Toll talk (News and Observer)
Like holiday traffic jams, tolls on North Carolina’s 182-mile stretch of Interstate 95 appear increasingly inevitable.
The north-south route’s traditionally toll-free status is under pressure from heavy traffic, tight funding and new technologies that claim to eliminate some of tolling’s aggravations. Within a year, members of the General Assembly can expect a drive for legislation that would allow tolls on already constructed roadways – a prerequisite for authorizing user fees on I-95.
Much will depend on the specifics of the toll plan. If the proposal is carefully constructed to bring about a needed upgrading of the interstate, if it doesn’t unduly burden those North Carolinians who use the road every day and if the methods of collecting tolls are practical and enforceable, ending I-95’s toll-free era could be worth the price motorists would pay.
The case for taking the toll route on I-95 was reported Sunday by The N&O’s Bruce Siceloff, in an article that carried the sub-headline “Advocates say state’s deadliest interstate sorely needs rebuilding.” Siceloff quoted Marc Basnight, the Senate president pro tem, as saying “You should collect that toll now. There’s not a worse road in North Carolina.”
Not-so-golden oldie
Tar Heel drivers probably could come up with quite a list of contenders in any worst-road competition. But it’s true that I-95 outpaces other interstates in its fatality rate, particularly near the South Carolina border.
The road’s central section in Johnston and Harnett counties is notably antiquated. Drivers taking the upgraded U.S. 64-264 east from Raleigh (toward Basnight’s beloved coast) may well be struck by the contrast between the mostly modern U.S. highway and the 1960s-era interstate it crosses.
In all, the state DOT would like to see $5 billion in improvements on I-95. But the money is nowhere to be found in the existing system of road funding.
It’s not news that there’s a misfire in how the state and the nation fund interstate infrastructure. A key factor is that fuel taxes don’t go as far as they once did. Road-related costs are up but fuel taxes aren’t, while increasingly efficient vehicles don’t use as much gasoline and diesel as they once did.
In that sense, the talk of adding tolls is a substitute for what might be a more sensible option, raising fuel taxes across the board. That route would both boost highway-repair money overall and dampen oil imports – but anti-tax pressure led North Carolina to essentially cap its fuel taxes.
And so, in the historically toll-averse South, officeholders are talking seriously about charging for the privilege of driving on I-95. Virginia’s governor kicked off the most recent round a few weeks back with a proposal to charge tolls at a new plaza just north of the North Carolina line.
Bake until done
That plan has obvious shortcomings. For one thing, the charge would bear no relation to distance actually traveled on the interstate. Plus, economy-minded drivers might simply bypass the sole toll station.
Whatever North Carolina does, it’s vital that officials don’t propose a half-baked tolling plan. For example, word is that there would be no traditional-style toll plazas. That’s good for traffic flow. But what about fair and equitable revenue collection?
Some drivers would pay via electronic payment systems such as E-Z Pass. The rest, however, would have their license plates identified by photo equipment; bills would be sent in the mail. Faith in the honesty of the American consumer is touching, but you have to wonder about that one.
Drivers may come to accept the inevitability of I-95 tolls. But the any such setup must be purposeful and, above all, practical.
Published Tue, Jun 15, 2010 02:00 AM
Modified Tue, Jun 15, 2010 06:52 AM
