Skip to main content

Editorial against tolling NC 540 from a socio-economic viewpoint

Earlier this week, there was an editorial column in the Raleigh News & Observer on the impacts the proposed toll road on lower-income drivers. Written by Julie McClintock, the column is decidedly against the toll highway and suggests that the annual $24 million in gap funding be better served for public transportation projects.

An excerpt from the op/ed:

ALTHOUGH THE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY HAS NOT YET DECIDED on a particular electronic tolling technology, it will probably require users to sign up for an account and obtain a transponder. This imposes several difficulties on low- income and minority drivers.

* First, most electronic tolling systems require either a credit card or bank account just to sign up. Many low-income and minority drivers do not have these. A 2002 study at UNC showed that 45 percent of low-income families in the state do not have credit cards and that 25 percent of all minority families in the nation do not have any bank accounts.

* Second, many toll road transponder accounts require a deposit or sign-up fee, a monthly service fee or automatic recharge fee.

* Third, electronic tolling discourages occasional or emergency use by requiring all potential users to go through the hassle of setting up an account and purchasing a transponder in advance. If a driver does not have a transponder and needs to use the toll road for an emergency, he would be subject to a very high fine.

Will the toll road affect many low-income drivers? You bet. One such group would be the many low-income workers who service office buildings. At U.S. Environmental Protection Agency offices alone, there are more than 300 maintenance and custodial contractors who would fall into this category.
Well, if North Carolina follows the lead of some Northeastern states that have EZPass system some of Ms. McClintock's concerns will be answered.

In New York, Pre-Paid EZPass Transponders can be purchased at local grocery stores, service plazas, or at various NY State Thruway offices. Called E-Z Pass On-The-Go, it is a $25 prepaid transponder that can be registered online or at a NY Thruway office or by mail. This EZPass on the go is also available in Pennsylvania. If the North Carolina Turnpike Authority follows this pre-paid multiple options to register and fund EZ-Pass On-The-Go, this will allow non-credit card holder or those without a checking account greater access to a transponder and the means to pay for it.

In New York, there is not a monthly service or recharge fee. In Pennsylvania, there is a yearly $3 fee and no recharge fee.

There is not a 'fine' to use the toll highway without a transponder, there is a higher toll-rate up to 3x the toll rate, but not a fine.

I do agree with Ms. McClintock that there should be a non-transponder cash toll booth option on the new highway. However, the NCTA sees this as a cost-savings move, and in other states like Texas, cashless toll highways are becoming more common.

Finally, Ms. McClintock closes with:

That body will decide in this year's short session whether to adopt the Turnpike Authority's request for $24 million a year "gap funding" that these toll roads won't cover. That is $24 million a year for 40 years that could be better spent on public transit improvements, such as light rail, recommended by the Special Transportation Advisory Committee. Legislators should do the right thing and put public transit ahead of toll roads.

Now in an area where Public Transportation is pretty much not utilized, and in an area where they can't get a common public transportation system and gameplan together, I'd argue that the $24 million per year over the next 40 years would be better spent improving, expanding, and building the transportation network we need (spread through highways and public options) vs. throwing everything in the boondoggle that can be public transportation.

Comments

John Spafford said…
I too would like to see a cash collection lane. As someone who lives far away from NC, but who occasionally visits (I was there in 2006), I want an option for the occasional out of state visitor.
Anonymous said…
North Carolina should be so lucky to have such a proactive state DOT. I'm so sick of people complaining about how will this affect this and that group. I'll tell you what affects those groups even more--a no build scenario.

This game is played out all the time here in Georgia. We have a statewide toll authority with one 4 mile stretch of toll road. Sure there have been plans to build and implement other toll facilities across the state including Atlanta, but you can't repair a sidewalk in this city without it becoming a socioeconomic or minority issue. The end result: nothing gets done.

According to the NCDOT's website, no toll road is built without a "toll free alternate." Why should the state of North Carolina cow down to people who aren't financially responsible enough to have a bank account? My guess is that if they don't have bank accounts, they can't get car loans either. However, I'm sure some people still manage to, and that's why there are free alternatives.

We should be so lucky in Georgia. I have copies of the last several 25 year plans going back to right after the 1996 Olympics. I even have a copy of the Peachtree and Auburn Corridor design projects released in 1991. Read through these grandiose plans and then take a look around you here in Atlanta, or look at a map--none of it gets done because groups such as the Atlanta Journal Constitution block these wonderful ideas before they can even hatch here. MARTA? No politician in this state would touch that with someone else's ten foot pole. Freeway projects, especially toll routes? Forget those too. We get interchange redesigns and repavings. That's it.

Popular posts from this blog

Grand Loop Road of Yellowstone National Park

  Grand Loop Road is a 140 mile loop highway which traverses the interior of Yellowstone National Park.  Grand Loop Road connects all of the major attractions and geological features of Yellowstone National Park along with the entrance roads.  Grand Loop Road is a seasonal highway and despite some conjecture never has been part of the US Route System.   Part 1; the history of Grand Loop Road The majority of history pertaining to Grand Loop Road was taken from the below National Park Service article: Historic Roads - Yellowstone National Park (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov) Yellowstone was declared the first National Park of the United States on March 1st, 1872.  The first real highway to access Yellowstone National Park came in 1873 when a tolled facility was constructed from Bozeman, Montana via Yankee Jim Canyon to Mammoth Hot Springs.  Numerous attempts were made to fund construction of roadway infrastructure during the early years of Yellows...

The last 1956-63 era California Sign State Route Spade?

Along southbound California State Route 170 (the Hollywood Freeway Extension) approaching the Hollywood Freeway/Ventura Freeway interchange a white California State Route 134 Sign State Route Spade can be observed on guide sign.  These white spades were specifically used during the 1956-63 era and have become increasingly rare.  This blog is intended to serve as a brief history of the Sign State Route Spade.  We also ask you as the reader, is this last 1956-63 era Sign State Route Spade or do you know of others?  Part 1; the history of the California Sign State Route Spade Prior to the Sign State Route System, the US Route System and the Auto Trails were the only highways in California signed with reassurance markers.  The creation of the US Route System by the American Association of State Highway Officials during November 1926 brought a system of standardized reassurance shields to major highways in California.  Early efforts to create a Sign State Route ...

California State Route 70; the Feather River Highway

From 2017 through to early 2019 I drove the majority of the California State Route 70; the Feather River Highway from CA 89 southwest to CA 99. CA 70 is an approximately 178.5 mile state highway which starts at US 395 near the Nevada State Line and travels west through the Feather River Canyon to CA 99.  CA 70 is often referred to as the Feather River Highway" given it's close association with the river.  Historically CA 70 was previously signed as US 40A and CA 24.  The Legislative Routes prior to the 1964 California Highway Renumbering that made up the current route of CA 70 are as follows: -  Legislative Route Number 21 from US 395 westward to Oroville. -  LRN 87 from Oroville south to Marysville. -  LRN 232 from Marysville to the current junction with CA 99.  CA 70 was even dual signed with CA 99 into Sacramento on what was LRN 232 for a time. The change from US 40A/LRN 21/LRN 87/LRN 232 can be seen by comparing the 1963 State Highway Ma...