Today’s Headlines

  • Opposition Building to Payroll Tax Portion of Ravitch Plan (NYT)
  • Manhattan Beep Stringer Joins TA in Calling for Speeding Crackdown (NY1)
  • Police Pursue Car in the Bronx; Car Jumps Curb, Injures Three Teenagers (News, NYT)
  • Guido Carabajo Identified as Dragging Victim (News, NYT)
  • Hundreds of Parking Spots Among the Spoils Claimed by State Senate GOP Under Bruno (News)
  • Obama Burned by Caterpillar CEO After Using Him as Stimulus Bill Prop (The Caucus)
  • NJDOT Expands Its Red Light Cam Program (MTR)
  • New Haven Safe Streets Activists Take Advocacy Statewide (NH Indy)
  • Fewer Markings, Safer Streets? (How We Drive)
  • The Benefits of a Sidewalk Perspective (Sustainable Savannah via Streetsblog.net)
  • J. Mork

    I have often felt safer cycling on NYC avenues in those brief periods after a re-paving before the lines are painted. I think because it does away with “get out of my lane” syndrome. I can just choose to ride exactly the right distance away from the parked cars and drivers just go around as necessary.

  • Car Free Nation

    As an owner of a small business, I definitely sympathize with those who don’t want to pay the additional payroll tax for transit. In New York, there are already steep fees and taxes to the employer for every new hire. These include unemployment insurance, social security, medicare, and health insurance (which we provide).

    Even though it is going to be hard, and my company will need to reduce some other expenses, I don’t have a huge problem paying such a tax for transit as long as others are paying their fair share. This is why it is essential that freeloading drivers pay as well. The Ravitch plan only adds fees for people driving in to Manhattan from Brooklyn and Queens. In addition to these fees, the legislature should consider taxes on vehicle registration in the same areas as the payroll tax is being considered, as well as parking fees in Manhattan. By doing so, we distribute the costs of transit more equitably.

  • Niccolo Machiavelli

    The Ravitch Plan is built on everybody hating their own piece but not minding everyone else’s minus the pain of fare increases and service cuts that the plan somewhat lifts. Brooklyn and Queens hate the tolls (for the most part) suburbs hate the payroll tax but both hate the fare increases and the service cuts. That is the political math that is supposed to drive this.

    Congestion pricing went down for many reasons but the reason given most frequently by Silver’s conference was that it was insufficiently “broad-based”. So they have come back with a broader base that will probably go down because it is too broad based. What is not broad-based at all are fare increases and service cuts. Only eight million daily riders will have to deal with that.

  • Rhywun

    RE: Fewer Markings, Safer Streets?

    Seems pretty straightforward to me, and I don’t even drive. That line down the middle makes it look more like a speedway than a residential street. They could narrow the street too, or–and this is radical–bring that streetcar back.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Perhaps the broad-based payroll tax, even though it will only pay for a few years of expenses and continue forever, is not sufficiently targeted to avoid upsetting generation greed.

    How about a 20% payroll tax on new hires and the payroll of new business, 10% on those hired in the last few years, and none on existing large (campaign contributing) corporations and their existing employees? And, of course, no tax on retirement income no matter how high. Now THERE is something the state legislature would love!