Riverdale Assemblyman Jeff Dinowitz certainly isn't alone in the constant Albany game of cutting MTA funding or denying it new sources of revenue year after year and then grabbing a pitchfork when his constituents express anger at the service cuts that come as a necessity because of his anti-transit votes, but he is among the most shameless:
"The people who live in the outer boroughs, especially the outer edges of the outer boroughs" are always the hardest hit, Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz told the MTA officials. "There are people who work hours other than nine to five, Monday to Friday."
Rather than threatening to cut service and hike fares, which Mr. Dinowitz referred to as "scare tactics," he suggested that the MTA work with city and state officials to find additional funding, such as from last year's federal stimulus, and come up with a more reasonable budget for future years.
"You're picking on the elderly, the disabled and students," Mr. Dinowitz said. "This is not the way to improve the city."
Nice pitchfork, Assemblyman. However, your voting record and loud soapbox against congestion pricing denied the MTA of a badly-needed annual infusion of some $500 million dollars. That's on you and every other elected official in Albany who decided to side with the wealthy suburban car commuter over the vast majority of metro-area residents who take transit to work. So either put away your completely disingenuous pitchfork and start doing something about the MTA's long-term fiscal outlook or just shut the hell up.
We are creating this blog solely because Silver single-handedly killed congestion pricing in New York City.
Congestion pricing would have placed a charge on cars driving in Manhattan. The idea was to reduce traffic, clean the air, and generate funding for mass transit. By reducing pollution, it would have made jogging, biking, and other outdoor activities possible year round. It would have saved the lives of countless asthmatic children. Finally, it would have saved the New York City subway system, which is now $900 million in debt.
By killing congestion pricing, Silver will be responsible for countless deaths, and for reducing the quality of life of people throughout New York City.
Not sure who's behind this blog, but it's hard to argue with the message.
The 33-year-old attorney who lives in the East Village should get the hang of it soon enough: Two weeks ago, he took a leave of absence from his job to launch a full-time campaign to oust the speaker of the Assembly, Sheldon Silver. Although the fliers Mr. Henry is handing out say "Choose Change," his motto might as well be "Get Rid of the Roadblock."
"Speaker Silver is the obstacle toward real reform," he said yesterday."Nothing is going to change in the state Assembly while he's still there and you can sit back and watch or do something about it and people want to do something about it, and I am one of them."
...
Mr. Henry's campaign Web site details his stance on a host of issues, indicating that he'll advocate repealing the Urstadt law so that local officials would have control over the city's rental laws; fight for public financing of state elections and a ban on political contributions from lobbyists and corporations, and work to create universal health care coverage in New York State.
...
"Silver is an obstacle towards making progress on these issues. None of these issues are easy and they require a real professional legislator and experts who can look at these issues seriously and everything that is done in Albany is done in a ham-handed way," he said. "Removing Silver is a way towards achieving progress on these issues."
"I need to get a few thousand people to vote for me," he said. "Sheldon Silver is a very powerful man in Albany. He's not that powerful downtown."
Mr. Newell is running on two issues: accountability and "affordable" housing, both of which, he said, Mr. Silver is against.
He accuses the speaker of "blocking development of 'affordable' housing in downtown for 20 years" and also blames him for "killing" congestion pricing, an issue, he said, that is "the perfect demonstration of Sheldon Silver's contempt for the democratic process and the concerns for Lower Manhattanites."
...
He has hired a campaign manager, Evan Hutchison, a grassroots campaigner for General Wesley Clark and Senator Kerry in the 2004 presidential race. And he's prepared to tap into personal funds. He feels confident, however, that voters across the state will fork over cash once he informs them the identity of his opponent. "There are millions of people in this state who don't like Sheldon Silver. Some of them use the Internet and some of them answer phone calls," he said.
...
In Washington State, he landed his first paid political job, a field organizer for what would be the final campaign of Rep. Tom Foley, the U.S. House speaker whose defeat in 1994 has ironically given Mr. Newell confidence in retrospect. "It taught me that a sitting speaker of a legislative body can be beaten in his home district," he said.
"If you had 44 Republicans and 32 Democrats, you could theoretically pass a bill that a majority of the Democratic conference opposed," said Assemblyman Richard Brodsky of Westchester, who emerged as the vocal public leader of the opposition to congestion pricing. "That is not the way we run the system. And frankly, it's not the way we should run the system."
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg sent a message to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver after the congestion pricing plan failed to be put up for a vote.
Bloomberg refused to take a swipe at Silver by name, but there was little doubt who he had in mind when he told reporters, "I just don't think one person should decide what's right."
"I think it would have passed in the legislature if there had been a vote," Bloomberg added during a press conference at Georgetown University in Washington after delivering an environmental speech.
Despite the backing of Gov. Paterson and the rest of the bipartisan leadership in Albany, Silver killed the measure that would have charged cars $8 to enter Manhattan below 60th Street on weekdays.
"The majority caucus in the Assembly chose not to bring the governor's congestion pricing bill to a vote - effectively killing it," Bloomberg said. "Ultimately they didn't have the courage to vote on it - they just killed it in a back room."
Ouch. They didn't have the courage. That's a pretty tough and true critique of this. This is something Bloomberg championed and its failure will no doubt leave a mark, not only on Bloomberg, but on Silver as well.
This is stinging, even by the Times' board standards. But can one really argue with it?
Rarely does one man have a chance to do so much harm to so many.
New Yorkers should remember Monday as the day Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, used the power of his office to deprive them of $354 million in federal funds to help mass transporation, ease traffic congestion and improve the air that all New Yorkers breathe.
Backed by his Democratic conference, the speaker killed congestion pricing in the most cowardly way: without even holding a vote. Mr. Silver said so many members of his own conference were against the plan that it would never pass. How many? Who knows? The speaker hid behind closed doors to keep the public from watching his cronies do the deed.
(snip)
We've seen Mr. Silver's style of leadership before. In 1999, he cavalierly killed the commuter tax, costing the city, so far, more than $5.5 billion. It's always difficult to pinpoint the motivations of the opaque and narrowly political Mr. Silver. Certainly, the speaker has made little effort to disguise his personal dislike for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who proposed congestion pricing. But there is no place for personal grudges in leading the state and city of New York.
The congestion-pricing plan was not perfect, but it improved over time. Mr. Silver did not seem to put any effort into addressing the concerns of its opponents or into moving his members to do the right thing.
He failed to put New Yorkers' needs before his personal agenda. That makes him unworthy of his office.
Shelly's idiot cheerleaders will have you believe that none of this matters because the vote in the Assembly Democratic caucus was overwhelmingly opposed to pricing. However, one item they selectively ignore is that the GOP minority was largely in favor of it, and the only point of debate was if Tedisco could actually deliver the unanimous vote of his conference.
Of course, we will never know if Tedisco would have been able to deliver his conference unanimously or if it actually would have passed the whole Assembly, but the vote wouldn't have been by as wide a margin as Shelly's brown-nosers would like to portray it.
Additionally, Azi has an explanation why pricing was never brought to a vote:
It should be noted that one practical reason that Silver didn't bring the bill to the floor for of the state Assembly for a vote, where his Democratic conference outnumbers Republicans 107 to 43, is that if he did, and if the Republican minority decided to vote together for the measure, it could have passed with a minority of support from the Assembly Democratic conference. And that would have established a precedent which would destablize the absolute control Silver has in that house.
It's democracy as defined by the members of an unassailable supermajority.
Poll below the fold- I fully expect it to be freep'd, but I don't care.
We would remind everyone that a consensus among the majority of the Assembly majority does not constitute a majority of the Assembly. We would also note that voters have the right to know their representatives' stance on key issues, regardless of whether legislators proactively use their "right and ability" to share their points of view. This is just one highly charged example of Assembly leadership protecting its members from accountability with their constituents.
Here is what is being said in a few newspapers this morning about yesterday's news that congestion pricing failed to even come to a vote and ended in conference.
Bloomberg's plan, which would have brought $354 million in federal transportation funds to New York, came as the Legislature passed another emergency appropriations bill -- $83.7 million to pay for state operations, unemployment insurance, legislative activities and the judiciary through Thursday.
The temporary spending plan, which triggered angry debate in the Senate, was necessary because of the failure to finish a 2008-2009 budget of $124 billion for the fiscal year that began April 1.
Assembly Democrats came out of a closed conference to say that the congestion pricing bill lacked enough support for a vote on the floor.
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said he favored the measure, but fewer than 25 of his 107-member majority supported it. It called for $8 fees on cars, and more for trucks, entering Manhattan between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday.
Bloomberg lobbied for the bill, arguing that if it didn't happen by Monday, the deadline would be missed to qualify for $354 million in federal funds.
Mary E. Peters, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, said her agency will begin discussions today with other cities that might use the money to cut traffic and reduce pollution.
After state lawmakers killed Mayor Michael Bloomberg's controversial congestion pricing bill Monday, supporters challenged opponents of the plan to find another way to fund improvements to New York City's beleaguered subway system and strained bus service.
"When people complain there are not enough trains and buses, you can point to all the state Assembly members," said Councilman Robert Jackson, a Manhattan Democrat. "It was right at their doorstep and they did not stand up for New York City."
Opponents such as councilmen David Weprin (D-Queens) and Lewis Fidler, (D-Brooklyn) said the $8 entrance fee into bustling parts of Manhattan would have been an unjust tax. "It seems unfair that a small number of middle-class people and small businesses would be taxed to pay for the entire system," Weprin said.
Fidler said he hoped the mayor "got the message" that the rich shouldn't be the only ones allowed to travel to Manhattan.
Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a chief supporter, also expressed disappointment. She called the Assembly's failure to act a setback, but said the Council is committed to "environmental responsibility and to improving and expanding our mass transit system."
In another thread, I asked where Luke Henry's statement was. Well, ask and you shall receive. Henry chimes in in an emailed press release:
"The conference has decided that they are not prepared to do congestion pricing," Speaker Silver, April 7, 2008
A Leadership Vacuum
What happened in Albany today is, unfortunately, more of the same. "The failure on congestion pricing is just the latest example of Speaker Silver's back-room, last-minute style of governing," said Luke Henry, Democratic challenger to Speaker Silver for the 64th Assembly District seat. "No part of this city would benefit more from congestion pricing than Lower Manhattan," said Henry. "That Speaker Silver would not even bring this important and progressive piece of legislation to a vote shows that he cares more about protecting his own interests than improving the lives of downtown New Yorkers."
Congestion Pricing Benefits Lower Manhattan
Congestion pricing was proposed a year ago to deal with the pressing environmental, public transportation, and traffic problems facing our city. Traffic to and from three bridges and one tunnel congests lower Manhattan, and virtually every subway line traverses the district. The reduced congestion, cleaner air, faster transportation times, and improvements to public transportation would greatly benefit the residents of the 64th Assembly district.
"The voters, the City Council, the Mayor, and the Governor all support congestion pricing - why doesn't Speaker Silver have the same courage and vision?"
Both challengers are smart to make this an issue and do so immediately. Shelly essentially spit in his constituent's faces today. He needs to be called on it.
"Earlier today Congestion Pricing failed to achieve the consensus necessary to move forward on the state level. As I've said all along, this is an important program to reduce congestion and pollution in New York City while raising vitally needed funds for mass transit. Now we need to come up with innovative approaches to the challenge of funding mass transit. Over the next several days I will be working closely with my colleagues in the legislature and experts both in and outside of government to arrive at such solutions."
It can be somewhat difficult to gauge disappointment through a written statement, but there seems to be a hint of disappointment from Paterson here that this failed, that it was a good plan and now we must move on and find alternatives.
This was a certainly a two-sided failure - not exactly a rarity in Albany. The side pushing this (NYC) pushed too hard, I would argue. They pushed at the wrong time. This state can't even dig itself out of a budget fiasco yet. Then NYC came in and wanted the state to address this. That was a lot to ask.
But Albany failed as well. If this isn't a primary campaign issue with Speaker Silver, I don't what is. People want leadership in these situations and he failed to lead here.
Now that congestion pricing is dead at the hands of a do-nothing, irresponsible legislature in Albany (expect a full diary on this soon to come), here is a political post-mortem.
WINNERS:
Richard Brodsky
Brodsky represents one of the wealthiest and most-automobile-centered districts in the state, and he pandered them proud. Brodsky has accepted over $16,000 from parking interests and today proved he is worth every penny.
Anthony Weiner
Anthony Weiner, along with Toney Avella, is the loudest congestion pricing opponent running for mayor. CP passing would have been disasterous for Weiner because if London is any example, it would have proved to be very popular in the end and his vocal opposition to it would have made him look incredibly short-sighted by the time 2009 rolled around.
Christine Quinn Despite CP's untimate failure, Quinn's sheparding it through the City Council was an impressive feat of political muscle. It shows she has respect within her caucus and throughout the outer boroughs that will make her formidable in the 2009 mayor's race, recent scandals notwithstanding.
LOSERS:
Michael Bloomberg
This is a serious blow to Bloomberg's long-term legacy. He was foresighted and innovative in putting CP on the map, but its ultimate failure is partially a fault of Mike's political skills. He framed CP as a non-partisan, common-sense solution, but he lost most of that moral authority with a $500,000 donation to the Senate Republicans in March. While this may have bought Bruno's support for CP, it alienated the Democrats in both houses of the legislature.
Sheldon Silver
Sheldon Silver's entire rationale for being re-elected to represent his district was destroyed today. While almost all of the state has been grumbling and groaning for years at Silver's heavy-handed leadership tactitcs, back-door deals, and anti-reform stonewalling, his constituents could take solace in the fact that he was always able to bring home the bacon and get what they needed. Not anymore. Almost no legislative district had as much to gain from congestion pricing as Shelly's, between the insane traffic over Canal street, the lack of revenue to bring the Second Avenue Subway to Downtown Manhattan, and the truly horrifying asthma epidemic affecting the children in his district. Without the ability to pass pricing, Silver now represents the worst of both worlds for his district- an insular, secretive, anti-reform leader who either did not or could not flex his muscle to look out for his own district. If he goes down to defeat in September's primary, today's failure will be the reason.
Malcolm Smith
For a man who hopes to be the first Democratic Majority leader in more than a generation, he was conspicuously absent from this whole process. Unlike Jim Tedisco, his minority conference has enough votes in its respective house to matter when it comes to passing crucial legislation. His lack of of a public presence on this issue brings many questions on his ability to lead his caucus, and ultimately, the State Senate.
NEW YORK TAXPAYERS AND THE MTA
With no more pricing, the MTA is now projecting a $17 billion gap in its next capital plan Either the state and other interested municipalities will plug this hole with general revenue or debt, or the transit system will revert to it's old state of the 70's and 80's. Neither of these is acceptable. Additionally, money to fund a whole host of expansion projects is now in serious doubt.
Today is a sad, sad day for New York. Now, more than ever, we see how our calcified legislature has failed to support environmental innovation and public health for New Yorkers. Here's to hoping we can eventually get accountbility for this failure at the ballot box.
"The conference has decided that they are not prepared to do congestion pricing," said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver after emerging from behind closed doors where he was closested with members of his Democratic majority. "I think you can speak to the members of the conferene who have made that determination."
"Many of them just don't believe in the concept," the speaker continued. "Many of them think this bill is flawed. So an overwhelming majority of the conference that opposes congestion pricing, and for that reason, the congestion pricing bill did not have anywhere near a majority of the Democratic conference, and will not be on the floor of the Assembly."
From a personal standpoint, Silver said he is "more inclined to admit we must do something about congestion and this is a plan with some work that could work, but it needs amendments."
Mr. Silver's announcement is a major defeat for the mayor, who had furiously advocated state and city officials for a year and worked to assembly a coalition of business, transportation, environmental and labor groups to support the plan. In recent weeks, the plan had seemed to gain momentum, as the mayor managed to secure support from Gov. David A. Paterson and from the City Council, which on March 31 voted, 30 to 20, to endorse the plan. But up through this afternoon the fate of the plan had seemed uncertain. The Republican leader of the State Senate, Joseph L. Bruno, gave his support the plan, and even Mr. Silver, the Assembly speaker, voiced partial support for it, though adding that he did not believe the members of the Assembly's Democratic majority were convinced.
Saying that this is a huge defeat for Bloomberg is an understatement. He was really pushing this plan and to lose out like this will hurt. But for now, congestion pricing is dead.
Day of all days, tomorrow I have jury duty. I may or may not be able to use my laptop while I'm waiting to be or not be selected for duty. So I'm posting this thread tonight.
The following image is of the so-called Triboro RX concocted by the Regional Plan Association and recently mentioned in Lee Sander's state of the MTA speech.
In that same speech, Sander noted that
China, spends 9 percent of its gross domestic product on infrastructure.Meanwhile, the United States spends less than 1% of its GDP. That is unacceptable.
Unacceptable indeed. Congestion pricing is one small but great way to start to reverse that trend.
Let's hope the legislature decides today to think globally and act locally.
While Gov. David Paterson and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno have embraced congestion pricing, the third man in the Albany power triangle, Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, has been his usual reticent self. Worse, Mr. Silver has said that he would not put a congestion pricing bill to a vote until after the state budget, now officially late, is resolved, perhaps by the end of the week. That's cutting it close because the deadline for collecting $354 million in federal money to implement congestion pricing is Monday. Mr. Silver can do better.
Congestion pricing has been put through its paces, many of them dictated by Mr. Silver. At his urging, a commission composed of representatives of top city and state elected officials was appointed. It markedly improved on Mr. Bloomberg's plan. Mr. Silver also asked for the City Council to approve the plan first, providing cover for state legislators to follow suit.
Now it is Mr. Silver's turn. He needs to schedule congestion pricing for a floor vote this week while there is still time to meet the federal deadline.
Once again, Michael Bloomberg has defied public opinion polls and noisy skeptics, lined up bipartisan support from the Democratic governor and the Republican State Senate and won over city lawmakers in support of an idea that would have a profound impact in New York City.
And once again, his big plan-this time, to impose a toll on cars driving into midtown Manhattan-faces a immovable obstacle in Sheldon Silver, who often seems to be the most powerful politician in New York.
(snip)
Of the three people who actually control the state's unwieldy, anachronistic state government, two-Governor David Paterson and the Senate majority leader, Joe Bruno-support the plan. Mr. Silver, as is his wont, has not taken a clear position either way, instead expressing vaguely defined concerns about the details that are available while demanding more information about the aspects that have yet to be worked out.
In voting to endorse congestion pricing, the City Council recognized the plan for what it is: the biggest boost for New York mass transit in decades.
The Legislature must show the same wisdom. Albany lawmakers - notably Speaker Sheldon Silver and Assembly Democrats - should approve pouring the billions of dollars that would flow from congestion pricing into transportation improvements.
Ball's in your court, Shelly. Hope you do the right thing, or you better be prepared to do a lot of 'splaining to your district come September.
The New York City Council did the right thing today and approved the Congestion Pricing Bill by a vote of 30-20, with one abstention.
I will write a much more detailed political analysis of congestion pricing once all is said and done on the state level. That said, today's vote was an impressive showing by Speaker Christine Quinn and I would say she is my prohibitive favorite for Mayor in 2009 at this point in time. Also of note, Alan Gerson and Rosie Mendez, whose districts overlap with Shelly Silver's, voted for it.
Governor David Paterson released the following statement regarding the New York City Congestion Pricing Program.
Last night, I amended my Governor's Program Bill regarding the New York City Congestion Pricing Program, recommended by the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission. The amendments to the bill address fiscal contributions by the Port Authority to the MTA capital plan and add an important tax credit provision for low-income drivers.
The City Council and State Legislature can and should continue to consider Congestion Pricing, which, if enacted, would provide much needed funds for the MTA capital plan and improve air quality. Other changes to this bill will no doubt be proposed and debated during the coming days as we approach the U.S. Department of Transportation April 7, 2008 deadline, and that is part of our democratic process. Now the City Council must take action on Congestion Pricing. And after the City Council acts, I will work with Mayor Bloomberg, Majority Leader Bruno, Speaker Silver, Minority Leader Smith, Minority Leader Tedisco and all of the Senate and Assembly Members on this important issue.
This has been something Paterson has really been focusing on. I know that this is an important issue to our friends down in New York City.
Paul Newell Calls for Sheldon Silver to Act on Congestion Pricing
Paul Newell today called for Sheldon Silver to stop pandering to special interests and stand up for the children in his own district by stopping his equivocating on congestion pricing. Newell, a lifelong Downtowner and community organizer, is challenging Silver in September's Democratic Primary for New York's 64th Assembly District.
"Sheldon Silver's continued fence-sitting on the issue of congestion pricing is endangering its possibility of passage, and with it, he is endangering the lives of countless children in the Lower East Side, Chinatown and Battery Park City. Congestion pricing is the best hope to combat the terrible epidemic of asthma that is gripping the children of our district and children all over congested parts of New York City. Speaker Silver's callousness to their needs is breathtaking."
Asthma is tolling a public health disaster on the children of the 64th District. News reports indicate that roughly 1-in-5 children enrolled in the P.S. 124 after-school program are afflicted with Asthma. An air sample taken by the Daily News last June found that the air on Canal Street at rush hour had 500,000 particles per cubic centimeter, the highest of any sample taken by that survey.
The 64th Assembly District includes the Brooklyn, Manhattan and Williamsburg Bridges and the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, with the Holland Tunnel just a few blocks away. The one-way tolls on the Verrazano and the Holland Tunnel mean that tens of thousands of out-of-town trucks and private vehicles a day use Lower Manhattan as a thoroughfare to avoid tolls. By ending this free ride, Congestion Pricing would solve this problem immediately.
Newell went on to note that while only 2.3% of Lower Manhattanites drive to work in the congestion zone, "the vast majority of Downtowners use public transportation every day. Why is Silver so unconcerned about securing a long-term source of revenue for public transportation?" Newell continued "This is a vital public health and quality of life issue for the overwhelming majority of Downtown families. Sheldon Silver's absence on the issue exemplifies the broken system in Albany where a legislator's personal power alliances take precedence over the concerns of New Yorkers."
Citing Canal, Broome, Allen and Pike Streets, Division Street, West Street, Christie Street, and Delancey Street as examples of where "the levels of congestion, noise and air pollution are unacceptable" Newell asked "Of 150 assembly districts in New York, none benefits so clearly from Congestion Pricing as the 64th. What interests is Silver serving here instead of showing the leadership our community deserves?"
###
Supporting congestion pricing in the 64th AD is a no-brainer- some of the worst asthma zones are in that district, and its revenues will also be very strategically important in securing money to extend the second avenue subway to lower Manhattan. Yet, again, Shelly continues to take an important issue and subordinate it to being a bargaining chip in some political deal.
With Paterson and Bruno on board for pricing, Shelly is the last roadblock. I feel if he lets it fail, the voters in his district will remember this with a vengeance come September.
The New York City Council today engaged in a marathon of hearings on Congestion Pricing. After a daytime session, the Council is holding another hearing that started at 6 o'clock tonight, in order to accommodate the concerns of everyone with an opinion (you watching this process, legislature?)
Streetsblog is all over this like white on rice and has a good summary of the testimony of New York City Transportation Commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan:
without congestion pricing:
*Western Queens will not see a 39% reduction in its most severe traffic jams and a 6.1 percent reduction in total traffic; will not get new bus routes from Middle Village to South Ferry in Lower Manhattan, and from Jackson heights to Penn Station; and will not get improved service on the Q60 bus route or 46 new subway cars that would increase service frequency on the E and F trains
*Western Queens may lose state-of-the-art train control on the 7 line that would allow trains to run faster and closer together for better, more frequent service
*North-central Brooklyn will not see a 22.1% reduction in severe traffic jams, 33 more buses on the B41 line, or more capacity on the C line
*North-central Brooklyn may lose BRT on Nostrand Avenue and upgraded PA systems on stations on the G line
*The northeast Bronx won't see an 8.3% reduction in severe traffic jams or three new express bus routes to Lower Manhattan
*The northeast Bronx may lose extension of BRT service to Pelham Parkway and upgraded service on the 5 line
*Staten Island won't see a 12.3% reduction in severe traffic jams or 33 new express buses
*Staten Island may lose BRT along Hylan Boulevard, 64 new cars for the Staten Island Railway, and a new Arthur Kill railway station
*Lower Manhattan will not receive a 32.3% reduction in severe traffic jams and a 6.4% reduction in total traffic, 33 new buses on half a dozen lines, or greater capacity on the E, F and C lines
Sounds like a lot of good stuff. Some Council Members are understandably justified in their skepticism of of the guarantee that the congestion pricing money will be reserved exclusively for transit. Upon a first read, the language in the bill sounds pretty tight:
Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all charges collected by the Department of Transportation of the City of New york [described in the previous sections] shall at all times be the property of the Metropolitan Transporation Authority and shall be paid to the traffic congestion mitigation fund of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority [except for money necessary to adjudicate violations, which will go to the NYC Dept of Transportation]
It sounds good, but the only problem is that money is completely fungible and with the congestion pricing funds being funneled into the MTA, it might just enable the State or City to cut their own contributions to the MTA by an equal amount.
The MTA's 2008-2011 financial plan assumes $614.9 million in subsidies from the state and local governments (mainly New York City and Nassau County), and an additional New York City subsidy exclusively for bus operations of $232 million. This is a total of $846.9 million.
If congestion pricing generates the most conservative estimate offered by the Traffic Mitigation Commission, the fees collected will be $387 million. Add that to the $354 million the Federal Government has offered in mostly bus upgrades to help expand transit options, that brings the first year's total to $741 million. So in order for the state and local government subsidies to be cut to mitigate the money from pricing, total subsidies would have to be cut by 87%. I don't see that happening anytime soon. For future years without the one-time federal infusion, the subsidies would have to be cut by 45.6%.
Keeping in mind that the most conservative estimate of pricing revenues is used and even the most irresponsible lawmakers would never make cuts to transit this enormous, it's pretty safe to say that adopting the pricing plan will result in a large net gain for transit projects and maintenance, even if the state or city do cut their contributions in these tight fiscal times.
A new Quinnipiac University poll shows that New Yorkers overwhelmingly support the Assembly's plan to raise by 1 percent the income tax paid by those making a million dollars a year or more. Even two thirds of Republicans back the plan.
New York State voters also support 77 - 19 percent a plan to raise state income taxes by 1 percent on people making more than one million dollars a year. Even Republicans back the so- called "Millionaire's Tax" 65 - 31 percent, while Democrats back it 83 - 13 percent and independent voters back it 81 - 16 percent.
"Remember that old verse: 'Don't tax you; don't tax me; tax the guy behind the tree?' If the guy behind the tree is a millionaire, New Yorkers overwhelmingly like the idea of raising his taxes," Carroll said.
"Could the 19 percent opposed to the idea be millionaires?
The state is facing a massive $4.6 billion shortfall this year and that gap has to be filled. We know that the scaremongering around the Assembly's plan almost entirely BS and now we know New Yorkers support the plan in overwhelming numbers. Will the powers that be have the courage to implement it?
Color me skeptical. I mean, we're talking about millionaires here.
Wonkster is reporting that Gov. Paterson has announced his support for Congestion Pricing:
In the first major policy decision of his very young administration, Gov. David Paterson has announced his support for congestion pricing and come up with a bill to move the controversial plan forward. Calling the governor's decision "tremendously helpful," Michael O'Loughlin, director of the Campaign for New York's Future, a coalition backing congestion pricing, said the bill would "give people something to work with" as they seek to win City Council and the State Legislature approval for charging people to drive in parts of Manhattan on weekdays.
In a statement, Paterson said he was taking this action because "congestion pricing addresses two urgent concerns of the residents of New York City and its suburbs: the need to reduce congestion on our streets and roads, and thereby reduce pollution and global warming; and the need to raise significant revenue for mass transit improvements."
Still no indication if Paterson is explicitly supporting the bill that surfaced in Albany on Wednesday. Regardless, this is a great development- sensible traffic policy may yet happen in NY.
