Bloomberg's congestion fee plan dies behind closed doors in Albany

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s far-reaching plan to ease traffic in Manhattan died here on Monday in a closed conference room on the third floor of the Capitol.

...

The plan would have charged drivers $8 to enter a congestion zone in Manhattan south of 60th Street during peak hours.

...

The mayor’s plan was strongly opposed by a broad array of politicians from Queens, Brooklyn and New York’s suburbs, who viewed the proposed congestion fee as a regressive measure that overwhelmingly benefited affluent Manhattanites.

"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,” Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, said after the meeting.

...

Some Assembly Democrats said that by Monday, even many of the supporters of the plan had significant reservations about it. Debate had veered from the issues of traffic and pollution, they said, to advocates emphasizing the need to finance badly needed mass transit projects. That further alienated suburban officials, whose constituents would have borne much of the cost of the fees but reaped little benefit from those projects.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/08/nyregion/08congest.html

[Dan J 277]

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's far-reaching plan to ease traffic in Manhattan died here on Monday in a closed conference room on the third floor of the Capitol.

...

The plan would have charged drivers $8 to enter a congestion zone in Manhattan south of 60th Street during peak hours.

...

The mayor's plan was strongly opposed by a broad array of politicians from Queens, Brooklyn and New York's suburbs, who viewed the proposed congestion fee as a regressive measure that overwhelmingly benefited affluent Manhattanites.

"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," Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, said after the meeting.

...

Some Assembly Democrats said that by Monday, even many of the supporters of the plan had significant reservations about it. Debate had veered from the issues of traffic and pollution, they said, to advocates emphasizing the need to finance badly needed mass transit projects. That further alienated suburban officials, whose constituents would have borne much of the cost of the fees but reaped little benefit from those projects.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/08/nyregion/08congest.html

Issues like this i think are being disucssed in cities all around the country.

Many people don't live in downtown, but often commute to downtown to work. But their property taxes go to the city they live in, but still use roads and other services downtown.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

From a pedestrian point of view it isn't a bad idea. The traffic in Manhattan ridiculous at the best of times.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Especially given that if you work in NYC but live in NJ you don't pay NJ taxes anyway.

They're already getting the state's money.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The Star Ledger is calling this the end of the NJ-NY "border war". What's really interesting is that the US DoT is encouraging this! This is the Bush DoT.

Congestion pricing failure ends NJ-NY border war

Democrats in the New York State Assembly handed New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg a major defeat today by killing his plan to charge drivers $8 to enter Manhattan during peak hours on weekdays to help ease traffic, diminish pollution and fund mass-transit projects.

The decision to block the congestion pricing plan saves New Jersey E-ZPass motorists up to $4 in additional levies that would have been piled atop the current $6 to $8 Hudson River-crossing toll for entering New York City below 61st Street, depending on the time of day.

...

Gov. Jon Corzine last week threatened to sue New York officials if the plan went through.

...

The decision ends a border war between New York and New Jersey that flared last week ... New York will lose $354 million in federal funding offered when it proposed establishing America's first congestion-pricing plan. A similar plan is in place in London.

Corzine said he supports the concept of congestion pricing but opposed this plan because New Jersey drivers would be charged more than those entering Manhattan from outer boroughs and suburbs.

...

U.S. Department of Transportation officials made clear they were moving on in their quest to convince a big American city to enact such pricing.

[Alex+R 0]

Aw. I haven't really been following this (although I really should have been) but Big Brother has been advertising on all the bus stops near my apartment that with congestion pricing, the crosstown buses would actually be faster than walking. That excited me. Oh well.

[mawilson 2,133]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Corzine hypocrite to cry highway robbery

Home News Tribune Online 04/8/08

Corzine weighed in last week by saying that he was dismayed by the scheme and would bring suit against New York if it went ahead with the proposal to charge motorists $8 and truckers $21 to drive into the most heavily trafficked parts of Manhattan; the N.J. governor was angry as well that the fees would come on the heels of a recent $2 increase for tolls at tunnels and bridges heading into New York.

Of course, Corzine had no similar qualms when he suggested last year that New Jersey raise tolls on the Garden State Parkway, the New Jersey Turnpike and the Route 440 Outerbridge Crossing between New Jersey and Staten Island. The governor's motive then, as it remained last week, was purely selfish with respect to neighboring states, since those toll increases would have gone to fill New Jersey's coffers at the expense of others; in fact, one of his big selling points just happened to be that a large percentage of the toll proceeds would have been paid by out-of-state drivers, New York motorists chief among them.

So it was more than a bit hypocritical of Corzine to disparage New York City's idea...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

We'll likely pay anyway - as road tolls and public transport fares will doubtless go up again. Personally I'd rather see Midtown drivers pay the premium.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

We'll likely pay anyway - as road tolls and public transport fares will doubtless go up again. Personally I'd rather see Midtown drivers pay the premium.

Yeah, if they can pay what I pay for my mortgage to park their cars, they sure can afford it

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's far-reaching plan to ease traffic in Manhattan died here on Monday in a closed conference room on the third floor of the Capitol.

...

The plan would have charged drivers $8 to enter a congestion zone in Manhattan south of 60th Street during peak hours.

...

The mayor's plan was strongly opposed by a broad array of politicians from Queens, Brooklyn and New York's suburbs, who viewed the proposed congestion fee as a regressive measure that overwhelmingly benefited affluent Manhattanites.

"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," Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, said after the meeting.

...

Some Assembly Democrats said that by Monday, even many of the supporters of the plan had significant reservations about it. Debate had veered from the issues of traffic and pollution, they said, to advocates emphasizing the need to finance badly needed mass transit projects. That further alienated suburban officials, whose constituents would have borne much of the cost of the fees but reaped little benefit from those projects.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/08/nyregion/08congest.html

Issues like this i think are being disucssed in cities all around the country.

Many people don't live in downtown, but often commute to downtown to work. But their property taxes go to the city they live in, but still use roads and other services downtown.

Also, somewhat WORSE in the case of NYC--as many commute there from out-of-state (and pay the state tax to Joisey).

Of course, the same issue is compounded for metro-DC area, where commuters oft live in MD, work in NoVA and commute to/from work THROUGH DC.

[mawilson 2,133]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

We'll likely pay anyway - as road tolls and public transport fares will doubtless go up again. Personally I'd rather see Midtown drivers pay the premium.

Yeah, if they can pay what I pay for my mortgage to park their cars, they sure can afford it

How so? If I have to spend more money than you on parking, I have less money left over

to spend on other things, not more. It's the same deranged socialist logic that suggests we

"tax the rich to give to the poor".

Also, I doubt your mortgage is $400 per month.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

We'll likely pay anyway - as road tolls and public transport fares will doubtless go up again. Personally I'd rather see Midtown drivers pay the premium.

Yeah, if they can pay what I pay for my mortgage to park their cars, they sure can afford it

How so? If I have to spend more money than you on parking, I have less money left over

to spend on other things, not more. It's the same deranged socialist logic that suggests we

"tax the rich to give to the poor".

Also, I doubt your mortgage is $400 per month.

What's so deranged about it? It's called progressive tax policy, and we're either committed to it or we're not.

And yes, that was a slight exaggeration. Slight.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Number 6, agreed. The issue is who pays for it. Manhattanites can certainly afford to pay more than we can.

New Jersey is already shouldering most of the cost for the TUNNEL project. Why should we also pay for NYC subway system?

Screw you, NJ. You come to Manhattan to work, you pay.

We'll likely pay anyway - as road tolls and public transport fares will doubtless go up again. Personally I'd rather see Midtown drivers pay the premium.

Yeah, if they can pay what I pay for my mortgage to park their cars, they sure can afford it

How so? If I have to spend more money than you on parking, I have less money left over

to spend on other things, not more. It's the same deranged socialist logic that suggests we

"tax the rich to give to the poor".

Also, I doubt your mortgage is $400 per month.

The same logic that suggests anyone who can afford to buy an Aston Martin and parks it in a street where it gets scratched or dinged can probably afford to have it fixed