At the direction of the San Francisco Transportation Authority, transportation planners in San Francisco are exploring the feasibility of charging motorists a user fee as a way to manage congestion, a concept known as congestion pricing, following receipt of a $1 million study grant from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Authority applied for the grant funds from the FHWA Value Pricing Program at the request of Jake McGoldrick, former District 1 supervisor and chair of the Transportation Authority.

The Mobility, Access and Pricing Study (MAPS) is developing and analyzing comprehensive packages that combine pricing for mobility with transit improvements, traffic flow enhancements, and other projects, to offer more sustainable choices to those traveling to and within San Francisco. For a link to MAPS, click here.

The next step is for advocates of the congestion toll to conduct an environmental impact report (EIR), a prerequisite under state law for implementation of such a tax on motorists. If the city does approve a congestion-pricing plan for San Francisco, the state legislature must give final approval.

Congestion-pricing advocates frequently point to the London plan. It is noteworthy that the mayor of London recently rolled back an extension of the congestion-charge zone introduced by former mayor Ken Livingstone last year amid a clamor of protests. New York state legislators also recently rejected a congestion-pricing scheme suggested by Mayor Bloomberg for New York City.

In a recent opinion piece published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Chamber President & CEO Steve Falk argued, "Because most (San Francisco) city congestion is caused by heavy regional traffic leading to and from bridges and freeways, not by drivers heading downtown, imposing a fee to drive downtown will only hurt San Francisco businesses and residents as has happened in Central London."

Falk goes on to suggest that, "At a time when people are paying close attention to every dollar spent, common sense says that charging to come to downtown San Francisco is more likely to suppress visits and spending than to serve as an economic stimulus and pollution control. City government will lose out, too, as fewer visitors will reduce the $250 million a year the city earns from parking garage taxes, meters and fines.

"We need solutions to reducing the regional traffic other than imposing a congestion fee. Incentives to use regional and in-city public transit, or to drive into the city on off-peak hours, would do more to ease congestion. In short, relieving regional traffic congestion requires regional solutions." For the full text of Falk’s column, "San Francisco is Not London," click here.