Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In

brodsky.jpgWe called Assemblyman Richard Brodsky yesterday to get his comments on the demise of congestion pricing. While he wouldn't talk to us on the phone, he fielded a few questions over e-mail. 

Streetsblog: With congestion pricing off the table and the deadline to receive $354M in federal support about to pass, will other traffic mitigation measures surface in the state legislature?

Brodsky: Several have already been proposed, including better enforcement (block-the-box and double parking being the prime targets) and reforms of yellow cab and black car services. But there is no support for using pricing or any other ability-to-pay mechanisms.

Streetsblog: How will the projected shortfall in the MTA capital plan be addressed? Pricing would have taken care of a big chunk of it -- what are some likely alternatives that will be proposed?
Brodsky: The Assembly has already passed a small increase in the income tax rate for those who earn over $1,000,000 a year, with the proceeds largely going to mass transit capital across the state. It has the added advantage of being pay-as-you-go, saving billions in interest costs.

Streetsblog: What's your reaction to today's news after such a long campaign to achieve this outcome?
Brodsky: I introduced my first bill opposing congestion pricing in 1995, for reasons that are still valid. I simply do not believe we should solve difficult social problems, or distribute public goods, or provide access to public spaces, based on ability to pay. Pricing mechanisms such as congestion pricing are regressive, unfair, divisive and inconsistent with the progressive policies I've tried to reflect in my public life. Additionally, the Mayor's plan eviscerated SEQRA, failed to include Jersey drivers, had no coherent way of collecting the fee from those who do not have EZ-Pass, and had numerous other practical failures. The Mayor, and many of his allies, would not acknowledge that opponents of congestion pricing were motivated by principle and philosophy, and the public debate became increasingly personal and angry. In the end, Members of the Legislature would not respond to threats, were disappointed by the failure to seriously consider their concerns, and remained philosophically uncomfortable with regressive pricing mechanisms. So it's no surprise that the plan failed, and rightly so. Next will be to continue our good faith efforts to deal with the real problems of congestion and mass transit funding.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

New Bill Would Block Apps From Deactivating Workers Without Cause

A Brooklyn Council member wants delivery app companies to be more human and less robot.

July 18, 2025

Friday Video: Is Berlin a Great Biking City?

Have recent moves by anti-bike, pro-car legislators ruined the experience in the capital of a unified Germany? Sort of!

July 18, 2025

Eyes on the Street: Meeker Avenue Bike Lane Is a Failure

The Department of Transportation still hasn't finished a critical bike lane under the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway that the agency has been stalling for over four years even after identifying the strip's danger and lack of proper signals.

July 18, 2025

Friday’s Headlines: Cuomo’s Road Rage Edition

Why does Andrew Cuomo drive so recklessly? Plus other news.

July 18, 2025

Fixing Third Ave. Was Once ‘Top of List’ For Eric Adams — But as Mayor He Backed Off

Mayor Adams has delayed a redesign of Brooklyn's Third Avenue despite once saying safety fixes there should be "at the top of our list."

July 17, 2025

Thursday’s Headlines: Jerry Nadler Edition

U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler faced off with Sean Duffy on Capitol Hill. Plus more news.

July 17, 2025
See all posts