 |
"Road Pricing in Singapore." © 2007 VK35. via Wikimedia Commons. |
Highway 37 is once again making headlines. A recent article by Susan Wood for The North Bay Business Journal announced that the California Transportation Commission has endorsed a Metropolitan Transportation Commission proposal to institute a toll on State Route 37. The exact toll figure is yet to be established, but it's expected to reflect the $7 charge for San Francisco Bay Area bridges, projected to rise to $8 by 2025. The toll approval includes two amendments, namely regional income-based discounts and revised guidelines for toll hearings. The projected toll's purpose is to help fund the $430 million expansion of the highway, currently carrying over 35,000 vehicles per day, predominantly from Solano County and the City of Vallejo.
The toll implementation on Highway 37 should consider the integration of a congestion pricing system, where fees vary based on traffic volume. This approach addresses several critical policy principles. Higher charges during busy hours promote vertical equity, as those choosing to drive at such times are often more financially able. It might also enhance efficiency by discouraging traffic during peak times, facilitating more effective highway use. Despite being more intricate than a single flat toll, current technology can simplify comprehension and compliance with variable pricing. Revenue sufficiency might be amplified by earning more during peak periods, contributing to highway upgrades. Congestion pricing might spur economic growth by reducing traffic and rendering the highway more attractive to businesses and commuters. It may also be more politically acceptable than a flat toll, as it provides drivers the option to evade higher costs by traveling during quieter periods. This approach's potential improvements in efficiency and equity might enhance the overall effectiveness of the toll policy. Hence, the adoption of congestion pricing for Highway 37 could better align with the tenets of an effective and fair policy, optimize the highway's efficiency, and secure the required revenue for its upgrades.
In contrast, a flat toll without supplemental congestion pricing has inherent shortcomings. While it exhibits horizontal equity by holding all drivers equally responsible, it lacks vertical equity as it is uniformly applied regardless of income. Public acceptability varies, with some considering it essential and others protesting the increased commuting cost. The toll is intended to cover a substantial portion of the $430 million needed for road enhancements, but a $250 million funding shortfall suggests potential insufficiency. Without price signals to enhance roadway efficiency or encouragement for better usage, a flat toll may prove deficient in areas like vertical equity and revenue sufficiency. Consequently, it could be less politically viable.