Democrat legislators refuse to allow vote on New York City central area toll - speaker says "dead"

Democrat legislators in a closed party meeting in the State Capitol in Albany decided today not to allow New York City congestion pricing to be put to a vote in the State Assembly. Democrat leader and assembly speaker Sheldon Silver claimed the opposition was "overwhelming" among Democrats. This he said, without explanation, was sufficient reason not to schedule a vote. That's the Stalinist way they do stuff in Albany under Democrat Party rule - we don't like it, we decided in the Party meeting. We've got the nummers, so we won't allow the legislature to debate it or vote on it.

The New York Times is quoting anti-toll legislators as deploying all the usual old arguments against tolling - that it is "elitist", that it is "unpopular", that it constitutes "double taxation", that alternatives like transit need to be improved first, or that there is something inherently wrong with charging for roadspace. (The Vince Lombardy Service Plaza on the NJ Turnpike never struck us as being especially "elitist" but perhaps Democrat legislators are very deprived up in Albany?)

The Democrats closed-door meeting decision appears to have thwarted the present moves by the City for central area tolls, because today was the deadline set by the USDOT for approval of the plan and the federal grants of $354m which were offered as an incentive.

Bloomberg says shameful and cowardly

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg issued the following statement late today:

“Today is a sad day for New Yorkers and a sad day for New York City. Not only won’t we see the realization of a plan that would have cut traffic, spurred our economy, reduced pollution and improved public health, we will also lose out on nearly $500 million annually for mass transit improvements and $354 million in immediate federal funds.

“I will be speaking with Secretary Peters and will express my thanks for her commitment to innovative solutions to real problems facing large cities today. I will also express my deep disappointment that, sadly, even Washington, which most Americans agree is completely dysfunctional, is more willing to try new approaches to longstanding problems than our elected officials in the State Assembly. It takes true leadership and courage to embrace new concepts and ideas and to be willing to try something. Unfortunately, both are lacking in the Assembly today.

“If that wasn’t shameful enough, it takes a special type of cowardice for elected officials to refuse to stand up and vote their conscience– on an issue that has been debated, and amended significantly to resolve many outstanding issues, for more than a year. Every New Yorker has a right to know if the person they send to Albany was for or against better transit and cleaner air. People know where I stood, and where members of the City Council stood. They deserved at least that from Albany.

“The idea for congestion pricing didn’t start in our Administration and it won’t end today. The $354 million we would have received from Washington tomorrow will go to another city in another state. But the problems congestion pricing could have helped solve are only going to get worse. And too many people from more than 170 environmental, labor, public health and business organizations recognize the merits of congestion pricing and hopefully someday, we will have more leaders in the Legislature who recognize it too.

“We will continue to push forward on the other 126 proposals in PlaNYC that will reduce our carbon footprint and green our City. We will move forward on proposals to plant 1 million trees, introduce hybrid taxis and install green roofs on City buildings. Congestion pricing is just one part of our ambitious agenda.

“I want to thank everyone who has worked tirelessly for congestion pricing and I want to acknowledge the courage and leadership that our partners in the City Council, Speaker Quinn, Governor Paterson, former Governor Spitzer, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, Assembly Minority Leader Jim Tedisco and some in the Legislature have shown by working together to convince their colleagues to support congestion pricing. Together, we will continue to work to build a greener, greater New York City.”

Earlier a spokesman of the Mayor's said:

"What we are witnessing today is one of the biggest cop-outs in New York's history. After insisting on the formation of a commission to make recommendations for a bill, and then for the City Council to vote to endorse that bill, the Assembly needs to stand up and be counted.

"They owe it to the majority of New Yorkers who support this plan, the scores of environmental groups, public health organizations, business leaders, unions, and the public at large, to put this proposal to a public vote."

Bloomberg got a good majority support for his proposal in the City Council recently which had voted 30 to 20 in favor of a plan, which was a variation suggested by a congestion mitigation commission jointly sponsored by state and city leaders.

Bloomberg addressed the issue before the Democrats meeting in a weekly radio address Sunday which is available below.

London decided on pricing without need for approval from on high

In London congestion pricing did not require approval by a higher level of government as in New York. It was championed there by the directly elected Mayor of London, Ken Livingston and approved by the London Assembly, the local elected body which grants legislative approval, or not, to the Mayor's initiatives. The Mayor's Greater London Authority provides public transport and emergency services and operates roads in the metropolitan area inhabited by about 7.5m people.

(The term City in London is used differently and is an historic relic. The City of London is a one square mile area of the financial district of London with a population of only 10k but employment of 300k. It has a "Lord Mayor" who conducts ceremonies mainly to uphold tradition (read: tourism.)

Unless it is seeking grants from the national government London government makes its own decisions, unlike New York City which apparently under the state constitution must gain state sanction for major changes such as City tolls.

In Stockholm Sweden congestion pricing faced the need for gaining support at two levels of government, more like New York. It had to be approved by the City and the national government (similar in scale to a state government in the US.)

Central area tolls were was also put to popular referendum where they were approved by a small majority.

Mayor Bloomberg's weekly radio address Sunday Apr 6:

"Last week, the City Council showed real leadership in voting for a policy that will help ensure the future our city and its transit system. I'm talking about congestion pricing. This week, our State Legislators will take up the matter. Time after time, they have served our city well. Now we need their support more than ever, because there are few policies that can deliver as many positive benefits as congestion pricing.

"Congestion pricing, and the transit enhancements it will bring, will immediately improve the daily commutes of thousands of people. For example, it will give commuters in the Bronx a one-seat ride to Lower Manhattan on three new express bus lines. It will bring Staten Islanders 33 new express buses. Queens residents will see 105 new buses as well as improvements to the E and F trains. Brooklynites will also benefit from subway service improvements, and new bus routes in neighborhoods like Canarsie and Bay Ridge.

"These improvements will begin enhancing the quality of life before anyone pays a congestion pricing fee. That's because the Federal government will give us more than $350 million to improve service before we implement congestion pricing. And once congestion pricing is fully implemented, the changes to mass transit will be even more dramatic. The money collected through the system - an estimated half billion a year - will go directly into mass transit.

"Some argue that congestion pricing will levy a tax on those who can least afford to pay it. To make sure this doesn't happen, we have included a provision to reimburse low-income drivers for any fees they are charged. And under our plan, all drivers would be able to deduct their tolls from the congestion pricing fee. But the truth is, most low-income and middle-class New Yorkers take mass transit, and they would benefit greatly from the improvements that could only be made with the revenues from congestion pricing.

"Voting 'yes' on congestion pricing will help ensure that the MTA can pay for the big-ticket transit projects in its capital plan. Projects like the Second Avenue Subway - something that the Assembly has been in favor of for years. Voting 'yes' on congestion pricing will help ensure that Queens finally gets better local service along the Long Island Rail Road, and that people in the Northeast Bronx will be able to ride commuter trains into Penn Station. Voting 'yes' on congestion pricing will help repair Metro North Stations in the Lower Hudson Valley, and it will allow the MTA to finally bring LIRR service into Grand Central, shaving 20 minutes off the commutes of riders who work on the East Side.

"By making improvements to mass transit and giving drivers an incentive to leave their cars at home, we can significantly decrease traffic congestion - not only on our City streets, but also on the highways and bridges leading up to them. And we have to do something, because right now congestion is choking us. It's polluting our air, driving up our asthma rates, and constricting our local economy. Ironically, congestion is really a problem of success; it's the result of so many people wanting to live and work here. After all, New York City is the economic engine that powers the state and the nation.

"To keep that engine firing, we have to make decisions now that will preserve and even improve our quality of life in the years ahead. We can't afford to go back to the days when our subways were a disaster. Congestion pricing was once thought to be a political non-starter, but today, not only has the City Council passed it, the governor supports it, and so do key leaders in the Assembly and Senate. The majority of New Yorkers support congestion pricing too, and now we need our State legislators to represent their interests and vote to strengthen the long-term health of our City."

Time for secession (COMMENT)

It is time for self-government for New York City. If a city of 7 million can't impose tolls on its own people, as its council voted recently, what the heck can it do?

Mayor Bloomberg should write a Declaration of Independence from these closed room wheeler-dealers in Albany - cowards who won't go on the record with an open vote.

The City has a population and economy - and problems too - of the scale of most states. It should secede from New York State and become the 51st state itself.

This is a shame. We didn't like all aspects of the plan but it was an important step in the right direction. Roadspace in New York City is a very scarce commodity and the congestion that plagues the city will only be relieved by pricing road use there, and by using the revenues generated to improve it.

Free use of congested roads – as voted in the backrooms of the reactionary Democratic Party today in Albany – is an anachronism that promises only continued inefficiency and waste. Tolls to use central areas like Manhattan are essential and inevitable. Nothing else will work to make the city mobile.

TOLLROADSnews 2008-04-07