| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Bob
Moderator
781 Posts |
 Posted - 02/28/2007 : 08:37:59
|
First, anyone who receives correspondence from their delegate or senator, (or US representative), please post it here (take your name off). I want to read any and all explanations of this vote. To date, I have gotten one email from Toddy Puller, simply stating the fact that the vote for the exemption was unanimous. What a copout. Not even any explanation or the honesty to even tell me her opinion.
Second, I want to organize a petition drive this summer. |
Edited by - Bob on 02/28/2007 08:38:17 |
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2007 : 09:55:04
|
Bob,
Actually, both my senator and delegate told me last year that they supported the exemption. If you'll recall, I polled many of the candidates before the last election and cound find NONE in either party who was opposed to it. I was rather surprised by Jody's posting from Albo earlier this year to the contrary - that is the only time I've heard of any opposition, and, well, Albo's record speaks for itself.
The problem you are likely to run into is that you can vote out the incumbant, but the replacement will probably have the exact same view. After all, the overwhelming majority of people in the Commonwealth believe the hybrid exemption is exactly what is needed - or they have no stake in the matter.
You belong to a fringe minority. But, please, don't let that stop you.
By the way, I also polled US Rep Davis on this, and he told me that he supported the exemption but that it should be evaluated every year to see if it was still appropriate based on traffic. It was the closest of anyone to not giving a hearty endorsement. |
 |
|
|
No2HOV-1
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 10:40:14
|
Message sent to VA Delegates:
Gentlemen, Last year the voters in Virginia were promised that the exemption for Hybrid cars to use the HOV with less than three persons would not be extended this year. It is my understanding that the exemption has been renewed. The traffic congestion on I-95 is due to volume. Allowing individuals to use the HOV offers no incentive to carpool and help reduce the number of cars on the road. In addition, as traffic becomes more congested, the amount of air pollution from regular cars only increases due to inefficiencies. The near term solution to reducing traffic congestion on I-95 South is to make the HOV three for all cars or even four to help reduce volume. I challenge either of you two gentlemen to travel on I-95 South between Washington and Fredericksburg at 5PM any weeknight and tell me less cars would not improve conditions. Please encourage Governor Kaine to veto the hybrid exemption as a benefit to a vast majority of Virginia voters. Thank you.
Response from Delegate Mark Cole:
I understand your concerns. The exemption for hybrids purchased before July 2006 was extended for another year. I think most believe that limiting it to hybrids purchased before July 2006 was a reasonable compromise and that will cause a gradual decline in the number of hybrids using the HOV lanes. Of course the real solution is to expand the HOV and regular lanes on I95 which is what I am pushing for.
Thanks,
Mark Cole
Delegate, 88th District
Stafford, Spotsylvania, and Fauquier Counties
|
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 11:27:24
|
OK. Now please write him back and make sure he understands that "expanding HOV" by putting tolls on the existing portion will actually cause the elimination of HOV, since there is no technical way to count the number of passengers in a vehicle, and therefore no way to allow free HOV use.
All cars will be tolled at the same rate, and so there will be far less incentive to ride share.
Plus, does he know the expected cost of a commute from Spotsylvania to DC on the new tollway? Over $30 EACH WAY. Everyday. Does he really want to vote for that tax on his constituents? They use the road for free right now... |
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 13:01:10
|
The letter from No2HOV-1 is riddled with errors. No promise was ever made on not extending the exemption; in fact, it was nearly the opposite.
I like the proposal by the Mayor of London reported in the Post 2/28 to charge fees (tolls?) based on emissions, with the worst offenders paying up to $49/day. |
|
|
|
MDC
Moderator
638 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 13:34:36
|
Mr. Troll,
I'm sure that any correspondence you've had with your elected representatives have been fact checked and were found to be 100% accurate. Just like everything you post here. |
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 14:28:07
|
| MDC - several of the messages I sent to candidates were provided to Robert Lang, including the responses. Thanks for helping. |
|
|
|
sluDgE
Moderator
1563 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2007 : 18:03:49
|
Bob,
Goober wrote about the canned response he got from a delegate in another string and is now contemplating writing to the Governor. Info below is FYI..
About the comment on contacting the Governor ...
Here's a quote from the current Governor's website at http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/biography.cfm
"In transportation, Governor Kaine is working to promote greater accountability, with a focus on measurable improvements, better connections between land use and transportation planning, and greater investments in road, rail and public transportation infrastructure. During his first year in office, he has recruited innovative transportation professionals and made significant advances in land use reforms that will make Virginia’s transportation network serve people better."
If you want to "contact" him, you can send a message at http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/contactGovernor.cfm
It would be interesting to see what, if any, response you would get.
|
|
|
|
darkprime
Senior Member Member
195 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 09:34:03
|
| I just sent a nice long explanation and mentioned this site too. |
|
|
|
No2HOV-1
Starting Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 03/02/2007 : 09:46:31
|
| The correspondence is factual. That is what was sent to Delegate Cole and that is his response. Delegate Cole voted against the exemption last year and this year he abstained from voting. Whether there was a "promise" for July 06 thru Jun 07 to be the last year, that's debatable. That was my inferrence as well as others. However, I've come to realize that the exemption will always continue because there are only a few of the delegates and senators who could care about this issue and they will never have the number of votes to reject the bill. The only way to stop it is to not have it introduced or to not have the Transportation Committee refer it to the House or Senate, but that will never happen because voting for the exemption makes the delegates and senators look good on the environment. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
632 Posts |
Posted - 03/09/2007 : 13:48:39
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by SpongeBob[/i]
[br]OK. Now please write him back and make sure he understands that "expanding HOV" by putting tolls on the existing portion will actually cause the elimination of HOV, since there is no technical way to count the number of passengers in a vehicle, and therefore no way to allow free HOV use.
All cars will be tolled at the same rate, and so there will be far less incentive to ride share.
Plus, does he know the expected cost of a commute from Spotsylvania to DC on the new tollway? Over $30 EACH WAY. Everyday. Does he really want to vote for that tax on his constituents? They use the road for free right now...
Spongy, I suspect you're half-right (and half-left). The likely solution is that EVERYONE will be tolled and HOVers will have to petition Flour to remove the fees that appear on their EZPass. I suspect HOVers would also need to provide written documentation of their carpool (similar to what many agencies do now to allow carpool parking). This also means that there would be qualification criteria, and perhaps even required notorized "carpool participation" affidavits and other processes (hoops to jump through) before the tolls could be removed. Forget that the whole EZPass system is an intrusive, big brotheresque means to track our comings and goings (read "1984," "Brave New World" or "Atlas Shrugged").
However, this makes total sense when you remember that this is designed solely to discourage carpooling and encourage toll paying.
The moral of the story is that whenever the government gets involved in something they screw it up for everyone! |
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 03/20/2007 : 10:00:46
|
Nah, Raymond; they are not going to implement such a paperwork-intensive, easily fooled process. Not when there is so much money at stake.
I have thought about this a lot (my wife says too much) and there is no technical way for the overhead transponders to charge one car with two people and not charge another car with three people. It can't be done.
OK, you could have cops stationed at numerous points along the system stopping every car with tinted windows and every van to count passengers. That would certainly make ride-sharing convenient, eh?
Remember EVERY vehicle that accesses these lanes, EVERY SINGLE ONE, must have an EZ-Pass. One theory I've heard is that carpoolers would have a "sock" to put their transponder in that would keep it from being charged by the toll booths. But what is to stop me from putting my transponder in the sock all the time? Heck, we could all do that any time we want! Do you think Flour/Transurban will let us do that?
So what is their alternative? Toll everyone!
Look, Kirby said it plain as day in the Post: HOV-3 won't be free.
|
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2007 : 10:02:11
|
Sponge -
Currently, CA 91 has a system for carpoolers to use the toll lanes. There are 2 lanes as you approach the unmanned electronic toll station; one for carpool and one for others. I suspect that enforcement is conducted via video surveillance of the lanes. Both lanes require the use of a transponder.
When you think about it, without a video surveillance, what's to keep those without transponders from using the lanes? If not video, then how are the toll lanes enforced without 24/7 police? The conclusion is that there has to be both the transponder recorder and a video system. |
|
|
|
SpongeBob
Advanced Member
USA
679 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2007 : 12:32:10
|
Yes, I've looked at the SR91 model. It is not applicable to the system as proposed by Fluor/Transurban. That road is only 10 miles long, not 35+, it has one entrance and one exit, not a dozen or more as will be the case with the planned toll road here, it has one tolling point, not several dozen as we will have. It has far, far fewer vehicles on it. It has two lanes, not three. It is used mostly, according to its statistics, by housewives going shopping and is not a central commuter route. It was not a pre-existing HOV, but was custom-built within the bounds of the existing freeway.
Carpools are not free during commuting hours on SR91, as was promised, but are tolled with a mild discount. That is the point.
The tolling on SR91 is not "congestion dynamic", as is planned for traffic management purpose on I95, but is based on a published schedule.
Current prices on SR91 (which increase every six months) are about 92.5 cents per mile in the evening and about 45 cents in the morning. Why expect anything cheaper here? Do the math on a daily commute from Woodbridge.
The lone toll checkpoint on SR91 is a video camera running tape, with the occasional human in the booth. Any chance that would work here given the traffic volume and speeds on our road? Given the fact you can't look inside a van? Given the darkness in the morning and a set of tinted windows?
Finally, SR91 included a controversial if not entirely sick-minded "non-compete" clause that only you could love.
Still, SR91 failed as private venture and had to be rescued by the state.
To compare the two roads either 1) displays your ignorance or 2)proves our suspicions that you are a troll in the gainful employ of someone with a financial incentive to toll the citizens of Virginia. (And please, don't do your usual attempt to divert the argument by saying that I, too, have a financial incentive at stake. Duh.) |
|
|
|
NoSUV
Advanced Member
1076 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2007 : 14:41:12
|
Sponge- the point is that IT IS TECHNOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE, which seems to soak right through you. Ever been on SR91? I drive it about once every 3 months using the regular lanes. As I've said with the hybrid, try it before saying it has no possibilty of working.
Is it possible that the carpools on SR91 could travel without a toll? Why, yes, it is!
Was the "improvement" based on widening the freeway, just like what it proposed in NOVA?
Why, yes, it was!
Is there serious congestion on SR91?
Why, it's almost identical to NOVA, with the regular lanes barely moving and the express lanes zooming during commuting (and most non-commuting) hours!
Can there be more than one entry and exit point on an electronic toll system?
My goodness, you think?
I agree that the illegal tinting of windows could be a factor - for which the video system could also record and send a ticket.
Squeezed enough or do you want to keep going? |
|
|
|
beachhead
Junior Member
46 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2007 : 14:52:58
|
Sponge,
Like you, I have never believed the "HOV-3 rides free" nonsense. There are only two viable alternative with HOT: 1) Install manned (womaned, if you prefer) toll booths along with an EZ pass lane at all entry points so that carpools are let through free, or 2) Charge all cars regardless of number of passengers, make, model, color, creed or religion.
Since most entry points don't have space for two lanes to accommodate option 1) and no self-respecting private company is going to hire more employees if it can get away without hiring any, it seems pretty obvious that option 2) will win the day. R.I.P. slug system. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Accountability and Petition Plans
Forum Locked
