Promises, Promises

Our Bay Bridge toll was 75 cents in the 70's (KQED)

A one-party State that has no fear of political opposition and is responsible only to itself for obeying rules will inevitably be corrupt. Case in point: bridge tolls have been diverted, and more toll increases have been requested. [bold added]

Part of a $3 Bay Area toll increase that voters approved in 2018 for public transit and freeway improvements is effectively being used as a slush fund for bridge maintenance.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s legally questionable diversion betrays promises made to voters. It affects the funding source for $4.5 billion of capital projects required by the nine-county ballot measure, known as Regional Measure 3...

RM3 provides $2 of the current $7 auto toll and, starting Jan. 1, $3 of the new $8 toll. The remaining portions are from separate authorizations for other purposes.

MTC’s comingling of these different portions affects both cash revenue from bridge tolls, expected to be more than $800 million this year, and liability for the $11 billion of borrowing through bonds the agency has issued since 2001, for which it still owes nearly $10 billion.

The comingling also makes it impossible to determine whether the diversion is limited to the RM3 portion of bridge toll revenues, or if other portions are also being misdirected or leveraged for excessive borrowing.

Despite the opaque finances, the commission on Wednesday will consider raising tolls another $2.50 by 2030, bringing the total to $10.50. The proposed increase, which would involve 50-cent annual increases starting in 2026, is supposed to be for bridge maintenance and rehabilitation.

But without transparent bookkeeping, agency commissioners and the public cannot intelligently evaluate whether the additional $2.50 toll is needed...

The melding of revenues from and debt liability attributable to the different portions of bridge toll revenue make it nearly impossible to ascertain whether other parts of the toll revenue are also not being spent as intended.

The problem is exacerbated because each component of the toll is permanent — there are no expiration dates — but the expenditures in many of the cases are for finite projects. That eventually leaves extra money.

Which raises the question: If MTC staff is correct that it can use any toll funds for bridge maintenance and rehabilitation expenditures, then does it really need to again permanently increase tolls, this time by another $2.50? Alternatively, if it raises tolls for bridge work, should it start phasing out other toll components for projects that have been completed?

Despite representations made to the voters that higher tolls will be used for non-bridge purposes (e.g., BART, Caltrain, freeway widening), MTC staff now claims that they can be diverted to bridge repair.

The lesson that sadly must be learned every few years: California governments promise the voters anything to increase revenues---whether they be taxes, bond issuances, or fee/toll hikes--then break those promises because no one will be penalized.