receive some account number I need in order to pay.  This lets them add late fees to the first generated bill.)

When I crossed the Port Mann Bridge outside Vancouver, BC (which is an electronic-only toll bridge), I was able to jump on the internet almost immediately and pay the toll. You entered in your state/province, and your license plate number, selected the vehicle type, and paid it. It doesn't check to see if that plate actually crossed the bridge, but rather archives the payment for later examination. When the system gets to processing your plate, it checks to see if the user has paid the toll, and (like in my case), when it saw my plate was already paid, it just tossed it aside.

As far as I can tell, this allows one to pay for their toll ahead of time, which is really helpful for people who are not from Canada.

That, IMO, is a right way to do it.

[1995hoo]

I'm curious: Does anyone have a sense for which toll agencies will send out a bill for a single trip and which of them just write it off unless you have enough unpaid trips to exceed some kind of threshold?

What made me ask that is that I'm thinking of one of our trips to Miami a few years ago when we decided to go over to Key Biscayne and I drove into the "C Pass" lane at the Rickenbacker Causeway plaza thinking it would be compatible with SunPass (because I had been led to believe all Florida's transponders were compatible). Got up to the gate arm and they had an 8.5-by-11 piece of paper taped up saying "This Is Not a SunPass Facility" (that is no longer the case). By then it was too late to back up. Gate arm eventually went up, we went on our way, and I was never billed for the toll. I suspect the agency that operates the causeway considered it not worth the cost of generating and mailing a bill to someone in Virginia for a single unpaid trip when the toll was something like $1.25.

It makes sense to me that some toll amounts are too trivial for them to bother, but I'm curious if anyone (Mike?) has some kind of data on different toll agencies' approach to that kind of thing.

Toll enforcement or traffic law enforcement? They are two separate things. If it's toll enforcement you're worried about, that can be done by license plate photography. If you're worried about speed enforcement, then I'd argue that on a private toll road, there is or should be no such thing as a speed limit that the violation of which becomes a legal matter. I don't think it's against the law for me to drive 80 mph on my own property, even if the speed limit on public highways is no higher than 70 mph.

On private toll roads in Virginia, you can definitely get a summons from the VSP for speeding.  Happened to a friend on the Dulles Greenway (Va. 267) some years ago.

....

The high-occupancy/toll lanes see a good amount of State Police activity because part of the deal for the private consortium putting up the money to build them was that they would also provide enough funding for the State Police to add additional manpower.

It makes sense to me that a private toll road would be subject to standard law enforcement. In most places the state will have to allow the road's construction in the first place, which means the state may put conditions on the right to build and operate the road. One of those would be allowing the appropriate authorities to enforce speed limits, DUI laws, and the like.

[cpzilliacus]

I'm guessing that CP's comment/suggestion could be a reaction to how the PTC stopped lising its toll rates on tickets.

Yes, though i have had an E-ZPass for as long as they have been available in this part of the world, so it has been a lot of years since I paid a toll on the Penna. Turnpike with a ticket, though I did go through it just recently on the Kansas Turnpike, which did not honor my E-ZPass. ( )