Comments on: Brodsky Taxes Milk! Toll Plazas Will be Named After Marc Shaw!

By: Vince

Vince — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:47:30 +0000

There won't be "toll plazas" to name for Marc Shaw. There will be cameras, but no gates and no plazas. Brodsky and co will want to scare everyone with fears of Lincoln Tunnel style back-ups, but that's not what modern congestion pricing looks like. Maybe Streetsblog can run a couple pics of London and Stockholm pricing camera arrays.

By: JF

JF — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:18:35 +0000

I used the "pro-car" term in response to Andrew's post (#5). Actually, I think people are really just pro-personal transportation devices.

Well, since we're expounding on what "people" want without any data, let me say that I think people want to give me money. Since this is what people all around the world want, we should waste no time getting that project off the ground.

Whether its horseback, stagecoach, bicycle, motorcycle, automobile, airplane, etc., people like the freedom to go where they want, when they want. I'd guess isn't about status or prestige, as much as it's about convenience and efficiency.

Of course people want convenience and efficiency, and where there's enough investment in transit to make it convenient and efficient so they can go where they want when they want, guess what? People want transit.

By: Hilary

Hilary — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:04:28 +0000

Glenn Q: I think the stagecoach should be considered transit, not personal transportation device. It conveyed unrelated passengers on fixed routes, usually long-distance.

By: glennQ

glennQ — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:58:12 +0000

I used the "pro-car" term in response to Andrew's post (#5). Actually, I think people are really just pro-personal transportation devices. Whether its horseback, stagecoach, bicycle, motorcycle, automobile, airplane, etc., people like the freedom to go where they want, when they want. I'd guess isn't about status or prestige, as much as it's about convenience and efficiency.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:53:44 +0000

The generation now in charge has screwed the future, and those who will be living in it, to benefit the people and interests that mattered in the past. All this posturing on congestion pricing, transit fares, etc. is about trying to make someone else to blame for it.

To take the transportation example, the MTA will be going down the tubes, and we will be paying more for less, to offset all the wonderful things done for us -- or for someone, back when. But gee, because Brodsky and Weiner are still fighting for something for nothing, they are on our side, right?

But just remember -- every debt, pension enhancement and tax break passed the state legislature by 212 to 0.

And everyone who was saying Yes! give us fare discounts! Take down toll booths and freeze tolls! Give us tax cuts! Give us tax breaks! Spend more on seniors! Give us pension enhancements! Shares in the responsiblity for what has happened. But they won't be the ones sacrificing.

By: Kate

Kate — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 04:57:34 +0000

How long can Brodsky really keep playing games like this. Shelly will at least hear this out. That is not to say he will support the plan as-is, but something that resembles the Mayor's plan should at least be considered. Maybe we should go back to selling fuel off with a rationing plan? Lots of good that did, eh?

By: Michael Steiner

Michael Steiner — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 23:21:53 +0000

Oops, the link to the report page I used above was cut off and also not in ``clicky-style'': Hopefully now a better link to the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission's complete Interim Report for Public Comment containing the mentioned Appendix J.

By: Michael Steiner

Michael Steiner — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 23:17:05 +0000

Apropos rationing: I was surprised to see how positively the interim report was treating the Rationing Plan in the strenght/weakness analysis (e.g., page 56) and then noticed something interesting. The main part of the interim report (pdf version) only referenced Appendix A-I. However, the main online page
(https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/programs/congestion_mitigation_commission/interim-report) contained also an index J which contained an IMHO rather damning evaluation of rationing, with none of the mentioned issues showing up in the weakness section of the main report? Political pressure ...?!

By: JK

JK — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 17:16:18 +0000

Two encouraging stories here: First, union big, and Teamsters leader, Gary LaBarbera finding his voice.The unions have major pull in City Council and the Assembly. Second Pricing/transit funding package gets 60% approval in the lastest poll. This especially encouraging given the last couple months of media coverage, which has amplified the most ignorant, cynical and even false criticism of pricing. All and all, I think pricing has a good chance. We get the mayor to sell a bit harder and this could be the big surprise of the year.

By: Gary

Gary — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:30:23 +0000

License plate rationing is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard.

1. Not a nickel raised for transit to abate the underlying problem.

2. Piss people off to no end, and would shortly fail.

3. Implementation nightmare.

4. Anyone with two cars (or more), i.e. Brodsky's wealthy Westchester constituents, just switches cars on day 5.

Mind-bogglingly bad idea.

By: Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 01:31:53 +0000

fdr - it is impossible to put much in the way of transit capacity improvements before CP is done because there is simply not enough money to go around. Some stuff could and will be accomplished, many new buses but really, this is about paying for the capital plan commitments that the public has already been promised. And, the main thing Shelly Silver got out of the commission approach is the home rule piece that will require City Council approval before the Assembly takes a position. If the term limited City Council goes for it the Assembly will feel safe in supporting it.

BillyBob - Believe it BB, Denny Farrel has lost a lot off his fast ball. However, Brodsky opposed the fare increase and has made a career of smearing the MTA. Those tendencies he shares with the Straphangers and the Daily News.

Andrew - yes the media is pro-car, my only question is why you have to ask. You must not have a TV or look at the ads in the newspaper. Good for you if that is the case.

Looks like one of the stronger players has become Gary LaBarbera a Bruno appointee and head of the influential central labor council. Hope that is the case and that he can bring along the Labor chiefs and use his juice with the City Council and the Assembly.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:53:05 +0000

(The City and State are, relatively speaking, going to be relatively broke as we put together the next MTA capital plan.)

Stop talking about "improvements." Did any of you read the Financial Times today? The lead story, in a publication published all over the world, is that the government of the United States might very will lose it's triple A credit rating.

We'll be lucky if we keep the transit system we have. This country, as a result of the public and private debts run up by past generations, is getting massively poorer as we speak. I'm not just talking about a recession. I'm talking about a recession that is a ratchet downward in the standard of living.

So they need money from wherever they can get it. Lots of fun for people like Brodsky who can say that are for the people and against anything. Not so fun if disaster strikes and they can be blamed.

The transit modes most likely to expand are bicycles and telecommuting. Little if any public capital costs, no operating costs.

By: Bwah

Bwah — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:50:07 +0000

Bogota and Sao Paulo have also tried license plate based rationing schemes - last I heard they were unable to enforce it and had narrowed to focus on peak hour rationing...

By: vnm

vnm — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:45:41 +0000

Why would the media be pro car? I can't think of any reason at all.

By: andrew

andrew — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:43:33 +0000

gary: point taken.
I suppose that is a great example of how unbridled capatalism is the true enemy to a free press.
So with the understanding that big corps rule, how will anything ever change for the better?

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:14:38 +0000

andrew, I don't see mass transit doing a lot of advertising, do you?

By: Angus Grieve-Smith

Angus Grieve-Smith — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:14:03 +0000

I just want to point out, per page 31 of the report, that these are nonexistent toll plazas that will be named for Marc Shaw.

By: srock

srock — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:40:53 +0000

The New York Times appears to be pro car (http://www.streetsblog.org/2008/01/11/times-real-estate-vp-joke-betrays-anti-bike-bias/#comments) and I have a hard time believing that the Post or the Sun is going to come out as more progressive than the Times.

By: andrew

andrew — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:37:05 +0000

Brodsky is a clown, why do we have to see his angry face all the time on the news, he is a huge stone in the path of progress.

Why does all the local news only choose to show the opinion against pricing.

Is the media pro car?

By: fdr

fdr — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:34:10 +0000

Brodsky and Farrell were both appointed to the commission by Shelly Silver. If they are reflecting his position, the Assembly isn't going to vote for any plan that the commission comes up with.