Regional officials outline tolling, express‑lane strategies and how revenues are used

Representatives from Washington State, Orange County, the Transportation Corridor Agencies and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority presented a range of tolling and express‑lane practices and policies during a joint commission meeting in Silicon Valley, describing governance roles, payment methods, dynamic pricing, enforcement and how agencies are using surplus toll revenue to fund corridor improvements.

The presentations illustrated that tolling serves multiple functions — funding projects, managing congestion and supporting corridor operations — and that implementation varies widely by state and county. Noah Crocker, financial analyst for the Washington State Transportation Commission, said, "tolling is likely to increase in Washington state, both as a means to fund projects and also to manage our congestion." Crocker described Washington’s four-party governance model: the legislature authorizes toll facilities, the commission sets toll rates, the State Department of Transportation builds and operates facilities, and the state treasurer manages financing and bond covenants.

Why it matters: Officials said tolling is becoming a routine tool for both raising capital and managing travel times. The agencies described tradeoffs among pricing approaches, enforcement, equity programs and the technical and legal limits that shape systems.

Washington overview: Crocker outlined existing and planned facilities — Tacoma Narrows Bridge (fixed tolls), SR 167 (express toll lanes), SR 520 (time‑of‑day tolls, used to help pay for a new bridge) and planned express tolling on I‑405. He said pre‑tolling on the old SR 520 bridge will contribute $1,200,000,000 toward the new bridge, and that the project still has an unfunded portion of $1,400,000,000 on the west end entering Seattle. Crocker also described Washington’s payment options (Good To Go transponder, pay by plate, pay by mail, short‑term accounts) and said different payment methods carry different premiums to reflect collection costs.

Orange County and the 91 Express Lanes: Daryl Johnson of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) described the 91 Express Lanes’ evolution from a private P3 facility to public ownership after state legislation in 2002 enabled the county purchase. OCTA’s system now moves about 285,000 vehicles per day and carries roughly 30% of peak‑hour traffic in the corridor. Johnson said the facility's pricing policy targets a throughput of about 65 mph; he summarized the policy as: "The only thing we sell is reliability." He said average toll revenue per transaction is roughly $3.66 and that net excess toll revenue is about $15,000,000 per year after debt service, reserves and operating costs. OCTA’s board adopted a policy to reinvest excess revenues in the corridor, splitting funds roughly 80% to highway projects and 20% to transit operations and capital in the corridor (express bus and commuter rail).

Financing and refinancing: Johnson said OCTA paid off an internal loan and refinanced in the prior year, producing roughly $25,000,000 in interest savings in the refinancing transaction and about $1,500,000 a year in interest savings that he said "goes right back to the toll payers and the rate payers." He said OCTA maintains a policy that public funds will not cross‑subsidize toll facility activities and that OCTA’s financing structure and policies influenced its pricing and reinvestment choices.

TCA and toll roads: Michael Grama of the Transportation Corridor Agencies described the county’s 51‑mile toll road network, which generates roughly $220,000,000 in annual revenue and represents about 20–21% of Orange County’s freeway network. He emphasized the agency’s role in planning, financing and building roads that are later transferred to the State of California for maintenance and enforcement, and noted environmental mitigation investments (about 2,000 acres of restored or preserved habitat).

Los Angeles results and lessons: Stephanie Wiggins of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority summarized LA’s conversion of existing HOV lanes to high‑occupancy toll (HOT) lanes under a federally financed pilot. LA’s dynamic pricing ranges from $0.25 to $1.40 per mile; she said the two pilot facilities produced preliminary net toll revenue of more than $26,000,000 and that the MTA issued almost 303,000 transponders to date (well above original distribution targets). Wiggins said the pilot’s evaluations showed travel‑time savings (13–17 minutes morning peak; 8–14 minutes evening peak) for drivers who changed behavior and that more than a third of new transit riders reported being influenced by the HOT lanes. She also described an equity program with about 4,400 enrolled households that have received roughly 8,000 toll credits.

Common implementation issues: Presenters and commissioners discussed technology interoperability (transponders and "hockey puck" devices), enforcement (use of CHP patrols and fixed cameras; high HOV fines), legislative constraints that can dictate technology choices, and differing local financing models that shape toll policy (e.g., facilities financed to cover debt service vs facilities aimed chiefly at congestion management). Several speakers urged regional coordination on toll policy to avoid conflicting pricing approaches at county borders.

Context and next steps: Panelists offered to brief state legislators and commissions on financing, enforcement and operational details. OCTA and other agencies said they are coordinating on corridor projects such as direct connectors and lane‑mile expansions, and noted upcoming toll facilities (I‑405 in Washington; planned express‑lane extensions in Riverside County). The presenters encouraged clearer public outreach to explain how toll revenue is used and to address equity and technology concerns.

The meeting moved next to other panels on data and innovation; several officials said they will make fuller briefings and supporting documentation available to interested staff and legislators.