This is different from what he told me when he was standing on a street corner while running for office not too long ago, so — assuming it holds up — good news!

There you go. I can't find a listing of their ratings. If they go to "102%" it doesn't say much for their respect for meaningful statistics (big surprise, coming from an old school environmental org). Anyway. He can't brag about his rating with a group as for cover in opposing congestion pricing when the same group is telling him to vote for it, explaining precisely why the objections he puts forth are insufficient.

Either Environmental Advocate's ratings and recommendations mean something or they don't; their judgment is to be trusted or it isn't. You can't have it both ways on congestion pricing, Daniel O'Donnell. That's the blessing and the curse of good policy. Happy voting!

Thank you for contacting me to express your position on congestion pricing for New York City.

As with any issue, I am very appreciative that you took the time to articulate your position. I would like to take this opportunity to explain my position, which has evolved as I had the chance to look carefully at Assembly Bill A.10406 and think about possible outcomes if it were passed. The bill was first introduced in the Senate on March 24th, and only a limited amount of time in which legislators could provide meaningful input has passed.

I care deeply about the environment, as is evidenced by my 102% rating from Environmental Advocates, and the effects of traffic congestion on the health of my constituents. When any piece of legislation is introduced in the Assembly, it is my responsibility to carefully review all aspects of a bill before I vote for it. After carefully reading the congestion pricing bill currently before the Legislature, I concluded that I could not support the legislation as written.

I am in Albany today, working out the final details of the 2008-2009 budget; I will be back in the district late next week and would be more than happy to speak directly with you about this important issue. Please forward your telephone number, or call my office at 212-866-3970, if you would like to discuss this further.

As stated by Environmental Advocates: "Short circuiting SEQRA has serious pitfalls."

As stated by Comptroller Bill Thompson: "I would like to offer for consideration three further amendments to enhance issues of equity in the plan. . . . Every driver with EZ-Pass should be allowed three free entries after 10:00 AM per month. This benefit will allow individuals to continue to drive in at no cost for a very limited number of trips each month when using a car may be unavoidable – [for example] a doctor's appointment."

Dick Dadey, Executive Director of Citizens Union states: "We are pleased to see that the plan has been made fairer over the past few days, but still feel additional changes are needed. Chief among them is the creation of an oversight panel of independent experts charged with ongoing review of the program and its implementation. Citizens Union knows that much of what is being proposed is an experiment that holds the promise of success. We ask that the program be subject to independent and periodic review to ensure that the promises made are in fact achieved."

I fully support increases in funding for mass transit; I also fully support efforts to improve the environment and create a more sustainable New York City. I have always been very open to the ideas put forth in the Mayor’s PlaNYC 2030. My reservations stem from careful consideration of the components of the plan, some of which I strongly believe have probable negative impacts that deserve attention.

As currently proposed, the fees charged to drivers that use Port Authority tunnels and bridges will go almost entirely to the Port Authority, not to New York City's mass transit. The "solution" is to either charge New Jersey drivers on top of the current bridge and tunnel fees to enter the central zone, or to require Port Authority to compensate Metropolitan Transit Authority $1 billion. Governor Jon Corzine has threatened to sue if either requirement, which he views as ultimatums and violations of historical Port Authority interstate cooperation, becomes law. We clearly need New Jersey's cooperation for this plan to work, and do not have that as the plan is configured.

New York's State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) demands a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for most proposed governmental projects. As written, the legislation does not require a full EIS, and truncates the statutory process that was designed to protect the environment and New York’s citizens. We know that there is potential environmental impact from congestion pricing, but without full SEQRA review, we do not – and will not – know what the impact is.

Another issue with which I am concerned regards the treatment of not-for-profits that depend upon vehicular transportation to fulfill their mission. An organization that provides meals to homebound seniors, for example, could face financial distress with such a significant daily expense added to an already stretched budget. We can do better.

Finally, I believe the plan is more viable if the State has the opportunity to review it after implementation and determine if its continuance is beneficial. There is not currently a sunset provision in the legislation, which means that no date is built in for review and renewal. If congestion pricing causes unforeseen problems, the State Legislature is not assured the opportunity to adjust and amend; a sunset provision should be part of legislation with such broad impact.

As stated above, I have always been very open to the ideas put forth in the Mayor's PlaNYC 2030. A.10406 attempts to address a very serious problem, but is ultimately fundamentally flawed.

Again, please feel free to forward your telephone number, or call my office at 212-866-3970, if you would like to discuss this further. As stated above, I’m currently in Albany negotiating the budget but will be in the district late next week and would like to speak with you directly about your questions or concerns. Thank you again for your advocacy on this very important matter.

Very truly yours,

Daniel O'Donnell
Assembly Member

They were very open to my feedback, though, so I weighed in at some length and tried to respond to what I guessed some of the other callers' complaints about CP might have been.

As you know I have my own plan which woukld in fact raise triple the revenue for transportation. It would share the burden among all partners in the NY region equitably as this is in fact a regional issue. In fact, I would love to invite Gov. Corzine to take a seat at the table to find a way for the NJ burbs to participate in proper regional planning and financing.

IF and I know this is a BIG IF, CP goes down, you have my word that i will continue to fight for a fair alternative solution. Are all of you in? [and note that I said IF.]

Lew from Brooklyn

Just cancel it and tell them why. Here's consumer reports on roadside assistance coverage:
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tires-auto-parts/car-maintenance/roadside-assistance-7-06/overview/0607_roadside-assistance_ov.htm

There are options that won't channel your money into an anti-environmental lobby.

This may not apply to many Streetsbloggers (including me), but everyone should know that AAA-New York is actively lobbying against CP. If you're a member, call AAA and tell them they should stop or that you'll cancel your membership.

I had a long conversation with their legislative director and tried to argue that many AAA members sign up for the road-side assist services, not to support anti-environmental lobbying. She was having none of it. She hit all of Brodsky's talking points and basically suggested drivers in New York are the abused, exploited and oppressed victims of a socialist conspiracy to bilk them of their money to fund state spending on non-road related things.

I voiced my support for CP and asked her to suggest that Sen. Adams reconsider his position on CP.

One question, right now, a Democratic Senator doesn't matter because the GOP has the majority in the Senate and Bruno has voiced support...the real issue is the Assembly and Silver, right?

I also called Brennan and was emailed his alternative bill press release.

ts

And the we can start demanding that Brodsky, Weiner and Lew come up with the $billions they promised.

Without taking it out of the hides of those who are already paying more than they would elsewhere or accepting less in other public services.

$20 / $10 students & unemployed
Lila Center
302 Bowery @ Houston St., 2nd fl.
F/V, D, 6, R/W trains all nearby
RSVP and Questions: info@theidproject.com

Presenters include:
New York City Council Member Bill de Blasio
New York State Assembly Member Brian Kavanagh
James Mumm: Executive Director, Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition
Marcy Palmer: Principal Legislative Analyst, New York State Senate
New York State Senator Eric Schneiderman

The Interdependence Project, based in the East Village, is a grassroots, community-oriented non-profit organization. They have started a campaign against plastic bags, and have organized this workshop to educate their members and other citizens and activists. The Interdependence Project offers weekly meditation classes, lectures and discussions inspired by the Buddhist philosophical tradition as well as other contemplative education systems, guest lecturers from a variety of backgrounds, workshops and retreats, monthly arts groups and seasonal arts shows, an online multi-genre magazine, community service and responsible consumption projects. http://www.theidproject.com/

Now I have known legislative counts to change before votes......

Lew from Brooklyn

i politely responded that the new amendments and the residential parking permit plan seem to alleviate all of his previous concerns, but that i'd love to hear about any others he has. we'll see about that...

Now his office is saying he is on the fence??

Danny's nose grows longer with each lie.