Commission hears widespread public outrage over bridge toll changes; votes to enter closed session for legal review

Bay City residents packed the Feb. 3 commission meeting to press elected officials over a recent unilateral increase in tolling and transponder charges for privately leased bridges overseen by Bay City Bridge Partners.

The city manager opened the matters in a public statement before closed session, saying staff and the commission had received resident notifications and social‑media inquiries about a toll increase and that officials were “exploring what rights we have as a city.” The manager said the city believes Bay City Bridge Partners “didn't follow the correct business” in implementing the increase and that the city would coordinate with partners and legal counsel to find a response.

Public comments were strongly critical. Speakers described receipt of emails notifying transponder holders that monthly unlimited transponder pricing would double (from $15 to $30), expressed concern that Google Maps still lists an old per‑crossing toll amount, and asked whether bridge closures or repair periods would extend the five‑year unlimited crossing period earlier negotiated with the lessee. Several speakers said the tolling decision was made without adequate notice to the city, and urged the commission to pursue legal remedies. One commenter said the community was ready to take direct action to remove tolling infrastructure; others called for emergency measures to ensure residents and first responders would be able to cross bridges without excessive cost while repairs or closures continue.

Commissioners and staff reported they had already sought an outside legal opinion and moved to review contract and bond questions. The commission voted to enter closed session to consult Warner Norcross & Judd attorney Dennis Langland and review the legal opinion on the status of revenue bonds and contract obligations. Commissioner Steven Prince made the motion to go into closed session; Commissioner Coakley seconded. The roll call vote was recorded as nine yes votes, and the commission recessed to closed session.

After returning from closed session, the clerk noted the commission had received the legal opinion and attendance remained the same. Commissioners reaffirmed that staff would continue to pursue legal options and explore coordination with regional partners to respond to the toll increase and its impact on residents.

Why it matters: residents described direct financial impacts on commuters, low‑income residents and workers who cross city bridges for employment, medical care and school. The dispute also raises questions about how the city’s contract with the bridge partner addresses unilateral toll changes, whether contractual remedies exist, and whether federal tolling statutes or bond covenants apply — items the commission directed staff and counsel to review.

What the commission did: the commission formally voted to convene a closed session to consult outside counsel on the status of revenue bonds and related legal questions regarding the bridge lease and tolling practices; that motion passed by roll call. Commissioners said they would report back to the public after counsel’s review and pursue remedies if warranted.