New Spin: Save the Mayor’s Congestion Plan by Modifying It

shaw.jpg
Congestion Mitigation Commission chairman Marc Shaw has a big job ahead of him.

Newsflash from Crain’s New York: Congestion pricing is politically challenging: While I don’t think any Streetsblog reader will be shocked by that big scoop, there are still some interesting tidbits in here. The Traffic Mitigation Commission has a new mandate, Greg David writes: "Save the mayor’s plan by modifying it." If nothing else, I suppose this means that opponents have to stop calling the Commission a "sham" now. The Crain’s story is available online only to subscribers. Here it is in full:

When the state legislature created a panel in June to review Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s congestion pricing plan, his aides claimed victory. They maintained that a majority of members would be appointed by officials who back the scheme. The thinking was that the panel would endorse congestion pricing, and show that the alternatives would neither reduce traffic enough nor raise large sums for mass transit. The City Council and the Legislature would then ratify that conclusion.

So much for the fix being in. Today, the plan is in deep trouble. Details emerging about the cost and the onerous implementation are worrying even the plan’s supporters. The mass-transit bonanza is now pegged at as little as $100 million a year, a far cry from the almost $400 million initially promised. Polls show public support declining. And the political calendar isn’t favorable; a vote on the plan is scheduled a mere eight months before legislators face the voters themselves.

Now the panel has a new mandate: Save the mayor’s plan by modifying it. The members may have to do so despite the mayor. Earlier this month, after Crain’s reported on the revisions being considered, he seemed to dig in his heels to defend his original proposal. Maybe he hadn’t been briefed on recent developments.

Marc Shaw, the former top deputy mayor who is in charge of the review, understands the new reality. He has three major objectives: Co-opt as many opponents as possible by adopting some of their alternatives, reduce the enormous administrative cost, and greatly increase the money generated for mass transit.

A number of the alternatives could easily be folded into a broader plan, though some involve political risks. One no-brainer is to sharply increase the cost of on-street parking. Another option-which would be subject to public outcry but would be very effective-is to establish taxi stands and discourage cruising. Voiding the tens of thousands of special parking permits that are abused by city workers clearly would help. Municipal unions will scream, but taking that step would convince New Yorkers that the burden of congestion pricing will be shared.

Administrative costs, now estimated at 40% of monies collected, must be trimmed.That likely will be accomplished by moving the northern boundary of the affected zone to 60th Street from 86th Street and focusing enforcement on people driving into the central business district, not those traveling within it.

Congestion pricing could raise more revenues for mass transit if tolls for tunnels and bridges aren’t deducted from the congestion pricing fee. Because of imminent increases in tolls, many New Jersey residents would pay no congestion pricing fee. Imposing East River bridge tolls would be lucrative, but such a proposal might kill the plan.

Political problems will remain even if these steps are taken. While the New York media have concentrated on opposition in the boroughs outside Manhattan, legislators from suburban counties also have been vocal about what they see as a city tax on their constituents. These leaders have had a great deal of influence on Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, and they will require concessions before allowing the plan to be enacted.

Mr. Shaw proved himself to be a talented operator while on Mr. Bloomberg’s staff. This policy tap dance will test even his skills.

Photo: Aaron Naparstek, September 25, 2007 Congestion Mitigation Commission meeting.

  • Spud Spudly

    Isn’t it kind of, like, copyright infringement to print this story in full here?

  • JF

    Intellectual property is intellectual theft.

  • Eric

    Fair-use law is not crystal clear, but it’s generally accepted that the law allows reproduction of copyrighted materials for non-commerical purposes, which is why Streetsblog can reproduce it here.

    Click here for the link to the U.S. Copyright Office summary.

  • They sell ads on their site and we’re driving traffic and pageviews to their site so I think it works out OK for them. But if they ask me to take it down I will.

  • Josh

    (Sorry, I know a discussion of copyright law vis a vis the Internet is off topic.)

    If you’re reproducing the article in its entirety, I don’t see how you’re driving traffic to their site.

  • fdr

    Crain’s site is not only a subscription site but you have to pay for it. So they’re probably not thrilled when you reprint it. If you’re creating traffic for their site, the visitors aren’t going to find this article there.

  • dbs

    Don’t take it down!
    I think if you put a clause like this whenever you post a copywritten article, you’ll be fine:

    FAIR USE NOTICE
    This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

  • Copyright or not. I think let’s get to the point on the article. INteresting to see that the house is deciding on whether 86th street is the border or 60th street is the border. Good movement. Whether NJ travelers will be changed or not and what to do with the parking bit. Now is when a wholistic and more foolproof solution to congestion pricing is evolving. Long live NYC! You will certainly gain.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

US DOT Gives NYC $354 Million for Congestion Pricing Plan

|
Sewell Chan at City Room has this morning’s news. Here are some excerpts from his report: The secretary of transportation announced this morning that the federal government will provide New York City with $354 million to implement congestion pricing in New York City, if the State Legislature acts by March 2008 to put in effect […]

Fact Remains: No Congestion Pricing = No Federal Funds

|
Last week, the parking garage industry-funded group Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free issued its latest salvo against congestion pricing. The report begins: Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free proposes a cost-effective, efficient, fair and practical alternative plan that will address the problems posed by congestion in New York City and exceed the guidelines imposed by the […]

Congestion Pricing Commission’s First Meeting

|
From Crain’s Insider: The Congestion Pricing Commission will meet for the first time next week, bringing together the 17 people who must choose between Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s traffic mitigation plan and some other program. To qualify for a $354.5 million grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, a plan must involve a pricing component and […]

Kheel to Push Free Transit Pricing Plan in ’09 Mayoral Race

|
As former deputy mayor and Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission Chair Marc Shaw predicts that congestion pricing may re-emerge soon in the form a proposal to toll 60th Street and the East River bridges, the Daily Politics reports that Ted Kheel is planning to put up $1 million to promote his free transit plan heading into […]

MTA Says it Needs More Money for Congestion Pricing

|
The deal that produced the 17-member Congestion Mitigation Commission mandated the MTA to "submit comments on the Mayor’s [congestion pricing] plan" by October 1, 2007. In these comments, the MTA was instructed to provide the Commission with three items: (a) a description of the additional capital needs required for implementation; (b) proposed utilization of any […]

Hakeem Jeffries Responds to Congestion Pricing Critics

|
From today’s Crain’s Insider: Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, who is holding a rally this evening for better G train service, is drawing fire from transit advocates because of his opposition to congestion pricing. Streetsblog commenters plan to confront him at the rally. "Simply because one did not support the mayor’s version of congestion pricing does not […]