Congestion Pricing

A delegation of approximately 30 members of the Campaign for New York's Future are traveling to Albany today to meet with more than two dozen state legislators and other public officials. Today's trip follows a series of meetings on Monday in which key coalition leaders joined Mayor Bloomberg to call for urgent State action on the Mayor's key PlaNYC initiatives. Today's press release (care of Howard Rubenstein) lays out some of Bloomberg's key legislative goals up in Albany:

Michael Bloomberg (front row, fourth from right) with other mayors at the C40 Summit 

The Bloomberg Administration is aiming to push its PlaNYC congestion pricing proposal through this session of the state legislature. That means the entire debate will take place within the next 36 days or so.

With one possible exception, no elected official has been more outspoken against congestion pricing for New York City than Queens Council Member David Weprin. A scan of the city's campaign finance database reveals over 20,000 reasons why that could be.

From a press release that just came across the Streetsblog transom:

Crain's New York Business reports that the group leading the campaign against congestion pricing will begin a lobbying blitz aimed at derailing Mayor Bloomberg's pricing proposal next week, just as the mayor goes to Albany to try to win state legislators over to his PlaNYC initiative. The arguments to be mounted by the "Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free Coalition" range from the speculative to the alarmist:

London mayor Ken Livingstone, whose congestion-pricing plan has served as a model for Mayor Bloomberg's, is expected to unveil today an even more radical measure aimed at reducing pollution in his city. According to the Guardian, Livingstone's proposal would target high-emission commercial vehicles:

Given that it was only a few months ago that Mayor Michael Bloomberg could be heard saying, "We like traffic, it means economic activity, it means people coming here," his pitch for a whole new set of progressive transportation policies at last week's meeting of the Regional Plan Association was all the more remarkable:

 Beer good, ethanol bad