Home › News › County News
Charging motorists for using roads considered
Download this story as a podcast!
James Glover II / Star staff A city councilman suggests transportation officials look at converting to a toll road the nonfreeway portion of Highway 118 from Moorpark to Saticoy.
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsDuring a community meeting two years ago concerning traffic from the construction on Highway 23, one frustrated driver suggested turning Lynn Road into a toll road as a way for those willing to pay to get around the mess.
That drew laughter.
But with money tight and traffic jammed, the idea of charging motorists to use Ventura County roadways has suddenly turned serious.
"It may be a good idea or it may be a bad idea, but I think we should discuss it," said Keith Millhouse, a Moorpark city councilman and member of the Ventura County Transportation Commission.
Millhouse suggested earlier this month that the agency look at converting to a toll road the nonfreeway portion of Highway 118 from Moorpark to Saticoy.
In part, his suggestion was meant as a leaping off point for a discussion about funding future transportation projects. Whether it's feasible or even practical, Millhouse said, a discussion of the idea would allow county residents to see some of the very real constraints in building highways and improving transportation options.
"It's the first time I've heard something like that mentioned here," said Joe De Vito, another commissioner as well as a member of the Ojai City Council. "I think something like that would be way, way down the pike. More likely is the concept of a local (transportation) sales tax."
Two private toll roads
But Millhouse's suggestion also comes as Californians, frustrated by traffic, appear to be turning a corner on what is and isn't politically acceptable.
Two years ago, state voters approved a $19 billion state bond to fund highway improvements. Late last year, the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Agency floated an idea of creating toll lanes on portions of Interstate 10 as well as Interstate 210 between highways 605 and 134.
Under the plan being discussed in Los Angeles County, drivers could use the carpool lanes on those roadways for fees that might change depending on the level of congestion. Instead of tollbooths, the fees would be collected electronically.
In San Diego County, a new 10-mile privately owned toll road opened late last year to deal with congestion around the U.S.-Mexico border.
That's only the second private toll road to be built in California, after Orange County's Route 91, which was recently bought by the Orange County Transportation Agency. Motorists pay almost $10 to use the route during peak commute hours.
Hamid Bahadori, the principal transportation engineer for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said many of these ideas arise because there isn't enough money to maintain the existing highway infrastructure in the country.
If public or private toll roads or congestion pricing results in adding new capacity, the club supports the idea, said Bahadori.
But if fees are being placed on the use of public freeways without adding capacity, then there's a problem, he said.
"That's a form of double taxation," said Bahadori.
Whether Ventura County residents would be willing to pay tolls or tax themselves to cover transportation projects is another question.
County voters have twice rejected an optional local sales tax for transportation. It is the largest county in the state without such a tax and the only one in Southern California that has not passed a similar measure. Statewide, 19 counties have the tax, which designates a half-cent or 1-cent sales tax for transportation. Passage of a measure in the county — which would take a two-thirds majority — could bring in $50 million to $60 million for use on roadways, bike lanes, pedestrian improvements and mass transit.
Local transportation planners say the county is increasingly at a disadvantage when it comes to getting state and federal money for transportation projects because it can't provide the matching funds.
"The buzzword is competitive disadvantage,'" said Darren Kettle, the executive director of the Transportation Commission.
Increasingly when Ventura County goes looking for transportation money, it is competing against other counties that can match state and federal money, said Kettle.
Quality-of-life issue
Los Angeles County has a transportation sales tax, a transit tax, and the county's transportation agency is considering "congestion pricing" for use of carpool lanes.
There is a willingness to look at such a broad range of revenue sources because traffic has become an important quality-of-life issue for commuters in Los Angeles County, Kettle said.
In some ways traffic isn't yet bad enough in Ventura County to trigger a willingness to pay for the right to drive in the carpool lane or spend a dollar a mile to drive on a toll road, he said.
Voters may be willing to support a half-cent sales tax, but a successful campaign to pass such a measure might take two years, Kettle said.
At the next Transportation Commission meeting in March, he said, he would outline some of these issues.
Posted by SF1943 on February 23, 2008 at 1:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Federal Government could take care of these types of problems in every state in the Union if it would just quit waging war and funding NASA.....Problem solved!
Posted by THX1138 on February 23, 2008 at 8:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
We already pay a hefty road tax every time we buy fuel! If the local government is lacking funds they should take the issue up with Sacramento! I would guess the state doesn't funnel money back to Ventura, but that's NOT the taxpayers fault!
To impose a toll would not only be a double tax; it would also encourage many to avoid the road thus concentrating traffic on other roads.
Re: 118; Most will recall the shellfish folks that live along the 118 shot-down an attempt to improve the road. They chose to live next to a main highway and yet want to maintain a small-town feel. We should upgrade the h.way to serve the many NOT the few!
Why does the local government feel they can keep nickle and diming the taxpayers?! We should not be considered an end-less supply of $$. Perhaps play the game SimCity and see what happens when tax goes up - people leave, the population goes down...
Posted by socal2310 on February 23, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Pricing is the mechanism by which markets allocate scarce resources and it is very effective. Eliminate the pricing mechanism, and you get shortages and surpluses (not enough freeway space or too much for the area in question).
Our freeway system is responsible for the much derided urban sprawl: existing freeways (emphasis on the "free") reduce the marginal cost of moving further out instead of infilling locally.
Something not appreciated by many people is that the majority of our state is open space (farming, ranching, undeveloped) with building taking place in the areas adjacent to freeways (paid for by everyone instead of by those who want to use it).
Posted by dcsfancy on February 23, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't think that a toll should be added to a road that has been here and paid for with fuel tax,property tax. If they want to ad a toll they need to build a new road first then they can attach a toll to pay for the cost of construction.
Posted by CAtruckdriver on February 23, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
THX1138's quote"To impose a toll would not only be a double tax; it would also encourage many to avoid the road thus concentrating traffic on other roads" is 1 of the primary reasons (detering the traffic) this is even being thought of in the first place. It's well known that the residents of Moorpark do NOT like commercial truck traffic thru their "small town" and will do just about anything to curb the truck traffic thru Moorpark. Keith Millhouse and the rest of the counsel members need to remember that taxpayers money paid for that portion of the hwy 118 to be built in the first place and who do they think they are to be double taxing people for one and anyone who has paid attention to the Moorpark city counsel will remember that they are anti-truck more then any city in the county. Trucking is a vital part of any city in Ventura County and they just need to realise that it's here to stay whether they like it or not. Do they even know how many truck drivers and trucking company owners LIVE in Moorpark? They'd be very suprised if they asked. A toll road is one of the lowest forms of greed a govt. can do to taxpayers, knowing that people are now willing to pay a little extra of their hard earned money just to get home a few minutes earlier from work. Mr. Millhouse and the counsel need to lay off the trucking industry or they will start a war that we WILL NOT win! They can call it whatever they want (needed trans. funds, improvments, etc) but we all know what it's really about! Moorpark residents just need to accept the fact that the highway was there first. I, as a truckdriver think the state DMV office has failed the public on not educating people on how to drive when near a truck and that results people to be afraid and unsafely drive near trucks. Trucks move slowly, they are very easy to manuver around if you know how they drive. Cutting a truck off, changing lanes directly infront of a truck is the closest thing to asking to be hit a car driver can do. Having patience and remaining behind a truck for a few extra seconds and then making a turn or lane change is 90% safer to do then cutting it off, but most people are not using their patience in their driving skills. If the county is low on transportation funds, go talk to the elected officials in the capitol, not screw the people already paying the road taxes!!
Posted by shaver_one on February 23, 2008 at 12:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My niece lives off of 118. It is the only road near her house. Should she have to pay a toll to get home...or to leave home? Will the city of Moorpark buy her a helicopter so she can go shopping and take her kids to school?
Seriously, making 118 a toll road is dumb. If you want to charge for using a 'diamond lane' on 101...maybe. But, first you have to improve Hwy 101.
Posted by CommonsenseVC on February 23, 2008 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually Shaver, you could implement a plan to exempt those living locally. Why shouldnt commuters from out of the area who pay nothing to maintain the road and use it as a cut through not pay something towards safety and capacity improvements. And why should the truckers who use this route to bypass the scales on the 101 not pay something? The alternative is to leave it the way it is and hope your niece isnt one of those who will be seriously injured or killed in a head on collision.
Posted by lrgvanman on February 23, 2008 at 6:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If fuel costs stay way ahead of the wages some of us make, that may be a money generator to make up for us who can no longer afford fuel.
Posted by CAtruckdriver on February 24, 2008 at 9:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CommonsenseVC, if Ventura County charged motorists passing thru on "our" hwy 118, do you think it's right for say Orange County to charge YOU to use the 57 fwy or any other if you needed to? No, it's not fair at all. ALL of our tax money thats supposed to be used in the transportation fund goes to build roads for everyone in the state to use, not just your neighborhood or someone elses.
Irgvanman, going by what you said do you
honestly think that if they make hwy 118 a toll road that they will cut you a check to pay for your gas if your running short one month? Thats wishful thinking my friend.
Posted by CommonsenseVC on February 24, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CA Trucker, You alreday do pay to use the OC roads. When you go through there and buy gas, fast food, or other items, they have a 1/2 cent sales tax that goes toward transportation. You pay to help maintain their roads, build new ones and fund mass transit.
The money that goes to the state for transportation is insufficient to pay for road improvements. The amount of money for roads has gone down since the 60's on a relative basis despite more people using them.
Bottom line is the state doesnt have the money even in good times. Someone either needs to come up with funding ideas or people need to just get used to the fact they will sit in congestion, roads and mass transit funding wont exist and the county's economy will be hurt.
As a trucker, I am surprised you dont see the importance of the need for funds. Truckers suppport the concept of dedicated truck lanes because time is money; the longer they spend idling and in traffic hurts their bottom line.
Finally, if the truckers coming through Moorpark were more considerate there probably wouldnt be as muck flack they catch from the residents. No jake brakes by houses, don't cut through to avoid the scales or inspections. Take the route you are supposed to go and if you need to use the 118, be considerate. I am sure you are very considerate; unfortunately, all your colleagues are not.
Posted by CAtruckdriver on February 26, 2008 at 7:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
My OC reference was just an example. My point was why charge a fee to use a 2 lane highway? If the powers that be want to widen it and make it a 4 or 6 lane road between Moorpark and Oxnard then it would only be a busier road. This fine state of CA has always cried poormouth ever since I've payed attention but yet the bills still get paid and it still functions day to day. I'm sure there are certain little things that have changed along the way but at the rate that the state charged commercial truck registration (approx $2300 per truck) and the CHP charges a Bi-annual Inspection fee @ $375 per truck/trailer and whatever else I'm forgetting I'm pretty sure this state has some $$ in the bank account.
Now I totally agree that there's some truck drivers out there that dont have any courtesy and drive like poo, but that's only a certain percentage out of all of us. I dont even like to be around certain drivers that haul certain types of stuff because they drive like idiots and think that cutting off even other trucks, let alone cars is funny and ok and they are just ruining the whole industry image as a whole but being from a 3rd world country/having that mentality they sure in the heck dont care!!
I'm still baffled why people who dont drive trucks think that trucks that use hwy 118 are "avoiding the scales". Does anyone know that there are indeed scales (inspection lanes) on hwy 118 near the railroad crossing on both sides??? Just because the CHP isnt there daily inspecting trucks does not mean that the trucks are doing something illegal. I use hwy 118 alot, I'm always legal and it's a nice shorter route then dealing with the 101 and the whole hwy 23 mess. It actually cuts about 20-30 minutes off of a delivery if heading thru that way. Lets not get a negative thought that just because trucks are using hwy 118 thru Moorpark that there's something illegal being done.
Back to the original story, if they somehow make 118 a toll road, the 101 & 23 will become a nightmare/parkinglot with truck traffic! Think long and hard on this one folks..
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 11 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.