The war on traffic--II.

THE time-honored ways of funding road projects simply don't pencil out anymore, at east on their own. The work is just too costly--and the political hurdles too high--for the state and federal governments to fork over all the money needed to keep traffic moving.

Last week, I offered up the idea of toll roads on some of the most congested freeways in Los Angeles. This would involve new lanes that would be financed through bonds and paid for by revenues gcnerated from tolls. Ideally, the system would ratchet, up or down, those toll fees based on the amount of traffic in the free lanes. The more congestion, the more you would be charged. Sensors embedded in the lanes would monitor usage and bill the driver accordingly (no need for those old-fashioned toll booths that are expensive to operate).

It's a system in place on a stretch in San Diego, where each day 22,000 cars travel along the Interstate 15 express lanes. Tolls range from 50 cents to $8; the average rush-hour charge runs from $2.50 to $3.50. That's doughnut-and-coffee money for drivers of most any income level.

Yes, there will be problems to iron out, some of them quite formidable. Like, where to add lanes in places where it's next to impossible to widen the road. What happens to existing car-pool pool lanes? And what's to prevent the toll lanes from clogging up on really bad days? Should the toll charges be open-ended, to the point where drivers might shell out $50 or more to ride a three-mile stretch of the San Diego Freeway on a Friday night rush hour? Then, of course, there's the philosophical question of favoring the folks with bucks over the ones without.

All quite legitimate issues. So let's take a whack at them--in public hearings, on the airwaves, in newspaper editorial pages and over a cup of Joe at the corner Starbucks. Because folks, there is a growing inevitability about the need for tolls, the sooner the better.

Actually, tolls roads go back to Colonial timesand have been used in various fashions and forms over the years. But the idea of a market-based toll is relatively new. Congress, in fact, has been considering legislation that would give states broad authority to levy tolls (a likely prerequisite for any system in L.A.). Similar efforts have fallen short over the years, though this time might be different because even in Washington there is a recognition that the current funding system--still based largely on the Federal-Aid Highway Act in 1956--doesn't work very well.

That's because most of the highway money comes from the federal gasoline tax, which, given the recent spike in prices, is not about to be raised. As part of a six-year transportation bill, the White House has set a ceiling of $256 billion (though it favors the toll road idea), while the Senate proposes $318 billion and the House $284 billion. This wrangling could go on for months longer, which in itself speaks volumes about the funding logjam and why it's time to get serious about toll lanes.

But where to begin? Southern California's various governments are notoriously disjointed when it comes to any transportation effort, much less one as challenging as this. Besides, who will take the lead on such an initiative? Caltrans? The governor? The MTA? As is often the way when trying to get something done in this community, it's the process rather than the idea that often can muck things up. More on that next week.

Mark Lacter is editor of the Business Journal.