Scale the express lane fees by income level. For lower-income drivers, it might be worth $1 a day to use the express lane. For higher income drivers, it might be worth $10 or $20 a day. That would be the only way to make it fair.

But ultimately I agree that we need better public transportation options, not just more roadway to stack up cars for a a few years until it's just as bad as it is now.

In Article: "$176 million proposal by VTA to convert the existing carpool lanes to express lanes" and "The agency collects roughly $1 million in revenue from tolls each year" . This doesn't include maintenance, billing, etc.
Thus, we spend $176 say for a maximum of 10-20 years that the people who benefit the most pay into only $1 mill/year?
In what way is this not a subsidy for rich drivers willing to pay?

correction:
we spend $176 million say for a maximum of 10-20 years that the people who benefit the most pay into only $1 mill/year?

They pay at best 10% of the cost, and get a 90% subsidy for the cost of the resource they use. In what way is this something gov should subsidize? These are not the neediest people who will be able to use it.

You know what would be the fastest and free? Get rid of the carpools lanes. The whole concept of 'let's restrict the amount of throughput at the times the throughput is needed the most' has always been the dumbest idea in the first place. Costs nothing except to take the signs down.

…or just make a friend or meet a coworker that you can share rides with. It costs nothing and cuts down on your net carbon emission by half.

(The whole point of these things is to incentivize that behavior. It's on you to take the government up on its offer to get you to work faster).

@or

Yeah, good luck finding someone where your schedules and work places line up so that the carpool lanes create an incentive. You must not work. Ride shares rarely work foe anyone without creating a longe commute time. The incentive simply is not there and it's totally unrealistic.

Plus the net carbon emission concept is totally false, if I cut mine in half but increase everyone else's the net effect is higher.

Generally what I see in Silicon Valley is everyone is incentivized to not interact with other humans, stare at some personal device and be very fearful of others at all times.

What would make sense to me is working on first and last mile solutions as well as creating better transit options to airports.

In the first 3 months of this year I have either driven or been driven to both SFO and SJC a total of 8 times. This is mainly due to the fact that there are no easy, reliable options to get to our airports other than car. I have on several occasions been sitting in traffic that isn't moving and on at least one occasion been very concerned about missing a flight. For each of these trips, a bus that traveled between SJC and SFO on highway 101, stopping at about every 7 miles at an off highway parking lot (but right beside the highway) would have been a suitable alternative. Dropping someone off at one of these parking lots would have prevented two trips on the highway and a full bus would have prevented something like 80 cars on the highway assuming a passenger was dropped off rather than using long term parking. I wonder how many trips could be saved on our highways if we had efficient bus connections to our airports.

Similarly, if Google can provide an efficient, reliable, clean bus for its workers traveling up and down the highways, why can't VTA do something similar? VTA approach transportation as providing a service for those who can't afford to run their own vehicle. Instead they should be looking at providing a service for regular commuters that is faster and more efficient than a private car that gets stuck in traffic and has to circle for parking. A luxury commuter service on highways with parking lots and efficient dedicated shuttles to areas of high employment in luxury buses with free wifi, could be envisioned. Then using dedicated shuttles, as well as other first mile/last mile, options, just might relieve some of the congestion on our highways.

VTA needs to review its vision. It is not always a long route snaking around residential neighborhoods that will entice people to use it. It is providing an efficient, reliable, clean, alternative commute that will make a difference. If Caltrain can do this well with trains on a track, then VTA can do similar with luxury buses operating on the highways.

Just how fast do you think you'll go in a carpool lane clogged just as badly as the other lanes?

Oh sure, there may be a mathematical difference, but people who think opening up the carpool lanes will do ANYTHING to eliminate traffic or how long your commute is, is going on what they think they know, not what the actual facts are regarding opening those lanes and their imagined benefit to the overall flow.

@ Fairness not Equality

"Scale the express lane fees by income level."

Care to explain how you're going to enforce that? If you drive a new Audi you pay $10, but if you drive a 1992 Civic you pay $1? Riiiiight. Typical CA approach: Add more rules and regs.

Also, while mass transit sounds great the reality is that it WILL be a money pit, whereas a toll lane is a revenue source. I don't think there is a single public transit system in the Greater Bay Area that is self-sustaining.

The other factor is culture and habit. People like their cars. You can argue until the cows come home about why they shouldn't, but they do. I have quite a few co-workers who come from Europe where mass transit is used a lot. Whenever the topic of public transit comes up, they all pretty much say, "No one takes mass transit because they like it. It's just very very expensive to own a car in Europe."

Are you seriously asking how the government is going to figure out how much someone made last year?

One criticism of the VTA's plan presented last year for combined HOV and toll lanes on Highway 85 was that the added lane would end at 280 for Mountain View (north) bound traffic causing an even worse traffic jam. So the VTA's answer now seems to be somehow making space to continue the extra lane in each direction to 101. How? At what additional cost? When? The VTA may be right about one thing: toll lanes lead to more toll lanes. Government agencies that can profit from tolls are joining with special interests that will also profit and convincing environmentalists that tolls on all roads covering every lanes will discourage driving and help pay for the true costs of driving. At the same time as toll lanes are being promoted and added, politicians in Sacramento want a mileage tax.

I think it is true that people in Europe find car ownership more expensive from here. But, it doesn't stop them owning cars.

From my impression of European friends and acquaintances, the reason they use public transportation is because it is reliable, safe, clean and efficient as well as it can often be difficult to use a car for work. Compared to here, very few work places give free parking to all employees. They just don't have the space to do so. If someone does have a place to park provided by their employers, it is considered a perk. For this reason, public transport is for everyone, not just those who can't afford a vehicle.

As an aside, they don't have dedicated school buses, the kids ride the regular buses. Many of the larger towns have dedicated bus lanes and any type of bus can use them. This makes buses move quicker than regular traffic. The dedicated bus lane possibility on ECR sounded very different than the rules for European bus lanes.