July 19, 2007
Congestion Pricing Might Just Happen (Maybe!)
Deal Is Reached!
While everyone else was busy trying to find someone to blame in the congestion pricing gridlock, it turns out that lawmakers have been actually trying to work out a plan. Of course, this may come too late for the city to qualify for federal funding, but progress is progress. The NY Sun reports that Albany Democrats "were close to agreeing to a deal in which they would authorize the city to begin implementing the infrastructure of the program, such as buying and installing cameras."
The deal would also create the congestion pricing commission that Assembly Leader Sheldon Silver had wanted - the commission would study congestion in the city. The Daily News reports that "Silver wanted assurances the MTA would submit a capital plan in early 2008 on how congestion pricing revenue would be used for mass transit" as well.
Politicians are hopeful that the city can still qualify for federal funding; Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno said the U.S. Department of Transportation sort of keeping the door open ... because they think the plan that the mayor submitted was the best plan, and this is the biggest community in the whole country."
And how is congestion pricing possibly making its way through Albany? Because Governor Spitzer is also negotiating with lawmakers about raises for legislators. Ah, politics.
Update: Monty Hall time, a deal was made between Governor Spitzer, Assembly Leader Silver, Senate Majority Leader Bruno and Mayor Bloomberg. Streetsblog has the details, here's some of them:
The 17 member congestion pricing commission is made up as follows:Senate Majority Leader Bruno's office issued a press release touting the agreements made, which included "additional property tax relief for seniors, secure desperately needed capital investments to help the State’s economy -- particularly Upstate -- and to provide New York City with the ability to move forward with Mayor Bloomberg’s ambitious plan to relieve traffic congestion." MTA CEO Elliot Sander gave a statement saying, "The MTA is thrilled that an agreement has been reached to advance congestion pricing, which is critical to funding the long-term needs of the transportation system."3 appointees -- Mayor
3 appointees -- Governor
3 appointees -- City Council
3 appointees -- State Senate majority leader
3 appointees -- State Assembly speaker
1 appointees -- Senate minority leader
1 appointees -- Assembly minority leaderSUMMARYOF CONGESTION PRICING LEGISLATION
· NYC is authorized to present and implement a detailed congestion pricing plan to address traffic congestion within a zone of severe traffic congestion in Manhattan. Such plan shall include (a) the geographic area to be covered; (b) the proposed dollar amount of any congestion pricing fee; (c) the technology to be used to implement such pricing plan; and (d) the number and scope of exemptions granted from such fee requirements. The Mayor shall submit the traffic mitigation plan by August 1, 2007.· NYC may not impose or collect any fee for traveling into or within designated zone unless the implementation plan has been approved by the State Legislature by March 31, 2008 and signed into law by the Governor, pursuant to a request from the Mayor that the State Legislature consider such plan where such request has been approved by the City Council.
· A NYC Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission shall undertake a review and study of the issues related to the implementation of the plan submitted by NYC. It may also review and study other plans to reduce traffic congestion and other related health and safety issues. The Commission shall have 17 members comprised of appointees by State and City officials.
And here's part of Mayor Bloomberg's statement,
"This agreement to move forward with congestion pricing marks a critical milestone in our efforts to make PlaNYC a reality, and to provide a better quality of life for us and for future generations of New Yorkers. By moving forward in our effort to clean our air and fight congestion, we will help our economy, improve public health and make critical improvements to our public transportation system...This agreement is a victory for the broad coalition of environmental and environmental justice groups, transit and public health advocates, organized labor and civic leaders who worked tirelessly for years to make real and important progress for our environment and our mass transit system. I also want to congratulate the leaders of both houses of the Legislature and the Governor for their support for this key element of PlaNYC and their commitment to moving it forward. We will continue to work together to access the federal funds that are available. Certainly there will be discussion of the details of various components of our plan, but together we have made a commitment to a greener, healthier and more livable New York."
|
Well this is certainly good news, but let's hope this doesn't take years to hammer out and implement.
Eh, I actually wouldn't be mad if it took a few years. It's a big step, so you gotta think it through and try to make all the parties happy.
Anyway - edit the Bruno quote in the third paragraph.
why couldn't they work on this over the weekend (before the deadline) instead of bitching and moaning. that way the chance of getting the federal money would be a lot better.
10 years, minimum before it hits and that's fine with me.
-Ph
The first year all the revenue will go to paying for the surveillance system by their own admittance. A new slush fund for the pols.
I can't believe how many people actually think this will do anything to effect the amount of vehicles on the road.
I'd love to see who is going to be exempt from paying this new tax...
Die congestion tax, die!
Bloomberg insisted it had to be done by Monday, and he threw a tantrum when it wasn't. Now it's happening on Thursday and everybody's friends again. So was Mike telling the truth or not?
Mike was never known for actually being upfront on anything.
(I'd love to see who is going to be exempt from paying this new tax...)
Senior citizens, members of certain public employee unions, polticians, their staff and relatives.
Quote from post #9: "members of certain public employee unions, polticians, their staff and relatives."
Exactly. Only the unconnected schlubs will have to pay.
If anything, cops, paramedics, and firefighters shouldn't be exempt... A few more of those people around only help the mass transit system.
Politicians, and MTA executives shouldn't be exempt either... Maybe the service would get better!
Ahh- who am I kidding... The only change in behavior will be the check being written to the government.
Die congestion tax, die.
How about all those cameras that will be installed to enforce the new tax?
Silver is still a completely useless politician and should be voted out next time he's up for re-election.
11 -- that will probably eat the entire 500M figure (though congress hasn't signed off on a single dollar for this program, so i doubt we will see the money). don't forget, they need some centralized system/network and software to monitor and ID everyones movements to tax them.
silver will never be voted out
his constituents are loyal little jews from the LES, plus latinos & asians who don't vote
"I can't believe how many people actually think this will do anything to effect the amount of vehicles on the road. "
It probably won't do much to reduce congestion, but it's a great source of funding for the MTA.
What's your problem with congestion pricing? What? You don't like to pay to use and abuse things? If you want to clog up teh streets and the air with your vehicle just so you are not inconvenienced, well pay up!
This is the best idea NYC has had in years and, yes, it will take a few years until it's implemented.
As for all those cameras, well, maybe it will reduce crime? heck, if you're not doing anything illegal, then what do you have to be worried about?
NYC are some of the rudest and wrost drivers in the world. Perhaps this will puit them back in the subways where they belong!
great... they'll need the extra revenue to cover up their shady accounting issues. excellent use of $$$.
ah, Reality Czech the moron's best friend is back.
The city has 2 more months to qualify for the federal funding, according to the Partnership for NYC.
I just wrote a paper on congestion pricing for a grad school class--I feel that it will be successful in that unlike other methods of traffic congestion, it makes driving less attractive. Methods that clear roadway space are simply "chasing their tails"--the space quickly fills up. By adding a fee, driving becomes less appealing, causing many drivers to opt for public transit. The beauty of this proposal is that it feeds the revenues back into public transit, producing a win-win situation for most drivers and non-drivers.
Reality Czech... We are already paying for the roads. As for paying up... We all will pay, even those who don't own a car. It will cost more to run a business, and that increased cost will be passed on to the consumer.
The biggest farce is the tax on trucks! How would deliveries be made using mass transit? If anything, cars should pay the $21 tax, and trucks would pay the $9.
The problem I have is that this will do exactly zero to effect the amount of vehicles on the road... It is purly a new tax.
Die congestion tax, die.
How about a congestion tax on the subways... Lets get more people on bikes! :rolleyes:
I have no problem with certain trucks paying more to enter the city. Fresh Direct customers have no problem paying for someone else to do their shopping. Now they can pay even more for the traffic problems their trucks cause not to mention the pollution from idling their refrigerated trucks and the extra waste from all of the extra packaging it takes to transport their product, especially corrugated cardboard.
NYC may be similar to London in some ways, but Americans ain't British and vice versa, culturally-speaking that is. I don't believe too many people who drive in now will stop driving in when this new tax is imposed. I also strongly doubt the money will be used for the stated purpose of aiding mass transit (maybe if things weren't so rotten in the subways, more people would already be taking them--the E train to name one line is HELL). Also, all those cameras, it's funny how that doesn't bother people very much--it really bothers me. Now in that way, if this goes through, New York will be MORE like London than ever.
It's not a new tax, because YOU DON'T PAY IT IF YOU DON'T DRIVE INTO THE CITY DURING THOSE HOURS, got it? So take the subway/train/bus and shut your trap.
Hey, I'm not for the truck free, but if it hasto be, then so be it, I'd rather trucks pay and have congestion pricing then have no congestion pricing.
Face it, New Yorkers are more concerned about their personal convenience than the betterment of the whole world.
Greedy fuggers.
Parking violations bureau scandal all over again.
How many Millions for the surveillance cameras? eraaaa, do I hear a briefcase opening?
How bout working on getting real revenue coming in first? start building Tolls.
Does anybody know anything about motorcycles in this proposal? Would we be taxed too? (same rate?)
I'm not such a fan of cameras everywhere, but in all honesty, how much privacy do you really expect to have on the streets of NYC.
I kind of doubt that the NYPD will be vigilantly monitoring the tapes looking for jaywalkers. Accordingly, I would imagine that the tapes could be quite useful for solving more serious crimes.
#27 That's a really good question. I think motorcycles should be exempt or at least pay a much lesser rate.
Actually, this very well could REDUCE costs to businesses. Most/much of the time delivery trucks spend in NYC is wasted due to traffic jams and gridlock. By reducing the amount of traffic, these deliveries can be made more efficiently, thus saving businesses money.
The fact is that currently all NYC residents pay taxes for road upkeep, while most residents don't even use them. Those who want to use our lovely potholed roads filled with exploding manholes are welcome to use them, as long as they help pay for the upkeep. This includes people who regularly use them for free (hello NJ, LI, and Westchester). The vast majority of New Yorkers will not have to pay one dime because of this plan. At the same time, they will (hopefully) receive mass transit improvements and a better quality of life (less air pollution, honking horns, cars conveniently parked in the middle of the crosswalk, hit and runs, etc...).
So.....the average New Yorker doesn't pay a dime, yet receives a host of benefits. Yeah, sounds horrible to me!
Motorcycles are (as far as I'm aware) way more fuel efficient than cars and take up less room to park. Makes sense to me that they should pay at a reduced rate. Similarly, I hope they make assholes with Hummers pay more.
Anything that annoys all you complaining outer-borough losers is worth it's weight in gold as far as I'm concerned.
so stupid.
This IS just another tax. Regardless of whether you own a car, you will end up paying more for some service that requires one.
AND this will do NOTHING to reduce the amount of cars.
Want to reduce cars? Reduce lanes.
How many pedestrian precincts are there in manhattan? Not many.
Give the car lanes to bikes.
More money to disappear.
They sold you a bs line about being green.
And you bought it.
Will somebody please explain to me what the big deal with the cameras is already!?!?!? Do you think they city is going to install facial recognition sofware and track you from your apartment door down to the corner newstand three blocks away where you buy your porn? They are much more efficient ways the government can find out what you're up to if they were so inclined. I welcome a system that could help track down specific vehicles like the British did with the recent terorism scare. And it has nothing to do with my being "scared" or a "sheep". I like seeing criminals caught.
@bklynd
"It's a big step, so you gotta think it through and try to make all the parties happy."
Like someone said if you try to make everyone happy you'll end up leading a miserable life, plus no one will be happy.
@#14
There's still Jews in the LES? Who would've guess. I thought they've been replaced by hipsters, yuppies
and the eurotrash who don't vote either.
Green Gene buys Hams from Harry Hummer.
Gene rides his bike to get to Harry's shop.
Harry drives his SUV from Westchester daily.
Will congestion pricing stop Harry from Driving?
Nope, it will cause Harry to raise the price of his Hams.
(He didn't get his house in westchester eating costs)
Result? Same amount of cars. More expensive ham.
And where did that 8 bucks actually go?
Nobody knows.
Where's the cigarette tax money?
Where's the cigarette tax money?
In the general coffers. Next question.
"Where's the cigarette tax money?"
Ronaldo has it.
While I strongly disagree with GlennQ, he does raise one interesting question... which is what about police cars, motorcades, etc...
I'm still in favor of this plan (some of you folks are plainly misinformed... it will be a boon for businesses, which is why all the major business groups in NYC are strongly backing it) but I do admit to some queesiness when the politicians start getting their hands into it.
[32] wrote:
I live in Brooklyn and I'm in favor, though the spoiled Manhattanite snootiness is almost enough to make me change my mind.[33] wrote:
Want to reduce cars? Reduce lanes.Once again - how can people continue to claim that this won't reduce cars, when it HAS reduced cars in other cities? What do people have to support this conclusion, other than simply saying, "Well, uhh, New York is different"?
Why would reducing lanes reduce cars? Are fewer people driving into the city from Brooklyn because the lower level of the Manhattan Bridge is closed? No.
Tim, how's it going to be a boon for business? I don't see it making business better or worse.
just what we need, more people taking the subway, because there's certainly plenty of room on the subway! and don't forget, mass transit also means buses stay and we certainly don't have enough buses blocking traffic!
This is going to be a great program when it finally works, and I do hope the $500M is still up for grabs.
Also, truck deliveries into New York City will now take place at night. Nothing will mysteriously cost more.
The money will be used to build bus rapid transit, the 2nd Avenue subway line and maybe, eventually, some LRT's. In the meantime they will probably buy some new trains too, which means more frequent subways. And they are extending the G.
Any questions?
This is good news. The concept of charging for drivers to enter Manhattan, to reduce congestion, is a good one. The actual plan advanced by Bloomberg was terrible. The zone was too small and the hours covered too small, so instead of reducing congestion it would have just raised revenue for the city, and pushed traffic elsewhere. It ignored the fact that Manhattan is an island, so you could accomplish the same thing just by putting tolls on the bridges, or even increasing tolls where they exist.
The process started might result in a better plan. Though I don't trust Albany at all, its hard to see how it could result in a worse one.
43... u r probably not that smart. if deliveries happen at night, small store must keep a night shift, this adds significant cost. as someone said earlier, the 500M never existed, congress has not approved a single cent.
London has not lessened its traffic because the plan there was botched in its implementation.
Motorcycles are worse for the environment than cars as they do not have to meet the same standards, so they should be charged more, if this is about the environment. (Kids with asthma.)
It's not going to put a dent in the asthma rates if you believe the studies that say global warming and higher CO2 levels are causing more pollen.
nooo why god why
- njguido.com
Stop spreading the BS that this is going to increase the price of goods in the city. The trucks are only charged one charge per day, therefore if they make multiple deliveries the cost quickly becomes negligible (in fact, it can be less than the gasoline wasted in traffic).
Small trucks and vans are charged $8 a day
large trucks are charged $21/day unless they install emission control equipment, then the charge is a paltry $7/day, equivalent to two 3.50/day tolls.
The truck contains a lot of stuff of very high value, the addition of a few dollars in cost will not be significantly passed on to the consumer!!!!!
[46] wrote:
Incorrect. As of the Fourth Annual Monitoring Report released last June (most recent available; note link to PDF file), congestion is reduced by 25%; emissions within the zone are decreased as well.A trial congestion charge was also implemented in Stockholm; congestion was also reduced by 25% and waiting times during rush hour decreased significantly.
Experience has shown that it works. (If, by some chance, it gets implemented here and it doesn't work, it can always be repealed.) Does anyone have any actual EVIDENCE to support their claims that pricing won't reduce congestion? Or do you just want to keep repeating unfounded conclusions?
Also, the 500 Million is a share of a federal highways administration "urban partnership grant" to study road pricing. It doesn't have to be approved by congress, and yes, it does exist. Grants don't need to be authorized directly by congress.
Who knows if it will cut down on traffic. If it does, great nice secondary bonus. The true positive is that those who actually use the roads might actually have to pay for them. I and millions of others pay high taxes, with a lot going to the road. Non-residents pay nothing and use it probably more then the city dwellers. So my congestion pricing was quadruple the rush hour tolls on access points into the city. Or if you want you can start paying the city portion of the income tax too, choice is yours. Now if it can cut down on congestion as well beautiful, and little bit would help those of us trying to use public transportation. If you can afford to park in the city zones targeted you can afford a congestion tax, we're not talking about the working class here, no way someone making $30-$45lk could afford to park in the city.
As for the idiots in Albany, leave it to them to wait afew days just so they lose out on money. Whatever side you fall on this issue, that was a total f-up. They should all be canned in the next election, starting with do-nothing-but-bitch-and-complain-about-others-not-bending-over-for-him-silver