Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver could make a slew of transportation bills move through his chamber or let them languish as in years past. Photo: Daily News

This year’s legislative session is rapidly coming to a close in Albany. With the state legislature wrapping up its regularly scheduled official business on June 20, the Capitol is entering a period of intense activity as legislators and lobbyists make a final push for their priorities.

Albany has some big items on its agenda this month: rent regulations, a property tax cap, ethics reform, and gay marriage. Somewhat below the radar, the push is on for a number of street safety and sustainable transportation priorities as well. Time is of the essence, as advocacy momentum built up over the year dissipates after the session ends. Bills that falter this time around will have to start over again after the legislature reconvenes in January.

If support gels for any of the following bills, the legislature can act extremely quickly to turn them into law. That’s especially true in the Assembly, where Speaker Sheldon Silver controls a large majority and where most of this legislation is currently stalled or has died in past sessions.

Complete Streets

Complete streets legislation would require planners to consider the needs of all road users when designing a road receiving state and federal funding. Last year, it passed the State Senate but stalled out in the Assembly.

After talking with the legislation’s opponents, complete streets supporters made some revisions to the language, and an updated version of the bill is headed to the Senate Transportation Committee today, said Nadine Lemmon, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign’s Albany legislative advocate. As now written, the complete streets bill would cover the large set of projects that already need to conduct extensive reviews as part of the federal approval process, which involves filling out thick binders of paperwork. “We’re targeting projects that already have to do a lot of review and we’re just adding two pages to their world,” said Lemmon.

Purely local projects wouldn’t be covered, but Lemmon argued that as towns or counties prepare complete streets plans on some projects, they’d grow more familiar with the concept, leading to what she called a “trickle down effect.”

In the Senate, the complete streets bill is sponsored by both Charles Fuschillo and Martin Dilan, the chair and ranking member of the Transportation Committee, respectively, along with twelve other senators. In the Assembly, however, the companion legislation hasn’t been introduced yet. That said, Lemmon reported that preliminary conversations about the bill with both the governor’s staff and state DOT officials have been encouraging.

Automated Enforcement for Speeding and Red Lights

Using automated cameras to enforce the speed limit would save lives, but local governments need state approval to do so. Legislation to allow New York City to install such cameras was introduced in the Assembly by Manhattan rep Deborah Glick last week, said Transportation Alternatives State Policy Director Lindsey Lusher Shute. The bill is now in front of the transportation committee. Companion legislation hasn’t been introduced yet in the Senate, she said, though she thinks that Brooklyn Republican Marty Golden may sponsor it.

Though the bill currently has 12 co-sponsors, “it’s going to take quite a few more sponsors and attention by the transportation committee to move,” said Lusher Shute, especially “given the reluctance of the chair to adopt more automated enforcement legislation.” Transportation Committee chair David Gantt killed legislation to allow bus lane enforcement cameras in 2008. Concluded Lusher Shute, “It’s not as close as we’d like.”

Another Golden-sponsored bill, to allow New York City to increase the number of life-saving red light cameras in use from 150 to 300, has moved quickly through the Senate. It passed through committee there and now only awaits a floor vote. Again, however, the Assembly version is stuck in the transportation committee.

Transit Funding Lockbox

The broad array of groups supporting legislation to make it harder for Albany to steal dedicated transit funds is headed up to the Capitol today, said Lusher Shute. The coalition includes transit advocates, labor and business leaders.

The bill is currently in front of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee. Assembly sponsor Jim Brennan urged supporters to contact Ways and Means chair Denny Farrell at a press conference last week.

Lusher Shute sounded optimistic about the lockbox’s chances. “There are tons of groups behind it,” she said, and legislators’ memories of recent fare hikes and service cuts are fresh. “It’s very possible that we could move that this session.”

Crossover Mirrors

An effort to require large trucks on New York City streets to be equipped with mirrors that enable drivers to see pedestrians in the blind spot in front of the cab got a big boost last week, in the form of a mayoral press conference supporting the bill. By standing with the bill’s sponsors, Golden and Brooklyn Assembly Member Joan Millman, Mayor Bloomberg showed that the legislation is a top priority for the city.

Yesterday, the bill passed the State Senate, where it was sponsored by Golden. In the Assembly, the bill is still in front of the transportation committee, but the Daily News reports that it could clear the whole chamber as soon as tomorrow.

"My Assembly colleagues and I fought hard to preserve student MetroCards, because we believe that students simply shouldn't have to pay to get to school every day," said Silver (D-Manhattan). "Many cash-strapped families do not have any room in their already-tight budgets to provide children with daily transit fare."

"Many children depend on city transit to get them to school, and the MTA Schoolfare Program offers them an affordable way to do so," said Farrell (D-Manhattan). "We cannot lose sight of the needs of our most vulnerable citizens during these tough times."

Of course the vulnerable and cash-strapped, with or without children, will end up paying for this deal one way or another, since Silver and Farrell did nothing but further compromise the MTA's own already-tight budget to cover Albany's student fare tab. To these guys, victory is making other transit riders eat the cost of student fares while they heap praise upon themselves for coming to the aid of poor kids and families.

• The Assembly rejects the Executive proposal to authorize: Bus Lane Photo Devices
  

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Ways and Means Committee Chair Herman "Denny" Farrell have rejected enforcement cameras that would make bus service faster and more reliable for New Yorkers.

The news from the Assembly does not represent the last word on bus cams, and there will be opportunities to restore bus lane enforcement in the final budget. But for now this budget proposal has sent a clear message: Bus riders and better transit service do not matter to the Assembly leadership. We'll have more on this story tomorrow.

Adriano Espaillat doesn't believe in bridge tolls or parking laws.

Meanwhile, Espaillat's Upper Manhattan colleague Herman "Denny" Farrell, the outspoken (and uninformed) congestion pricing foe, recently made news as the lone Assembly member to report zero personal use of his state-provided vehicle. Has he eschewed his car keys for a MetroCard? Not exactly, as NY Politics reports:

Farrell’s office said the lawmaker never drives his state car for personal use, preferring to tool around in his own convertibles. 

Good to know.

On Monday, April 7, Sheldon Silver walked out of a closed door meeting of State Assembly Democrats and announced congestion pricing was dead. Never mind that New York City's mayor and City Council supported the plan along with the governor, the State Senate and an unprecedented coalition of business, labor, environmental and civic groups. Like so much else in Albany, the decision was made in secret, without a debate, a vote or even a record of the proceedings.

Until congestion pricing came around, I never paid all that much attention to Albany. Sure, I knew about the sex and graft scandals, the "three men in a room," and the Brennan Center reports showing New York's government has more in common with the old Soviet Politburo than America's 49 other state legislatures. I knew "dysfunctional" was the official adjective to describe Albany. But the dysfunction never seemed to impinge on my own life in any immediate, tangible way. Until congestion pricing.

I was really looking forward to seeing motorists pay to drive into Lower Manhattan. While I understood the importance of $354 million in federal aid, $491 million per year in revenue for transit and fewer kids growing up with asthma, this wasn't what pumped me up. What I liked most about congestion pricing was the fact that the people who make life in New York City most miserable -- the armada of horn-honking, exhaust-spewing, space-hogging, oil-guzzling, climate change-inducing motorheads that rolls through my neighborhood every day, to and from the free East River bridges, were finally going to have to pay for the privilege.

Assembly Democrats gave lots of reasons why they couldn't support pricing, few of which dealt with substance and most of which boiled down to their feeling that an arrogant, imperious billionaire mayor and his elitist supporters were trying to stick it to New York City's poor and middle class. No matter that New York City's poor and middle class already pay a fare to ride the subway and bus and that the number one propagator of this populist claptrap was Richard Brodsky, a Westchester Assemblyman who represents the region's wealthiest Manhattan-bound car commuters, average annual income, $176,231. At least Brodsky did a good job standing up for his constituents. That's a hell of a lot more than Joan Millman, Deborah Glick, Hakeem Jeffries, Daniel O'Donnel, Jonathan Bing and the rest of the city's Assembly delegation can say for itself.

The moment I realized pricing was doomed in the legislature was when Denny Farrell, a 34-year Assembly veteran, stood up before the Congestion Mitigation Commission, of which he was a member, and delivered an impassioned speech against toll booths on the bridges between Manhattan and the Bronx. Toll booths, Farrell said, would "freeze all of northern Manhattan in gridlock" on Yankees game nights. The speech took place not at the first Commission hearing in September but at the penultimate meeting in January. Somehow, incredibly, Farrell managed to sit through four months of meetings and hearings without realizing that congestion pricing fees are collected electronically; toll booths were not part of the plan. This was the guy who was assigned to bring the work of the Commission back to his colleagues in the Assembly and he either wasn't paying attention or simply didn't care.

During Commission meetings, Farrell frequently shared his experiences driving and parking in the city. Invariably, his personal transportation anecdotes never involved a subway, bus, bike or even a sidewalk. It was a reminder that while New York state legislators are paid a middle class salary (by New York City standards, at least), they are still members of New York City's other elite -- the free riding class. Their unlimited parking privilege allows them to drive wherever and whenever they want. From their windshield perspective, the city is a transportation problem to be solved for cars. Ultimately, the biggest hurdle congestion pricing faced was the simple fact that the people required to enact the legislation were the ones who stood to pay the most because of it. You know that beleaguered middle class driver the Assembly kept talking about? He was a state legislator.

If any good has come of the Assembly's failure to act on congestion pricing, it's simply this: A new generation of citizen activists got to see up close and personal how broken New York State government is and how badly it's in need of fixing. Assembly members come up for election every two years and are often ushered in to office by as few as 5,000 votes. September 2008 ought to be the last time any of these legislators have the pleasure of going un-challenged in a Democratic primary.

By Aaron Naparstek. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Transportation Alternatives.  

The Sun reports:

The MTA's executive director, Elliot Sander, who will testify at the hearing, has said Mr. Bloomberg's plan to charge drivers $8 to enter Manhattan below 60th Street would generate $4.5 billion in revenue, which the MTA could borrow on in advance. Even with the use of congestion fee funds, the MTA budget has a $9 billion shortfall.

Mr. Silver said in a statement yesterday that he is concerned that the congestion plan would not be fully funded and that it is unclear whether the proceeds from the traffic tax would be devoted to capital projects alone or to routine maintenance and operations.

The congestion pricing plan would qualify for $354 million in federal aid if passed by Albany and the City Council by March 31. Mr. Silver has said he would not support it unless it includes rebates for low-income drivers.

According to the hearing announcement, the assembly members will "seek information on the specific details associated with the proposed projects contained in the plan as well as the funding of the plan. This hearing will also provide an opportunity for the Committees to examine the other components of the plan, such as how a congestion mitigation plan and its consequences are addressed."

The hearing will begin at 10:30 a.m. at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Meeting Hall, 42 W. 44th St. (bet. Fifth & Sixth Aves., 2nd Floor, in Manhattan.

Brodsky's anti-pricing antics are well known to Streetsbloggers. Below is an excerpt from Farrell's February bulletin to his Northern Manhattan constituency, with emphasis added.

Read it and weep.

I would like to take a moment to explain my 'no' vote on congestion mitigation. Simply put, I saw this issue as a matter of fairness, where our community was being asked to shoulder the costs of this plan without receiving our fair share of the benefits.

While this idea of reduced traffic and a corresponding reduction in air pollution in our neighborhoods is appealing, the residents of New York City should not carry the burden for the entire metropolitan area while others use our bridges and tunnels without having to pay a fee. Unless there is some way drivers coming into Manhattan can be required to pay, these persons will continue to avoid paying their fair share, and this will do nothing to solve the pollution problems in our community which are caused by traffic on the George Washington Bridge.

However, my 'no' vote was one of only two cast by the review committee, meaning congestion mitigation passed the first hurdle without seriously addressing the concerns of our community.

From here, the City Council will take up the issue and must make a recommendation of its' own before the issue is considered by the State Assembly. Should congestion mitigation be approved by the City Council and taken up by the Assembly, the Assembly must approve congestion mitigation by March 31 in order to receive federal funding to implement this plan.

While both the Council and the Assembly are committed to meeting the deadline, should congestion mitigation be judges worthy of pursuit, it is imperative that this decision be made after consideration of all the facts. By design, this must include a long hard look at MTA's five-year plan, which was promised to the Council and the Assembly by the transit agency. However, MTA has yet to make good on their promise to release this information.

It's hard to know where to start here, but last things first: the MTA released its capital plan shortly after Farrell wrote this letter, and the overriding message, as expected, is that the MTA needs congestion pricing. But this is almost beside the point, not only because Lee Sander has been saying it for months now, but because a state legislator like Farrell, if anyone, should be well aware of the MTA's dire financial straits. Perhaps Ferrell expected the agency to say it doesn't need that $500 million a year after all.

Unlike some of his colleagues, Farrell seems willing to acknowledge that pricing will reduce traffic and air pollution. But that isn't good enough, since New Jersey drivers would receive a toll credit, thereby giving them a "free" ride. This is a classic example of the us vs. them strategy adopted by the anti-pricing crowd from day one: Even if there is less gridlock, less pollution, fewer kids hospitalized with asthma, we don't want it unless the other guy pays his "fair share."

our community was being asked to shoulder the costs of this plan without receiving our fair share of the benefits

Again with the "fair share" bit. If by "our community" Farrell is referring to Northern Manhattan, then he's at least partially right: drivers traveling below 60th Street would indeed have to pay the $8 congestion charge. But since just 3.4 percent of Farrell's constituents commute alone by car to Lower Manhattan from his transit-rich district, most of his community would indeed benefit. Greatly.

this will do nothing to solve the pollution problems in our community which are caused by traffic on the George Washington Bridge.

Not sure what Farrell means here, since the GWB has an inbound toll, and since the east and west side highways are included in the cordon area recommended by the TCMC.

Unless there is some way drivers coming into Manhattan can be required to pay...

Like an $8 charge to drive below 60th Street?

Despite Farrell's apparent willful ignorance when it comes to pricing, as of last week he had not signed on to Brodsky's $4 cab surcharge plan. Being a Manhattan legislator with his sights set on a City Council seat, it's hard to imagine he would. Yellow cabs aren't nearly as prevalent uptown, but Farrell would have a hell of a time justifying a $6.50 drop charge to the 77.9 percent of households in his district (full disclosure: mine included) that don't own a car and rely on taxis from time to time.

But now that Brodsky and his band of non-Manhattanite lawmakers have jumped the shark, what's next?

 
To be fair, the QCC has promoted this idea for several years, long before pricing was introduced by the Bloomberg administration. Here's the QCC in 2005:

Re-instate the Commuter tax after and dedicate this money for transportation infrastructure. If the proposal includes sharing the proceeds with our suburbs, it should pass in Albany. Let the 'burbs keep what their residents pay; New York City will do well with wealthy out-of-staters who live across the Husdon, Connecticut and elsewhere. Double the former rate -- netting $450 million to start, and reaching $1 billion soon.

But it's easy to be cynical when the QCC suggests the city, or the MTA, abandon congestion pricing to get behind the commuter tax. Setting aside the fact that it would do nothing to reduce congestion or VMT and has no environmental or public health benefit, Albany has already rejected it, and did so almost on a whim. Current state legislators Richard Brodsky, Denny Farrell, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver were among those who voted to repeal the tax in 1999.

These guys are still in charge, and no one at the capitol is talking about a commuter tax. There's no reason to believe it would be voted back in. Not even Brodsky, who has elevated anti-pricing rhetoric to an art form, is suggesting a return to the commuter tax to alleviate congestion, preferring a carbon tax and license plate rationing instead.

Besides having no basis in reality, claiming "it should pass in Albany" is a weak nail on which to hang the future of public transportation in New York City. In that light, the QCC commuter tax push should be seen for what it is: another attempt to distract from a plan that would actually reduce traffic congestion while raising critical funds for transit.

Photo, of QCC President Corey Bearak and MTA Executive Lee Sander, by Bruno DeFranceschi via Queens Civic Congress

13 yes votes.
2 no votes: Richard Brodsky and Denny Farrell
1 abstention: Richard Bivone
1 absent: Vivan Cook

Next stop on the timeline, March 28:

The City Council must vote to approve the "Implementation Plan," send a home rule message to the state legislature. A home rule message is a request from a city or town council to the state legislature asking them to vote on legislation affecting only that town or city.

Now that the policy making is done, let the politics begin.

With its report released the day before, there wasn't a lot of news to be found at yesterday's meeting of the Congestion Mitigation Commission. There was, however, some good political theater and, with the deadline to produce a recommendation approaching, influential commissioners began staking out their positions.

The day's agenda was to discuss the four alternative traffic mitigation plans presented in the report. Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, as usual, had questions. Would the alternative plans include an exemption from environmental review or a residential parking permit program? Do they address government parking placards or include commitments to have transit improvements in place before the pricing system is turned on?

The back and forth went on for a while, Brodsky suggesting through his questions that none of the traffic mitigation plans were detailed enough for responsible legislators to take a vote.

While the tone of the discussion was spirited and collegial, at a certain point, Shaw, it seemed, had enough of Brodsky's nitpicking. "Look," he said:

There are only two ways to reduce congestion. Less people come to work or you improve mass transit. We don't want less people to come to work and the only way to improve mass transit is with money and resources which we don't have. The City and State are, relatively speaking, going to be relatively broke as we put together the next MTA capital plan. This congestion pricing plan is one of the best hopes for this town to fund the next MTA capital plan.

In other words, as James Carville might put it, "It's about the MTA capital plan, stupid."

Teamsters president Gary LaBarbera is the one commissioner who Brodsky seems to treat with a noticeable sense of deference. LaBarbera added on to Shaw's thought:

I don't think we should start splitting hairs over whether this is about raising funds for the MTA or improving the environment or reducing VMT. The reality is that it's about all of those issues. Without funding for a realistic capital plan we can't continue the economic development of this region. I think it's important not to get bogged down. The capital funding is one of the critical issues that we as a Commission have to address, hopefully, in a way that will be palatable to the legislature in Albany and the City Council.

After a lengthy ramble from Assemblyman Denny Farrell about how toll booths on the Harlem River Bridges will "freeze up all of Northern Manhattan" on Yankee game nights (Response from a fellow commissioner: "Page 31 of the report says there would be no toll plazas or physical barriers where they don't already exist"), Brodsky finally stopped asking questions and laid his own cards on the table. "I have a deep philosophical objection to user fees and pricing mechanisms."  (Happy Hour? Airline tickets? The electricity bill?) He went on,

Which of the five plans reduces pollution the most and congestion the most? License plate rationing. But it doesn't generate revenues. Which is why I am for a carbon tax. Let's get it over with. The mayor proposed $15 per ton. I support the mayor. It was a national proposal but it doesn't have to be national. It could be in New York. The advantage is that the revenue would come from people who benefit from mass transit but don't necessarily use mass transit.

Long-Term Sustainability Chief Rit Aggarwala replied that a carbon tax would almost certainly need to be a federal initiative to work properly. "A carbon tax would be impractical for a municipality," Aggarwala said. "If you put a high tax on electricity in New York City you'd immediately drive out electricity intensive industries. Computer data centers, for example, would move to Westchester."

The carbon tax discussion prompted Shaw to remind the commissioners that their goal is to decide "something that's able to get accomplished."

Brodsky intensified, reminding Shaw that, traditionally, when Albany increases capital funding for transit it also gives more money to roads and bridges. "So, what's real and politically possible, Marc?" he asked. "Any mechanism that is geographically small will not pass the Albany test of linkage between roads, bridges and mass transit and you know it."

DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, who speaks sparingly in these meetings, chimed in, "This is not a tax commission. I understand the context in which Assemblyman Brodsky brought this up. But a debate over carbon taxes would more properly be considered by the State legislature. I suggest that they move forward on this."

Well played, Madame Commissioner.

With the carbon tax idea tabled, discussion turned to the idea of license plate rationing.

LaBarbera: "How do you tell a mother that your kid can only have fresh milk four out of five days a week? License plate rationing would turn the trucking industry upside down."

Shaw: "I can see the headline in the Post tomorrow: 'Brodsky Taxes Milk.'" Laughs.

Brodsky: "I move that we name all the toll plazas after Marc." More laughs.

Kathy Wylde: "The only place that ever tried rationing was Mexico City and it was fiasco."

One of the most oft-repeated slams against congestion pricing we heard at this week's Congestion Mitigation Committee hearings is that congestion pricing would be a "regressive tax," an unfair burden to poorer New Yorkers.

Is congestion pricing regressive? The data suggests otherwise.

As the chart above shows, even in Brooklyn Council member Lew Fidler's heavily auto-dependent district, households with a car earn more than twice the income than households without. Meanwhile, only 5.3% of workers living in Fidler's distrit drive to work in Manhattan south of 86th Street (unfortunately, Fidler is probably one of them). Fact sheets for Richard Brodsky, Vivian Cook, Denny Farrell, Jeffrey Dinowitz and other congestion pricing opponents' districts are equally revealing and very much worth a download. Cook, for example, represents a Queens district where only 3.5% of workers drive into the proposed charging zone for work.

In testimony before the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission, the Tri-State Transportation Campaign argued the point. From this week's Mobilizing the Region:

Some anti-pricing politicians seem to have dressed up for Halloween as populists defending “working stiffs” from a “regressive tax” on driving. But an analysis of Census data by TSTC and the Pratt Center for Community Development shows that, in all but one State Assembly district in NYC, vehicle-owning households are 50% wealthier than households without a vehicle; in nearly half of districts, average income is twice as high.

Furthermore, only a small minority of commuters drive alone to the proposed congestion pricing zone (CPZ); this is true not only in Manhattan but in the outer boroughs and the surrounding suburban counties. For example, only 5.1% of workers from Rockland County drive alone to the proposed CPZ. In Westchester, 3.4% of workers drive alone to the CPZ. In Nassau and Suffolk Counties, the percentages are even lower.

Fact sheets containing a breakdown of commuting patterns by mode and destination, vehicle ownership statistics, and the average incomes of vehicle-owning households and non-vehicle-owning households are available online. The fact sheets cover counties and City Council, state Assembly, state Senate, and U.S. Congressional districts in the New York metropolitan area.

"This is going to be interesting," Straphangers Campaign Senior Staff Attorney Gene Russianoff said as he waited for the start of yesterday's inaugural Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission meeting. "Usually with these things, the fix is in before you start but I really don't know what's going to happen."

Commission chairman Marc Shaw, a former Bloomberg Administration deputy mayor, opened up the meeting saying, "I'd like the Commission to operate as informally as possible." It was a not-so-subtle suggestion that the presence of the press and public weren't necessarily going to help the 17-member group come to a deal any more quickly, and that the real discussion would be taking place offline. When someone in the crowd complained that Shaw's microphone wasn't working and no one could hear what he was saying, Shaw joked, "Good."

After a unanimous vote ratifying him as chairman, Shaw took a few minutes to describe the context in which they'd be working. "The most important thing is the economic backdrop," Shaw said. "We'll be talking about slower economic growth in the next 12 to 18 months. As we look for ways to provide resources for the MTA in its capital plan, we're not going to have any new state or city resources."

As for the city's gridlock, Shaw said, "At end of the day there are only two ways to deal with traffic congestion in this town. One way is to have less economic activity take place in midtown and downtown, a choice that no one wants. The only other way to deal with congestion is to find ways to improve mass transit."

Noting that the Commission would need "a fairly aggressive work plan" in order to come up with an agreed upon plan within the four month time frame laid out in the deal made with the US Department of Transportation, Shaw offered a set of criteria by which various traffic reduction proposals might be measured consistently. The criteria were:

• Reduction of vehicle miles traveled
• Peripheral parking and traffic impacts to neighborhoods
• Privacy issues
• Air quality and environmental concerns.
• Impact on various economic classes
• Revenues for mass transit
• Cost of implementation
• Best practices
• Overall economic impact of any proposal

Following Shaw's introduction, Rohit Aggarwala, City Hall's Long Term Planning and Sustainability Director presented Mayor Bloomberg's proposal for a three year congestion pricing pilot program and some of the thinking and data behind it (see Aggarwala's presentation here)

Aggarwala noted that about 30 percent of travelers into Manhattan's Central Business District go by car or truck and that despite significant improvements in subway and bus service, that "modal share" hasn't changed since 1975. That "leads us to believe that transit improvements and incentives alone would be insufficient" to reduce traffic congestion," Aggarwala said.

A slide from Rohit Aggarwala's presentation to the Commission.

Aggarwala also noted that "only a small percentage of New York City residents," 4.6 percent, "drive in every day as their main way to get to work." Even among Staten Island residents, the percentage of commuters regularly driving in to the CBD doesn't reach 10 percent. If you looked at what causes traffic, one of Aggarwala's slides showed that 59.5 percent of the vehicles in Manhattan's CBD are private autos. About 30 percent are taxis and for-hire cars.

At the end of Aggarwala's presentation, Shaw opened up the floor for questions, most of which came from two of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's three appointees, Northern Manhattan Assembly member Denny Farrell and Westchester Assembly member Richard Brodsky.

"Is it a tax or is it to lower the amount of vehicles coming in?" Farrell asked.

"The reason why congestion pricing is such a compelling tool," Aggarwala said, "is because it's the kind of solution that does all these things at once. It raises money, it gets people out of their cars, it cleans the air…"

Farrell, who was first elected to the Assembly in 1974, around the time that Aggarwala was likely starting nursery school, raised his voice, "You didn't answer the question."

Northern Manhattan Assembly member Herman "Denny" Farrell

They went back and forth a bit on traffic modeling and mode share numbers until Farrell zeroed in what on what seemed to be his issue. "Pricing will not effect anyone coming from New Jersey," Farrell said. "I live right next to the George Washington Bridge. Come visit us on a Friday afternoon. Starting about 100th Street traffic is jammed, stopped dead. Nothing you're doing here will effect that."

Brodksy was next.

"I don't think this is the time to argue," he said. "My problem is that I don't understand what you've proposed."

Unlike the Commission's other two Assembly members, who seemed most passionately concerned with issues immediate to their own districts, Brodsky posed broader questions about the Commission's mandate, how traffic reduction and air quality claims were being measured, and revenue.

In what may very well be the set up for a legal challenge to push for an Environmental Impact Study, Brodsky repeatedly pressed the point that the Commission didn't have enough information to approve the Mayor's congestion pricing pilot program.

"What are you asking us to consider?" he asked Aggarwala. "What are we statutorily bound to consider? How do you measure the health and air quality impacts in your plan? How do we know the air quality impacts of this plan on Jackson Heights, Queens?"

Aggarwala took a stab at answering some of his questions but Brodsky still felt he didn't have the information he needed.

"I don't get it," he said.

"We have four months to use this Commission for this very purpose," Shaw replied.

Other Commissioners -- you can find their bios here -- laid some of their issues on the table as well.

Russianoff said he wanted more guidance from the city on residential parking permits and how the proposed MTA toll and fare hikes might impact the traffic reduction and mode shift projections made in the Mayor's plan.

Tom Egan wanted to know why there were no new bus routes proposed for Southeastern Queens.

Ed Ott wondered what would happen to the city's mass transit system if congestion pricing revenue didn't materialize.

Richard Bivone asked whether the MTA could handle the additional riders.

Elizabeth Yeampierre wanted more specific information about how the Mayor's plan would improve the environmental and health problems in Bronx and Brooklyn neighborhoods that "are host to the city's highway infrastructure and environmental burdens."

And with arms crossed, head cocked and a tone of skepticism in her voice, Assembly member Vivian Cook made it clear that "that Queens County and Long Island City aren't going to become a parking lot for the region."

The meeting closed with Brodsky peppering Sander and DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, also a Commissioner, with revenue-related questions. Brodsky wanted clarity on whether congestion pricing revenues would be used to pay for MTA capital projects or MTA operating expenses. He also asserted that New York City's agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation doesn't "contain any commitment of funds" and "gives the feds the right to give us nothing even if we pass congestion pricing."

Sander, hinting that the public forum might not be the ideal "context" for he and Brodsky to hash out some of these issues, said, "We do not anticipate use of any congestion pricing funds for operating assistance. Zero. Our position is that if we were to approve congestion pricing, that funds should be used for our capital program." Specifically, Sander said, if he had his "druthers," congestion pricing revenues would go towards building the Second Avenue subway, updating the Authority's 19th century signal system, improving transit service in the outer boroughs and a variety of other projects.

As for the $354.5 million commitment from the federal government, Sadik-Khan told Brodsky, "We do have a commitment from the US DOT and from DOT Secretary Mary Peters and I'd be happy to sit with you and clarify that."

Shaw said that the Commission will be meeting approximately once a month between now and February and will host a number of public hearings along the way as well.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg today joined Governor Eliot Spitzer, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn to announce appointments to the New York City Traffic Mitigation Congestion Commission established by the Governor and Legislature as part of the congestion pricing legislation.

Mayor Bloomberg appointed three people to the commission: Gene Russianoff from the New York Public Interest Research Group and the Straphangers Campaign, New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan and civil rights attorney and Executive Director of UPROSE Elizabeth Yeampierre.

“Today we are continuing to move forward and work with our partners in State government and in the Council to relieve congestion in New York City,” said Mayor Bloomberg.  “Together, we’ll reduce traffic, improve New Yorkers’ health and strengthen the City’s economy.”

Governor Spitzer’s appointments include former First Deputy Mayor Marc Shaw, Port Authority Executive Director Anthony Shorris, and Metropolitan Transportation Commission Executive Director and CEO Elliot “Lee” Sander.  Mr. Shaw will be nominated to be the head of the commission. 

Governor Spitzer said, “Putting the congestion pricing commission in place is an important step towards creating a healthier, cleaner environment for our children and generations to come.   The Commission has a vital task to ensure the ability of New York City’s continued growth, and do so in an environmentally responsible manner.  My nominees all have extensive transportation and public policy experience that will ensure that the congestion pricing plan is well thought out in terms of the impact on the transportation system, the economy, and the environment of the City of New York.  My thanks go to the Mayor and his staff for their hard work on this crucial issue.”

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver appointed Assemblyman Herman “Denny” Farrell, Jr., Assemblyman Richard L. Brodsky, and Assemblywoman Vivian E. Cook. 

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said, “The traffic congestion mitigation legislation signed into law by the Governor last month outlines a process for a thoughtful and in-depth discussion of the most effective means to address traffic congestion and related health and environmental issues. I am pleased with the nomination of Marc Shaw to head this effort. His demonstrated experience and ability to build consensus on difficult issues will be a great asset to this Commission.”

Senator Bruno appointed New York City Central Labor Council President Gary LaBarbera, SUNY Chairman Thomas F. Egan and Nassau County Council Chamber of Commerce President Richard Bivone to commission.

“We are pleased to join Mayor Bloomberg and others in announcing the Senate Majority’s appointments to the New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission.  By naming the members of this important commission, we have taken another step forward in our efforts to make New York a national leader in reducing traffic congestion, modernizing mass transit and improving the quality of the air we breathe,” Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno said.

Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith appointed Counsel and Project Director of Arverne By the Sea, Gerard Romski, to the Commission.

“Mr. Romski will be a strong asset for members of the Senate Democratic Conference in working to address New York City's long-term transportation needs,” Senator Smith said. “His appreciation of public transit's role in that process as well as his open mind about the structure of any traffic congestion mitigation plan will serve our Conference well.”

Assembly Minority Leader Jim Tedisco appointed Environmental Defense New York Regional Director Andy Darrell to the Commission.

“Andy Darrell’s track record on environmental and health-related issues is second to none,” said Assembly Republican Leader Jim Tedisco. “His input and ideas will be invaluable as we look for answers to New York City’s traffic congestion problems. I am honored to appoint him to this crucial commission.”

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn has appointed Drum Major Institute Executive Director Andrea Batista Schlesinger, Greater Allen Cathedral CFO Edwin Reed and Partnership for New York City President and CEO Kathryn Wylde to the Commission.

“New York City anticipates adding nearly one million new residents over the next two decades, and we must have a forward-looking plan in place to handle such substantial growth,” said Speaker Christine C. Quinn. “We are confident that the Commission will carefully consider the different proposals and find a responsible and impartial solution to reduce traffic congestion in our City. The Council’s appointees are extremely familiar with moving and shaping public policy in our diverse communities.  They bring a broad range of experience that will enable the Commission to come up with a plan to make New York a cleaner, greener, more livable city.”

 

Biographies of Commission Members:

Richard Bivone is the President of the Nassau Council of Chambers of Commerce and the President and Founder of RMB Drafting Services, the largest research/drafting/expediting firm on Long Island.  Richard played a key role in forming the Nassau Business and Community and Planning Coalition (NBCPC), a unique partnership between the Nassau Council of Chambers of Commerce, the Nassau Village Officials Association, Vision Long Island, and environmental and civic groups.  He is a retired member of the New York City Fire Department (FDNY).

Assemblyman Richard L. Brodsky represents the 92nd Assembly District. Brodsky currently serves as Chairman of the Standing Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions, which oversees the state’s public and private corporations. In addition to his Committee Chairmanship, Assemblyman Brodsky has also introduced a number of proposals to reform state government through constitutional change.

Assemblywoman Vivian E. Cook began her civic role more than 30 years ago when the Kennedy Airport and airport expansion threatened her community. Cook, who represents the 32nd Assembly District, has been an activist for community improvement. Working tirelessly to secure funding for various building and reconstruction programs, Cook has helped develop community housing programs that provide residents with affordable homes. Assemblywoman Cook currently serves as Assistant Majority Leader.

Andy Darrell is Director of the Living Cities program at Environmental Defense, focused on practical, market-based solutions for climate change and health in major cities.  He also serves as New York Regional Director.  He is a member of Mayor Bloomberg’s Sustainability Advisory Board, convened in 2006 to help create a new sustainability plan.  Previously, he helped form two organizations instrumental in revitalizing abandoned New York City waterfronts.  After law school, he worked at Davis Polk and Wardwell, an international law firm, and as a consultant on financing clean energy projects.  He received a JD (Law Review) from the University of Virginia and a Master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.  He is a trustee of the Van Alen Institute, the New York League of Voters Conservation Voters Education Fund, and New York City’s International House.

Thomas F. Egan was appointed Chairman of the State University of New York Board of Trustees on February 8, 1996, and a member and Vice Chairman on June 27, 1995.  A lawyer and banker, he has spent over 30 years in the securities industry, with extensive experience in capital market finance. Mr. Egan is a managing director at Citigroup Global Markets in New York City.  Previously, Mr. Egan was a principal in Langdon P. Cook & Company, Inc., for twelve years and a staff attorney with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for three years. Mr. Egan is the past chairman of the Foundation for the New York United Hospital Medical Center and active in civic affairs. He has also served as a member of the board of directors of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, a trustee of Marymount College, and member of the Port Chester Village Planning Commission.

Assemblyman Herman “Denny” Farrell, Jr. was elected to the State Assembly in 1974 from a district that encompasses West Harlem, Washington Heights and Inwood. Farrell serves as chair of the Committee on Ways and Means and is a member of the Committee on Rules. Prior to his appointment to Ways and Means, Farrell was Chair of the Committee on Banks, where he successfully secured passage of the Omnibus Consumer Protection and Banking Legislation Act.

Gary LaBarbera is the President of the New York City Central Labor Council and has nearly 25 years of progressive labor leadership with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, including currently serving as Joint Council 16 President, which represents over 100,000 members in the New York Metropolitan area. He also serves as a Vice President for the New York State AFL-CIO, the Long Island Federation of Labor AFL-CIO, and the New York State Building and Construction Trades Council.

Edwin C. Reed is the Chief Financial Officer at the Greater Allen Cathedral of New York and has been serving in this capacity since 1995. He has previously served on the Board of Directors of the New York Bank from 2001 to 2003. The Allen organization provides services such as rehabilitating and building affordable housing, developing and managing 14 commercial stores, operating a community service center, and providing quality education for up to 500 students.  Previously, Reverend Reed was the Executive Staff Director for Congressman Floyd Flake of New York. Reverend Reed has served as: Chairman, Jamaica Business Resource Center; Treasurer, Outreach Development Corporation; Vice Chairperson and Member of the Board of Directors, Hofstra University; Member of Wheelchair Charities; Co-Chairperson, New York Housing Conference; Member, Chase Community Advisory Board; Member, Federal Home Loan Bank of New York Affordable Housing Advisory Council; and Member, Allen Christian School, Allen Transportation, Allen Women's Resource Center and Allen Housing Development Corporations. Reverend Reed formerly served as Chairman of the Queens County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Commission.

Gerard Romski is a former partner at the law firm Ross and Cohen, LLP, he currently serves as Counsel and Project Executive for one of New York City's largest mixed-use development projects, Arverne by the Sea, incorporating more than 2,300 new housing units in Queens.  A strong advocate for public transit investment, Mr. Romski has also served as the Assistant Division Chief in the Real Estate Litigation Division of the New York City Corporation Counsel's office where he represented the City in real estate matters.

Gene Russianoff has been mass transit and government reform advocate for the New York Public Interest Research Group, a student-directed social change organization, since 1978. Mr. Russianoff is a staff attorney for NYPIRG's Straphangers Campaign.  His efforts have helped to win unlimited-ride transit passes and free subway-to-bus transfers; increased transit service; creation of independent transit safety and management watchdog agencies; $53 billion in funds to rebuild the subway and bus system since 1982; and rider and labor representatives on the MTA Board of Directors.   New York 1 News named Russianoff a “New Yorker of the Year” in 1997 for coalition work to win unlimited-ride Metro-cards.  Russianoff is the author of more than 100 reports on transit service.
 
Janette Sadik-Khan was appointed Commissioner of the New York City Department of Transportation by the Mayor in April.  Prior to her appointment, she was a Senior Vice President of Parsons Brinckerhoff, a leading international engineering firm. Commissioner Sadik-Khan is nationally recognized for her expertise in innovative finance, public policy development and transportation issues - knowledge gained in over 15 years of experience at the federal, state and local level.  Before joining Parsons Brinckerhoff, she was Deputy Administrator at the U.S. Department of Transportation.

As Chief Financial Officer, she managed the agency's $4 billion annual capital construction budget and was responsible for developing an innovative finance program which provided localities with increased funding and regulatory flexibility. She also served as Director of the Office of Policy where she initiated the FTA’s Art in Transit program to expand federal funding for art and design in transit facilities and implemented new criteria to improve the ways in which the benefits of transit capital projects were quantified.

Elliot “Lee” Sander, Executive Director and CEO of the MTA, has served as a Corporate Senior Vice President at DMJM Harris, a leading transportation engineering firm, and as Director of the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University. Sander is also the founder and co-chairman of the Empire State Transportation Alliance, and he is a Commissioner on the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission.  He graduated from the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown.

Andrea Batista Schlesinger has led the effort to turn the Drum Major Institute, originally founded by an advisor to Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during the civil rights movement, into a progressive policy institute with national impact.  Under her leadership as Executive Director, DMI has released several important policy papers to national audiences including: Middle Class 2004: How Congress Voted, People and Politics in America's Big Cities, and From Governance to Accountability: Building Relationships that Make Schools Work. She has worked in various capacities to promote educational equity and youth empowerment. She directed a national campaign to engage college students in the discussion on the future of Social Security for the Pew Charitable Trusts, and served as Director of Public Relations of Teach for America before working as the education advisor to Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer.

Marc V. Shaw is Executive Vice President for Strategic Planning at Extell Development Company and is responsible for the overall strategic direction of the company. From 2002 to 2006, Mr. Shaw was the First Deputy Mayor and Deputy Mayor for Operations under Mayor Bloomberg. Prior to that he served as the Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.  He also served as City Budget Director, Commissioner for the New York City Department of Finance, and Director of Finance for the New York City Council. Mr. Shaw also held a position with the New York State Senate Finance Committee.  He has been an adjunct assistant professor of Public Services at the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Services at New York University, and is currently an adjunct professor at the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University.

Anthony Ernest Shorris, Executive Director of the Port Authority, formerly served as the Director of Princeton University's Policy Research Institute at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and as Deputy Chancellor of the New York City Board of Education. He also has served as the First Deputy Executive Director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, as New York City's Commissioner of Finance, and Deputy Budget Director.

Kathryn S. Wylde is President and CEO of the Partnership for New York City, a nonprofit organization of the city's business leaders, established by David Rockefeller in 1979. The Partnership is dedicated to maintaining New York City as a center of world commerce, finance and innovation. Its public policy focus is on issues in the areas of education, infrastructure and the economy.

The Partnership’s economic development arm is the New York City Investment Fund. Wylde served as founding President and CEO of this $110 million civic fund, which was established in 1996 under the leadership of Henry R. Kravis. Wylde was also founding President and CEO of the Housing Partnership Development Corporation, serving from 1982 to 1996.   In that capacity, she was instrumental in creation of a number of pioneering initiatives in affordable housing at the local, state and national levels.   An internationally known expert in housing, economic development and urban policy, Wylde serves on a number of boards and advisory groups, including the New York State Commission to Modernize the Regulation of Financial Services, the Mayor's Sustainability Advisory Board, the Special Commission on the Future of NYS Courts, Independent Judicial Election Qualification Commission for the First Judicial District, NYC Economic Development Corporation, Research Partnership for New York City Schools, NYC Leadership Academy, Governors Island Advisory Council, the Manhattan Institute and the Biomedical Research Alliance of New York.
 
Elizabeth C. Yeampierre, a Puerto Rican civil rights attorney born and raised in New York City is Executive Director of UPROSE, Brooklyn’s oldest Latino community based organization.  In 1996, Elizabeth helped shift UPROSE’s mission to organizing, advocacy and developing intergenerational indigenous leadership through activism.  In reaching these goals, UPROSE focuses on environmental, economic and social justice.  Ms. Yeampierre is a co-founder of CURE (Communities United for Responsible Energy) and OWN (Organization of Waterfront Neighborhoods).  Ms Yeampierre serves on Mayor Bloomberg’s Sustainability and Long Term Planning Advisory Board and the US EPA National Environmental Justice Advisory Council.

Liz Benjamin has the latest scoop on congestion pricing legislation in Albany:

The third version of a bill dealing with congestion mitigation in
the city was introduced yesterday in both houses of the state
Legislature.

The Assembly and Senate are scheduled to return to Albany Thursday
to take up this new bill – and nothing else. Each of them will be
eligible to collect $49 worth of taxpayer-funded per diem pay to cover
meals and other incidentals, and those who are traveling more than 50
miles will be eligible to put in for that to be publicly paid for, too.

NOTE: The full-day per diem is $152 while
the half-day is $49, I’m informed by the Speaker’s press office. The
mileage reimbursement depends on how far a lawmaker travels. Just FYI - and mine.

The measure,
which represents the four-way compromise hammered out by the governor,
legislative leaders and Mayor Bloomberg last week, is a program bill
from Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver is the main sponsor in his house.
Co-sponsors include two of the most outspoken opponents to Bloomberg’s
congestion pricing plan – Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, of Westchester;
and Assemblyman Denny Farrell, of Manhattan; along with two who
supported the mayoral measure: Assemblyman Jim Brennan, of Brooklyn;
and Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, of Schenectady.

In the Senate, the bill is being sponsored by the mysterious Sen. Rules.

A reader sent along this helpful comparison
between the new bill and the Bloomberg bill the Senate moved out of
committee but never brought to the floor for a full vote after Senate
Minority Leader Malcolm Smith made himself a target of the mayor’s
wrath by saying that his members wouldn’t be voting unless there was a
deal with the Assembly.

Opponents of Mayor Bloomberg's plan, like State Assembly Member Denny Farrell, a Democrat from Northern Manhattan, have suggested that federal funding doesn't actually hinge on approval of congestion pricing by the state legislature.

Farrell and friends are wrong.

The federal Transportation Research Board is holding its summer meeting in Chicago right now, with members of the nine finalist cities vying for federal funds in attendance. Patrick Decorla-Souza is co-chair of TRB's congestion pricing committee. Roger Herz, a TRB member here in New York City sat in on a meeting of the pricing committee, Sunday afternoon. Herz reports:

Decorla-Souza reiterated that for New York City to win federal funding for its congestion pricing pilot project, state approval is essential. The U.S. DOT has given the city a deadline of July 16 to submit a legislatively approved plan. The federal DOT has receved 25 applications for federal grants for congestion pricing pilot projects. Nine semifinalists, including New York City, were invited to make presentations directly to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters. A maximum of five finalists will be chosen to divide up one billion dollars in grants. New York City's application is considered likely for federal approval since it is so different than other proposals, most of which involve using the federal funds to build new toll roads and HOV lanes rather than de-congesting existing city streets. The federal DOT plans to announce the five finalists by August 8 and there is very little flexibility on these deadlines.

In other words: If New York State Assembly Members do not return to work and find a way to approve the Mayor's congestion pricing plan within the next week or so, hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants -- funding that would be used for immediate mass transit improvements throughout the five boroughs -- will go to other cities.

Photo: Herman "Denny" Farrell Jr. (Suzanne Plunkett/Associated Press) via CityRoom

Seated alongside ten colleagues in the auditorium of the New York City Bar building in Midtown, Herman "Denny" Farrell, Jr. (D-New York), set the tone right away. In opening remarks, Farrell complained that legislators had been chastized in the media for not acting on PlaNYC before "a single public hearing" could be held, and pledged that the hearings would uncover the facts -- and "just the facts" -- about congestion pricing.

"Clearly, something must be done" about congestion, Farrell said. "However, we must be sure that the cure is not worse than the disease."

Farrell disagreed with Bloomberg over whether a possible $500 million federal grant for city transportation projects hinged on the approval of congestion pricing by state lawmakers, insisting that other initiatives could attract the funds. Bloomberg told Assembly members that almost half of the $500 million would cover pricing start-up costs, while the remaining funds would be invested in immediate transit improvements in the run-up to implementation. The mayor, having met with U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters yesterday, said the feds will steer the half-billion dollars to another city if congestion pricing doesn't clear the legislature.

Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff said pricing is expected to net $380 million in revenues in its first year, all of which would be spent on further transit upgrades. Farrell was unimpressed, wondering what effect a congestion charge would have on "working folks," and predicting that cars kept off Midtown streets by pricing would be replaced by trucks. When Doctoroff reminded Farrell that large commercial trucks would be subject to a $21 fee, Farrell was dismissive: "It's a write-off, though."

At times Farrell seemed to be arguing for the sake of arguing. In discussing the E-ZPass technology that would be used for billing and collections, the Assembly member declared "I don't give E-ZPass my money." When Bloomberg and company explained that congestion charges could be paid online, by phone and at retail locations throughout the city, Farrell responded with "I don't have a computer."

A bit more thoughtful but no less confrontational, Assembly Member Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) dominated the questioners' time, first thanking Mayor Bloomberg for bringing big ideas to the table, then congratulating him on "stampeding the political class." As if it wasn't clear where he stood from the outset, Brodsky then referred to congestion pricing as "a 600 million dollar tax increase."

Brodsky said he conceded the "wider benefit" of pricing, but asked why the same effect couldn't be achieved by new taxes on wealthy New Yorkers. When Bloomberg replied that the point of congestion pricing is to discourage driving by making it more expensive, Brodsky likened it to "gentrifying the roads."

Brodsky and others spent a good bit of the morning dwelling on the erosion of civil liberties they fear would be inherent in the photographing of license plates for billing purposes, with Brodsky himself going so far as to condemn traffic cameras as "Un-American."

"I don't even like your red light cameras," he said.

Instead of pricing, Brodsky has presented the city with a proposal involving congestion rationing -- which limits certain cars on certain days based on plate numbers or other identifiers (and is presumably enforced without the use of cameras). But such a plan, Doctoroff pointed out, would do nothing to raise much needed transit funds.

"I'm prepared to vote for a tax increase for mass transit," Brodsky vowed -- indicating, in so many words, that Bloomberg has shamed the Assembly into action of some sort.

Not all legislators were as churlish. Robert Sweeney (D-Lindenhurst) told the mayor he is "glad [Bloomberg] did not adopt a more timid approach" to the city's environmental ills. And James Brennan, (D-Brooklyn) assured Bloomberg is he "generally sympathetic" to the pricing plan. (Even so, Brennan eventually asked how it could be "fair" to force "mom" to pay for ferrying the kids across town for a play date.)

Other queries followed regarding the discredited edge effect, "serious" penalties for late payment, and the "extremely problematical" ramifications for those who aren't among the Manhattan "elite." On many of these points, Bloomberg and staffers -- Doctoroff, PlaNYC Director Rohit Aggarwala, and new DOT Deputy Commissioner Bruce Schaller -- indicated a willingness to provide further clarification and an openness to negotiation. The key, Bloomberg said in his concluding remarks, is to act now.

And if we don't, "Shame on us."

The Daily Politics reports:

The hearing will be conducted by the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Herman “Denny” Farrell, Jr.; the Transportation Committee, chaired by David Gantt; the Corporations, Authorities and Commissions Committee, chaired by Richard Brodsky; the Energy Committee, chaired by Paul Tonko; the Environmental Conservation Committee, chaired by Robert Sweeney; and the Cities Committee, chaired by James Brennan.

But is it too little, too late? Though Mayor Bloomberg has refused to criticize state lawmakers for premature criticism of congestion pricing, the Daily News, for one, has not held back:

No bills have been introduced, no hearings held. Gov. Spitzer didn't mention the topic when he met with legislative leaders last week, until Senate GOP leader Joe Bruno chided him for the oversight.

At this rate, the waters of melting glaciers will be lapping at the Empire State Building doors before Mayor Bloomberg's proposal gets out of committee. When it comes to gridlock, the Manhattan streets have nothing on the Capitol corridors.

The editorial board at the Times has expressed similar sentiments (though you'll need a subscription to read them at this point). And the News blog's Elizabeth Benjamin wonders if the hearings are a sign of progress at all.

I asked [Press Secretary] Stu Loeser whether Mayor Bloomberg plans to participate in the Assembly Democrats' first hearing on congestion pricing in Manhattan this Friday, and also if he considers the event a positive development or a stalling tactic.

Bloomberg is "looking forward" to testifying, Loeser replied, adding: "It's very encouraging that the Speaker has made it a priority in the last month of session to find time to discuss the merits of PlaNYC."

So what are Assembly members -- the ones who haven't already endorsed PlaNYC -- concerned about? Pricing opponent Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester) told Benjamin that Bloomberg can expect questions regarding "the consequences of installing hundreds more cameras throughout Manhattan to determine who needs to be charged for entering the congestion pricing zone and the idea of charging for access to public roads based on an individual's ability to pay."

Photo: stgermh/Flickr