Increasing the cost to cross the Tacoma Narrows Bridge isn’t sitting well with many residents and business owners in Gig Harbor and the Key Peninsula area already hurting due to the weak economy.

More than a dozen people spoke during last Wednesday’s sometimes emotional public hearing as the bridge’s Citizen Advisory Committee considers a recommendation to raise tolls on the eastbound bridge for the first time since 2008.

Ruth Baldwin cried as she said it would be cheaper to drive to Shelton to shop than pay a higher toll to visit Tacoma.

“I can’t afford it,” she said. “I used to go to Tacoma quite a bit, but I try not to if I don’t have to.”
Janet Gonzalez said she must cross for her job in Renton, while her son’s caretaker must come from the other way. She said tolls strain the budgets of both households and that the state needs to do a better job of controlling costs.

“We live over here, and we get stuck with the brunt of it (paying off the bridge), and that’s not the way it should be,” she said.

Other speakers said higher tolls would hurt business and increase the cost of providing goods and services.

“You have an effect with an increase on the bridge, not only on the people who cross it but on the entire economy of the peninsula. ... I think you need to take a look at other options,” said Russ Bucy of Gig Harbor.

He suggested the committee look at variable pricing, which is being used on the state Route 520 floating bridge in Seattle, or lower tolls for people who frequently cross the Tacoma Narrows Bridge.

It appears the committee has no choice but to recommend an increase in the face of flat toll revenue. Payments on the money borrowed to build the bridge are set to increase, plus some major bills are coming due, and there’s a need to replenish an emergency reserve fund.

Staff members from the state Department of Transportation have presented the committee with four preliminary options. They would raise Good to Go! to $4.25 or $4.50 from $2.75; increase the price at the toll booth to $5.50 or $6 from $4; and increase the fee for pay by mail, which began in December, to $7 or $7.50 from $5.50.

The committee has meetings set for Feb. 22 and March 8, if needed, to draft a recommendation to the state Transportation Commission, which sets the toll rates. The committee is scheduled to send its recommendation March 20.

The new rate would take effect as early as July 1, nearly five years after the bridge opened.

The anemic economy has taken a toll on bridge use. The state has revised the estimated number of vehicles making round trips on the bridge in 2012 from 16 million to 14 million. Fewer vehicles means less revenue.

The state sold 10 series of bonds that total $680 million to finance the eastbound bridge’s construction under the assumption that a series of toll increases would cover rising principle and interest payments.

State law doesn’t allow restructuring of that debt, so stretching out the payments to moderate the increases isn’t an option.

In addition, the state deferred payment of the sales tax on bridge construction. It must pay $5.75 million a year for 10 years starting in December.

Speakers said those payments must be put off, if not eliminated.

“It will kill this community in the middle of a recession,” bridge watchdog Randy Boss said.

In addition, a $5.3 million startup loan from the state’s gas-tax account also needs to be repaid.

In March 2010, the state Transportation Commission left tolls unchanged after lawmakers postponed repayment of that loan. Last year, an increase was avoided by dipping into a reserve fund.

Without new revenue, ongoing expenses are projected to empty the reserve in November. A recent state policy requires reserve to pay bridge expenses for 45 days in case of emergency, totaling about $8 million during the upcoming fiscal year.

The commission last raised tolls on the bridge by $1 in 2008.