Toll Roads in Orange County? The Oklahoma Experience

Congratulations for editorializing in support of examining the viability of toll roads in Orange County (April 9).

Most people in the West are unaware that toll roads are fairly common in other parts of the country and that earlier in our history many major roads were built by private companies that then charged tolls to recover their investment.

Last year I traveled extensively in the United States and observed on many occasions that the toll roads generally seemed to be in better repair. An interesting comparison can be seen in Oklahoma, between Tulsa and Oklahoma City. There is a toll expressway and a parallel non-toll highway that passes through several towns with signals and other traffic control. Both are well traveled. In other words, people pay to use the faster route and avoid traffic congestion. Oklahomans are apparently content with having such a choice.

Users of our existing freeway system, and the taxpayers, would benefit greatly from initiating a toll charge during “rush hours.” Many freeway on-ramps now have a control mechanism to regulate the rate at which additional cars enter the freeway during rush hours. Buses and car pools are allowed to bypass these controls. The system is supposed to encourage more car pooling and bus use--but rush-hour congestion is not getting any better.

The reason we have rush-hour congestion is that all users view the roads, including freeways, as a free good. Even though demand for road space is extremely high during rush hours, there is no market pricing mechanism to ration the fixed supply. However, if drivers had to pay real money to use the freeway during peak travel time, the incentive to car pool, use the bus, or drive at other times would increase dramatically. It makes sense to replace the on-ramp control mechanisms with toll collectors and set the tolls higher during peak usage times.

Freeway toll proceeds should be used exclusively for maintenance and improvement of the freeway system. The ultimate goal should be to make the freeways self-supporting from user fees. Infrequent freeway users should not be forced to subsidize the everyday commuter by using general tax funds for these purposes.

SHARON A. AYRES

Costa Mesa