Comments on: Will Richard Ravitch Resurrect Congestion Pricing?

By: Cameron Williams

Cameron Williams — Thu, 08 May 2008 12:29:47 +0000

OK, but why not double the tolls on the Throgs Neck, Triborough and Whitestone bridges? Why toll only Queens and Brooklyn residents, who only make up 17% of those polluting the city with their cars?

The people using the Throgs Neck, Triborough and Whitestone have access to MetroNorth trains, which are more highly subsidized by federal and state funding than are the decrepit subways. Then add "Welcome to New York City" tolls on the L.I.E., the Grand Central, the Southern and Northern State Parkways. That seems like a more effective and equitable solution to me.

By: Schadenfreude

Schadenfreude — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:38:16 +0000

The USDOT has taken the $355 million that had been allocated for New York City's cordon pricing plan and reallocated it, 60-40, between Los Angeles and Chicago instead. Fancy new buses will soon be plying express lanes in both cities.

By: barak

barak — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:25:20 +0000

If CP happens, the political careers of those that implemented it will be shortened.

By: Mark Walker

Mark Walker — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:17:07 +0000

We have more people than the roads can handle. Unlike the roads, the transit system can be expanded. The main problem with the subway is that it hasn't been significantly developed since the 1930s when the Robert Moses roads-only approach to transit took over.

By: Queens Crapper

Queens Crapper — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:49:43 +0000

"But we still have the giant problem of way too many people driving into Manhattan when they could be taking the subway, Metro North, NJ Transit or the LIRR."

No, the giant problem is that we have a mayor encouraging rampant overdevelopment when there are already more people than we can handle here and a subway system built in the early 1900s. We have an infinite supply of people and not enough trains to carry them all.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:12:23 +0000

Too late for that. The CP opponents have taken the ball into their court when it comes to funding the MTA. And I'm in no mood to pay anything without a very good deal.

At this point, I'd rather discourage driving by taking away lanes.

By: Gizler

Gizler — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:27:46 +0000

No question the MTA is a mess. But we still have the giant problem of way too many people driving into Manhattan when they could be taking the subway, Metro North, NJ Transit or the LIRR. And way to many people driving in NYC period. If tolls are the answer, I say put them in regardless of where the money goes.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:23:57 +0000

If CP comes back, I want Bloomberg and the City Council to oppose unless those who opposed last time beg for them to accept it.

Specifically, the City of New York turned the Triboro Bridge and Tunnel Authority, with its surplus tolls, over to the MTA under a deal that provided transit in the city with 67% of the surplus in the short run, but only 50% today. Even though city residents pay 67% of the tolls.

Does the MTA really want to repeat that trick with the East River Bridges?

I don't believe Bloomberg was so insistent on the city's share. Worse, the MTA would have gotten the revenues by NYC would have had to pay to maintain the bridges -- and pay interest on the debts used to rebuild them.

And if the MTA were to take over the bridges and the debts, a reasonable outcome in some ways, what is to say the suburbanites would not force the agency to ban bikes and peds -- just because they can? Of charge the city to allow them?

They had their chance. No additional taxes on wages or jobs. No fare increases. There are other options. The MTA could go bankrupt and cut what it pays for debt service, pensions and retiree health care, or the state and city income tax could be revised so that retired people who earn as much as I do would have to pay more than zero.