Freeway User Fees Would Pave Road for Transit Overhaul : Costly rail systems and highway construction have not solved problems. ‘Peak-load pricing’ would relieve MTA’s deficit and reduce congestion.

As the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board prepares to vote on a $3.4-billion budget, it should move to correct the past failures of the region’s transportation policies.

The past was marked by heavy spending on highway construction and costly rail systems. Yet freeways remain congested, and the outlook for improvement is bleak.

The region would be better served if we turned from expanding rail systems and lane-building toward a freeway user-fee program.

It would solve two problems. It would greatly relieve the MTA’s budget deficit and, for a change, would actually reduce congestion on Los Angeles freeways.

Traffic congestion is more than a nuisance. Several studies have estimated that it reduces production in Los Angeles by as much as $9 billion a year.

Alternative mass-transit projects are popular among transportation planners and bureaucrats but are very costly. The elevated rail proposed for the Ventura Freeway would cost an estimated $2.3 billion, for example.

While this project has been delayed in the new MTA’s budget--due only to funding difficulties--the budgeted Pasadena trolley line will cost an estimated $841 million.

These projects should be canceled. Studies continue to show Americans--not just Angelenos--steadily less inclined to use public transit.

Commuting patterns are growing more among suburbs than between suburbs and central cities (the most frequently used transit design).

The rail lines so popular among many interest groups make little economic or practical sense.

Another approach has been to expand the existing freeway system--a plan that has been tried many times in Los Angeles and elsewhere without success.

Freeway expansion projects are very expensive. The 1989-93 widening of the Ventura Freeway cost more than $42 million. Yet congestion is not relieved when construction stops. It has been shown that more drivers are drawn onto the freeway system in anticipation of less congestion.

Despite this, Caltrans recently proposed spending $6.2 billion on car-pool lanes on most Los Angeles freeways.

Aside from the cost, safety issues include lane-narrowing and the use of median space.

We need to give people a financial incentive to change their driving behavior. A program using “peak-load pricing” would provide just such an incentive. Los Angeles should charge a user fee for each freeway use. To be most efficient, the user fee should be set at a higher level during heavily congested periods.

With a user-fee program, drivers would make less important trips during off-peak times, reducing rush-hour congestion. To avoid fees, many would share rides.

This program would not require toll booths on every entry and exit ramp. A user-fee system can make use of scanner technology, send monthly bills and issue rebates to reduce the burden on low-income drivers.

In all likelihood, implementation would require some form of approval from state and federal officials.

The revenues can be used for highway maintenance, government budget relief or as a tax offset or reduction.

Peak-load pricing has been used effectively in Singapore since 1975. Scanner technology of this type was tested successfully on a large scale in Hong Kong from 1983 to 1985. And this technology will be in use on a private toll road under construction in Orange County.

Is this another way for government to raise dollars? No. Higher user fees are fundamentally different from other forms of taxation.

User fees promote the efficient use of “resources”--and this includes our time--while other forms of taxation do not.

It would save money on transportation construction, allowing a shift of tax dollars to schools or tax reduction.

At a time of large budget deficits at all levels of government--including the MTA--lower-cost solutions to public policy issues should receive critical attention.

Reducing freeway congestion in Los Angeles can help reduce business costs, increase employment, raise revenues and make Los Angeles a better place to live.