Today’s Headlines

  • Brodsky Unclear on Pricing Grant Details (Daily News, Daily Politics)
  • RELATED: LI Lawmakers: What’s in It for Us? (AMNY)
  • Tax Breaks for Drivers Undermine Alt-Trans Investments (NYT)
  • Pedicabbies Ride in Protest of Pending Restrictions (City Room, AMNY)
  • City Tests Painted Bus Lanes (Daily News)
  • Bronx Advocates Unimpressed With Trash Train Hype (AMNY)
  • Spitzer Vetoes Segways on Sidewalks (Times Union)
  • NBC Infotainment Screens Coming to PATH Trains (NYT)
  • Hydrant-Blocking, Bird-Flipping Traffic Agent Caught on Tape (Daily News)
  • Larry Littlefield

    What’s in it for the suburbs? The current regional expansion program, based on taxes collected throughout the region including NYC, federal money for the whole region, and bonds we will all have to pay back, is this:

    1) East Side Access, for the suburbs (a little for Queens.

    2) Metro North to Penn, for the suburbs (a little benefit for the Bronx).

    3) Access to the Region’s Core (entire benefit to NJ).

    4) A three station extension of the BMT Broadway Express, the only portion of the Second Avenue we are likely to see.

    That’s it for NYC. The Flushing Extension is NYC funded.

    There is also a third track on the LIRR Main line to allow Long Island to have the benefit of moderate income families from Queens without having to live with them, by enabling reverse commuting. A similar project is ongoing on the Harlem line.

    You know what: cancel the whole thing. Really. We’ll bike and work at home, and if the schools are improved here (if Skelos doesn’t arrange to slash the NYC share of school aid again) let the affluent workers of Manhattan live in the city and not the suburbs. And let the McDonalds workers of Rockville Center live there and not here.

  • mike

    why why why the proliferation of TVs everywhere? It’s bad enough that MTA has televised ads on their subway entrances, but inside PATH trains now? If our government actually had its funding priorities straight, we could dispense with this consumerist nonsense.

  • Re: LI Pols

    You will continue to have access to a world class city that boosts your property values simply because of your proximity to NYC.

    If you want to have access to more high-income jobs, entertainment, restaurants and diverse culture, I suggest you start building livable cities in your backyard instead of sprawling suburbs.

    Thanks
    New York City

  • Hilary

    A formula should be negotiated that will allocate CP revenues to areas that achieve the greatest reductions in traffic they send to the city (or increases in transit. This is easily measured.

  • momos

    Brodsky is such a blowhard. There are legitimate issues congestion pricing raises — such as civil liberties — but he and Shelly Silver continue to read utterly clear statements from the USDOT in terms directly opposite from what they actually mean.

  • Angus Grieve-Smith

    On Long Island, lawmakers say they would like to see money for a bus and train shuttle system to alleviate traffic on the East End, and electric lines to power the north line of the Long Island Railroad, now powered by diesel fuel, among other things.

    Hey, I’m happy to support them in this. Maybe you can say it shouldn’t come from the congestion pricing funding, but I think it’s a good idea. Bring back the Greenport Scoot and electrify the Port Jefferson line. But I thought that the Port Jeff electrification was put on hold because of NIMBY opposition to a new yard?

  • Angus Grieve-Smith

    To put this another way: Brodsky, Weprin and friends have been against this from the beginning. They know that it will adversely affect their rich friends who benefit from this public subsidy. But they don’t want to come right out with their (elitist, regressive) reasons for opposing it. So they throw everything they can at it. It’s a wall around Manhattan! It penalizes the working stiff! Poor old ladies won’t be able to get to the doctor! It violates our civil liberties!

    Skelos seems to have happily joined that camp. On the other hand, this guy Steve Englebright is doing the right thing. Based on the article, he agrees that congestion pricing is good for the region. He wants to see it happen. But he knows it will be a hard sell for his constituents. So he’s asking for something else to sweeten the deal. Not some budget-sapping tax credit or sprawl-inducing road project or park-and-ride, but decent transit improvements that advocates like Tri-State have been pushing for years.

    If I were Spitzer or Bruno, or even Kathy Wylde, I’d be out there myself tomorrow morning laying down third rail on the Port Jeff line and track on the Manorville Branch. If congestion pricing gets final approval, it’s going to be thanks to people like Englebright. I only wish our Queens reps were doing the same thing.