Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. Is it fair to ask non-bridge users to take part in the vote on rate increase, so the new revenue can be used to do road projects elsewhere for non-bridge users?
2. Is it lawful to still collect bridge or highway toll, when all construction bonds have been paid for?
1. Is it fair to ask non-bridge users to take part in the vote on rate increase, so the new revenue can be used to do road projects elsewhere for non-bridge users?
2. Is it lawful to still collect bridge or highway toll, when all construction bonds have been paid for?
Are you planning to sue? This has been going on for close to 50 years. The Golden Gate Bridge was paid for about that far back, and the employees grew concerned about their job future, so they invented Golden Gate Transit, a transit company connecting Marin County with SF. Were bridge commuters consulted? No. It was done hush-hush. But nobody's complained about the results, AFAIK, until the recent rate hike proposal.
I-66 in Virginia/DC I think I read that there's a $35 toll on it during rush hours. Someone from the area can perhaps clarify that.. But that 'toll' isn't really a 'toll'.. It's them incentivizing you to stay off the damn road.
As I recall, it's only for single occupant vehicles, so, they're trying to push people to mass transit or carpooling. And traffic does suck in DC.
Not giving an opinion on right or wrong, just what I think they're attempting to do.
Seems to me that everybody benefits from roads and bridges whether they personally drive on them or not.
Our taxes should be enough to cover the cost and maintenance of any bridge built. If not, dump the current government officials and start over with regular people who know how to budget.
Nobody should be penalized for driving alone across a bridge. It's absolutely ludicrous to support that notion. Our leaders come up with such foolish excuses for fattening their wallets. Why do we accept it?
1. Is it fair to ask non-bridge users to take part in the vote on rate increase, so the new revenue can be used to do road projects elsewhere for non-bridge users?
2. Is it lawful to still collect bridge or highway toll, when all construction bonds have been paid for?
1. How else are you going to do it? Democracy isn’t that specific. I still get a say in stuff I will never use and still pay taxes for programs that aren’t applicable to me.
Last time I was in NYC crossing the Verrazano Bridge ran me $17. Makes $9 sound like a bargain.
lol Yup. All NYC bridges and tunnels, including ones connecting to NJ, cost more than $9. I’d take $9 any day over what we pay. They are some opportunities for discounts, like for EZpass users who cross the bridges and tunnels a certain number of times each month, but still.
Basically OP, they have you by your nether region and so they're going to squeeze money out of you to pay for whatever else they want to fund that they can't charge a fair market price for.
There is a WORLD of difference between charging people property taxes to pay for schools even if they don't have kids, roads even if they don't own cars, or whatever AND squeezing those you can get away with to pay for those you cannot squeeze.
CA keeps pushing more and more of the tax burden onto those that are not incurring the huge budgetary increases.
I'm not even going to say that's right or wrong because that's up to the city, county, state voters there...not my business.
It’s over $40 to cross the Confederation Bridge connecting Prince Edward Island to New Brunswick.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.