Gothamist: Congestion Pricing Failure Fallout: Bloomberg Calls Assembly Cowardly, Shameful

west side Michael

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:29:51 -0500

Sheldon Silver has been a advocate of saving rent protections he is a god.

west side Michael

Thu, 10 Apr 2008 22:28:19 -0500

The parking garage mafia did not want this tax they defeated it at "20 dollars the first hour or any part thereof"plus tax why would they want this to pass? to lose business. This whole thing was a sham however well intentioned it's like Con Edison telling us to save electricity while a zillion hi rises are being built which use a zillion megawatts of juice.

pissyrabbit

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:46:24 -0500

Regardless of which side of this you are on, the issue now is that there was no vote. I, as a voter, want to know what my reps are voting for. These people just dodged the bullet by not standing up and being counted. "Cowardly" may be a little strong , however "douchey" is quite apt.

brooklyn and i

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:51:09 -0500

so if i want still to pay 8 dollars for entering Manhattan from Brooklyn you may should sent it to Christine. Quinn entities ? thank you Albany for not to put a tax of Brooklyn brooklyn and i

JacqueMehoff

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:10:27 -0500

tie up on the FDR due to some dumb hick who didn't know his commercial truck was not allowed. who did the news interview besides the dumb hick? single occupant drivers, black, white, asian, hispanic all cars with operator only. All stuck on the FDR. Let's clean that up first before some crazy convoluted payment schemes. anyone remember the PVB scandal? there's money to be made in techno/bureaucracy.

JenChungsBra

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:09:52 -0500

OMG, if I had a buck for every error I've ever found on Wikipedia! How silly. And his position of power makes his Manhattan district the more politically powerful piece of real estate in state government. I would never vote him out if he was my rep.

Murray Hillster

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:48:58 -0500

Reading Sheldon Silver's entry on Wikipedia is fascinating and reveals how very little he's done: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheldon_Silver Obviously, not complete, but interesting nevertheless. Managed to get the death penalty reinstated (then "ruled unconstitutional by the New York State Court of Appeals") and "In 1999, Silver was instrumental in the repeal of New York City's commuter tax, which taxed non-resident workers similarly to city residents" (sounds familiar) and then a long, LONG, history of stopping and/or blocking everything. Why does this guy represent anybody in Manhattan? As the NYT notes, he doesn't really seem to do much for his constituents.

Murray Hillster

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:44:53 -0500

Reading Sheldon Silver's entry on Wikipedia is fascinating and reveals

Think twice

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:01:10 -0500

Enforce carpooling and turn away single occupancy vehicles at exit ramps. Let's call it a "security measure".

kissel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:55:25 -0500

instead of whining, bloomberg should be fighting to get more federal money to improve the system first before herding more people into it (he actually should have been doing this all along instead of trumpeting a plan that anyone knew would go nowhere). even the officials in london warned that the improvements needed to be done first.

EastRiver

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:36:18 -0500

New Yorkers already put more money into the federal tax system more than they receive in federally funded projects. That's only because Wall Street rapes the average American and pays itself a handsome salary before collapsing the financial system. If you're a typical New Yorker chances are you aren't doing much to aid this imbalance unless you're a managing director at Goldman Sachs or a partner at Cravath with way to much time on his/her hands that you can comment on Gothamist in the middle of the day. Furthermore, I have yet to see how this data is compiled or if it takes into account benefits we receive for spending done elsewhere. I gladly welcome prudent highway spending in Pennsylvania if it means my food can get trucked here in a reasonable amount of time. Last I checked those vertical farms had not been built yet.

murphguide

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:00:53 -0500

I don't see why taxpayers from the other 49 states should be paying for a city in NY's public transit. New Yorkers already put more money into the federal tax system more than they receive in federally funded projects.

Bottomless Chips

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:36:06 -0500

Ace

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:33:58 -0500

DWM2008 (#6) Your posts are always filled with anti-Semitic and racist remarks. Why?

EastRiver

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:25:43 -0500

its funny - i can drive into plenty of areas of manhattan most times of the day without seeing this unbearable traffic all you people who DONT even drive keep talking about I don't need to own a car to know that Midtown traffic between 34th St to 57th St and between Eighth and Lexington Avenues and between the hours of say, 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM is a parking lot. But I have driven it myself on a few occasions and it sucks.

eyekantspel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:24:46 -0500

PlaNYC? wtf is that? do you work for the Bloomberg administration? I agree on the smoking ban and some of this other stuff, but just because he's right some of the time doesn't mean he's right all of the time.

andoman

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:20:52 -0500

The plan will be reincarnated some time in our lifetimes.

eyekantspel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:19:40 -0500

I don't see why taxpayers from the other 49 states should be paying for a city in NY's public transit. that's all part of the free money attitude that exists now. Wait another 8 years or so, when the cashflow from social security taxes that the goverment loans itself is less than the money it has to pay out. Factor in medicare, and we're basically screwed.

jnguy

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:16:18 -0500

rant begin. I love how short sighted everyone appears to be. I'm also very sad that Bloomberg was unable to push through congestion pricing, as I thought it would was a great idea, definitely worth trying, and something that New York City could once again lead the nation in. And I do admit that Bloomberg gets pretty whiny when he doesn't get his way, but this guy has still done some amazing things for our city. To go from a deficit to a surplus right after 9/11, the smoking ban, 311, PlaNYC, hybrid cabs, among other things. He is still a great mayor but people seem inclined to forget that pretty easily. end rant.

eyekantspel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:06:01 -0500

unbearable traffic? don't even need to drive for it to affect you. try getting out to JFK or LGA on a weekday That's true, but that's because the worst traffic problems aren't in lower Manhattan but are instead on/near any of the bridges or tunnels, or on major roads like the BQE, Grand Central Parkway, the LIE, the Van Wyck or the Belt Parkway.

Bottomless Chips

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:01:01 -0500

As others have noted, if you want to decrease the number of non-commercial drivers in Manhattan it's easy enough to do. Just eliminate or increase the cost of parking. YES! But the city doesn't need to increase the cost of parking, the free-market will set the prices as it already does. There is no crisis with driving in the city, and with fuel costs rising and rising we don't need to further tax people to dissuade them from driving; our suckling on the Middle East's teet for too long will limit driving across the country soon enough and spurn a better alternative fuel than ethanol. Can someone please explain why the city loses $354 million in federal funds for mass transit? Was congestion pricing mandated by someone in the federal government? Yes, and I don't see why taxpayers from the other 49 states should be paying for a city in NY's public transit.

JacqueMehoff

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:54:10 -0500

I thought this was the second revision? unbearable traffic? don't even need to drive for it to affect you. try getting out to JFK or LGA on a weekday.

Reality Czech

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:53:06 -0500

Basically, this didn't come down to making Manhattan only available to the wealthy, or taxing New Jersey or the outer boroughs. What this comes down to is there are a lot of selfish people who want to do what is more convenient for themselves instead of what is better for the city. Obviously, most of these people do not live in Manhattan, and the only time they do come in is to go to work. But, hey, this is the American way. This is why we're in the mess we're in now and it's why we will never actually be a civilized country.

arsguide

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:51:57 -0500

sheldon silver was against tax payers paying for a corporate stadium too. i actually like silver now. damn bloomberg. he wants manhattan to be even more exclusive for the rich - never mind the REAL traffic in bklyn and queens - at the same time he didnt protect brooklyn from all this short sided development that happened - damn bloomberg - yah for silver

murphguide

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:49:46 -0500

"The idea for congestion pricing didn't start in our Administration and it won't end today. The $354 million we would have received from Washington tomorrow will go to another city in another state." Can someone please explain why the city loses $354 million in federal funds for mass transit? Was congestion pricing mandated by someone in the federal government? Just asking...

likesrudylikesbooty

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:44:56 -0500

He had a chance to revise the initial proposal, which may have won support from those who were up in the air. Instead, he left it alone, said it was fine as it was, and took to calling anyone who opposes it, "stupid".

arsguide

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:43:39 -0500

its funny - i can drive into plenty of areas of manhattan most times of the day without seeing this unbearable traffic all you people who DONT even drive keep talking about

JacqueMehoff

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:40:31 -0500

joe sixpack is driving in from Queens and LI, only thing is joe sixpack nowadays is making 75K and above. don't let that joe sixpak handle fool you, it's fooling the politicians. joe sixpack will be at the mets opener this afternoon. I know joe sixpack. joe sixpack was on the news last night praising the decision.

GM

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:39:55 -0500

Can anybody explain why having a car appears to be a constitutional right? My impression of the federal DOT is that they are moving in a direction to begin ending federal subsidies of highways and handing over more roads to be handled by public/ private partnerships. Taxes are going up one way or another. If there is anything true in infrastructure, it is that the sooner the better for costs. Another way to look at is that I may pay social security but I'm not necessarily guaranteed any certain amount of that money back in the future. Why is the assumption that because we all pay taxes we all should have free access to the roads? We have had over a year since PlaNYC was introduced. Since then there have been little substantive arguments towards modernizing our transportation policies. Even if our elected politicians didn't support it, they have given no alternatives. Bloomberg will do this city a lot of good to keep the spotlight on the goings on in Albany (or the lack thereof).

Tim N.

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:38:15 -0500

It is interesting how many of the posts written here are challenging the stereotype of "dopey outerboroer" or "selfish SUVer from Jersey" or "elitist Manhattanite." I, for one, find myself forced to think of this a little differently (though when some Escalade with Jersey plates blocks the intersection or crosswalk I will probably revert). Personally, I live in Brooklyn and have to drive into the city from time to time (you try getting six dozen cupcakes on the #2 at 8:15 in the morning for the kids bake sale!), but I was totally down with the plan. It would have been a pain, but we would have dealt. There are more cars in the city than there were ten years ago... all you need to do is walk around and it's obvious. So something has to be done about this. I think we'll see a ban on single-occupant vehicles into Manhattan at rush hours pretty soon. Won't raise any money, but it will cut the number of cars down. The more I think about this, the more my wrath turns to Mayor Bling. This should be proof once and for all that a successful businessman does not always equal an effective politician, in fact, it usually results in a pretty inept one, as is the case with Bloomberg. I think his legacy will be one of failure... failure to land the Olympics, failure to land congestion pricing, failure to learn from his mistakes (how do you let the same political hack beat you TWICE?), failure to protect neighborhoods from raptuous developers and greedy bankers... after six years I think a pattern is developing.

JenChungsBra

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:36:02 -0500

I actually think Shelly was in favor of CP but just couldn't get his membership on board.

takethecannoli

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:32:51 -0500

So when is ol' shelly going to drop dead anyway? Pretty cowardly, not even having a vote.

likesrudylikesbooty

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:26:01 -0500

I don't know about green, but he sure seems red with rage, carrying on like a spoiled brat.

eyekantspel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:24:18 -0500

Those opposing congestion pricing are so often people that work and earn a living from working in Manhattan, live elsewhere and pay nothing for it. What is this theory based on? I make a healthy income and take the subway to work, as does almost everyone I know. There's no such thing as paying nothing to drive to work in Manhattan. Parking alone is probably $500 a month for commercial areas, plus costs of gas, ownership, tickets... Anyone who thinks Joe Sixpack is driving his Chevy from an outer borough and parking on the street for free is ill-informed.

IvoryJive

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:19:47 -0500

Nobody is mentioning that Silver also blocked Moynihan Station in a purely political move, so that it wouldn't happen under Pataki. Then, when Spitzer was elected, it was suddenly revived. Only then, the RE market went into the crapper, the bottom fell out of the funding, and MSG pulled out of the plan. $130 million in federal funds was lost on THAT project and now it looks like it will never happen. This arrogant f***er is either aggressively anti-transit or just a posturing sleazebag political maniac. There is no doubt in my mind that New York would be a MUCH better place without him. He should burn for this.

eyekantspel

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:19:42 -0500

Who can disagree that Manhattan needs to take new measures to deal with traffic congestion? I can. The effect of the status quo on economic development, air quality, urban acoustics, and just plain quality of life are deleterious. no change in 20 years, in fact, has gotten better with newer vehicles that don't spew soot every time someone steps on the gas. (urban acoustics-- lol, that's a good one). And yet the arguments tumble here into petty ad hominem attacks and that tired cry "no new taxes!" Neither of which are relevant, in the long run. A different opinion is not the same as a petty ad hominem attack. In the long run, making life more expensive for everyone is NOT going to change air quality, urban acoustics or the quality of life. In fact, if anything, if the behavior shifts this is supposed to encourage actually happened, large, noisy trucks doing deliveries between midnight and 6am would probably make urban acousitics worse. The environmental benefits of congestion pricing are largely empty promises. The major beneficiary of congestion pricing would be an organization which has repeatedly shown an unlimited appetite for more revenue with no change in service. The costs of setting up and maintaining the "ez pass" style system around Manhattan would eat into the revenues it would raise. As others have noted, if you want to decrease the number of non-commercial drivers in Manhattan it's easy enough to do. Just eliminate or increase the cost of parking.

Dave Hogarty

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:15:07 -0500

"we will also lose out on nearly $500 million annually for mass transit improvements . . ." Bloomberg makes it sound like we just shot down the transit fund faerie, who was on her way to drop a half-billion in cash in our laps every year. The reality is that he's lost the ability to siphon $500 million from the people who live and work in NYC and hand it over to the MTA, who we all know would spend it wisely and effectively [cough]. That $500 million is still going to be around to be spent; it's just not going directly into the coffers of the City. I'm agnostic on transit pricing, but I hate it when politicians who can't raise taxes make it sound like we've blindly refused to accept a free gift of manna from heaven.

nerdkiller

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:12:50 -0500

What an incredible joke. $354 million is a measly sum. The first phase of the 2nd ave subway is estimated at 3.8 BILLION, and that only goes from 125st - 96st and it's already way over budget. $354m is what they'll spend on overtime after this thing falls way behind schedule, has the MTA completed anything on schedule? Maybe I wouldn't have thought about it so much 2 years ago when I didnt need my car to get to work from manhattan to queens, but considering the enormous cost I would have paid for my reverse commute I gave this plan a serious look and realized what a joke it all was. Bloomberg is laying down a platform which he can use in the future to run as an electable "green" candidate for whatever office he chooses. I'm all for green, as long as it works. I say double the tolls for Jersey and Conn commuters. Let those states shell out for public commuter improvements, get their own drivers off our roads. I'm gonna go punch something, or maybe I should just go hi-five sheldon silver.

evidiot

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:07:18 -0500

No matter where you stand on this, the bottom line is Sheldon Silver screwed his own district and the entire city. When MTA fares go up again next year, we'll all know who to blame.

Medium Happiness

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:00:47 -0500

I had a discourse with Council Member Mr. Tony Avella asking that he explain why he was so outspoken against congestion pricing this is his non-response: Dear Mr. Weprin and Mr. Avella: As a purportedly educated people the two of you should be ashamed of your parochially mindless and outspoken stance against the congestion pricing plan. Seriously, what century do you live in? Fewer cars is a good thing. This city has better buses and subways than most of the cities I’ve ever visited. Do you disagree? You are both blow hards who do not deserve to be within 10 miles of any public office. It’s frightening that people as dumb and ill-informed as you two jab holes wield any influence in this city. Medium Happiness Dear Mr. Cesari: Judging by the nastiness of your email, I would say that Council Member Weprin and I were on the right side. Respectfully, Tony Avella Dear Mr. Avella: First, thank you for responding to my previous letter, I apologize for its acerbic tone. Nevertheless, I would like to know why you and Mr. Weprin are so vehemently opposed to the congestion pricing plan? Did you ever stop and think that you might be doing something unforgivably bad by convincing people that the congestion pricing plan is a rich v. poor issue? I concede, New York City has got to do something about the mis-distribution of wealth, but opposing this plan is not it. My fear is that the congestion pricing plan is now synonymous with “penalize the poor.” This is thanks to you and your brethren’s strange brand of constituent watchdogism, which may keep you in office, but does little else. In the end, truthfully, I know very little about what you do. You are probably a good person. But, I genuinely think that you have taken a giant misstep off a very high precipice by not supporting or at least helping to salvage the congestion pricing plan. New York City’s citizens and politicians are not infallible; we are all given to self-importance and need to take a step back sometimes and realize that we don’t have it all figured out. The city’s traffic needs to be fixed, and the congestion pricing plan would have been a great start. I think you owe the public a solid explanation and some proof of why the congestion pricing plan was so bad. To date, we have been given nothing but speculative talk and opining. As an aside, the MTA is going to need every dime they can get and you guys really shortchanged them by killing this deal. When they raise fares again or go bankrupt we’ll send you guys the thank you note. Sincerely, Medium Happiness

mlcastle

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:57:02 -0500

Yo, I think it's supposed to say "$354 million". If it were just $354 Bloomberg wouldn't even notice if he ponied it up himself.

camera_club

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:52:05 -0500

Those opposing congestion pricing are so often people that work and earn a living from working in Manhattan, live elsewhere and pay nothing for it. Those that are living in Manhattan are paying for it daily with high rents, taxes and cost-of-living and those who earn their living there and live elsewhere should pay for it too.

likesrudylikesbooty

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:43:49 -0500

Don't know if it will work. How will the environment-friendly Fresh Direct and Whole Foods trucks get through?

JenChungsBra

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:33:25 -0500

AAaaaahhhhh, the anti-semitism bubbles to the surface. What fun. Forget pricing people out of their cars, just GIVE LESS SPACE TO CARS. The city can do that without Albany's approval and it's guaranteed to decrease the numbers of cars on the street and increase transit usage and revenue. Cars are going to fill up whatever space they're given so GIVE THEM LESS. Take away lanes, create bottlenecks and traffic control devices to prevent dickwads from Westchester and Long Island from cutting through the local streets and let the traffic back up to Putnam County and Montauk. That would work.

fortunate one

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:29:47 -0500

someone must have put acid in the punch at the door to this thread

edEx

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:13:05 -0500

brace yourselves for another fare hike

DWM2008

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:11:03 -0500

it is just too much...

DWM2008

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:10:18 -0500

"Sad day" when New Yorker vote their against our interest and vote for someone from Boston...all he had to doo was outspend 10 to 1... That the Closeted freak and his paid for Cronies are now going to be exposed through a ponzi City council Funding scheme.... What exactly has Furher Bloomy done for NYC, outlaw civil rights, support George Bush in 2 presidential elections, Support the Iraq War, Beat deatain protesters while creating nyc's own little guantanamo on the West side where he could sell land real cheap to his friends (Sharpe James is on trial for the exact same thing). Lowered graduation rates, removed parents of the education process, increased poverty and finally gave away the farm for sports teams that threatened to leave NYC... He may be a jew, but he like most jews could give a shite about NYC unless they can milk it for as much miney as it can,.....screw em! He raised taxes by encouraging rampant speculation in the outwer Boro which have alost all of it varied local community flavors... and

David McCaffredy

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:10:08 -0500

There has to be a change in how NYC's mass transit is managed. Since the government has proven uncapable of maintaining such an essential utility - is it out of the question to start discussing the MTA being handed back to the public sector again? Today is a different business world than what it was in the 1950's...

fortunate one

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:09:37 -0500

Proof again that emotion will trump logic every time; politics are just the tail wagged by (not wagging) the dog that is the vox pop. Who can disagree that Manhattan needs to take new measures to deal with traffic congestion? The effect of the status quo on economic development, air quality, urban acoustics, and just plain quality of life are deleterious. And yet the arguments tumble here into petty ad hominem attacks and that tired cry "no new taxes!" Neither of which are relevant, in the long run. I'm not at all sure what nivek means to say, but I do accept that New York City is much more timid than it's ever been in undertaking ambitious public works projects for the general good. And I'm by no means a fan of Robert Moses, but I can't help wondering -counterintuitively- that he might not have been an advocate of "congestion pricing" were he alive today. Anyway, a real opportunity lost here, and a failure that will only cost more when it must, finally, be addressed.

Ph

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 10:56:58 -0500

Bloomberg can call all the names he wants, it doesn't make him less of a douchebag. Its funny though..when I first read that he was running for Mayor I laughed about it, then I started to like him, then I laughed about it again with the West Side Stadium idiocy and the IOC...now its congestion pricing. I go from liking to hating this guy on a weekly basis. Maybe because I'm Jewish...who knows.

JenChungsBra

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 10:48:23 -0500

Bloomberg spun the defeat of congestion pricing far better than he ever spun congestion pricing itself. Though when he loses he does take on the air of a whiny little bitch.

nivek

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 10:46:06 -0500

Honestly this is a chicken or the egg thing; either you do the infrastructure upgrades now and then tax the fuck out of drivers who then won't have a need to drive to get into Manhattan, or you tax them now and then do the infrastructure upgrades. But...as we all know, unless it's a private firm from Asia or Europe that gets the tax money and sets up their own rail, it will never get it done thanks to the MTA.