A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 33.2-612 and 33.2-613 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 6 of Title 33.2 a section numbered 33.2-617, relating to toll relief; maximum charges.
HB1399 would create a new statewide toll-relief cap for Virginia residents using electronic toll collection devices. Under the bill, no resident could be charged more than $200 per month for tolls on toll bridges, toll ferries, toll tunnels, or toll roads in the Commonwealth through an electronic toll device; once that cap is reached, additional use would be toll-free for the rest of the month. The Department of Transportation would be required to implement the cap and could adopt regulations to carry it out.
The bill also revises existing toll-exemption and toll-operations rules in §§ 33.2-612 and 33.2-613. It preserves and restates the prohibition on unauthorized free passage over revenue-bonded toll facilities, keeps the list of officials and certain public-service vehicles that may use toll facilities without paying in the performance of official duties, and expands the emergency authority to suspend toll collection during disasters, hazardous incidents, major crashes, and mandatory evacuations. It also adds a provision allowing courts to assess lost toll revenue, up to $2,000 per incident, against persons found responsible for incidents that trigger toll suspension.
The bill’s impact on state law would be significant for toll policy and revenue administration. It would impose a new monthly toll ceiling on resident drivers, require the Department of Transportation to track cumulative toll charges by user, and create a new misuse prohibition against sharing or transferring toll devices to game the cap. It would also continue and clarify exemptions for certain public officials, emergency responders, school buses, commuter buses, and some disability-related toll users, while maintaining special rules for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel, Richmond Metropolitan Transportation Authority facilities, and public-private toll facilities.
The general sentiment reflected in the available record is limited because there were no recorded committee transcripts or floor votes, but the bill did not advance and was stricken from the Transportation docket on a 21-0 vote. That suggests the proposal did not receive committee support despite unanimous opposition to moving it forward. The absence of debate records makes it difficult to identify detailed arguments for or against the measure from the legislative discussion itself.
The main point of contention is likely the monthly toll cap and its effect on toll revenue, congestion management, and administrative enforcement. Supporters would likely view the bill as toll relief for Virginia residents and frequent commuters, while opponents may have been concerned about reduced toll collections, fairness to nonresidents, and the potential for device-sharing abuse. The emergency toll-suspension provisions and the interaction with public-private toll agreements could also raise operational and contractual concerns for toll operators and the Department of Transportation.
HB1399 would add a new toll-relief framework to Title 33.2 of the Code of Virginia by capping monthly electronic toll charges for Virginia residents at $200 and requiring the Department of Transportation to administer that limit. It would also amend existing toll exemption statutes to preserve current official-duty exemptions, emergency toll suspension authority, and special-use rules for certain facilities, while adding enforcement provisions against misuse of toll devices and allowing recovery of lost toll revenue in some incident-related cases.
The available legislative record shows little substantive debate, but the bill was ultimately stricken from the Transportation docket by a 21-0 vote. That outcome indicates the committee did not support advancing the measure, even though no recorded testimony is available to show specific arguments. Overall, the sentiment appears unfavorable to the bill’s approach, likely because of concerns about toll revenue, administration, and operational impacts.
The central controversy is the proposed $200 monthly toll cap for residents, which could reduce toll revenue and require new tracking and enforcement systems. Another likely point of contention is the bill’s anti-abuse language, since the cap could incentivize sharing or transferring electronic toll devices. The emergency suspension provisions and the interaction with public-private transportation agreements may also have raised concerns among toll operators, transportation officials, and policymakers focused on preserving existing contractual and financing arrangements.