Comments on: LaHood: NYC’s Congestion Pricing Money Still There for the Taking http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/ Covering the New York City Streets Renaissance Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:31:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Mark Walker http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-97141 Mark Walker Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:59:46 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-97141 That crazy old MTA -- always spending money on trains and buses! Let's defund the MTA. After all, who needs trains and buses? That crazy old MTA -- always spending money on trains and buses! Let's defund the MTA. After all, who needs trains and buses?

]]> By: Aaron Berkman http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-97101 Aaron Berkman Sat, 08 Aug 2009 14:34:52 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-97101 "Congestion pricing would go a long way toward filling that gap," Say again, this time without smiling. The MTA spends on a magnatude of BILLIONS, not millions, for each capital budget line item. So how is 350 million from the Fes going a long way to doing anything? Answer, it CAN NOT. The truth is that by ceiling off all avenues of entry into and out of Manhattan we would have handed over the biggest extortion racket in the history of mankind to the MTA all for a lump of sugar that couldn't sweeten the MTA's coffee. "Congestion pricing would go a long way toward filling that gap," Say again, this time without smiling. The MTA spends on a magnatude of BILLIONS, not millions, for each capital budget line item. So how is 350 million from the Fes going a long way to doing anything?

Answer, it CAN NOT.

The truth is that by ceiling off all avenues of entry into and out of Manhattan we would have handed over the biggest extortion racket in the history of mankind to the MTA all for a lump of sugar that couldn't sweeten the MTA's coffee.

]]> By: J. Mork http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-68062 J. Mork Fri, 15 May 2009 19:43:26 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-68062 I like the logic on the Gridlock Sam plan -- I wonder if we need a federal law to remove the toll on the Verrazano altogether, or if the legislation in place merely prohibits tolling it in the Brooklyn-bound direction. I like the logic on the Gridlock Sam plan -- I wonder if we need a federal law to remove the toll on the Verrazano altogether, or if the legislation in place merely prohibits tolling it in the Brooklyn-bound direction.

]]> By: Think_twice http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-68050 Think_twice Fri, 15 May 2009 18:53:47 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-68050 Bloomberg and Sadik-Khan seriously need to look at <a href="http://www.gridlocksam.com/congpri.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Gridlock" Sam Schwartz's version of the congestion pricing</a> if they're going to convince outerborough pols to side with the plan. Bloomberg and Sadik-Khan seriously need to look at "Gridlock" Sam Schwartz's version of the congestion pricing if they're going to convince outerborough pols to side with the plan.

]]> By: Clarence Eckerson Jr. http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67956 Clarence Eckerson Jr. Thu, 14 May 2009 21:30:42 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67956 Mark, yes I know it was intended to be a three year program. But that doesn't mean that an elected official couldn't say they support a shorter program, or issue an press release and then commit to a three year program. I was just giving options in case anyone was actually listening. Mark, yes I know it was intended to be a three year program. But that doesn't mean that an elected official couldn't say they support a shorter program, or issue an press release and then commit to a three year program. I was just giving options in case anyone was actually listening.

]]> By: Mark Walker http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67948 Mark Walker Thu, 14 May 2009 20:45:53 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67948 Clarence, as a matter of fact, CP as proposed for NYC was always intended to be a three-year pilot program. See <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/transportation_congestion-pricing.shtml" rel="nofollow">nyc.gov</a>. Theoretically, all of the electeds (including Brodsky and Silver) could have supported the mayor's original proposal while committing themselves to nothing more than a pilot program. Clarence, as a matter of fact, CP as proposed for NYC was always intended to be a three-year pilot program. See nyc.gov. Theoretically, all of the electeds (including Brodsky and Silver) could have supported the mayor's original proposal while committing themselves to nothing more than a pilot program.

]]> By: Clarence Eckerson Jr. http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67944 Clarence Eckerson Jr. Thu, 14 May 2009 19:48:03 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67944 One thing that boggles my mind.... Despite some councilmembers and state legislators opposition to congestion pricing... If the federal government really wants NYC to try this AND give us the federal dollars for it, why not get behind it and issue some sort of statement like the following: "I am personally opposed to congestion pricing for reasons (A, B, C, whatever) however in these very desperate financial times where our city/state needs to obtain as much money we can, it would be foolhardy to look the other way. Therefore, I would support a (one year, two year, whatever) trial period to institute congestion pricing so that I can help add $350 million dollars to the coffers of our state to help bring about better transportation infrastructure." The politician would be off the hook - make themselves look good and if it didn't work out could always say they told us so. So what's the big deal? Oh yeah, I forgot, this is NYC. One thing that boggles my mind....

Despite some councilmembers and state legislators opposition to congestion pricing...

If the federal government really wants NYC to try this AND give us the federal dollars for it, why not get behind it and issue some sort of statement like the following:

"I am personally opposed to congestion pricing for reasons (A, B, C, whatever) however in these very desperate financial times where our city/state needs to obtain as much money we can, it would be foolhardy to look the other way. Therefore, I would support a (one year, two year, whatever) trial period to institute congestion pricing so that I can help add $350 million dollars to the coffers of our state to help bring about better transportation infrastructure."

The politician would be off the hook - make themselves look good and if it didn't work out could always say they told us so.

So what's the big deal? Oh yeah, I forgot, this is NYC.

]]> By: Glenn http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67929 Glenn Thu, 14 May 2009 16:53:08 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67929 I frankly don't even care about where the money goes from Congestion Pricing. While mass transit improvements would be my first choice, the main idea is to disincentivize folks from driving into congested areas of the metropolitan area. I frankly don't even care about where the money goes from Congestion Pricing. While mass transit improvements would be my first choice, the main idea is to disincentivize folks from driving into congested areas of the metropolitan area.

]]> By: fdr http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67927 fdr Thu, 14 May 2009 16:06:07 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67927 "So if Barack Obama's DOT comes back with that $354 million offer, would NYC's state legislators still walk away from all those transit improvements for their constituents?" Yes. "So if Barack Obama's DOT comes back with that $354 million offer, would NYC's state legislators still walk away from all those transit improvements for their constituents?"

Yes.

]]> By: Rhywun http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67926 Rhywun Thu, 14 May 2009 15:43:00 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67926 If "free" East River bridges are sacrosanct, what makes anyone think the current legislature would approve an even more radical plan? Sure, talk is good, but certain elected officials aren't going to be changing their strategy of appeals to faux populism any time soon. If "free" East River bridges are sacrosanct, what makes anyone think the current legislature would approve an even more radical plan? Sure, talk is good, but certain elected officials aren't going to be changing their strategy of appeals to faux populism any time soon.

]]> By: Mark Walker http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67921 Mark Walker Thu, 14 May 2009 14:25:20 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67921 Good news, if only because it puts CP back into the public discussion about transit's future. Also, the failure to adopt tolls now makes a kind of sense. Now we can argue for something better. Good news, if only because it puts CP back into the public discussion about transit's future. Also, the failure to adopt tolls now makes a kind of sense. Now we can argue for something better.

]]> By: J. Mork http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67920 J. Mork Thu, 14 May 2009 14:23:45 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67920 Where the hell was LaHood during the recent MTA non-negotiations? (I would totally bother to log in if I could edit my typos after posting.) Where the hell was LaHood during the recent MTA non-negotiations?

(I would totally bother to log in if I could edit my typos after posting.)

]]> By: J. Mork http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67919 J. Mork Thu, 14 May 2009 14:22:13 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67919 Where the hell was LaHood while during the recent MTA non-negotiations? Where the hell was LaHood while during the recent MTA non-negotiations?

]]> By: David_K http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/05/14/lahood-nycs-congestion-pricing-money-still-there-for-the-taking/comment-page-1/#comment-67917 David_K Thu, 14 May 2009 14:00:42 +0000 http://www.streetsblog.org/?p=6129#comment-67917 "LaHood said the money is still there if lawmakers change their minds." Can lost minds be changed? "LaHood said the money is still there if lawmakers change their minds."

Can lost minds be changed?

]]>