Final construction work is underway on a bridge linking Yeongjong Island, home to Incheon International Airport, with Cheongna International City in Incheon, Nov. 3. Yonhap
Incheon’s new bridge toll exemption policy, which The Korea Times previously reported had drawn criticism for discriminating against foreign residents by excluding them under a city ordinance, has yet to prompt a substantive response from authorities or city council members.
But as backlash has intensified around the discriminatory policy, some council members told The Korea Times that they see problems with it and are open to revising it.
Set to open in January, the 4.68-kilometer bridge — which has yet to receive an official name — will connect Incheon International Airport, Korea’s main international gateway, to Incheon’s major business hub of Cheongna International City.
Upon its opening, vehicles owned by residents registered at addresses in Incheon’s Yeongjong Island, Cheongna and the islands of Bukdo Township will qualify for unlimited toll exemptions ranging from 2,000 won for passenger cars to 4,400 won for large vehicles. The exemption will be expanded to all Incheon residents beginning in April.
Foreign residents, however, are excluded from the applications that began this month, even if they live at the same addresses as Korean nationals.
The city ordinance limits eligibility to addresses registered under the Resident Registration Act, a system local governments use for population tracking and administrative planning. Under Article 6 of the law, foreigners are explicitly excluded, as their address records are managed separately under the Immigration Act.
Amendments to the ordinance can be proposed by any of Incheon’s 40 city council members or by city administrators including the mayor and the Transportation Bureau.
Asked about possible revisions, the mayor’s office said the central question was policy feasibility rather than the mayor’s willingness, adding that the Incheon Free Economic Zone (IFEZ), which oversees the bridge, has said an amendment would be difficult. The city’s Road Division echoed that view, saying it would move forward with the necessary procedures if requested by IFEZ.
IFEZ said it was not considering an amendment for now, but would review the issue after the bridge opens in January.
“We’ve received many calls and complaints,” an IFEZ official said, adding that the policy remains under review.
The Korea Times contacted all 40 Incheon city council members for comment and conducted follow-up phone interviews with members of two key committees — Industry and Economy, which oversees the bridge, and Construction and Transportation, which handles the toll ordinance. The newspaper also reached out to council members representing districts expected to be affected when the toll exemptions take effect in January.
Of the 15 members interviewed by phone, two said they were aware of the issue and open to revising the ordinance, while most said they had been unaware of it and would look into the matter.
“I’m aware of criticism that the current toll policy falls short of the city’s standing as a global city,” said Seok Jeong-gyu, vice chair of the Construction and Transportation Committee.
Seok added that foreign residents who live in the city and pay taxes should receive the same benefits, saying the issue could be reviewed at the committee level and potentially lead to an amendment.
Lee Sun-hak, whose constituency includes Cheongna 3-dong, also said he was aware of the issue and believes the ordinance should be revised.
“Anyone — foreigner or otherwise — who contributes to the city should be eligible for these benefits,” said Lee, a member of the Industry and Economy Committee.
Lee added that the issue had not been fully considered when the ordinance was revised as recently as November and that, while another change so soon might be premature, it would still need to be revisited early next year.
Kim Yu-gon, chair of the Industry and Economy Committee and the ordinance’s lead sponsor, said he was unaware of the criticism and would review the issue again.
Sin Seong-yeong, whose constituency includes Yeongjong Island, said he had not previously reviewed toll exemptions for foreign residents but would raise the issue with fellow council members.
But Sin, vice chair of the Industry and Economy Committee, added that the high costs of building and maintaining such bridges, along with ongoing debate even among Korean residents over which Korean groups should qualify for toll discounts, make extending exemptions to foreign residents difficult.
Jeong Jong-hyeok, whose constituency includes Cheongna 1 and 2, said he was unaware of the issue and plans to consult IFEZ to verify the facts, including whether foreign residents were excluded for justifiable reasons.
Sin Yeong-hui, whose constituency includes the islands of Bukdo Township, said she had only just learned of the issue and would discuss it with relevant departments.
Foreign residents say policy is unfair
Foreign residents in Incheon said they could not understand the rationale behind a policy that excludes them.
Yang Gyong-ho, a 64-year-old Korean American who lived in Seattle for 20 years and has run a business on Yeongjong Island for the past six, filed a complaint with the city council last week.
“This toll policy makes no sense in a city that brands itself as an international hub trying to attract foreign residents,” Yang said. “Several bridges around Seattle charge tolls but do not distinguish between foreigners and locals.”
Under Washington State Department of Transportation policy, no one may be excluded from, denied benefits of, or otherwise discriminated against in its programs on the basis of race, color or national origin, in line with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
“Regardless of whether the toll is large or small, this is an international embarrassment,” Yang added.
Patrick Y., a 37-year-old Canadian who has lived in Incheon for about three years, said he welcomed public acknowledgment of foreign residents’ concerns but still found the policy hard to understand.
“Whether one views this as administrative convenience or shortsightedness, policies that directly affect residents’ daily lives, particularly in an IFEZ, should be carefully evaluated in light of the purpose and principles behind establishing such zones in the first place,” he said.
“The policy fails to account for the realities of a diverse resident population that contributes economically and socially to the region,” he added.
