Streetsblog New York City

The one-way tolls on the Verrazano Bridge have been a major cause of truck traffic in New York City since they were instituted in 1986. Though numerous efforts to restore two-way tolls have failed over the last two and a half decades, technological progress may finally bring victory within reach. Congressman Jerry Nadler thinks that the MTA’s moves toward cashless tolling could make two-way tolls politically feasible, and he’s trying to pass the federal legislation necessary to allow them.

The one-way tolls concentrate truck traffic in the city along specific routes and hit some communities — like Chinatown — especially hard. Trucks from New Jersey can drive into Staten Island, cross east on the Verrazano for free, drive up the BQE or Brooklyn local roads to the free Manhattan Bridge, then cross Lower Manhattan and head back to New Jersey for free through the Port Authority’s tunnels, which impose no tolls heading westbound. This long counterclockwise circle can save trucking companies a fortune in tolls, while endangering and clogging up New York City’s streets for everyone else.

“A two-way toll would eliminate the flow of trucks entering New York City via Staten Island in order to escape the charges on the Hudson River bridge and tunnel crossings,” said Nadler, who represents hard-hit Lower Manhattan. “With the MTA now poised to test new toll-collection technologies, which are likely to be implemented across the region, all New Yorkers will reap the benefits and the MTA will generate new revenue that it sorely needs.”

You may be wondering: How did such a senseless policy get enacted in the first place? The answer: Staten Island politics. Residents were sick of the long lines of traffic building up behind the tollbooths on the Staten Island side of the bridge, spewing exhaust near their homes.

In response, Congressman Guy Molinari, with strong support from Senator Al D’Amato, stuck a provision into federal transportation law forbidding two-way tolling across the Verrazano in 1986. Eliminating the eastbound charge meant that tolls only caused back-ups on the bridge itself and in Bay Ridge. The MTA was opposed to the move at the time, and the following year reported increased traffic through Lower Manhattan and millions in lost toll revenue as a result of the switch.

Read more…

Last night’s 33rd Senate District transportation debate pitted two candidates against each other who are unlikely to ever appear on the same ballot: Democrat Daniel Padernacht and Green John Reynolds. Padernacht is running a distant third place in polling for the September 14 primary, after incumbent Pedro Espada Jr. and challenger Gustavo Rivera. Neither Espada nor Rivera showed up at last night’s debate: Espada refuses to debate his opponents and Rivera chose to attend an NAACP forum instead.

Unseating Espada this cycle is perhaps the top target of public transit supporters (and good government organizations, and tenants’ advocates, and labor unions, and… let’s just say he’s made some enemies in the last few years). The district, which covers the area west of Bronx Park and south of Van Cortlandt Park, has extensive transit coverage, including the B, D, 4, and 1 subway lines, two MetroNorth lines, and the Fordham Road Select Bus Service. Among all households in the district, 71.5 percent don’t own a car [PDF]. But even so, Espada led the opposition to tolling the free bridges onto Manhattan, all but dooming his constituents to fare hikes and service cuts.

Since Espada’s cardinal transportation sin was over transit funding, it’s worth asking if his challengers are any better. Though Padernacht said he’d fight for state funding for transit at last night’s debate, he told the crowd that he doesn’t want either road pricing or increased taxation to raise revenues. “The Bronx will become a parking lot for Manhattan,” he said of congestion pricing, and argued that higher taxes would only drive residents and businesses from New York.

I approached Padernacht after the debate to ask him how he would find the billions that the MTA needs, if those two revenue sources are off the table. “The first thing I would do is look to cut costs,” he said, suggesting that limited buses could be eliminated during midday hours and that smaller vehicles might be cheaper to operate on low-ridership routes. After that, he said, he’d have to “brainstorm the issue.”

In Rivera’s response to the TA/TSTC transportation survey, he rightly pointed the finger at Albany for cutting off transit funding over the past few decades and forcing the MTA to drop ever deeper into debt. On what to do, however, Rivera showed himself to be an expert hedger.

Read more…

The journey of the new Willis Avenue Bridge has been a sight to behold. Over the past few weeks, the gargantuan span that will replace the existing bridge linking Harlem and the South Bronx has floated down the Hudson from Coeymans, NY, up the East River and over to the Harlem River, between First Avenue and Willis Avenue. It was an awesome spectacle.

Today the new span settled into its final position, where crews will put on the finishing touches to connect it to approaches on each side of the Harlem River. The new Willis Avenue Bridge will be an upgrade in many ways (for starters, it's not 110 years old), but like its predecessor, it will be free to drive across, beckoning to toll-shopping motorists and incurring all sorts of costs in air pollution, lost time, noise and danger caused by unnecessary traffic.

The act of replacing the bridge is rather expensive too. To mark the arrival of the bridge at its destination, the city released some figures today showing the pricetag for the replacement -- $612 million -- as well as how much all the recent bridge work in the city has cost.

Since 2002, the city has spent more than $5 billion on bridge projects. It has cost a bundle to maintain the linchpins of NYC's ostensibly free road network, including:

• $508 million on the Brooklyn Bridge;
• $364 million on seven bridges along the Belt Parkway;
• $277 million on the Williamsburg Bridge;
• $168 million on the Queensboro Bridge; and
• $150 million on the Manhattan Bridge.

These are important investments that need to be made. The question is why motorists should continue to get a free ride on all this expensive infrastructure.

The results are in from the City Council Progressive Caucus budget survey, and when it comes to road pricing, they're telling, if unscientific. Road pricing remains unpopular across a broad swath of New York City, though among proponents, support is intense.

The newly-formed caucus is still in the process of inventing itself. Though the 12 members have signed on to a general statement of principles, precisely what they will advocate for remains to be seen. Two months ago, the caucus released a survey asking New Yorkers how they'd fix the city's budget gap. That survey included a question about tolling bridges into Manhattan.

The results show just how much organizing remains to be done around tolling. Of all the revenue sources surveyed, bridge tolls were the second-most unpopular. Only a property tax hike fared worse. Bridge tolls still had more supporters than opponents, but since every revenue option did, that's probably just due to the framing of the question.  

Interestingly, despite the opposition to bridge tolls, when it came to open-ended responses, support for congestion pricing was one of the most common. So was raising revenue through stepped-up enforcement of traffic and parking regulations. 

In other words, support for road pricing is strong -- proponents went to the extra trouble of filling in the open-ended questions -- but not broadly distributed. And there are a lot of opponents, even among self-selected respondents to a Progressive Caucus survey.

The caucus's statement of principles calls for "a more sustainable and environmentally just city" and mentions a "sound transportation system" specifically. That should entail strong support for transit, the clean mode choice of most working-class New Yorkers. But if the Progressive Caucus pays attention to these survey results, support for bridge tolls (and presumably congestion pricing as well) may end up pretty low on the agenda. 

One would be hard pressed to find a more broadly drawn constituency in the city than that of state Senate District 31, which spans from the Upper West Side to Harlem, Washington Heights and Inwood before hopping the Harlem River into Riverdale. But in spite of vast differences in culture and income, most district residents have at least two things in common: they don't own a car, and they rely heavily on trains and buses to conduct their day-to-day lives.

Eric Schneiderman has represented District 31 since 1998. Though he has distinguished himself as a progressive who lauded PlaNYC and publicly blamed Albany for abandoning transit riders, Senator Schneiderman has basically been a no-show when it comes to the current MTA budget crisis. Now that Schneiderman's bid for state attorney general has opened up the seat, transit-dependent voters in the district's Democratic primary will have to choose from a field of candidates with varying views on providing the MTA with adequate, long-term funding -- though none are calling for road pricing to shift part of the burden to drivers entering their neighborhoods.

Among District 31 aspirants, Adriano Espaillat is probably the most widely known. That is, the Assembly member is known to be inconsistent when it comes to supporting stable revenue streams for the city's transit system. Espaillat was a vocal supporter of congestion pricing. But a year later he came out strongly against tolling the "free" bridges of Upper Manhattan, and never mind that some 80 percent of households in his Assembly district do not own a car. Espaillat also lambasted the MTA for its plan to cut student MetroCards, insisting that Albany had done its part to shore up transit finances. (Full disclosure: Espaillat, like Schneiderman, represents part of Inwood, where I live. In addition to covering Espaillat's maneuvering for Streetsblog, I posted the occasional related rant on my now-defunct neighborhood blog. Espaillat once accused me of making false statements about his record, but did not respond when pressed for specifics.)

Read more...

Last week we profiled Igor Oberman, the challenger gunning to unseat State Senator Carl Kruger this September who's made support for transit, including bridge tolls, a centerpiece of his campaign. So, what's going on with the other three members of the Fare Hike Four -- Pedro Espada, Rubén Díaz Sr., and Hiram Monserrate. Their anti-transit obstinacy undercut the MTA's finances, leading to the sweeping service cuts about to take effect, but have they drawn challengers committed to improving subways and buses? In these three districts, it seems, unseating the incumbents wouldn't necessarily mean that the work of transit advocacy is done. 

Monserrate, of course, was expelled from the State Senate and then defeated in a special election for his old seat by Assembly Member José Peralta. Peralta was one of the leading opponents of bridge tolls in the Assembly and put his opposition to congestion pricing front and center on his campaign website. In Peralta's Senate district, 53.3 percent of households do not own a car [PDF].

Carlos "Charlie" Ramos, Jr., formerly an aide to Comptroller William Thompson, announced that he was challenging Díaz just a couple of weeks ago. Ramos told Streetsblog that he is "unequivocally opposed to raising fares to subsidize the commutes of suburban residents" and boasted that he "grew up riding the El train" through the Bronx, but was not ready at this point in his campaign to offer any solutions for how to keep fares low, given the MTA's fiscal condition.

In a press release tied to the Staten Island Ferry crash, Ramos announced his general support for sustainable transportation. "Innovative ways to relieve vehicular congestion in the city, such as the 'Yankee Ferry' here in the Bronx, should be explored in an effort to reduce our carbon footprint and thwart potential environmental hazards," the statement read.

In the district where Ramos is running, 67.0 percent of households do not own a car [PDF].

Desiree Pilgrim-Hunter, a leader in the fight for higher wages at the Kingsbridge Armory, has taken on scandal-battered Pedro Espada. Before she takes any position on MTA financing, Pilgrim-Hunter told us, she wants to "look at the books -- the real books -- to look at what's going on and how this money is being managed." 

Read more...

The primaries are only four months away, and election season is starting to heat up in New York. All signs point to strong anti-incumbent sentiment among voters, with several entrenched legislators facing primary challenges. In Brooklyn's 27th State Senate district, long-time incumbent Carl Kruger is facing a primary challenge for the seat he's held since 1994.

Kruger is best known to Streetsblog readers for his role last year in gutting the Ravitch Plan and killing bridge tolls, which would have put the transit system on steadier financial footing. His opponent, Igor Oberman, has made support for public transit a centerpiece of his campaign.

Oberman, an administrative judge for the Taxi and Limousine Commission and Environmental Control Board, launched his campaign a few weeks ago after deciding that the powerful finance committee chair needed a serious opponent. "I don't think he represents the people inside the district or the Democratic Party," said Oberman. 

For the last few weeks, Oberman has been handing out literature [PDF] at busy subway stations across southern Brooklyn, criticizing Kruger and fellow Fare Hike Four members Ruben Diaz, Sr. and Pedro Espada for scuttling the plan to toll bridges over the Harlem and East Rivers, an act of obstructionism that set the stage for major service cuts and layoffs. Transit riders will feel more effects soon: The MTA's budget gap still exceeds $450 million.

At the Kings Highway station this morning, Oberman questioned whether his opponent can relate to constituents who depend on transit. "When's the last time he ever took the subway?" he asked, before flashing his very well-worn MetroCard. Oberman believes that "this is a commuter district" and that transit is "as important to them as police service or ambulances." 

Oberman supports bridge tolls, if the revenue is used to keep transit fares low and service strong. "We deserve a better transit system," he said. "We're trying to go green and compete as a major metro area."

Read more...

No, it's not April First.

The Daily News and the Times-Union report that the Bronx pol who played a critical role in derailing bridge tolls last spring has proposed, yes, tolling the East River bridges.

Espada's office says that more than $500 million could be raised annually from two-way $2 tolls on the East River bridges, funds that would be used to prevent service cuts and restore discount student fares. His proposal does not include tolls on the Harlem River bridges. According to the Daily News, the State Senate will not include the idea as part of its upcoming state budget proposal, which may be approved as soon as today.

So has Espada given new life to road pricing or is this too little too late? A back-of-the-envelope calculation by road pricing maven Charles Komanoff suggests that the revenue projections are too optimistic by a large margin, but the net gain -- about $240 million, at most -- would seem to fall within the range needed to cover the cost of maintaining service and student fares.

We have a request in with the Senate leadership for comment. The Assembly, where bridge tolls pegged to the subway fare apparently enjoyed majority support last spring, has been characteristically tight-lipped. "At this point Speaker Silver is still in conversation with all members of the Assembly majority," a spokesperson told Streetsblog this morning.

While Espada hasn't exactly endeared himself to other Democrats in Albany, his change of stance may signify the erosion of the bloc that killed bridge tolls last year. Note, however, that the proposed tolls won't affect downtown-bound car commuters from his district (only about three percent of his constituents, by the way [PDF]). And the Espada/Ruben Diaz, Sr./Carl Kruger alliance had already dissolved with the departure of their disgraced Fare Hike Four colleague Hiram Monserrate.

One thing to keep an eye on is whether any proposal for new MTA revenue also includes an ironclad "lockbox" mechanism to guarantee the money goes to transit. As we've seen, dedicated transit revenue is not, in fact, dedicated exclusively to transit.

Noah Kazis contributed to this post.

Yesterday, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio organized volunteers to campaign for student MetroCards at 20 subway stations across the city. We were encouraged by his decision to focus attention on legislators in Albany, and we had one big question: What funding solutions does the public advocate envision for the recession-battered MTA and the millions of riders who count on it?

Here's the answer we just received from a de Blasio spokesperson:

Given the MTA’s current fiscal outlook, Public Advocate de Blasio believes that our City and State have to make tough choices. The Governor and the State Legislature should not reduce payroll taxes while forcing the City to pay more than its fair share, especially since upstate communities also benefit from the MTA. We should look at other options such as stimulus funding, weight based registration fees or reviving Speaker Silver’s proposal to impose bridge tolls that are tied to the cost of subway fares. But over the long term the MTA must be more accountable and responsible with managing its budget.

So it's come to this. With transit revenues plummeting to the point where the MTA has to deal with a $400 million shortfall on top of an austerity plan that already calls for deep cuts in service, Governor Paterson yesterday proposed shifting the burden of the MTA payroll tax to fall heavily on New York City businesses. The idea is to tax city payrolls at .54 percent and suburban payrolls at .17 percent, skewing the flat .34 percent rate established last spring.

The proposal would raise $230 million for transit -- enough to avoid some damage but not enough to stave off the service cuts that have been announced or restore funding for student MetroCards. It would also come at a heavy price, discouraging businesses from hiring while unemployment remains stubbornly high. If the choice is between horrific service cuts and a 60 percent increase in the local payroll tax, then the New York City economy is between a rock and a hard place.

Despite the fact that the MTA's commuter rail lines, which keep suburban roads from turning into parking lots, are already more heavily subsidized than the subway, we are poised to enact a policy that will lessen the burden on the suburbs and hit the core of the region's economy the hardest.

Are bridge tolls or congestion pricing an option right now? The window to prevent this particular transit catastrophe by putting a price on wasteful driving probably isn't open any longer -- the revenue stream couldn't start flowing fast enough to balance the MTA's books. And the fact is, the same State Senate crew who killed bridge tolls last spring is still in power, and we're nine months closer to election day.

So think of the New York City payroll tax hike, if it comes to pass, as a testament to the obstinacy of Carl Kruger, Pedro Espada, Ruben Diaz, Sr., and the disgraced Hiram Monserrate -- as well as their GOP counterparts like Marty Golden and Andrew Lanza who sat idly by and did nothing to help the Ravitch plan last year.

Nine months after these NYC-based State Senators killed bridge tolls and nearly two years after members of the city's Assembly delegation stopped congestion pricing in its tracks, we now face the distinct possibility that NYC businesses will end up shouldering more than three times the payroll tax rate as suburban businesses. Think back to all the city politicians you've heard float make-believe proposals about reinstating the commuter tax or making only non-NYC motorists pay bridge tolls. This new tax on New York City -- on their constituents -- is their handiwork too.