Gothamist: Governor Paterson Supports Congestion Pricing

iralarry

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 13:44:25 -0500

I have a car and NEVER drive in to the city, NEVER. Public transportation is the way to go. I am not convinced that CP will achieve this and if the law goes into effect before the masses (for example) scurry to the 4 line from Brooklyn every AM, I can not imagine the MTA having the wherewithal to manage the crush with either more trains or more frequent arrivals into bowling green. Money may not even come pouring in if the idea of spending so many extra dollars will cause people to not drive, then where are we? No more extra revenue and hundreds of thousands of more people jamming into overcrowded trains. I fear this will not work because it was rushed into legislation for fear of loosing the 300 plus million promised the MTA. Where are the public forums on this? Perhaps this should be put to a referendum.

snowman

Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:50:46 -0500

Does anyone know, will congestion pricing apply to motorcycles and scooters?

Damien Walder

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:48:37 -0500

Suggest making congestion levees tax deductible for essential service commuters (eg Fire Dept. Police services, EMS) who might use their vehicles differently and not live right in the core. Lawyers and Traders? Charge them extra.

nonumentalart

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 05:07:44 -0500

i agree with edgar. and in addition people don't need cars in this city. they should have to pay many more fees for owning them...ride a bike, walk..get some exercise fatties! you don't need your suv and the environment doesn't need the pollution...that being said..the MTA is absolutely run by monkeys

blablanyc

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:50:11 -0500

How can you charge anyone to use public roads that are paid for by tax dollars?

blablanyc

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:49:13 -0500

The costs of this tax will be passed on from delivery services. The cart guy you buy coffee from in the morning will pass the costs on down to you. Or maybe they will cease to operate. Small businesses will be effected. The price of products in grocery store, beer at a bar, everything will increase because of the tax.

Jerky

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 02:53:23 -0500

So geniuses, then, what is your alternate plan to alleviate traffic? Since I'm sure you all have degrees in urban planning, and are familiar with the most recent published papers of traffic simulations, let's hear it!!

Steven

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 01:07:44 -0500

Last time I checked driving into Manhattan cost an arm and leg without any congestion pricing. The bridge or tunnel tolls, parking, wasted gas sitting in traffic yet people still drive into Manhattan. Look at how expensive gas is now. Are people driving any less?

JenChungsBra

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:56:53 -0500

"In other words, congestion not dropping as much as expected would be a sign that the economic deadweight being cleared up by pricing was bigger than we expected. This would be a plus for the economy." It's quite sad Edgar that you consider those who would be relegated to the subways by congestion pricing to be "economic deadweight." I consider them to be equal citizens as the rest of us equally entitled to use of the city's streets. If we're really going to decrease congestion then it shouldn't be by pricing people off the streets so that the Donald Trumps of the world can continue to drive unimpeded. It would be better to just close all the streets period. Or, since whatever street capacity that exists is likely to be filled by someone, decrease street capacity.

JenChungsBra

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:51:20 -0500

BTW, don't forget that for Jersey residents who already pay the Port Authority $8 to cross the Hudson the congestion pricing scheme is an actual BENEFIT. They don't have to pay any extra and there might actually be a little less traffic, thereby giving them even more incentive to drive. How wonderful.

JenChungsBra

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:49:12 -0500

Nicely wrong, Edgar. Right now one of the main inhibitors that's keeping many wealthy suburban people from driving into the City is congestion itself. Reduce congestion and the space will merely be filled by someone for whom the $40 a week charge is meaningless. There are hundreds of thousands of wealthy Westchester, NJ and Long Island residents alread paying through the nose for their monthly transit and parking passes, not to mention the subways many of them take to work once they get here. Those people are already driving their BMWs to Metro North parking lots and the like. It would be nothing for them to keep driving into the City if congestion is truly decreased. So let's not call this a congestion scheme -- it's a REVENUE scheme. And part of that revenue is going to come from delivery trucks. And that cost WILL definitely be passed along to the public.

snowman

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:29:25 -0500

nicely done edgar

edgar

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:39:27 -0500

In other words, expect prices NOT to go up, since companies will not have to pay delivery men as much to sit around in traffic all day like they do now.

edgar

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:38:31 -0500

You guys are wrong about prices, so stop talking out of your asses or educate yourselves with a little math/econ before "theorizing" so wrongly. This solves a basic concept central to Economics known as the "Tragedy of the Commons"--people who don't NEED to drive into the center of town do because it's free, so they don't bear the brunt of the social cost of their decision. With congestion pricing in effect, those who need to drive into the city--truck drivers, delivery men, etc.--will be able to get in and out quicker. Congestion will find a LOWER equilibrium level under pricing; congestion WILL NOT be the same as it is now, since not everyone will find it worthwhile to drive in if it's more expensive. To the extent that congestion DOESN'T completely disappear, it will be because people who economically needed to get into the city before (hence why they'd be willing to pay the fee) but couldn't because of all the congestion will finally be able to get in. In other words, congestion not dropping as much as expected would be a sign that the economic deadweight being cleared up by pricing was bigger than we expected. This would be a plus for the economy.

blablanyc

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:39:35 -0500

This is a BAD idea. Expect the price EVERYTHING to go up.

Steven

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:35:14 -0500

Always looking to make money off people. Congestion pricing isn't going to help the MTA one bit.

Spiritof76

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:05:55 -0500

Wow. In office just a few days and he's already done more than Spitzer in his whole first year. I like this guy.

eyekantspel

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:52:22 -0500

Establish the fee as recommended by the Commission, including a surcharge on taxis and livery vehicles. so taxi fares, as well as cost of goods, will go up. Eliminate the Manhattan long-term parking tax discount for vehicles parked within the zone. parking for residents goes up. authorized emergency vehicles; safety, traffic and parking control, and inspection vehicles; sanitation vehicles; school vehicles; and privately operated over-the-road buses. government "officials" get a free pass. The funds raised by the fee will be used, after deducting for the cost of operations, to support the MTA capital plan... I'm sure they'll find a way to swallow most of the revenues as cost of operations. For capital expenses derived from Congestion Pricing, the MTA will follow all legally applicable prevailing wage laws. make sure the unions get theirs.

eyekantspel

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:45:55 -0500

"Congestion Pricing addresses two urgent concerns of the residents of New York City and its suburbs: the need to reduce congestion...and thereby reduce pollution and global warming; and the need to raise significant revenue for mass transit improvements." It won't do anything for the first; congestion will remain the same- trucks, busses, taxis, limo services. As for raising significant revenue (otherwise known as TAX), yes, it will do that. I very much doubt that mass transit will improve. The subways are already crowded and with all the $ pouring into the MTA, they still can't keep the place maintained. I suppose they might be able to increase the bus frequency... which will just add to congestion. Once the government sees this as an easy source of revenue, and notes that congestion hasn't changed, it will have an excuse to increase the toll every now and again to cover the costs of the system. We'd be better off subsidizing his affairs at the Days Inn, at least that way only a few of his constituents get fucked.

Think twice

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:38:03 -0500

Good for him.

Ethan

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:18:05 -0500

More red tape.