Toll road user's bill of rights

[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.

....

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.

Agreed.

When the Ca. 91 (Riverside Freeway) HOV/Toll lanes in Orange County were opened (then a private facility, but since sold to a public agency), an agreement was signed between the toll lanes operator and the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans regarding law enforcement, including how much in the way of CHP personnel were to be assigned to patrol those lanes.  Even though the operator of the toll lanes is required to patrol them with freeway service patrol vehicles at all times 24/7, because there are no shoulders on either side of those lanes for most of the way, having CHP close by is probably important - especially during peak traffic times.

[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.

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.

Strongly agreed.

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.

Agreed ... unless the tolls are part of a demand management plan, as they are on Maryland's ICC and the HOV/Toll lanes in Virginia and California.

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

Absolutely.

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.

I have no problem with that. 

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.

I think the goal should be to encourage anyone that crosses a toll road or toll crossing - even infrequently - to have a transponder.  And they should be no charge, and the cost recouped by toll revenue (even if that means that frequent users subsidize infrequent users slightly).

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.

I would want it to be an option (only states using such transponders now are Virginia and California). 

Remember that trucks are issued a blue transponder because they are heavier and larger, and they do not need a break because they have more than one person in the truck.

[Pete from Boston]

Since we're telling states and their contractors how much money they can make, there has to be a provision that food offerings at rest areas must be at a price comparable to an average based on a survey of similar food outlets in the immediate area, just like gas.

Only if this rider is attached will I support your bill.

[Thing 342]

Your thoughts?

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

A problem with this is that tolled crossings who have paid off their bonds will no longer have a source of income to use for future capacity improvements. This can be seen in the Hampton Roads area with the formerly-tolled tunnels now badly needing capacity improvements that there is no money to pay for. This led to the reinstatement of tolls on some of the tunnels, which caused a huge public backlash.

[kkt]

The Tenth Amendment argument somebody mentioned is unlikely to get very far because tolled highways can be deemed by Congress and the courts to affect interstate commerce regulation of interstate commerce

You wouldn't even necessarily have to use the "interstate commerce" argument.  You could use the "post roads" clause of Article 1 Section 8, which is more specific and therefore stronger.

[Pete from Boston]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

[1995hoo]

The Tenth Amendment argument somebody mentioned is unlikely to get very far because tolled highways can be deemed by Congress and the courts to affect interstate commerce regulation of interstate commerce

You wouldn't even necessarily have to use the "interstate commerce" argument.  You could use the "post roads" clause of Article 1 Section 8, which is more specific and therefore stronger.

You could, but for whatever reason, Congress hasn't cited that clause in the past. Either way, though, I think it's quite clear the Tenth Amendment argument wouldn't fly.

[oscar]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

Did the "extortionate monopoly" have to commit to better service, including speedier removal of wrecks/breakdowns from travel lanes, in order to get the government to give it an exclusive for road service on a particular road?  Even if there is no exclusive, if your vehicle is in the way of other travelers, I doubt the police will -- or should -- let you turn away the first available tow truck so you can wait for AAA.

Such exclusive arrangements seem common in major cities in Quebec.  I don't know what the experience has been. 

[cpzilliacus]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

Did the "extortionate monopoly" have to commit to better service, including speedier removal of wrecks/breakdowns from travel lanes, in order to get the government to give it an exclusive for road service on a particular road?  Even if there is no exclusive, if your vehicle is in the way of other travelers, I doubt the police will -- or should -- let you turn away the first available tow truck so you can wait for AAA.

Such exclusive arrangements seem common in major cities in Quebec.  I don't know what the experience has been.

As I understand it, those "extortionate monopoly" providers usually take AAA cards (in at least some states), and are required to comply with a pretty tough set of requirements, and their prices are subject to close review (and in some cases regulation) by the toll road agency.

[Duke87]

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.

Per passenger mile energy usage varies a lot:
http://cta.ornl.gov/data/chapter2.shtml

This depends largely on the average number of passengers per vehicle. New York City has trains that are well-used at all hours of the day and tops the list in terms of efficiency. Other systems do not perform as well if they are less crowded. But really what drives it is off-peak usage. Systems that mostly just serve commuters and see little ridership midday and on weekends will not have good overall efficiency numbers. Systems that serve all sorts of trips for all sorts of purposes will do better.

Of course New York is also special because of it's 24-hour "city that doesn't sleep" culture. People in New York will be out and about at all hours doing all sorts of things and using transit in the process. Compare this to a city like Cleveland where if it's not rush hour, everyone just drives wherever they're going and the trains run basically empty. Never going to be efficient like that.

[cpzilliacus]

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.

Per passenger mile energy usage varies a lot:
http://cta.ornl.gov/data/chapter2.shtml

This depends largely on the average number of passengers per vehicle. New York City has trains that are well-used at all hours of the day and tops the list in terms of efficiency. Other systems do not perform as well if they are less crowded. But really what drives it is off-peak usage. Systems that mostly just serve commuters and see little ridership midday and on weekends will not have good overall efficiency numbers. Systems that serve all sorts of trips for all sorts of purposes will do better.

Of course New York is also special because of it's 24-hour "city that doesn't sleep" culture. People in New York will be out and about at all hours doing all sorts of things and using transit in the process. Compare this to a city like Cleveland where if it's not rush hour, everyone just drives wherever they're going and the trains run basically empty. Never going to be efficient like that.

Agreed that per-mile use of energy varies a lot.  Depends on type and size of engine, among other things.

New York City is unique among urban areas of the United States for many things, starting with the amount of employment located in New York County (Manhattan), and the superb transit system that serves same - the subways, the passenger railroad systems from Long Island, the Hudson Valley, Connecticut and New Jersey.  Add in the buses that come in to the Port Authority for good measure, and you have a very large percentage of transit ridership in the nation.

As one expert that I respect said, transportation in the United States is about two places - Metropolitan New York City and the rest of the United States.  The Metrorail system of Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia is so far behind (even though it is #2 in terms of patronage) that just one of the New York City subway lines (such as the IRT Lexington Avenue Line) carries more patrons than the entire Metrorail system serves.

I believe that forecasts for the new Second Avenue Subway predict that it will also carry more people than the entire Washington system.

[Pete from Boston]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

Did the "extortionate monopoly" have to commit to better service, including speedier removal of wrecks/breakdowns from travel lanes, in order to get the government to give it an exclusive for road service on a particular road?  Even if there is no exclusive, if your vehicle is in the way of other travelers, I doubt the police will -- or should -- let you turn away the first available tow truck so you can wait for AAA.

Such exclusive arrangements seem common in major cities in Quebec.  I don't know what the experience has been.

As I understand it, those "extortionate monopoly" providers usually take AAA cards (in at least some states), and are required to comply with a pretty tough set of requirements, and their prices are subject to close review (and in some cases regulation) by the toll road agency.

The last time I needed service on the New Jersey Turnpike was twenty years ago, but they had local contracted providers then, and instead of taking AAA they accepted $$$.  I've heard of these arrangements on various roads, but I have no idea how current any of them are.

[SP Cook]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

I had forgotten about that.  100% agree.

[jeffandnicole]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

Did the "extortionate monopoly" have to commit to better service, including speedier removal of wrecks/breakdowns from travel lanes, in order to get the government to give it an exclusive for road service on a particular road?  Even if there is no exclusive, if your vehicle is in the way of other travelers, I doubt the police will -- or should -- let you turn away the first available tow truck so you can wait for AAA.

Such exclusive arrangements seem common in major cities in Quebec.  I don't know what the experience has been.

As I understand it, those "extortionate monopoly" providers usually take AAA cards (in at least some states), and are required to comply with a pretty tough set of requirements, and their prices are subject to close review (and in some cases regulation) by the toll road agency.

The last time I needed service on the New Jersey Turnpike was twenty years ago, but they had local contracted providers then, and instead of taking AAA they accepted $$$.  I've heard of these arrangements on various roads, but I have no idea how current any of them are.

They still have those arrangements on the NJ Turnpike. They are put out to bid every few years, although for the most part the same companies win, because they know exactly what the NJTA requires and are already equipped with such. I believe if you have AAA, you can submit the receipt to them and they'll reimburse you.

[Pete from Boston]

Also, motorists must be free to have any road service (e.g. AAA) handle their car, rather than some extortionate monopoly. 

Did the "extortionate monopoly" have to commit to better service, including speedier removal of wrecks/breakdowns from travel lanes, in order to get the government to give it an exclusive for road service on a particular road?  Even if there is no exclusive, if your vehicle is in the way of other travelers, I doubt the police will -- or should -- let you turn away the first available tow truck so you can wait for AAA.

Such exclusive arrangements seem common in major cities in Quebec.  I don't know what the experience has been.

As I understand it, those "extortionate monopoly" providers usually take AAA cards (in at least some states), and are required to comply with a pretty tough set of requirements, and their prices are subject to close review (and in some cases regulation) by the toll road agency.

The last time I needed service on the New Jersey Turnpike was twenty years ago, but they had local contracted providers then, and instead of taking AAA they accepted $$$.  I've heard of these arrangements on various roads, but I have no idea how current any of them are.

They still have those arrangements on the NJ Turnpike. They are put out to bid every few years, although for the most part the same companies win, because they know exactly what the NJTA requires and are already equipped with such. I believe if you have AAA, you can submit the receipt to them and they'll reimburse you.

That's good to know.  Somehow I think 1992 is outside the statue of limitations, but, next time. 

[cpzilliacus]

Your thoughts?

4 - When bonds are paid off, tolls end.

A problem with this is that tolled crossings who have paid off their bonds will no longer have a source of income to use for future capacity improvements. This can be seen in the Hampton Roads area with the formerly-tolled tunnels now badly needing capacity improvements that there is no money to pay for. This led to the reinstatement of tolls on some of the tunnels, which caused a huge public backlash.

Which is why expensive (and expensive to maintain and operate) toll crossings should probably not be de-tolled.

It may be reasonable to reduce the tolls to cover the cost of operation and maintenance, and to build up a cash reserve to pay for at least some part of the heavy maintenance needs that such crossings will require.

I do not have a problem with toll roads (that do not have expensive tunnel and bridge components) being de-tolled.

[SidS1045]

They still have those arrangements on the NJ Turnpike. They are put out to bid every few years, although for the most part the same companies win, because they know exactly what the NJTA requires and are already equipped with such. I believe if you have AAA, you can submit the receipt to them and they'll reimburse you.

Most arterials in NYC have this arrangement too (denoted by "ROAD SERVICE BY PERMIT ONLY" signs at the entrance ramps).

[mrsman]

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.

And the key reason for the difference between BATA and Golden Gate policies is that there is a cash option for BATA crossings.  It is a moving violation to be in a lane that you are not supposed to be in, hence the fine.  Whereas for Golden Gate, everyone is welcome, there is no cash option, and options to pay for those without transponders are provided.  IMO that's very fair.

Contrast that to some East Coast facilities (Henry Hudson Bridge and the ICC come to mind) that are also all-electronic, but provide no option for those without transponders, other than a relatively hefty fine.  Part of the goals with national interoperability would be to avoid these types of fines for most people.

[Pete from Boston]

The Henry Hudson provides the option to pay by mail.   

[mtantillo]

As does the ICC and all other Maryland Toll facilities (including ones with a cash option).

[cpzilliacus]

Contrast that to some East Coast facilities (Henry Hudson Bridge and the ICC come to mind) that are also all-electronic, but provide no option for those without transponders, other than a relatively hefty fine.  Part of the goals with national interoperability would be to avoid these types of fines for most people.

Incorrect.  Both the ICC and the Henry Hudson offer pay-by-mail for vehicles without E-ZPass transponders.

[texaskdog]

Speed limits should be set by the toll operators.  That's how we got the 85 MPH speed on Texas 130

[cpzilliacus]

Speed limits should be set by licensed engineers paid by the toll operators.

FTFY.

[jeffandnicole]

Speed limits should be set by the toll operators.  That's how we got the 85 MPH speed on Texas 130

They usually are. And that's why some speed limits are set way too low. The DRPA, for example, has a blanket 45 mph max speed limit, regardless of the road or bridge characteristics.

[cl94]

Speed limits should be set by the toll operators.  That's how we got the 85 MPH speed on Texas 130

They usually are. And that's why some speed limits are set way too low. The DRPA, for example, has a blanket 45 mph max speed limit, regardless of the road or bridge characteristics.

Yes, but state maximums are usually set by law. To encourage people to use them, toll roads typically have the highest safe speed limit allowed by law. That's why the Ohio Turnpike, for example, went to 70 and dropped truck limits before the rest of the state. That's how we get TX 130's insane speed limit and 65 on the New York State Thruway in developed areas that are, on other roads, restricted to 55.