Today’s Headlines

  • New Yorkers Demand Cuomo Take Action on Congestion Pricing … (NY1)
  • … But the Governor Is Set on Taking More Cash From New Yorkers Instead (Politico)
  • Will Nixon Force Cuomo to Get Serious About Fixing the Subway? (Politico)
  • Rechler and Weisbrod Endorse Pricing (News); Times Questions E-ZPass as Cordon Tech
  • What It’s Like to Face Cuomo’s MTA After a 12-Hour Workday (QNS)
  • Some of Yesterday’s 4/5/6 Delays Were Triggered by Death of Track Worker (NYT, Post)
  • Post: Time to Repair Existing Hudson Tunnels as Alternative to Gateway
  • Businesses, Eric Adams Push Back Against de Blasio’s Lame Congestion Measures (Eagle)
  • With Growth Slowing, How Will de Blasio Make Good on Pledge to Increase Bike Ridership? (AMNY)
  • Stringer Calls for Elevated Penalties for Drivers With Repeat Camera Violations (NY1)
  • The State DMV Is Failing to Keep Dangerous Used Cars Off NY Roads and Streets (NY1)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Fool

    Revenue! Revenue! Revenue!

  • Larry Littlefield

    “With congestion pricing on sidelines, Cuomo doubles down on controversial subway-funding measure.”

    It isn’t a subway funding measure. It’s a measure to fund “the MTA.” Including MetroNorth and the Long Island Railroad. An unlimited ability to tax without accountability. They could jack up the cost of suburban improvements as high as they want, and suburban legislators would be thrilled because suburban graft jobs would be created.

    How about a lawsuit about the fact that NYC is the only locality in the state that doesn’t get municipal aid? Including the Hamptons.

    https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/medicaid-the-rest-of-new-york-state-re-declares-war-on-new-york-city/

  • reasonableexplanation

    Okay, so what’s the angle here: “The State DMV Is Failing to Keep Dangerous Used Cars Off NY Roads and Streets”

    The article is a cookie cutter one, and focuses on the fact that after a flood, con men clean up cars without reporting them as flood damaged, making it hard for folks to detect. I don’t understand what you want the DMV to do, make already illegal fraud more illegal?

    Also, I guess the premise is confusing to me too; do we have a history of flood damaged vehicles causing pain for anyone but their owners?

  • Vooch

    The cycling numbers in the core areas are simply amazing ! The latest data proves latent demand for cycling as a mobility solution is enormous.

    Expansion of the PBL network remains the most cost effective solution to increase mobility in NYC. Adding 50 miles of PBLs every year should be the goal. 50 miles of PBLs costs $25 million. pennies

  • bolwerk

    Hell if I know what to do, but anything that could fail while moving 60 mph seems dangerous and you don’t really need a statistical profile to argue it shouldn’t be encouraged.

    It also probably increases insurance costs for everyone.

  • bolwerk

    So the most progressive candidate we could find to challenge Cuomo is an actress from a bad TV show with no political experience?

    That said, kudos for her for not being Christine Quinn. A very good baseline is not being Christine Quinn.

  • reasonableexplanation

    Well…good thing it’s illegal then, right? Like, other than complaining, what do you want to do?

    We already have yearly safety inspections, and it’s already a good idea to take a used car you’re planning to buy to a mechanic to get it checked out. They’re not magicians, they miss these things too, and that’s the honest ones, which are hard to find to begin with!

  • JarekFA

    It’s also illegal to register your car out of state when residing in NYS but how is that ever enforced?

  • bolwerk

    I don’t know what you can do other than use fines to discourage it. Or possibly set fines high enough so that the people who get caught are paying remediation for the people who aren’t caught. That probably can be a catch-all for all people who lie about the condition of their cars to buyers, inspectors, etc..

    But libservatives prefer prison sentences, I guess because it creates more jobs for disaffected rural whites?

  • bolwerk

    Is it? I’d think there are times when you *should* register out of state, though most of them are for business purposes. The one exception I can come up with is you primarily use the car out of state to begin with (e.g., because you have a vacation home elsewhere).

  • Vooch

    Someone needs to step it up – video of wen riding 20,000 miles/year

    https://www.wired.com/video/how-this-woman-rides-20-000-miles-a-year-on-her-bike

    LOL

  • Joe R.

    That’s pretty amazing. My best year so far was 5,000 miles and I don’t think I could have done much more even if the weather cooperated. One reason I didn’t pursue bike racing when I was young was the fact I would have needed to ride upwards of 10K miles annually to be competitive. I love riding, but not enough to spend that much time on the bike.

  • JarekFA

    If you are a NYS permanent resident then you are required to register your vehicle within 30 days of becoming a resident. Most people who register out-of-state must have some sort of out-of-state address that they use. But, I’d say the vast majority of those people truly live in NYS and register out of state since it’s cheaper.

  • Walk-Bike-Bus-Rail-Car

    PBLs are being slowed to a crawl by the awful community board process. Fortunately, I watched Bronx DOT commissioner Nivardo Lopez face down an audience dominated by anti-bike people last night at Bronx CB8. DOT is overruling CB8’s rejection of the PBL on Broadway along the northern 2/3rds of Van Cortlandt Park, and his defense of DOT’s decision against the audience’s parochialism and car-focus was intelligent and impressive.
    http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/bio-lopez.shtml

    fwiw, I had some qualms about the PBL plan, because there is no PBL around the 242nd Street terminus of the #1 train. But the outrage by some in the audience against the plan was ridiculous considering the plan provides a NET GAIN of 3 parking spaces for cars and SHORTENS THE CROSSWALKS by 30%.

  • I am a piker compared to this amazing person. Even if I did the total of my best month ever, 1158 miles in July of last year, and repeated it for 12 months, I’d still be nowhere near 20,000 miles for the year.

    I probably won’t even hit my desired goal of 10,000 kilometres (6200 miles) or the lesser goal of 6000 miles, because I took my first-ever intentional break in February, and have missed so many days in March (such as today, for example).

  • I love riding in the summer; hence hitting 1000 miles in July for five straight years, with a high of 1158 last July. But in the winter I sure don’t love it! Then it is pure work; and I have to remind myself frequently that I am doing it in order to stay in shape.

    Then there’s fact that this rider has acheived these totals in Alaska! Doing this in Arizona, where it’s regularly 100 degrees in the summer and 70 in the winter and it never freezes, that I could almost understand. But doing it in Alaska is doubly incomprehensible.

  • Joe R.

    Exactly. Even in my good riding years I miss at least 100 days due to rain, snow, extreme cold or heat, or illness. So best case in NYC maybe you get 250 good riding days, more likely closer to 200. If I manage to do 25 miles on each of those days, then I’m at 5,000 miles

  • djx

    No government experience. I’d argue she has moderate political experience as an activist/citizen. More than the average citizen for sure.

  • Jesse

    Whoa Whoa Whoa. Say what you want about her political experience but leave Sex and the City out of this. That show never hurt you.

  • bolwerk

    I wonder if she soured on de Blasio. His civil liberties record is probably worse than Cuomo’s, and maybe as bad as Bloomberg’s.

  • bolwerk

    That’s true. Cable news has inflicted far more psychological damage.

  • bolwerk

    TBF, I don’t really care about the show, but I’m not a big fan of celebrity-politics crossovers.

  • Jesse

    I was kidding. But I happen to be a huge fan of SATC and I think we can all agree that if one of them had to run for governor, Miranda would be the best option by far.

  • djx

    I think there’s a difference between truly well-meaning celebrities on the one hand. I’d take Jesse Ventura as an example of that (though he was a mayor before running for governor).

    And on the other hand celebrities who run based on either ego (bad) or the potential to profit (very bad). Mr. Trump reflects these two.

    So would I rather have a hack like Cuomo who is experienced and working to slowly loot out state? Or a total newb like Nixon who has decent politics and who is doing this out of real ethical motivation. I’d go for the latter?

    I voted for Zephyr Teachout in the last primary. Will vote for Nixon in the next.

  • bolwerk

    No denying Nixon’s politics seem far less odious than Cuomo’s already.

  • bolwerk

    I concur. My post was more a commentary on how sorry it is that we don’t have homegrown politicians that are at least as progressive as Nixon, not a swipe at Nixon.

    For that matter, nearly every executive politician in NYS over the past generation has somehow been a product of infotainment culture anyway. Cuomo got his position largely through his daddy’s name and connections, his brother works at CNN, blah blah. Bloomberg ran a media empire, and has the rare of distinction of running for office to enrich his friends for ideological reasons. Even Giuliani was a useful stooge promoting a narrative of “liberal” indulgence in a counter-grassroots backlash refereed by tabloids. And de Blasio came about mainly because the favored neoliberal anointed candidate, “qualified lesbian” Christine Quinn, turned out to be a complete and utter policy lightweight.

  • Larry Littlefield

    The alternatives are collapse, bankruptcy, or de facto default on 50 percent of debt and pension obligations via 100 percent inflation over a period of years. Which is how NYC escaped from the 1970s.

  • Vooch

    twice a month to Philly and back would still leave you short

    LOL

  • redbike

    If you avidly follow Marty Golden’s career trajectory, check out

    https://citylimits.org/2018/03/21/watch-and-listen-andrew-gounardes-takes-a-second-shot-at-unseating-gop-senator/

    A heavy lift but IMHO its success is more likely than challenging Cuomo.

  • It is worth pointing out that Bloomberg not only enriched his friends for ideological reasons, but he also improved New Yorkers’ quality of life for ideological reasons, as he gave us bike lanes out of his ideological commitment to public health and to the principles of livable streets.

    Anyway, while Cynthia Nixon seems like she has pretty good values, I agree that the phenomenon of the celebrity-turned-politician is not one which we want to encourage. The political career of Reagan didn’t cause actors to think that they ought to enter politics. Likewise, Schwartzeneggar, Jesse Ventura, and Al Franken were seen as individual cases, not as trend-setters.

    If the society concedes that celebrity is an appropriate path to political office (see the absurd fervour in support of the idea of Oprah running for president), then that will represent a lasting harm that Trump will have done.

  • bolwerk

    Jeeze, you could almost argue a famous little moustached Austrian was great based on those criteria.

    Bloomberg only net improved quality of life for the rich. He didn’t care about jobs and housing, did his best to damage the social safety net, attacked public schools, and his vicious policing policies fell heavily on the most vulnerable.

  • (I’ll ignore that opening line, the implications of which are well beyond the bounds of honest argument and civil dialogue.)

    Bloomberg had many flaws. His policy on pubic schools was destructive; his attitude towards the poor (“public housing residents should be fingerprinted”) was appalling; and his stop-and-frisk policy encouraged the police to harass black people openly.

    Yet he brought in bicycle lanes on a scale that no one could ever have imagined, thereby transferring huges swathes of land to the masses. Bloomberg made New York a leader in bicycle infrastructure amongst large American cities by empowering his Transportation commissiner Janette Sadik-Khan to travel the world learning about best practices, and to implement those ideas here. His strong leadership helped Sadik-Khan realise her goals despite vitriolic criticism from all corners (including from then-Public Advocate de Blasio).

    Bloomberg’s bike lanes enhanced safety for the mode of transport that is least expensive and that is most consistent with the maintenence of good health. This led to an explosion of bicycling, as many thousands of people were incentivised to take up the practice.

    What’s more, because bicycle lanes perform a traffic-calming role, our bike lanes have made our City’s streets safer for pedestrians. And this effect brings benefits even to drivers, as drivers who crash their cars at lower speeds are less likely to die or to suffer severe injuries.

    Before Bloomberg, bicycle lanes were essentially nonexistent in New York; by the time he was done we had nearly a thousand miles’ worth. This was the biggest change to the New York since the Tenement Law; and it transformed the City.

    Bloomberg’s bicycle lanes thus drastically improved the quality of life of all New Yorkers, and changed the course of the City’s history. This stands as the centrepiece of Bloomberg’s legacy. It is a legacy which is by no means untarnished, but which, on balance, is a great one.

  • Vooch

    same stroad filmed with better camera

    https://youtu.be/CRW0q8i3u6E

  • bolwerk

    But ignoring someone with a long tenure of promoting civil rights violations because he allegedly brought bike lanes to New York is within the bounds of civil discussion? It’s not an exaggeration that Bloomberg quite seriously is guilty of what are called human rights violations when committed in wartime by occupying powers. To say he improved the quality of life for even a majority of New Yorkers is to demean and erase his victims.

    The irony is that without Bloomberg, we very likely would have more bike lanes too. Bike lanes came about as a result of a mix of street level demand and activism. Bloomberg could have refused to acquiesce to them, as a Mayor Weiner might have done, but giving somebody credit for not stopping a good thing is pretty low-bar.

  • The vast majority of officials in every jurisdiction in America are responsible for human rights atrocities; Bloomberg is no exception. I do not erase his victims; the organisation for which I work deals intimately with them.

    But no one should ever diminish Bloomberg’s role in giving us bike lanes. The suggestion that we would have more bike lanes without him is laughable. If Mark Green, the guy I wanted, had won the election of 2001, we’d have a tiny fraction of the 1000+ miles of bike lanes that we currently have. And if Weiner had not self-destucted and had followed his expected trajectory, we’d have none at all. Something doesn’t just appear because it’s a “good thing”; it needs to be accepted and implemented by the people in power. Bloomberg alone was open-minded enough to have been persuaded by the decades of advocacy on complete streets. And he alone was a strong enough leader to get his desired changes done, critics be damned.

    It is entirely due to Bloomberg that we now have the expectation of bike infrastructure on the major roads of our City. And it is because of the demonstrable success of his bike lanes that someone like Tish James can announce that bike lanes should be part of all street redesigns (even if she walked that back a little, in a bit of pandering).

    On the fundamental level, Bloomberg caused a profound change in the applicablilty of the social contract to bicyclists. Before Bloomberg, you’d never have heard me complain about cyclists blowing red lights; indeed, I was one of those cyclists. A bicyclist was entitled to reason that the government doesn’t recognise my needs, therefore I have no duty to behave in accordance with its laws. But the proliferation of bike lanes made clear that government was, for the first time, taking into consideration the interests of bicyclists. This altered the ethical landscape, and created a responsibility to follow the rules that did not exist before.

    Bloomberg is responsible for taking a giant step towards normalising bicycling and redefining bicyclists from “the other” to normal citizens. That process is far from complete; but no one ever made a bigger contribution to it. Every subsequent advance in bicyling infrastructure owes its existence to the groundbreaking work that Bloomberg did in legitimising bicyclists’ interests. And, if we ever get legislative reform in the form of the Idaho stop, then that, too, will have its roots in Bloomberg’s revolutionary changes.

    Bloomberg is unquestionably a hero to bicyclists. And, when we take into consideration bike lanes’ knock-on effects that benefit everyone, we can honestly say that Bloomberg improved New Yorkers’ quality of life, without denying or ignoring the bad things that he did.

  • bolwerk

    Say what you want about me, but you don’t exactly see me holding different politicians to different standards, do you? The vast majority of elected officials in the USA, the ones who aren’t Republikans anyway, also probably manage to do a few things right, and many cities are well ahead of NYC in building efficacious bike infrastructure (and have light rail, clear bus lanes, etc.). It is good that Bloomberg “gave” us bike lanes, but whatever he did was because he is fundamentally a panderer. Bike lanes became popular with a large portion of his political base of upper middle class whites. By 2007 or so opposing them had greater political cost for Bloomberg than accepting them.

    Probably can’t blame Bloomberg for this directly, though he certainly didn’t stop it, but what is particularly troubling about this St. Bloomberg narrative is enforcement of bikes was quickly weaponized against vulnerable groups.