Oh, hear hear.

So are these existing roads or roads to be built?

I believe two of them are new roads and the 3rd is adding a lane to I-205.

Building any new highway or bypass roads is a waste of time and somebody's (taxpayer?) money. We already have plenty of roads, how about evening out the alternative options before we make it even easier to get around in our cars? I wouldn't think it a terrible waste to add tolls to existing lanes. Why not recoup some of that lost construction and maintenance money?

Ever try to bicycle from Salem to Hillsboro on a daily basis before?

While it's arguably a bad idea to commute that far anyways, people do it...

An interesting editorial appeared in the SF Chronicle describing the benefits of making new toll-HOV lanes available for Bus Rapid Transit, giving a double benefit. - Dave Brook

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/01/13/EDGIAGM2HP1.D
TL

I like the idea of toll roads. ALL major thoroughfare roads SHOULD be toll roads. It would cover the other zillion dollars that the gas tax doesn't cover.

Somehow, someway, people should be charged more directly for their auto use so that it is more reflective of what is actually being used. This subsidized transit for roadways (trains, airplanes, and others) is a bunch of crap.

But then of course if America where smart it would look at it's history and unsubsidize it all, re-privatize it, because as for percent of personal income transit was more available and capable 50-100 years ago than it is now.

The real question will be what percent of the total bill the tolls will cover and how much will have to come from the general transportation fund.

Tolls could be used as a measure of market demand for transportation facilities. This would put roads on same footing as other utilities. I doubt that PGE would put a new high transmission line if the eventual users wouldn't be paying the cost of building and operating it.

If tolls would cover 100%, then it seems as if the need, and market demand, justifies the new facility. If tolls only cover, say, 10%, then there really doesn't seem to be the demand for the faciity.

Is there somewhere in-between where the public interest in a new road is worth the investment? The studies i have seen show tolls paying less than half the cost of a new road, not a very strong argument for construction.

I would like to know why ODOT has spent millions (if not billions) over the last few years expanding various highways (examples, U.S. 30 from Scappoose to St. Helens, Oregon 22 from Salem to Stayton, U.S. 97 in Bend and Klamath Falls, Oregon 34 from Corvallis to Lebanon) -- and all of a sudden has no money for 99W.

Further - 99W carries on a daily average basis more vehicles than these other routes.

If ODOT is to toll 99W, then these other roads - in fact, both I-5 and I-84, and every road crossing over the Cascades and the Coast Range, and the major cross-Willamette Valley routes (like 99W/18, 22, U.S. 20 and 34) should all be tolled. There is no reason to punish Yamhill County, when it has never gotten its fair share of transportation improvements, whereas Marion, Polk, Benton, Linn and Columbia Counties are getting far more than their fair share.

(And that means tolling BOTH Oregon 34 AND U.S. 20 between Corvallis and Lebanon. At least Corvallis would then get a replacement for its aging Van Buren bridge.)

Erik -

Interesting argument. I used to live in Corvallis and did take advantage of those improvements.

It would be interesting to see a chart detailing ODOT revenue sources (fed. grants, state gas taxes, gen. fund dollars) by county, and the ODOT expenditures by county, so see if spending was being fairly apportioned by county, population, etc.

Does anyone know if such data is available publicly in an easily digestible form?

- Bob R.

look you guys are getting this all wrong. these roads are paid for. the new trend for toll roads is to allow private companies such as the spanish corporation cintra to tax american citizens. in texas they are doing this. even if you are dumb enough to be programmed to think this concept is ok, lets look at this closer. money for roads comes from taxes which are not going away. why should we be additionally taxed for driving on our own roads? because these companies will maintain the roads? forget it - they will charge the commuter way way more to drive on these roads than it costs to maintain them or they wouldnt be in business. in the end these companies will always try to get corporate welfare to pay for maintenance anyway. also you should check out the states actual numbers. get a copy of the comprehensive annual financial report "CAFR" and see that states are running huge surpluses while they complain about "budget defecits". the term neo-feudalism" comes to mind. only fools want toll roads.