To the Editor:

I am condensing my public comments filed with the Mackinac Bridge Authority (MBA) about its alternate proposals for a 24-hour round trip for commuter card use. Only a government bureaucracy could offer discounts to the public, and then when people actually sign up by the government's own rules to save money, publicly (in this newspaper) call it "abuses" by the public. Toll revenue is down mostly because of the toll increases, even more so than the economy.

The MBA blunted organized opposition to those increases by keeping commuter increases minimal for "locals," and now that they have what they want, are coming in the back door to gradually eliminate commuter discounts. If it is going to do that, the MBA must decrease general tolls back to about $2 one way. Until commuter cards are discontinued, the current minimum deposits sufficiently ensure that only repeat users (commuters) will buy them.

The state continues to spend on Detroit roads the five million dollars a year from the feds for the Bridge portion of I-75, and not a cent on the Bridge, causing the 2007 toll increases. Representative Gary McDowell told me that he agrees with the governor in spending the bridge money "downstate." Who does he represent? They are requiring a ransom from mostly locals from the economically depressed U.P. to subsidize Detroit roads we rarely use. They need to creatively find a way to spend that money on the Bridge, as intended, rather than creatively look for ways to squeeze more money out of local people. We cannot afford these proposals.

A "commuter" by definition is anyone who crosses repeatedly. The MBA has a right to determine the frequency of crossing that qualifies for a discount, and set up the software accordingly. That is the extent of its role.

I have suggested the following alternatives: 1. Set an expiration date per card of one year after those trips purchased (use or lose paid trips within one year); or, 2. establish an annual pass on a calendar or fiscal year basis, like we have for state parks. Allow an option of say $150 per year, per car or pickup truck (with license number and vehicle description on the card) for unlimited usage, increasing 5% per year (which gives the MBA all money up front); or 3. Revise the 24- hour proposal to a one-week proposal. Why should a person who lives in Petoskey be able to get a discount to go hunting at their camp in the EUP for a day a dozen times a year, when a sales rep living in St. Ignace and working in the Lower Peninsula all week would not qualify because they can't return home at night? And by the 24-hour rule, MBA would be blocking some patients from getting medical care. A shopping trip to Traverse City mall's would qualify higher than someone's livelihood or hospitalization.

Under any proposal, the current "one size fits all" expiration date of December 31, 2009, must be canceled, as most commuters will not be able to magically use up all paid trips that exact date, especially with minimum deposits.

Who came up with the 24-hour proposals? They bear no absolutely NO relationship whatsoever to who is or is not a "commuter." Not all commuters are daily commutes. Circumstances often do not permit true commuters to return within 24 hours.

Meanwhile, the MBA resorts to its old tricks of putting forth two horrible and similar proposals, in hopes of looking like heroes when they accept the lesser of the two evils they have created. Most people I have talked to believe the MBA has already decided, and been told how to decide by the pro-Detroit governor. Then they most likely circumvent state public hearing laws by scheduling for them a time when they know most people have to work. This is all designed to keep the public from hearing out loud what their neighbors say, in order to minimize vocal opposition when they have to face the people.

Current commuters, determine how much you currently spend per year on tolls. Then if either of the 24-hour proposals are passed, join me by eliminating and consolidating trips, in order to cross the Bridge less than half as often as you do now, thereby spending less, not more per year. This will result in a toll revenue decrease from commuters for the Bridge as a direct result of their counterproductive actions. Of course, that would just lead to them coming back for another increase later, and another, and another... Tom North St. Ignace