520 Tolls, I-90 Tolls (Spokane, Moses Lake, Monroe: neighborhoods, construction, taxi)

[RunTheDistance476]

Right. I am aware that wsdot conducted this study, my thoughts were to try and spread out the taxation, so people aren't paying $7 a day or crowding I-90 as well.

I don't know how significant it is but there are thousands of commuters wasting gas to avoid 520.

My thought was not to completely pay for the bridge through gas taxes. Rather, with a small increase (such as 10 cents on the gallon or something) would help ease the pain of those who have to commute.

Obviously 520 is vital to the states economy and, like other roads in the area, is extremely dangerous if neglected. So just charging those who already had houses or places they were living a fee only, Seems unfair and it doesn't help traffic on 405, 5, or 90.

[Jalhop]

A problem I have with tolling is that I'll not have a transponder and a monopoly will be running the fee system. That means the request for payment will be threatening, with the fee quickly exponentially increasing. I'd rather avoid the hassle. If I knew the payment request would be polite with 30 days to pay it online and simply so (no login), I'd be much more amenable with tolling.

[mkarch]

Originally Posted by flyingsaucermom

I just wish this was, in someway, scaled for income. My husband is blue badge at Msoft. In addition to the tens of thousands he gets in annual bonuses/stocks, free food and coffee at work and whatnot, we enjoy perks of the prime card that provides discounts to all sorts of travel, admissions and services. He also gets a free ride to work. Paying for the tolls would be annoying, but not significant.

I worked (just quit for the summer) as a home health care aide. I made $13-13.75 an hour. The company requires you have a car, insurance and a phone with text capability (we often drive clients to appointments and the phones are for emergencies), but they don't offer any sort of discount packages for any of these requisites. They don't offer health insurance. They also don't pay for the time you are commuting: you clock in and out at the client's house. So let's say you are living in S. Seattle and you have a 4 hour shift in Redmond. It takes you about 45 minutes to get to and from the shift. You make $53-55 for essentially 6 hours of time, but if you have to cross the hypothetical 1-90 toll bridge, then you potentially lose $11 of that $53. That means you just made $7 an hour (before taxes).

The tolls are reasonable for those who can afford them. They are not reasonable for the overwhelming majority of my 250 coworkers, many of whom are struggling college students, young single mothers, "displaced" baby boomer housewives, minorities and immigrants.

I understand the need for revenue and I feel some tolling is appropriate, but from the perception of the poor, I think it's unreasonable to toll both bridges.

Looking at this bigger picture, what you're describing is a business model that will no longer be viable due to an increased cost of single car transportation. This is something we've already seen due to a rapid increase in gas prices over the last decade, so it shouldn't come as a shock. In your specific example, it means the company coordinating the in home care will need to have a larger network of employees and route them to destinations closer to home. If they decide to carry on with the current routing plan, they'll either lose workers or be priced out of the market by more efficient competitors.

Let's face it, the current system of 'free roads' isn't working. It's very difficult to cross the metro area many hours of the day and there's no viable alternative short of using a helicopter. Tolls won't solve the problem entirely, but they'll improve it in a way that ties the cost of use to the people using them. I certainly don't think lowering the cost of driving is the best or most efficient social welfare scheme to help the poor.

[flyingsaucermom]

Let's face it, the current system of 'free roads' isn't working. It's very difficult to cross the metro area many hours of the day and there's no viable alternative short of using a helicopter. Tolls won't solve the problem entirely, but they'll improve it in a way that ties the cost of use to the people using them. I certainly don't think lowering the cost of driving is the best or most efficient social welfare scheme to help the poor.

They already operate 3 offices in Bellevue, Tacoma and Seattle. That doesn't mean, however, that employees don't travel around the city. I'm not sure how these companies are going to adapt when Dept. of Labor suggests that these very services are going to explode as baby boomers get older but I certainly hope they either provide discounted rates for insurance/care maintainance, pay tolls or raise wages to offset the costs.

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by Jalhop

A problem I have with tolling is that I'll not have a transponder and a monopoly will be running the fee system. That means the request for payment will be threatening, with the fee quickly exponentially increasing. I'd rather avoid the hassle. If I knew the payment request would be polite with 30 days to pay it online and simply so (no login), I'd be much more amenable with tolling.

Why fight it We have a transponder in all 3 cars and automatic funds transfer at $30 when it goes below $8. All I do is log in every month and verify the accuracy and so far it's not been a problem. We only cross 520 maybe 2-3 times a month, but it's convenient and safer, since we rarely pay much attention to the US Mail any more, it's all junk mail since all our bills are done online.

Once all the roads and bridges have tolls, people will stop wasting gas going on I90 and then the gas tax revenue will drop so they will have to raise the tolls.

[jjinla]

Be careful for what you wish for on bridge tolls. Out in NY, they raise tolls every year. Do the roads get better? No...the unions get another huge raise and they become a cash cow for ten million pet projects. I think the GW Bridge is up to about $17 and the Tappan Zee is rumored to be in the $20+ range once reconstruction is finished. You do NOT want to build a $20 wall between Seattle and the eastside...commerce would change so rapidly it would likely devastate downtown.

You can't force people onto mass transit when you barely have any compared to many larger cities.

And as I read, the 90 toll would be used to pay down the 520 one. How is that any more fair than just upping the gas tax? You are taxing a group of people that receive limited benefit from it either way.

[RunTheDistance476]

I think once the east side light link rail is completed in 2023, public transportation will be up to par with most metros, so maybe raise the tolls after then.

[jjinla]

Raise tolls for what, though? In our state, they raised tolls on all the bridges and tunnels to pay for the 911 Memorial.

If you want to vote yourselves in a tax increase, or punish people for driving, by all means support a toll. But do not assume that the tolls are going to improve your roads or transit. They become political slush funds.

[509]

The simple solution is to charge a toll between western Washington and eastern Washington!!! Get rid of tolls internal to the region.

For years, we in eastern Washington have been able to travel to western Washington without paying any tolls. The gig was up a few years ago when the legislature shifted gas tax dollars so the gas tax revenue from eastern Washington now is sent to western Washington instead of ALL of it being spent in eastern Washington.

Fair is fair....and it will cost us in eastern Washington. Just put a toll on ALL the cross-Cascade highways.

If your going east-bound...the toll goes to eastern Washington...if your west-bound it goes to the coast.

Then get rid of tolls for the 520 bridge and I-90.

I feel this is much more fair.....and then just let the gas tax dollars get spent within the half of the state where the gas was purchased.

[Botev1912]

Yes, but Washington is one state not two. I haven't seen better (smooth and traffic free) roads than Tri-cities