USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

The feasibility of open road tolling in Florida

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The feasibility of open road tolling in Florida
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Reich, Stephen L
Davis, Janet L ( Janet Lynn )
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Florida -- Dept. of Transportation
Florida State Turnpike Authority
Miami-Dade Expressway Authority
Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority
Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority
Publisher:
Center for Urban Transportation Research
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Toll roads -- Economic aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Express highways -- Economic aspects -- Florida   ( lcsh )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida ; in collaboration with the Florida Department of Transportation, Florida's Turnpike, the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, and the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority.
General Note:
Principal investigators: Stephen L. Reich, Janet L. Davis.
General Note:
"November 2001."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - C01-00087
usfldc handle - c1.87
System ID:
SFS0032205:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nmm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s2001 flu|||| ||||||eng
datafield ind1 7 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00087
2 doi
040
FHM
0 4 245
The feasibility of open road tolling in Florida /
c prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida ; in collaboration with the Florida Department of Transportation, Florida's Turnpike, the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, and the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority.
260
Tampa, Fla. :
b Center for Urban Transportation Research,
2001.
500
Principal investigators: Stephen L. Reich, Janet L. Davis.
"November 2001."
650
Toll roads
x Economic aspects
z Florida.
Express highways
Economic aspects
Florida.
1 700
Reich, Stephen L.
Davis, Janet L.
q (Janet Lynn)
710
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
Florida.
Dept. of Transportation.
Florida State Turnpike Authority.
Miami-Dade Expressway Authority.
Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority.
Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority.
049
FHmm
8 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.87



PAGE 1

''' The Feasibilitv of Open Road in Florida November 2001 Prepa r ed by the Center for Urban Tra n sportation Resea r ch Un i vers i ty of Sou th F l or i da i n coll abo r ation with the F lori da Department of T ranspo rtation F l or ida' s Turnpike the Mi am i Dade Expressway Authority th e Or l ando Ora n ge County Expressway A ut h ority a nd the Tampa -H i llsborough County Exp r essway Autho r ity

PAGE 2

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Acknowledgements This report was prepared under Florida Department of Transportation Contract No Bd065 Turnpi ke District with the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida. Florida's Turnpike, the Miami-Dade Exp ressway Authority, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, and the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority also provided staff and consultant services and support Principal Invest igators for the project were : Mr. Stephen L. Reich Program Director, T ransp orta tion Program Eva l uation & Economic Analysis Center for Urban Transportation Research Un i versity of South F lorida Ms. Janet L. Davis Senior Research Associate Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida

PAGE 3

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Ta ble o f C on tents Acknow l edgements ...... . .... .. .... ... .. ...... ... ...... .... ..... ..... .... .. ..... .. .. . .... .... ..... .... 2 Executive Summary ... ..... ... ...... .. ... . ...... ....... .... ......... ... ...... . ....... .... ... .... .... .... .4 Introduction ..................... ........... ... .... ..... ................ ....... ...... .. ............ ...... ......... 9 Open Road Tolling Defined .. .... .. ...... ... .. ............ ........... .. ................. .... ...... .. 10 Background .. ....... ..... ..... ...... ...... ..... ..... ... .. .... .. ... ... ... .. .... ... .. .......... .... ......... 13 Study Pu r pose ... .. .. ..... ..... ..... .... ... .... .......... ..... .... ..... ..... ... ...... .... ...... ... ..... 14 Study Organizat i on ...... .... .... ....... ..... ... ... ..... .... ..... .... ..... .... ...... ...... ...... .... ... 15 Why Examine All Electronic Toll Collection? ............... ....... ... ....... ................... 17 Customer Impacts and Market i ng ..... .... ............... .... ... .. ........ .. ..... ....... ..... .. ..... 19 Tel ephone Survey ... .... ....... ..... ... .. ....... .... ... .. ...... .... .... ... ................ ... ........ 20 Focus Group Find i ngs ....... ...... .... ... ...... .. .... .... ....... ............... ........ ....... .. ..... 25 Operations and Collections Reliability ......... .. .... .......... ... .......... .... ....... ... .. ..... .. 29 Le.akage .. ...... ........ .. .................. . ..... ........ . ... ..... .... ............ ........... . .... . . .. 29 ETC Partic i pation Goa l s ..... . .... ......... ...... .... ... ..... ...... . .... .... ... ......... .. ... ..... 33 Business Policies and Procedures ...... ... .... ............ ... .... .. ... ......... .... ... ... .. 33 Statutory Changes .. ....... .. ....... .... ... .. ....... .. ... ..... ...... ........ ..... ...... ... ... ........ 33 Other Enforcement Capabil i ties .. .... .. ..... ... ............ . .............. ...... ... .. ... .... ... 34 Employing a S u rcharge to Make Operat i ng Costs Neutra l .. ................ ...... .. 35 Current Technolog ic al Performance and Capabil ity ..... .......... .... ..... .... .... .. .. 36 Backroom Operations .. ..... .... ... ..... .. ....... .. ... ... ........... .......... .. ...... ..... .... ..... 38 Traffic and Revenue .... .... ... ... .......... ..... .... ..... .... ...... ... .... ...... ... ... . .. ..... ... .. ...... 40 Current Traffic C h aracteristics .... ... ..... ... ..... ... .. ... ... .. .... ... .. .. ....... ........ .. ... 41 Comparison to Other ORT Systems .. .... ...... ....... ......... .. .... ..... ............... ..... .45 Estimated Future Traffic and Revenue .. ...... .. ..... .... .... .... ..... .... ..... ...... .... .... 46 Revenue Real i zation ..... .... ............ . .... ..... .... .. .... . .. .... ........ ...... ...... .... ..... ... 51 Estimated Revenue Loss .. ....... ...... ...... .... ..... .. ................. ............ ..... .... . 53 E n gineer i ng . ..... ... ...... ...... ..... ... .... .... ... . . .... .. ...... ... ... .... . ... . .. .. ... .... .... .... .. 56 Potentia l Capital Cost Issues .... ...... ...... ............ ...... ... ........ ..... .... .. ........... 56 Toll Plaza Traffic Throughput .... ..... ...... ....... .... .. ...... ..... . ..... ....... .. ... ..... .. .. 59 Organizationa l and Legal ... .... .... .. ..... ........... .... . .. ...... .... ...... ............ ......... .... 64 Organization ..... ... ... ... ..... .... .. ......... .. ........... ... ..... ...... .... .... ...... ............ ..... 64 Legal Review ....... .... ...... ... .... .. .... ..... ...... .. ..... .. ....... . .... ... ..... .... . ....... ....... ... 68 Im plications on Other and Smaller Toll Agencies ... .... ...... ........ ...... ... ........ .. .... 7 4 Conclusion and Recommendations ............. ... ... . .... ..... ... .... ..... ........ ... ... ... .. .. 76 List of Appendices ..... ........ .... .. ........... ... .. ...... .. ....... ....... . ...... .... .... .... ..... ..... 80

PAGE 4

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Executive Summary The study of the Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida" was a collaborative effort undertaken by the Florida Department of Transportation, the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority and the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority A commitment to continuous improvement and a heav ier reliance on the toll road sector to provide Florida with transportation enhancements led the group to investigate the possibility of implementation of a statewide all electronic toll collection system. The effort used two existing systems that employ all electronic toll collection as case studies (Toronto and Melbourne) and reviewed the concept from the perspectives of Customer Service and Marketing Operations and Collections Reliability Traffic and Revenue Engineering and Organizational and Legal. Subcommittees for each of these functional areas were formed along with a Management Committee to oversee the effort. Project management services were provided by the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the Uni versity of South Florida. Perspectives Customer Impacts and Marl
PAGE 5

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida than a manual transaction, the qu eu ing at toll plazas can be reduced and the hurdle of non-transponder users is min imized if ORT is pursued. Operations and Collections Reliability Several significant issues are raised in the analysis of Operations and Collections Reliability. There seems to be litt le doubt that the introduction of an all-electron i c toll collection system will result in some additional loss of potential revenue to toll agencies. The extent of this loss is difficult to estimate given that a specific system for the state has not yet been specified In addtlion, the employment of AETC w ith the current technology requ i res a practice of video billing. When a non-transponder customer uses the AETC toll facil ity, an image of the l icense plate is captured, processed, and the vehicle owner of record is then billed The cost for this transact ion is estimated to be as h igh as $0.75 compared with an ETC transaction cost of about $0.15. The Operations and Collections Reliability group determ i ned that the technology exists for the imple m entation of pilot projects in Florida, statutory changes will help t he i mp le mentation of open road tolling, and that if video tolling i s emp loyed in Flor i da, a surcharge to cover the incremental costs should be established. Traffic and Revenue The Traffic and Revenue group analyzed exist ing revenues for the participating agencies and provided projections of traffic and revenue for the four operating agencies for fiscal year 2010 with and without open road tolling. The OOCEA s projections are ide nt ical since it has embarked on a 7 -year plan to collect tolls in an open road environment through express, high-speed lanes while maintaining manual collection to the extent that the market dictates Estimates of traffic and revenue are provided for the open road tolling and non open road tolling options. Building off of the work of the operations group, a $0.50 surcharge is assumed for v i deo transactions With this assumption, the open road-tolling scenario becomes revenue neutral. Engineering The Engineering group focused on the potential capital cost avoidance of open road tolling. Using four plazas on the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority's system severa l detailed estimates were deve l oped. The analysis yields no universa l factor that can be applied to a potential toll plaza to estimate capital cost avoidance because of the ext re me variances by location. In the four MiamiPage 5 of$()

PAGE 6

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Dade cases examined. estimated savings r ange from 14% to 74% from traditional toll plaza construct i on to the use of ORT. An examination of toll plaza th r oughput shows that while the use of exp r ess l anes can theoretically address toll p l aza throughput. the advantage lies in the smaller footprint requi r ed for an ORT collection point i n contrast to a traditiona l toll plaza. In some cases the reduction of the requ i red to bui l d a toll plaza may make the difference in a projects' fi nanc i al feasibility. Organizat i onal and Legal The review of potential legal issues and existing statutes revealed some potential for improving the climate for all elect r onic to ll collection. Severa l organ izatio nal models were examined in l i ght of the increased coordination that is recommended if a statewide ORT system were to be pursued There are several organizationa l models that would be app r opriate to forward the cause of AETC and open road tolling. Those part i cipating in th i s study seem to support an organization tha t would focus on interoperability consensus and respect for individual b u siness practices and operating needs. While there is no compelling legal obstacle to the implementation of AETC, the technology needs to be of sufficient reliability to satisfy the r equirements of the bondholders of the various author it ies. As new debt issuances are contemplated, part i cular attention must be paid to the Operating State men t development and other documents, if an agency is seriously considering the implementation of AETC. Conclusion and Recommendations The t est for feasibility of open road tolling in F lorida in this effort has been to identify any fatal flaws in the concept. While there have been many potential obstacles revealed that must be addressed before implementing a system across the State none has emerged as fata l T he range of issues that has been identified represent challenges that need to be overcome befo r e the deployment of a statew i de, "barrier les s" toll collection system can be successful. Based on this analysis none of the challenges appea r to be techno l ogically i nsurmountable Several of the soc i a l and pol it ica l ramifications present formidable issues What has become clear through this study is the uniqueness of each of the participating agencies and the differences between f aci l it ies operated by the same agency Open road toll ing with all e l ect r onic toll collection is, however, feas i ble. l'ag< 6 of80

PAGE 7

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida The recommended approach for Florida to move to AETC is an evolutionary path. It is recommended that Florida begin to offer high speed, non-stop toll collection at as many locations as possible, thereby reducing customer demand for trad it ional toll collection. As the demand for manual collection wanes the resistance to all el ectron ic collection will diminish. This evolution will occur at a different pace in the various locations and facilities. The next step for many agencies is to remove the traditional tollboo ths from the centers of mainline toll plazas in order to create express lanes. Commit to as Many Express Lanes as Feasible as Quickly as Pos sible This form of open road tolling (although not AETC) will attract more customers to participate in the ETC programs. Offering more non-stop collection opportunities will not only provide a more attractive option to the customer, it will also allow toll agencies and their private sector partners to work on the revenue loss issues. As the leakage rates come more in line with other methods of collection toll operators, th eir boards of directors and the financial community will become increasingly more confident in an All Electronic Toll Collection model The widespread express lane approach is the next logical step in the evolution of the toll plaza and associated toll customer enhancements. Manual lanes evo lved to automatic coin lanes, to A VI, and to dedicated ETC lanes. Express ETC lanes represent the next move to total barrier free collection or AETC. The increased plaza capacity afforded by these lanes in conjunction with the attendant increase in ETC participation could help defe r some of the plaza expansion that would otherwise be required. As ETC participation rates warrant, lanes in existing plazas can be converted to match local demand and coincide with toll agency reconstruction plans. Toll Agencies Must Work Even More Closely for a Consensus-Based Strategic Evolution Although TEAMFL and the collaboration on this study represent a level of cooperation among toll entities that is commendable, an even closer relationship needs to be established if the goal is to address many of the challenges outlined i n this report. One good example and there are many, is the issue of e lectr onically collecting tolls from customers in rental cars. While there are on going attempts to arrive at a solution, this is not an i ssue that should be negotiated or settled by one of the toll agencies alone. The policy and business practice impl ications are too i mportant. Another issue is the one dealing with trying to capture a large percentage of the commercial vehicle market for ETC. Page 7 of80

PAGE 8

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida The chief executives of the four agencies that participated in this study could create a formidable alliance in these endeavors and send an even stronger message that movement towards a seamless more convenient system of toll facilities in Florida is a top priority. Steps Should be Taken Now to E stablish Tiered Pricing It seems apparent from th is study that for the reasons of customer acceptance, revenue protection, and good management practice a course needs to be set to eventually establish a toll schedule bearing a closer relationship to the cost of collection All of the agencies have programmed a planned increase in to their lo ng-range financial forecasts. It is recommended that these plans be reviewed to exam i ne the tim ing of future increases to perhaps create a "d iscou nt" for ETC customers. T h is may take the form of postponi ng the ETC increas e or accelerating the cash toll increase. This could establish a precedent for a differential where none now exists (some operators already have established a differential). Prepare a Legislative Proposal for the 2003 Legislative Session Several le gisla t ive actions will not only help the evolution of toll collection in F lo rida but can also help to create a more efficient and reliab le sys tem based on today's practices. It is recommended that the general and bond counsels of the participating agencies rev iew this report, particularly the Operations and Collection Reliability section, and work with a group that was invo lved in this effort to draft any desired statutory changes. The effort involved by dozens of staff and consultants in the analysis cannot be overstated While some of the conclusions and recommendations may appear to be obvious to the reader, the data collection, analysis, discussion, debate and finally consensus-building were no small tasks. The Management Committee should be acknowledged for their commitment of time and patience. The Steering Committee should be applauded for the attention and time that they devoted to making th is a comprehe ns ive look at the feasibility of open road tollin g in Florida l'a,y8 of80

PAGE 9

The Feas ibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Introduction As the demands for increased mobility and transportation capacity continue to outpace traditional highway funding in Florida, toll facilities are becoming a larger piece of the transportation solution. Currently, tolled highways and bridges total approximately 700 miles in Florida. This represents almost 20 percent of the Flor ida Intrastate Highway System, the major highway network carrying 32 percent of the state's traffic. While the number and extent of tolled highways and bridges in the state are significant, what is more compelling is that the new center l ine mileage that is being added to the State Highway System to serve the explosive growth is essentially all tolled A recent analysis by the Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority for the Tr ansportation and Expressway Authority Membership of Florida (TEAMFL) shows that some $4 billion worth of toll projects have been completed since 1975 and an additional $2.6 billion are now being developed. The heavier reliance on toll entities to provide highway capacity has led to a redoubled effort to maximize the financial capacity of these institutions. This heavy reliance on toll entities to provide more of Florida's transportation capacity along with the long-standing entrepreneurial nature of transportation authorities, have led to an examinat ion of a concept to operate toll facilities more efficiently in the state. As a possible method to decrease both operating expenses and future capital outlays, the concept of all electronic toll collection has been examined by four of the state's toll entities. The Florida Department of Transportation's Turnpi ke District (the Turnpike), the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority (MDX), the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority (OOCEA), and the Tampa Hillsborough County Expressway Authority (THCEA), collaborated t o conduct this assessment of feasibility of the concept of open road tolling. Representatives from the Florida Transportation Commission and TEAMFL also agreed to participate. This collaborative effort while significant and forward thinking is only one of many efficiency and customer service init iatives be ing carried out by the toll agencies in Florida This feasibility of open road tolling (ORT) in Florida is a fatal flaw analysis conducted from at least five different perspectives. The impl ications of introducing ORT were examined from the operations, engineer ing, customer impacts, revenue and legal/organizational standpoints. This report summarizes Pagt 9 of80

PAGE 10

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida the work of staff and consultants of the participating organizations along with the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research. Open Road Tolling Defined Open road tolling, or ORT, is a method and system of collecting tolls on expressways and other facilities that essentially involves no people collecting tolls in traditional tollbooths. Through the use of the proven technology of automatic vehicle identification (AVI), a portion of the tolls is currently being collected automatically at Florida's toll facilities. AVI collection in Florida currently requires that a customer subscribe to a program that allows their vehicle to be automatically identified in a toll lane by an electronic or other device affixed to the vehicle. This device can be an electronic transponder such as SunPass the Florida Department of Transportation's system, or E-Pass, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority's system. Older AVI systems employ the use of a simple bar code sticker on the vehicle In each of these cases, the customer has registered with the toll entity and pre-paid into an account. When the customer uses the toll facility, a reader in the toll lane identifies the customer's vehicle as valid to proceed legally The collection methodo logy that employs electronic transponders is known as electronic toll collection or ETC. Typically, toll agencies use several other systems in the ETC toll lanes to encourage payment compliance, to identify potential loll violators, and to provide financial controls. Both the SunPass and E-Pass systems employ a video enforcement system. The system captures a video image of the rear license plate of the vehicle and is used in the event that an invalid vehicle proceeds through the lane. Lanes at loll plazas are outfitted to either accept both cash payments and the electronic transactions or in many cases exclusive lanes are devoted to the electronic toll customers. Most of the benefits of ETC accrue to the customer that uses an exclusive or "dedicated" lane. These ETC-only lanes provide faster toll payment in addition to the advantage of the driver not having to have cash or exact change ready to make payment. The cash-paying customer may also be advantaged by virtue of the electronic payment customers being removed from the lanes manned by toll collectors. If the system is working efficiently, the benefits to the toll facility operator include the reduction of manpower to manually collect tolls, increased throughput of vehicles through the toll plaza (enhanced customer service) and reduced operating costs. Page 10of80

PAGE 11

The Feasibilffy of Open Road Toiling in Florida Open road tolling describes a toll collection scenario where all vehicles are identified for tolling purposes electronically while maintaining highway speeds. For existing subscribers to an electronic toll program l ike SunPass or E-pass. this presents some issues but can be achieved. The challenges to be overcome in imp lement ing ORT stem large ly from collecting tolls from vehicles not equipped with identification dev ices. If the vehicle has no transponder, and there is no opportunity to pay cash, how can the toll be collected? Throug h the use of essentially the same technology that Florida uses for video enforcement, a few toll agencies outside of the United States have deployed ORT. In one case, a customer without a transponder that proceeds along the toll facility is identi fie d by means of digitally photographing the license tag, and the registered owner is subsequently billed for the trip Two current but different applications of ORT were exam ined throughout the course of the study. One application is in place in Toronto on the 407 ETR (Express Toll Route). Th e other application is in M elbourne Australia, on the toll project known as City Link. Highway 407, Toronto On Toronto's Highway 407, electronic sensors are located on overhead gantries log highway entry and exit points. Opened in 1997, the Highway 407 ETR was the first toll road in the world to apply ORT technologies. Highway 407 ETR runs east and west just north of Toronto, Canada's largest city, for a total of 65 miles. A customer's toll charge is calculated on a per m i le basis. Vehicles are detected at their entrance and exit points in order to calculate the appropriate toll. The facil ity has over 500,000 transponders in service and approximately 700,000 da ily toll transactions. No cash tolls are c o llected on the system. Transponders Page 11 oj'RO

PAGE 12

L The Feas ibility o f Open Road Tolling in Florida are required for all commercial vehicles, and non-transponder equipped vehicles' entrances and exits are recorded via license plate recognit ion cameras and the customer is billed. Customers either have a transponder for th e 407 OTR system or they are non-transponder users of the h ighway and treated as customers rather than violators. Their toll is collected through a video ident i fication and billing system. The license plates of users who do not have transpo nders are identified through the use of high-speed came ras and optical character recognition (OCR) technology with manual verification when n e cessary Non transponder customers' addresses are obtained through the Canadian motor vehicle department, and the users are billed directly for their toll plus a trip surcharge to account for the additional administrative expense of the direct billing. City Link, Melbourne In Melbourne, a series of eight toll zones are created by gantries over the mainline of the highway to capture the toll transactions The City Link is located in the city of Me lbou rne in the State of Victoria, Australia. The project is a Build-Own-OperateTransfer (BOOT) that opened to traffic in January 2000. The project consists of approximately 13 miles of new lim ited access expressway connecting the airport to downtown Melbourne. The project provides two new tunnels under the Yarra River connecting downtown to the Southeastern Freeway and includes 17 inte rchanges This exclusive ORT project has already generated over 650 000 transponders in service. A series of eight toll zones are created by gantries over the mainline of the highway to either capture the transaction via an ETC transponder, or to capture the non-subscriber with license tag recognition cameras. The system mounted on overhead gantries captures images of every vehicle at speeds up to 93 mph. J>(lge 12 if 80

PAGE 13

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Unlike Toronto, City Link does not employ direct billing In addition to ETC, City Link does allow occasional users without transponders to phone in advance (or imm ediately after) for a one-day use of the roadway. Users provide their license tag number and a credit card to which a flat rate is billed for the day to obtain a "day pass The Harris County Toll Road Authority in Houston, Texas has started construction of the Westpark Toll Road that will be an "all-el ectronic" facility. The 12-mile project is estimated to cost $240 million to $260 million to build and access to toll payment will be exclusively through the agency's existing EZ Tag electronic toll collection system. The highway is being constructed in three segments with opening of the ent i re 12 miles scheduled completion fo r 2004. Open Road Tolling is straightforward i n concept but fairly complex when contemplating its implementation. The prospect of introduc ing this type of system on a well established network of toll highways that are owned and operated by various agencies in a state with near ly 50 million annual visitors (one fifth of which rent cars) 1 serving diverse customer bases raised many questions. Background Based on a strong tradition of innovation in the toll community i n Florida, the Turnpike staff v is ited the innovative Highway 407 Express Toll Route (407 ETR) in November of 2000 An Open Road Tolling Forum was conducted on February 5 and 6 2001 Representatives of 407 ETR, the private concessionaire tha t operates Highway 407 in Toronto were i nvited to Florida for a daylong forum. Representatives of four toll agencies and the Florida Department of Transportat io n's Office of Toll Operations (OTO) participated in work sessions w i th those that have implemented a toll operation where no manual collection i s provided in the travel lanes and all collection is, in fact electronic. Subsequent to that forum, a presentation was made to TEAMFL at the March 1 4, 2001 meet ing in Tallahassee, and each of the four operating entities participating in this effort presented their views It was the consensus of th e TEAMFL Board of Directors that the concept of statewide open road tolling, while posing significant challenges and offering significant potential, warranted further study. The g r oup decided to engage the services of the Center for Urban Transportat ion Research at the University of 1 Source: BEBR .1998 F lorida Visitor Stud y

PAGE 14

The Feasibility of Open Road Toll ing in F l orida South Florida to act as project manager for a feasibility study and that the Turnpike would be the contracting entity. The other th r ee toll agencies, OOCEA, THCEA and MDX pledged the full support of their staff and consu lt ants. Preliminary interviews were conducted with the executives of the four toll agencies as well as the chairman of TEAMFL and the Act ing Executive Director of the Florida T r ansportation Commission in order to prepa r e for the project's init i ation. The study organ i zation and assignment of key personnel as we ll as the study purpose and schedule, were established at the first of a series of work sessions in early June 2001. Study Purpose The chief executives of the Turnpike, OOCEA THCEA and MDX with the chair of TEAMFL and the Acting Executive Director of the Transportation Commission (later described as the Management Committee) arrived at the following statement of purpose: "The study of the feasibility of open road tolling in Florida will focus on the implementation of a "barrier less" toll collection system that is fully electronic, has the capability of collecting tolls from every customer at highway speeds, the ability to identify all vehicles regardless of the owner's subscription to an electronic toll collection program, be interoperable statewide, and is easily understood and embraced by Florida's toll facility customers." Some of the agencies are currently collect ing tolls w i thout barriers at highway speeds from customers with transponders, notably the OOCEA with its express l anes on State Route 429 As of this writ ing, others are c l ose to doing so. The T urnpike Distr i ct is about to open its express lanes on the Suncoast Parkway, and still others are p l anning for this opt ion. The THCEA has designed i ts new elevated reversible express lane facility to accommodate on l y electronic collection This facility i s scheduled to be open to traffic by earty 2004. Although all of these facilit i es i ncorporate several important attributes of an open road toll project ("barrier less," high speed and interoperable) none of them w i th the exception of THCEA's project contemplated the not i on of the absence of manual or cash-less" collection. It should be noted that the elevated reversible express lane facility in Tampa was conceived by THCEA as being available only to customers of SunPass or E-Pass The agency is now contemplating an all electron i c system whereby nontransponde r users would be billed us i ng video license plate recognition technology Pag< 1 4 1 ( 8 0

PAGE 15

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida The Orlando Orange County Expressway Authority is collecting Tolls at highway speeds now at its Fore s t Lake Plaza SR 429 Because of the potent ial confus i on between collecting tolls in an "open roa d environment" as i s now being done by OOCEA (express high speed lanes in the center of the plaza and cash lanes separated to the outs i de) and the concepts emp l oyed in Toronto and Melbourne (no accommodat i on for cas h payments), a more appropriate term for what was examined in this s t udy i s A ll Electron i c Toll Collect i on (AE T C) For purposes of the "Feasibilitv of Open Road Tolling in Florida" the term Open Road Toll ing and All Electron i c Toll Collection are used interchangeably. Study Organization In order to address the wide range of i ssues prese n ted the following organ izati on to conduct the research on this i ssue was devised. Several subcomm i ttees, cha ired by high-ranking off i cia l s from the participat ing toll agencies were established. These subcomm itte e cha irs formed a Steer ing Committee for the project and ensured that over l ap was minimiz e d and that coordinat io n occurred Open Roa4 Tolling Projee t Man.agtM&t'lt 9rojM.t Si'fP'!I" I = ..... ... ,.w ..... Mtrtt.Un g THCEA h.<;t OOCEA FOOT. OTO Figure 1.1 Study Organization P ,wt5 ..

PAGE 16

The Feasibi/ffy of Open Road Tolling in Florida Each subcommittee was staffed with representatives of the four participating toll agencies. Appendix A contains a complete list of the subcommittee membership. The wor1< of the subcommittees centered on answering dozens of key questions that were iden tified by the Management Committee and the ir work represents the vast majority of the research supporting this report Several subcommittees documented their results in formalized reports. Several questions eme rge in addressing the potential statewide implementation of AETC. How will the toll customers accept a system that does not accept cash in the lanes? What benefits are there to the customers and the authorities? Is the tec hno logy sufficient to ensure adequate payment compliance? How will tolls from out of state and rental car customers be handled? What are the costs and organizational implications of instituting such a syst em? If the concept is feasible how best should AETC be implemented in Florida? Th is report attempts to answer these and many other issues regarding ORT, or AETC, and categorizes the assessment of feas ibi l ity by the functional areas represented by the subcommittees established: Customer Impacts and Marketing; Operations and Collections Reliability; Traffic and Revenue; Engineering; and Organizational and Legal. Page 16 of80

PAGE 17

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Why Examine All Electronic Toll Collection? One of the central reasons for looking at AETC is to ascertain if there are any opportunit ies to decrease operation costs of a toll highway. Unlike non-tolled highways the cost of collecting the revenue to build operate, maintain and expand the system is directly attributed to the agency. It is not necessarily true that toll roads cost more to operate it is just that the collection costs are not indirecl as they are for non-tolled fac i lit ies and more c ont ro llab l e by the operator Any operating efficiency ga ined flows to bottom line, and depending on the agency s debt position, can be l everaged severa l times over. A fractional decrease in the cost of collection can be significant. As a matter of perspect i ve, the FY 1g99 Turnpike District's operating budget for toll collection was $58 7 million. A review of the cost to collect tolls in F l orida shows that operating savings are achieved through the use of elect r onic toll collection. The extent of these operating cost savings vary significantly with cost allocation assumptions and the maturity of an ETC system. A system with a higher percentage of ETC transact i ons should see more savings per transaction due the spread of the fixed cost over a large r transaction base Based on this review i t is estimated that at current ETC usage rates, the operating cost savings per transaction over a manual transaction is on the order of $0 05 to $0 06 Applying these differentials (understanding that this savings should grow as ETC market penetration increa ses) would result in an estimated annual operating savings for FOOT owned or operated fac i lit i es of $23 mill ion. Th i s is rough l y equivalent to the ability to bond over $320 m i llion for capita l projects. Another significant potent ial of an all-e lec tronic collection system is that of customer conven i ence. The long standing dilemma for toll operators is the custome r service implication of charging for a premium service, in many cases a true timesaving, and then delaying the customer to accept payment. The potent ia l of employ i ng a system where no customer has to fumble for money and stop to pay a toll is both intriguing and worth invest ig ating I n addit i on to the operating costs of toll collection, there are significant capital costs involved in any toll fac i l ity. The widening of the highway to "flare" for the toll plaza, the administration building the plaza and booths, canopy, access tunnels and the electronic equipment are expensive. A recent estimate for MDX projects a cost for a 14-lane plaza, not including the roadway work, right of way pavement and drainage at over $8 million (nearly $600 ,000 per lane). The Pa,g;e 11 of 80

PAGE 18

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida estimate just to provide a tollbooth, equipped with manual and ETC equipment and a concrete barrier, is roughly $260,000. It is imp o rtant to understand if the introduction of AETC can reduce these costs in the future. The Turnpike alone expects to spend $400 million over the next ten years to renovate or expand toll plazas on their existing facilities. Potential benefits fro m an AETC system could be derived from eliminating the need to have toll collection personnel working in traffic lanes T he introduction of dedicated ETC lanes and express lanes complicates employee health and safety issues. Even with access tunnels there is routinely the need for supervisory, maintenance and other toll employees to confront highway t raffic. Although a substantial number of customer service personnel would undoubtedly need to be employed in lieu of toll collectors offsetting operational savings, they would certainly work in a safer environment. other safety issues that may be involved include the elimination of queuing at toll plazas. If all tollbooths were eliminated, there would be no capacity reduction at the point of collection. The other side of this issue is that i n some urban settings, the toll plaza acts as a traffic meter. The elimination of the plaza will i n some cases overload downstream inte rchanges or highway sections. The backup will merely move from the plaza to another location. Although from the toll operator's standpoint, this may in fact be somewhat beneficial. The next five sections of this report represent a summary of the in-depth work performed by the project subcommittees. Page 18 of80

PAGE 19

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Customer Impacts and Marketing While the concept of high speed non-stop toll collection initially seems like a customer service enhancement, there are clearly some issues that require examination. As with the other subcommittees, the group was given a series of key questions developed by the Management and Steering Committees. These questions dealt with potential customer concerns regarding all electronic toll collection or AETC: 1. Is there customer resistance to not being able to use cash? 2. Will AETC encourage/discourage use of the (toll) roads? 3. What are today's impediments to the use of toll roads? 4 Do customers have privacy concerns over the use of video tolling? 5 What are reasonable collection and enforcement methods? 6. What is an acceptable delay to pay a toll? 7. Is pricing differential for payment method (cash, electronic, video) acceptable? The Management and Steering Committees thought the most appropriate method of understanding customers' acceptance of an AETC system was to survey them. In addition to customer attitudes towards AETC their receptiveness to SunPass and E-Pass needed to be better understood. If in fact all toll customers were ETC subscribers, eliminating manual collection would be simple. With 100% ETC market penetration. concerns over not being able to use cash in the toll lanes, video collection and privacy would have all been overcome The reality is that current ETC penetration for the Turnpike customers was 22% system wide as of July 2001 includ ing "start-up" projects and rural facilities. OOCEA's more mature and urban E-Pass has achieved a 44% participation rate and is experiencing over 70% ETC transactions in the peak period in the peak direction at some of i ts plazas. It follows that the need to understand more fully what impedime nts exist to using SunPass or E-Pass is important in assessing customer acceptance of AETC In addition to the telephone survey conducted by the study team a series of focus group sessions were recently conducted. The results of these two efforts have given valuable insight into the customer acceptance issues I'
PAGE 20

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Telepho ne Surv e y The purpose of the survey was t o assess t h e op i nions of cash users and t ho s e tha t do no t use t o ll roads in selecte d areas in F l orida wi t h regard to the concept o f open road tolling Pecora & Guitar Inc of Wint e r Park Florida and Or. Evan B e rman conducted t he s tu dy. On Target Marketing of St. Louis { M O) conducted the i nterv i ews Respondents were selec t ed f r om four geograph i c areas with i n Florida All respondents were r andomly selected from am o ng listed residentia l phone numbers from t h e South Florida, Orlando, Tampa and Turnpike r egions. T he Turnp ik e r eg i on was defined as an area within twenty-five miles of Flor i da s Turnpi k e f r om Boynton Be ach to Wildwood excluding the area from K i ssimmee throug h Winter Garden due its inclusion in the Orlando survey area The survey results in thei r e n tirety are included i n Append i x B The pho n e survey was conducted between September 10 and October 1 200 1 excludi n g the days of September 11 and 1 2 due to the national tragedy. T he final sample of co m pleted s u rveys consists of 605 cash users and 606 n on-users and is d i stri bu ted across regions as depicted in Table 2 .1. Tab le 2.1 S u rvey Sa mple S outh Orlan d o Florida Tamp a T urnpike Total C ash User s 151 15 1 15 1 152 605 N o n U sers 151 152 150 153 606 TOTAL 302 303 30 1 305 1 2 1 1 T he sample a n d p o pul ation demographics are compared i n Tab l e 2 2. Table 2. 2 P o p ulation and Survey D emogr a p hi cs Orlando South Florid a T a mpa Turn p i k e Population Sample Pop u lation Sampl e P opula t io n Sampl e Population Sampl e Age 18-24 13.5% 5.3% 11.0% 12.6% 9 4% 11.3% 8 1% 14.8% 2544 44.3% 37.5% 41.2% 38.4% 35.7% 30.2% 33.1% 33.8% 45 28.3% 35.5% 28.7% 34.5% 29.8% 38.5% 28.3% 33.5% 65+ 13.9% 21.8% 19.1% 14.6% 25.1% 20.0% 30.5% 18.1% Gender M ale 47.6% 47.4% 47.8% 40.3% 47.3% 41.9% 47.5% 43.8% Female 52.4% 52.7% 52.2% 59.8% 52.7% 58.2% 52.5% 56.2% l'agt 20 qf$0

PAGE 21

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida T he sampling error for 600 completed surveys is about 4.0%. This means that, on repeated sampling, the results of th i s survey will be replicated 95% of the time with a margin of no more than plus or minus 4% Paying with cash The overwhelming majority of the respon dents (all cash or non-toll highway users) indicated a strong preference for continuing the option of paying cash. The cash customers were stronger in this preference with 91.1% either indicating that they agreed or strongly agreed that cash should always be an option on toll roads (Figure 2.1.) The preference did not significantly vary by r egion but was, as expected, stronger in those that currently use cash on toll There does seem to be, however, a willingness to shift to ETC if there was a pricing differential. When asked if it were less expensive to travel toll roads by having SunPass or E-Pass, both cash customers and non-users overwhelmingly responded that they would use ETC (Figure 2 .2). Cash Payments Should Always be a n Option on Toll Roads Strongly ArQift ..... Somewh-at AgrM Don't K!tOW Sorntwtltlt Dratgr'M o ....... StronglyDfUOI'M D 20 40 SO 80 100 PGtoent jocosh CUslUse
PAGE 22

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Toll Road Use A l arge majority of those surveyed are very infrequent users of toll facil i ties. Prev io us research has indica t ed that the toll roads simply do not provide access to places that potential customers need or want to go. Over 81% of cash users ride the toll roads less than 5 times per week, 13.4% use the toll roads between five and ten times per week, only 5% use the toll roads more than ten times per week. There does seem to be interest in not having to stop at a toll plaza to pay a toll. When asked if they would participate in an ETC program if they did not have to stop to pay their tolls, the results mirror the ETC discount question (Figure 2.3). Privacy I Would Get SunPass/ E-Pass if I Did not Have to Stop at Plazas Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Don"tKnow SOmewhat OINgrM DINg .... F Strongly Disagreo 0 20 40 Percent 60 80 Figure 2.3 ii Non-Stop Collection and ETC Acceptability Confidentiality of customer records is a concern to those indivi d ua ls surveyed. Over 75% of cash customers (58.4% non -us ers) believe that motorist travel information generated by video tolling should not be made available to the general public. Nearly 88% of cash customers (75.6% non users) believe that toll agencies should treat this information as confidential and 79.6% (74.8% non users) feel that motorist travel information should only be made available when I' a g e 2 2 of 80

PAGE 23

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida requested by the courts. If these safe guards could be put in place, 54% of cash customers (46.7% non-users) indicated that they would part icipate in an ETC program. While privacy issues are of concern to the individua ls surveyed, the mixed response to whether the customer would participate in an ETC program if safeguards were in place suggests that a large number of customers are not motivated by the privacy issue. Other factors, inc lu ding frequency of use and unique individual travel needs are more important to enticing no n-ETC customers to acquire new and advanced technology for their travels on toll roads It is recommended that changes in Florida Statutes be made to broaden privacy protection laws to include customer account and travel information that would be generated by future AETC systems These recommended changes would be a consistent extension of existing privacy protections currently in place for the customer records/information of the SunPass and E-PASS programs. Collection and enforcement methods Toll enforcement methods currently utilized by Florida toll agencies have been proven to be an effective deterrent to toll violators i n the state. These enforcement methods include the issuance of toll violation warning le tters and Uniform Traffic Citations as provided for in Florida Statutes. Additional use of law enforcement officers to target high toll violation locations has also helped apprehend motorists who fail to pay the required toll. Use of these toll enforcement methods has resulted in a statewide toll violation rate of approximately two-percent. The survey project asked cash users and non-users to respond to the statement: "It is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls." Sixty-eight percent of cash customers responded that they either somewhat agreed, agreed, or strongly agreed with the use of collection agencies. Nearly 65% of non-users s uppo rted government hiring a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls, with one-fourth (25.6%) somewhat disagreeing, disagreeing, or strongly disagreeing with the idea. (The use of outsourced collection agencies may require legislative approval.) Support among cash customers and non users for this idea could serve as a platform for more aggressive action by toll agencies to pursue unco llected tolls However it should be recognized that an unde rcurrent of disapproval exists for l'age2 3 of80

PAGE 24

The Feasibility of Open Roed Tolling in Florida the idea among those individuals who are the least l ike ly to use the state's toll facilities. Acceptable delays The survey results ident ified elasticity in the tolerance for delays at toll plazas, with delays over one minute being viewed negatively Cash users and nonusers responded consistently when asked whether it was OK to wait one minute, three minutes, or five minutes to pay a cash toll. Approximately three-quarters of respondents either somewhat agreed, agreed or strongly agreed that one minute was an acceptable wait. A three-minute wait was acceptable to about half of respondents and a five-minute wait was OK with less than one-quarter of people. Pricing differentials based on payment method The topic of pricing differential provided a near even 50-50 split among survey respondents. This mixed result suggests that additional clarification of the concept of a pricing differential may be necessary to gauge public acceptance of a hierarchical pricing structure based on payment type. IMlen asked to choose between video toll collection and SunPass/E-PASS when Video Toll Collection {or VTR, the 407 ETR model that photographs the license tag and bills a customer) is more expensive more than 80% chose the less expensive SunPass/E-PASS option. Further testing should be done to determine whether respondents were motivated to choose a preferred technology or whether their decision was motivated by price. Cost of purchasing a transponder as a deterrent Non -users surveyed responded favorably to the question of whether they would get a SunPass or E-PASS if the transponder were free. Seventy percent of participants said they either somewhat agreed, agreed or strongly agree that they would sign up if the transponder were free {Figure 2 4).

PAGE 25

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in F l orida I Would Get SunPass/ E-Pass if The Transponder Was Free Strongly Agree Agree E Somewhat Agree Don't Know SOmewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree 1"---1--1---11---11----l----l 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Percent lceash <;ustomers DNon-Oters I Figure 2.4-ETC Acceptability with No Cost Transponder Differences in demographics, travel patterns, and cultures between markets The survey results are very similar across markets and can be further evaluated by the individual agencies as they move forward Focus Group Findings Twelve focus groups were conducted in September 2001 in order to determine how current toll road customers react to different toll collection alternatives. Resource Systems Group of White River Junction, Vermont for URS Corporation and Florida s Turnpike performed this work The groups included randomly identified toll road customers i n each of th ree metropolitan markets : Miami, Tampa and Orlando. Three of the groups consisted of current ETC customers (SunPass or E-Pass) and the remaining nine consisted of cash customers (used a toll road at least once in the past week). All participants were asked to complete a weeklong trip log for the period just prior to their session.

PAGE 26

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florid a How do they perce i ve current travel condit i ons on the to ll ed and toll free roads? What do they know about the current electronic toll collection (ETC) opt i ons? How wou l d their use of different toll collection alternatives and trave l patterns change w i th : 1) introduction of express lanes that bypass toll plazas 2) introduction of video toll collection accounts (VTC) and 3) introduct i on of open road tolling? At the end o f the focus group discussion. partic i pants comp l eted a written questionnaire that covered the key discuss i on topics and i nclude d sta t ed preference exerc i ses that measured the quant i tative t r ade offs customers make in deciding whether to acqu i re ETC, and how the i r trave l patterns might cha n ge under diffe r ent toll ing confrgurat i ons The Resource Systems Group's report o n the focus group results is i ncluded in Appendix C ETC cust omers Cur r ent ETC use r s a r e generally among the most act i ve toll r oad users ETC users are gene r a l ly very satisfied w it h the system they use ETC u sers universally like the idea of express lanes bypassing plazas Open road tolling is perceived as providing equivalent benefits as express l anes Cash customers Many cash customers are a l so frequent t oll r oad users Awareness of ex i sting ETC options i s very low among cash custome r s The transponder purchase requirement i s a s i gnificant dis i ncentive for cash cus t omers Cash customers do not place a h i gh value on the convenience offered by the current ET C system E T C express lanes prov i de a real perceived benefrt React i on to VTC is m i xed Open road tolling r eceived a gene r ally negative recept i on a m ong cash c u stomers

PAGE 27

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida The focus group part i cipants completed a questionnaire that covered most of the i ssues discussed in the groups. The following are i nitial observat i ons from the stated preference r e s p onses : A l most t hree-quarters of existing cash customers wou l d be will ing to acqu i re a toll account (ETC or VTC) if an express lane system or open road toll ing is instituted Some would do so only w i th significantly more favo r able account feat u res than are currently offered but express lanes and open road tolling clear l y provi d e an added incentive to acquire an account. Even if they were to remain cash customers, over three-quarters would continue to use the toll road with sur c harges or other account requirements that cou l d be i mpose d on them Less than one-third of current cash custome r s make trips that could be diverted from toll free roads to t oll roads i f an express lane system or open road tolling is instituted Of these, about 80% indicate that they would divert to the toll road if they had ETC or VTC and did not have to travel through plazas About two-thirds of current ETC use r s make trips that cou l d be d i verted from toll free roads to toll roads i f an express l ane system or open road tolling is instituted. All of these users indicated that under some future circumsta n ces they would shift their travel to the toll roads if plazas d i d not impede them. Cash paying customers who participated in the focus groups stated a strong belief that the transponders should be f ree; howeve r many stated that even if the transponder was provided at no cost, they wou l d still not sign up for SunPass or E-Pass. S i mply put. those i ndiv i duals felt they either did not use the toll roads sufficiently to make it worth the i r while to set up an account or they just wanted to cont i nue to pay cash on a on-going basis. From this work i t is apparent that there are some challenges to be overcome in order to implement AETC statewide. The customer responses to the d i scount and free transponder questions, their preference for non-stop toll collection along w ith their indication that they would not divert to another facility if AETC were i mp l emented, show some potential level of acceptance to the idea. It is also apparent that additional public education w i ll he l p i ncrease the acceptability of open road tolling. Although t i ghter p r ivacy laws may help Page 2 7

PAGE 28

L The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida overcome resistance to video tolling, the extent of the existing privacy protections also needs to be disseminated. l'age Z 8 of 80

PAGE 29

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Operations and Collections Reliability The Operations Subcommittee was charged w ith studying the viability of transitioning from a conventional toll collection environment to an open road tolling environment. Ma jo r areas that were reviewed inc lude: potential revenue losses (leakage), enforcement capabilities, ORT technology backroom issues, and operating costs. The study relied primarily on infonnation provided by the Toronto 407 ETR and the Melbourne City Link. In information was gathered from the FOOT Office of Toll Operations, FOOT T urnpike District, Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority Miami-Dade Expressway Authority, and Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority. This information was used for comparative purposes to ensure the information obtained from outside sources seemed valid and reasonable. While the study did not r eveal any unexpected "show stoppers," several major areas of concern assoc iated w it h deployment of ORT in Florida include : an increased potential for r evenue losses due to un-collectable invoices a surcharge to maintain revenue and the potential functiona l obsolescence of the existing AVI system. Leakage While toll agencies would prefer to avoid leakage entirely, it is an expected business cost of operating a toll road. I n order to determine an "acceptable level of leakage" for a cashless toll collection system, leakage must be considered in the broader context of the total business cost of customer service in an ORT environment and the off-setting cost savings that may result from lower maintenance f aci l ities and construction costs. Revenue loss results from four major areas: violators, ETC customers (delinquent), equipment malfunctions and toll collector fraud. All will remain with ORT (except the latter), and it is possible that the others may actually inc rease at least in the start up phases Page 29 if 80

PAGE 30

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Violations The violation rate for Florida's toll roads today averages 2-3%. Prior to implementation of SunPass and E-Pass, violation rates averaged 1% system wide. Florida's toll agencies are actively seek i ng ways to red uce the c urrent violat ion rate. Deterrents include increasing customer awareness violation enforcement systems (VES) law enforcement presence on the toll roads, press coverage of violat ion consequences and signage. Table 3.1 -Revenue Loss by Agency for Violations Agency Annual Toll Revenue Revenue Loss for each o/o of Violations FOOT $430,000,000 $4,300 000 MDX $36,000,000 $360,000 OOCEA $150,000,000 $1,500,000 THCEA $24, 000,000 $240,000 The amount of revenue lost through leakage is dependent on the overall revenue figures for ind i vidual agencies as illustrated in Table 3.1. It can be estimated that every one percent of revenue loss for these agencies represents about $6.4 million OOCEA's experience with their new express lanes provides additional i nsight into the effects of barrier less tolling on leakage resulting from violations. The violation rate at Forest Lake Plaza is currently around 3%. The Forest La ke Plaza express lanes are the first of the Authority's planned express lane projects which will include 10 mainline plaza conversions w i thin the next 7 years. These plans represent the OOCEA's approach to Open Road Tolling. Further insight int o leakage expectations can be derived from existing open road tolling applications in operation today. However, the information provided by ORT operators at the Toronto 407 ETR and Melbourne City Link differ significantly. On Toronto's 407 ETR, the leakage number is estimated by the study team to be between 4% and 5%, while the Melbourne City Link recently reported a violation rate of o nly 0.7% which i s lower than any existing ETC, express or dedicated lanes in the US. Because of the wide disparity in these numbers, the operational, societal and polit i cal differences between these two systems and Florida's situation must be considered. Business rules also have a major effect on the percentage of violations. Both Toronto and Melbourne are supported by legislation favorable to ORT policies and violation deterrents. Users of the

PAGE 31

The Feasib i lffy of Open Road Toiling in Flor ida Melbourne City link ten d to live i n t h e local area, and 85% have a t r ansponder on their vehicle. Toronto's largest revenue losses come from trucks, even though they are statutorily required to have a transponder in order to use the Highway 407 and owners risk substantia l fines for non-compliance Unlike the F l orida model, both the Melbourne and Toronto projects implemented ORT from the outset of ope r ations, so thei r c u stomers did not need to change t h eir behav i or. Implementation of ORT in Florida may face the natural resistance and confusion inherent with procedural change and the elim i nation of manual payment methods The fact that U S dri vers are less likely to correct their addresses when they move poses an additiona l c h allenge ETC Cus tomer D e linquency Just as with any bus i ness there is a certain level of un-collectable accounts and re<:eivables associated with the SunPass and E Pass systems. The amount of leakage currently exper i enced by Flor i da toll agencies depends on the i r i ndividual policies and procedures For example i f ETC account balances are allowed to go negative subsequent payments can be used to offset toll s missed when the account was without funds. The downside of this policy is that customers may take advantage of the opportunity to post pay rather than pre pay their accounts. Decis i ons as to whether an ETC customer is treated as a vio l ator when his account bal ance reaches a no-funds status a l so influences delinquency behavior and the ab i l ity to recover lost tolls Th i s w i ll continue to be the case in an ORT environment. A highe r level of l eakage may be acceptable as l ong as cost savings are, at a min i mum off-sett i ng. Operators of the existing ORT systems in Canada an d Australia seem to have experienced differing results While t h e 407 ETR has experienced substant i al cost avoidance due to the l ower operating costs of ORT, Me l bourne s financ i a l reports showed a loss of about $120 million during their first 6 mont h s of operation .2 High start-up cos t s and operational challenges during the initial deployment of the Me l bourne system cont r ibuted to t h e h i gh ini t i al operations costs. 2 Toll revenue $ 34m, oper at ing expens e s of $60m, concession fees pa ya b l e to the state of$13m depreciation of$35 m a n d net i n tere s t o f$45m.

PAGE 32

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Methods to stop leakage and curb losses Enforcement is a key element to the successful deployment of ORT. Toll operators must balance the cost of enforcement (includ ing both infrastructure and administration costs) with its effectiveness as a deterrent. In an ORT env i ronment, using license plate i nformation customers without a valid transpond er can be charged their tolls plus a surcharge. T he existing 407 ETR system in Toronto, for example, has been us ing video toll collection and enforcement methods in an all-electronic environment since October 1997 This system, which claims to be the lowest risk ETC solution in the world, curbs leakage by using the following combination of policies deterrents and fee struc tures: 1 The 407 ETR de-activates transponders for accounts that are outstanding and not i fies the Registrar of Motor Vehicles for p l ate denial where the customer is unable to renew their license plate or ob t ain a new l icense plate unt i l all tolls, fees and interest have been paid in full. Th is is the same process the Canadian Ministry of T r ansportation uses for parking tickets and parking permits. 2. Accounts overdue more than 90 days are sent to a collection agency and are subject to a Late Payment Fee of $30 (Can. plus applicable taxes) In order to i mplement similar measures, Florida's toll r oad operators will need authority to place regis tra tion stops i n the Department of Highway Safety and Moto r Vehi cle (DMV) system Since Florida has a substan ti al tourist industry there will be a need to educate the vacationing public and to collect tolls and fees from those with out -ofstate l i cense plates. The OOC EA estimates that out-of state violators account for 4.5% of all vio l ators. The percentage of out-of-area violators in an ORT environment may be much higher because these moto rists are unl ike l y to have transponders or accounts with Florida agencies. In they may not be aware of toll payment requ i remen ts in an ORT envi r onment and manual payment options will not be available at toll plazas as they are today Common enforcement po l icies m i ght also he l p to foster customer acceptance

PAGE 33

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida ETC Participation Goals Substant ial ETC participation will reduce leakage and administration costs The ETC participation goal will depend on the ORT model. For example, an all-ETC model (such as Toronto) will require higher ETC participation than a day-pass model (such as Melbourne). Other variables inc lude time of day (with peak periods at a higher level) and roadway profile (i.e., urban components typically report hig her ETC levels than rural components) Flo rida's to ll operators are targeting a minimum of 65-85% ETC part icipat ion by 2010. The ORT participation goal is also expected to be in the 55% to 85% range. Table 3.2Electronic Toll Collection Participation Agency Current ETC ETC Targets Participation withoutORT FOOT 27% overall 55-70% OOCEA 44% overall 65-85% Business Policies and Procedures Successful ORT will require new business policies and procedures to reduce leakage and curb losses System payment methods may be ETC-based, video based or may employ some new paradigm. As an example, Florida toll road operators currently use an axle-based class structure. Multilane ORT systems of the future may require classification schemes that can be measured by overhead mounted equipment that is also more conducive to correctly classifying vehicles that are straddling lanes. Policies and procedures must have a seamless look and feel for ORT customers in Florida to avoid confusion and promote "buy-in". Statutory Changes Statutory changes that support ORT operations are also needed. The following areas need to be considered: License Plate Readability The variety of Florida license plate designs presents a definite challenge to l icense plate recognition systems. I t would

PAGE 34

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida be helpful to set a standard for new plates within Florida that will require consistency i n character fo nt size, contrast of color and reflective materials. Background colors and designs should be designed to promote readability. Laws prohibiting license plate obstruction must also be enforced. Dirt, license placement on the vehicle, trailer hitches, decorative l ighting and missing plates all contribute to VES problems with Ieday's technology Payment Enforcement Laws that support both ETC and non-ETC payment methods, surcharges, and violation enforcement must have the necessary bite to make toll evasion unattractive to users of the toll facilities. Statutes with meaningful consequences for account holders with de l inque nt status will also help prevent leakage. Law Enforcement Vehicle Access to Account Status Currently law enforcement officers can cite vehic le s for non-payment of tolls, but it is often difficult for them to determine whether a vehicle is equipped with a working transponder. I f law enforcement vehi cles were equipped with portab l e transponder readers, this problem would be alleviated. Real-time access to account information could a ls o be useful in reso lv ing payment issues while the vehic l e is using the toll faci l ities. OOCEA law enforcement off icers have this capability today. Access to DMV Information -In order to collect tolls from both in-state and out-of-state drivers, easy access to current vehicle owner information is needed. Today, Florida's toll agencies have developed relationships with Department of Highway Safety and Motor Veh i cle personnel in other states to obtain i nformation on an as-needed basis There are also companies that will provide tag look-up info rma tion as part of a batch process. Other Enforcement Capabilities One of the most important issues appears to be the need for legislation similar to Toronto's where multi-axle commercia l vehicles are required to have transponders It would appear the transponder for commercial vehicles would need some kind of feedback mechan ism for the drivers. The Type II transponder with the l i ghts and tones OOCEA is using is a possible alternative As an alternative to requiring transponders, cameras could be used to photograph the front license plates on commercial vehicles thereby solving the problem associated with enforcing violations caused by le ased trailers. Florida has a high Pag
PAGE 35

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Flori
PAGE 36

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida make the operation cost neutral. Some savings might be possible by partnering with utility companies to include invoices in their bills, or by allowing video customers to set up prepaid credit card secured accounts. It is important to note that the estimated cost of video transactions in To ronto is 52 cents U.S. or 75 cents (US equ iv alent) in Melbourne. A more conservative approach may be in order. Starting with a surcharge of $.50-$1.00 would provide a much higher comfort l evel for financial feasibility. It will be much easier to lower the surcharge, if efficiencies are gained and costs are lower than it would be to try to raise it if costs are higher than originally projected. Given that the estimated operating cost recovery figure is about $.50 per transaction, the Traffic and Revenue analysis that follows assumes only this amount. Current Technological Performance and Capability Based on the existence of the Toronto 407 ETR and Melbourne City Link systems the re is little doubt that technology exists today to support ORT. However, in order to optimize the effectiveness of an ORT deployment, there must be an evaluation and selection of the most appropriate AV I equipment for an ORT application. The physical configuration of ORT facilities requires a system that is capable of capturing traffic i nformation i n multiple lanes beyond the two-lane express lane design used in Florida today. If migration from traditional barrier toll facilities to the ORT model occurs gradually by i ncorporating express lanes and maintaining cash lanes for non transponder users, many important lessons may be learned along the way that may help to m inim ize the risk associated with an abrupt transition. A methodical phased transition may also be helpful by allowing ORT designs and systems to become more mature before the final transition occurs. Recent ORT innovations such as real-time enforcement and the use of transponder data by the inci dent de tection algorithms in the traffic management sub-system are just a few examples of recent advances in technology. The difficulty in looking at any one project to determine the viability of the associated video technology to be used for ORT is the uncertainty of what the final design will be and the lack of defined business rules Therefore, the study approach focused on available technology and how it is being used or might be used to convert today's violators into video billing customers.

PAGE 37

The Feasibility of Opan Roac:J Tolling in Floric:Ja To address the pros and cons of today's ORT technology, a number of ORT and AVI projects from around the world were inv estigated. While none of the projects are exactly the same in their technologica l configuration or operation, they all involve similar applications of video technologies to high-speed t raff ic In addition because the degree of available data associated with each of the projects is different, it was also difficult to ma ke direct comparisons of their effectiveness. The following represents the general pros and cons regard ing current ORT technology. Pros Based on the resea rch, the following information supports the use of current technology for ORT demonstration projects: Current state-of-the-art camera technology (cameras and trigger mechanisms) can produce images of high-speed vehicles and their license plates acceptable for use in optical characte r recognition (OCR) and/or manual identification procedures OCR software has been developed by multiple manufacturers to the point of being capable of scanning and ident ifying license plates with very high degrees of confidence based on the software's ability to "learn" font and graphic characteristics of specific plates and languages High-speed computer processors and storage devices are capable of processing, downloading and storing the vast amounts of data required to support video of high traffic volumes Communications technology has advanced far enough to e nsure the accu rate transmission of this data to the appropriate "back office" operations Cons The following information contains the concerns and issues uncovered during the research: The primary technological concern related to ORT is the lack of uniform standards in the U.S. (and worldwide) throughout all elements of ETC and Pa:,dl of80

PAGE 38

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida VES including transponder type, operations software and communications and approaches to integrating video The wide range of quality and performance that exists among vendors of video and OCR technology that appears to be independent of the cost of these components Because there are few "experts" in this very new field, the possibility of a project getting out of control i s higher, thus the potential for very high development costs exists. U l timately this translates into higher management and oversight costs. Even though there were a number of concerns relat ed to the overall ORT technologies and the uneven nature of the available information about ORT projects, there is still enough data and reports about these projects to conclude that the upper end of the current video and related technologies will support implementation of p ilot p rojec ts. Backroom Operations Interviews were conducted with primary hardware and software contractors and with field and back-office operational personnel. Field trips were taken to New York (Lockheed-Martin EZPass service center for the State of New York), Toronto (Highway 407 operations center), and New Jersey (JP Morgan/Chase EZPass service center for the State of New Jersey) Additional interviews were conducted with the principles and/or the consultants for Raytheon (p r ime ORT contractor for Highway 407 and the Cross Israel Highway), NESS {account manageme nt and customer service provider for Cross Israel), State of Victoria (representatives from the Melbourne City Link project) TrafficWerks (traffic engineering consu lta nts to the Southern California toll road consortium), Adesta (formerly M FS prime contractor for New Jersey E-Z Pass for i nstalling lane equipment and performing VES), as well as numerous direct suppliers of ORT and ETC equipment including Transcore Transdyne Swartz Optical, Pulnix and Efkon Based on the interviews and the research, it is clear that economies of scale would be possible through centralizing back-office operations (no matter what operations are included in the back office). Typical support costs in terms of IT staff and equipment are extremely expensive and a single combined operation would minimi ze redundancy. Additionally, overall quality can also be enhanced Page 3 8 o/80

PAGE 39

The Feasibility of Ope n Road Toil in g in Florida by centralizing in house or outsourced expertise and communications (financial and customer account r elated) into one single location. Centralized statewide process ing and cust o mer service centers for New York and New Jersey EZPass have resulted in h igh quality and efficient operat i ons All of these are outsourced operations The contractors for these centers should be capable of migrating the ir processi n g approach to Flo rida with much l ower startup costs because of the resea r ch and development that has already occur r ed on these projects. I n essence the learning curves to create an outsourced centralized back office to service the Florida toll industry should not be lengthy or expensive for these experienced serv i ce providers The downside t o a single central ized approach is the potential for loss of direct feedback from customers which many agencies value highly. Another r isk to a totally centralized operation is the potential for loss of service due to a disaster Mu l tiple strategically located decentralized centers could serve as back-ups to each other in the even t of a catastrophic event. Add iti onally an alternative to a completely centralized operation would be to s h are some outsourced backroom serv i ces to benefit from the economies of scale that would be otherwise availab le. Some examples of potential sha r ed services are invoicing services, distribution serv i ces and software sup p ort It should be made clear that the EZPass backroom is not a single central iz ed operation. There are a series of large statewide centers that are interoperable with each other. Based on the rev ie ws of the exist ing Highway 407 and EZPass operat i ons there is no doubt that the ability to provide numerous detailed financia l and operationa l reports already exists E ach of the cont r actors for these centers produces a complete package of month ly financial reports that is used for ana l ysis of the performance of the c ente rs. Real-time as well as daily and mon thly traffic reports for each of the operat i ons provide the bas i s for current operational decision-mak in g and future traffic planning activities. The level of financ i a l reporting that exists in these two operations is neithe r unique nor unprecedented in Flor ida. The OOCEA's Electronic Toll and Traffic Management Syste m produces accurate and timely financia l i nfor mation. The reporting systems available to the other toll operators must be more precise and timely in order to effec ti vely imp l ement addi ti onal toll collection technology advances Page 39 if 80

PAGE 40

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Traffic and Revenue To assist in the analysis of the Open Road Tolling proposal, the various major toll agencies were asked to provide historical and estimated future traffic and revenue in formation (Three of the four toll agencies estimated the traffic and revenue imp acts based on deployment of a cashless ORT system OOCEA however, plans to utilize a form of ORT tha t would continue to permit customers to stop and pay their toll w ith cash ) Currently OOCEA utilizes this type of an ORT system on SR 429 (i.e., dedicated high-speed or express lanes separated from convent i onal lanes). Furthermo r e OOCEA anticipates conversion of its other facilities to this type of configuration by FY 2010. Thus, for OOCEA estimated traff ic and revenue impacts included in this report are based on this model. The traffic and revenue est imates provided by the various toll agencies for this analysis assume tha t ORT would be i mplemented so as to simply rep l icate the current cash barrier and c l osed ticket collection systems. Specifically only vehicles passing th r ough the current toll plaza locat i ons would be assessed a toll and toll rates would be the same with or without ORT. Except for Florida's Turnpike T icket System, the traffic and revenue estimates were not based on per-mile toll rates. Prior studies for F l or i da's Turnp ike reveal that implementation of per-mile toll rates will result i n a slight inc rease in traffic and a sl i ght decrease in revenue The traffic and revenue est imates do not include value pricing rates. Concerning future toll rate changes, the tra ffic and revenue estimates p r ovided assume all current facilities remained tolled. If ORT were used to extend toll collection to currently toll-free sections, it is l i kely that the revenue impacts would be more positive than shown. F uture toll rate increases were assumed for THCEA (FY 2010), MDX (FY 2002) and the Turnpike expansion projects only (10th and 15th year) However, for the three toll agencies that provide a cashless toll env i ronment, a per-t r ansaction surcharge fee was assessed to non ETC transactions to cover the incremen tal inc rease in processing expenses. Lastly, the ETC discount p r og r am i n p lace for three of the toll agencies (e.g., Florida s Turnpike MDX and OOCEA) was assumed to continue.

PAGE 41

The Feas ibility of Open Road Tolling in Flor i da Current Traffic Characteristics The following five tables summarize traffic and r evenue data for Florida's major toll agenc i es The data are for the most r ecent fisca l year just ended, FY 2001 and categorized by vehicle class and ETC status. Table 4.1-Florida's Turnpike Revenue and Transactions Florida's Turnpike Revenue and Transaction Information FY 2001 Annual Number of Number of Gross Daily Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactions (Millions) Trips (Millions) 2 axle non ETC $258.2 682 300 320 3+ axle non ETC 56.0 31,800 2 axle E TC 47.9 190,900 89. 3+ ax l e ETC 11.0 9,000 Total $373.1 914,000 429.E Percent ETC 15.8% 21.9% 21.9% P a g' 41 o/8 0

PAGE 42

The Feasibilit y o f Ope n Road Tol l i ng in Florida Table 4 2 -THCEA Revenue and Transactions Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority Revenue and Transaction Information -FY 2001 Annual Number of Number of Gross Daily Annua l Revenue Veh i cle Transactions (Millions) Trips (Millions) axle non ETC $19.8 39,900 25 9 a>
PAGE 43

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in F lorida Table 4.4 Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Revenue and Transactions Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Revenue and Transaction Information FY 2001 -Annual Number of Number of Gross Dally Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactions (Millions) Trips (Millions) ?-axle non E TC $83.( 1 92 900 126.4 3+ axle non ETC 3.6 3 000 2 ( ? axle ETC 51.9 119 300 ETC 4 7 4 400 2.9 Total $143 2 319 600 209.! Percent ETC 39.5% 38.7% 38.7% Table 4.5 Florida's Major Toll Agencies Revenue and Transactions Total for Florida's Major Toll Agencies Revenue and Transaction Information FY 2001 12 ax l e non ETC $389.2 1 074,400 531. 13+ axle non ETC 62.9 39,700 19.1 12 axle ETC 107.9 353,300 184. 13+ ax l e ETC 16.2 14,300 7 .! !Total $576 2 1 481,700 742.5 Percent ETC 21 5% 24 8% 25 .9o/c Currently, almost $600 million of toll revenues are collected annually from the four largest toll agencies in F lorida This represents approximately 750 million annual transactions or about 1 5 million da i ly vehicle trips. Comparing total

PAGE 44

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida annual gross revenu es to total annual transactions indicates that the average toll for the comb ine d group is approximately $0.78 per transaction. The information also shows that approximately 96 percent of the vehicles are 2-axle. Furthermore with nearly 700 thousand SunPass and E-PASS transponders i n service during FY 2001, approximately 26 percent of all transactions incurred were ETC. Table 4 .6 provides select miscellaneous traffic characteristics about Florida's major toll agencies. Table 4.6-Florida's Major Toll AgenciesMiscellaneous Traffic Information Florida s Major Toll Agencies Miscellaneous Information FY 2001 Florida's Item Turnpike MDX OOCEA THCEA Dailv VolumeVehicle Trios 914 ,000 202.700 157,300 45 ,400 Percent TrafficOut of State 4% 2% 10% 3% Percent Traffic Home Countv 96% 90% 90% 90% Percentaae of Commuters 62% 50-60% 59% 60-70% Peak H our PercentaQe of T raff ic 13% 7 .5% 9.4% 12% Peak Hour Directional Distributio n 61% 68% 65% 66% Percent Traffic2-axle 96% 98% 98% 97% Percent r evenue 2-axle 82% 96% 94% 90% Percent Traff ic -ETC 22% 20% 26% 9% Based on the current traffic mix information provided by the toll agencies, they generally serve a high percentage of 2-axle commuters. Also, most of the customers are from the home county or, in Florida's Turnpike case from the State of Florida. On the surface, the ETC participation appears low ; however, many of the toll facilities did not deploy ETC until FY 2001. Thus, the participation rate is expected to ramp-up significantly over the next few years. l'a.g. 44

PAGE 45

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida C ompar ison to Oth e r O RT System s Comparing F lorida s major toll agencies to the two exist ing ORT Systems Toronto Highway 407 Express T oll Route and the Me l bourne City Link provides some interest ing s i milar i ties. On a typ i cal weekday, 407 ETR serves nearly 300 thousand custome r s Most of these customers are Canadian commuters operat ing 2-axle veh i cles and making r elat ivel y short tri ps (10 to 20 miles) Toll collection is based on a "closed" or per mile toll rate sys t em that charges between $0 10 per mile (night) and $0.18 per mile (day) for passenger cars and $0 20 per-mile (ni ght) to $0 .55 per mile (day) for heavy trucks (U S equivalent). Currently the 407 ETR i s experiencing about 75% ETC participation Non-ETC custome r s are v i deo tolled ; spec i fically a photograph is taken of the vehicle s l icense plate the l icense p l ate numbe r i s matched to the customer through a review of the DMV database and a bill is subsequently sent. F or 407 ETR, a major reason for the high level of ETC partic i patio n rate-after cons i dering that all users of this facil i ty are custo mers-is the application of a relat ivel y h i gh surcharge fee for vehicles not equipped with a transponder. T ransponders are l eas e d from the h i ghway s ope r ator at a cost of $1. 00 per month (Can ) p l us an act i vat i on fee of $10 00 (Can) Spec i fically if a customer does not lease a transponder trips are logged by us i ng a state -ofthe-art, l i cense plate recognit i on system T he system is located on each overhead gantry and sends up to 5 video images to a centra l process i ng computer when the c u stomer enters and exits 407 ETR. Consequently a $2.00 non-transponde r surcha rge per trip i s added for this process Transponders are mandatory for heavy veh i c les, which have a Registered Gross Veh i c l e Weight (RGVW) of over 5 000 ki l ograms (five tons). Currently, i f a commercial vehicle uses the facil i ty without a t ransponde r a $25 (Can ) surc h arge o r fine is levied T h i s rate will increase to $50 (Can) as o f January 1, 2002. F or Melbourne s C i ty Link typica l use r s are da i ly commuters and use of t ransponde r s th r o u gh prepa i d accounts or Day Passes (e i ther p r e or post arranged) is r equi r ed On typical weekdays, the r e are approximate l y 600,000 transactions of which app r oxim a tely 92% are transponder transactions Th i s high l eve l of ETC partic i pat ion i s due to the fact that customers must have a transponder or Day Pass in order to use the facility All other users of t he facil i ty are cons i dered v i olators All transact i ons are photographed and those w i t ho u t transponde r s (8%) are sent to thei r central computer system for p r ocessing Valid Day Pass transactions Pag e45

PAGE 46

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida (7%) are matched and approved. Valid trips without transponders (video tolling) are determined and the appropriate toll and processing fee charged Non readab le photographs are discarded and the remaining transactions are considered violations and sent for processing. For City Link, toll collection is based on an "open" toll collection system and toll rates are adjusted quarterly to match i nflation. An "open" system assesses the same toll to all vehicles of the same class that pass through a barrier/gantry. Such toll is based on an overall per mile toll rate as an approximate standard; however, some customers may pay more or less than the standard per-mile toll rate depending on the trip length. Toll rates are applied in three categories for passenger vehicles l ight trucks and heavy trucks with a to ll cap of $2.20 applied for vehicles traveling the maximum length. For passenger vehicles, this equates to $0.16 per mile. All shorter trips pay a higher per-m ile toll rate. Customers of 407 ETR and City Link are generally urban residents commut ing and making business trips, very similar to the customers of MDX, OOCEA, THCEA and urban sections of Florida 's Turnpike. Florida's Turnpike rural toll facilities including the Ticket System and parts of the Northern Coin System, are different. The typical customer profile for these two components is a long distance business or vacation/recreation traveler. Only about a third of the customers on these two components are commuters. While Florida's urban toll facilities may eventually record ETC participation rates similar to these two existing ORT systems, the rural toll components of Florida's Turnpike will be significantly l ess (e.g., approximately 50 percent in FY 2010 with the deployment of Open Road Tolling). Estimated Future Traffic and Revenue Tables 4.7 through 4.9 provide FY 2010 estimates of revenue, vehicles and transactions without ORT and with ORT. The first group of three tab les relates to F lo rida's Turnpike. These estimates include traffic and revenue generated from t he current existing system, future Seminole Expressway Project 2 and future improvements contained in the 5-year Work Program. It should be noted that gross revenue shown below for the "with" ORT scenario assumes that violations and system errors are not higher than the "without" ORT scenario. However, such forecasts are reduced accordingly in the Estimated Revenue Loss section of this report

PAGE 47

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Table 4.7Projected Turnpike Revenue Without ORT Florida's Turnpike Revenue and Transaction Information FY 2010 Without Open Road Tolling Annual Number of Number of Gross Daily Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactions (Millions) Tri ps (Millions) 2 axle non ETC $218.1 520,300 244. 3+ ax le non ETC 47.3 24,6 0 0 1H 2 ax le ETC 223 6 644,400 302.5 3+axle ETC 51.3 30,4 0 0 14.1 Total $540.3 1 ,219,70 0 573. 1 Percent ETC 50.9% 55 .3% 55.3"/c Table 4.8Pro jected Turnpike Revenue Witb ORT Florida's Turnpike Revenue and Transaction Information-FY 2010 W 0 R ith )pen oad Tolling 2 ax le non ETC $162.1 246,40( 115 3+ axle non ETC 35.1 16,40( 7 2 ax l e ETC 3 03.3 864,20( 406.0 3+ axle ETC 69.6 4 1 ,OOC 1 9.( h'otal $570.1 1 ,168, 000 548.' P erc ent ETC 65 .4% 77.5 % 77 .5 % f>ag. 4 7 oj80

PAGE 48

The Feas i bility of Ope n Road Tolling in F lorida Table 4.9-Turnpike Traffic Comparison Florida's Turnpike Revenue and Transaction Information-FY 2010 Differences With vs. Without Annua l Number of Number of Gross Daily Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactions (Millions) Trips (Millions) IAmounWolume +$29.8 -51,700 -24. 4 Percent +5.5% -4.2% -4.2% Percent ETC +14.5% +22.2% +22.2% Traffic on Florida's Turnpike is est i mated to increase from approx i mately 430 million transactions (about 900 thousand daily vehicle trips) in FY 2001 to nearly 600 million transactions (about 1 .2 million da i ly vehicle trips) by FY 2010. Furthermore, ETC participat i on is expected to i ncrease to app r oximately 55% by F Y 2010. Should ORT be dep l oyed i n FY 20 1 0 t r affic would decrease 4.2 percent due to a $0.50 per transaction surcha r ge assessed to non-ETC vehicles While the amount of this surcharge is necessary to partia ll y offset t h e incrementa l process ing and video costs of non-ETC transactions it represents up to a 200 percent increase in tolls for non-ETC custo m ers Because the surcha r ge represents a significant increase in the toll for non-ETC customers. setting the surcharge at an even highe r level is cautione d However, with ETC levels at approximately 78 percent of total traffic, the surcharge sign i ficantly encourages ETC participation. In addition to customers sw i tching from non-ETC to ETC, it should be noted that E T C t r affic a l so i ncreases sl i ghtly (0.5%) due to the perceived conveniences of a barrier less toll facility Florida s Turnpike est i mates that t h e $0.50 surcharge w i ll yield approximate l y $59 million in gross su r charge r evenues Tak ing into account the net i mpact of a loss in traffic prompted by the surcharge i ncreased l evels of SunPass discount due to inc r eased ETC partic i pation, and the gross surcharge r evenues overall P ae,e 4 8 o(80

PAGE 49

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida revenues for Florida s Turnp ike are estimated to i ncrease by approximately $30 million The following three tab les d i sclose the overall traffic and revenue impacts for F l orida's four major toll agenc i es. Tabl e 4.10Projected Revenue Without ORTTurnpike, OOCEA MDX THCEA Total for Florida's Major Toll Facilities Revenue and Transaction Information FY 2010 W th t 0 R d T u I ou Jpen oa 0 In Annual Number of Number of Gross Daily Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactions (Millions) Trips (Millions) 2 axle non ETC $337.5 857 000 429 8 3+ axle non ETC 53. 3 31,100 15 0 2 axle ETC 408.2 1,151,400 599.1 3 + axl e ETC 67.1 47 000 24.4 Total $866.1 2,086 500 1 ,068 .3 Percent ETC 54.9"/o 57.4% 58.4% Page 49 ./80

PAGE 50

The Feas ibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Table 4.11-Proje cte d Re venu e With ORTTurnpik e, OO CEA, MDX, T H CEA Total for Florida's Major T oll Facilities Revenue and T ransaction Information -FY 2010 W 'th 0 R d T II I Jpen oa 0 Annual Number of Number of Gross Dally Annual Revenue Vehicle Transactio ns (Millions) Trips (Millions) 2 axl e non ETC $263.0 488 700 263.7 3+ axl e non ETC 40 2 21,100 10.4 2 axl e ETC 510.6 1,452 800 734.5 3 + axl e ETC 86.7 59.400 30. 1 $900 5 2,022,000 1 038.7 Percent ETC 66.3% 74. 8 % 73.6% Tabl e 4.12-Traffic Comparison-Turnpike, OOCEA, MDX, THCEA Total for Florida's Major Toll Facilities Revenue and Transaction Information-FY 2010 Differences With vs. Without }\mounWolume +$34 .4 -29. Percent +4 0% -3 1% 2.8% Percent ETC + 11.4% +17.4% +15 .2% Overall combined t r aff i c for the four major toll agencies i s est i mated to increase from approx i mately 743 million transactions (about 1 5 million daily vehicle trips) in FY 2001 to approximately 1,068 million transac ti ons (almos t 2 1 million da i ly vehicle trips) by FY 2010. Likewi se, ETC participation is expected to increa se to I'' ( *' 50 o f 80

PAGE 51

The Feas ibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida approximately 58 percent by FY 2010. With ORT, ETC participation is expected to further increase to approximately 7 4 percent of total transactions. Except for OOCEA which plans to continue providing a cash toll option and no surcharge for non-ETC customers, ORT for the other three toll agencies would require a $0 .50 per transaction surcharge assessed to non-ETC vehic l es This surcharge, considered s i gnificant, will prompt a net decrease i n transactions of approximately 4 percent (approximate l y 3 percent when consolidating all four toll facilities) as some vehicles divert to other competing routes. Taking in to account the net i mpact of a loss in traffic prompted by the surcharge and the gross su r charge revenues, overall revenues for these toll agencies are estimated to increase by approximately $34 million or just over 5 percent (approximately 4 percent when consol i dating all four toll facilit i es). Revenue Realization During the summer of 2001, representatives from the various toll agencies visited the Toronto Highway 407 ETR and the Melbourne City Link in Austral i a to discuss with its management the potent ial for revenue losses under the two open road tolling systems. At the core of their business, both 407 E T R and City Link i ndicated that management is very focused on m it igating revenue losse s In fact, the 407 ETR management plans to roll out several new procedures (i.e inc r eased use of vehicle regis tration renewal denial and Y. trip billing-current practice requ i res the entrance and exit transac tion to match for a val id trans act i on) that will sign i ficantly increase revenue Revenue leakage i s defined as the amount of revenue loss generated by vio l ators/scofflaws, system errors and accounts receivables that are sign i ficantly past due with m i n i mal chance of collect i on (i.e., write-offs). Th ese types of losses can be c l assified as follows: 1 Unreadable These revenue loss es are generally caused by non-ETC customers that have no license p l ate a dirty or rusty license p l ate an obstructed license p l ate, bad v i deo image due to l ighting or weather conditions, or scofflaws. Based on discussions with the management of the two ORT systems, this type of revenue l oss ranges between approximately 1% and 4% of tota l traffic. 2. Un billab/e These revenue l osses are considered system errors and may be attributed to ETC or non-ETC customers. The reason for the error is often anomalous Y. trips or Y. video trips overlapping trips, trips that are Pagt 51 of80

PAGE 52

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida too o l d to b i ll or non reads. By estab l is h ing a procedure to bill for the sh ort est trip, th i s type of reven u e loss for a closed" system cou l d be controlled at app r ox i mate l y 2% of tota l traffic F or an "open" system the revenue l oss would be negligib l e 3 Un collectible -These revenue losses stem from customers not pay ing the i r b i ll For the City Link c u stomers use transponders through prepaid accounts or Day Passes (eithe r p r e or post-arranged) As a r esu l t customer accounts receivab l es represent an insign i ficant port i on of the i r business However for 407 ETR, ETC accounts are not prepaid and 407 ETR sends monthly bills to both E T C and non-ETC {i e v i deo) customers. Consequen tly, 407 ETR manages a s i gnif i cant vo l ume of accounts receivables Howeve r un-collect i ble a c counts rece i vable generally occur wit h the non-ETC v i deo customer rather than the customer with a transponder. Based on d i scussions. it is estimated that approx i ma t e l y 10% of the non -ETC customers will not pay the i r bill Regarding system errors or problems encountered i dentifying the customer (i.e., unreadab l e and un b i llable revenue l osses) a toll facility operating a sim i lar system cou l d expec t a r evenue l oss rang ing between 1-6% Th i s r ange i s due to whethe r an "open o r closed" system is util ized a n d the l evel of ETC part i cipat i on Gene r ally h igher ETC levels prompt l owe r leve l s of revenue l oss However it shou l d be noted that whi l e systems tha t l i mit customer cho i ce ( i.e. do not recognize nonET C andlor non-Day Pass moto r ists as custome r s) may result in h i gher levels of ETC participation, such systems may also resul t in less t r affic and gross revenue Regarding un co ll ect i b l e revenue losses i f everyone i s considered a customer then one could expect a 10% r evenue loss from nonETC and non-Day Pass c u stomers who do not pay the i r bill Curren tly, the F l orida Department of Transportation's Office of T oll Operatio n s r eports that toll vio l ations and sys t em errors represent app r ox i mate l y a 3% loss of tota l revenue. Such percentage i ncludes unreadable and un b i llab l e revenue l osses. However as bills are not sent to nonETC customers, such percentage does not inc l u de revenue l osses from uncollectibles. The follow i ng tab l e discloses revenue loss b y type for the ex i sting system and for a proposed ORT system that i s either "open" or "cl o sed The unreadable revenue loss is based on the m i dpoint of the p r evious l y mentioned range. Furthermore, it s h ou l d be mentioned that 407 ETR r equires that t r ucks that use the toll fac i l i ty must be equ i pped with a transponder Because of this restr i ct ion, the 407 E T R notes that a portion of the unreadab l e revenue loss i s directly attributable to la r g e tru cks As a resul t f or toll fac i l ities tha t are off limits to trucks (i.e THCEA s Reversible Pago 5 2 o(80

PAGE 53

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida Express Lane Project), the estimated tota l revenue loss could be furth er dampened. Table 4.13 Projected ORT Revenue Loss by Type Revenue Loss Assumptions (%) Toll Methodology 0Den Road Tolling Type of Current Open (Trucks Revenue Loss Overall Closed' Open not Allowed) Unreadable 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 1.5% Unbillable 0.5% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% Uncollectible2 0.0% 4.0% 3.0% 3.0% Revenue Loss 3.0% 8.5% 5.5% 4.5% 1 Per m i le tolling. 2 Based on 35% and 50% non-ETC "": for an open coin system Summarizing, the percent of revenue loss for an "open system may possibly range between 1.5% (without trucks) and 2.5% (i.e., unreadable and un-b illable revenue losses) Additionally, the added procedure of billing non-ETC customers produces another 3% revenue loss from un-collectible accounts for a total revenue loss ranging between 4.5-5 .5%. For systems that are closed" (i.e Florida's Turnpike Ticket System) th e revenue loss may be as high as 8.5%. Estimated Revenue Loss Based on the experience of the two existing ORT systems mentioned earlier, Table 4.14 applies these percentages to the revenue estimates provided by the toll agencies. Of course, such revenue losses may or may not occur depending on the final system and approach selected.

PAGE 54

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Table 4.14ORT Revenue Effeets by Toll Agency Florida's Turnpike, MDX and THCEA Estimated Revenue Loss Florida's Scenario Turnpike MDX THCEA1 OOCEA2 (closed/open) (open) (open) (open) jwithout ORT: FY 2010 Revenue (millions) $540.3 $60.0 $40.3 Less Unreadable and Unbillable loss es (16.2) (1 8) (1 2) NA Net Revenue $524 1 $58 2 $39. 1 Percent Revenue Loss 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% jwlth ORT: FY 2010 Revenue (millions) $570.1 $62.6 $42.4 $225.5 Less Unreadable and Unbillable losse s (16.5) (1.6) (1. 1) (5.2) Less Uncollectibles (19.7) (1. 7) (1.2) -Net Revenue $533.9 $59.3 $40.2 $220.3 Percent Revenue Loss 6.4% 5.3% 5.4% 2.3% Difference +$9 8 +$1. 1 +$1.1 For the entir e facility including the Reversible Express Lane Project z Percent revenue loss based on current OOCEA levels of 2.3%. As is evident from Table 4.14 ORT with a $0.50 per-transaction surcharge to non-ETC customers provides significantly more gross re venue, and slightly more net revenue as the "without" ORT scenario. Should the percent revenue loss for the "without" ORT scenario exceed 3%, then net revenues for the with" ORT scenario become convincingly more favorable. It is important to note however that the add iti ona l operating costs associated with processing non-ETC transactions are not included in the above analysis. It may well be, for example, that the $0.50 surcharge is only sufficient to simply offset the incremental operating costs associated w ith video processing In fact based on discussions with the two existing ORT systems, operating costs Page 54 of80

PAGE 55

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida typically range between $0.08 and $0 10 for an ETC transaction and between $0.50 and $0 75 for a non-ETC t r ansact i on. Page 55 of80

PAGE 56

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida Engin ee ring P o t e ntial Ca p ital Cost Iss u es There are sign i ficant capital costs involved i n the con struction o r reconstruct ion of a toll faci l ity that are not associated with a non-toll facility. Although t ollboo t hs and an admin i stration bui l d i ng are two t h at are immed i ate l y apparent, there are numerous other items that contribute to the cost of a to ll plaza T o understand what costs might be avo i ded these trad i tional plaza costs are enume r ated The unit costs are derived from the Miami Dade Expressw a y Authority s toll plaza preliminary construction estimates and are specific to that agency's project. The unit costs can be used however to understand orders of magn i tude statew i de Tabl e 5 1 -Toll P l aza Construct i on Unit Costs Construction Item Unit Unit Cost I mpact Attenuators Ea. $27,000 Plaza Comput er Ea. $90,000 Manual Toll Equip. Ea. $61,800 Automatic Toll Equip Ea. $80,000 SunPass Equip Ea. $90 000 SunPass Equip. Mixed Ea. $25 ,000 Toll P laza Can opy Sq. Ft. $50 Tunnel Lin. Ft. $1,800 Concr ete Is land Ea. $15 ,000 To ll B o oth Ea. $40 ,000 T he w i den i ng of the highway to "flare" for the toll plaza the administrat i on bu i lding t h e p l aza and booths canopy acc ess tunnels and the electronic equipment are noteworthy A recent estimate for an MDX p r ojec t yie l ds a cost of over $8 m i llion for a 14 lane plaza not including the roadway wor k right of way, pavement, and drainage (nearly $600,000 per lane.) The estimate just to prov ide a tollbooth, equ ip ped with manual and ETC equipment a n d a concrete barr ier is roughly, $260 000 each Pa_g< 56 oj80

PAGE 57

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida The subcommittee reported that i t was not appropriate to attempt to calculate a factor of capital cost increas e or decrease for use across all toll plazas because of the significant differences at each site. For example, to compare a mainline plaza to an all-electronic gantry collection point would require establishing many assumptions Is it fair to attribute the horizontal roadway alignment adjustments that are required to provide for an access tunnel in the plaza? If an agency were contemplating a brand new plaza then, these cost avoidance figures would be valid. Given the most rele vant situation for Florida toll agencies is a retrofit of a traditional toll plaza to an open road system, there are too many variables to make a blanket statement about capital costs. There are some costs that can be generalized when contemplating a retrofit: 1 Demolition of an Existing Toll Plaza -The demo l ition of an existing toll plaza is estimated to be i n the range of $25-$30 per square foot. This figure could vary significantly based on maintenance of traffic issues and to the extent a tunnel is present and needs to be removed. 2 Geometric Modifications to an Existing Plaza -The introduction of AETC where a traditional plaza exists presents the need for extensive geometric changes to the approaches to the plaza to be removed. In general the cost for this work can be estimated to be $45-$60 per square foot. Depending on the facility, remova l or addition of any impervious area could result in changes to the existing storm water characteristics. Design parameters such as approaches to the toll facility will require reconstruction of the mainline roadway facility to conform to design standards. The project l imits could extend to one mile on each side of the facility. The requirement for rights of way to build a toll plaza, or expand one along with issues mentioned earlier, result in a true comparison having the points of collection being physically in different loca tions when comparing open road to traditional toll collection. Miami-Dade Expressway Authority did perform these in depth planning and engineering studies on several l ocations of their system. Again, while the comparisons may not be directly applied to other toll plazas t hey are instr uctive Page 57 llf $()

PAGE 58

P toje<:t No. The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Tabl e 5.2 O p en R oad Tolling vs. Conve ntional Toll P laza Preliminary Compa rati ve A n a lysi s Final Design P roject Project Description ruction Allocation Developme n t Cost s Allocation Demolition Cost Total Profect Cost 836.014 SR 836 Extel\$100-Tol l Plaza Section $51, 649,055 $3.656, 727 $1,863,694 N/A $57 169,476 8 36.014 Open Road Tolling Scenario 8 7 4 005 SR 878/SR 8741ntl!fehaog& 874-005 Ope n Roa d Tolling Scenario 8 7 4-006 SR 874 Northbound Ton Plaza 874.006 Ope n Roa d T oiling Scenario 112 l ntercoon ecto r Ramps from M I A to SR 112 112-005 Ope n Roa d T olling Scenario TOT AL EXI ST I NG COS T TOTAL OPE N ROAD TOI.LING SCENARI O Assumptions: Estimate dou not inClude ORT Equipmen t costs. C
PAGE 59

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling i n Florida Additional Costs of Open Road Tolling Offsetting some of these potential savings are additional costs fo r AETC. The estimates above do not include the equipment costs for the ORT scenario. Conservatively one can add $100,000 to $200 ,0 00 for an equipment gantry spanning the highway and roughly $200,000 per lane for the ORT equipment not i ncluded the estimates in Table 5.2. Another significant cost that needs to be considered i s the fiber optic communications network. This critical component of an AETC system can range from $300,000 to $400,000 per mi l e The cost includes materials installation and the system components required to accurately transmit data and video. Toll Plaza Traffic Throughput Another important dimension of AETC is the impact that it may have in moving traffic through Florida's toll plazas. Creating the right mix and placement of manual lanes, automat ic coin lanes mixed manual and ETC lanes and dedicated ETC lanes var i es by physical l im itations of plazas and traffic mix. The following figures attempt to demonstrate the throughput capacities of various toll lane configurations. The figures used are theoretical and presented here for illustrative purposes All figures attempt to represent a 6-lane expressway with one-way toll collection. Three freeway lanes would warrant a 9-lane toll plaza using traditional industry rules of thu mb Figure 5 1 illustrates that the 9-lane plaza has a theoretical throughput of 4,050 vehicles per hour (vph) or about 60% of the maximum capacity of the three lanes feed ing it. Figure 5.2 illustrates the additional vehicles that could be handled through the toll plaza with the introduction of automatic coin machines. With an additional per lane capacity of 100 vph for each of the three lanes with a coin machine, a 5% (to 4 350 vph) gain in theo retical throughput is achieved. The introduction of dedicated ETC lanes into the plaza results in almost a balance between the capacity of the highway and the capacity of the toll plaza. The 9-lane plaza is capable of moving 6,950 vph in the ideal circumstance (Figure 5 3).

PAGE 60

The Feasibilffy of Open Road Tolling in Florida Toll Plaza Manual Collection Approac. h Roadwty J..Lants dernfll'ld 'foil 91\1anual 450 ,ph Manual Collect ion 4SO ' Ph Manual Coltcccioo ph Manual Collettioo 4SO 'Ph Manual Colloccion 450 ''Ph Manual Colloecioo Throughput Figure 5.1 Theoretical Toll Plaza Throughput-Manual Collection Toll P l aza Combination Manual Collection and Automati c Coin Machines Toll Piau6 Mu ... l t.uu + J Aulomatit Coia Lants A pproach !iSO vph Aut o.tlat i c Coin 550 'Ph-Au to mat i c C oi n !iSO v plli Automat i c Coi n Tbroughpul I "Ohp. I ., ..... > 450 ''Pll Man u a l C oll ec t i o n . a ...:I 'Ptl-Manua l Collection
PAGE 61

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Toll PlazaManual, Coin & Dedicated ETC Lanes Approach Roadv.-ay J-Lanes Toll Plaza 5 Manual Lanes+ 2 Automatic Coin lAnes+ 2 Dedicated TC l..ants 1 .800 vph Oedkatcd E T C 1800 vphDedicated f:.IC Througbpul -Automatic. Coin Ttl
PAGE 62

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida Toll Plaza -Manual Collection and Express ETC Toll Plaza 4 Manual Lanes+ l Automatic Coin Lanes+ 2 Express ETC Laots A pproach Roadway 3-Lanes LOST Throug hpu t : [ 1 550 \'Ph .. Automatic Coin ThtUr'i:licill Mli:U t nu!ll d('lll3 1l d 450 ''Ph Manual C ollecticm ItO% o.f'lbeoctieal Oenl:lndOR 450 vph-Manual Collec ti on ftl%q(4.Lnnc: 450 vph -Manual Collection DeJMnd 450 vph Manua l Collec t io n Figure 5.4 Theoretical ThroughputManual, Coin and Express ETC Lanes When open road tolling is viewed in this way, the throughput always equals the demand. Figure 5.5 illustrates this graphically. The big advantage is that the theoretical highway demand can always be matched in much less physical space. The 6,600 vph can be processed in approximately t he area of four to five traditional toll lanes. These reduced land and pavement requirements explain some of the cost differentials revealed in the MDX comparisons. There is an additiona l advantage in the flexibility of the placement of the collection point when reconstructing an existing facility in order to mitigate potential impacts and costs. l'age62 if80

PAGE 63

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling i n Florida Toll Plaza All Electronic Collection Approach Road\o\'-ay J .. Lants tb:orc tic:al Maxin:r11m dtutatld Toll Plaza --3 ETC Lanti Throughpul Figure S.STheoretical Toll Plaza Throughput-All Electronic Toll Collection While the cost analysis performed for this study cannot be transformed into a single factor that can be applied to any toll lane in the State, there seems to be a clear opportunity for AETC to offer some capital cost savings. The practicality of actually real iz ing those savings is dependent on the implementation of open road tolling in a large-scale manner There may be applications for the barrierless plaza prior to any decision to proceed with a statewide program. As already mentioned the THCEA will use open road tolling on rts new facilrty. Another potential application for the Tampa Hillsborough County Expressway Authority may be on an Intersta te 4 connector project that they are now contemplating This is a project where the financial viability may hinge on the capital cost of a trad itiona l toll plaza. A fully automated collection system may help the important project become a reality

PAGE 64

Ill am The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Organizational and Legal Organization Given the myriad of issues already identified in th i s report, and the suggested approaches for addressing them, a new relationship between and among the toll agencies seems to be in order. The different AVI systems, discount programs and toll plaza configurations around the state could benefit from additional commonality while maintaining flexibility fo r individual agencies. The efforts that have begun through the dialogue facilitated through TEAMFL, and the working subcommittees that participated in this study need to be strengthened and formalized. No "off the shelf' model exists that appears to be able to be overlaid on Florida although elements of multi-state arrangements can be borrowed. The In teragency Group {lAG) is perhaps the most well known in North America. The group is comprised of the Toll Agencies mainly in the northeastern United States. Its current membership is comprised of: 1. MTA Bridges and Tunnels {Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority) 2. New Jersey Highway Authority 3. South Jersey Transportation Authority 4. New Jersey Turnpike Authority 5 Delaware River Port Authority 6. New York State Thruway Authority 7. Port Authority of New York! New Jersey 8. Pennsylvania Turnpike Authority 9. Delaware Department of Transportat ion 10. Maryland Transportation Authority 11. New York State Bridge Authority 12. Massachusetts Turnpike Authority These twelve agencies are responsible for the operations of toll facilities in six states with a total population of over 52 m illion and an area in excess of 123,000 square miles. While the comparison to Florida may not seem valid, consider that the north to south interstate corridor from Massachusetts to Maryland is only 450 miles long. The long and rich history of toll facilities in that part of the country led to many "in terstate" facilities prior to the creation and construction of the National Pay64

PAGE 65

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida System of Interstate and Defense highways. Toll highways have long comprised key elements of the highway network It can be argued that with so many agencies in such a concentrated area, working under the auspices of so many different governing entities, the need for an interagency arrangement was more compelling than it is in Florida Consider that Florida has at least 13 different entities responsible for some aspect of toll operations. These agencies range from a local bridge authority to Florida's Turnpike. While the 700 plus miles of tolled highways and bridges in the state are significant, what is more compelling is that the new center line mileage that is being constructed in the state to serve the explosive growth is essentially all tolled A recent analysis by THCEA for TEAMFL shows that some $4 billion worth of toll projects have been completed since 1975 and an additional $2.6 billion are now being developed Many of the projects under development involve not additional capacity to existing facilities, but new facilities closing critical gaps in the State's Intrastate Highway System. The strain on transportation funding resources to preserve the existing "free" road system and to fund the growing needs of other critical modes of transport demands that more emphasis will continue to be placed on toll financing for new highway facilities. All of these factors coupled with the evolut ion to more electronic toll collection point to the need for increased cooperation and a shared common vision for the future of toll operations in Florida A strategic vision for the industry needs to be constructed so tha t individua l advancements of agencies are implem ented within some forward-look ing context Several significant events have already begun to move Florida in this direction. The state's transportation leadership should be recognized and applauded for the integration of Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority s well-established E Pass system with the more recent and statewide SunPass subscription systems In fact, the interagency agreement establishing roles and responsibilities is an excellent foundation for building an even more interconnected web of agencies and functions. Also significant is the creation of TEAMFL and the routine and regular forum for the exchange of ideas and info rmation lastly, the on-going deliberations and planning for the integration of the FOOT Office of Toll Operations with the Florida Turnpike District cannot be overlooked. While the rejoining of these two inseparable functions will not ensure improved service to toll customers (both individuals and agencies buying the collection service) the merger has the greatest potential to move FOOT toll facilities operations and management to a higher level. l'age 65 '1/'110

PAGE 66

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida While there may be resistance to a more formalized body to deal with open road tolling and "a ll electronic collection," the independence of the local toll authorities becomes the central reason for this considerat ion If a strong centralized approach to these issues were taken, the need for such an organization would be negated An organization with a charter to respect and maintain the individual needs of various toll agencies while taking advantage of the economies that may be available for pu rchase of hardware, software, account processing and other services seems prudent. Areas of common interest that could be addressed by such an organization incl ude but are not limited to: Reciprocity with other states for collection / violation A sing l e point of contact to negotiate with rental car agencies/commercial vehicle operators etc A "critical mass" to deal w ith issues like reciprocity and rental agencies Account reconciliation across agencies Joint procurements of services and equipment Maintenance of the integrity of ETC brand/logo/trademarks Interag ency dispute resolutio n Maximizing value from customer service centers or other "back room" operations Toll plaza signing and configuration Future technologies emp loyed for toll collection Speaking with a common voice to industry Consistency regarding other uses for transponders In put from all toll agencies into the issues associated with ETC Consensus on the use of any and all information made available through the widespread use of ETC and AETC systems Membership into the body should be voluntary and obviously subject to the approval of the governing bodies of the agencies. There should be a cost of entry and an annua l fee that is substantive enough to demonstrate commitment but not exorb i tant for smaller agencies. These fees would be used to create an operat ing f und for the entity to carry out the mission of the organization without having to seek a sponsor each time an activity is to be conducted The concept of a weighted vote could be employed on certain policy issues. While the voices of all agencies are important, statewide policy cannot be imposed on the largest agencies by a small group that represent a small fraction of the state s toll revenue and customers. This is a controversial issu e but an l'
PAGE 67

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida important one g iven the wide disparity of toll agencies span of control and extent in Flor i da. OPERATOR Florida's Turnpike Orange CountyOrlando Expressway Authority Florida DOT Miami-Dade Expressway Authori ty Lee County Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority Osceola County Mid-Bay Bridge Other Facili ties' F Y '99-'00 Revenue (In millions) $348. 0 $125. 4 $33.9 $34.3 $28.0 $21.4 $7. 2 $6.9 $13.4 *Includes Miami-Dade County facilities, Broad Causeway, Card Sound Toll Bridge, Pensacola Beach Oridge, and Treasure Island Causeway. Perhaps a 501 3(c) private non-profit organization could be fonmed in order to accomplish the charter and goals. Several standing committees cou l d be established to tackle issues assigned by the Board. Recommendations that would be adopted would then be the responsibility of the respected agencies to implement. A different approach to organizing for future toll collection would be to adopt an even more formalized and more centra l ized approach One agency or organization would have sole responsibility for toll collection statewide. While efficiencies may be gained in this approach, the loss of local effectiveness may result. An interesting balance seems to have been achieved in the mu l ti-state, public private approach of the Heavy Vehicle License Plate Inc., or HELP Inc Help Inc. is the operator of the "P r e-Pass" system fo r commercial vehicle operations, and "is a non-profit partnership between motor earners and government agencies whose mission is to develop and deploy advanced technology systems to create a cooperative operating and regulatory environment which improves the efficient and safe movement of commercial vehicles and the performance of highway systems." Pag' 67 of80

PAGE 68

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Their structure is very different than that of the l AG and the a p proach seems to have been less than successful in the area of ETC. Essentially, a group of governmental agencies agrees to have a private sector partner team for the prov i sion of roadway services The private partner provides the up-front cap i tal required to outfit the highway and charges cus t omers on a per-transact i on basis After selection of the private sector partne r (s) a Board of Directors is established that includes all stakeho l ders. In the case of F l orida Open Road Tolling th i s could potentially include representatives from t h e r ental car a n d trucking industries to address the issues mentioned ear l ier i n the repo rt relat ing to these two sectors. State and local toll entities wou l d make up at l east fifty percent of the Board in order to assure their interests and customers are served. A third approach to consider is to regionalize certain port i ons of "all electronic" or trad i t i ona l ETC. Th i s would invo lve a core agency or organizat i on for the true "backroom" operations but create regional "nodes" to deal with customer issues. The advantages of this approach are that customer questions and hardware i ssues could be handled by peop l e in the area with local know l edge of the specific nuances of the system. The processing of accounts and video billing functions cou l d occur at a central loca tion t o maintain the economies that are inherent to a central process i ng function. Any of these models would serve to create a mor e consistent and comprehensive approach to toll collect i on and could be beneficial as the state moves towards all electronic toll collection The key to success in any more formalized arrangement will be i n the willingness and commitment of the respective agencies to the organization and its mission It must also be recognized that some of the very small entities may never be able to realize any savings or customer enhancements by moving in this direction Although the smaller agencies stand to benefit from the technological advances that would be funded and tested by the larger agencies the highly localized and very specific requirements of their operations may never lend themselves to incorporation of any statewide approach. Legal Review A subset of the O r ganizational and Legal subcommittee was assigned the task of investigating potential legal issues. Attorneys engaged by the toll authorities performed the work. Specifically this work group was asked to look into the follow ing subjects : Pa$<' 68

PAGE 69

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida Identify existing statues that relate to all electronic toll collection Outline any existing laws or rules that may i mpede enforcement or reciprocity Review existing agreements and identify any impediments to ORT e.g. bond agreements Summarize the legal collection methods that can be used Identify any privacy or public record issues While there was much discussion over several of the iss ues, the following report excerpted from the Legal Committee's report does a good job framing them and in offering an opinion. Viewing a non-prepaid toll road user init ially as a customer, rather than as a violator, based on when a toll has to be paid, only adds an after-the-fact payment component to what already occurs with electronic toll collection processes. Several constitutional issues and the existing statutes on tolls and traffic violations are addressed. Constitutions/Issues Pledging Credit Is allowing a vehicle to use an expressway and turnp ike and pay for usage after the fact an extension of credit that is prohibited by Article VII, Section 10. Florida Constitution? (This issue does not address individual bond covenants.) Article VII. Section 10 states that "[n)either the state nor any county, .... municipality, special district, or agency of any of them, shall become a jo int owner with, or stockholder of, or give, lend or use its taxing power or credit to aid any corporation association, partnership or person .... The word "credit" as used in the constitutional prohibition against pledging cred it implies imposition of some new financial liability upon the state or political subdivision thereof. Nohrr v Brevard Co. Educationa l Facilities Auth., 247 So. 2d 304 {Fla. 1971) The purpose of the consmutional provision is to keep state out of private business, to insulate state funds against loans to individual corporations or associations and to withhold state's c redit fro m entanglement to private affairs. Dade Co.Bd.of Public Instruc tion v. Michigan Mut. Liability Co., 174 So. 2d 3 (Fia 1965). Constitutional prohibition acts to protect public funds and resources from being exploited in assisting or promoting pr ivate ventures when the public would be at l'agt 69 of80

PAGE 70

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida most only incidentally benefited. Bannon v Port of Palm Beach Dist. 246 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1971) Where there is no direct or indirect undertaking by a public body to pay an obligation from public funds and no public property is placed in jeopardy by default of a third party, there is no lending of public credit within the meaning of the Constitution. State v Housing Auth. of Polk Co., 376 So 2d 1158 (Fla. 1979). In that ORT does not e lim inate the toll but merely alters how it is to be paid, and collected if not paid ORTwou ld not appear to contravene Artic l e VII, Sect i on 10. I mpairment of Contract I s allowing payment of tolls after the fact of use of an expressway or the turnpike a vio l ation of Article I Sect ion 10, United States and Flor ida Constitutions? Article I, Section 10 states that "No ... law impairing the obl i gation of contract shall be passed." This provision has relevance to whether Florida s statutes can be amended to address ORT i n light of revenue bonds and other contractua l relationships that are relevant to expressways and the turnp ike The legislature may, change te r ms and conditions of r edemption from tax certificates but as against bondholders may not make change to the substantial det rime nt of a contract without consent of the bondholders. Wall v McNee, 87 F. 2d 768 (1937) (Such verb i age i s set forth in the enabl ing le gislation for expressways ) Payment of contractual ob li gat i ons such as bonds, that are valid and enfo r ceable in a particular way and from specified resources against a public corpo r ation when incurred, cannot be hampered de l ayed, or avoided by subsequently adopted constitutional or statutory enactments. Humphreys v State, 108 Fla. 92, 145 So. 858 (1933). A statute contravenes the constitutiona l prohibition against impa i rment of a contract when it has the effect of rewriting antecedent contracts, meaning that it changes substant ive rights of parties to ex i sting contracts State Farm Mut. I ns Co. v Hassen 650 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), rev granted 662 So. 2d 932 appr. 674 So. 2d 106, reh. den. Obligation of a contract in a constitutiona l sense is the means prov i ded by l aw whereby a contract can be enforced, which are methods whereby parties ob li gated can be compelled to perform a contract, and any legislation wh i ch lessens efficiency of means, and any conduct on the part of one party which attempts to place it beyond the power of the other party to enforce the contract impairs the obl i gation State ex rei Simmons v. Harris 139 Fla 375, 161 So. 374 {1935). Will ORT be a breach of the bond obl i gations that financed expressways? Page? Oo/80

PAGE 71

The Feasibility of Open Road Toil ing in Florida Article I, Section 1, Florida Constitution, states that all natural persons have the right to acquire, possess, and protect property A suit for breach of a bond obligation is an act i on to protect property The bond documents establish the agreement between the issue r and the bondholders Whereas Article I, Section 1 0 of the two constitut i ons act as a constraint on the legisla ture's changing the law toll facilities must still adhere to the terms and conditions of bond covenants With regards to impa i rment of contract and potential breach of bond obligations, if draft legislation is needed to imp lement ORT, the text of the various bo nds will have to be reviewed to determine whether the draft leg isl ation would contravene the text of any bond that would depend on ORT for revenue Furthe r i f an All E lectr onic To ll Collection System is implemented, a similar r eview must take p l ace. It shou l d be noted that these conclusions regarding the lega l issues surrounding OR T represent the majority of the views held by the attorneys that participated i n the project. For an in-depth d i scussion of the issues refer to Appendix D Open Road Tolling L egal Memoranda. Statutes Interstate Traffic Violation Enforcement Section 322.44 Florida Statutes Drivers License Compact and Section 322.50 Florida Statutes, Non-resident Violator Compact, are two compacts that are in force in F l orida and most states. The American Association of Moto r Veh icle Administ r ators i s c l ose to having a revised compact drafted that addresses i n one compact what the two existing compacts now address. The revised compact will be submitted to the states for consideration The enfo r cement of one state s traffic laws i n other states throughout the nation and in Canada i s on going The compacts, apparent l y have not been declared unconstitutiona l but there has been litigation concerning not following the letter of the law and the equivalency of violations between states The compacts are enforced at the vehicle regi stration/license point in each state. Public Records Section 119.07(3)(bb) Florida Statutes and 1 8 U S C 2721 apply to information i n motor vehicle records. The state statute was passed to bring F lor i da law into compliance w i th th e f ederal law. The federa l law was recently amended and the Florida law has not followed suit w i ll have to be amended. Currently the Flor ida law authorizes a person to make personal i nformation in motor vehicle records exempt from disc l osure but non-personal i nformation may be disclosed The federal law exempts disc l osure unless authorization to disclose is granted. Under both laws, personal and non personal i nformation in moto r vehicle r ecords are generally usable for traffic violation Page 71of80

PAGE 72

The F easibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida pu rposes It should be understood tha t federal appropriations are t i ed to compliance with privacy requirements i n the federal l aw Non payment of Toll as a Traffic Vio l ation in Flor i da Sect i on 318. 1 001(1) Florida Statutes, requ i res every person that uses an expressway to pay a toll (wi t hout specifying when the toll has to be paid) and makes non-payment of a toll a movi n g violation under Chapte r 318, Florida S t at u tes S u bsection (2) authorizes expressways to authorize to ll enforcem e nt officers to issue traffic citatio n s and a toll enforcement officer is the designee of an expressway Section 316.640 (1 )( b )2.b., Flo r ida Statutes. empowers e x pressways to employ independent contractors as toll enforcement officers S u bsection (3) author i zes the i ssuance of a t r affic citat i on for non payment of tolls by certified mail, r eturn rece i pt requested to the vehicle owner's address The not i ce of t h e vio l ation must be sent within 14 days of the vio l ation and must no t ify the recipient that per Section 318 18(7). Florida Statutes. the fine is $1 00 but that p r ompt payment of $30 to the c l erk of court will r esult i n withholding of adjud i cation and assessi n g of poi nts The major ity of t h e fine goes to the app r opriate exp r essway authority Subsect i on (2) a l so states that the veh i cle owner is responsible for pay i ng t he f i ne un l ess the owner ca n es t ab l i sh that the vehicle, at the time of the violation was i n the care, custody or contro l of anothe r Such a claim has to be made w it h i n 14 days of rece i pt of the r egistered letter in the form of an affidav i t that either prov i des the oth er person's name and add r ess o r a po l ice r eport i n dicating t h e vehic l e was stolen at the time of the violation I ssuance or withdrawal of a violation based on an affidav i t is author i zed L astly subsect i on (2) makes e i ther a written report or photogra phi c evidence admiss i ble i n any proceeding to enforce a c l aim of non payment of a toll Subsection (3) makes a fa lse affidavit a mi sdemeanor Subsect i on (4) authorizes supplying the Department of Highway Safety and M o tor Vehic l es with machine readable data concerning persons who have three violatio n s for the purpose of precluding the re issuance of a driver's l i cense or a r e validation sticker. In conclusion, t here are severa l o r ganizational mode l s that would be approp r iate to forward the cause of AET C and open road toll i ng The Steering Committee reached qu i ck consens u s that someth i ng more formal than t h e existing T E AMFL arrangement i s needed and t hat the l AG model seemed to be the best fit. Those participating i n t his study seem to s u pport an organ ization that would focus on i nteroperability. consensus and r espect for i n d i v i d u al bus i ness pract i ces and ope r ating needs. Whi l e there is no compelling l egal obstacle to the implementation of AETC, the techno l ogy needs to be of suffic i ent rel i ability i n order to satisfy the requirements of the bondholders of the various authorities. As J'pgfl2 o f 80

PAGE 73

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida new debt issuances are contemplated, particular attention must be paid to the Operating Statement deve l opment and other documents if an agency is seriously considering the imp l ementation of AETC. Pay 7 Ju/80

PAGE 74

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida Implications on Other and Smaller Toll Agencies In an attempt to get a broader perspective of the potential implicat ions of open road tolling and all electronic toll collection agencies outside of the participating group were also consulted. The other agencies contacted, visited and interviewed were: Treasure Island Causeway (City of Treasure Island Department of Public Works). Lee County and the Miami-Dade Public Works -Causeway D ivis ion. While many of the iss ues raised by the four participating toll operators are also concerns of these agencies. others did emerge. For example, the desire to collect toll at high speeds is in conflict with some of the operating environments that were reviewed. Just as the toll plaza acts as a traffic meter in some of the high volume plazas operated by the larger agencies, the plaza is used to calm traffic at some smaller facilities. The charac ter of the surrounding land use changes dramatically on either side of the toll plaza, and in some cases so does the function of the highway There is neither the need nor the desire to promote high-speed traffic at p lazas like the Treasure Island or the Venetian Causeways, although all six of the facilities have a form of AV I for toll collection. The systems range from Lee County's state of the art ETC system where the organization is experimenting with cutting-edge applications of road pricing to the tried and true bar code system at Treasure Island. One t hing that all three agencies have in common is the need for a resident discount program, which usually features a flat annual or semi-annual fee In several cases. the toll fac il ity is the only access to or from a residential area and in fact may have been constructed to allow that development to occur It may be discovered that the res ide nts would res ist any actions to inc rease accessibility. Another difference from the smaller facility perspective is certainly the issue of cost. Although all indicated a desire to be compatible with the SunPass E-Pass system, the cost benefit is not there for some of them. In many cases the vast majority of their revenue comes from occasional users. Under an AETC scenario these transactions represent the highest cost. It is impractical to assume that an organization funded by an enterprise fund within a municipa l or county government will shift from a leased system that may be costing them only severa l hundred dollars (including system maintenance) per day to one that could cost millions of dollars to install. 7 4 480

PAGE 75

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Several of the facilities serve tou rist destinations and the multi-lingual customer base that they serve makes signing a plaza for dedicated ETC or coins a problem today. The challenge of explaining the video tolling concept while not l i mited to these faci lit ies, is certainly one that will require some creat iv ity. Several operators indicated concerns that their customer profile includes a disproportionate number of seniors who may not be as receptive to a non-cash system as other age groups. Although the faci lit ies varied in size many of them are not facing the prospect of toll plaza expansion that could result in capital cost avoidance with AETC In fact, several are at their practical l imit today, which could argue for the increased throughput that AETC offers in the future. These agencies are critical when thinking about the statewide nature of an AETC system. Early and continuous consultation is recommended so that a system can be devised to accommodate the uniqueness of these operations in the development stage. It may not be practical or even desired to pursue a course that could accommodate all of the different local business practices, but an understanding of the issues will be valuable. Finally, while the cost benefit may not be apparent to the local or county operator, it may be thought by the policy makers that statewide interoperability is a goal worth subsidizing Paul> of80

PAGE 76

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida Conclusion and Recommendations The test for feasibility of open road tolling in Florida in this effort has been to identify any fatal flaws in the concept. While there have been many potential obstacles revealed that must be addressed before imp lementing a system across the State, none has emerged as fatal. The myriad of issues that have been identified represent challenges that need to be overcome before the deployment of a statewide, "barrierless" toll collection system can be successful. Based on this analysis, none of the challenges appear to be technologically insurmountable Several of the social and political ram ifications present formidable issues What has become clear through this study is the uniqueness of each of the participating agencies and the differences between facilities operated by the same agency. Open road tolling with all electronic toll collection is, however, feasible. One very significant difference between the Highway 407 and Melbourne experiences used as comparisons is that these facilities opened with an AETC system in place. Marketing the concept and educating the customers on the use of a brand new highway with a new method of toll collection is significantly different than removing manual toll collection from an existing facil ity. In addition, financing a new facility with AETC imbedded into its original design and plan of finance represents a very different scenario than a retrofrt approach where revenue losses must be addressed. The recommended approach for Florida to move to AETC is an evolutionary path. It is recommended that Florida begin to offer high speed, non-stop toll collection at as many locations as possible thereby reducing customer demand for traditional toll collection. As the demand for manual collections wanes, the resistance to all electronic collection will diminish. This evolution will occur at a different pace in the various locations and fac ilit ies. The next step for many agencies is to remove the traditional tollbooths from the centers of mainline toll plazas in order to create express lanes. Commit to as Many Express Lanes as Feasible as Quickly as Possible One conclusion of the study is that a key to moving towards statewide AETC is to aggressively promote the construction of high-speed express lanes. This form of open road tolling {although not AETC) will attract more customers to participate in the ETC programs. Offering more non-stop collection opportunities will not only provide a more attractive option to the customer, it will also allow toll agencies and their private sector partners to work on the revenue loss issues discussed l't(gt 7 6 '!{80

PAGE 77

The Feasibility of Open Road Toiling in Florida earlier. As the leakage rates come more in line with other methods of collection toll operators, their Boards of Directors and the financial community will become increasingly more confident with an All Electronic Toll Collection model. As mentioned earlier, the OOCEA is already operating express lane s and MDX and THCEA are on this path. The express lanes on the Turnpike District s Suncoast Parkway are about to become operat ional. The Turnpike is contemplating the recommendations of an initiat ive, the "Sun Pass Challenge," to double the use of SunPass on its facilities. The results of the "SunPass Challenge" are almost final and will inc lude additional steps to increase ETC participation including a doubling of dedicated toll lanes and will consider retro fitting existing plazas with express lanes. The widespread express lane approach is the next logical step in the evolution of the toll plaza and associated toll customer enhancements. Manual lanes evolved to automatic coin lanes, to A VI, and to dedicated ETC lanes. Express ETC lanes represent the next move to total barrier free collection or AETC. The increased plaza capacity afforded by these lanes in conjunction with the attendant increase in ETC participation could h elp defer some of the plaza expansion that would otherwise be required. As ETC participation rates warrant, lanes in existing plazas can be converted to match local demand and coincide with toll agency reconstruction plans. Toll Agencies Must Worlc More Closely To Achieve Consensus-Based Strategic Evolution Although TEAMFL and the collaboration on this study represent a level of cooperation among toll entities that is commendable, an even closer relationship needs to be established if the goal is to address many of the challenges outlined in this report. One good example, and the re are many, is the iss ue of electronically collecting tolls from customers in rental cars. While there are on going attempts to arrive at a solution, this is not an iss ue that should be negotiated or settled by one of the toll agencies alone. The policy and business practice implications are too important. Another issu e is trying to capture a large percentage of the commercial vehicle market for ETC. As mentioned in the Organization and Legal section of this report, the need to formalize a relations hip between those agencies interested i n pursuing any or all of the attributes of a system that was studied here, i.e. a "barrierless" toll collection system that is fully electronic, has the capability of collecting tolls from every customer at highway speeds, to ident ify all vehicles regardless of the owner's subscription to an electronic toll collection program, be interoperable l'ag<77 of 80

PAGE 78

lltUTR The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Florida statewide, and easily understood and embraced by Florida's toll facility customers. The chief executives of the four agencies that participated in this study would create a formidable alliance in this endeavor and send an even stronger message that movement towards a seamless more convenient system of toll facilities i n Florida is a top priority. Steps Should be Taken Now to Establish Tiered Pricing It seems apparent from this study that for the reasons of customer acceptance revenue protection, and good management practice, a course needs to be set to eventually establish a toll schedule bearing a closer relationship to the cost of collection. All of the agencies have programmed a planned increase into their long-range financial forecasts It is recommended that th ese plans b e reviewed to examine the timing of future increases to perhaps create a "discount" for ETC customers. This may take the form of postponing the ETC increase or accelerating the cash toll increase. This could establish a precedent for a differential where none now exists (some operators already have established differential). For those agencies planning to employ video tolling before the others it would be wise to establish the practice of pegging the toll to the relative differences in collection costs. As agencies follow in imp lemen ting a form of video tolling, again, the precedent will have been set. These variances in rates should not be characterized as surcharges; rather the customers using the least expensive method of payment should enjoy the benefit of a reduced toll i.e less of an increase Prepare a Legislativ e Proposal for the 2003 Legislative Session Several leg islative actions will not only help the evolution of toll collection in Florida but can also help to create a more efficient and reliable system based on today's practices. It is recommended that the general and bond counsels of the participating agencies review this report, particularly the Operations and Collection Reliability section, and work with a group that was invo lved in this effort to draft any desired statutory changes. Topics for consideration include "OCR friendly" l icense tag provisions, payment enforcement, law enforcement vehicle access to account status and Florida compliance with federal information disclosure laws. The Florida Transportation J>agt 7 8 o/80

PAGE 79

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling in Flor ida Comm i ssion shou l d be consu l ted to determine if they have an interest in assisting in this effort. The effort involved by dozens of staff and consultants in the analysis cannot be overstated. While some of the conclusions and recommendations may appear to be obvious to the reader, the data collection, ana l ysis, d i scussion, debate and finally consensus-building were no small tasks The Ma n ageme n t Committee should be acknowledged fo r their commitment of time and patience The Steering Committee should be applauded for the attention and time that they devoted to making this a comprehensive look at the feasibility of open road tolling in Flor i da Page 79 of 80

PAGE 80

The Feasibility of Open Road Tolling i n Florida List of Appendices Appendix A -List of Subcommittee Members Appendix BOpen Road Tolling Telephone Survey Results Appendix C-Resource Systems Group Summary of Focus Group Results Appendix 0-Open Road Tolling Legal Memoranda l'ag' 80 of80

PAGE 81

Appendix A -List of Subcommittee Members

PAGE 82

Management Committee Mr. James Ely, District Secretary, Turnpike District, Florida Department of Transportation Mr. Bill Ham, Acting Executive Director, Flor ida Transportation Commission Mr. Patrick J. McCue, P.E., Executive Director, Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority Mr. SeNando Parapar, Executive Director, Miami-Dade Expressway Authority Dr. Harold W. Worrall, Executive Director, Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Engineering Chair Samuel E. Gonzalez, P.E. Engineering Director, Miami-Dade Expressway Authority Members Reynaldo Cortez, P.E., Program Director, PBSJ Ben Munns, P.E., Chief Engineer, Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority Joe Berenis, P.E . Director of Engineering, Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Steve Austin, P.E., Program Manager, PBSJ Traffic and Revenue Chair William Thorp, Chief Financial Officer, Florida Department of Transportation, Florida's Turnpi ke Members David O'Neal, Deputy Director/Chief Financial Officer, Miami-Dade Expressway Authority Teresa Slack, Chief Financial Officer, Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Hugh Miller, Vice President URS Edward Regan, Sr. Vice PresidentWSA 1

PAGE 83

Operations/Collections Reliability Chair Evelio Suarez, Florida Department of Transportation, Off i ce of Toll Operat io ns Members Rick Nelson, Florida Department of Transportation, F l orida s Turnpike Marty Stone, Tampa-Hillsboroug h County Expressway Authority Ron Fagan Orlando -Orange County Expressway Authority Sue Hofstetter, Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Customer Impacts and Marketing Chair Jorge Figueredo, Orl ando-Orange County Expressway Authority Members Kim Poulton, Fl orida Department of T r ansportation, Florida's Turnpike Dawn Brown, Tampa-Hillsborough County Expressway Authority Beverly Rodrigues, M i ami -Dade Expressway Authority Organizational and Legal Chair: Brady Sneath Chief Financial Officer, TampaH illsborough County Expressway Authority Members: Alberto Bustamante Ill, Esq., Akerman Senterfitt John Beck, Esq., Beck Barrios and Malaney Terry Denham, Florida Department of Transportation Theresa Moore, Esq. Greenberg Traurig Woodrow Lawson, Florida Department of Transportation, Florida's Turnpike 2

PAGE 84

Appendix 8 -Open Road Tolling Telephone Survey Results

PAGE 85

OPEN ROAD TOLLING A SURVEY OF PUBLIC OPINION IN CENTRAL FLORIDA SUN COAST SOUTH FLORIDA TURNPIKE CORRIDOR OCTOBER, 2001

PAGE 86

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This survey assesses the opinions of cash users and non-users of existing toll roads in South Florida, Central Florida, the Tampa region, and along Turnpike corridor. The results are based on a phone survey among 1 ,211 respondents, conducted between September 10 and October 1, 200 I. Cash Users and Non-Users are nearly identical in their primary reasons for not getting Sun-PASS/E-PASS. Among Cash Users, 72.7% state that the reason is that they don't use the toll roads that much, as do 76.2% of Non-Users Cash Users would consider getting Sun-PASS/E-PASS if it was cheaper than paying cash (73.4% agree or strongly agree), or so that they didn't have stop at toll plazas (72.1% agree or strongly agree), or if the transponder were free (78.3% agree or strongly agree). The respective responses among Non-Users are 69.5%, 63.3% and 63.4%. Less than a majority of respondents support rate differentials among different collection methods. Among Cash Users, 41.2% agree or strongly that it is OK for toll rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payment and SunP ASSIE-PASS payments. Similarly, 42.6% of Non-Users agree or strongly agree with this statement. Among Cash Users, only 19.0% prefer video tolling over SunPASSIE-PASS, and 31.2% prefer video tolling over cash (resp., 20.8% and 8.1% have no opinion). 62.9% of Non Users said that they would use toll roads if they didn't have to pay with cash. Most Cash Use rs (86.2%) and Non-Users (73.8%) agree or strongly agree that it is important that toll agencies keep travel information of toll road users confidential. 75.8% and 70.8% agree or strongly agree that this information should only be made avai lable when requested by the courts. A large majority of respondents state that cash payment should always be an option on toll roads. Respectively, 91.3% of Cash Users and 87.8% of Non-Users agree or strongly with this statement.

PAGE 87

I M ETHODS The purpose of this survey is to assess the opinions of (i) cash users and (ii) non-users of existing toll roads in selected areas in Florida with regard to the concept of open road tolling. This concept entails the use of video toll collection for non ETC users (that is, Electronic Toll Collection devices such as Sun PASS and E PASS), as well as the possibility o f eliminating cash tr.msactions along toll roads. The study was conducted by Pecora & Guitar, Inc. of Winter Park, F lorida, and Dr. Evan Berman Interviewing was conducted by OnTarget Marketing of St. Louis (MO) Responden t s were selected from within four geographic areas within the State of Florida All respondents were randomly selected from among listed residential phone numbers Respondents within South Florida were selected from an area c orresponding with the population center of South Florida that ranges from Homestead, in the South, to Boynton Beach, in the North. Respondents from Central Florida (called "Orla ndo") were selected from within an area encompassing Kissimmee, Winter Garden Deltona, Titusville and Cocoa (this includes Grater Orlando). Respondents from the Sun Coast (called "Tampa") were selected from within an area that encompasses Sarasota, Clearwater, Brooksville and Tampa Respondents within the Turnpike region were selected from with i n an area of twenty-five miles of the Florida Turnpike; this corridor stans at Boynton Beach, in the South, and runs until Wildwood, in the North, but excludes the area from Kissimmee through Winter Garden that is part of the Orlando survey area. A phone survey was conducted between September 10 and October 1, 2001, excluding the days o f September II and 12 due to the national tragedy Calls were generally made Mondays through F ridays, between 3 PM and 9PM, ES T The final sample of completed surveys consists of 605 cash users and 606 non-users, and consist of the following distribution across regions: Completed Surveys (Sa mpl e): REG I ON: South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike Total Cash Users 151 151 151 152 605 Non-Users 151 152 150 153 606 TOTAl 302 303 301 305 1 211 Across all regions and types of surveys, a total of approximately 1 5,343 different phone numbers were dialed. Each phone number wa s dialed up to four times in order to contact potential interviewees; a total of approximately 25,234 phone calls were made. Of these approximate l y 15,343 different phone numbers, 6,188 were deemed ineligible because 104 were a business or a government office, 28 were fax/modem lines 69 were disconnected or out of service numbers, 4,163 did not answer (despite dialing up to four times) or have al)

PAGE 88

2 answering machine and 1, 824 did not have an eligible respondent. Of the remaining 9,155 numbers, we reached answering machines in 4,979 instances. Also, 2,791 respondents refused to participate, 174 surveys were not fully completed (early termination) and 1 ,211 were completed. Thus, the response rate among those with whom we spoke is [1,211/ (2,791+174+1,211) =I 29.0%, and among all potentially eligible residential households [1,211/ (2,791+174+1,211+4,979) =I 13.2%. However, this latter number is a low estimate of the actual response rate, because it includes households that may not have been eligible or even available to participate at the time of the study. It i s interesting to note that we encountered households in which we only reached answering machines despite up to four calls most frequently in South Florida. The ratio of such househo lds (with answering machines, only) to completed surveys is 6.2:1 in South Florida. as compared to 3.4:1 among all other regions combined. Spanish-speaking interviewers were made available in the South Florida region for conducting interviews in Spanish among residents who did not speak English. Respondents who did not understand o u r requests in English were transferre d to Spanish speaking interviewers. The sample and population demographics are shown below. It shou ld be noted that t h e following popula tion demographics are only rough approxi mations based on t he 2000 U.S. Census as reported for Florida counties The population estimates of the Turnpike region are li ke l y to be quite imprecise. The samp le age groups are slightly different from those reported for the U.S. Census (18-25, 26-45 46-65, and 66+ years) Orlando South Florida Tampa Turnpike Populat ion Sample P opu la tion Sample Population Sample Population Samp l e Age: 18-24 13.5% 5.3% 11.0% 12.6% 9.4% 11.3% 8.1% 14.8% 25-44 44.3% 37.5% 41. 2% 38.4% 35.7% 30.2% 33.1% 33.8% 45-64 28.3% 35.5% 28.7% 34.5% 29.8% 38.5% 28.3% 33.5% 65+ 1 3 .9% 21.8% 19.1% 14. 6"4 25 1% 20.0% 30.5% 18.1% Gender: Male 47.6% 47.4% 47.8% 40.3% 47.3% 41.9% 47.5% 43.8% Female 52. 4% 52.7% 52.2% 59.8% 52 7% 58.2 % 52. 5% 56.2% The sampling error for 600 comple ted surveys is about 4.0%. This means that, on repeated sampling the results of this survey will be replicated in 95% of such replication efforts with a margin of no more than plus or minus 4%. The sampling error for 150 completed surveys is about 8.0%.

PAGE 89

3 FINDINGS Note: Differences among respondents across regions are indicated as present. A. Profile of Respondents All Cash Users respondents in the survey state that have used a toll road in the State of Florida in the past six months, and that they do not currently have a SunPASS orE-PASS device on their vehicle None of the Non-Users in this survey has used a toll road in the State of Florida in the past six months. Comparing incomes, we find that the estimated mean annual household income of Cash Users is higher than that of Non-Users: respectively, $56,700 and $50, 000. For example, 24.1% of Cash Users report having annual household incomes over $65,000, compared with only 14 .9 % of Non-Users who report such incomes. Likewise, 19 .2 % of Cash Users report having annual household incomes under $25,000, compared with 31.6% of Non-Users. The reported mean annual incomes are higher among Cash Users than Non-Users in each of the four regions The age and gender profiles of respondents reflect those of the population (see methodology), and thus should not be used when comparing Cash Users and Non-Users in this study. Nonetheless, we did find that more Cash Users were between the ages of 36 and 55 years than Non-Users (respective ly, 46.4% and 32.7%). In the study, 43.5% of Cash Users are males, as are 43.1% of Non-Users. B. Road Use Cash Users are infrequent users of toll roads 81.6% of Cash Users report using the roads less than five (5) times per week. This suggests that a vast majority of Cash Users do not use toll roads for daily commuting. 13.4% of Cash Users use the tolls roads 5-10 times weekly, and 5.0% use it more than 10 times each week. Non Users were asked why they don't use toll roads. 66.7% of Non-Users state that they don't use toll roads because they don't go where they need them to go (66.7%). Very few stated that they don't use the toll road system because it is too expensive (6.4%), unsafe (1.9%) or has too much traffic (2.8%). The remainder. 19.5%, stated other, unspecified reasons. Non-Users in different regions do not vary much in their primary reason for not using the toll roads, but there are some differences among other stated reasons Non-Users in South Florida state more often that there is too much traffic (8.6% versus 0.9% all other regions) and that they are unsafe (4.3% versus 1.0% other regions). Non-Users in Tampa state more often they that don't know where the toll roads go to (6.3% versus 1.6% other regions).

PAGE 90

4 C. Getting SunPASS/E-PASS Most Cash U sers (89.9%) and Non Users (84.3%) state t hat they were aware of SunPASSIE PASS before the interview. Non-Users in Tampa are less likely to have heard of SunPASS than respondents in other regions (66 .7% versus 90.1% other regions). Cash Users and Non-Users are nearly identical in their primary reasons for not getting Sun PASSIE-PASS. Among Cash Users, 72.7% state that the reason is that they don't use the toll roads that much, as do 76. 2% of Non -Use rs. Very few respondents state it was too much trouble to get (respectively, 6.9% and 2.6%), that it costs too much or is expensive (resp., 3.6% and 3.0% ), that they prefer to pay cash (resp. 2.1% and 4.5% ), that don't want people to have a record of their travels (1.0% and 1.7% ), or that they can't get a receipt at the time of transaction (0.3% and 2.0%). 12.7% of Cash User and 9.2% of NonU sers stated other, unspecified reasons. Some minor regional differences exist regarding this item. Among both Cash Users and Non Users, respondents in South Florida are l east like to state that their primary reason for not getting Sun-PASSIE-PASS is that they don't use the toll roads that much : respectively 64.2% and 65.8% of South Florida respondents state this, compared with 75.5% and 79.8% among respondents of all other regions. Among Nun-Users, respondents in South Florida more often state that it is too much trouble to get (8.6% versus 0.7% other regions) Despite the above results, many Cash Users would consider getting Sun-PASS/E-PASS if it was cheaper than paying cash (73.4% agree or strongly agree), or so that they didn't have stop at toll plazas (72.1% agree or strongly agree), or if the transponder were free (78.3% agree or strongly agree). The respective responses among Non-Users are 69.5%, 63.3% and 63.4%. Also, 84.9% of Cash Users and 81.7% of Non-Users state that they would get Sun PASSIE-PASS if video tolling was more expensive than Sun-PASSIE-PASS (the concept of video tolling i s discussed below). Finally a slim majority of Cash Users (58.8%) state that they prefer to pay monthly rather than each time that they ride However, less than a majority of respondents support rate differentials. Among Cash Users, only 41 2% agree or strongly that it is OK for toll rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payment and SunP ASSIE-PASS payments. Similarly, only 42.6% of Non Users agree or strong! y agree with this statement. Among South Fl orida Users we also asked two additional questions. Only 16.0% of Cash Users in South Florida are aware that SunPASS users receive an immediate 10% discount on roads that are operated by the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority when they drive through SunPASS lanes After being told about this discount, 41.3% state that they now would consider purchasing a SunPASS device, and 16.7% stat e that they didn't know. When we asked these questions of Non-Users, only 15 8% were aware of the discount, and 36.5% would consider purchasing a SunP ASS after being told of the discount. 18.2% of Non-Users still didn't know whe ther they would purchase a SunPASS.

PAGE 91

5 D. Video Toll Collection Respondents were read the following statement defining the new concept of video toll collection: "Technology now exists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive monthly bills. Video cameras can record the vehicle lic ense plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars. This is called 'video toll collection."' The vast majority of respondents who completed the survey understood the concept on first reading; only 16.7% of Cash Users and 12.5% of Non -Us ers asked for the statement to be re read. All respondents stated that they understood the concept before proceeding with the survey. It should be noted that only 12 .6% of all respondents who begun the survey discontinued the survey at some point suggesting that understanding this concept, as well as other concepts in the study (such as "cash-less t oll collection," see further), was not very difficult. Among respondents, 56.8% of Cash Users and 52.1% of Non Users agree or strongly agree that they would use a road that has video toll collection. Among Cash U sers, video toll collection was not popular relative to either cash payments or SunPASSIE-PASS. Only 19.0% prefer video tolling over SunPASSIE-PASS, and 31.2% prefer video tolling over cash (resp. 20.8% and 8.1% had no opin ion ). 62.9% of Non-Users said that they would use toll roads if they didn't have to pay with cash. Although this latter statement suggests that video toll collection could prompt some Non -Users to use toll roads, other considerations include the confidentiality of information (below) which could detract from such use A by-product of video toll collection is that motorist travel information will be available. Most Cash Users (86.2%) and Non-Users (73.8%) agree or strongly agree it is important that toll agencies keep this information confidential Respectively, 75.8% and 70.8% agree or strongly agree that this information should only be made available when requested by the courts. However, somewhat fewer believe that this information should not be made available to the general public (respectively, 73.4% and 54.1%). E. Cash-less Toll Roads Respondents were asked to "imagine that all tolls must be paid electronically on Florida 's toll roads. Cash would no longer be an option for paying tolls. In other words, all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection. This is also called 'cash-less toll collection."' Most respondents who completed the survey understood the concept on first reading; only 21.8% of Cash Users and 28.4% of Non-Users asked for the statement to be re-read. These petcentages are somewhat higher than for the concept of video to ll collection, which may suggest that this concept is somewhat more difficult to understand. All respondents stated that they understood the concept of cash-less toll collection before proceeding with the survey.

PAGE 92

6 A large majority of respondents state that cash payment should always be an option on toll roads Respectively, 91.3% of Cash Users and 87.8% of Non-Users agree or strongly with this statement. In addition, they also agree or strong l y that there should ways be people like to ll collectors who provide information to motorists (resp., 89.1% and 79.2%) Cash Users also agre e or strongly that there should always be a way to get an irrunediate receipt (85.0%). Under the system, of cash less toll collecti on, 53.7% of Cash Users would use SunP ASSIE PASS, 30.1% would use video tolling and 16.2% don't know. Among respondents, 45. 0% in Tampa state that they wou l d use video tolling, as do 33.1% in South Fl orida, 26. 5% in Orlando and 15 .8% along the Turnpike corridor. F. Miscellaneous Among Cash Users 60.7% agree or strongly agree that they would like to be able to buy a day pass that allows them to travel on any Florida toll road for that day. 56.0% agree or strongly agree that would like to be able to buy week-long passes, and 68.1% would like to be able to buy month-long passes. 56.3% 64.0% and 60.6%. Many Cash Users state that it OK to wait one minute in line to pay cash tolls (72.9% who agree or strongly agree), but only 40.4% agree or strong l y that it is OK to wait three minutes and even fewer, 17.4%, agree or strongly agree that it is OK to wait five minutes in line. Among Non-Users, these percentages are, respectively, 77.9%, 28.3% and 32.8%. Non-users i n tbe Turnpike corrido r are Jess likely to than those in other regions to agree or strongly agree that it OK to wait one minute in line: 58. 9% versus 84.3% in other regions. Among Cash Users, 65.1% agree or strongly agree that it is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls. Among Non-Users, 64.3% agree or strongly agree that it is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls.

PAGE 93

I APPENDIX 1: SURVEY RESULTS (ALL DISTRICTS) Note: Additional instructions provided in Appendix 3, "survey protocol.'' N ote: Tota l sample is n = 1,211. 1. In order for our survey to be valid, we must interview only persons over the age of 18 living, who own a car and live in [ location ] Would that be you? (n=1,211) Location Names: Central Florida the Greater Tampa area, including Sarasota Dade, Broward or Palm Beach County Within 25 miles of the Florida Turnpike Yes............ .... .... ........... .. . .... ....... ........... .......... 100 0 % No .................................. .... .. ... .. ........ ..... ........ 0.0 If "yes," Continue (GO TO QUESTION 2). If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAll. NOW. 2. Have you used any toll road within the State of Florida during the previous six months? (n=1 211) Yes . .. ..... .. . ... ........ ... .. .. .. .... .. .. ... ... ... ... ... ... . 50.0 % No .. ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . . .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. 50.0 If "yes," Continue (GO TO QUESTION 3) If "no," GO TO NON-USER SURVEY 3 Do you h ave either a SunPASS orE-PASS device on your vehicle? (n=605) Yes.................................................................... 0 .0 % No . .. . .... .. ... .. .. .. .. ... ... ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... ..... 100.0 If "yes," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAll. NOW If "no," GO TO CASH CUSTOMER SURVEY

PAGE 94

2 Cash Customer Survey Note: All responses based on n=605, unless otherwise indicated. (IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNP ASSIE-PASS." IN SO liTH FLORIDA, TAMP A AND TURNPIKE MARKETS, USE "SUNPASS.") PART I I will you read you some statements about SunPASSIE-PASS. SunPass and E-PASS are prepaid accounts from which toll charges are paid. SunPass and E-PASS are transponders that go on the front windshields of cars. They are little white boxes that you may have seen on other cars. As cars go throug)l special toll booth lanes, these SunPASSIE-PASS transponders record transactions and a monthly statement is later sent to the account holder. 4. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes. .. .... ... ... ........... ... ... ................. .......... .. . . . 15.4% No................................... ... .... ..... .... ............ .... . 84.6 If "yes," ? H "no," ? Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 5 GO TO QUESTIO N 5. 5. Do you understand the concept of paying tolls through SunP ASSIE-PASS? Yes .. . . . ... ........ .. .. .. ........ . .. ..... . ... ..... .. ... ...... 100.0% No...................................................................... 0.0 If "yes ... If "no," 7 GO TO QUESTION 6 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 6. Did you hear of SunPASS orE-PASS before my call? (n=604) Yes..... ............... ..... ..... ....... ... .......... ........ .......... 89.9% No......... ............ .... .... .......... ...... .. ............. .... 10. 1 7. What is your primary reason for not getting SunPASSIE-PASS (Choose one response only. Do NOT read the following statements.) Prefer to pay cash.............................................. 2.1 % Too much trouble to get, it is inconvenient, or not enoug)l time to get .. .......... .... ...... .... 6.9 Don't use the toll roads that much.......... . ......... 72.7 SunPASSIE-PASS costs extra/Expensive .. ....... 3.6 APPENDIX I

PAGE 95

3 I don 't mind waiting to pay tolls . ............... .... . 0.5 I don't want anyone to have a record of my travels........................ ...... . .... ... .......... 1.0 I can' t get a receipt at the time o f my transaction 0.3 Other ........ .... . . ......... ............ ... ...... .... .......... 12 7 I will read you some statements. Please tell me whether you strongly agree agree, somewhat agree don t know/can't say, somewha t disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 8 I would get SunP AS SIB-PASS if it was cheaper than paying to ll s with cash Strongly Agree .......... ... .... ... ............................. Agree ........ ....... .. .... ... .. ..................... ... .......... Somewhat Agree ............ ... . .... ....... ...... ........... Don't Know or Can 't Say .. .......... .. .. .. .............. .. Somewhat Disagree ... ...... .... ... ............... .. .... .. Disagree .......... .......... . . .... ... ... ............... . ........ Strongly Disagree ........ ...... .... .... ... .... ... .... ...... .. 15.4% 58 0 4.0 6.4 0.7 14.7 0.8 9. I would get SunPASS/E-PASS if so that I didn't have to s top at toll plazas Strong) y Agree .. .... ....................... ..... ..... .. ....... Agree .............. .................... ... ...... ....... .... .... Somewhat Agree ............. ..... ... ... .... . ........... D on t Know or Can't Say ................................ .. Somewhat Disagree ......................................... .. Disagree ............................................................ Strongly Disagree ............... . .............. ... ..... .... . 12.6% 59.5 5.6 4 1 1.0 15. 9 1.3 1 0 I would get S u nPASSIE PASS if the transponder was free Strongly Agree ........ ............ ......... ..... .. .. ............ Agree .............................................................. Somewhat Agree ............................... ............. .. Don't Know or Can't Say ................................ .. Somewhat Disagree ... ........... ...... ....... ... .......... Disagree ... . ... ... ... ...... . ........ ... .... . .... . . . . . .... Strong l y Disagree . ... .... .... .................. ........... .. .. P A R T II 22 .8% 55.5 3.1 6.9 0.5 10.2 0.8 Technology now ex ists that allows cars without E-PASS or Sun P ASS to rec e ive monthly bills. Video cameras can record the vehicle license p l ates of cars as they go through toll APPENDIX I

PAGE 96

4 plazas and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars This is called "video toll collection." II. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes ....... .. .. ...... .... . .. .. .. .. ... ........ . .. .. . ............ 16.7% No..................... .... .. ........... ... ... .. .. .. ........ ...... .. 83.3 If "yes 7 Repeat the statemen t and GO TO QUESTION 12 If "no," 7 GO TO QUESTION 12. 12. Do you understand the concept of video tolling? Yes ..... .... . .... . ....... ..... .............. ........................ 100.0% No............................. ............................... ........ 0.0 If "yes," 7 If "no," 7 GO TO QUESTION 13 lHANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 13 Do you prefer video toll collection or the use of transponders such as SunPASSIE PASS to pay for tolls? Video tolling ..... ... .. .. .. ... ..... ... . ................... SunP AS SIB-PASS ............... .. ........................... Can't Say/ Don't Know .... .................. .. .. ...... . 19.0% 60. 2 20.8 14. Do you prefer video toll collection or the use of cash to pay for tolls? Video tolling .. .. ... ..... .. .. ... .. .... .. ........... .. ........ Cash . ........ .. .. ....... ...... .. ......... .... .................... Can't Say/ Don't Know ..................................... 31.2% 60.7 8.1 14-2. FOR SOUTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Are you aware that SunPass users who commute on toll roads operated by the Miami Dade Expressway Authority receive an immediate 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (n=150) Yes No ... .. ...................................... .................... Don't Know ........................ .... ... ....................... 16.0% 72.0 12.0 14-3 FOR SOUTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on tolls for SunPass users on Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roads, APPENDIX I

PAGE 97

5 would you consider purchasing SunPass and using Miami -Dade Expressway Authority roadways? (n=150) Yes .. ... ... ... ... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. ...... . .. ......... No ... .... ... ............ .. .................. ...... ......... . Don't Know ..... ...... ......... .... ..... ......... ................ 41.3% 42.0 16.7 I am now going to read you some statements about video toll collection Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, know/can 't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or s t rongly disagree. 15 I would use a road that has video toll collec t ion Strongly Agree ... .. ... .. .. ..... ............................. Agree ...... . . . . . . ........ .... ........... ................. . Somewhat Agree ......... .. ... .. .... . ... .. . . .. .. .. .... Don't Know or Can't Say ...... ...... .. ... . .. ....... Somewhat Disagree ...... ..... .. .......................... Disagree ........... . . ... ... .. .. .. . ... .. ... .. . ............. . Strongly Disagree ... ... ........ . .... . . ........ .. . .. .. . 4.6% 52.2 6.0 6 8 1.8 23.1 5.5 16. If video toll collection was more expensive than gening SunPassiE-PASS, I would get SunPassiE-PASS. (n=604) Strongly Agree ...... .............. . .. . .... ............ .. .. Agree .............. ........ .......... .................... ... ..... Somewhat Agree ...... ........... ... .... ............ .. .. ... Don't Know or Can t Say . ............ ..... .. ....... .. ... Somewhat Disagree .... ...... . ............. ......... .. .... Disagree .... . ...... .... .. .. .......... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. Strongly Disagree ................. .. ........................ 13.4% 71.5 2.8 4.5 1.3 5.8 0.7 17. It is OK for tolls rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPassiEPASS payments. ( n=604) Strongly Agree ..... ... .. .. ...... .. ................... .... . Agree .... ........ ... ... ..... .... ................... ............. . Somewhat Agree .... .......... . .... . . ....... .. ....... .... Don't Know or Say .............. ... ... ........... .. Somewhat Disagree ....... ..... . .. ........... .. .......... . D . sagree ..... ... .. ... ... . .. ...... ...... .................... ... Strongly Disagree .. ... .. ..... ......................... ..... 3.8% 37 4 3.3 7.5 2.0 38.4 7.6 18 I would rather pay monthly than each time I ride a toll road. (n=604) APPENDIX I

PAGE 98

6 Stro ngly Agree . ... .... .......... ... .......... ........... ... . Agree ........................... .................... ......... ... .. Somewhat Agree ....... ...................... ................. Don't Know or Can't Say ................................ .. Somewhat Disagree ............... .... ...... ....... ......... Disagree .. ...... ............... .......... ...... ...... ............. Strong! y Disagree ... .......................... ............. .. 8.6% 50.2 3.6 5.8 0 .8 28.5 2.5 A by-product of video toll c ollection is that motorist travel i nformation will be available. Again, pl ease te ll me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, know/ c an't say, somewhat disagree disagree, or strongly disagree. 19. This motorist travel information should not be available to the general public. Strongly Agree .................. .......... ..... .......... ...... . Agree ................... ....... ............ ........................ Somewhat Agree ............. .......... .... .. ........ ........ Don't Know or Can't Say ........................... ...... Somewhat Disagree .......................................... Disagree ............................................................ Strongly Disagree ............. .......... .... ...... ......... . 31.7% 41.7 2.0 3 8 0 2 18.0 2.6 20. It is important t hat toll agencies treat this information as confidential. (n=604) Strong! y Agree ............................................ ...... Agree .................... ... ..... .... .............. ............... .. Somewha t Agree .... .......................... ............... . Don't Know or Can't Say ................... .............. Somewhat Disagree ....... ..... ............. ................ Disagree .......... ...... ...... ..... ... ............ ................. Strong! y Disagree ....................... ..... ... ... .... ..... .. 35.9% 50.3 1.5 2.8 0 .3 8.9 0 2 21-1. This information sho ul d only be made available when requested by the courts. (n=603) Strongly Agree ................ ............ ...... ....... ... .... . Agree ... ....... ......... ... ... ......... ........ ........... ..... . Somewhat Agree ............. ............ .. ........ .... ... .. Don't Know or Can't Say ................................. Somew h at Disagree ........................ ................ .. Disagree ... ............ . ........ .... ......... ... .................. Strongly Disagree .............. ................... ....... ... . 18.6% 57.2 3.8 4.1 0.3 12.8 3.2 APPENDIX I

PAGE 99

7 21-2 If information about the motorist's toll account and travel were strictly confidential and protected by law, would you consider panicipating in an electronic toll co ll ection program rather than paying cash for yo u r trip? (n=604) Yes No .... .............................................. ............ ... ............. ... ..................... ... .. ... . ........... 54.0% 32.9 Don't Know/ Can't Say ... ... ... ... ..................... . 13.1 PART III Now, imagi ne that all tolls must be paid electronical l y on Florida's t oll roads. Cash would no longer be an option for paying tolls In other words, all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection This is also called "cash less toll collection." 22. Would you like me to re-read this sUltement? Yes No .............. .............................. ................ .. .............................................................. 21.8% 78.2 If If "no," 7 Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 23 GO TO QUESTION 23. 23. Do you undersUlnd the concept of cash-less toll collection? Yes No If If "no." GO TO QUESTION 24 100.0 % 0.0 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAll NOW. 24. Under this system, would you use video t oll collection or transponders suc h as SunP ASSIE-PASS to pay fo r tolls? Video tolling........ ...................... ... .................... 30.1 % SunPASSIE-PASS ...... .... ... ... .... ... .......... .... ... 53.7 Can't Say/ Don't Know............................. ........ 16.2 Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree disagree or strongly disagree. 25. Cash payments should always be an option on toll roads (n=593) Strong l y Agree..................... ............. .. ............... 25.8 % Agree ........... .......... .......... ... .... ... ...... .... ... ...... 65.3 APPENDIX I

PAGE 100

8 Somewhat Agree ... .. . . . . . . .. ... . .. . .. . . . .. .. . 3.0 Don't Know or Can' t Say...... .................... .. ...... 1.5 Somewhat Disagree.. ........................................ 0.2 D isagree. ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. .... . ...... . .. .. ... ........ . . ... 4.0 Strongly D isagree...... .... .. ................................ 0.2 26. I think there should always be people like toll collectors who provide infonnation to motorists (n=578) Strongly Agree .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. . ... . ... ...... .. .. ... ... Agree . .......... ... . . ... .. ......... .. . .... .......... .... . . . Somewhat Agree ..... .. ...... ....... . ... .. .. .. .. ... .. Don't Know or Can't Say ............ .. .................. .. Somewhat Disagree .. .. ......... .. .. .. ...... .. .. ... . .. Disagree ..... .. ...... ... ....... ................................ .. Strongly Disagree .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. ... .. .. ... .... .. .. .. 24.0 % 65. 1 5.0 1.2 0 5 3 8 0.3 27 There should a l ways be a way t o immediately get a receipt Str ongly Agree ... ... .. .. .......... .. ..... ................... Agree ... ...... . .. . ...... . .. .. ... . ... ... .. . . .. ... ... Somewhat Agree ... ...... .. .. ..... .... ... ........ . ...... Don t Know or Can't Say .. .. .. .. ........... .. .......... Somewhat Di s agre e .......................................... Disagree . .... .. ..... . .. .. .. .. .... .......... ...... ......... .. Strongly Disagree ......... ...... ........ ...... .. .. ... .. 13.4% 71.6 4.3 3 0 1.0 6 6 0 2 28. I would like t o be able to buy an ail -day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day Strongly Agree ... ................ ... ... .. ............ .. .. .. Agree ...... ...... .................... ..... ...... .. ..... .... ........ Somewhat Agree ........ . ........ ................ ......... Don't Know or Can' t Say .. ...... ... ...... ....... ........ Somewhat D isagree ... ......... ... .. ...................... .. Disagree ........................................................... .. Strong l y Disagree .. .. .. .... ........... .. ............. ...... .. 5.5% 55.2 4.8 8.9 2 1 22. 6 0.8 29. I would like to be able to buy a week-long pass that allows me to trave l on any Florida toll road for that week. Strongly Agree .. ... .. .. ......... ... . .. ........... .. .. ..... Agree ............................................ . .. .............. Somewh at Agree ........ .... .... . .. . ... ............ ..... Don't Know or Can't Say ................................. Somewhat D isagree ... ......... ....... .. ... .. .......... .. .. 5.1% 50.9 4.0 10.4 1. 7 APPENDIX I

PAGE 101

9 Disagree.. .. . .............. . . .. .. .... . .. .. ...... ... ..... .. 26. 4 Strongly Disagree.. .... ....... .. .............. .. .. ......... 1.5 30. I would like to be able to buy a month-long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that month. Strongly Agree ................ ........ .. .. .... ........... .. .. . Agree .......... .. .. .. .. ... ............................ . .. ..... Somewhat Agree .... ............ .................. .. . ..... Don't Know or Can't Say ... .. . .. .. . ..... ........ .. . . Somewhat Disagree .... ... ... .. . .. .. .. . .. ........ .. . . Disagree .... .. . ... . . .... .. .......................... .. .. .. Strongly Disagree ............... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ... ..... 5.0% 63.1 4.1 5.1 1.5 19.5 1.7 31. It is OK to wait one minute in line to pay my cash t olls. Strongly Agree ....... ........... .. ... ..... .... .......... .. ... Agree . . .................. ......... ..... ........... . .. .......... Somewhat Agree ............. .. ................ .. .. ... ... . Don't Know or Can't Say .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .... ...... Somewhat Disagree ........................................ .. Disagree . . ... ..... ................ ................... ....... ... Strongly Disagree ..... .. .................. ...... ...... . .. .. . 3.0% 69.9 4.8 1.5 2.0 16.5 2 .3 32. It is OK to wait three minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. Strong! y Agree ...... ... .. ... .. ... .. ....... ............... . Agree ...... ... . . .... ..... ... . . .... . ............... ........... Somewhat Agree .............. . .. . .......................... Don't Know or Can't Say ......... ...... .................. Somewhat Disagree ................... .. ................ ... Disagree ... . . ... ..... .. ............ ... .. .. .. ........... .. Strong! y Disagree .................. .... ... ...... ... .. . .. .. . 1.7% 38.7 1 0.4 1.7 3.8 36.7 7.1 33. It is OK to wait five minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. Strongly Agree .................... .... ................... . .. Agree . . . ............. .... . .... .. ... . . . ................. . Somewhat Agree .. ... ... .. . .. . ........ .. ... . . ........ .. Don t Know or Can't Say ... .. .. .. . .. .. .. . . ........ .. Somewhat Disagree .. .... ....... ...... ...................... Disagree ........ ....... ........ ... . ........ .. .. .... .... .. .... Strongly Disagree .. . .. ... . .... . . . . . .. ...... ... . .. . 1.0% 16.4 6.1 1.5 3 0 46.4 25.6 34. It is OK for the government to h ire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls. (n=604) AE'PENDIX I

PAGE 102

10 Strong l y Agree . . . .............. ............................. . Agree .. .. ... .... .. ... . ... . .. ........... .................. ... Somew hat Agree .......................................... Don' t Know or Can"t S ay ................................. S o m ewhat Disagree .. . .... ................................. Disagree . ......... . . .. .... . ...... ... ......... ........... ...... Strongly Disa gree . .... . . ..... ....... . ....... .... .. .... 5.5 % 59 6 2. 8 6.5 1.2 19.7 4 8 Now l wou ld like to ask you s o me q ues t io n s that help to better analyze the res ults of t his s urvey 3 5 How o f te n do you use a t oll r oa d i n F lorida in an a verage week ? (che c k o n e) (n=604) Less t han 5 times... ........ ............. ..... ... .... ......... 81.6 % 5 10 times... .. ..... ............................... ....... ...... 13.4 111 5 times ... ........ .. .. .... .. ................................... 4 0 165 times 0 00000UOH000000000000000000000000000o00000000o00000000 0 5 than 2 6 times ..... ..... ...... ....................... ... 0 5 36. Wha t i s your gender? ( cheek one) ( n=604 ) Male .......................... ..... ... ... ..... .... ........ ...... 43.5% Female ... ... ...................... ...................... .... ........ 56.5 37. Wh a t i s your age (check on e) (n =604) 18 -25 year s ........... .... ........... ....................... ... .. 1 0 .3% 26-35.............. ... ...... .......... ................. .............. 1 3.9 36-45 .... ..... .. ...... .. .. ..................... ........ .............. 2 1.7 46-55o .ouooooouoooooooooo. o o o oooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.oooo 24.7 . .. ... ..... .. .. . .... ..... . . ............................. .... 15.2 66 and older u n ........... 1 4 2 3 7 -2. W hat isyour zipcode ? -----3 8 Wha t is your househo l d i ncome ? (c h ec k one ) ( o=472) Under $ 15,(K)C) ...................... ... ............ ............. $15,()()()..$24 999 ........ ......... ............................. .. $25 ,()(X)$34,999 ......... .......... ....... .......... ... ... ... $ 35, 000 $44 999 ... .......... ... .... ... .. ... .......... ...... .. $45,000-$54,999 ................................. .............. $55, 000-$64 ,999 ....... ...... .... ..... ........... ........... .. $65.()()()-$7 4 999 .... . ... ..... ... .. ..... .............. ....... over S75.(K)() ... ... . .... . . .. .. ..... . ....................... 2.5% 16.7 1 6.1 14. 8 19. 5 6.1 4.4 19 7 APPENDIX I

PAGE 103

II Non-User Survey Note: All responses based on n=606, unless otherwise indicated. 4. Why do you NOT use the toll road system? (Check all that apply). (n=606; 642 responses) Doesn't go where I need it to go ....... ... I don't know where it goes ........... ........ Too expensive ...................................... .. Too much traffic ................................... Unsafe ......................... ... ...................... .. Other ......... ...... .......... ............. ... ....... .... 66.7% 2.8 6 4 2.8 1.9 19.5 IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNPASSIE-PASS." IN SOUI'H FLORIDA, TAMPA AND TURNPIKE MARKETS USE "SUNPASS." PART I. I would like to talk with you about different way s of collecting tolls on Florida's toll roads. Although you do not currently use the toll roads, some proposals could be relevant to you. Assume that a toll road exists that goes where you need it to go, such as a road that might go to your work or shopp i ng. Assume also that the toll road is safe to use. 5. Can you imagine such a road? Yes No Yes No If "yes," If "no." 68.3% 31.7 GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE Q UE STION 8 6. Would you lik e m e to re-read the scenario? (n=192) 100.0% 0 0 If "no RESPOND E NT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes," Repeat the scenario and GO TO Quest i o n 7 7. Can you now imagine this ? (n = 192) Yes No 100 .0% 0 0 If no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes," GO TO Question 8 APPENDIX I

PAGE 104

12 I will now you read you some statements about SunPASSIE-PASS. SunPass and E-PASS are prepaid accounts from which toll charges are paid. SunPass and E-PASS are transponders that go on the front windshields of cars. They are little white boxes that you may have seen on other cars. As cars go through special toll booth lanes, these SunPASSIE-PASS transponders record transactions and a monthly statement is later sent to the account holder. 8. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes No If If "no: 28.1% 71.9 Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 9 GO TO QUESTION 9. 9. Do you understand the concept of paying tolls through SunPASSIE-PASS? Yes No If "yes," If "no," GO TO QUESTION 10 100.0% 0.0 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 10. Did you hear of SunPASS orE-PASS before my call? Yes No 84.3% 15.7 11. What is your primary reason for not getting SunPASSIE-PASS (choose one response only. Do NO T read statements the following statements). Prefer to pay cash .... . ...... .................................. 4.5 % Too much trouble to get, it is inconvenient, or not enough time to get .......................... 2.6 Don't use the t oll roads that much ..................... 76.2 SunPASS/E-PASS costs extra/Expensive......... 3.0 I don't mind waiting to pay tolls........................ 0.8 I don't want anyone to have a record of my travels.................................................... 1.7 I can't get a receipt at the time of my transaction 2.0 Other ............................................................... 9.2 I will read you some statements Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 12. I would get SunPASSIE-PASS if it was cheaper than paying tolls with cash APPENDIX I

PAGE 105

13 Strongly Agree ............... .................................. .. Agree . ......................................... ...... ...... ....... Somewhat Agree ................ ............................. .. Don't Know or Can't Say ................................ .. Somewhat Disagree ............... ....... . .................. Disagree ... ................. .... ............... .. ...... ....... .... . Strongly Disagree ............................................. 7 .8% 61.7 7.6 4.0 2.8 15.3 0.8 13. I would get SunPASSJE..PASS so that I didn't have to stop at toll plazas Strongly A,gree ........................... .......... ............. A .gree .............. ................................................ Somewhat Agree ........ ........................... .... ...... Don't Know or Can t Say ................................ .. Somewhat Di sagree ........ ........................... ....... Disagree ...................................................... ...... Strongly Disagre e .................. .......... ........ ......... 9.7% 53.6 9.2 1.8 12.2 13.4 0.0 14. I would get SunPASSIEP ASS if the transponder was free Strongly Agree ... .......... .................................... Agree ................ ....... ........... ......... ................ ... Somewhat Agree ... ... ......... ........... ... ........... ..... Don't Kn ow or Can 't Soy ........ ... ..................... Somewhat Disagree ................... ....... ............... Disagree ........................... .................. ........ ....... Strongly Disagree ............................................. 7.1% 56.3 6.6 6.3 6.9 16.8 0.0 14-2 FOR SO liTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS ONLY: Are you aware that SunPass users who commute on toll roads opera!ed by the Miami Dade Expressway Authority receive an immediate 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (n= 1 52) Yes ................ ............... ......... ..... ... ............. No ................ .......... .. ...... .. .. ... . ......... ....... Don't Know ............................... ....................... 15.8% 69. 1 15.1 14-3 FOR SO liTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONL V: Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on t olls for SunPass users on Miami Dade Expressway Authority roads, would you consider pur:chasing SunP ass and using Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roadways? (n=148) Yes ............. ............... .... .......... .... ............. ... 36.5% APPENDIX I

PAGE 106

14 No ..................... .. ... .. .. ... ... ... .. ..... .............. 45.3 Don't Know ............................ ...... .......... ...... .. .. 18.2 PART II. READ: Technology now exists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive monthly bills Video cameras can record the vehicle license plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars. This is called "video toll collection." 15. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes No ............................................................... ........................................................... .... 12.5% 87.5 H .. If "no Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 16 GO TO QUESTION 16 16 Do you understand the concept of video tolling? Yes No .................. .................................... ......... 100.0% 0.0 If "yes," 7 [f "no," 7 GOTO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 17 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAll. NOW. I am now going to read you some statements about video toll collection Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 17. I would use a road that has video toll collection Strongly Agree ..... ..... .. ... .... .. ..... .... ... ... ............ Agree ......... . ....... .... ... .......... ... .... . .. ........... Somewhat Agree .... ..... ........ .... ............. ........ .. Don't Know or Say .............. .......... .. ...... .. Somewhat Disagree ................................... .. ... .. Disagree ........................................................ .. .. Strongly Disagree ............................................. 2.8% 49.3 5.6 10.1 0.5 29.2 2.5 18. I would use toll roads if I did not have to pay with cash Strongly Agree .................................................. Agree ................. ..... ................... .... ................ .. Somewhat Agree ........................................ .... .. Don't Know or Can't Say .............. .............. .... .. 4.5% 58.4 5.4 6.1 APPENDIX 1

PAGE 107

IS Somewhat Disagree ..... . . . . .. .. . . . ... .. .. . . . .. . 1.3 Disagree... .... . ................... .......... ... .. ......... .... ... 23.4 Strongly Disagree...... .... .................. .......... ....... 0.8 19. If video toll collection was more expensive than geuing SunPass/E-PASS, I would get SunPass/E-PASS Strongly Agree .............. . . ..... .............. ... ......... Agree .. ....... ............. ....... ... . . . .......... ... ......... Somewhat Agree .. ........ . .... ....... .... . ......... ....... Don' t Know or Can't Say ... ...... .... . . . ............. Somewhat Disagree ............ .... ....... . .... ...... ...... Disagree ............. .......... .............. ...... ... .. ..... ....... Strongly Disagree ............... ... ... ........ ........ ...... 8.1% 73.6 1.5 8.6 0.0 7 9 0 3 20. It i s OK for tolls rates to be di ffer ent for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPass/E-PASS payments. Strongly Agree ................ . ................... ....... ...... Agree ... .. ........................ ...................... ..... ... ... Somewhat Agree .......... ............. ........... ....... .... Don't Know or Can't Say ... ... .... ........... .... ....... Somewhat Disagree ........... ....... .... ... ... .... .......... Disagree . ..... . .................. ..... Strongly Disagree . ....... ....... ....... .... .... ... . .... . 2 .5% 40.1 4.5 9.1 1.0 37.6 5.3 A by-product of video toll collection is that motorist trave l information will be available. Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say somewha t disagree, disagree, or s trongly disagree. 21. This motorist travel information should not be available to the general public. Strongly Agree ...... .................. ........ ..... . .. ...... Agree ... .... . ........... .... ............... ... . ................ Somewhat Agree ... . ... ... ..... ...................... ..... Don't Know or Can't Say ... ................ ............ . Somewhat Disagree ............................ ..... ....... Disagree ........ ... .. ....... ............. ............. ...... ... Strongly Disagree ............................. . .............. 14.0% 40. 1 4.3 8.3 3.5 28.7 1.2 22. It is important tha t toll agencies treat this information as confidential. Strongly Agree ........ ............................ ...... ..... Agree ... ... .. ......... ... ...... .... ..... ................ ....... Somewhat Agree .. ...... ...................................... 17.0% 56.8 1.8 APPENDIX I

PAGE 108

16 Don't Know or Can't Say..... ... ... ....... .......... . . 4.5 Somewhat Disagree.... .... .......... .................... ..... 0.0 Disagree................. ......... .......................... ... .... 19.5 Strongly Disagree..... . .... ............. .................... 0.5 23 -1. This information should only be made available when reques ted by the courts. Strongly Agree ..... ...... . ............... .................... Agree .... ... . .... ... .... . . . ..... .............. . .... . . ...... Somewhat Agree ......... ....... ....... ... .... ......... ...... Don't Know o r Can't Say . . ...... ..... . . .... .... .. . Somewhat Disagree . . . . ..... ... . ... ... . .... ... .. ... . Disagree ..... . ........... . . ....... .... . ... .... .............. . Strong! y Disagree ................... ....... ......... ....... . 11.2% 59.6 4.0 8.4 0.5 15. 3 1.0 23-2 If in f ormation about the motorist's to ll account and travel were strictly confidential and protected b y Jaw, would you consider participating in an electron i c toll collection program rather than paying cash for your trip? Yes No Don't Know .... ..... ........ ... ........ ............. ..... . .. ..... PART III. 46.7% 30.7 22.6 Now, imagine that all tolls must be paid electronically on Florida's toll roads Cash wou l d no longer be an option for paying tolls. In other words all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection. This is also called "cash-less toll collection." 24. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes No ............................................................... 28.4% 71.6 If yes/' If "no," Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 25 GO TO QUESTION 25. 25. Do you understand the concept of cash -less toll collection? Yes No If "yes," If no," 100.0% 0.0 GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 26 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. APPENDIX I

PAGE 109

17 Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agre e, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 26. Cash payments should always be an option on toll roads Strongly Agree ....... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .... ...... ...... . Agree .................. .. .. ....... ... .... ... ... .......... ..... ... Somewhat Agree .. .. .. ... ... .. .......... ....... .. .. ... Don't Know or Can' t Say ............. ......... .. ..... . . Somewhat Disagree .. ................. ..... ....... ...... .. Disagree . .... ... ...... .. ..... . .. . .. . .. . .. .. ........ .... Strong l y Disagree .. .............. .. .. .. .. . . . . ......... 8.9% 78.9 2.8 2.0 0.2 7.1 0.2 27. I think there should always be people like toll collector s wbo provide infonnation to motorists Strongly Agree .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. ... . . .. .. .. .. .. ....... .. .. Agree ............ .... . ........................ ................... Somewhat Agree . ... .. . ... ... ... .. .. .. .... .. ...... . .. . Don't Know or Can't Say ....... .. .. ...... .. .... .. ........ Somewhat Disagree .. .. .. .. .... .. ..... .. ..... ..... .. .. . Disagree .. ..... .. .. .. ....................... ............ .. ........ S trong ly Disagree . ... ...... ...... .............. . .. . ... . 7.9% 71.3 4.0 4.0 1.0 11.1 0 .8 28 I would like to be able t o buy an ali-day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day. Strongly Agree....... . ............ .. .. .. .. . ............ ..... 3.3 % Agree ................ ................. ............. . . ....... ...... 53.0 Somewhat Agree ......... ..... . ................ . .. ... . . 4.5 Don t Know or Can't Say... .. ... ........ ........ .. .. .. .. 7.3 Somewhat Disagree.. ..... .. .... .. ......................... 1.3 Disagree. ......... ...... .. ... ... ... .. . .. ... ... ....... ....... 28.2 Strongly Disagree... . . ....... .. ... .. . ...... ... .......... 2.5 29. I would like to be able to buy a week-long pass that allows me to trave l on any Florida toll road for that week. Strongly Agree .... ..... ... .. .... ............. ...... .. .. .. .. Agree .... ...... . . . ...... ... ............... .. ... ............ ... Somewhat Agree . . . .. . ... .. .... . .. .... .. ....... .... Don't Know or Can't Say ..... .. ............... ...... . . Somewhat Disagree .. .. ....... .. ... .. .. . ......... . .. . Disagree .................. ............. . ... ... ... . . . .. .... .. Strongly Disagree ..... . ....... ... . .............. .. . .. .. 3 .6% 60.7 3.3 6 4 1.2 23. 6 1.2 APPENDIX t

PAGE 110

18 30. I would like to be able to buy a month-long pass that allow s me to travel on any Florida toll road for that month. Strongly Agree .. .. . . ...... .. . .. .. .. .. .. ... . ............. Agr e e ... .. .. . .. . .. .. . ...... .. . .. ......... .. .. . .. ...... . Somewhat Agree ...... . .. . .. . ... .. .. ... .. . . ........ . Don't Know or C an't Say . ... .. .. ... . ... .. .. ... .... . Somewhat Disagree ..... .. . ... ... .. ... .. ... .. . .. .. .. .. . Disagree . .. . ........ . .. .. .. .. ........ . .. ... . .. ....... . .. .. . Strongly Disagree .. ........ . ... .. .. ........ .. .. . . .... 4.3% 56 3 3.1 8 6 0 7 25.4 1.7 31 I t is OK to wait one minute in line to pay my cash tolls. Strongly Agree .. .. .. . ............... .... .. . .. .. .. ........ Agree .. . .. .... .. ... ..... . ...... ... .. .. .. .. ...... ..... ... Somewhat Agree ........ .. . . . . . ... .. .... .. ... . ..... . Don't Know or Can't Say . ....... .. .. .. .. .. ........ . Somewhat Disagree . ....... ............................ .. .. Disagree .. .... . ....... . .... . .... .... .. .... . ....... ....... Strongly Disagree .. ...... . . . .. . ... .. . . . .. . . .. . . 2 .5% 75.4 3.3 3 5 0 8 12.7 1.8 32. It is OK to wait three minutes in l ine to pay my cash tolls Strongly Agree .... . .. . .. ........ . . .. ........... . . .. .. Agree .. .. .. .. .. . . ... .. . .. . .. . . ... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. Somewhat Agree .. . .. ... ... . . ... ... .. .. . .. .. . . . . . .. Don't Know or Can't Say ............ ... ........... .. . Somewhat Disagree .. .... .. .. .. . .. . ..... .... .. .. ...... Disagree ........ .. .... . .. .. .. .......... .. ... . . .. . .. .... Strongl y Disagree ... . .. .... ...... .... .... .. . .. .. .. .. . 3 .5% 24. 8 2.6 3 6 5.9 46. 5 13.0 33. I t is OK to wait five minutes i n line to pay my cash tolls. Strongly Agree .... .. ..... ... .... .. .... . .. ..... ....... .. Agree . . ... . . . .... .. . ..... . ... ......... . ... . ........ . . Somewhat Agree .. . .. .. . ... .. ...... ..... .. . ...... ... .. Don't Know or Can't Say ....... .. . .. ... . ............ . Somewhat Disagree ..... ............ . ... ...... . ..... . .. Disagree ....... ..... ...... . ... .. ... ..... ... ... . .... ..... ....... Strongly D isagree .. . .. ... .. . . .. .. .. .. . ........ . . .... . 1.8% 31.0 1.2 3.5 6.8 43. 6 1 2 .2 34. It is OK for the government to hir e a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls Strongly Agree. .. .............. . . . . .. .. ... . . ..... .... . 5 .9% Agree ... ....... ...... . ... .. . .. .. ... .... .. .. .... .. . ....... 58.4 Some what Agree . . .... ... . .... . ... ......... .. ......... ... 1.3 APPENDIX 1

PAGE 111

19 Don't Know or Can 'I Say......... ..... .. .................. 8 .7 Somewhat Disagree .. .. ... ................................ 1.0 Disagree....... ............... ................... ..................... 23.1 StrOngly Disagree....... ....... ............................. .. 1.5 I would like to ask you some questions that h elp t o better analyze the resu l ts of this survey 35. What i s your gender? Male ...... ........................ ................................. 43.1 % Female ................... ... . .... .................... .............. 56.9 36. What is your age (n=603) 18 -25 years ... .. ......... ... . .. ........ .... ...................... 11.8 % 26-35 .. .. ... .. . .. .. .. ..... .. .. ............................... 17.7 3645 ..... ......... .............. ................................. 16.6 46-55 .... ................ .......... ......... ........................ 16.1 56-65 1 4 .9 66 and older... ...... ................................................... 22.9 36 -2. What is your zi p code? -----37. What i s your hou sehold income? (n=482) Under $ 1 5,000 ... ... ...... .. ... . . ....... . ................. $15,000-$24,999. .. . .. .. . .. .. ................. . ... $25,000 $34.999 . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... . ...... .. ... ......... $35,000-$44,999 . ..... . .. .. .. .............................. $45 ()()(}-$54,999 ...... .... ............. ........................ $55 ,()()(}-$64.,.999 .......... . . ....... ...... ..................... $65,()()()..$74,999 over $75,000 ... ...... ... ...... ..................... .......... 7 .3% 24.3 13.5 18.0 14 1 7.9 6.0 8 .9 APPENDIX I

PAGE 112

I APPENDIX 2: SUR VEY RESUL T S BY DISTRICT Note: Addi tional instructio n s provided in Appendix 3, "su rvey p rotocol.'' 1. In order for our survey to be valid, we must interview only persons over the age of 18 Jiving, who own a car and Jive in [ location ) Would that be you? (n = 1,211) Location Names: Central Florida the Greater Tampa area including SarasoUI Dade, Broward or Palm Beach County Within 25 miles of the Florida Turnpike Orlando Yes ....... ... ....... ... ..... .... ... ................ ............ ..... 100.0 No.................................. .... ........................ ... ... 0.0 If "yes," -? Continue (GO TO QUESTION 2) South Florida 100.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If "no," -? THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAlL NOW 2 Have you used any toll road within the SUite of Florida during the previous six months? (n= 1,211 Orlando Yes...................... .............................. ......... ... ... 50 0 No......................... .... .............................. .......... 50 0 I f "yes," -? Continue (GO TO QUESTION 3) South Florida 50. 0 50.0 I f "no," -?GO TO NON-USER SURVEY (n=301) Tampa Turnpike 50.0 50.0% 50.0 50.0 3. Do you have either a SunPASS orE-PASS device on your vehicle? (n=605) Orlando Yes..................................................... ............... 0.0 No......................... ....... ......... ..... ...................... 100.0 South Florida 0.0 100.0 Tampa Turnpike 0.0 0 0 % 100.0 100.0 If "yes," -?THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAlL NOW. If "no," -? GO TO CASH CUSTOMER SURVEY (n=605)

PAGE 113

2 Cash C u stomer Survey Note: AU responses based on the following sample s izes: Orlando, n =151; South Florida n=lSl; Tampa, n=lSl; Turnpike, n=l52 unless otherwise indicate d (IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNP ASSJE.PA SS." IN SOUTH FLORIDA TAMP A AND TURNPIKE MARKETS, US E "SUNP AS S." ) PART I. I will you read you some statements about SunPASSJE.PASS. SunPass and :&PASS are prepaid accountS from which toll charges are paid SunPass and :&PASS are transponders that go on the fron t windshields of cars. They are little white boxes that you may hav e seen on other cars. As cars go thr ough specia l toll booth lanes, these S unPASSJE.PASS transponders record transactions and a monthly statement is later sent to the account h older. 4 Would you lik e me to re-rea d this statem ent? Orlando Yes........ .. ............ ...... ................... .......... .......... 17. 9 No...................... . .. .......... .. .. .. .................... ... .... 82 1 South Florida 9.9 90.1 Tampa Turnpike 21.2 12.5% 78.8 87.5 If yes," ? If no," Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 5 GO TO QUESTION 5. 5. Do you unders tand the concept of paying tolls through SunPASSJE.PASS? Orlando Yes................. ... ............................................... 100.0 No............. ......................................................... 0.0 GO TO QUESTION 6 South Florida 100.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If "yes," If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAlL NOW. 6. Did you hear of SunPASS orE-PASS bef ore my call? Orlando Yes .. ......... .. 94.7 No.............. ....... .... ............ ............................... 5.3 South Florida 89.4 10.6 Tampa Turnpike 91.3 84.2% 8.7 15.8 7. What is your primary reason for not getting SunPASSIE-PASS (Choose one resP?nse APPENDIX2

PAGE 114

3 only. Do NOT read the following statements. ) South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpik e Prefer to pay cash ..... ............. ... ................... ..... 1.3 4.0 2.6 0.7% Too much trouble to get, it is inconvenient, or not enough time to get .......................... 6.0 11.3 4.0 6.6 Don't use the toll roads that much ... .......... ... ... 68.2 64.2 80 8 77.6 SunPASSIE-PASS costs extra/Expen sive......... 6 0 5.3 2.0 1.3 I don't mind waiting to pay tolls....... ... . .... ........ 0 7 0.7 0.7 0.0 I don't want anyone to have a record of my travels ... . .................................. ... ......... 0.0 2.0 2.0 0 0 I can 't get a receipt at t he time of my transaction 0.7 0.0 0.7 0 0 Other ....... ............... ....... ................................. 17.2 12.6 7.3 13. 8 READ: I will read you some statements Please tell me w hether you strongly agree agree. somewhat agree don't know /c an 't say, somewhat disagree disagree or strongly disagree 8. I would get SunPASSIE-PASS if it was ch eaper than paying tolls with cash. Orlando Strongly Agree...... ..... ... ... ... ... .......................... 16.6 Agree ......................................... .. ... ......... ...... 58.9 Somew h a t Agree ......................... .............. ...... 4.6 Don't Know or Can't Say...... ............................ 4.6 Somewhat Disagree. ...... ... ...................... ......... 0.7 Disagree...... .......................... .. ........................... 13 . 2 Strongly Disagree..... ....... ................................. 1 . 3 South Florida 14.6 60.9 2.0 8.6 0.7 12.6 0.7 Tampa Turnpike 13.9 16.4% 58.3 53.9 4.0 5.3 4.0 8.6 1.3 0.0 17.9 15.1 0.7 0 .7 9 I would get SunPASSIE-PASS if so that I didn't have to s top at toll plazas. Strongly Agree ..... Agree ....... Somewhat Agree ....... ............. ........ ... ... .... ...... Don't Know or Can't Say ..................... ... ....... .. Somewhat Disagree ............ .... ................. ........ Disagree ..... ..... ..... ........ .................................... .. Strongly Disagree-.... ....................... .................. Orlando I2. 6 62.9 4.0 4.6 2.0 12.6 1.3 10. I would get SunPASSfE..PASS if the transponder was free South Florida 10.6 62.9 4.6 3.3 0.7 16.6 1.3 Tampa Turnpik e 13.2 13.8 % 57.0 55.3 6 0 7 .9 2.6 5.9 0.7 0.7 18.5 15.8 2.0 0.7 APPENDIX 2

PAGE 115

4 South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike Strongly Agree .. ................. ...... .............. . . . ... 26.5 23.2 23.2 18.4% Agree ...... .. ......... . .... ........ .......... ... .. ......... . 58.9 55. 6 52 3 55.3 Somewhat Agree . . ............. .... ... .......... ... ..... . 2.6 2.6 4.0 3.3 Don't Know or Can't Say ... .... .... . . ............. . 4.0 7.3 5.3 11.2 Somewhat Disagree ... ............. . ... . .... . . ....... . 0.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 Disagree . . . . .... . ... . ....... ...... .......... ........... . . 6 0 8.6 14. 6 ll.8 Strong y Disagree .... ...... ... ........ .. ... . . . ....... .... . 1.3 1.3 0.7 0 0 PART II Technology now exists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive monthly bills. Video cameras can record the veh. icle license plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars This is called "video t o ll collection." 11. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Orlando Yes........................... ......... ................. .... ......... 19.9 No......... ........................ ....... ..... ....... ... .... ........ 80.1 South Florida 11.9 88.1 Tampa Turnpike 18.5 16 .4% 81.5 83.6 If "ye.s, -7 lf"no," 7 Repeat the statement and GO TO QUEST ION 12 GO TO QUESTION 12. 12. Do you understand the concept of video tolling? Orlando Yes..... . ... . .... ...... .. ..... .... . . . ..... . . ....... .......... 100 0 No.. ..... ...... ... ... ..... ......... ....... ......... . .... ........... 0.0 GO TO QUESTION 13 South Florida 100 0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If "yes," 7 If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 13. Do you prefer video toll collection or the use of transponders such as SunP ASS/E PASS to pay for tolls? Orlando Video tolling ................... . ... ... ... ...... ...... ......... 19.9 South F lorida 20.5 Tampa Turnpike 19.2 16.4% APPENDIX2

PAGE 116

s SunP ASSIE-PASS ....... . .... ............ . ...... .... . .. . Can't Say/Don t Know . . . .... ... .... .... .... . . ..... . 58.3 21.9 64.2 55. 0 63.2 15.2 25 8 20.4 14. Do you prefer video toll collect ion or the use of cash to pay for tolls? Video tolling ...................... ...... . . ....... . ...... .... Cash ......... ... ...... ....... . ......... ... ...... . . . . .......... Can't Say/Don t Know ............ . . . . . . .... ....... Orlando 35.1 56.3 8.6 South Florida 29.8 59 6 10.6 Tampa Turnp ik e 29.1 30.9% 64.2 62.5 6.6 6.6 14 2. FOR S O UTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Are you aware that SunPass users who commute on toll roads operated by the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority receive an immediate 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (n=150) Yes . . . . . .... .... . . ........ . ... ............ . . . .............. No .... . . .... ... ... ... ... . . .... . . ... . .............. . .... .... . Don't Know .......................... ................ ......... South Florida 16.0% 72.0 1 2.0 14-3 FOR S O UT H FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on tolls for SunPass users on Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roads, would you consider purchasing SunPass an d using Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roadways? (n=150) Yes . .............. ........................ . . . .... ... . . ........ No .......... ...... ................ .... . ....... ....... .... . . ... Don' t Know ...... . ............. . ............................. South Florida 41.3% 42 0 16 7 I am now going to read you some statements about video toll collection. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree somewhat agree, don't know/can't say. somewhat disagree disagree, or strongly disagree. 15. I would use a road that bas v i deo toll collection Strong) y Agree ........ . . ....... . .... . ....... . . . .... ... Agree .................. .... . . .... . . . . . ... .... . ... . . . .. Somewhat Agree ............. ............ ................ ... Don't Know or Can't Say .... ................... ......... Orlando 6 0 55.6 6.0 2 0 South Florida 4.0 50 3 7.3 9.3 Tampa Turnpike 5.3 3.3% 51.7 51.3 5.3 5 3 7.9 7 9 APPENDIX2

PAGE 117

6 Somewhat Disagree ............................ .... ... ... ... . . ............. . ....... ........... .............. ... .. ..... Strongly ....... ........ . .... . ..... . ....... ... .. 4.0 19.2 7.3 1.3 1.3 0.7 21.9 23 .2 28.3 6.0 5.3 3.3 1 6. If video toll collection was more expensive than getting SunPass/E-PASS, I would get SunPass/E-PASS. N= Strongly Agree .... .... . ............ ........ ................... Agree .......... ... ... .... . ............................... ... ... . Somewhat Agree ............ .................... ... .......... Don't Know or Can't Say .......... ................. . . . Somewhat Disagree ..... .... ...... ...... ... . . .... ......... Disagree ................... . . . ......................... ... ..... Strongly ..... .......... ....... . ............... .... Orlando 151 13.9 70.9 3 3 0.7 2.6 7.3 1.3 South Florida 1 50 10.0 74.7 2.7 5.3 0.7 6.7 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 151 152 15.2 14.5% 69 5 71.1 3.3 2.0 4.6 7.2 2.0 0.0 5.3 3.9 0.0 1.3 17. It is OK for tolls rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPassiE-PASS payments. South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike N= 151 1 50 151 152 Strongly Agree .............................................. ... 4.6 3 3 2.6 4.6% Agree ......... ... ... .... .... ...... ..... ... . ... ............ ....... 33.8 40.0 39 .1 36.8 Somewhat Agree ... ... ... .... ................................. 2 .6 6.0 2.6 2.0 Don't Know or Can't Say . .... .... ... ..... ... ... ...... 3 3 7 3 9 3 9.9 Somewhat Disagree ... ....................................... 5 .3 1.3 1.3 0.0 .............................. ................... .... . ... . 43.7 34. 7 36. 4 38.8 Strongly Disagree ...................................... ...... 6.6 7.3 8.6 7.9 18. I would rather pay monthly than each time I ride a toll road. South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike N= 151 150 151 152 Strongly Agree ........ ..................... ............... . ... 10.6 8.0 9.9 5.9 Agree . ............. .... ....... ........ .... .... ...... . . ... . ... 54.3 50.7 46.4 49 3 Somewhat Agree ...... ....... . . . .... ... . . . ....... ..... 0 7 4.0 6.0 3 9 Don't Know or Can't Say .............................. . . 2.0 11.3 2.6 7.2 Somewhat Disagree ..... ... ..... ... ...... ....... ...... ... 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.7 Disagree .............. . . .... . ................................ ... 27.8 24.0 31.1 30.9 Strong) y Disagree ................... ... ................. . .. . 3.3 0.7 4.0 2.0 APPENDIX2

PAGE 118

7 A by-product of video toll collection is that motorist trave l infonnat ion will be available. Again, please tell me whether you s tron gly agree, agree somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 19. This motorist travel information should not be available to the general public. South Orlando Fl o rida Tampa Turnp ike Strongly Agree .... .. .. .. ......... . . .. .... . .. .. .. .. .. . . 32.5 28.5 30. 5 35.5% Agree .................... ... ...... ...... ............ .......... 46.4 41.7 40.4 38. 2 Somewhat Agree .......... . . . ... .. . .. .. .. ..... ... .. .. 0.0 4 6 2.0 1.3 Don't Know o r Can't Say ..... .... ........................ 2.6 2 6 5.3 4.6 S omewhat Disagree ..... .. .. ............ ....... .. ... .. ... 0.0 0.7 0.0 0 0 Disagree ....................... ... .......... .. ................ ... 1 4.6 20.5 16.6 20.4 Strongly Disagree ....... ...... ... .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. ... .. 4.0 1.3 5.3 0.0 20. It is important t hat toll agencies treat this information as confidential. N = Strongly Agree .......................... . . . .. .. ... . .... .. Agree ..................... ................. ........ ....... . .... . Somewhat Agree .. ..... ....................................... Don't Know or Say .... . ........................... Somewhat Disagree .. ................ ...................... Disagree .... ......... .......... . ...... ....... .. ............. . Strong) y Disagree .......... ... ..... ....... . .. ... . .. ... .. . Orlando 151 33.8 54.3 0.0 2.6 0.7 8.6 0.0 South Florida 150 34.0 48.0 4.0 2.7 0.7 10.7 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 151 152 34.4 41.4% 52. 3 46.7 0.7 1.3 3.3 2.6 0.0 0.0 8 6 7.9 0.7 0.0 21-1 This information should only be made available when requested by the courts N= Strongly Agree ...... . . ... . .. ........ . .... ....... ... ...... Agree .. ............... ... ......... ..................... .. ..... .. . Somewhat Agree .... .. ... . .................................. Don't Know or Can't Say ............... .. .... ........ .. Somewhat Disagree .. ....... .. .. .. ... . . .. .. ..... ... .... Disagree . .. .. .. ... .. .......... .. ...... Strongly Disagree .. .................. ... . .................. Orlando 151 16.6 58.9 4.0 4.0 0.0 12. 6 4.0 South Florida 149 19.5 55.0 2 .7 6.0 0.7 14.1 2 0 Tampa Turnpike 151 152 19.2 19.1% 60.9 53 9 4.0 4.6 0.7 5.9 0.0 0.7 11.9 12.5 3.3 3.3 2 1-2 If information about the motorist's toll account and travel were strictly confidential and protected by law, would you consider participating i n an electronic toll collection program rather than paying cash for your trip? APPENDIX2

PAGE 119

Yes No 8 N= Don't Know /Can't Say .................................... PART III Orlando 151 60. 9 29.1 9.9 South Florida 150 50.7 32.7 16.7 Tampa Turnpike 151 152 55.6 48.7% 27.8 42. 1 16.6 9.2 Now imagine that all tolls must be paid electronically on Florida's toll roads Cash would no longer be an option for paying tolls. In other words, all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection. This is also called "cash-less toll collection." 22. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Orlando Yes......................................................... ......... . 21.2 No............................. ... ... ..... . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . 78.8 South Florida 17.9 82.1 If If "no," Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 23 GO TO QUESTION 23. 23. Do you understand the concept of cash-less toll collection? Orlando Yes............................. ......... .... .. . ...... . . ........... 100.0 No....................... .. ...... ... ... ... . . .... . .. . ..... ....... 0.0 GO TO QUESTION 24 South Florida 100.0 0 0 If "yes," If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. Tampa Turnpike 27.2 21.1 % 72.8 78 9 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 24. Under this system, would you use video toll collection or transponders such as SunPASSIE-PASS to pay for tolls? Video tolling ................ ...... .. .. .. . .. .................. . SunPASSIE-PASS ......................... .. .. ...... .. .. . Can't Say/ Don't Know .... .. ... ....... ...... .... .... ..... Orlando 26.5 55.6 1 7.9 South Florida 33.1 53.0 13.9 Tampa Turnpike 45.0 15.8% 41.7 64.5 13.2 19.7 APPENDIX2

PAGE 120

9 Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, dis agree or strongly disagree. 25. Cash paymen ts should always be an option on to ll roads N= Strongly Agree .. . .... . . ... ...... ... .... ... . . .. ....... Agree .................... ................. ..................... ... Somewhat Agree ...... ... .... ... ...... ... ... ....... .... ... . Don't Know or Can't Say .. ... ... ....... ..... ..... ... ... Somewhat Disagree ........... ... ... ........... . ...... . Disagree .. .. .... .... ... ... ... .. .. ... ... ....... ... ... ....... ... ... Strongly Disagree ................... ..................... ... Orlando 140 25. 0 66.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 6.4 0.7 South Florida 151 24.5 64.9 3.3 4.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 150 152 27.3 26.3% 64.0 65.8 7.3 0.0 0 0 2.0 0 0 0.7 1.3 5.3 0.0 0.0 26. I think there should a l ways be people like toll collectors who provide information to motorists N= Strong ly Agree ... ........ . . .... ..... ....................... Agree ............. ................ ....... ...... ........... ..... Somewhat Agree . ... ... . .. . .............................. Don't Know or Can't Say .... . . .... ..... . . . .... .... Somewhat Disagree ..... .. ...... . ....... .. ... . . . ........ Disagree ......................... ....... ..... .... ............... .... Strongly Disagree ...... ........ . . ... . .. ... ............ . Orlando 140 17.1 70 7 7.9 0.7 0.0 3.6 0.0 27. There should always be a way to i mmediately get a receipt Strongly Agree . ... . . . ... . .... .... ... . ........ .. .... ... Agree ...... ...... ............ ........... .... ...................... . Somewhat Agree ...... . .. .... .............................. Don't Know or Can't Say .......................... .... . Somewhat Disagree ................ . ....... ... .... ... .. ..... D i sag ree . . . . . . . ... ... . .. ... .... .... ...... .... ........ .... Strongly Disagree ..... .......... ............. .... ......... Orlando 13. 9 68.9 4.6 3.3 0.0 9.3 0.0 South Florida 151 19 .9 63.6 5.3 0.7 1.3 8.6 0.7 South Florida 1 2.6 74.8 4.0 2.0 0.0 6.6 0 0 Tampa Turnpi ke 135 152 29.6 29.6% 65.2 61.2 3 0 3 9 0.7 2.6 0 0 0 7 1. 5 1.3 0 .0 0.7 Tampa Turnpike 14.6 12.5% 68.2 74.3 6.0 2 6 2.0 4.6 3 3 0.7 6.0 4 6 0.0 0.7 28. I would like to be able to buy an ali-day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day South APPENDIX2

PAGE 121

10 Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike Strongly Agree .... ..... ..... ....... ......... ... ..... ... ...... 6.0 2.6 8.6 4.6% Agree .. .. ...... .... ....... . ..... .... . ... ............. ... ........ 51.0 64.9 51.0 53.9 Somewhat Agree ... . ...... ....... ... ... .... . . ........ . 6.6 4.6 4 6 3.3 Don't Know or Say . ... ...... ... ......... ....... 4.6 4.0 13.2 13.8 Somewhat Disagree . .. . ...... ..... . . ...... .. . . . .. . 0.7 3.3 4.0 0.7 Disagree . ............ . ......... .............. ....... .............. 29 8 19.9 17.9 23.0 Strongly Disagree .... .... ...................... ... ..... ...... 1.3 0 .7 0.7 0.7 29. I would like to be able to buy a week long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that week. Strongly Agree ............ ......... .... ....... ..... ......... . Agree ................................................. .... .... .... Somewhat Agree ..... .... ... ....................... ........ Don't Know or Can't Say .. ...... ..... ................. Somewhat Disagree .... .... .... ......... .... ............... Disagree ............................ ............................ . . Strongly D isagree .... .... .... ... ...... . ..... .... ..... ... Orlando 4.6 48.3 6.0 3.3 0.7 35 8 1.3 South F lorida 5 3 57.0 2.6 8.6 2.0 22.5 2.0 Tampa Turnpike 6 6 3.9% 45 0 53. 3 3.3 3 9 16. 6 13.2 2 6 1.3 25.2 22. 4 0.7 2 0 30 I would like to be able to buy a month long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that month. Strongly Agree .. ..... .... .... ... ...... ..... ... ............... Agree ....... .. .. . ... .... . . ...... . ...... ................. .... Somewhat Agree .. .... . . .... .................. ............ Don't Know or Can't Say ... ... . ........ ....... .... ... Somewha t Disagree ................. .... ..... ............... Disagree .... .... ............. ..... ... . ......................... Strongly Disagree .. .................... ......... ............. Orlando 4 0 58.3 2.6 3.3 0.7 28.5 2.6 31. It is OK to wait one minute in line to pay my cash tolls. Strongly Agree . . ................................. .... ....... Agree .... . ............ ................. ............ ... ...... Somewhat Agree ................... ..... .... . . . .... .. ... D on t Know or Can't Say ... .. .. ...... ... .. ... .......... . Somewhat Disagree ... ..... ... ....... .... ..... .... . .... . Disagree ........ .................... ..... ............ .... .... ..... Strongly Disagree .... .. . . .... ....... ........... ......... Orlando 3.3 69.5 4.6 0.0 0.0 21.2 1.3 South Florida 4 6 64. 9 4.0 4.0 3 3 19 2 0.0 South Florida 4.6 62.3 6.0 0 7 2.0 19.9 4.6 Tampa Turnp ike 6.0 5.3% 56.3 73.0 5.3 4 6 9 3 3.9 0.7 1.3 21.2 9 2 1.3 2.3 Tampa Turnpike 2.0 2.0% 74.2 73.7 5.3 3.3 2.6 2.6 3.3 2.6 11.3 13.8 1.3 2.0 APPENDIX2

PAGE 122

11 32. It is OK to wait three minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. Strongly Agree ...... .... .... ...... ......... .... ... . . . . . ... Agree .. ... .. . .. . . ....... . ...... ... . .... . . . .... . . . . . Somewhat Agree ... ..... .... ................................ . Don't Know or Can't Say . .......... ............. ..... Somewhat Disagree .... ..... . . . ...... .... . ......... .. . Disagree . ... .. ......... ............. . . ... ..... ...... . . . . . ... Strongly Disagree .... ... ... . ................. ............... Orlando 0 7 37.7 12.6 2.0 2.6 36.4 7.9 33. It is OK to wait five minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. Strong! y Agree ............. ............ .... ..... ..... ........ Agree . . . . .. . .. . .............................. . . .. . Somewhat Agree .................... ......................... Don t Know or Can t Say ... ......... .. ... .... . .... ..... Somewhat Disagree . .......... . . .... . .. . .... . ... ..... . Disagree ...... .... . .... . . ....... .. .... . . . . . . . ....... . .. . Strongly Disagree . ...... .... .................. . .... ....... Orlando 1.3 1 0 6 5.3 0.7 4.6 47.7 29 8 South Florida 2.6 31.1 9.9 1.3 2 6 47 0 5.3 South Florida 1.3 12.6 6.0 2 6 2.6 44.4 30.5 Tampa Turnpike 2.0 1.3% 39.7 46.1 6.6 1 2.5 1.3 2.0 4 6 5 3 35.1 28.3 10.6 4.6 Tampa Turnpike 0.7 0.7% 19.2 23 .0 6.0 7.2 2.0 0.7 2.0 2.6 46.4 4 7.4 23.8 18.4 34. I t is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike Strongly Agree ......................... . .... ... ...... . . .... 7.3 5 3 4 0 5.3% Agree . ... . . .. .. .. ..... ... ....... ....... . .... .. .. .. . ... ... 63.6 66.0 52 3 56.6 Somewhat Agree .. .. ...... .... . ......... ............... ... . 4.6 0.0 4.0 2.6 Don't Know or Can't Say ................ ....... . ........ 5 3 6 7 4.6 9 .2 Somewhat Disagree ............................. ..... ... ... 0.7 0 7 0 7 2.6 Disagree . ...... .... .. .... ...... .... .... . . .......... . .... .... 13.2 18.0 26.5 21.1 Strongly D i sagree ... ....... ...... . .... . . . . . ..... ... ... 5.3 3.3 7.9 2.6 Now, I would like to ask you some questions that hel p to better analyze the resu l ts of this survey. 35. How often do you use a to ll road in Florida in an average week? (check one) Orlando N = 151 Less than 5 times .. ... .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . .. . . . .. . .. 77.5 South Florida 1 5 1 76.2 Tampa Turnpike 150 152 86.7 86 .2% APPENDIX2

PAGE 123

12 510 times ............... ............. ................... ....... 1 1-15times .......................... ......................... . 16-25 tim es ......... ............... . ................... ..... . . more than 26 times ........... ...... ... ... ................ 36. What is your gender? (check one) 19.2 3 3 0.0 0.0 Orlando Male............ ................. ........................... ........ 44.4 Female..... ...... .... .... ................ ..... ... . ... ...... ...... 55.6 37. What is your age (check one) N = 18-25 years ..................................... .............. .... 26-35 ................................ ....... ... . ..... ..... ..... ... 36-45 ... .............. ..................... ........ .................. . 46-55 ........... ..... ....... . .......... ........ . ............. . . . . 56-65 ..... .... . . .. ....... .............. ... .. .. .. ..... .......... . 66 and older ...................................................... 37-2. What is your zip code? -----38. What is your household income? (c heck one) N= Under $15,000 ....................... ................. ... ...... $15 000-$24,999 ............. ................................. $25,000-$34,999 . . ... . . . ... ...... . . .... . ... ...... ... . $35.000...$44,999 ...................... ...... .... ........ .... $45,000-$54,999 ... ................ .. . ....... ....... ...... $55 ,000 $64,999 ..................... ......................... $65,000-$74,999 ............ .... . ... ... ...... ... .... .... ... over $75,000 ... ... ................. ...... ................ ... ... Orlando 151 7.9 14.6 25.2 21.2 15.9 15.2 Orlando 117 0.9 8.5 21.4 15.4 22 2 4.3 5.1 22.2 16. 6 10.0 7.9 3.9 1.3 0.7 5.3 3.3 0.7 0.0 1.3 0.0 South Florida 40.4 59.6 So uth Fl orida 150 10.7 15.3 24.0 21.3 16.0 12.7 South Florida 128 4.7 26.6 16.4 11.7 13.3 4.7 5.5 17.2 Tampa T urnpike 43.0 46.4% 57.0 53.6 Tampa Turnpike 151 152 7.9 14.5% 13.9 11.8 17.2 20.4 23.8 32.2 22.5 6 6 14.6 14.5 Tampa Turnpike 114 113 4.4 0.0% 14.9 15.9 12. 3 14. 2 14.0 18.6 23.7 19.5 7.0 8.8 2.6 4.4 21.1 18.6 APPENDIX2

PAGE 124

13 Non -User Survey Note: All responses based on the foUowl n g sampl e sizes: Orlando, n = 1 51; South Florida n=l52; Tampa, n=l50; Turnpike, n=153, unl ess otherwise Indicated. 4 Why do you NOT use the toll road system? (Check all that apply) (n=606; 642 responses) Doesn't go where 1 need it to go ..................... .. I don't know where it goes ................................ Too expensive ...... ............ .............. ........ ...... .. Too much traffic ........ .. .. .. ................................ .. Unsafe ...... ............................... ................ ......... Other .............. ....... ... ...... .......... ..... ......... ........ Orlando 69.8 0.0 6.9 0.0 1.3 22 0 South Aorida 66.9 1.8 6.8 8.6 4.3 11.6 Tampa Turnpike 68.2 62 .0% 6 3 3.1 3 2 8.6 2.6 0 0 0.0 1.8 19.7 24.5 IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNP ASSIE-PASS." IN SOUTH FLORIDA, TAMP A AND TURNPIKE MARKETS, USE "SUNPASS. PART I I would like to talk with you about different ways of collecting tolls on Aorida's toll roads. Although you do not currently use the toll roads, some proposals could be relevant to you. Assume that a toll road exists that goes where you need it to go, such as a road that might go to your wor k or shopping. Assume also that the toll road is safe to use. 5. Can you imagine such a road? Yes ( I No ( I Orlando Yes.... . . . . ...... ....... ... . . . ........ ... . . . ........ ... ... 67.5 No .. . .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . ... .. . .. . . .. ... .. . . . 32.5 South Aorida 64 5 35.5 Tampa Turnpike 66.0 75.2% 34.0 24.8 If GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 8 If "no," 6. Would you like me to re-read the scenario? Orlando N= 49 Yes. ............. ......... ................. ....... .... .............. 100.0 No.. .... . . . . . ................... ....... .......... ... .... . . .... . 0.0 South Aorida 54 100. 0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 51 38 100.0 1 00.0% 0 0 0 0 APPENDIX2

PAGE 125

14 If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes," Repeat the scenario and GO TO Question 7 7. Can you now imagine this? Yes [ I No [ I Orlando N= 49 Yes...... . .... ...... ............. .................. ....... .. ......... 100.0 No........................ ................ ........... . ............... 0.0 South Florida 54 1 00.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 51 38 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes," GO TO Question 8 I will now you read you some statements about SunPASSJE-PASS. SunPass and E-PASS are p repaid accounts from which toll charges are paid. SunPass and E -PASS are transpon ders that go on the front windshields of cars They are little white boxes that you may have seen on other cars. As cars go through special toll booth lanes, these SunP ASSIE-PASS transponders record transactions and a monthly statement is later sent to the account holder. 8. Would you like me to re read this statement? Orlando Yes....... ...................... ... ... . ................... . ... ... .... 13.9 No... ... . .......... ......... .......... ... ........ .. ...... ............ 86. 1 South Florida 45.5 54.6 Tampa Turnpike 12.0 40.5% 88.0 59.5 If lf "no," R epeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 9 GO TO QUESTION 9. 9. Do you understand the concept of paying tolls through SunPASSIE-PASS? Orlando Yes............................................ .... ......... ........... 100.0 No............. ................................... .................... 0.0 GO TO QUESTION 10 South Florida 100.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If If "no," -) THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 10. Did you hear of SunPASS or EPASS before my call? Orlando Yes. ... ..... .......... . .... ................ ..... .................. .... 78.8 South Florida 96.1 T ampa Turnpike 66. 7 95.4% APPENDIX2

PAGE 126

15 No .... ........... ......... ............ ..... ........................... 21.2 3.9 33.3 4.6 11. What is your primary reason for not getting SunPASSIE-PASS (choose one response only. Do NOT read statements the following statements). Prefer to pay cash ............................................. Too much trouble to get it is inconvenient or not enough time to get . .... . ....... . ... ... . Don't use the toll roads that much ...... .... .... ... .. SunPASS/E-PASS costs extra/Expensive . . . . I don't mind waiting to pay tolls ......... . ....... . . . I don't want anyone to have a record of my travels ................................................. . Orlando 2.0 0.0 87.4 1.3 0.0 0 7 I can't get a receipt at the time of my transaction 2.0 Other ...................... ............... ...................... 6.6 South Florida 7.2 8 6 65. 8 1.3 1.3 3.9 0.0 11.8 Tampa Turnpike 6.0 2.6 1.3 0.7 72.0 79.7 5 3 3.9 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.3 4.6 10.0 8.5 I will read you some statements Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 12. I would get SunPASSIE-PASS if it was cheaper than paying tolls with cash South Orlando Florida Strongly Agree ... ..... ......... ..... ............. ........ ..... 6.6 9.2 Agree .... . ... ... . .... . . . .... ... . .... . . . ....... ... .. ... 64.9 59.9 Somewhat Agree ........... ........... ....... .......... ..... 7.3 11.8 Don't Know or Can't Say .......... ...................... 2.6 5.3 Somewhat Disagree .... .... .......... ..... .... ... .... ........ 0.0 3.3 D i sagree .... ............ ....... .... ............... ...... .... .... 15.9 10 5 Strongly Disagree ............................................. 2.6 0.0 13. I would get SunPASS/E-PASS so that I didn t have to stop at toll plazas. Strongly Agree . .... . . . ....... . . . . . .... . ....... . . . Agree . . . ..... ..... ..... ............................... ... . . Somewhat Agree .............................................. Don't Know or Can't Say .......... .... ................. Somewhat Disagree .... ..................................... Disagree .................... . ............. ......... ............... . Strongly Disagree ....... .. .. . ... .... .. ........ ....... ..... . Orlando 8 6 50.3 13.2 1.3 12.6 13.9 0.0 South Florida 17. 8 46.1 10.5 0.7 10.5 14 .5 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 6.0 9.2% 58.0 64.1 5.3 5.9 2.7 5 2 8 .0 0.0 20.0 15.0 0.0 0.7 Tampa Turnpik e 4.7 7.8% 65.3 52.9 0.7 12. 4 2.0 3 3 14.0 ll.8 13.3 u.s 0 0 0.0 APPENDIX2

PAGE 127

16 14. I would get SunPASSIE PASS if the transponder was free Orlando 6.6 South Florida 7. 2 Tampa Turnpike Strongly Agree ..... ... ............... .......................... Agree .... ..... ... ........ ......... ........ .... ..... ... ... .. ...... Somewha t Agree ....... .... ....... ..................... ..... Don't Know or Can't Say ......... ... ................... . Somewhat Disagree ... ........ .... . . . . .......... ...... Disagree ....... ....... .... .... ....... ... . .... ..... ......... Strongly Disagree ..... . .... ... ....... .............. ... ... . 57 0 8.6 4.0 4.0 19. 9 0.0 43.4 9.9 11. 8 10 5 17.1 0 0 6 0 8.5% 64.7 60.1 5.3 2.6 3.3 5.9 8.0 5.2 12 7 17 6 0 .0 0.0 14-2. FOR SOliT H FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Are you aware that Sun Pass users who commute on toll roads oper ated by the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority receive an immediate 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (n=l52) South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike Yes. ........ . . .... .... .... .... . .... . ....... .... ... . . . . ... ... 15 .8% No ... . .. ............. ...... .... .................................. ... 69.1 Don't Know. .......... .... . . . . . ....... .... ............... 15.1 14 3 FOR SOUTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on tolls for SunPas s u sers on Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roads, would you consider p urchas ing SunPass and using Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roadways? (n=l48) South Orlando Florida T am pa Turnpike Yes . . ... .. .......................... ... .................. ..... ....... 36.5% No ......... . . ..... ...... ......................... ... ................ 45.3 Don't Know....................................................... 18.2 PART II. READ: Technology now e x ists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive mont hly b ills. Video cameras can record the ve h icle license plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner o f those cars This is called "video toll collect i on." 15 Would you like me to re-read this statement? South APPENDIX2

PAGE 128

17 Orlando Ye s ... . . ...... ... .. . ... . . .... .. . ... .. .. .. . . . . .. . .. . .. 8 6 No .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. 9 1.4 Florida 15.1 84. 9 Tampa Turn p ike 19.3 7.2% 80. 7 92. 8 If "yes,"-? If "no" -7 Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 16 GO TO QUESTION 16 1 6. Do you u nderstand the concep t of video tolling? Orlando Yes .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .... .... .. ... . .. . .. 100 0 No........ ........... ........... ... ..... ... .... . . ........... ....... 0.0 South Florida 100.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpik e 100.0 100.0% 0.0 0.0 If "yes,"? If "no" GO TO: READ STA TEMENT ABOVE QUESTIO N 17 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. I am now going to read you some stat e ments about vid e o t o ll collection. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can' t say, s omewhat disagree, disagree or strongly disagree. 17. I would use a road that has v i deo toll coll ection Orlando Strong) y Agree ............................ .... .............. ... 0.7 Agree .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... . .. . .. .... ........ .. . . .. .. .... .. 51.7 Somew hat Agree .................... ........ .. . .. ... ..... . 4.0 Don' t Know or Can't Say ................................ .. 9.9 Somewhat Disagree ...... .......... .... .... ................ 0.7 Disagree ............ ...... .... .. ........ .................. ........ .. 28.5 Strongly Disagree ..... ....................... ... .. .......... 4 .6 18. I would use toll road s if I did not have to pay with cash Strongly Agree .... ............................................. Agree ............. ........... ................ .... ................ Somewhat Agree ...... ..... ........ .. .... ... .............. Don't Know or Can't Say .......................... .. .... .. Somewhat Disagree .......... .............................. .. Disagree. ... ... . ........ ..... ... ........ .... . .... ..... ... ... . Strongly D i sagree ...... ........................ ........... .. Orlando 4.0 59.6 5.3 7 9 2.6 19.9 0.7 South Florida 0.0 59.2 3 3 7.2 0 0 30.3 0 0 South Florida 6.6 55 9 3 3 6.6 0 0 27.6 0.0 T ampa Turnpike 10.7 0 .0% 43.3 43. 1 10. 0 5 2 9.3 13.7 1.3 0.0 24.7 33. 3 0.7 4.6 Tampa Turnpi k e 7 3 0 .0 % 60.7 57.5 10.0 3.3 4.0 5.9 1.3 1.3 16.7 29.4 0.0 2.6 APPENDIX2

PAGE 129

18 19. I f video toll collect ion was more expensive than gelling SunPassfE.PASS, I would get SunPass!E-PASS Strongly Agree ........................................... ..... . Agree .... ....... ... ........... ...... .... ... ... ........... ... Somewhat Agree ... ... .. .. .. ... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. Don't Know or Can't Say ......... ... ... .. .. .. .... ... Somewhat Disagree ... .... ... .... ... . ...... .. .... ... Disagree .. ............... ........................................ Strongly Disagree .................. . ............ ...... ..... Orlando 7 3 64 2 4.6 12.6 0.0 10.6 0.7 South Florida 9 2 73.7 0.0 9.2 0.0 7.9 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 7.3 8.5% 80. 0 76.5 0.0 1.3 6.7 5 9 0.0 0.0 6.0 7.2 0.0 0.7 20. It is OK for tolls rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPass!E-PASS payments. Strongly Agree .. .. .. ... ... .. ... .. .. . . .. ... . .. . ... . . Agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . So. rnewhat Agree .............................................. Don't Know or Can't Say ... . .......... ..... ......... .. Somewhat Disagree .......................................... Disagree . ... ... .... ........ .................... .. .. ........... Strongly Disagree ............................ . ........... .. Orlando 1.3 31.8 5.3 12.6 0.0 43.7 5.3 South Florida 3 3 47.4 9.2 9.9 0.0 30.3 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 3.3 2.0% 46. 7 34 .6 2.7 0.7 5 3 8.5 3.3 0.7 30.7 45.8 8 0 7.8 A byproduct of video toll collec tion is that motorist travel i nformation will be available. Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree somewhat agree, don't know/can t say, somewhat disagree disagree, or strongly disagree. 21. This motorist travel information should not be availab l e to the general public. Strongly Agree ... ..... ... . .. . .. ..... ... ...... .. ........ Agree .. ... .... ........... ................. ...... ..... ...... Somewhat Agree ..... ... .. ... ............................ Don't Know or Can't Say . ..... ...... .................. Somewhat Disagree ... .... ......... .................... .. Disagree ..................... ....... . . .. . .... . . ..... . ... .. . Strongly Disagree ....... .......... .... . .............. .... Orlando 17.2 36.4 4.0 8.6 2.6 31.1 0.0 South Florida 3.3 30.9 9.2 10.5 7.9 35.5 2.6 Tampa Turnpike 18.7 17.0% 50.0 43.1 0.7 3.3 9.3 4.6 0 7 2.6 19.3 28.8 1.3 0 7 22. It is important that toll agencies treat this information as confidential. South Orlando Florida Tampa Turnpike APPEND1X2

PAGE 130

19 Strongly Agree ... ...... ..................... ... ... .... . ...... Agree . .......... .............. ... ....... ....... ....... . .... . . Somewhat Agree . ........ . ... .............................. Don't Know or Can't Say ... ... .... ...... ................ Somewhat D isagree .... ...... ...... ......... ............... Disagree ... .......... ..... .... .... ... ........................... Strongly Disagree ............ ............................. ... 21.2 55.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 17 9 0.0 6.6 18 7 54.6 67.3 4.6 2 7 0.0 8.0 0 .0 0.0 34.2 2.7 0.0 0.7 21.6% 50. 3 0.0 3.9 0.0 22.9 1.3 23-1. This information should onl y be made available when requested by the courts. Strongly Agree . .... . ..... ... ........... ... . ... ..... ...... Agree . . ....... . . . . ...... .. ... ... ........ . ... ... .... . . ... Somewhat Agree .... . ... ... ... .... . . . . ....... . ... ... Don't Know or Can't Say . ........... . .... .... .... . . Som e w h at Disagree . . ... ... .. ................ .... .... .... Disagree ...................................... .... . .... .... ... .. StrOngly Disagree .. ....... . . . .... . ......... .... ...... Orlando 11.9 51.0 7.9 11.3 1.3 15.2 1.3 South Florida 6.6 65.1 0.0 9.9 0.0 18.4 0.0 Tampa Turn p ike 8.7 17 .6% 74.0 48.4 1.3 6 5 4.7 7 8 0.7 0.0 8 7 19.0 2.0 0 7 23-2. If informat io n about the motorisfs toll account and travel were strict l y confidential and protected by law, would you consider participating in an electronic toll collectio n program rathe r than paying cash for your trip? Orlando Yes ...... ..... ............. ...... ................................. ... 43 0 No ........... ............... .... . . . . ..... ........ ... ............. 28.5 Don't Know................................. ..... . .... . .. .... 28.5 PART UI South Florida 45.4 36.2 1 8.4 Tampa Turnpike 56.0 42.5% 22.7 35.3 21.3 22 2 Now, imagine that all tolls must be paid electron i cally on Florida's toll roads. Cash would no longer be an option fo r paying tolls. In other words, al l t olls must be paid through either t ransponders or the method of video toll collection. This is also called "cash-less toll collection 24. Would you like m e t o reread this sta temen t? Yes [ I No [ ] Orlando Yes............................ .... ..... ........ ..................... 25.2 No..... ...... ............... ..... .... .... ....... ... .............. ..... 74.8 South Florida 45.5 54.6 Tampa Turnpike 20.0 22.9 80. 0 77. 1 If "yes," Repeat the statemen t and GO TO QUESTION 25 APPENDIX2

PAGE 131

20 If "no," -7 GO TO QUESTION 25. 25. Do you understand the concept of cash-less toll collection? Orlando Yes..................................... .... .................. ......... 100.0 No ................................ ............. ....... .................. 0.0 South Florida 100.0 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 If "yes, If "no -7 GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 26 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agJee, somewhat agJee, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. 26. Cash payments should always be an option on toll roads Strongly AgJee . ..... .... ....... ... . ..... ... .... .............. Agree ... .................................................. .... ... Somewhat Agree ........ . ...... .... .... ....... .. ............ Don't Know or Can't Say ... ...... ..... ... ............ .. Somewhat Disagree .................. . ..................... Disagree ..................... ......... ...................... ..... Strongly Disagree .................. ..... .... ................. Orlando 7.9 73.5 3.3 1.3 0.0 13.2 0.7 South Florida 8.6 82.9 2.0 5.3 0.7 0.7 0.0 Tampa Turnpike 6.0 13.1 % 79.3 79.7 6.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 7.2 0.0 0 0 27. I th.ink there should always be people like toll collectors who provide information to motorists Strongly Agree .................................................. Agree ........... ........... ............... ....... ... ........... Somewhat Agree ................................. .... ...... .. Don't Know or Can't Say ..................... .......... .. Somewhat Disagree ....... ..... .. ............... ...... ..... Disagree ................ ................. .......... ............... Strongly D is agree . .... ....... ... ..... .... ... ... .. ... ........ Orlando 7 3 79.5 2.0 2.6 0.0 8.6 0.0 South Florida 9.2 55.9 7.2 5.3 2.6 16.4 3.3 Tampa Turnpike 6.7 8.5% 69.3 80.4 6.7 0.0 5.3 2.6 1.3 0.0 10. 7 8.5 0.0 0.0 28 I would like to be able to buy an all -day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day Orlando Strongly Agree................................................... 1.3 South Florida 7.2 Tampa Turnpike 1.3 3.3% APPENDIX2

PAGE 132

21 Agree. ... ... ............. .................. ........................ Somewhat Agree .......... ... .. . ............ . .. .. ....... Don't l
PAGE 133

22 Strongly Agree . ... .... .......... ... ....... ...... ........... Agree .... ........................... ........ ......... .... ... .... . Somewhat Agree ..... ... .... .... ... . ....................... Don't Know or Can't Say ... ... ..... ..... .. ... .......... Somewhat Disagree .... ........................... ..... .... Disagree ....... ... .. .. .. ........... ... ... .. .. .. .. ... . ... .... .... . Strongly Disagree .......... .................................. . Orlando 4.6 19.2 2.6 6.0 6 0 53.0 8 6 33. It is OK to wait five minutes in line to pay my cash tolls Strongly Agree . ... .......... ... ..... .... ... .... . .... ........ Agree ........ ... ..... ......... ...... .... ... .. ....... ... ... ...... Somewhat Agree ............. ........................ .... . . Don't Know or Can' t Say ........................... .... . Somewhat Disagree ........ ... .... ... ...... .... ... ... .. .. D i sagree ....................... .................. . ..... ......... Strongly D isagree ............ .... .... .... .... . ............ . Orlando 1.3 35.8 1.3 2.6 8 6 41.7 8.6 Sou th Florida 3.9 23.0 1.3 2.6 7.2 44 7 17. 1 South Florida 2.6 40.1 0.0 3.9 2 0 40.1 11. 2 Tampa Turnp ike 4.0 1.3% 26.0 30.7 4.0 2.6 1.3 4.6 5.3 5 2 41.3 47.1 18.0 8 5 Tampa Turnpi k e 0 0 3.3% 16.7 31.4 2.0 1.3 4.7 2.6 4.0 12.4 50.0 42.5 22.7 6.5 34. I t i s OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls Strong! y Agree ...... ... ...... . .. . . ..... ........ . ......... . Agree ......... ................ ..... . ........ .... ...... ..... ... Somewhat Agree .... ....... . . ...... . . . . . . . . ...... . Don't Know or Can't Say ..... ................. ....... ... Somewhat Disagree . . .... ....... ... ......... . . ....... . Disagree ................................... .... ....... ............ Stron gly Di sagree .... .... ... . .. ... ................ . ... Orlando 6 0 61.6 3.3 6.0 0.0 23. 2 0.0 South Florida 17.1 4 6 7 0.0 1.3 3.3 27. 0 4.6 Tamp a Turnpike 0.7 0 .0% 63.3 62.1 0.7 1.3 14.0 3.7 0.0 0.7 20.0 22.2 1.3 0.0 I would like to ask you some questions that help to better analy1.e the results of this s urv ey. 35. What is your gender? (check o ne) Orlando Male...... ..... .............. ... .... .. . . . ..... .... . .... . . ....... 50.3 F emale .. .. .. . .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. . . ... .. ... . .. ... . .. .. .. 49.7 36. What i s you r age (chec k one) S o uth Florida 40.1 59.9 Tampa Turnpike 40.7 41.2% 59. 3 58.8 APPENDIX2

PAGE 134

23 N= 18-25 years ............. ... ............ . .................. . . 26-35 . ... ... . .... ..... . ........................................... 36-45 ..................... ............ .... ..... ..... ......... ..... ... 46-55 ................................................................. 56-65 ....... ... .................... ....... ... . . .... ............. . 66 and older ...... . . .... . ... ... . .......... ....... ........... 36-2. What is your zip code? ____ 37 What is your household income? (check one) N= Under $15,000 ........ .. ....... ... ....... .... . . .... .. .... . . $15,000-$24.999 . . .... . ........ ............. ........ .... . $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$44,999 $45,000-$54,999 .......... ..... ......... ... .... .... ... ....... $55,000-$64,999 ......................... ............... .... ... $65,000-$74,999 ..... ... ............... . ....... .... . ....... . over $75,000 ..... ................ ... .... ......................... Orlando 1 48 2.7 16.9 18.2 13.5 20.3 28.4 O rl a ndo 110 8 2 1 9.1 13.6 23.6 20.9 8.2 1.8 4.5 South Florida 152 14 .5 23.0 14.5 17 1 14.5 16.4 South Florid a 125 5.6 28.8 14.4 10 .4 12.0 4 .8 10.4 13 6 Tampa Turnpike !50 153 14.7 15.0 % 14.0 17.0 15.3 18.3 19.3 14.4 11.3 13 7 25.3 2 1.6 T ampa Turnpike Ill 136 10.8 5 .1% 21.6 26.5 15. 3 11.0 9.0 27.9 13.5 11.0 9.0 9.6 7.2 4.4 13.5 4.4 APPENDIX2

PAGE 135

I APPENDIX3: SURVEYINSTRUMENT Open Road Tolling Survey READ: Hi, My name is and I'm calling on behalf of state and local transp ortation agencies in the State of Florida that operate the toll roads. The sponsors of thi s survey include Florida 's Turnpike and several local Expressway Authorities. This is a legitimate survey; I'm not selling anything. We want to know how you feel about some new transportation initiatives. Of course, your participation is compl etely voluntary, but we hope you will participate. The entire interview should take less than ten minutes. The validity of our results depends on your willingness to help, so we hope that you will participate. Of course, you may discontinue the interview at any-time or refuse to answer any questions that make you uncomfortable. We will only report group tendencies in this survey; Your individual answers will be held in strict confidence. Do you have any questions you want to ask me before we begin? If you have any questions after the survey, you should call Mr. Steve Reich at 813-974-6435. (INTER VIEWER: if asked, Reich works at the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida. He is responsible for this project.) 1. In order for our survey to be valid, we must interview only pe rsons over the age of 18 living, who own a car and live in (location] __ Would that be you? Yes ( ] No [ ] Location Names : Central Florida the Greater Tampa area, including Sarasota Dade, Broward or Palm Beach County With in 25 miles of the Florida Turnpike If "yes," Continue (GO TO QUESTION 2). I f "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAlL NOW. 2. Have you used any toll road within the State of Florida during the previous sixmonths? If "yes," Continue (GO TO QUESTION 3) If "no," GO TO NONUSER SURVEY (PAGE 6) 3. Do you have e ither a SunPASS orE-PASS device on your vehicle? If THANK RESPONDENT AND END CAlL NOW. If "no," TO CASH CUSTOMER SURVEY (PAGE 2)

PAGE 136

2 Cash Customer Survey INTERVIEWER: IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNPASSIE-PASS." IN SOUTH FLORIDA, TAMPA AND TURNPIKE MARKETS, USE "SUNPASS." (E-PASS IS MARKETED IN TifE ORLANDO MARKET, ONLY) PART I. READ: I will you read you some statements abou t SunPASSIE-PASS. SunPass and E-PASS are prepaid accounts from which to ll charges are paid. SunPass and E PASS are transponders that go on the front windsh i elds of cars. They are little white boxes that you may have seen on other cars. As cars go through special toll boo th lanes, these SunPASSIE-PASS transponders record transactions and a monthly statement is later sent to the account holder. 4. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes [ I No [ ) If "yes," -7 If "no," -7 Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 5 GO TO QUESTION 5. 5. Do you understand the concept of paying tolls through SunP ASSIE-PASS? Yes[ I No[ I If "yes," -7 If "no,', GO TO QUESTION 6 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 6 DidyouhearofSunPASSorE-PASSbeforemycall? Yes[ 1 No[ I 7. What is your primary reason for not getting SunPASSIE-PASS (INTERVIEWER: choose one response only. Do NOT read statements the following statements). Prefer to pay cash............................... ....... .... ... .. .... . .... . .... . ................ . [ 1 Too much trouble to get, it is inconvenient, or not enough time t o get.... [ ] Don't use the toll roads that much ......................... .... ... ... .......... ........ .... [ ] SunP ASSIE-PASS costs extra/Expensive. ....... .... ..... . ...... ............... .... [ 1 I don't mind wai ting to pay tolls.................. .... .... ......... ...... . .......... .... ... ( 1 I don't want anyone to have a record of my travels .... .... . .... . .......... ..... [ ] I can't get a receipt at the time of my tran s action . ..... ....................... .... ( 1 Other . .. . .. ... ...... .. . ... .. ... .. ... ..... .. .. .. .. .. .......... .. .. .. .... ... ...... ... .... .. .... . ... .. . [ 1 READ: I will read you some statements. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can t say, somewhat disagree, disagree or strong l y disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT TinS IS A S E VEN POINT SCALE. 8. I would get SunPASSIE-PASS if it was cheaper than paying tolls with cash. 9. I would ge t SunPASS/E-PASS if so that I didn't have to stop at toll plazas. APPENDIX2

PAGE 137

3 10. I would get SunPASSIE PASS if the transponder was free PART II. READ: Technology now exists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive monthly bills. Video cameras can record the vehicle licens e plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars. This is called "video toll collection." 11. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes [ ] No [ 1 If "yes,', 7 If .. no," -;) Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 12 GO TO QUESTION 12. 12. Do you understand the concept of video toll i ng? Yes [ I No [ I If "yes," If "no," -;) GO TO QUESTION 13 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 13. Do you prefer video toll collection or the use of transponders such as SunPASSIE PASS to pay fortolls? VT [ I SunPASS/E-PASS [ I CS/DK [ I 14. Do you prefer video toll collection or the use of cash to pay for tolls? VT ( I Cash ( I CS/DK ( I 14-2. FOR SOUTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Are you aware that SunPass users who commute on toll roads operated by the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority receive an immediate 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (IF RESPONDENT WANTS TO KNOW WHICH ARE MDX ROADS, THEY ARE SR 112 -AIRPORT EXPRESSWAY; SR 836 DOLPIDN EXPRESSWAY; SR 874DON SHULA EXP.; AND SR 924 GRATIGNY EXP.) Yes[ ]No[ )DK[ ) 14 FOR SOUTH FLORIDA RESIDENTS, ONLY: Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on tolls for SunPass users on Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roads, would you consider purchasing SunPass and using Miami-Dade Expressway Authority roadways? Yes [ I No [ ] DK [ ) READ: I am now going to read you some statements about video toll collection. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT THIS IS A SEVEN POINT SCALE. APPEN1>1X2

PAGE 138

4 15. I would use a road that has video toll collection 16. If video toll collection was more expensive than getting SunPassJE..PASS, I would get SunPassiE-PASS. 17. It is OK for tolls rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPassfE..PASS payments. (INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT WANTS MORE INFORMATION ABOUfTHIS ITEM, VOLUNTEER THIS: "PEOPLE WOULD PAY A DIFFERENT AMOUNT BASED ON HOW1HEY PAY. CASH USERS MIGHT PAY A TOLL THAT IS A DIFFERENT AMOUNT FROM THOSE WHO USE VIDEO TOLL COLLECTION AND HAVE MONTID.-Y BILLS SENT TO 1HEM, AND THEY, IN TURN, MIGIIT PAY A DIFFERENT AMOUNT FROM THOSE WHO HAVE SUNP ASSIE-PASS. ") 18 I would rather pay monthly than each time I ride a toll road. READ: A by-product of video toll collection is that motorist travel information will be available Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT THIS IS A SEVEN POINT SCALE. 19. This motorist travel information should not be available to the general public. 20. It is important that toll agencies treat this information as confidential. 21-1. This information should only be made available when requested by the couns. 21-2 If information about the motorist's toll account and travel were strictly confidential and protected by law, would you consider participating in an electronic toll collection program rather than paying cash for your trip? Yes [ I No [ I DK/CS [ 1 PART Ill. READ: Now, imagine tbat all tolls must be paid electronically on Florida's toll roads. Cash would no longer be an option for paying tolls. In other words, all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection. This is also called "cash-less toll collection." 22. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes [ I No [ I If "yes," 7 If "no," ? Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 23 GO TO QUESTION 23. 23. Do you understand the concept of cash-less toll collection? Yes [ I No [ I If If "no," GO TO QUESTION 24 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. 24. Unde r this system, would you use video toll collection or transponders such as SunPASSIE-PASS to pay fortolls? VT [ I SunPASSJE..PASS [ I CS/DK [ 1 APPENDIX2

PAGE 139

5 READ: Again please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT TinS IS A SEVEN POINT SCAlE. 25. Cash payments should always be an option on toll roads 26. I think there should always be people like toll collectors who provide information to motorists 27. There should always be a way to immediately get a receipt 28. I would like to be able to buy an all-day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day 29. 1 would like to be able to buy a week-long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that week 30. I would like to be able to buy a mont h -long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that month. 31. It is OK to wait one minute in line to pay my cash tolls. 32. It is OK to wait three minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. 33. It is OK to wait five minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. 34. It is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls READ: Now, I would like to ask you some questions that help to better analyze the results of this survey. 35. How often do you use a toll road in Florida in an average week? (check one) Less than 5 times 5 -10 times 11-15 times J6-25times more than 26 times 36. What is your gender? (check one) Male Female 37. What is your age (check one) 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 65+ 37-2. What is your zip code? ____ 38. What is your household income? (check one) APPENDIX2

PAGE 140

Under $15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$44 999 $45, 000-$54,999 $55,000-$64,999 $65,000-$74,999 over $75,000 6 That's all the questions I have. Thank you very much for your help. If you have any questions or comments regarding the survey you should contact Mr. Steve Reich at 813-974 6435 Would you like his telephone number again or his email address (lreich@tampabay.rr.com)? By the way you ma y get a call from one of my supervisors to check on my performance. Thank you for your time. (end of survey) APPENDIX2

PAGE 141

7 Non-User Survey 4 Why do you NOT use the toll road system? CHECK ALL lHAT APPLY Doesn't go where I need it to go I don't know where it goes Too expensive Too much traffic Unsafe Other INTERVIEWER: IN ORLANDO MARKET, USE "SUNPASS/E-PASS." IN SOUTH FLORIDA, TAMP A AND TURNPIKE MARKETS, USE "SUNP ASS (E-PASS IS MARKETED IN THE ORLANDO MARKET, ONLY) PART I. READ: I would like to talk with you about different ways of collecting tolls on Aorida's toll roads Although you do not currently use the toll roads, some proposals could be relevant to you Assume that a toll road exists that goes where you need it to go, such as a road that might go to your work or shopping. Assume also that the toll road is safe to use. 5. Can you i magine such a road? Yes [ ] No [ ] If "yes." -+ If "no" GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 8 6. Would you like me to re-read the scenario? Yes [ ] No I ] If "no," RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes Repeat the scenario and GO TO Question 7 7. Can you now imagine this? Yes [ ) No [ ] If "no," THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. If "yes," GO TO Question 8 READ: I will now you read you some statements about SunPASS/E-PASS SunPass and EPASS are prepaid accounts from w h ich toll charges are paid. SunPass and E-PASS are transponders that go on the front windshields of cars. They are little white boxes that you may have seen on other cars. As cars go through special toll booth lanes, these SunPASSIE-PASS transponders record transactions and a month l y statement is later sent to the account holder 8. Would you like me t o re-read this statement? Yes [ ] No [ ] If "yes," If "no?" Repeat the statemen t and GO TO QUESTION 9 GO TO QUESTION 9 APPEND!X2

PAGE 142

8 9 Do you unders t and the concept of p aying t o lls thro ugh SunPASSIE PASS? 10. Yes[ ] No[ I GO T O QUESTION 10 If I f "n o THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW Did you hear of SunPASS or EPASS before my call? Yes ( I No[ I II. What is your primary reason for not getti ng SunPASSIE-PASS (INTERVIEWER: choose one response only Do NOT read statements the following statements). Prefer to pay cash..... . ....... ..... ...... ... .... ........ ...... ............ ... . . ......... . .... ... ( I Too much troub l e t o get it is inconvenient, or n ot enough time to get.... ( 1 Don't u se the t oll roads that much ............ ....... .... ........... .... ...... ... ........ [ ] SunPASSIE-PASS costs extra/Expensive........... . .... .............. .... ...... ... ... [ ] I don't mind waiting to pay tolls . .... .... ..... . .... .... . ... ....... ... ....................... [ I I don t want anyone to have a record of my trav e l s . . . . . .... ... .. .. ... . .... . [ I I can't get a receipt a t the time of my transaction ....... ... ......... .... . ..... . . . [ 1 Other .. .. . .. . .. . .. ... . . .. . . . . . .. ... .. . .. . . . . . .. . .. .. . ... .. .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. .. [ ] READ: I will read you some statemen t s. Please tell me wheth er you strongly agree agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER : N01E THAT TinS IS A SEVEN POINT SCALE. 12. I would get SunPASSIE-PASS i f it was cheaper than paying tolls with cash 13 I woul d get SunP ASS IEPASS so t hat I didn't have to stop at toll plazas. 14. I would get SunPASSIE PASS if the transponder was free 14-2. FOR SOUTH FLORID A RESIDENTS O NL Y: Are you aware that S u nPas s users who commute on t oll roads operated by the Miami Dade Expressway Authority receive an immedia t e 10% discount on tolls when they drive through the SunPass lanes? (IF RESPONDENT WANTS TO KNOW WHICH ARE MDX ROADS, TilEY ARE SR 112 AIRPO R T EXP RESSWAY; SR 836-DOLPHIN EXPRESSWAY; SR 874 DON SHULA EXP.; AND SR 924 GRATIGNY EXP.) Yes [ 1 No [ 1 DK ( 1 14-3 FOR SOUT H FLO RIDA RESID ENTS, ONLY : Now that you are aware of the 10% discount on tolls for SunPass users on M iami Dade Expressway Aut hority roads would you con s ider purc h asing SunPass and usi n g Miami -D ade Expressway Authority roadways? Yes [ 1 No [ 1 DK [ 1 PART II. APPENDIX2

PAGE 143

9 READ: Technology now eXists that allows cars without E-PASS or SunPASS to receive monthly bills. Video cameras can record the vehicle license plates of cars as they go through toll plazas, and toll agencies can then send a monthly bill to the owner of those cars. This is called "video toll collection." 15. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes [ ) No ( ) If "yes, 7 If "no," Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 16 GO TO QUESTION 16. 16. Do you understand the concept of video tolling? Yes [ 1 No [ I If "yes. II 7 If "no," 7 GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 17 THANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. READ: I am now going to read you some statements about video toll collection. Please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, don't know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT TillS IS A SEVEN POINT SCALE. 17. I would use a road that has video toll collection 18. I would use toll roads if I did not have to pay with cash 19 If video toll collection was more expensive than getting SunPass/E-PASS. I would get SunPassiE-PASS. 20. It is OK for tolls rates to be different for cash payments, video toll payments, and SunPassiE-PASS payments.
PAGE 144

10 PART III. READ: Now, imagine that all tolls must be paid electronically on Florida's toll roads. Cash would no longer be an option for paying tolls. In other words, all tolls must be paid through either transponders or the method of video toll collection This is also called "cash Jess toll collection." 24. Would you like me to re-read this statement? Yes [ I No [ I If If "no," Repeat the statement and GO TO QUESTION 25 GO TO QUESTION 25. 25. Do you understand the concept of cash less toll collection? Yes [ ) No [ ] If "yes/' -;) If "no," 7 GO TO: READ STATEMENT ABOVE QUESTION 26 TilANK RESPONDENT AND END CALL NOW. READ: Again, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, know/can't say, somewhat disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. INTERVIEWER: NOTE THAT TI:IIS IS A SEVEN POINT SCALE 26. Cash payments should always be an option on toll roads 27. I think there should always be people like toll collectors who provide information to motorists 28 I would like to be able to buy an ali -day pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road that day 29. I would like to be able to buy a week-long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that week. 30. I would like to be able to buy a month-long pass that allows me to travel on any Florida toll road for that month. 31. It is OK to wait one minute in line to pay my cash tolls. 32. It is OK to wait three minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. 33. It is OK to wait five minutes in line to pay my cash tolls. 34. It is OK for the government to hire a collection agency to collect unpaid tolls READ: Now, I would like to ask you some questions that help to better analyze the results of this survey. 35. What is your gender? (check one) Male Female 36. What is your age (check one) APPENDIX2

PAGE 145

18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 65+ 11 362. What is your zip code? -----37. What is your household income? (check one) Under $15,000 $15,000 -$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$44 999 $45,000-$54,999 $55 000-$64,999 $65,000-$74,999 o ver $75 000 That's all the questions I have Thank you very much for your help If you have any quest i ons or comments regarding the survey, you should contact Mr. Steve Reich at 813 974 6435. Would you like his telephone number again or his email address (lreich@tampabay.rr com)? By the way, you may get a call from one of my supervisors to check on my perform ance. Thank you for your time. (end of survey) APPENDIX2

PAGE 146

Appendix C -Resource Systems Group Summary of Focus Group Results

PAGE 147

Summary repon: FLORIDA TOLLING OPTIONS FOCUS GROUPS Prepared fo<: Florida's Turnpike URSCorp 8 October 2001 331 Olcott Drive. White Rivor Jvnction. V ormont 05001

PAGE 148

FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY Twelve focus groups were c:onducte:d in September 2001 in order to detennine how cutrent toll road customers react to different about toll coUec;tion alternatives. Each group consisted of approximately ten participants and was led by the moderator through a set of discussion points: How do they pexceive cu.ttt:nt travel conditions on the tolled and toll-free roads? + What do they know about the current electronic toll collection (ETq options? How would their use of different toll collection alternatives and travel patterns change with: 1) introduction of e xpress lanes that bJ'P"" toll plazas, 2) introduction of video toll collection ae<:ounts (VTq and 3) introduction o f open road tolling? At the end of the focus group discussion, participants completed a written questionnaire that covered the: key topks and which included sm.ted preference (conjoint) exercises that me2s.ured the quantitative trade-offs that customers make in deciding whether to aoquire ETC and how theit travel patterns might change under different tolling configurations The groups included randomly-identified roll road customers in each of three metropolitan markets: Miami, Tampa and Orlando. Three of the groups consisted of cuuent ETC customers (SunPass or EPass) and the rcma.iniog nine consisted of cash customers (used a toU road at lost once in the past week). All participants were asked to complete a week-long trip log for the period just prior to their SCSSlOO. Discussion in all of the groups was quite active; participants clearly bad a strong interest in conveying theit opinions about tolling options. \X'hile there were decidedly differing opinions among the participants about many of the issues, sever:al consistent themes emerged among ETC customers and among cash customers ETC CUSTOMERS + Climnt ETC UJm ""mzl!J among lhe mMI acli> /QU road usmMost ETC custOmers use the toll roads in theit areas very regularly for both work and nonwork trip purposes. They use the toll roads because of the time savings they offer but also s elec t toll free roads when there is congestion along the toll rods or at theit approaches. !'.!any do not have a very good sense of how much they actually pay in tolls per month. ETC UJm ""!.'ntrt11!J "'?' satisjitd ll'ith 1/Jtir JYSkm -Vittually all acquired ETC because of its convenienc e and they felt that it served this purpose well Those who were aware of the 10 % discount appreciated it but said that it was not the primary reaso n that they bad ETC. The most commonly noted issues w ere plazas where queues frequendy block the ETC lanes, non unifonnity in the placement of ETC lanes and froquent misr .. ds at some plazas. ETC usm like the itka of e:xpros laner Jopat.ringplazas-Express lanes address two of the major issue\ that current users have with the system; blocked ETC lanes and non-uniformity in

PAGE 149

DRAFT ReP.ot"-Open Road Tolling Foeus Groups 28 Septemw 2001 Resource Syslems Group, Inc. page2 the location of lanes. They would also reduce tra\el times, making ETC customers more like ly to choose toll alternatives over toll free options. Open tr)(Jd tq//ing it plrived as pmuiJing ttjuivalent ben!fiu as e;..press laJiesMost ETC customers sec open road tolling as addressing, for them, the same user issues that express lanes do. Some p.refer permile chatges but othets are concerned about the induced t.rnffic (their own as weU as from others) thai would re.sult from less-obvious toll charges. When prompted, they see the cost benefit of dimi.natingplazas but want to see that benefit translated into better roads and/or lower tolls. IV!any e xpressed skepticism about the reliab ili ty of the video t echnology used to identify cash customers, the ability tO thwan toll C\aders and the ins tiro tional capacity co manage this more complex system. CASH CUSTOMERS t Ma'!Y cash customtr.r an al.so .freq11tnl loU road users-On average, cash customers make: fewe r trips ove.rall and fewer toll road trips than do ETC customers. However, there is a wide range in the levels of toll road among cash customers. Some make frequent use and others make only occasional use of the toll roads. Most are selective in their use of toll roads, actively trading off cost vs. travel time sa-.-ings. + AIVartnetJ of
PAGE 150

DRAFT Report-Open Rolld Tolling Foeus Grou.,_ :Ill September 2001 Ra.ource Systems Group, lne. page3 cash users indicated that the benefit to them from thls improvement could offset the costs of acquiring ETC if those costs were reduced by modifying the transponder purchase or lowering the pre-payment amount. '&adion to VTC is mixed-Some see advantag es in a system that alloW$ them to avoid the costs of acquiring a ttansponder and the minor inconveniences involved in mounting and mo,-ing it. However, they are generally not (eccptivc to account set-up or monthly account maintenance fees to offset the costs of a VrC system In most of the groups, strong concerns were expressed about the reijability and security of a video tolling system They were concerned about the possibility of ge!Mg inconcctly charged for someone else's use, about toll evasion by others and about being tncked by their license tag number. Open road tolling rmud a genmzlfy neg!lliw "''/'lion among cash ruJtomtn-\Vhil e thj liked the idea of removing bottlenecks on the toll roads, most cash users did not like being "for ced" into making a choice between obtaining a toll account or being billed surcharged tolls. S ome rely on the current cash pay-as-you-go system as a way to meter their usc of toll roads and ens we that they do not end up spending more than they can afford. They are very concerned about receiving large bills that they arc unable to pay. When pressed, most indicated that they would obtain a toll account if open road tolling were implemented and the remainder said that they would reduce or eliminate their toll road use. SURVEY RESPONSES The focus group participants completed a questionnaire that covered most of the issues discussed in the groups. Tabulations data from these questionnaires will be included in a later report. The questionnaire also included stated preference (also known as conjoint) exercises to detennine how customers would react to change$ in tolling procedures. The stated preference exercises presented a vari ety of future tnvel conditions. These data are being used to develop statistical models that caprure customer ttade-of(s. The following ue initial obserntions from the stated preference responses. AlmottthrtNJJIIJ11m of txitting ""h t11Jiomm "'o"ld bt IVilling to acquirt a toU acrount (ETC ()1' 'VTQ if an expmt lane !Jflem ()1' open road to/5ng it institutedSome would do so only with significandy more favorable account features than ace currently offered but express lanes and open road t olling clearly provide an added incentive to acquire an account. EVUJ if they.,.,. to mmzin rash ruJitmtm, ()JJlf' thne.qNtJrltrt ..,uld tOntinut to ust til< toU road IVith mrrhatt!t or other atX:IIIInt reqllinnwtltthat muld be impotttl on thtm. Fe.,.lhan ont-lhird of mrnn l rash make trips thai rould bt dirMmd from JoU:frn roads to toU roads if an txpros !ant !JIItm or open road to/5ng is intlilllted-Of these, about 80% indicate that they would divert to the toll road if they had ETC Or vrc and did not have to tnvcl through plaaas. AboNI hw-tbirds of mrnnl ETC""" make triplthal rould bt diwrltd from toU:frn roads 10 toll roads if an
PAGE 151

APPENDIX 1 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION GUIDE 24 September 2001 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH The objectives of these focus groups are to: Detennine travelers perceptions of current tolling systems (SunPass. cash); Explorereactions to open road tolling alternatives in terms of both SunPass acquisition and use of toll highways + Conduct a stated preference survey that can be used to quantitatively estimate effects of open road tolling system design on transponder acquisition and toll road usc. These objectives will be accomplished by conducting a series of 12 focus groups over the period September 4 to September 8. Each focus group session will include eight to ten participants from one of two traveler segments and will be approximately one and one-half to rwo hours in duration. The two traveler segments to be included are: SunPass customers and cash customers. There will be five groups ofSunPass customers and seven of cash customers. Four groups will be held in each of Miami, Tamp a and Orlando. SESSION OUTLINE I Introduction (20 min.) (m) A. State purpose (Define toll highways of interest} I) to find out how participants' current use of toll roads and 2) how they might change choices with changes in tolling (m) B. Ground rules 1) session will last I.S hts. 2) being observed/ recorded speak clearly, one at a time 3) Any questions?

PAGE 152

DRAFT Report-Opon Road Tolling Focus Groupt; 28 September 2001 Resource Systems Group. lne. page2 C. Personal introductions Describ e your trip on these toll highways: who travels with you, wh
PAGE 153

DRAfT Report-Open Rod Tolll.ng Focus Groupt RMource Syatem8 Group. tnc. 28 S.p1ambet :1001 page 3 a. ETC b License plate VTC (already in use for violators on current sunpass). Multiple plates on one account 3. Toll rates a. Bill at pla:
PAGE 154

APPENDIX 2FOCUS GROUP OBSERVATIONS MIAMI CASH GROUP 1 Current travel Most use toll roads frequendy beO>use they are usually faster and less congested. Some noted that Don Shula northbound was congested in AM peak. MoS< have no idea how much they currendy pay per mile. SunPass Most have heard of SunPass but know vet) litde about com and how to acquire 1\iany have not acquired an account simply because they have not gotten around to it; others becau se Wey say they do not usc toll roads enough to justify the cash outlay Some had heard stories about Sun Pass not working coaecdy ETC with Express LanesAll liked the idea of Express Lanes and most said they would ac quire SunPass if the major toll roads had such lanes. VTC with Express Lanes-Most did not like the idea ofVTC; they were concerned about theft of t:ag_s, about inaccuracies in reading tags and about getting charges when someone used their car (a s opposed to with Sun Pass which can be removed from the car to avoid this). Open road tolling-Most liked the general idea but did not like the fact that they would be forced to either get SunPass or rely on VTC. They would prefer to hav-e a pay-as-you-go option MIAMI SUNPASS GROUP 2 Current travelMost use toU roads because they save considerable amounts of time.. They genenlly use toll roads whenever they are a real alternative; an exception is entering HEFr at Bird Rd when backups can be considerable. SunPass Most obtained Sun Pass because of convenience, not having to deal with change and time savings (not having to get in a long change line). About half were aware of the 10% discount; all have had some experience with the transponder not getting re:ad and were awa.re of frequent read problems. None felt they were overcharged but none specifically re\'iewed their charges. They like the instant feedback provided by the transponder but do not like worrying about whether gates will lift in time. Some noted that s.ignage is not adequate given in lane locations. ETC with Express Lanes All really liked this concept Many would ue toll roads more but plaza delays are not seen a s the main issue here (except at Okeechobee and SR 836). VTC with Express Lane-Most saw no real benefit to them from VTC except possible fl exi bility in not having to switch their SunPass transponder between vehicles. Open road tolling -Most liked it but had a potential concern that it will tum toll .roads into "another because of induced traffic.

PAGE 155

DRAFT ReponOpen Road Tolling Focua Groups 28 September 2001 MIAMI CASH GROUP 3 Re&ource Syatem Group In<:. pase2 Current travel Most use toll roads because they ate fa.ste:r, cspeciaUy duriog peaks. Some actively trade-off between free and toll roads while some use toH roads whenever they are available. Sun Pass Most do not know much -about it; those who do think $25 is too much for occasional users. When they learned about it, some said that it wou l d be worth getting it given the 10% savings. ETC with Elcpress LanesMost would get SunPass but are concerned about the balance between cash and SunPass lanes. They arc also con cerned about toll vio lators. One would not get because of the additional expense. One other would avoid toll roads if cash had higher tolls. VTC with Express Lanes Most prefe r Sun P ass or straight cash. Open Road Tolling-Most would get Sun Pass rathe r than rely on VTC, sorne would change route, some would allow cash c:harges, even with surcharges. MIAMI CASH GROUP 4 Current Travel About half are regular commuters and use tollroads regularly. They have alternatives for some, but not all trips. During the peak toll roads are perceived as almost always faster than other roads. SunPass Several have simply not gotten around to getting one; others feel that they do not use it enough; one does not have a credit card Some think $25 is too much. ETC with Express Lanes Some felt tbat they would get their money's word1 if there were no plaza delays; on e thinks it's a waste of money. SunPass is perc:eived as a "pi'()vcn" system; but s:eve:r.U think that Express Lanes arc not good idea for the "masses, VTC with Express Lanes-Four want to use VTC; four would pay 01.sh. Most have concerns about any set up fee and would choose based on overall c:ost. Open Road Tolling'Ibis group had an overall very negative reaction to the concept. They do not like to get a bill at end of month; They like to pay as they go because they are worried about getting large bill at end of month. Half said that they would stop using toll roads if open road tolling were implemented 'lney are concerned about be in g "lured" onto toll roads. Most do not want to pay $25 fo r an account. Overall. they feel chat they have no reasonable cash payment alternative and therefore reacted negatively to ORT. TAMPA CASH GROUP 5 Current TravelMost find that the Veterans and Crosstown save time at peak times and arc well worth the tolls. At off-peak times and for discretionary trips, however, some do not think that the tolls justify the time s avings. Sevetlll in thi, gtoup used toll toads in the area only a few times each month.

PAGE 156

DIIAFT 11_.-t-Open Rood Tolling FGcua Groupo 28 SOp-be 2001 Resource Syatema Group. toe. paae3 SunPass -None in this group were well infonned about SunPass. Most knew that SunPass would allow drivers to go through s p ecial lanes but that was the extent of their knowledge They did not know where/how to get SunPass; one person guessed that SunPass could be obtained at the Motor V ehicle Department. None knew h o w much the Sun Pass cOSt ; one person had heard $50 \Vhen they were told about the costs of obtaining and using SunPass sevc:nl o b jected to h aving to buy the transponder and suggested instead that a deposi t wou.ld be fairer They had not realized that SunPass could be used throughout the State and fe lt that tha t would offset their infrequent use of to ll roads in Tampa. Only two in this group would qualify for the 10% discount. One person was concerned about confidentiality of r ecords a private investigator who claimed that he would be able to obtain such infonnation if necessary Sevc:nl in the group said that they would be interested in obtaining SunPass given what they now knew. Those who were not interested said it was because they used toll roads so infrequendy that there would be l i ttl e benefit to them. ETC with Expr ess Lanes All liked the i dea of dedicated lanes for SunPass and felt that this provided a real reason to obtain SunPass A few of the moderate-level (>$3/month) users (beyond those who said that they would likely obtain SunPass given what they already knew) said that they would obtain SunPass if express lanes were constructed on the roads that they used. VTC with Express Lanes -The leas t frequent u s ers were interested in VTC asswning that the initial costs of starting an account were low. Several expressed concern about reliability of a vrc system and did not like the idea that whoever used the car could charge rolls to the ear owner. They prefcned being able to remove a transponder to avoid this Open Road Tolling While most indicated that they would likely get either ETC or VTC i s express lanes were built, as a group they did not like the notion of forcing all users to either have an account o r receive a bill with surcharges. They suggested that such a system could possibly be phased in but that they were not in fav o r of it eurrendy. Those who made les s-frequent toll trips said that tbey would use toll free alternatives rather than deal with a monthly bill with toll surcharges. TAMPA CASH GROUP 8 Current Travel-Respon dents are using the C rosstown the Ve1erans and a couple are also using the new Sun Coast Expressway. Most had a toll free alternative in Dale Mabry or Route 60 to/from B randon. There was a mix of frequent and occasional users. Toll roads arc used because they are seen as much faster and -a safer less sttessful driving experience. Dale Mabry is seen as a good alternative in many situations. as it is NOT limited access for trips where people need to pickup/ drop off passengers and when travelers n.eed to tal
PAGE 157

DRAFT Report-Open Road ToUing Focue Groups Resource Syetems Group, Inc. conveniences i.e. gas purchase, parking payments, etc None realized Sun Pass can be used state wide. They feh that buying hardware so that they can pay a toU, even if it js faster is generally not worth the cost of the hardware. Severa l said they would switch to free ro2ds if open road tolling is implemented. They felt that an itemized bill is impottant and that it should be free. They felt that an internet bill is an acceptable substinue if free. One re$p ondent was concemc::d about charges to her credit card account and wanted to be assured tha t the prepay could be done through a debit cud or through a direct withdrawal out of her bank account so as not to incu.c credit card interest charges ETC with E xpres LanesMost felt this is a good option, although most would still pay cash (frequent users would switch t o SunPass; not due to expres s lanes, but instead due to regular SunPass conveniencc::s) VTC with Express Lanes-VTC was not seen as any better than El'C on expre ss lanes. O ne person liked the idea of not needing a transponder. Open Road Tolling -These cash users were geneW!y not happy about h aving to pay extra to do what they are currendy doing. They asked why, if open road tolling is so much cheaper for the toll road authorities, they have to pay a surcharge for it. Most said they would switch tO a free road if they were cha.rged extta for open road tolling Most did not want to set up an account. TAMPA SUN PASS GROUP 7 Current Travel All in this group were frequent tollroad users; two made significan t numbers of SunPass toll trips elsewhere in the sta t e. Most in the group qualified for the 100/o discount. Some used the toU road in one direction but not in the other when the time savings were lower. F .or the most part. the y liked the Veterans and Crosstown but several commented on the traffic dif6culties at the Veterans junction near the airport. SunPass All were very satisfied with their SunPass. However, most had had problems with misreads and one noted that the Andctson Rd. plaza never read s the SunPass properly. 'lbe ocher frequendy citcd problem was that some plazas have no dedicated SunPas.s lanes, meaning tha t SunPass users are forced to wait behind cash customers. Those who use the bank for rcplenishrm::nt complained about the 10 days i t takes for their accounts to be credited. One person pointed out that the g l ue used to affix the Velcro doe s not stand up to the temperatures that occur in a car. f>'TC with Express Lanes-All really liked the idea of express lanes and some thought that they would use the toll roads mote often if the plaza delays were eliminated. The onl}' concern expressed was that the merge areas would become congested and that the net travel time savings for SunPass users would be reduccd. VTC with Express Lanes All like their SunPass and would not switch to VTC. They expressed concem about reliabilicy of such a system.

PAGE 158

Open Road Tolling Focus Groups 28 September 2001 Resource Systems Group, Inc. pageS Open Road Toiling !his would not directly impact SunPass users differently from express lanes However, several expressed concerns about impacts on (1\ave-nots''. TAMPA CASH QROUP 8 Current Travel This group included a mix of Crosstown, Veterans and Skyway B ridg e travelers. The toll roads are seen as fa ster, better alternatives. There are mostly occas i onal users in this group some going up to Orlando and using toll roads to avoid 1 4. SunPassThe participants in this group have very little Sun Pass awareness or knowledge. Respondents did not know where or how to obtain SunPass the costs involved etc. ETC with Eapress Lanes Respondents felt this was a good idea but it would not cause them to get SunPass VTC with Express Lanes-Most did not see much point in the VTC as i t relates to them. If they really want to do more, then they would get SunPass The VTC doesn"t seem any more convenient or different than Sun Pass Open Road Tolling Respondents were not pleased about having to pay any surcharges for not having an ETC/VTC account Respondents are tired of being "surcharged" for 211 sorts of things: account change fees for phone. bank account fees, etc . e[c. Many feel that they would switch to free roads i f a surcharge i s instituted for non-account OTC travelers. However, they do not mind paying an end of the month bill if there are no surcharges on tolls. They felt that a per mile charge is more equitable ORLANDO SUNPASS QROUP 9 Current Travel-There was a wide range of toll road users in this group-some use the roads daily while others use the toads much more occasionally. Some use the toll roads whenever the}' :are even slightly faster while others are much more selective in deciding between t oll-free and tolled alternatives. Among the toll roads, only the East-West Eapressway (SR 408} was consistently perceived as having significant peak-period congestion. EPassAll in this group had EPass and most had obtained it when i t was first introduced. All appreciated hat.jng and using though they cited a number of i ssues that have bothered them. Seven! did not like the plazas such as those on SR 408 in which cash lanes are pbeed on either side of the EPass lanes. In addition, they would like more standardization io lane placement and better signage indicating lane locations Several did not appreciate the switch from bumper-mounted to windshield tranSponders and some indicated that they would not pay $25 to buy a transponder as is now required. Some also said that their transponders were not always read propedy. All indicated that having EPass resulted in them using the tollroads more than if they did not have E Pass. ETC with Eapress Lanes-All like the express lane concept and felt that it would be "good advertising" for EPass. Some said that removing plaza delays would cause tbem to make more trips

PAGE 159

DRAFT Ropor1 Opon Road Tolling Foeu. Groupe Rea.ource Group, Inc. 28 September 2001 page& on toll roads than they do now. The only concern e x pressed was lhat the system would not give any feedback on whether the transponder was read. VTC ""th Express Lanes Seeral people exprC$scd concerns about the reliability of video tolling, saying: lhat the technology u.ul be too difficult and that others 'Will find ways to circumvent the S)'Stem. Assuming that the system proves reliable, some india ted that they might switch to i t to avoid having to deal with a transponder. Open Road Tolling Most in this group felt that open road tolling would work for them. They were concerned about whether the system wou l d be able to deal with L-uge numbers of violators and in general were concerned that removing the toll plazas would result in large increases in use of the roads. They generally like the idea of per-mile charging rather than the current system of plaza based charges ORLANDO CASH GROUP 10 Curren t TravelThe participants in this group were generally occasional users with some frequent toll road u..'\ers. Respondents were using the 417. 408 turnpike to avoid l-4 and SO. They weretaking toll r oads because lhey are much fascer and le ss stressful than the altemate routes. SunPass/E pass Respondents had almost no knowledge about EPass They didn't know its cost, how to gee one, how it worked, etc All had seen the lanes. but no one had any real undetstanding of how the system worked. After it was described, the fr-equenc toll road users said th-at they were a going ro loo k inco it". Some were concerned about responsibility for a defective unit They did not like "having to pay to pay" and instead felt a $25 deposit was reasonable. Occasional users saw no compelling reason to get EPass ETC with Express Lanes They thought this was fine for them. Some had concerns about how the mf6c at the plaza would merge in and out, and about v i ol> tors getting off without paying. Most felt express lanes would not make them any more interes[ed in obtaining Epass. The responde nts did noc feel that plaza delays were a big deal. They experienced them, but did not seem to mind them very much, especially because they felt they were getting a big time sa'-ings from the toll road anyway They felt they would only be saving "a few seconds" ""th express J.nes. Also felt that the bill should be free though an email/web b ill that is free is acceptable and that 50 cents to send a. bill is also okay. VTC with Express LanesThe availability of a video account option did not seem to change -anyone's mind. They would still pay cash unless they were frequent users, where they might swicch to EPass, but mosdy for convenience in toll paying and not for decreased plaza delay. Open Road ToilingMost did not like the idea of pa)>ing any sort of toll surcharge for open road tolling. Again, don't want to have to pay, in order to pay. TI>ey liked the idea of a per mile charge They complain ted about frequent and ''arbitrary" tolls very close cogether in some places, and very spread out and infrequent in other places. They don't mind a bill at the end of the month for open road tolling, but do not wont to be charged for not opening and paying for an account They do not

PAGE 160

DRAFT Roport-Open Rood Tolling Focus Gro-28 Stplember 2001 Resource S)'teml Group, Inc. page7 see road tolling as a major congestion improver, but do like the per mile tolls. If it remains the same price as now, but they pay an end of month bill, that's okay. Some concern was expressed about loss of toll collector's jobs. ORLANDO CASH GROUP 11 Current Travel-Most in this group were more occasional users of Orlando's toll roads. They used the roads when making trips to areas where toll-free roads are either not available or very inconvenient. Some used the roads selectively for work trips when congestion was heavy on 1 -4 or wheo they were in a burry. They noted that SR 408 is sometimes congested enough at the toll pb>safe traffic condition. On the other hand, other roods such as SR 417 and the Beeline a.re rarely congested and no one expressed such concerns for these roads. Some felt that tolls on SR 417 were too high and that levels for particular trips were inordinately high because of the toll pbza placement. EPass All were aware of EPass but most did not know the specifics of how/where to get an account and how much it cost. None kne\v chat toll discounts were av:ailable and, in any case, did not use the toll roads enough to qualifY at either the Sun Pass or EPass thresholds. When given the infonnation about transponder cosrs and pre-payment levels, almost all felt that d>e $25 purchase cost was Wl.tCasonable and fdt that a $25 deposit would be much more reasonable. When asked about the possibility o f charging for a transponder with a $2/month fee, they indi cated that this would be preferable to the $25 up front purchase, but that a deposit would still be the best alternative. Some also liked the idea of a lower pre4payment amount for infrequent users. Some suggested that since the EPass reduces toll collection costs, the transponder should be free or very low cost. One person suggested that a flat monthly rate for unlimited usage should be considered. ETC with Express Lanes -Most did not see a express lanes as providing them a big enough benefit to influence their EPass acquisition decision. However, one -or rwo participants indicated that it could influence them to acquire EPass if the acquisition were accomplished with a deposit rather than a transponder purchase. VTC with Express Lanes -Some indicated that VTC would be interested to them if the account set up were free or very low cost and if they could have a lower pre-payment level Open Road Tolling-The overall reaction to open road tolling was negative in this group. Most saw some degree of coercion in this system and felt that they, as corrunitted cash users, would be penalized unduly Phrases such as "big brother and "spooky" were used to describe the system. However, some saw the advantages of the system and indicated that i t would be more palatable if the tolls were discounted for those who used ETC or VTC as opposed to surcharged for cash customers. If furure toll increases were applied only to cash customers, most would likely obtain a VTC or ETC account, so lone as the front costs were low.

PAGE 161

DRAFT Roport-Open Road Groups Resource System Group, tnc. 28 September :2001 page a ORLANDO CASH GROUP 12 Cunent Travel-1bis group included a variety of respondents, some frCXjuent users, some more occasional (2 times/week or less). Several use SR 417 and SR 408 and one person uses SR 429. SunPassIn genera l there '1/U much better knowledge:: of SunPass/EPass i n this group than in other cash groups One person's spouse had it, but all had a better under.tanding of it compared to other groups After discussion, at least 2 or 3 p<:oplc (or more?) said that they were seriously considering obtaining ETC. Treating the transponder price as a dc:posit instead of a purchase was preferred by all. ETC with Express Lanes Everyo11eliked the idea of express lanes as there is no downside for them and they arc not forced into choosing ETC. The express lanes would encourage some to consider making the chaogr to ETC vrc with Express Lanes -There was not a strong reaction either way to video tolling in this group. One person was concerned about privacy issues in having license tags tracked on toll roads. Open Road Tolling -A no cash option was seen as acceptable-the reaction to this option was much more positive than in other groups. However. express lutes were still received more favorabl}' Discounted tolls for ETC/VTC users were fine with this group. Surchatges for cash customers were not received well.

PAGE 162

Appendix D -Open Road Tolling Legal Memoranda

PAGE 163

Greenberg Traurig Memorandum DATE: September 20, 2001 TO: Open Road Tolling Subcommittee FROM: Teresa J Moore RE: Open Road Tolling Access to Information/P rivacy Issues FACTS . In an open road tolling system there must be some sort of mecharusm that detects the presence of a vehicle and then assesses a charge to that vehicle for the use of the road. Assuming frequent users or state residents had some sort of device that made this possible, it is conceivable that other users (such as tounsts), will riot have that device and, therefore, will be able to drive on the tolled road without paying a toll. Since failure to pay a toll on a toll road is a vio lation of state law, there must be some way to identify the vehicles that are not assessed a toll, locate them, and notify them of their failure to pay the toll and the resulting penalty . Under SunPass, the license plates of vehicles that pass through a "SunPass Only" lane without paying tolls are photographed. Th e license number is then used to access the identity and location of the owner of the vehicle through the State of Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicle ("DHSMV") records. However, there are some concerns that under an open road tolling system this type of enforcement for failure to pay tolls will not be available if access to DHSMV records is limited by existing law. QUESTION In an open road tolling system, if a driver fails to pay appropriate tolls, what statutory remedies are available for enforcement of the applicable penalties? Are there certain conditions that must be met to charge a driver with a violation? Will the enforcing authority be able to access information needed to identify and locate violators? I

PAGE 164

ANSWER ReQlliremeot of payment of tolls: Per Fla. Stat. Anil. 316.1001 (1), a person must pay a toll when using a toll facility. Failure to pay a toll is a noncriminal moving II)Lffic infraction. Authority to enforce to!Vtoll enforcement officers: Per Fla. Stat. Ann. 316.100 I (2), any governmental entity, including expressway and transportation authorities, that owns or operates a toll facility may authorize a toll enforcement officer to issue a uniform traffic citation for a violation o f this section. Toll enforcement officers are those designated by a governlnental entity and whose sole authority is to enforce the payment of tolls. Per Fla. Stat Ann. 316.640 (l)(b)2 a & b, it is Up to the Department of Transportation ("FOOT') to set the training qualifications and standards for toll enforcement officers and these officers may be independent contractors or employees. The only statutory limitations .. placed on toll enforcement Officers provided they .meet all FOOT are that they are not permitted to carry weapons or firearms or make arrests. With regard to the circumstances under which a toll enforcement officer is permitted to issue a citation for fai l ure to pay a toll it appears that the only requirement is that a person failed to pay. Fla. Stat. 316.640 (5)(a) requires that traffic enforcement officers. may oDiy is5ue traffic citations when they have actually observed the commission of a traffic i.nfra:ction or actually observed an illegally parked vehicle However, traffic enforcement officers are defined differently than toll enforcement officers i n the statutes and no such "observation" limitation appears in relation to toll enforcement officers. Furthermore, the procedure outlined for the issuance of traffic citations in Fla. Stat Ann .14(2) indicates that it is not necessary for a toll enforcement officer to hand the citation to the violator and obtain the violator's signature On the contrary, Fla. Stat. Ann. 316. 1 001 (2)(b) allows the toll enforceD).ent officer to mail the citation by certified mail to the address of the registered owner of the vehicle involved in the violation. According to Fla. Stat Ann. 316.1001(2)(d), only the written report {If a toll enforcement officer or photographic evidence is required to show that a violation occurred. Photographic evidence raises a rebuttable presumption that the motor vehicle named in the report or shown in the. photograph violated the toll payment requirement. These statutes do not indicate any limitation on the type of toll system to which they apply, they merely apply to any failure to pay a required toll. Therefore, it does not appear under the current statutory framework that a toll enforcement officer must be present at the site where tolls are charged in order to observe firsthand any vehicles that 2

PAGE 165

. pass without paying the required tolls. Thus, photo enforcement of toll violations s hould be an acceptable means of enforcement for open road tolling systems Accessing infonnation to identify toll violators : Once a photograph has been iaken of the li c ense plate of a vehicle that has pas sed without paying a toll, the tolling authority needs to detemiine the identity of the party to whom the citati o n should be issued. According to Fla. Stat. Ann. .1001(2)(c), the owner of the motor vehicle involved in the tol.l violation is the party responsible for the penalty for failure to pay a toll. Therefore, the owner of the vehicle is the person to whom the c i tation is to be issued. The burden is then on the owner to prove that he was not the driver of the vehicle at the time the toll violation occurred. Under the current SW1Pass system, vehicle registration records have been used to identify and locate vehicle owners This is made possible under Fla. Stat. Ann. 119.01(1) which indicates that it is F l orida's policy that al l public records shall be open for personal inspection by any person Fla. Stat. Ann. ll9.011(1) defines p u blic records as a ll documents "made or received . in connection with the transaction of official business by any agency." This inc l udes records. Under Fla. Stat. Aim. 320.02 everyone who owns or is in charge of a motor vehicle operated on Flo rida roads shall reg i ster their vehicre with the DHSMV. This is done by completing an application which include s the owner's penilanent stre e t address and personal (or business) identification information such as driver's licens e number. The registration is then issued Fla. Stat. 320.05(2) requires the DHSMV to release this information as it appears in their records as long as the party requesting the information furnishe s proof o f identification. Per subsection (3)( d) of this statute, this information shall be furnished without charge to any governmental entity Once the identity and address of the owner of the vehicle has been determined from vehicle registration records furtlier information can be obtained from the Division of Driver Licenses. Per Fla Stat. Ann. .20(l),the DHSMV is required to maintain a record of e very application for license it receives. Per Fla. Stat Ann .08(2)(a) & (b), each application shal l include, among other things, the name address, and social security of the applicant. Fla. Stat. Ann. .20 (8) & (10) authorizes the Division of Driver Licenses to search, copy, and release the Division's records to a requesting party. There is no charge for furnishing any of this information when it is requested by any law enforcement agency (Fla. Stat. Ann. (ii)(b)). It sijould also b:e noted that the Federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act, encoded in 18 U.S C A. 2721 does not limit the DHSMV's ability to release the information in its records when released to toll enforcement authorities. This Act prohibits the release of personal information in certain situations but exempts release of such information when used by government entities in carrying out their functions or for use in connection with the operation of private toll facilities. 3

PAGE 166

Limitations on jnfonnation available: Although access to public records, including the records of the DHSMV Division of Driver Licenses and Division of Motor Vehicle Licenses is required by statute, there are certain exceptions to the types of records available. One such exception mcludes registrations and license plates issued under fiCtitious names. Fla. Stat. Ann. .025(1) requires the DHSMV to issue confidential r egistrations and license plates. under fictitious names to vehicles owned or operated by law enforcement agencies, the Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and any public defender's office If a license plate and registration is issued pursuant to this section it may be difficult to identifY the party to whom a citation for failure to pay a toll should be issued. It may be possible to send the violation to the fictitious party, whom it is likely that toll enforcement officers wilt be unaware is a fictitious party, assuming that the actual party is made aware that a citation has been issued to its fictitious identity. Another limitation on infonnatio n available to i dentity toll violators of open road tolls arises under the exceptions to access to public records found io Fla. Stat. ll9. 07(3)(i) . This s e ction restricts access to infonnation including home address, telephone number, social security number, and photographs with regard to: active or fanner law enforcement personnel (including probation officers and correctional offjcers), -Child and Family Services iovestigators, -Department of Health investigators, --Department of Revenue or local government persons who collect revenue or enforce child support, --firefighters, judges and justices, current or fanner state attorneys, -current and former human resource, labor relations, or employee relations directors, assistant directors, managers or assistant managers of any local government agency or water management district, --(:urrent and fanner code enforcement officers, and -the spouses and children of any of these. Under Fla. Stat. Ann. 119 07(3l(s)l, access to infonnation is also restricted when the person whose infonnation is sought is a victim of sexual battery, aggravated child abuse, aggravated stalking harassment, aggravated battery, or domestic violence. . However, these limiting restrictions are thernselves lirnited in that the confidentiality of personal infonnation of any of those named above is only maiotained, per Fla. Stat. Ann. ll9. 07(3)(i)4, if that person submits a written request for confidentiality to the custodial. agency In effect the exempted persons would have to write letters to the DHSMV asking that their identifying infonnation be kept confidential. However, although the confidentiality of these records requires a written request, with regard to eligible persons who have made such a request there is no statutory provision in relation to this subsection that allows the release of this information under any 4

PAGE 167

circumstance, such as to identify a toll violator. Therefore, in order to access this infonnation in the future it may be necessary to request the legislature to include wording similar to that which is found under 119.07 (3)(bb) which allows the release of information under circumstances as discussed below. . :In addition, under ll9.07(3)(bb), anyone can submit a form to the DHSMV requesting that their personal information, such as address, social security number, et cetera, be kept confidential. However, per 119.07(3)(bb)(2), information to be kept confidential as allowed by this particular subsection can be released for use by any government agency orprivate person or entity acting on behalf of a government agency, for use in carrying out that agency's functions and, per ll9. 07(3)(bb)(ll), for use in connection with the operation of private toll transportation facilities. Therefore, individuals not otherwise exempted (such as law enforcement, firefighters, et cetera as listed above) from having their personal information made available when it is part of a public record, but who specifically request that their information be kept confidential, cannot keep i t confidential from toll enforcement officers who are seeking such information in order to enable them to issue a citation fora toll violation. Situations wbere the registered oWner is not usually the driver: -. . When accessing DHSMV records as described above for identifying the owner of a vehicle in violation of the toll payment requirement, it is likely that many of the owners of vehicles will be either businesses that own many vehiclesthat -are driven by their employees, agencies who rent or lease vehicles-for short terms, or lessors who hold title to a vehicle that is being lease d on a long term basis by an individual lessee. . Wiih regard to vehicles owned by a business and driven by employees who are not the registered owner of the vehicle, the statutes provide a method for the registered owner of the vehicle to have the appropriate person/the actual violator charged for the violation. Fla. Stat. Ann. 316.1001 (2)(c) r equires that the notice of violation be sent to the registered owner, but then the registered owner may, within 14 days of notification of the violation, submit an affidavit setting forth the name,. address, and, if known, the driver license number of the person who had care, custody or control of the vehicle at the time of the violation. It is then up to the toll enforcing authority to issue a citation to the proper person. With regard to vehicles that are rented or leased for short terms (less than one year), the current statutory language gives the registered owner, which would be the rental or leasing agency, the same option provided to individual or business owner$ in Fla. Stat. Ann. 316_.1001 (2)(c) . This would permit the rental or leasing agency to search its records to determine who was in possession of the vehicle at the time of the violation and then submit an affidavit identifying that person. The problem with this scenario is that it presents rental and leasing agencies with the large burden of researching to find the actual violator and sending an affidavit in a relatively short time period, and failure to do so would expose them to liability for toll 5

PAGE 168

violations. This problem received some attention in 2001 Senate Bill 1830 in relation to photo enforcement of red-light violations Although the Biil failed, there is language in Section 3(1)(b) of the Bill that proposes that the tell)l "owner" not include a motor vehicle rental company when the vehicle is rented out or a vehicle leasing company when the vehicle is leased for less than a year. However, while this language appears to remove liabilitY from rental and leasing agencies as owners of the vehicles, there is no provision in the Bill indicating how the renter or lessee is to be identified. Therefore, in an open road tolling situation it may be beneficial to have some sort of legislation that has similar language excepting rental and leasing companies from the definition of owner, but it would also be necessary to have statutory language providing a means for identification of the parties who have rented or leased the vehicles. For example, it may be nec e ssary to have a statutory provision requiring rental and leasing agencies to release to the enforcing authority information regarding the name, address, and driver license number of the party who had custody of the vehicle at the time of the violation. In essence, when the enforcing authority identifies that the owner of a vehicle in violation is a rental COJ11pany, the enforcing authority would merely contact the , renta l company to get informatjon, rather than .issuing the renial company a citation. The enforcing authority could then use that information to issue the citation to the actual driver . With regard to long term leases, although the title is in the name of the lessor, the vehicle is typically registered in the name of the lessee. Therefore, an attempt to identify the party responsible for a toll violation will most likely produce the correct resu)t if vehicle registration and driver license records are used to identify the violator. Access to infoanation on yehjcles not re&istered in Florida: THE NONRESIDENT VIOLATOR COMPACf: In addition to the limitations on information available to identify drivers of vehicles registered in the state of Florida, . there may be some difficulty in accessing information needed to identify drivers of vehicles registered in other states who fail to pay tolls in an open road tolling situation. Under the Nonresident Violator Compact encoded in Fla. Stat. Ann. 322.50 (2)(c) (the "Compact"), states who are parties to the Compact each agree to extend cooperation "to its fi.illest extent" to assist anothe.r party to the Compact in their efforts .to obtain compliance with the te.rms of a traffic citation issued in one state to a resident of another state. Although this is pretty broad language, it is unclear whether this Compact will enable toll enforcement authorities to access information from other states to enable them to identify drivers and whether citations issued by mail are covered. 6 .

PAGE 169

The Compact defines "citations" as a ticket or other document isSued by a police officer for a traffic violation. While a toll enforcement officer is generally not necessarily a police officer, the Compact defines "police officer" as any individual authorized by the state to issue a citation for a traffic violation, thus a toll enforcement officer would be considered a police officer for the purposes of the Compact. Article VIII of the Compact also indicates that the Compact does not apply to parking or standing violations. Since toll violations are considered moving violations (per Fla. Stat. Ann. 338.155), they should be covered by the Compact. Although toll violations themselves and citations issued by toll enforcement officers should be covered by the Compact, the Compact only discusses citations issued in a situation where they are handed directly to !Pe motorist by an officer at the time of the violation. Article III of the Compact describes the procedure for the issuing jurisdiction and specifically states thai the officer shall issue the citation to the motorist. The Compact really iakes effect when the motorist fails to comply with the citation. The issuing entity is required to notify the state where the motorist is licensed that the motorist failed to comply with. ilie citation. At this point, under Article IV of the Compact, the home state of the lllOtorist notifies the motorist of the failure to comply. The home state, as agreed in the Compact, is then to begin suspension proceedings against the motorist's driver's license until the motorist complies. . ' Generally speaking, the Compact does not appear to provide assistance with locating motorists residing in other states until the motorist has failed to comply with a citation. And even then the point of locating the motorist is so that the resident staie can begin suspension proceedings of that motorist's license. This doe5 not make it possible for a toll enforcement authority to locate a motorist in order to issue a citation in the ftrSt place. Since the intent of the Compact is to have part icipating states provide assistance "to the fullest extent" in enforcing traffic violations, it may be possible to have the Compact amended or at least interpreted to include the type of exchange of information needed for open road tolling purposes. However, since the Compact affects many states, it may be difficult to amend or establish a favorable interpretation encompassing the type of assistance needed in this situation. TilE DRIVER LICENSE COMPACT: Another agreement that may be of some assistance in obtaining information regarding out of state motorists is contained in the Driver Licens e Compact descnl>ed in F la. Stat. Ann. .44 (the "DL Compact"). The purpose of the DL Compact is to "promote compliance with the laws, ordinances, and administrative rules and regulations relating to the operation of motor vehicles by their operators in each of the jurisdictions where such operators drive motor vehicles." While this would seem to encompass providing information to allow a toll enforcement officer to enforce a statutorily prescribed toll, the 7

PAGE 170

DL Compact primarily discusses providing information to enable states to assess points on driver licenses issued in their state for violations incurred in other states. Other than these two compacts; there do not appear to be any interstate agreements regarding the exchange of information. This will make it difficult to properly assess tolls or toll violation on motorists whose vehicles are registered in another state. Additional limitations on assessment of tolls: In addition to complications with identifying toll violators another issue that will arise in an open road tolling system is that under Fla. Stat: Ann. .155, certain lJersons and entities are exempt from payment of tolls. Therefore, there must be some mechanism that recognizes exempt parties and does not assess tolls on their vehicles. Exempt parties include toll project employees when on official state business, military personnel when on official busines s and military vehicles at any time persons exempt fro"m payment by the authorizing resolution for bonds issued to finance the tOll facility, persons exempt on a temporary basis where use of a toll facility is required as a detour route, law enforcement officers operating marked vehicles when on official business, fire and rescue vehicles when on official business, and handicapped persons meeting certain requirements. A further COIDplication arising !f9m this particular statute is that the statute req,uires FOOT to provide envelopes for and aecept voluntary payments of tolls by any of the parties exempted above. With no toll booth, there will be no way to receive voluntary toll unless these paY.men,ts can be inail<;d to the tolling autllority rather than handed to it a t the time of" use. This would, of course, not apply to expressway authorities : Furthermore, there are certain sit,uations applicable to FOOT where the charge of a toll is not as straightforward as a5sessing a toll upon when a vehicle passes a certain point For example, under 14 Fla Admin. Code Aiin. .0011 (3)(c), if a vehicle becomes disabled while on the toll road, neither the disabled vehicle nor the towing vehicle shall be charged a toll if they need to exit at the same pomt where they entered the toll road. Furthermore, ae<;ording to this section, there are times when a U tuin is permitted and tolls then apply. SUMMARY Toll enforcement officers can issue citations by mail. whether or not they actually observed the toll violation, to any motorist who has not paid a toll, provided that motorist is not exempt from payment of tolls. Toll violators on open toll roads can be identified by taking a photograph of the license plate of the motor vehicle as it passes the toll point. DHSMV records can then be a.ccessed to determine the identity of the toll violator in order to issue the toll. 8

PAGE 171

However, Florida Statutes make several exceptions for the types of people about whom personal informati on in public records is accessible. In addition, access to infonnation regarding out of state residents is not easily accessible, making it difficult to issue citations to no.n-residents Interstate compacts designed to help with the enforcement of traffic laws against non-resident violators do not appear to be helpful. Therefore, some statutory changes will likely need to be made before all persons traveling on open toll roads can be tolled effectively. \\wpb-srv(l I\MOOR.E'l\)S3417v01 \7KP$0 1 t.OOC\9/19/0 I \2124$.010000 . . . 9

PAGE 172

TO: FROM: DATE: Memorandum Legal Subcommiuee on Open Road Tolling Alberto S. Bustamante, ill, Esq. November 1, 200 1 RE: Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority/Open Road Tolling Impairment of Contract/Extension of Credit FACTS A statewide legal sub-committee ("Committee") is currently investigating the idea of electronic/ video toll collection on t he state highway system within Florida. This proposed program contemplates video tolling which includes the abandonment of toll booths and the use of transponders, currently trade-named "E-Pass" or "Sun Pass." The existing toll collection methodology allows travelers to prepay tolls which is then subtracted from the prepaid account. The proposed system would not utilize prepaid transponders. The video tolling concept entails taking a video photo of each vehicle license plate and thereafter submitting a bill for the toll charges incurred. With respect to OOCEA, the proposed system would require processing over 600,000 pictures per day, matching the identified license tags to a national database and the subsequent billing and collection for each transaction within the system. This proposal raises many questions which this Committee is analyzing. The following memorandum addresses four legal issues QUESTION PRESENTED assUE #ll WTI.L THE PROPOSED AUTOMATED VISUAL TOLL COLLECTIONS SYSTEM IMPAIR CONTRACTUALOBUGATIONS OF THE RESPECTIVE fLORIDA EXPRESSWAY TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES ("AGENCIES")?' Having not reviewed the contractual obligation of Agencies other than the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System ("OOCEA"), I assume the Agencies have comparable obligations pursuant 10 their respective bond covenants. Having identified no other contractual arrangements which would be affected by a modification in the toll eollection methodology, there is no impainnent except as referenced below. OR426:&Sl;7

PAGE 173

SHORT ANSWER Yes. The proposed all electronic, non-prepaid visual collection system probably violates representations of the Agencies to its bondholders as specifically referenced in the "Official Statement", as well as numerous provisions of the Junior and Senior Bond Resolutions. DISCUSSION The "Official Statement" which i s a part of the OOCEA's Junior Lien Revenue Bonds Series of 1998, assumes cash payment of tolls, including the concept of prepaid accounts for toll collection purposes in form of theE-Pass, (i.e. the "E-Pass system allows motorists with prepai.d accounts to travel non-stop through the toll facilities.") B-21 of the Official Statement) Revenues derived f rom the toll collection are pledged to the bondholders. The OOCEA continually discloses its revenue figures to the bondholders, both on an annual basis (in the form of submi ssion of financial statements for the applicable year to the bondholders), and by making availab l e a website which displays toll revenues on a monthly basis Tolls collected electronically are charged against the individual traveler's prepaid account or credit card (i.e., every time the account balance in the driver's account drops to $10, the account is automatically replenished by charging the motorist's credit card to reach a $50 prepaid balance in the account). The t oll revenues are reflected in the Authority's financials for each month. The cash and electronic prepaid system has also now been implemented throughout the state highway system by the Agencies. It ensures a reliable toll collection methodology and accommodates the demands of increasing traffic impacts which bas led to a constant increase of revenue of which the prepaid E-Pass and Sun Pass are highly significant factors. Based upon the established system, revenues are predicted to substant iall y incresse at the various locations/plazas. The reliability of this collection method is one of the essential factors in forecasting future gross revenues. Contrary to the prepaid and established methodology described above, the concept of video tolling without prepaid transponders may adversely affect the efficiency and reliability of revenue collection Technically, the system involves taking a photograph of a vehicle license plate (as the car passes an automated facility), identifying vehicle ownership via tag recognition, and charging the motorists by sending a statement to the license plate registration address after the actual transactions have taken p lace The system is, therefore, dependent on the identification accuracy and accessibility of the Department of Motor Vehicle databases in jurisdictions throughout the country. While revenues may increase due to incressed speed and capacity of the system, the capture ratio is likely to degrade. The possible inability to locate the individual driver who utilized the toll roads or obtain the appropriate jurisdiction for enforcement of such collection upon individuals residing outside the state is a substantial risk. The possible inability to locate the individual driver (who utilized the toll roads) or obtain the appropriate jurisdiction for enforcement (e.g., individuals residing out of state) yields an uncertain method of collection. The uncertainty of this OR42685l:7 2

PAGE 174

"after-the-fact" collection method is likely to result in a less certain revenue source, adversely effect the ratio of collection and loss. The bonds issued by the OOCEA currently have a AAA rating. Any uncertainty regarding the ability to uniformly and consistently collect tolls could result in down-grading, suspension or withdrawal of ratings. Such an event would constitute a breach by the Agency of its contractual obligations to bondholders. Several provisions of the Junior and Senior Bond Resolut ions of the OOCEA ("Bond Resolutions") are likely to be violated, as well. Fo r example in 3.27 of the Bond Resolutions (Enforcement of Right to Receive Gross Revenues, System Payments, Series Payments and Supplemental Payments), the OOCEA, "covenants to diligently enforce its right to receive the Gross Revenues, System Payments, Series Payments, and Supplemental Payments ... (and) will not take any action which will impair or adversely affect its right to receive Gross Revenues, System Payments, Series Payments and Supplemental Payments, or impair or adversely affect in any manner the pledge thereof as provided or contemplated herein ... [and ) shall take all actions required for it to qualify to receive the Gross Revenues System Payments, Series Payments and Supplemental Payments in accordance with the governing instrument providing for such payments." ( 3 .27, Bond Resolutions.) Because of the greater likelihood of increased revenue loss with an all electronic/visual and non-prepaid system, the Agencies may be deemed to have breached their covenant to diligently enforce their right to receive revenues. By electing to use the proposed methodologies, the authorities impair the ability to receive the gross revenue which might otherwise be realized. The proposed system of collecting tolls after the fact could have an adverse effect on toll collection, and could significantly impair the Agencies' right to receive a maximum proponion of the toll revenues. The proposed methodology is also inconsistent with 3.05(D) of the OOCEA Bond Resolutions which provides "tolls will be uniform in all application to all traffic .... Collection against local residents who could be located more easily, and against whom collection could be enforced more successfully, would be disproportionate to users outside the local jurisdiction or the state. This would not allow for a uniform collection methodology for all traffic and thereby violate 3.05(D) of the Bond Resolutions. The proposed system may also violate 3.06 of the OOCEA Bond Resolutions wherein the Agency covenants it, "will not allow any free use of the toll facilities of the Expressway System except to officials or employees of the Authority and the Department [of Transportation] engaged in official business of the Authority and the Department [of Trans portation] or law enforcement officers or emergency vehicles while in the discharge of their official duties, or except as required by existing law." Inability to collect the toll revenues from vehicles registered outside the state, effectively allows free passage of vehicles. The proposed system likely violates 3.18 of the Bond Resolutions which provide the Authority, "will operate or cause the system to be operated properly and, in a sound and economic 3

PAGE 175

manner .... Because of the: ( 1) uncertainty of a visual after -the-f act toll collection system; ( ii ) and obvious problems associated with locating and collecting the revenue from foreign and out-of state individuals (in addition to excessive costs necessary for processing of transactions, postage, and tracing required for distribution of bills and other documents necessary to effectuate collection),the Agencies are unlikely to be able to operate their system s in a sound or economic manner. Therefore a proposed all-electronic, video tolling without prepaid accounts or cash alternatives, will result in a breach by the Agencies of their contractual obligations. However, use of transponder-related express lanes ("Open Road Tolling") with prepaid electronic collection methodology can be im p lemented and is necessary Open Road Tolling can be effecruatedefficiently and without negative impac t to the economic soundness of the Agencies so long as it also includes a cash alternative at toll collection facilit ies. The ever inc reasing demands on the expressway systems will reqwre cash collection alternatives be housed to the side and at a safe distance from the Open Road Tolling or main traffic Janes, such as that implemented by the OOCEA at the Forest lake P laza on S.R. 429 in Central Florida. QUESTION PRESENIED OSSUE #2) DOES THE PROPOSED CONCEPT OF ALL ELECfRONIC VIDEO TOLL COUECfiON SYSTEM, WIDCHENT AILS AFTER THEFACTCOLLECTION,CONSTITUTE THE PLEDGING OF CREDIT IN VIOLATION OF 10, ARTICLE VII OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION AND CHAPTER 348 FLA STATIITES? SHORT ANSWER Yes. The concept of all electronic video toll collection with no prepaid accounts and with no cash/currency alternative, constirutes an extension of credit by the Authority to individuals traveling on toll roads and, therefore, violates 10, Article VII of the Fla. Constitution and Chapter 348 Fla. Statutes DISCUSSION The Agencies created by Chapter 348, Fla. Statutes generally have the power to "fix, alter, charge, establish and collect rates, fees, rentals and other charges for the services and facilit ies." However, both 10, Article VII of the Fla. Constitution and Chapter 348, Fla. Statutes prohibit the pledging o f credit. 10 Art. VII, Fla. Constitution prov ides in part: OR426&S2:7 Pledging credit. Neither the state nor any ... special dis1ric1, or agency of any of them, shall ... give, lend or use its ... credit to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person ... 4

PAGE 176

Chapter 348, Fla. Statutes, provides: The authority shall have no power at any time or in any manner to pledge the credit . of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof, . Video tolling and post use collection is the equivalent of the Agency's lending money to individual drivers for passage on the toll roads. Even though there is no case law directly addressing the pledging of credit by a Chapter 348 agency or the pledging of credit in violation of Chapter 348, Fla. Statutes, there are Florida cases and Florida Attorney General Opinions which interpret the pledging of credit in Florida. In Neill v. Bums 198 So. 2d I (Fla. 1967), the Florida Supreme Court considered whether bonds (to be issued by the State for the creation of headquarters for a nonprofit corporation served a paramount public purpose). The conc lusion was determinative of the issue of whether the bonds would constitute a violat ion of 10, Art. Vll, Fla Constitution. The Court explained pledging of credit was only permissible where there was some "clearly identifi ed and concrete public purpose as the primary objective and a reasonable expectation that such purpose [would] be substantially and effectively accomplished." IQ. at 4. The Supreme Court also explained the meaning of "pledging of credit" as set forth in 10, Art. vn. Fla. Constitution by stating it entailed the disbursing, lending or pledging of public fund to a non-governmental enti ty. IQ. at 4. As part of an after-the-fact collection system, the Agencies would utilize assets and credit for construction, maintenance and operation of the expressway system and provide access in advance of payment thereby lending money to the users. Therefore, according to the Florida Supreme Court the proposed concept would constitute lending public funds t o a non-governmental entity, i.e., to private individuals, an activity prohibited by 10. Art. vn, Fla Constitution. The lending of credit may be pennitted only if there is a paramount public purpose affiliated with the pledging of such credit. See State v. JEA, 789 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2001). The paramount public purpose can be argued to be the efficient movement of vehicular traffic, and increasing the safety and capacity of expressway systems. However,this efficiency can and has been achieved by expressway authorities without the need to pledge or extend credit to any person, with the E-Pass/SunPass programs and operation of the Open Road Tolling facilities, which provide a cash payment alternative offthe main traveling lanes such as S.R. 429 in Central Florida. The Florida Supreme Court cases of Cf. Qrange County Dev Autb v. State, 427 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1983), O'Neill v. Bums, 198 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1967) andFioridaAttorneyGeneral Opinion 79-84 discuss the elements of a valid pub lic, as opposed to a private, purpose. In Cf. Orange County Indep. Dev Auth. v. State, the Florida Supreme Court found a paramount private purpose in the county's issuance of bonds to purchase and construct a television station for a private corporation. The corporation would enjoy substantial benefits over the life of the bonds with only incidental benefits to the pablic, such as improved local news coverage (which OR4268S2:7 5

PAGE 177

might produce a more informed public in the Central Florida area and a limited increase in employment which could le ad to limited economic prosperity). i.\1. at 179 Also, in Nejll v. Burn s, 198 So. 2d I (Fla 1 967) the Florida Supreme Court decided bonds issued by the State for the creation of headquancrs for a nonprofit corporation did .!!.Ql serve a paramount public purpose as the purported benefits to be derived by the pub lic from the expenditure i.e .. promotion of tourism, were inciden t al. l!l. at 4. Co nsistent with the in Orange County Indep Dev. Auth and Neill v Burns, the extension of credit by the proposed non-prepaid/collection concept constitutes no sp ecific. paramount benefit to the public However, there would be a predominant private benefit to the individuals using the expressway systems, to-wit: the elimination of pre-pay requirements or the need to stop for cash payment. In Op. Atty Gen. 79-84 the Florida Attorney General el\amined the question of whether a loan of County funds to a medical student for the purpose of inducing the student to practice medicine in the County, afl e r receiving his medical degree, constituted the pledging of credit in violation of 1 0, Art VD, Fla. Constitut ion The Attorney General opi ned the loan to the student served a private and not a public purpose and the expenditure primarily benefitted the student. There was no clearly identified and concrete pub li c purpose as the primary objective, nor the expectation such purpose would be substantially and effectively accomplished. The issue of non-prepaid video toll co llection is analogous to the findings of the above-referenced cases. The Agencies would construct, maintain and operate the expressway systems and allow individual passage/use on credit. With the increased degree of loss, when compared to the current prepaid and cash co llec tion system, the proposed system would only serve the private interest of the persons using the expressways Lending of public funds by the Agencies and implementation of a non -prepai d video toll collection system violates 10, Art. VD of the Florida Constirution and Chapter 348 Fla Statutes. QUESTION PRESEN'IED GSSUE #3) WOULD FAILURE TO PAY A "TOLL BilL" BE CONSIDERED A TRAFFIC VIOLATIO N PUNISHABLE UNDER CHAPTER 318, FLORIDA STATJ.JTES? SHORT ANSWER Yes. The current statutory language utilizes general terms such that failure to pay a "prescribed toll" is a traffic violation, punishable under Chapter 318. Because the issuance of a toll bill does not eliminate the toll itself but onl y alters the manner and time in which it must be paid. the current language is broad enough to cover such a violation. OR42:6352;7 6

PAGE 178

DISCUSSION The Florida Statutes contain a general classification of non-payment of tolls as a traffic violation. 316.1001, Fla. Statutes, provides in pertinent part: (I) A person may not use any toll facility without payment of tolls ... Failure to pay a prescribed toll is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a moving violation under Chapter 318. In regard to the provision of penalties for such toll violations, 318.18(7) states that the penalty shall be one hundred dollars for a violation of 316.1001. However a person may elect to pay $30 to the clerk of the court, in which case adjudication is withheld, and no points are assessed under 322.27 ... The language defining the violation for non-payment of tolls is currently termed in such a broad manner that it is likely that non-payment of a toll bill would be included in this definition. The system of billing users of the toll roads instead of requ iring them to pay at the time of use either through cash or transponder does not eliminate the toll itself, but only delays the time at which the toll is due and the manner in which it is paid. Because the current statutory languag e applies broadly to the failure to pay a "prescribed toll" and does not make it dependent on the time such toll is due and owing, it appears that failure to pay a toll bill would be included within this language, and hence considered a traffic violation within the statute. OUESTIQN PRESENTED assUE #4l WOULD ADDmONAL LEGISLATION BE NECESSARY AND/OR DESIRABLE TO MAKE FAU..URE TO PAY A "TOLL BILL" A TRAFFIC VIOLATION? SHORT ANSWER Additional legislation would not be necessary to make failure to pay a toll bill a traffic violation per se. However, addition legislation is likely to be necessary to address the change in method for assessing the tolls, as well as procedural aspects of payment of the bills and disputes arising out of the bills themselves. DISCUSSION Whether additional legislation will be necessary and/or desirable is unclear. At this time there is no indication of whe ther language will be added to Chapter 316 (specifically addressing the all electronic tolling system), e.g. giving authority for the Agencies to collect the vehicle information and is sue the toll bills to vehicle owners. It appears the current language is broad enough to include failure to pay a toll bill as a traffic violation. Howeve r, the bulk of 316. 1001 (and the OR4248$2;7 7

PAGE 179

corresponding p enalties provisions in 318.18, Fl a Statutes), refer to "citations" issued as a result of failure to pay a toll, specifically referring to drivers who run through the toll lanes without paying at a toll booth or with a transponder. With the all electronic video tolling system without prepayment, such citations will no longer be necessary, as the actual violation will not arise until the recipient of the bill fails to pay the toll within an allotted time. Additionally, with the issuance of toll bills instead of citations, it may be necessary to include specific language addressing the procedures relating to receipt o f the bills, time for payment, and avenues available for challenging the amount of the t oll or receipt of the bill in general. If authority were added to 316.1001 to allow for issuance of the toll bills, it would be appropriate to also amend 318 18 to mirror such language, and provide the appropriate procedural requirements. As a side note on this issue, Toronto, Canada has recently opened a fully automated toll road They have eliminated the toll booths, but have retained the transponder system for frequent users. Additionally they have installed a system capable of collecting information from vehicles not using the transponders and sending a bill to the registered owner ofthe vehicle forthe use o f the toll roads, as contemplated in Florida. I pulled the statute relating to this tollway, which includes sections discussing payment of the toll bills and penalties for failure to do so. Under the Statutes of Ontario, failure to pay a toll bill is not a traffic violation as would be speeding or running a traffic light. The statute does provide extensive notice periods for payment of the bills as well as avenues for disputes over the bills themselves, and states that drivers who fail to pay such toll bills may be prevented from registering their ve!Ucles in the future. OR4268$2;7 8

PAGE 180

AKERMAN SENTERFITT ATTOitNEVS A T LAW CITRUS CENll:R l1 S SOUTH ORANGE AVENUE PoST OFfiCE Box HI 0SU .. AN00, FLOJU:OA. 3'l80'l 0'211 PHONE (401} SH-7860 fAX (407) 8<36610 http://www. a.ktnnan .com October 23,2001 Mr Stephen L. Reich, Program Director Transportation Management, Finance & Administration Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT 100 Tampa, Florida 33620-5375 Re: 0.-lando-Orange County Expressway Authority Open Road Tolling Project Legal Subcommittee Dear Steve: This letter is a follow-up to a telephone conversation which I had \\ith Vance Kidder on October 9 2001, relating to various issues addressed by the Open Road Tolling L egal Subcommittee. I n that conversation, we discussed the positions of the respective representatives of the subcommittee on the issues be ing analy ze d by the subcommittee We focused on the asswnptions made by me mth regard to the issue of impairment of contractual obligations and the pledging of credit. Mr. Kidder expressed a concern that the basic assumption made by our legal team in analyzing these questions may have resulted in our reaching a conclusion which was d iffer ent from that of the majority of the other representatives on the committee. I provide the following swnmary so as to document our position in that regard. Impairment of Contract. If, in fact, non-prepaid visual collection system mthout cash altema:tives is implemented it i s likely to violate the representations of the OOCEA and perhaps the other agencies to the bond holders. The principal reason being that the reliability of a non prepaid visual collection system is questionable at this time and likely to result in an uncertain method of collection and, therefore, a Jess certain revenue source which adversely affects the ratio of collection to los s Currently the OOCEA enjoys a stable 98% collection percentage mthin its system. Based on all estimates and analysis of the visual electronic collection technology, the capture/loss ratio currently e njoye d by the OOCEA mil be substantially impaired by the implementation of a strictly electronic toll collection system. If, howe ver, the integrity of the automated visual collection system was in fac t, equal to or more precise than the current system used by OOCEA, which includes Open Road Tolling mth pre-paid transponders aJ)d cash {OR440040;l} AKERMAN, SENTERFITT & EiDSON, P.A. f'OKT LAU0R.OA.L JACKSONVlu.E MI.\MI TAU.AHASSU TAMPA WEST PAl.M BEAOi

PAGE 181

Mr. Stephen L. Reich October 23, 2001 Page2 alternative lanes, obviously there would be no question that the Authority would not compromise its source of revenue and would not, therefore, be in violation of the respective covenants. At this time, however, the OOCEA and Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, as its general counsel, is not prepared to make such an assumption. Extension of Credit. As you may be aware, I was not charged with the responsibility of analyzing whether al l electronic video toll collection, which entails after-the-fact collection constitutes the pledging of credit in violation of I 0 Article 7 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 348, Florida Statutes. However, the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority requested that we specifically review !his issue and make an assessment thereof. Our opinion in that regard remains that, in fact, all electronic video tolling collection with no pre-paid accounts and with no cash alternatives does constitute an extension of credit by the Authority to individuals traveling on toll roads. The agency utilizes assets and credit of the state for construction, maintenance and operation of expressway systems and, therefore, allowing passage or use on a system that strictly relies on video tolling and a promise by the consumer to pay at some future date, does in effect constitute the pledging of credit in that it compromises the revenue source which actually places the assets of the agency in jeopardy by default under its bonds. Again, !his position has been reached based on the same assumption that the contemplated method of collection is so uncertain that it will result in a substantial reduction of revenue by compromising the collection to loss ratio. In fact certain consumer/vehicle transactions wil l be uncollectable by virtue of jurisdiction Additionally we believe that the agencies are precluded from arguing that there is a paramount public purpose for such extension of credit because there is, in fact, a more secure and equally efficient method of collection which includes a combination of open road tolling with cash alternatives, as currently implemented by OOCEA on Highway 429. I trust that the information provided herein will be helpful in clarifying our firm's position regarding these issues. I also request that you memorialize this by caveat or as a dissenting comment, in the final report. We are confident that the representatives of the Open Road Tolling Committee will make the appropriate determination in its final recommendation. We and the OOCEA will continue to support implementation of the most advanced technologies, while preserving the integrity of its revenue source. I look forward to working with you and the other members of the committee and to the extent you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. S incerely, III ASB:ds {OR440640;11