I would like a clarification on whether the tolling would just be on the HOV lane like I394 or would be on all lanes?

Great question Doug. When the Crosstown Commons reconstruction is complete, pricing would only apply to the HOV lane and some extension of that into Downtown Minneapolis. During the Crosstown Commons reconstruction, however, it isn't possible to price a single lane, so we are proposing that -- for one year out of the 3-4 years of the reconstruction -- we apply pricing for solo drivers to all the lanes, only through the construction zone and only when there is congestion (as it currently works on I-394). This is the kind of demonstration that the feds are looking for and could bring us anywhere from $200 million to $800 million to implement BRT in 2008 rather than 2023. The BRT service and telecommuting incentives must be in place when pricing begins. Under current plans, buses will not have free flow through the Crosstown Commons reconstruction. This will create free flow for the entire construction zone during the one year period. If it doesn't work or the public is against it, we can discontinue and we still have the benefit of all that the feds have paid for.

I can see problems with making all lanes toll lanes. I don't routinely drive that section of freeway, but occasionally I may need use it. Does that mean I need to buy a transponder and setup an account that I may never need to use, just in case I need to drive that section someday? Is there going to be signs to divert people without transponders onto city streets to bypass that section of road during certain times? While a bus may work great for those that live by a transportation hub and their place of work is by another hub, but those that live and work in areas that are not easily served by a bus may have no choice but to drive. I don't know if it would jeopardize getting selected into the program, but I believe that at least 1 free lane is necessary to make the program viable.
I don't have a problem with the use of tolls on HOV lanes to make better use of those lanes. I do have a problem with tolls on all lanes and even if it is called free-flow pricing it is still a toll. If you take a simplified look at the gas tax by saying the average vehicle gets 20 mpg and with the 20 cent gas tax, each vehicle is paying a penny for each mile that they drive. The result is that the more congested a highway is, the more the drivers contribute per mile. As an example, if a section of road had 100,000 vehicles per day, they would pay $1,000 per mile per day in gas tax, where a section of road that had 10,000 vehicles per day would only pay $100 per mile per day in gas taxes. The call for tolls on congested sections of roads have nothing to do with the drivers not contributing their fair share, but those are the most profitable sections of road to collect tolls on. I support funding for public transportation, but I believe it is a metrowide benefit and it is fairer to use some kind of a metro wide tax rather than to double tax those driving a certain section of road.

I think your questions are a good representation of how a lot of thoughtful people might view this. The Citizens League would only support pricing the Crosstown Commons reconstruction if free transponders were offered to anyone who thinks they might use the construction area during peak hours. That should be no problem because some of the federal money is specifically for technology. I am sure there would have to be public build-up and appropriate signage for all of this.

The one-year pricing of the Crosstown Commons reconstruction could not start until new transit infrastructure and service is ready to go, so that means more park and rides in some new locations and more capacity and more service.

The other part of the equation that needs to be moving when pricing starts is getting more employers actively offering flex time and telecommuting. That is also one of the areas that the feds will fund and the current proposal has $10 million in it to offer resources to replicate Best Buy's Results-Oriented Work Environment. The ability to get this type of choice offered more often is a cultural issue with many employers. The amount of reduction in vehicle numbers that we need at particular times to really reduce congestion is not as much as you might think, because the ripple effect once the congestion begins is so substantial.

I like your analysis about how much people pay per mile for road use through the gas tax. When it is more congested, they pay more because they burn more fuel and pay more in gas taxes. That is one current "toll" if you will. If we implement free-flow pricing, that driver pays a "toll" only when there is congestion that reduces several other "tolls" they already pay. The amount of gas tax they pay goes down by avoiding congestion. They also get the benefit of saving the time they would have wasted, the air pollution they would have caused and the higher chance of being in an accident. These are all "tolls" in my view.

I think if we polled the public, most would associate tolls with toll roads and would say that "tolls" are applied 24 hours a day, 7 days a week based on the amount of road that you use and that the money is used to build and maintain the road. Nothing about that description is accurate for free-flow pricing. That's why I don't think it is accurate to call free-flow pricing "tolling."

With that said, I think you put your finger exactly on where the public decision needs to be. Are we willing to try this to push forward our options in one corridor and possibly replicate it in other corridors? Or do we limit our transit and telecommuting options to capturing general revenue sources? We are still waiting for the first bus rapid transit (BRT) facility in the Twin Cities Metro Area. This is an excellent opportunity to provide it.