Happy New Year 2014

I wish all my readers a Happy New Year and hope 2014 brings them prosperity, good health and happiness for themselves and their loved ones.

I wish to apologise for the more haphazard level of writing in 2013.  That has been driven largely because of the tragic terminal illness of my father, who is suffering from laryngeal cancer.  I have spent some considerable time with him in the past nine months.  Secondly, work has been very busy in that time and so my free time to dedicate to this blog has been more limited than I would have liked (although I am far from unhappy about being busy with valuable work).

The past year in road pricing has seen continued growth in the application of tolling worldwide, and despite some controversy, network road pricing systems are about to be implemented in France for trucks, and in Belgium for trucks (and a vignette system for cars).  In the United States, difficulties in raising fuel taxes continue as states move forward either with expanding the application of tolls for new highways (e.g. in Texas and Florida) or in new forms of charging (e.g. Oregon's implementation of distance based highway taxation).  This appears to have percolated north, with stronger interest in forms of road pricing in Canada.

Gothenburg has now completed its first year of congestion pricing, although there is little sign of significant moves forward towards such pricing elsewhere.  More notably, Denmark seems to have backed off introducing congestion charging in Copenhagen.  

Fundamentally, the key problem faced by governments at all levels and highway authorities is that it is becoming less satisfactory to raise money from road users by taxing motor fuels, when vehicles fleets are becoming so much more efficient.  Parallel to that is growing resistance from voters to increases in such taxes, especially when they are sceptical as to whether politicians will use such revenues wisely.  Although motorists may resent them, at least tolled roads raise money for using roads directly and the revenue raised is spent on those roads.  Similarly, whilst economic slowdown in many countries has seen reduced concern for congestion, it still remains that major cities cannot significantly address traffic congestion by simply building more highway capacity or public transport capacity, but must address the underpricing of urban road capacity at peak times.  It is notable that cities such as Jakarta, Beijing and Shanghai appear to be at the forefront of considering congestion pricing, rather than those in Europe and North America.

Yet, despite all of this, there are significant challenges in convincing governments and voters of the merits of charging directly for road use.  For all of the economic arguments, there is a strong undercurrent of scepticism and resistance, as so many think that road pricing is just another way of governments to extract more money from them for little value.

When governments don't reduce other taxes or don't provide means to dedicate such revenue to (more of less) objectively defined high value projects, then I am hardly surprised.  Road pricing doesn't succeed when the whole governance, funding and management structures of roads are driven by short term political imperatives rather than delivering service to customers.  It is curious indeed that this problem is seen widely in the United States, and less widely in parts of Europe, where commercial and private sector management of major highways is more widespread and acceptable.  

Finally, it is worth talking briefly about technology.  Costs keep coming down, and most notably it is becoming clearer that there is a future in using smartphones, connected intelligently to vehicles, as a means of introducing road pricing.  It is becoming more difficult for opponents to road pricing to claim cost is a reason to reject it.  Their biggest argument remains a lack of trust towards those who would implement it.

It remains, in my view, that this is the key challenge.  In a political environment of mistrust of government, there is a need to recast arguments about road pricing in terms of changing the relationship between road users and the provision of roads.  In most jurisdictions, there remains little real useful feedback between road users and providers, and expectations remain low.  In a world where more automated road use is looking ever more likely in the medium term, this will have to change, simply because traditional political/engineering based ways of managing such infrastructure wont be dynamic enough.

Think how telecommunications and the internet would be if it were subject to political and bureaucratic horizons as to what you need.

That is today what happens with roads.

So whether you work as an infrastructure manager, engineer, policy maker, researcher, politician or a road user, think how much more innovative this sector could be, and what would happen if the cynicism and doubts so often seen are replaced with creativity and intelligent debate about practical change.  

Road pricing almost always will appear negative to those used for taking what exists for granted, it is the role of those of us who can see a vision of better highways, cities and transport networks to address the real concerns of so many.  It isn't about telling people how to get around, or punishing them, or trying to take more money from some to give to others with grand visions, but actually about being more rational about what is done now.  

News briefs - Brazil, UK, USA (California and Texas)

Brazil to let major private highway concession on existing road

Infranews reports that the ANTT (Agência Nacional de Transportes Terrestre - National Transportation Agency) has announced it will be auctioning a 30 year concession for a US$3.4 billion toll road. The route is a 817km section of federal highway BR-040 between Brasília and Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais.

What the auction effectively means is that prospective concessionaires have to bid to finance, build, operate and toll the road, and the offer that will do so, with the lowest tolls, is more likely to win.  Studies on the project indicate it can more than generate enough toll revenue to pay for the upgrade of the highway.  The proposed maximum toll rate is BRL 0.0973 (US$ 0.041) per km, or BRL 9.73 (US$ 4.12) for 100km. The successful concessionaire will have to demonstrate it can operate, maintain and upgrade the road to the required standard at tolls with a discount on those rates.  Recent concessions have been awarded to groups that offered to do other routes with discounts of over 40% on the proposed rates.

This is quite some road, being roughly the distance from London to the top of Great Britain as the crow flies, and being most of the main highway from Brasilia to Rio.  Interesting of course, that it is to be tolled to fund the upgrade.  The section from Rio to Juiz de Fora is already tolled and subject to a concession held by the company Concer, since 1996.

BR-040 in red

Interesting that leasing out large stretches of highway to private companies to upgrade, using tolls, is being implemented by a leftwing government in Brazil.  A similar concept in the United States or the UK would provoke howls of outrage from some quarters.

UK- Vehicle Excise Duty to be made fully electronic

The BBC reports that as of October 2014, the annual (or 6 monthly) "tax disc" that is proof of payment of Vehicle Excise Duty (a tax on vehicle ownership), is to be scrapped.  Proof of payment will now be linked to number plates and Police checks of payment will be enforced by ANPR cameras.

Vehicle Excise Duty is rated on vehicle size (to charge trucks more to reflect wear and tear they impose on the network) and CO2 emissions.  It raises about £6 billion a year in revenue.  None of it is hypothecated for road spending.  The UK Government spends £9 billion a year on roads in England, funding for roads in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland is contained within the budgetary contribution to those devolved governments.   Of course, revenue from fuel tax exceeds £27 billion a year as well.

UK - Further comment on scrapping of toll plan for the A14

Guy Bentley at City AM argues for network road pricing to manage congestion and encourage more efficient investment in roads.

AutoExpress reports that the Labour Opposition blames the Government for a cost increase in the project due to delay, and called tolls "half-baked".

USA - California - Orange County debates free lanes over toll lanes

According to the LA Times, there is general agreement that there needs to be additional lanes on the San Diego Freeway (I-405) between Long Beach and Costa Mesa.   The debate is whether they should be HOT or untolled lanes.  Caltrans (the state entity responsible for managing the state highway network) wants toll lanes, on the basis that new capacity should be paid by those directly benefiting from it.  However, six of the boroughs that the freeway passes through want the lanes to be untolled.  

I-405 upgrade corridor

The report said, of a latter signed by the Mayors of the six cities:

"Constructing toll lanes is a breach of trust with Orange County residents," the letter stated, adding that residents agreed to a half-cent sales tax increase that would fund one additional general-purpose lane on the 405 Freeway.

One option is to add a free lane and a HOT lane, but that would seem ridiculous.   The HOT lane would have so little demand to make it not worthwhile.  Either there is money to widen the road or there isn't.

Now I consider sales taxes being used to pay for highways to be economic insanity.  Why should people shopping have to pay for an additional lane on a road many of them do not use regularly and most wont benefit from?  However, if it is there, in part, to pay for it, then it is difficult to argue against, unless of course, the sales tax is cut when the toll lanes open.

The report also says:

City leaders expressed worry that the project would push traffic onto their streets, or that motorists traveling in the toll lanes would find it too difficult to pull off the highway and patronize local businesses.

The first point makes no sense, as the lanes are additional capacity.  They will improve traffic conditions for those who pay, and a little for those who don't.  I also doubt whether those wishing to pay to use the toll lanes (who are more likely to be those on a time constrained trip) have any special interest in pulling off the highway.

If the lanes can be substantially funded by being tolled, they should be, and let sales taxes for transport be cut.

Orange County Transportation Authority website on the project.

USA - Texas - El Paso getting its first toll lanes 

I noted this proposal two years ago.

El Paso is getting its first toll lanes opening soon.  A 9 mile stretch of the I-10 will see one new lane each way from the interchange with US-54 to Zaragoza Road with a toll of US$0.10 per mile. The Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority encouraging "sticker tag" installation of users.  These lanes will be pure toll lanes, with no option for high occupancy vehicles to get a free trip.

Austin

An 11-mile stretch of Austin’s MoPac Boulevard will expand to eight lanes from six to accommodate a growing population.  Neither the Texas Department of Transportation nor any of the local entities involved in the $200 million project are predicting it will transform MoPac into a free-flowing thoroughfare.  The project is the responsibiilty of the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority.  It is to accommodate population growth.  The key is the extra lanes are pure toll lanes, not HOT lanes.   Carpooling will not give you a free trip, the reason apparently being that the lanes are intended to maintain a minimum level of service.   By not allowing carpooling, it saves on enforcement and means that the lanes are purely managed by price.  

According to the Texas Tribune, the Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority board is hoping it will boost bus patronage as buses will use the new lanes toll free.  Bus routes are to be revised to see how much they can usefully take advantage of the new lanes.  "Registered van pools" and emergency vehicles are also exempt.

The price will be set dynamically with the lowest price being US$0.25, and an average expected to be less than US$4 with trip lengths being a minimum of 5 miles.  However, unlike many toll systems elsewhere, there is no price ceiling.  The price will be as high as is necessary to maintain good free flow conditions.  Of course, those not liking that can use the parallel untolled lanes.

The payment system is a simple DSRC 915MHz system compatible with TxTag, TollTag or EZ-Tag.   Users without tags will be billed to their home address traced by ANPR cameras and accessing of motor vehicle registration databases.

Allied to the project are improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities ( US$5 million, including 3 miles of new path and 4 miles of footpaths).

The MoPac website says...

The project is being financed through a unique partnership with the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). CAMPO and TxDOT have approved grants totaling $199.5 million to fund the project. As part of the partnership arrangement, the Mobility Authority has agreed to set up a Regional Infrastructure Fund, and over the next 25 years, will deposit $230 million into the fund. CAMPO can then allocate money from the fund to other transportation projects in the region.

So the lanes are taxpayer funded, but will they raise enough money to recoup that expenditure?

UK A14 highway project to proceed toll free, due to public opposition

So it is not to be.  It appears that the proposed A14 toll road is going to be built - but not as a toll road.

In the Autumn Statement of the British Government it is to be announced that the major upgrade of the A14 will proceed, but as a conventional highway project funded by Treasury, according to the BBC.

I've written extensively before about the project:

UK investigates more tolling and private finance;

A new toll road for Britain?

UK government adds new (A14) toll road to programme

Lukewarm reception for A14 toll road idea

A14 project to have one tolled section

A lonely toll road that wouldn't come remotely close to paying for itself

So this is a story of some wishful thinking, which I'll admit, I agreed with at the time.  It was right to investigate whether tolling could usefully help pay for a project.

A very large highway project, involving mostly new capacity, was ready to go.  Then came the General Election in 2010, and a change of government.  It faced a fiscal crisis and had to rein in some major spending commitments by the previous government to address the budget deficit, and freezing development of this highway project was one way to do that.

The road itself is considered critical because it is frequently congested and carries high volumes of truck traffic linking the West and East Midlands (including the city of Birmingham) to the ports in Suffolk and Essex at Felixstowe and Harwich.  About a quarter of the traffic involves HGVs, which makes it a critical freight corridor.  It suffers from peak congestion as commuters travel between various towns, with Cambridge as a key attractor.  Whilst some efforts have been made to promote rail freight (successfully) and public transport, it is not considered likely that mode shift can alleviate the remaining regular congestion, and the route is considered to be a bottleneck on the development of the Midlands, given it provide the primary port access for the region's towns and cities.

The A14 upgrade project in detail

The map above is a detailed description.  The upper part depicts the Huntingdon Southern Bypass (which looked like it could be tolled) , the lower part the doubling of capacity on the A14 northwest of Cambridge from 2 to 4 lanes each way, and then the widening of the Cambridge northern bypass (with a series of junction and link improvements.

France's EcoTax suspended - politics triumphs for now

It appears that France's EcoTax (HGV distance based road charging/tolling system) is now on hold, although the latest reports indicate that it will still be introduced on 1 January 2014.  It is not because of any technical problems, it is politics.

France does protests on a level unseen elsewhere

I am not surprised.  The politics of France is peppered with disruptive protests by vested interests unhappy whenever governments implement major changes to the status quo - typically by specific interests negatively  affected (never by the wider group of citizens positively affected).  The OTRE (Organisation des Transporteurs Routiers Européens), a trucking industry association, comprised mainly of smaller operators, has protested that it would hurt their businesses.  Their protests have included road blocks, with a deliberate attempt to halt foreign trucks (they aren't so keen on competition from their European partners).  Protests have included vandalism and arson against enforcement gantries (which include ANPR cameras, laser profilers and DSRC detectors).

It is difficult to imagine that level of anger in many other countries.

France's Ecotax truck toll network

Ecotax isn't a creation of Hollande's socialist government, but wasn't opposed when in Opposition

The Ecotax proposal was approved by the previous centre-right Sarkozy administration, and was supported by the Socialists (who run the current government) at the time, but some in the government now think that the amount that Ecomouv - the consortium that won the contract to develop, install and operate the system - is paid, is excessive (Ecomouv is to receive 20% of the gross revenue, which is quite generous).  Ecomouv is a consortium comprised of Autostrada (the well known Italian toll road owner/operator), Thales (a French technology, aerospace and defence company), SNCF (the French national railway), SFR (French telecommunications company, primarily operating mobile services) and Steria (French IT-services company).  

So the socialist bent of the French Government is coming out in thinking that the private sector may be profiting too much from the system.  

My view is that costs are quite high, although they ought to come down over time, and part of the procurement is to allow for competitive service delivery, which ought to keep pressure on costs (although it isn't clear that Ecomouv has quite the same pressure). 

However, the simple point is that a large government contract to collect revenue is always going to be a chance for operators to ensure they minimise costs so they maximise their own revenue.  That obviously is controversial when it comes to a tax.  Given the system does involve GNSS based technology with on board units, communicating via the mobile phone network, the simple point is it will be costly to introduce.  owever, I would not be surprised if political risk is factored into the price - which is wise.

Meanwhile, it appears, in rather typical French style, that government is now negotiating with protestors over what to do next - even though the contract with Ecomouv binds the French Government.  In short, the key risk is that rates will be lowered, but Ecomouv will insist on receiving the fees it contracted for.  General taxpaers, the interest group that seems to be least loud, may pick up the difference for a short while at least.

Jakarta proceeding with congestion charging system UPDATE: May go for a simpler approach

According to the Jakarta Post, the city will proceed with the first stage of a congestion charging system (called electronic road pricing because of its parallels to the Singapore system) in early 2014.  Jakarta Governor Joko Widido ideally would like to see it operational in the first quarter of 2014.  However, the Jakarta Transportation Agency believes a bylaw needs to be amended before there is full legal authority to start collecting tolls.

The system is expected to be very similar to that in Singapore, primarily because the proximity has enabled officials to observe the results of the Singaporean system, which is clearly the most comprehensive and successful such operation to date.  All motorised vehicles (except motorcycles, and there is some debate about whether they also should be included) using the charged roads, would need to have a DSRC transponder installed with a read-write smartcard inserted, that would deduct stored value from the card every time the vehicle passed under a charging gantry.

Prices are expected to vary by individual roads, and have different charging periods.   Previous plans to introduce a controlled zone based on only allowing vehicles with odd or even numbered licence plates are to be scrapped.  

In advance of the new system, an unspecified number of new buses are to be introduced, with the intention that the charge will first apply to the Rasuna Said area because of the busway corridors that exist through it. The initial charge will be Rp. 21,000 (US$1.87), but one report indicates that prices could be lowered if traffic levels drop by more than is necessary to achieve free flow traffic.  A previous post I wrote described where it looked like charging would be introduced.

Interestingly, it appears that there is strong political interest in having a state wide electronic vehicle identification system in place by 2015, to enable rapid, accurate and effective enforcement of traffic laws. Jakarta's electronic road pricing system will be compatible with that. 

I am highly sceptical that such a system can be operational by early 2014, with the testing, distribution of transponders and enforcement processes fully effective in such a time, but I thoroughly applaud the decision to move forward.   Jakarta has chosen a bold approach, but I predict some big issues around enforcement and managing the changes in traffic patterns that come from an incremental introduction of such charges.   It may have been better to await the implementation of the electronic vehicle ID programme, as the ability to more readily enforce traffic laws (and deter and remove non-compliant vehicles), may deliver some useful gains in reducing congestion.

Nevertheless, if Jakarta can make this work, it will be the largest city in the world with such a road pricing system, given its metropolitan population of over 25 million people.

UPDATE:  It would appear that the complexities of introducing a Singapore style system in less than 6 months are causing some concern, as a report from the Jakarta Post seems to be indicating a partial backdown, as there is now some interest in introducing a "manual" system rather similar to the original Singapore Area Licensing System that was introduced in 1975.

What is proposed is holographic stickers for monthly or annual access to the city centre, essentially an urban "vignette".  This would be far simpler to implement, although the enforcement would be labour intensive, requiring a large number of enforcement officers targeting parked vehicles, or visually identifying vehicles crossing cordon points and pursuing them for fines (or sending them violation notices).  It is thought the idea may be implemented once 800 new buses are added to the urban fleet, allowing for the expansion of services.  The article suggests "scanners" could be used at parking lots, but this is far from tried and unless the stickers had some sort of RFID device (and it was illegal to install them incorrectly, and it was possible to read a number plate of a vehicle that didn't have one), this seems quite an unwieldy approach.

It is suggested that buses to the charged area could be free, but meanwhile the "vehicle transfer fee" (a tax on transferring ownership of a car) is to be increased to 20% of the vehicle's value.  I'm unsure what that will do other than make a small difference to the cost of ownership, and encourage people to continue to operate older cars.  

What all of this implies is some mismatch between decision-making and good quality advice for the authorities.  Yes, Jakarta could implement an urban vignette, but the fundamental problem of any system - enforcement will be little easier with that compared to an electronic option.   It would appear that there ought to be a rethink, and perhaps some more consideration that Jakarta cannot simply transplant Singapore's success.

A14 project to have one tolled section

With the announcement of the Investing in Britain's Future programme for infrastructure investment, the UK Government has essentially decided to fund all of the prospective projects on the Highways Agency's books in the coming years, included the long mooted A14 upgrade.  That project is expected to cost £1.5 billion and involves 25 miles of upgraded and new highway, with new lanes and a new bypass.

Full A14 upgrade project, only the orange section will be tolled.

I've written previously about proposals to toll parts of that project.  It now seems that the idea of building a new expressway parallel to the existing road, and tolling it, has been dropped.  Now it is just the Huntingdon Southern bypass that will be tolled, so that only a relatively small proportion of the project's total costs will be recovered directly from road users.

proposed Huntingdon Southern Bypass toll road

So it will be a new section of road that is likely to be tolled, at fairly modest levels (£1-£3 between 0600-2200, with no tolls at other times).  The technology planned to be used is an Automatic Number Plate Recognition system, presumably with prepaid and postpaid accounts (although details have not yet been developed).

Alternative untolled routes

The new tolled route will be superior to alternatives, not least because part of the existing route is to be demolished (the bridge over the railway at Huntingdon).  This is likely to be controversial as it will mean the untolled alternatives will be substantially inferior to the current option (which will be gone).   The reason for that is entirely to ensure the new tolled route generates enough revenue to justify the toll.  I'll leave it to others to determine if that fits into the "only toll new capacity" position of the Government, when the old capacity is substantially reduced.

It looks like this will be the UK's next new toll road on the strategic road network, with construction to start in 2016.  At the moment, this final proposal is out for public consultation (the full consultation pamphlet is available here), but I expect it to proceed in full.

A small step for Oregon, a giant leap for the United States

The Oregon State Legislature has now passed the first legislation to allow for the implementation of a distance based road user charging system for cars on existing roads, in the United States.

Extensive background about the Oregon system was written and linked to in these articles:

Advocates of distance based road pricing look to Oregon in the coming months

Oregon progresses pilot of vehicle mileage tax

The SB810 Road Usage Charging Bill passed the Oregon State Senate by 24 to 6.

It passed the Oregon State House of Representatives by 48 to 12.

It now awaits the signature of Governor John Kitzhaber, who is understood to be fully supportive.

What it means is that Oregon will be implementing distance based charging for ultra fuel-efficient vehicles (those with greater than 55 MPG fuel consumption).

This provides a benchmark approach that some other states are likely to follow, whereby a small number of road users - those which pay little to no fuel tax - will be paying to use the roads directly.   It offers a long term path to shift vehicles from taxing energy use, to taxing road use.   Most Oregonians will notice nothing, unless they purchase such fuel efficient vehicles, and over the next decade or two, more and more will.

I don't have to explain to readers what a significant evolutionary step this is, and how long term the policy is.  A stark contrast to the approach of some states and countries.

I will be open, that I played a very small part in this project a couple of years ago, assisting the team at D'Artagnan Consulting LLP, which has been one of the key firms advising and developing the system architecture for the Oregon Department of Transportation.

However, those who know this project understand that it is, in particular, through the efforts of Jim Whitty - Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding Manager at Oregon Department of Transportation - who over some years, with his team, have taken the best experience from across the US and across the world (dare I say that sometimes Americans can be accused of minimising the relevance of experience from other countries, Whitty did not), to develop a solution for Oregon.

I congratulate Jim his team, both within ODOT and his advisors and consultants, on this landmark success.

ODOT Road User Charging website

Apologies again

Serious family illness has taken me away from work for an undefined time.

News Briefs - Hungary, India, USA

Hungary - Budapest unlikely to introduce congestion charge in short term

Following on from the report last year that the Hungarian Government had suspended development of a congestion pricing scheme for Budapest (which had received money for its metro system from the European Commission contingent on introduction of such a scheme), Caboodle reports that the Budapest Public Transport Centre, CEO David Vitezy, says that it wont happen in the next two to three years.

He says that until there is more public transport capacity, it can't be done.  He wants the fourth metro line (under construction) and some new tram lines built first.  I'm slightly curious about this, given Budapest functioned for many years with the existing public transport network and much less car traffic, and has had relatively static/declining public transport usage for some years.

However, I suspect the politics around this are too difficult for now.

India - Andhra Pradesh state may establish hypothecated roads fund

According to The Hindu, the Andhra Pradesh Road Development Corporation (APRDC) is considering replicating what has been done in four states (Assam, Kerala, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh), by setting up a dedicated roads fund which would receive revenue from motoring specific taxes.  The primary reason being to allow for better quality and longer term funding decisions on road infrastructure, than ad hoc annual funding decisions competing with other public spending.   In addition, it is intended to support the autonomy and accountability of the APRDC in delivering improvements to the network.   Taxes on motor vehicle ownership and fuel, tolls, and other revenue sources may be dedicated to the roads fund.  A key priority is to fund major safety improvements to reduce the high accident and road fatality rate on the state's roads.

USA - Texas - article on tolling

The Texas Tribune has an excellent four part series of articles on toll roads in the state.

- Part One. Includes an interactive map of toll roads in Texas, which looks like not much given the size of the state, but are clustered around major cities.

- Part Two.  Describing the rise of tolling in Texas.  Noting that fuel taxes have not risen in Texas in 20 years, that more than 150 miles of toll roads have been built in the past six years and the growth in private sector interest in building, owning and operating such roads.

- Part Three. Focusing on HOT and other toll lanes in Texas.

- Part Four.  On the failed Trans-Texas Corridor proposal and what came after.

Vancouver road pricing debate continued right up to the election

I wrote last year a couple of times about debate in Vancouver about road pricing.

Given it is the British Columbia Provincial Elections on 14 May, I thought I should outline some of the latest developments in debate over the past six months.

The NowNewspaper reports on how Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts thinks road pricing would be a fair and equitable way to raise revenue for public transport in Vancouver.  She suggests to radio station CKNW that it could replace property tax and reduce fuel tax.

Delta Mayor Lois Jackson also says it might be fairer than property taxes, but it hasn't been researched enough.  The Delta Optimist reports that she is less than impressed by proposals for more property taxes to pay for Vancouver public transport.

The Globe and Mail reports that Richard Walton, the chairman of the TransLink mayors’ council, says that road pricing has to be a new way of funding, not an additional tax.  

The Vancouver Sun reported on how the Mayors of Vancouver's boroughs rejected a property tax increase to pay for public transport.

I will report shortly about the outcome and what lies ahead for British Columbia in road pricing.