tal , 5 hours ago (edited 5 hours ago)

I agree – that decoupling of fees is what’s happening and is what the article is complaining about.

EDIT: I’d also add I kind of feel like this pattern is turning into something of a chronic problem for California. The same sort of thing happened with EVs getting to ignore carpool rules.

1. California tells people that if they buy an EV, they can ignore carpool rules and use the carpool lane without carpooling. Advocates get this past voters by billing it as being “green”.
2. EV companies sell a relatively-costly product, implying that the policy will continue ad-infinitum. They can charge a premium because they’re giving special road access bundled with the vehicle. This is lucrative for EV manufacturers; they’re actually profiting by selling access to a state service that they aren’t paying for.

https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/b57d9e24-df24-41f1-981b-fd4f0e2897e0.webp

3. Well-to-do people do the math and figure out that while the car costs more, it’s a pretty cheap deal for your own road. They buy the car.

4. California announces that the policy is going to expire. People who paid more and had an expectation of never-ending special road access are angry.

   abc7news.com/…/14604142/

   There are over 400,000 drivers in California who currently have decals - many of them bought their clean air vehicle to speed up their commute so losing that privilege is a big deal.

   A Tesla driver says, " It is frustrating. Like I said the main reason for the decision is driving in Bay Area traffic."