The Better Question is a recurring series that grounds complex industry assumptions in facts, feasibility and community impact.

As states explore new ways to fund transportation improvements, tolling is often positioned as a practical financial tool: a user-based mechanism designed to generate revenue, manage congestion and accelerate delivery.

But in regions where tolling is not part of the existing transportation landscape, the conversation quickly broadens. A sound business case can show that a program can work, but that alone can’t determine whether it can earn confidence and endure over time.

In this edition of The Better Question, Heather Wills, vice president and national director of tolling, examines the difference between proving that a pricing program is feasible and creating the conditions for it to last.

Myth: If the numbers work, the project will succeed.

Where did this idea come from, and why does it persist?

Tolling has long been framed as a financial solution: users pay for infrastructure, generating revenue that can be reinvested into the system.

From a technical standpoint, this framing holds. Agencies rely on traffic modeling, revenue forecasting and cost-benefit analysis to determine feasibility and justify investment decisions.

But this view captures only part of the story.

Tolling is not just a financial transaction. It is also an operating model, a set of institutional decisions and a visible, recurring interaction between people and the transportation system. For users, it represents a daily choice, a perceived cost and a measure of value.

A traffic and revenue study can establish feasibility. But feasibility and durability are different tests. A program also has to have a clear purpose, workable governance, credible operations and financing, and a value proposition that customers and communities can understand. And those pieces have to hold together as conditions change.

What does the actual evidence tell us?

Federal guidance reinforces the importance of bringing stakeholders into transportation decisions early, with agencies noting that robust public engagement can help agencies identify issues earlier in the planning process, reduce the need to revisit decisions and improve project quality. For tolling programs, that reinforces a broader lesson: financial and technical analysis may establish what is possible, but a program also has to work institutionally, operationally and for the people who will use it.

Stakeholder engagement matters within that larger picture. It can improve understanding and surface concerns, but confidence is earned by explaining the purpose, making decisions transparently, operating reliably and following through on commitments.

Customers and stakeholders also need to understand why they are being asked to pay, see value in what they receive and know how costs and other key decisions are being handled.

How has STV evolved its approach?

When I look at a potential pricing program, the revenue forecast is only one part of the picture. I also want to understand why the program is needed, who has the authority to make difficult decisions, which partnerships have to be in place, how customers will experience it and how the program will operate and be financed over time.

• Clear purpose and value so the problem, intended outcomes and tradeoffs are understood
• Workable governance and partnerships that clarify authority, roles and decision-making
• Customer, stakeholder and fairness considerations built into design, communication and implementation
• Operational and financial credibility grounded in realistic assumptions and reliable delivery
• Adaptability over time as conditions, needs and expectations change

That means treating engagement as an essential source of insight, not a substitute for sound governance, reliable operations or realistic financing.

For me, the question is not simply whether each of these pieces exists. It’s whether they reinforce one another. A technically sound program can still struggle if customers do not understand its purpose, governance is unclear or operations fail to deliver the experience people were promised.

What does success look like in practice?

A durable pricing program brings those dimensions together. In practice, that means:

• A well-defined purpose and a clear explanation of the benefits and tradeoffs
• Defined authority, clear roles and timely decisions
• Partners who can work through difficult choices across agencies, stakeholder groups and communities
• Customers who understand why they are paying, how decisions are made and what they will receive in return
• Reliable delivery and financial plans that reflect actual costs and risks
• Flexibility to adjust as conditions, technology and customer needs change

None of these conditions operates independently. Governance shapes how decisions are made. Those decisions affect customer experience and trust. Operations determine whether the promised value is actually delivered. And changing conditions test whether the program can continue delivering that value over time.

If stakeholders are considering introducing tolling, what question should they be asking?

Instead of asking:

“Can tolling generate enough revenue to fund this project?”

Ask:

“What conditions have to be in place for this pricing program to work, earn confidence and endure?”

That shift changes the conversation from whether tolling can work financially to what it will take for the program to work institutionally, operationally and for the people who will use it. Revenue remains essential, but it becomes one measure of value rather than the definition of success.