http://webdocs.nyccouncil.info/textfiles/Res%200774-2007.htm?CFID=2288156&CFTOKEN=32250190

The vans in New Jersey also run at all hours; instead of running on a schedule they wait at 42nd Street (or the lower level of the GWB bus terminal, or Newport Mall) until they're full. I've taken them very late at night and on weekends. And Bergenline Avenue (as you can see from the pictures) is working-class, but Boulevard East is most definitely a wealthy neighborhood, at least nowadays. Those Manhattan views are pretty expensive.

I'm not a libertarian and in general I think libertarian ideas are simplistic, but I do know that sometimes libertarians need to be persuaded. The NJ vans show that transit can be profitable under the right circumstances (and safe and effective when properly regulated), which is a good argument against blanket statements by some libertarian anti-transit people.

At some point when I have more free time I'd like to check out the Brooklyn vans, and I'd be happy to show some Streetsblog people the NJ vans. I think it would be a very interesting comparison.

Back to Lew Fidler: based on what you all say about the dollar vans, he was right to rail against them. It doesn't sound like it was very effective, but if they are inefficient, unsafe, exploitative and destructive of bus service, then something should be done about them.

Lots of the vans have out of state plates. They are for the most part a cash (read tax free) business. And, more critically, the drivers are very poorly paid and have no health insurance or benefits, entirely under the thumb of the van operators. That leaves the drivers economically incentivized to drive as fast as humanly possible and as aggressive as they can so that they can cutoff the "competition", the MTA.

Also, they only run during prime time, leaving the MTA to serve the off hours and the overnight when no money can be made. That drives down the operating ratio for the MTA and requires more tax support that the van drivers do not pay.

Though they may fit some Libertarian ideal of ruining public sector employment they represent a very backward and primitive sector that would never be allowed to operate in the wealthier neighborhoods.

Did you ever get in one Angus?
In short, and I'm never short, the vans are a nail in the coffin of good bus service.

Crzwdjk, the NJ vans seem to be much larger, newer and better-maintained than the Brooklyn ones; they're actually tour minibuses and can seat at least 20 people.

Here are a few pictures:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/silentkv/399521015/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/66119114@N00/220105384/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/detoxicide/253471437/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/silentkv/399523605/

They're really very interesting, and worth checking out for any transit advocate; you also get to hear Egyptian drivers speaking pidgin Spanish with the radio dispatchers. And the view is great:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/69225969@N00/357141435/

Just go to one of the parking lots on the north side of 42nd Street between Eighth and Ninth avenues and ask for Boulevard East. To come back, just hail a van from one of the bus stops on the other side of the Boulevard.

Lew drove up to MetroTech last August (and took up the valuable time of those of us there to offer meaningful testimony) to jump on the Atlantic Yards bandwagon.

So I'm looking at multiple issues in drawing my conclusion that he's an idiot.

"Outer boro" is also disingenuous, because it glosses over the fact that many proponents of congestion pricing live in the outer boroughs. I do, and I think a lot of the Streetsblog contributors do too. It's not a Manhattan vs. Brooklyn issue.

"Tax" and "Outer borough" are weasel words, and by using them Fidler is letting everyone know that he's not above stretching the truth for the perceived benefit of a small minority of his constituents.

With environmental allies like Fidler, Environmental Defense and the Sierra Club, who needs enemies?

I encourage anyone who thinks dollar vans are inherently bad to visit Boulevard East during the morning rush hours. In addition to the frequent, well-patronized New Jersey Transit buses and ferry shuttles, there are privately-owned, state-regulated vans coming by at amazing headways. I'd love to see an estimate of the amount of people they carry in a day, and how it compares with other routes.

Finally, does anyone know what Fidler said about his old Buick?

Calling this a tax is just a simple way for politicians to rephrase the debate to curry favor with a small group of constituents. What's next? Calling movie tickets an "entertainment tax"?

To look at it from a different perspective...

In a way outer boro residents would have an economic advantage over those who live just over the river or immediately outside the congestion pricing zone, in the same way that a person who pays $2 to ride into the city from the end of the C train is getting more value per mile than someone who rides from, say, West 4th Street to Times Square.

If the city institutes congestion pricing, I would assume that the price of driving into the CBD would be the same whether one is coming from Fidler's district or from the Upper West Side, just outside the congestion zone. Paying, say, $4 to drive into the CBD seems like quite a bargain if you are coming from the far reaches of Brooklyn, but makes less economic sense for someone who could ditch the car and hop on the subway instead. And isn't that the point? Not to punish or unfairly "tax" anyone, but to encourage people to take public transportation where it is available?

Boulder, Colorado did a similar thing a few years ago. Set up their own bus and van system b/c the Denver-based system wasn't meeting local needs. The new system was so successful that, eventually, the big system came in and bought it up.

I have also heard Fidler say that Congress ought to outlaw the gasoline combustion engine-both manufacture and importation-in 10 years...so that we could see just how fast they develop an adequate alternate clean fuel source for cars. So maybe you ought to know the guy, rather than pick on an environmental ally who differs on your view of whether congestion pricing is an outer boro tax.

There are plenty of politicians (your namesake the former vice-president is one) who talk the big talk about the environment but fail to take any strong stances on non-car transportation. Fidler can be pro-transit and pro-recycling, but if he leads the charge to block any attempt to get well-off car commuters to pay for the disproportionate share of city resources they use, then his environmental record is very incomplete. And your characterization of these fees as "taxing" is misleading and inappropriate.

About the dollar vans: I've always thought that the vans in Brooklyn and in Hudson County, NJ (East New York and West New York!) were good evidence that under the right conditions, transit can be profitable. If the service level is equal or better to that provided by the public transit provider, then I say great. Of course, it's important to regulate the service to ensure that it is at least as good as that provided by the MTA. Even better if the staff is unionized. If Fidler helped to bring those vans under regulation, that's a good thing; if he just wanted them banned it isn't.

BTW, has he done anything to promote increased transit access to his district, like the Nostrand Avenue BRT or the Utica Avenue Subway?

You can't look at a single issue and draw nasty conclusions. Maybe Fidler doesn't think that taxing Brooklynites for the privilege of commuting by car into precious Manhattan is fair. Maybe you disagree...but Fidler's environmental record is strong.

If just one in three of those cars have two people, then the 4,644 "auto commuters" to the CBD are using only around 3,500 cars, which means district residents would be paying only 3,500 tolls more or less daily. And if some of them already use a tolled facility like the Bklyn Battery Tunnel, the additional toll incidence would be still less.

I assume Fidler's district has ~160,000 residents. (8.2 million divided by 51 districts). Since ~70% are "of driving age" (18-80), the 3,000-3,500 newly tolled commuters would be 2.7-3.1% of the population. Not negligible by any means, but not a tidal wave either.

These figures jibe beautifully with the borough-wide numbers in my 2003 report, "Who Will Pay?," for the Bridge Tolls Advocacy Project (www.bridgetolls.org, under Research). It's terrific to see TA and Bruce Schaller get the data down to the district level.