Today’s Headlines

  • Queens Civic Congress Finds ’09 Candidates Under the Mistletoe (Daily Politics)
  • Bloomberg Opposes Congestion Zone Shrinkage (Post
  • City Criticized for Skimping on Transit Contribution (Post)
  • Mayor Says Pricing Would Keep Fares "Reasonable" (News)
  • San Francisco Plan Would Debit Drivers’ Bank Accounts [Audio] (KQED)
  • Chicago Transit System Verges on Collapse (STLtoday)
  • 7 Line Extension Work to Start, Minus Hell’s Kitchen Stop (AMNY)
  • Neighborhood Groups Don’t Want Sanitation Garage (Chelsea Now)
  • California Transpo Funds Restricted to Non-Polluting Projects (Union-Trib)
  • Congress Close to "Meaningful" New Fuel Standards (NYT)
  • Larry Littlefield

    Illinois has been selling out the future for years, just like New York. Going deeper into debt. Handing out pension enrichments while reducing pension contributions. Etc. It is heading for disaster.

    Except for one thing. That state’s tax burden as a share of personal income (like every other state’s burden) is WAY below New York’s. All Illinois and New Jersey residents have to do is pay more taxes to get out of the hole.

    We ARE paying more and going deeper and deeper into the hole besides, part of the ongoing war against younger generations.

  • Attended the 86th Street Merchants and Residents association meeting about congestion pricing last night. Lots of NIMBYism and complaints about process – from both the 5 electeds that showed up and the numerous car owners that packed the meeting.

    One line that I was repeated but the city representative did not refute was that Manhattan residents both north and south of the zone would pay much of the charges – since they would not have any other tolls to offset the congestion charge.

    I thought that was way off. Does anyone have any data on which areas would pay most of the charges?

  • Glenn,

    That’s just an insane claim.

    Only 17 or 18 percent of Manhattan households even own a car.

    The vast majority of Manhattan residents will never pay a single cent for the congestion charge.

    Since Manhattan currently has the most transit and most congestion, I think it’s much more accurate to suggest that Manhattan stands the most to gain of any of the five boroughs.

  • I was very surprised by the claim and the lack of the response from Mr. McGuire on this point. I feel like this is something that could easily be refuted – anyone have data on this that I could use to educate folks…what would Manhattan residents pay?

  • Jonathan


    I agree with both Aaron and the original claim. Aaron is correct in the larger sense that it only affects the small minority of motorists.

    But the claim does seem kind of reasonable. Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx would be your three areas affected the most, because Queens commuters are likely already using the QMT or Triborough Bridge (Queensboro Bridge has poorer connections to highways on both sides). In addition, commuters between Upper Manhattan and Brooklyn or Queens will end up paying also because getting onto the Queensboro and Manhattan Bridges will no longer be free. Economical drivers will be crowding the Brooklyn Bridge, because that’s the only one with the direct link to the FDR.

  • vnm

    There are two totally different ideas being presented:

    1) Much/most/disproportionate share of the congestion pricing revenues will be paid by Manhattanites.

    2) Much/most/disproportionate share of Manhattanites will pay the congestion pricing charge.

    I believe Glenn first described 1), while Aaron refuted 2).

  • Niccolo Machiavelli

    Another solution for Illinois would be to demand that the fare payers in Chicago cough up more than 50% of the farebox for operating expenses. If the farebox operating ratio were to rise to MTA levels the crisis would be temporarily averted, at least until the generational tsunami that Larry describes washes ashore.