Compilation of Public Opinion Data on Tolls and Road Pricing (2008)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

50 1. DeCorla-Souza, P., “Value Pricing Projects Around the United States,” Presented at 8th TRB Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods, Corpus Christ, Tex., Apr. 22–26, 2001. 2. Polsby, N. and A. Wildavsky, Presidential Elections, 7th ed., The Free Press, New York, N.Y., 1988. 3. Key, V.O., Public Opinion and American Democracy, Knopf, New York, N.Y., 1961. 4. “Founding Fathers Home Page,” Documents, Federalist Papers [Online]. Available: www.foundingfathers.info/ federalistpapers/ [accessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 5. Gallup, G. and S. Rae, The Pulse of Democracy: The Public Opinion Poll and How It Works, Simon and Schuster, New York, N.Y., 1940. 6. Harsman, B., “Urban Road Pricing Acceptance,” Presented at IMPRINT-EUROPE seminar, Brussels, Belgium, 2001. 7. Zmud, J., “Data Requirements to Support Road Pric- ing Analysis,” Proceedings of the Expert Forum on Road Pricing and Travel Demand Modeling, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2005. 8. Durrenberger, J.A., Turnpikes: A Study of the Toll Road Movement in the Middle Atlantic States and Maryland, Southern Stationery and Printing, Valdosta, Ga., 1981. 9. “2007 Toll Facilities in the United States,” Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. [Online]. Available: www.fhwa.dot.gov./ohim/tollpage/history. htm [accessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 10. Lindsey, R., “Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Road Pricing? The Intellectual History of an Idea,” Econ Journal Watch, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2006, pp. 292–379. 11. Hedlund, K. and R. Smith, “SAFETEA-LU Promotes Private Investment in Transportation,” 2005 [Online]. Available: www.ncppp.org/resources/papers/nossaman_ safetea.pd [accessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 12. “Poll Finds 58% Favor Foothill Extension,” Los Angeles Times, June 7, 2001. 13. “Candidates Differ on Best Solution to Traffic Crunch: The Public May Be Open to the Idea of Toll Roads,” Your Voice, Your Vote, News & Record (Greensboro, North Carolina), Oct. 1, 2000. 14. “Tolls Not Big Issue, but the Traffic Is,” Chicago Tribune, May 16, 2001. 15. Regan, E., “The View on Tolls: Political Perceptions vs. Public Opinion,” Presented at International Bridge Tunnel and Turnpike Association International Trans- port Finance Summit, Nice, France, 2005. 16. “Poll Shows Most Support Toll Road—TCA Surveys Says 54 Percent of Residents Support Foothill South: Environmental Groups Question Poll,” Orange County Register, June 7, 2001. 17. “Support Falls for 241 Extension,” Orange County Register, June 7, 2001. 18. “California: Toll Poll,” Bond Buyer, July 6, 2001. 19. “Far South Support for 241 Extension at 55%,” Orange County Register, June 10, 2001. 20. Baldassare, M., “PPIC Statewide Survey: Special Survey of Orange County,” Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, Sep. 2001. 21. Burris, M., M. Byers, and C. Swenson, “Results of Driver Survey Investigating Intersection Queue Jumps,” Transportation Research Record 1839, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washing- ton, D.C., 2003, pp. 25–33. 22. “Orange County; Build Foothill South, Voters Say in Survey,” Los Angeles Times, July 12, 2002. 23. “Residents Give Edge to Toll Road, Survey Says,” Orange County Register, July 18, 2002. 24. “Hanson’s Toll-Road Statistics Wrong; Survey Quoted by Commission Does Not Say 98% Support Road,” Orlando Sentinel, April 4, 2002. 25. “Hike Cigarette Taxes to Stop Kids from Smoking, New York State Voters Tell Quinnipiac University Poll; State Voters Oppose East River Tolls 3–1,” Quin- nipiac University, Feb. 28, 2002 [Online]. Available: www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=440 [ac- cessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 26. “Views Vary on Survey for Parkway,” St. Petersburg Times, Sep. 1, 2002. 27. “Big Foothill–South EIR Is on Its Way/Toll Agency Also Releases Survey,” Orange County Register, Sep. 18, 2003. 28. Holguin-Veras, J., K. Ozbay, and A. de Cerrano, Eval- uation Study of Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s Time of Day Pricing Initiative, Final Report, Mar. 2005. 29. Baldassare, M., PPIC Statewide Survey: Special Sur- vey of Orange County, Public Policy Institute of Cali- fornia, San Francisco, Dec. 2003 [Online]. Available: www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_1203MBS.pdf [accessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 30. Collier, T. and K. Womack, “Public Perception Data Collection Regarding Tolling in a Small Urban/Rural Area: Some Surprising Findings,” Presented at the 84th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 9–13, 2005. 31. “Road Test; Poll: Voters Want Next Mayor to Fix Traffic,” Saturday State Times/Morning Advocate, May 29, 2004. 32. “Survey Shows Support for Foothill-South,” Orange County Register, July 2, 2004. 33. “Decision Research,” Foothill-South Follow-up Public Opinion Survey Report, Prepared for the Transporta- REFERENCES

51 tion Corridor Agencies [Online]. Available: www. thetollroads.com/home/images/decision_research.pdf [accessed Aug. 21, 2007]. 34. “Residents Satisfied with State Highways; Seventy- Nine Percent Said They Think the State Is Maintaining Highway Systems Well,” Wisconsin State Journal, Aug. 12, 2004. 35. “Field Poll: California Government: Support Broad for Review Plan,” Press Enterprise, Aug. 11, 2004. 36. NuStats, Austin, Tex., Texas Toll Road Study: Final Report, Prepared for the Texas Department of Trans- portation, Austin, Apr. 2005. 37. “Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics,” OC Weekly, Sep. 2, 2005. 38. “Public Support Strong, Steady to Complete 241 Toll Road,” The Toll Roads, Irvine, Calif. [Online]. Available: www.thetollroads.com/home/news_press_ aug05a.htm [accessed Aug. 22, 2007]. 39. “Education May Shift Toll Road Acceptance into Fast Lane,” San Antonio Express-News, Oct. 13, 2005. 40. NuStats, Austin, Tex., Central Texas Toll Road Base- line Marketing Survey: Final Report, Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, July 2005. 41. Wilson Research Strategies, Report on CTRMA Public Survey, Aug. 2005. 42. “Toll Poll Puts Agency on Notice,” Austin American- Statesman, Sep. 29, 2005. 43. “Most Favor Toll Roads—ASAP,” Deseret Morning News, Feb. 20, 2006. 44. “Many in EP Oppose Toll Roads,” El Paso Times, Feb. 26, 2006. 45. “Results Are in for City’s 2nd Survey,” Orange County Register, July 13, 2006. 46. Pan Atlantic SMS Group, Report to the Maine Turn- pike Authority and Swardlick Marketing Group— Benchmarking Survey, Jan. 2007. 47. Sullivan, E., Evaluating the Impacts of the SR 91 Variable-Toll Express Lane Facility Final Report, May 1998 [Online]. Available: www.ceenve3.civeng. calpoly.edu/sullivan/SR91/final_rpt/finalrep_full.pdf [accessed Aug. 22, 2007]. 48. Sullivan, E., Continuation Study to Evaluating the Impacts of the SR 91 Variable-Toll Express Lane Facil- ity Final Report, Dec. 2000 [Online]. Available: ceenve. calpoly.edu/sullivan/SR91/final_rpt/FinalRep2000.pdf [accessed Aug. 22, 2007]. 49. Resource Systems Group, Summary Report: Orlando I-4 Express Lanes Focus Group Report, Prepared for Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, July 2000. 50. Resource Systems Group, Summary Report: Miami Value Pricing Focus Group Summary Report, Prepared for Miami Value Pricing Project, June 2002. 51. Buckeye, K. and L. Munnich, “Value Pricing Outreach and Education: Key Steps in Reaching High Occupancy Toll Lane Consensus in Minnesota,” Presented at the 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 11–13, 2004. 52. “Minnesota Poll; 69 Percent Comfortable with Toll Roads,” Star Tribune, Jan. 28, 2004. 53. Resource Systems Group, Summary Report: South Florida Managed Lanes Focus Groups, Prepared for MDX and Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise, April 2005. 54. “Express Toll Lanes Endorsed by Commuters,” The Tom Warne Report, Vol. 3, No. 17, Apr. 27, 2006 [Online]. Available: www.tomwarnereport.com/twr/twr_v3n17. html#a3 [accessed Aug. 26, 2007]. 55. Resource Systems Group, Summary Report: I-75 Express Lanes Focus Groups, Draft, Prepared for MDX and Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise, Nov. 2006. 56. Above Water Public Relations Marketing, Collier County Citizen Survey 2007: Executive Summary & Methodology, Collier County, Florida, 2007. 57. Wilbur Smith Associates, I-15 Congestion Pricing Project Report, Task 3-A—Baseline Market Study, Pre- pared for the San Diego Association of Governments, Nov. 1996. 58. Godbe Research and Analysis, I-15 ExpressPass Focus Groups Conducted for the San Diego Association of Governments, July 1997. 59. Golob, J., J. Supernak, and T. Golob, I-15 Congestion Pricing Project Monitoring and Evaluation Services. Task 3.2.3. Phase I Attitudinal Panel Study, San Diego State University Foundation, Prepared for the San Diego Association of Governments, May 1998. 60. Golob, T., J. Golob, and J. Supernak, I-15 Congestion Pricing Project Monitoring and Evaluation Services. Task 8. Phase II Year 2 Attitudinal Panel Study, San Diego State University Foundation, Prepared for the San Diego Association of Governments, June 2000. 61. Godbe Research and Analysis, I-15 Focus Group Research for I-15 Commuters Conducted for the San Diego Association of Governments, Aug. 1998. 62. Golob, J., J. Supernak, and T. Golob, I-15 Congestion Pricing Project Monitoring and Evaluation Services. Task 8. Phase II Year 3 Attitudinal Panel Study, San Diego State University Foundation, Prepared for the San Diego Association of Governments, Feb. 2001. 63. Pacific Rim Resources, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., and HS Public Affairs, Managed Lanes Public Opinion Research—Draft, Prepared for Washington State Depart- ment of Transportation, Olympia, May 2001. 64. Wilber Smith Associates, I-15 Managed Lanes Value Pricing Project Planning Study for San Diego Associa- tion of Government, Vol. 2: Public Outreach, Feb. 2002. 65. Ungemah, D. and C.D. Tighe, “You’re Making Me Hot: Talking High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) Lanes with the Denver Public,” Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 22–26, 2006. 66. VTA Board of Directors Workshop Meeting Minutes, Friday, Nov. 7, 2003.

52 67. Illinois Tollway Value Pricing Focus Group Summary Report, Resource Systems Group, Chicago, Nov. 2003. 68. Li, J., S. Ardikani, S. Govind, S. Mattingly, J. Williams, and R. Cole, Developing a Comprehensive Pricing Eval- uation Model for Managed Lanes, Report for the Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, June 2005. 69. NuStats, Austin, Tex., MnPASS Evaluation Attitudinal Panel Survey: Wave 1. Final Report, Prepared for the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, Uni- versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Feb. 2005. 70. Sycamore Consulting and Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, High Occupancy Toll Lanes and Truck Only Toll Facilities: Potential for Implementation in the Atlanta Region, Draft Focus Group Report, Prepared for Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta, Sep. 2004. 71. Zmud, J., S. Peterson, and F. Douma, “Preliminary Before and After Results of the I-394 HOT Lane Panel Survey,” Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 21–25, 2007. 72. Wilbur Smith Associates with Kelley Swofford Roy, Inc., I-95 Managed Lane Focus Groups. Revised Exec- utive Recap, Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, Apr. 2007. 73. Dan Jones & Associates, UDOT Image Update, 2005, Study conducted for Penna Powers Brian Haynes on behalf of the Utah Department of Transportation, Salt Lake City, July 2005. 74. True North Research, San Diego Region Public Opinion Survey. Final Report, Comox, BC, Canada, July 2005. 75. Bradley, M. and J. Zmud, “Validating Willingness to Pay Estimates for Tolled Facilities Through Panel Survey Methods,” Presented at the 11th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research, Kyoto, Japan, Aug. 2006. 76. NuStats, Austin, Tex., MnPass Evaluation Attitudinal Panel Survey Wave 3 Final Report, Prepared for the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, Uni- versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Aug. 2006. 77. “Poll Finds Most Disapprove of Fee for Using HOT Lanes,” The Associated Press State and Local Wire, May 8, 2006. 78. NuStats, Austin, Tex., Interstate 75 Passenger Car Stated Preference Survey: Final Report, Prepared for the Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, May 2006. 79. NuStats, Austin, Tex., SR400 Stated Preference Survey Final Report, Prepared for the Georgia Department of Transportation, Atlanta, Sep. 2006. 80. Burris, M., K. Sadabadi, S. Mattingly, M. Mahlawat, J. Li, I. Rasmidatta, and A. Saroosh, “Reaction to the Managed Lane Concept by Various Groups of Travel- ers,” Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 21–25, 2007. 81. Summary Report. PRIMA: Pricing Measures Accep- tance [Online]. Available: ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/ transport/docs/summaries/road_prima_report.pdf [accessed Aug. 22, 2007]. 82. Government Office for London, Road Charging Options for London—A Technical Assessment, The Stationary Office, Norwich, United Kingdom, 2000. 83. Tfl World Review of Road Pricing: Phase 2 Case Studies, Nov. 2006. 84. Burris, M. and K.T. Lanan, “Predicted Driver Response to a Cordon Toll Around Fort Myers Beach, Florida,” Advances in Transportation Studies an International Journal, Section B 5, 2005. 85. Cain, A., “Achieving Majority Public Support for Urban Road Pricing—Preserving the Driver’s Right to Choose,” Presented at the 84th Annual Meeting of the Transporta- tion Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 9–13, 2005. 86. “Life in the Faster Lane,” Wall Street Journal, July 20, 2007. 87. Michaels Opinion Research, Congestion Pricing: Sup- port Among New York City Residents, Conducted for Tri-State Transportation Campaign, New York, N.Y., May–June 2006. 88. Quinnipiac University Poll, “New York City Voters Oppose Congestion Pricing 2-1,” Press Release, Jan. 18, 2007. 89. “Congestion Pricing Gets Modest Support: Poll,” Crain’s New York Business [Online]. Available: www.newyork business.com [accessed Aug. 26, 2007]. 90. “Poll Shows Strong Congestion Concern,” Surface Transportation Newsletter, News Notes, Reason Foun- dation, Los Angeles, Calif., Mar. 2007. 91. Quinnipiac University Poll, “Spitzer Approval Bounces Back in New York, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds: State Voters Prefer Congestion Pricing to Fare Hike,” Press Release, June 19, 2007. 92. NuStats, Austin, Tex., Technical Report of Methods, Nov. 2005. 93. “Privately Operated Toll Roads Get Thumbs-Down Vote in Alamo City, Poll Shows,” San Antonio Business Journal, Feb. 6, 2006. 94. “Daniel’s Approval Down to 37 Percent; 30 Percent Against Lease,” Associated Press State and Local Wire, Mar. 5, 2006. 95. “Poll Finds Majority Against Indiana Toll Road Lease,” Associated Press State and Local Wire, Sep. 18, 2006. 96. “Do We Want State to Sell Its Toll Roads? No Way: 56% Oppose Plan, 19% Favor It in AAA Poll,” Record, Mar. 20, 2007. 97. NuStats, Austin, Tex., Technical Report of Methods, June 2007. 98. “Pennsylvania Voters Back Rendell Plan to Hike Sales Tax, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds” [Online]. Avail- able: www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1069 [accessed Aug. 23, 2007]. 99. Rutgers–Eagleton Poll, “Corzine Faces Uphill Climb to Sell Toll Road Idea,” Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers—The State University of New Jersey, Aug. 2007.

53 116. PRR, Traffic Choices Pilot Project Focus Group Sum- mary Report, Prepared for the Puget Sound Regional Council, May 2006. 117. Cambridge Systematics, Public Attitudes Research Syn- opsis, Prepared for the Washington State Transportation Commission, Olympia, 2006. 118. Weinstein, A. and J. Dill, “How to Pay for Transporta- tion? A Survey of Public Preferences in California,” Journal of Transport Policy, Vol. 14, No. 4, July 2007, pp. 346–356. 119. Transportation Omnibus “Pockets of Pain” Survey, AAA Market Research, Nov. 2006. 120. Monroe, A., “Consistency Between Public Preferences and National Policy Decisions,” American Politics Quar- terly, Vol. 7, 1979, pp. 3–19. 121. Page, B. and R. Shapiro, “Effectiveness of Public Opinion on Public Policy,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 77, 1983, pp. 175–190. 122. Evans, A.M., E. Gougherty, M. Morris, and M. Smith, “Politics, Public Opinion, and Project Design in Califor- nia Road Pricing,” Presented at the 87th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 13–17, 2008. 123. Buttons, K. and E. Verhoef, Road Pricing, Traffic Con- gestion and the Environment: Issues of Efficiency and Social Feasibility, Elgar, Cheltenham, England, 1985. 124. Groves, R., “Research on Survey Data Quality,” Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 51, Summer 1987, pp. 158–172. 125. Zmud, J., “Instrument Design: Decisions and Proce- dures,” In Travel Survey Methods: Quality and Future Directions, P. Stopher and C. Stecher, Eds., Elsevier Science, London, United Kingdom, 2006. 126. Zmud, J., “Designing Instruments to Improve Response,” In Transport Survey Quality and Innovation, P. Stopher and D. Jones, Eds., Pergamon Press, London, United Kingdom, 2003. 127. Zmud, J. and C. Arce, “Item Non-Response in Travel Surveys: Causes and Solutions,” In Conference Proceed- ings, Transport Surveys: Raising the Standard, Inter- national Conference on Transport Survey Quality and Innovation, Grainau, Germany, May 1997. 128. Higgins, T., “Congestion Pricing: Public Polling Per- spective,” Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 2, Spring 1997, pp. 97–104. 129. Habermas, J., The Structural Transformation of the Pub- lic Sphere, Ploity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1989. 100. “Latest Poll: Turnpike Lease Idea Loses Steam,” Post- Gazette, Harrisburg Bureau, Aug. 24, 2007. 101. “Atlanta Drivers Want Better Roads, but Don’t Want Higher Gas Tax, Poll Finds,” Atlanta Journal and Constitution, Jan. 14, 2002. 102. Elway Research, Pierce County Public Opinion Survey— State and Regional Transportation Plans, Mar. 2002. 103. [Online]. Available: www.rtid.dst.wa.us/2-20-03%20 Summary%20Opinion%20Polls.pdf [accessed Aug. 26, 2007]. 104. “Most Against Hike in Fuel Tax,” Tulsa World, July 5, 2005. 105. “Poll Finds Strong Opposition to Proposed Fuel Tax Increase,” Tulsa World, Sep. 4, 2005. 106. “Poll: Wyoming Residents Oppose Raising Fuel Tax for Roads,” Associated Press State and Local Wire, Jan. 8, 2007. 107. “Study Suggests Tolls Instead of Gas Tax,” Oregonian, Dec. 25, 2000. 108. Podgorski, K. and K. Kockelman, “Public Perceptions of Toll Roads: A Survey of the Texas Perspective,” Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transporta- tion Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 22–26, 2006. 109. JMM Research, TransNet Public Opinion Survey, Pre- pared for SANDAG, 2006. 110. “New Tolls, Not Taxes, Favored for Area Roads,” Washington Post, Feb. 16, 2005. 111. Results of San Antonio Focus Groups: Public Accept- ability of Express Lane Options for I-35, Texas Trans- portation Institute, College Station, Sep. 2005. 112. San Antonio Northeast Corridor (IH35): Value Priced Express Lanes Traffic Estimate. Draft Final Report, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, Sep. 2005. 113. Vrtic, M., N. Schuessler, A. Erath, and K. Axhausen, “Design Elements of Road Pricing Schemes and Their Acceptability,” Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Jan. 13–17, 2007. 114. MarketLine Research, Minnesota Department of Trans- portation Statewide Omnibus Study 2005, Prepared for Mn/DOT Market Research, Mar. 2006. 115. Lawrence Research, A Two-Phase Study of Attitudes of Washington State Voters Toward Transportation Issues, Prepared for Washington State Transportation Com- mission, Apr. 11, 2006.