For the next four years, Mike Bloomberg will be joined in citywide office by Democrats Bill de Blasio and John Liu.

And how few votes were cast. Total turnout -- 1.1 million out of about 4 million registered voters -- looks to be even lower than in Ed Koch's election to a third term, back when a million fewer people lived in the city. Participation in New York City's democratic process hasn't been this paltry since the days before women were enfranchised.

The Thompson camp appeared to take some satisfaction in the relatively close finish. Still, Democrats have got to be second guessing themselves today. No doubt much hand-wringing will ensue about the failure of President Obama and local power brokers to rally around the party's standard bearer.

But here are some numbers to chew on: Thompson lost by 50,000 votes, and New Yorkers make more than two million bus trips every day. What if the Democratic candidate had actively campaigned on specific ideas to improve bus service? Vastly outspent or not, Thompson couldn't clear the bar set by Freddy Ferrer in 2005 despite an electorate that seemingly felt little enthusiasm for the incumbent. (Disgust with the term limits extension may explain why Bloomberg himself garnered 200,000 fewer votes than he did four years ago, even though his approval rating, at 70 percent, remains quite high.)

Instead, when it came to New Yorkers' transportation concerns, Thompson sounded few consistent themes except the notion that self-serving complaints from a few local merchants should take precedence over safety gains and transit improvements on our streets. The Democratic Party -- purported defender of the working class and the environment -- failed to make the connection between urban transportation, economic opportunity, and sustainability.

Overall, transportation remained a second- or third-tier issue during the campaign. Under Janette Sadik-Khan, Bloomberg's Department of Transportation has made notable strides to improve walking, biking, and transit, but the mayor seldom strayed from his core themes of falling crime rates and rising student test scores. In the televised debates, parking tickets got more attention than pedestrian safety. The city's 2008 toll of 292 motor vehicle fatalities and annual rate of 50,000 traffic injuries were never even mentioned.

Transportation issues may not have affected this election, but this election will affect transportation policy. Bloomberg will be joined on the citywide stage by two ambitious Democrats, John Liu and Bill de Blasio, whose records on progressive transportation have so far appeared to vary according to the political opportunities available. With Liu in the Comptroller's office and de Blasio taking over as Public Advocate, each now commands a high-visibility bully pulpit, presumably with an eye cast toward 2013. Each can choose to reinforce, ignore, or obstruct livable streets policies.

And the next four years will be an intensely active time for livable streets in New York City. Since Bloomberg appointed Sadik-Khan to run DOT in 2007, we've seen a string of innovations: the city's first rapid bus corridor, major new pedestrian plazas, and the beginnings of a safer, protected bike network. As of today, these important changes to New York's streets exist mainly as experiments and fragments. Expect the question of how to allocate street space to play out on a much bigger scale as the city attempts to expand and solidify its recent progress.

This term also gives Bloomberg the chance to address the gaping holes in his sustainability agenda. By 2013, will NYCEDC and the City Planning Commission still foist anti-urban disasters like the Gateway Center Mall and East River Plaza on New York's car-free majority? Will NYPD rein in reckless driving so New Yorkers can walk and bike without fear? Bloomberg's legacy on the environment, transportation, and quality of life depends on these questions as much as anything.

In the days ahead, Streetsblog will publish a series of essays from local advocates and experts about New York City's transportation and public space agenda for the next four years. What should the mayor set his sights on, and how much can the city accomplish? We'll kick things off next Monday, so stay tuned.

Right now, you might just want to breathe a sigh of relief -- no one's about to rip out bike lanes or ax plans for bus improvements. At least not for the next four years.

With extremely low turnout expected for tomorrow's mayoral election, Bill Thompson and Mike Bloomberg canvassed the city over the weekend trying to drum up some enthusiasm for their candidacies. For Thompson, the itinerary included a stop in Bedford Stuyvesant this Saturday to protest plans for improving bus service along Nostrand Avenue.

Hopping off the campaign truck at the corner of Fulton and Nostrand, Thompson and the entire citywide Democratic ticket joined local council rep Tish James for a quick show of solidarity with Nostrand Avenue Merchants Association president Lindiwe Kamau. Kamau takes issue with bus improvements planned for Nostrand because, she claims, dedicated bus lanes will eliminate curbside parking along the corridor. Here's the thing: The most recent renderings of Select Bus Service on Nostrand [PDF] depict buses operating in an existing travel lane. The curbside parking lane would still be there.

That didn't stop Thompson, James, John Liu, and Bill de Blasio from lending their support for a few minutes, standing beside Kamau and repeating stock phrases about "protecting small businesses." The biggest constituency they addressed appeared to be the press. About four reporters were on hand, outnumbering Nostrand Avenue merchants by approximately four-to-one. After a light cycle or two, the pols hopped back on the truck and were driven away.

If the Democratic ticket had walked over to the B44 stop around the corner, they would have found a much larger and more captive audience to address. Their message might not have gone over very well though.

Around the corner: Waiting to board the B44.

On a typical weekday, more than 40,000 people ride the B44 on the Nostrand corridor. On Saturdays, average ridership is about 29,000. B44 riders can definitely use some relief: They currently depend on the second-most unreliable bus route in the city, according to the Straphangers Campaign. The improvements promised by Select Bus Service -- pre-paid boarding, dedicated travel lanes, signal priority -- would speed trips and enable buses to stick to their schedules.

Around the corner from Saturday's presser, dozens of people were waiting for the next B44, many carrying shopping bags on a warm fall afternoon. Henrietta David, one of the older women waiting at the stop, told me that she doesn't bother glancing at the posted schedule to find out when the next bus will arrive; the bus comes when it comes. There was nowhere for her to sit as she waited. After a bus pulled up, it took a good two minutes for everyone to board.

When I had asked Kamau why she opposed plans for BRT on Nostrand, the indignities and inconveniences of riding the bus weren't foremost in her thoughts, nor were her own customers' transportation needs. She said merchants already get ticketed for parking their cars on this stretch of Nostrand during the p.m. rush, when the west side of the street is a no-standing zone. "We already have problems with parking," she said. "Our merchants get tickets constantly."

• Intro 624: This is Jessica Lappin's effort to hold businesses responsible for traffic law violations committed by bike delivery personnel. The bill was inspired in part by Upper East Side constituent complaints about restaurant employees and other commercial delivery workers riding on sidewalks.
• Intro 901, from committee chair, presumptive comptroller-elect and rock star John Liu, would mandate all commercial parking facilities to set aside 10 percent of spaces, or 10 spots, whichever is less, for car-sharing programs.
• Intro 947: Responding to the deaths of Robert Ogle and Alex Paul and Diego Martinez and Hayley Ng, Queens Council Member Elizabeth Crowley's bill would raise the fine for unattended idling vehicles to $250. The current fine: five bucks.
• Continuing his crusade against the travesty that is parking enforcement, Vincent Gentile's Intro 1076 would require DOT to give 60 days notice to community boards and council members in advance of changes to parking meter regulations.
• Intro 1077, another Gentile bill, looks as if it would basically codify DOT's current practice of presenting new projects -- pilot projects, specifically -- to community boards prior to implementation.

In the end the votes matter most, but it's interesting that Gentile, for instance, is not a co-sponsor of Crowley's anti-idling bill or Liu's car-sharing intro, but is on board with Lappin's commercial cyclist regulations. Guess we all have our priorities.

Tomorrow's hearing, one of the last of Liu's tenure as committee chair, convenes in the council chambers at 10 a.m.

We're off today for Yom Kippur but here's a reminder:

Two important citywide elected positions are going to be decided in tomorrow's Democratic primary election run-off. David Yassky and John Liu are vying to be New York City's next Comptroller and Bill de Blasio and Mark Green are running for Public Advocate. Since no serious Republican opposition is expected in November's general election, the winners of tomorrow's run-off win the whole enchilada. 

If you've ever wanted to know what it feels like to be a powerful Democratic party Boss with lots of political influence, then do this on Tuesday morning September 29: Wake up, slap some suspenders over your shoulders, and stuff a cigar in your face and a pocket watch in your vest. Waddle over to your local polling place and simply cast a vote. That's it. That's all you have to do to wield serious power on Tuesday.*

Only 11 percent of registered Democrats bothered to vote in the primary two weeks ago and turnout for tomorrow's run-off is going to be absurdly low. If you are one of the few people who show up to the polls on Tuesday, your individual vote will count for a lot. You may never again have so much influence over a citywide election, so get out there and enjoy it just like Vito Lopez does. On Tuesday your one vote makes you the Boss.

Find your polling place here.

* Actually, if you really want to feel like a Democratic Boss, then you should drive to the polling place, don't walk. Once you've arrived feel free to park in front of a hydrant or in some other illegal spot. Remember: You're the Boss!

John Liu and David Yassky might be headed for a run-off in the comptroller race.

If you're a little unclear about what these positions do, here's the short version: The comptroller is the city's financial watchdog, and the public advocate is the watchdog for everything else, evaluating the effectiveness of city policies and sometimes serving as a check against mayoral power. Whoever holds these positions will wield important oversight powers for the next four years, and we'll probably see one or both of the winners make a run for mayor at some point.

In the right hands, both offices can advance the cause of livable streets. We'll review the comptroller race first and then take a look at the public advocate contenders later today.

The comptroller can't cast a vote in Albany for a transit funding package, but he or she can certainly help frame the debate. Democratic mayoral contender Bill Thompson could have used his comptroller's pulpit to reinforce the Ravitch Commission bridge toll plan this year. Instead he opted to push for vehicle registration fees as an alternative to road pricing, giving the State Senate additional cover for its watered down transit funding package.

The race to succeed Thompson, which will effectively be decided in the Democratic primary, pits four City Council members against each other: David Yassky of Brooklyn, and John Liu, Melinda Katz, and David Weprin of Queens. Neither Katz nor Weprin cleared the most elementary livable streets hurdle during their council tenures, with each siding against congestion pricing in last year's vote. So let's review the intriguing Yassky-Liu rivalry.

Liu's inconsistencies have been well-documented here on Streetsblog. His "yes" vote on congestion pricing in 2008 somehow morphed into vocal opposition to bridge tolls this year. He lectured on pedestrian safety from his post as transportation committee chair, but when DOT actually improved safety with its Midtown reclamation projects, he scolded the city for "expropriating" street space. And when the Bicycle Access Bill came before the City Council, Liu looked ready to scuttle the historic legislation until the last minute. As a comptroller candidate, he has turned to standard-issue MTA bashing as a staple of his campaign.

In addition to sponsoring the Bike Access Bill and shepherding it through the council, Yassky has consistently supported a car-free Prospect Park and helped secure funding for the Bedford Avenue bike parking swap. An early supporter of congestion pricing, Yassky has not made transit funding a signature campaign issue. But in his response to the TA candidate survey, he gives some promising indications that he will use the comptroller's office to highlight the necessity of funding transit with road pricing.

Pledging to "set up in-depth assessments of the economic impact congestion has" and to "advocate and support policies like congestion pricing," Yassky says his office will "provide a solid platform from which to advocate change." A comptroller who follows through on those promises would be a valuable ally in the fight for sustainable transportation policy in the New York region.

L-r: Council candidates S.J. Jung, John Choe, Evergreen C. Chou, James Wu and Isaac Sasson

With the September 15 primary fast approaching, the race to succeed Liu in District 20 is one of two especially compelling Queens contests, where long-time council incumbents are leaving open seats. (District 26's Eric Gioia is running for public advocate. Streetsblog will profile the race to replace him later this week.)

Of the three District 20 candidates who answered the Transportation Alternatives Candidate Survey -- S.J. Jung, John Choe and Evergreen C. Chou -- all expressed support, to varying degrees, for road pricing, bus rapid transit, bike-share, public plazas, and improved traffic enforcement. Each candidate also said he would like to see innovations like BRT and Summer Streets come to Queens.

Choe served as Liu's chief of staff for eight years, and has the endorsement of his former boss. If elected, Choe says he would advocate for improved service on the 7 train, BRT on Northern Boulevard, and unrestricted subway access for bikes. He would also like to see ferry service on the Flushing River. Choe says he would favor targeted traffic enforcement with increased fines for speeders, and thinks congestion pricing "should be further explored" as a means to reduce traffic and provide funding for transit expansion in areas without easy access to subways.

Choe and Jung, an entrepreneur and community volunteer, are in sync on many if not most transportation issues. But Jung differentiates himself in a couple of key areas. Jung is the only candidate to employ the term "traffic justice" in his survey responses, citing "thorough investigation of all traffic crashes" as a component of a successful strategy to reduce dangerous driving. He also supports "exploring the option" of raising on-street parking rates to "discourage long-term parking, convince some drivers to utilize garage parking and direct others to take public transit."

Chou, a Green Party nominee, is big on bikes: bike lanes, bike parking, bike-share, and bike racks on buses. He would also like to see lower transit fares. While he seems to favor the interests of pedestrians, cyclists and transit users, Chou's positions are largely short on specifics -- though he is the only candidate among the three to declare his unqualified support for congestion pricing.

Candidate James Wu didn't return the TA survey, but according to a Gotham Gazette write-up of the District 20 race, he "would seek to curb rampant jaywalking and reduce speeding." Wu says he would also push to restrict traffic on Main Street in Flushing to pedestrians and buses.

Democrats dominate the District 20 field -- Yen S. Chou and Isaac Sasson round out the Democratic roster -- but with Chou along with Republican Peter Koo in the race, voters won't finalize their choice for John Liu's successor until November.

DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan speaks at a press event yesterday. That's bill sponsor David Yassky in the green tie.

"This will open up commuting by bike for New Yorkers," said Council Speaker Christine Quinn today. "We can use bikes as a main mode of transportation." She was speaking to a packed house. The security guards at City Hall were turning people away from the council chamber because the galleries had reached capacity.

"No other city in the country has a policy like the one City Council passed today," said Transportation Alternatives director Paul Steely White in a statement on the significance of the bill. "When we open the doors of New York City’s workplaces to cyclists, tens of thousands of commuters are going to get on two wheels."

For many cyclists forbidden to bring their rides to work, today's vote was a long time coming. TA first called for bicycle access legislation in 1993, as a plank in its Bicycle Blueprint. Since then, multiple bills like Intro 871 have come and gone without becoming law.

"This is historic, a very, very major step," said John Kaehny, who served as director of TA from 1994 to 2004. "I can't think of something that comes close to this from the City Council. This is very important because they've done something big. More than anything else, it validates bicycles as legitimate."

Gaining passage for Intro 871 entailed a combination of confronting and cajoling one of the quintessential New York City interest groups: the real estate lobby. Organizations like REBNY -- the Real Estate Board of New York -- don't like the idea of a bicycle access mandate, and they wield a lot of influence. To overcome that inertia, everything had to line up perfectly.

TA's constant advocacy has mobilized efforts over the course of many years. This time around, all the other pieces fell into place: a persistent sponsor in David Yassky, a Council Speaker in Christine Quinn who represents a cyclist-heavy district, and perhaps most crucially, a mayor and DOT commissioner who came out strongly for the bill. Even with the stars seemingly aligned, it took one last push from more than a thousand cyclists to put the bill over the top.

What does this all mean for bike commuting in New York? Well, the change won't happen overnight. The bill takes effect in 120 days, and then it's up to individual tenants to petition their building managers for access (we'll explain how to do this in a future post). Odds are, as Kaehny told me, "it's going to be a fight the whole way." The bill sets the stage for thousands of mini-battles between bike commuters and landlords who will try to claim exemptions from the law. Ultimately, the bill will be judged a success if commuters come out on top in the vast majority of those fights.

There are gaps in the legislation that will need to be plugged. The bill explicitly covers one building type -- office buildings that have freight elevators -- so there's plenty of room to extend its applicability. A future bill could fortify this version, for instance, by guaranteeing bike access to schools, or to office buildings without freight elevators. After today's vote, there's every reason to believe those improvements are achievable.

The revised bill, which would require building managers to provide bicycle access to tenants who request it, divvies up responsibility for enforcement between DOT and the Department of Buildings differently than previous versions, Streetsblog has learned. Core provisions intended to expand bicycle access to buildings remain unchanged.

The bill, now supported by 35 co-sponsors, would come up for a vote at the council's next stated meeting,  scheduled for Wednesday, July 29.

The last time we checked in on the Bicycle Access Bill, it was still sitting in John Liu's Transportation Committee after other legislators, including sponsor David Yassky and 31 additional supporters in the City Council, had expected it to reach the full floor for a vote. Then came an outpouring of e-faxes from cyclists asking Liu to get behind the bill.

Today, a number of people have forwarded us an invitation from Liu's office to hear him explain his position this Friday. Read it after the jump.

Dear Fellow Cyclist:

Thank you for reaching out to me about your support for legislation in support of expanding bicycle access to buildings in our City. This is an issue I have fought for over the last couple of years and my position on it has been clear and consistent, notwithstanding recent efforts by some folks to misrepresent my actions and statements on this.

I wanted to take this opportunity to invite you to meet with me so I can give you the latest update on bike access legislation. Can you meet me at City Hall this Friday July 24 from 4:30-5:30pm? (to try to accommodate those who have regular work-hours). No need to RSVP (but you can if you’d like) and feel free to pass this along to others who may be interested.

John Liu
Member, City Council
Chairperson, Transportation Committee

We're hearing that Liu is now prepared to support the bill. An aide at his office said he would explain all at the Friday meeting.

Does anyone believe that John Liu's position on bicycle access to buildings has remained consistent since last September?

A cycling advocacy group has been flooded with e-faxes pushing Councilman John Liu to schedule a committee vote on a bill allowing bicycles in some office buildings. Transportation Alternatives has received more than 800 messages in four days. "We've never had anything like it, not even at the height of the congestion pricing drama," a TA spokesman says. The group is delivering the messages to Liu, who questions whether the bill would improve bicycle access. Bill sponsor David Yassky is running against Liu for city comptroller, but Liu says that has nothing to do with his position. He previously backed a stronger bike access bill that, unlike this one, lacked mayoral support.

Our calls to Liu's office have yet to be returned, so we can't expand on his rationale that the bill won't improve bike access to office buildings. At this point, Liu doesn't really need to explain himself. The fact that the committee chair with jurisdiction won't move a bill supported by the mayor, 29 other Council members, and the city's best-known advocates for cycling speaks volumes.

If Liu lets the bill come up for a vote, we're looking at a watershed moment for bike commuting in New York. If he doesn't, it will be a major blow to PlaNYC's vision of a bike-friendly city, and the collective record of transportation committee chairs everywhere will somehow sink even lower.

A few months ago, John Liu was all for bikes in buildings.

Danny Kanner, a spokesman for bill sponsor David Yassky, confirmed this afternoon that the landmark piece of legislation has yet to clear John Liu's transportation committee. "The bill has been laid on council members' desks for eight days, which is typically what is done before a bill comes before the full council," said Kanner. "That was done with the anticipation that it would be voted out of the transportation committee today."

Liu's office has not yet returned requests for comment. But here's what we know.

• When a previous version of this bill surfaced in the council in 2006, John Liu was a co-sponsor.
  
• Last September, Liu joined Yassky and Tish James on the steps of City Hall to call for better bike access to buildings. Rally speakers noted the odd aversion many building owners display toward letting bikes inside office buildings, and the manifold benefits of legislation to correct that bias.
  
• In March, Liu switched from the crowded public advocate race to the somewhat less crowded comptroller race, in which he faces two other candidates from Queens -- and Yassky.
• At the last transportation committee hearing on the bill, Liu started questioning whether DOT should have jurisdiction over bicycle access to buildings. No one else on the committee voiced similar concerns. DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan and Buildings Commissioner Robert LiMandri assured Liu that their agencies would have it covered.
• Today, Liu's committee did not meet and advance the bill despite the widespread expectation that it would do so.
  

The next opportunity to move the bill will come in July, when the full City Council is scheduled to hold a stated meeting. "David and a variety of advocates have worked hard on this bill, a bill that will reduce congestion, carbon emissions, and improve public health," Kanner said. "It should pass."

Last September, John Liu stood on the steps of City Hall to support bicycle access to buildings. Will he follow through on that commitment?

We Are Not There Yet -- Bicycle Access to Buildings Bill in Jeopardy

Your voices are needed. Now! With the expected passage of the Bicycle Access to Buildings Bill slated to take place at tomorrow’s City Council meeting, we are concerned to learn that there still may be some strong opposition to the bill. Please immediately call Council Member John Liu, chair of the Transportation Committee, and let him know that you support this bill and that we need his support too!

Information:
Council Member John Liu
Chair, Transportation Committee
City Hall office: 212-788-7022
District office: 718-888-8747

Advocates have been fighting for this legislation for years. Its passage would make it much easier for thousands of cyclists to ride to work -- boosting bike commuting by as much as 50 percent -- and one last push from supporters can help put it over the top.

Will the real John Liu please stand up? The councilman plays to the crowd at last year's Tour de Queens. Photo: qmaparks/Flickr.

Before I get to that, a little explanation is in order about the current status of the bill. This is the second committee hearing on Intro 871. It's been reworked substantially in the seven months since the first hearing, with both transportation advocates and the real estate industry weighing in. The bill has also been tweaked since Streetsblog posted the revised text earlier this month. I don't have the most up-to-date version available, but based on today's testimony, there are two notable changes:

• The bill now clearly states that building owners can claim an exemption if "secure" bike parking is available nearby. This should close a potential loophole in previous language, which granted exemptions for buildings near "sheltered" bike parking. That's the good news.
• The bad news: The bill no longer requires buildings that have a passenger elevator but no freight elevator to provide bicycle access. Previously, any building with a passenger elevator big enough to accommodate a bike had to comply.

The current legislation is still strong enough to merit the support of transportation advocates, but the loss of passenger elevator access is significant. Said bill sponsor David Yassky, "My hope is that at some point in the future, the bill will be amended to include passenger elevators." We have a request in with the Department of Buildings to determine how many buildings this exemption would affect.

Most of the questioning and testimony this morning centered around enforcement. Intro 871 relies on a "tenant-driven" process: Building owners have to provide bike access if a tenant requests it, and they may deny the request if their freight elevator can't accommodate bikes. Council Member Daniel Garodnick suggested that the final bill should spell out exactly how the city will determine whether building owners have legitimate reasons for denying access. Sadik-Khan agreed.

This addressed one of the major shortcomings Liu found in the bill, but the committee chair wasn't satisfied. In a long, combative exchange with Sadik-Khan, he questioned why DOT "is involved in this bill in the first place." Sadik-Khan and Buildings Commissioner Robert LiMandri had already explained that DOT and DOB would jointly monitor compliance with the bill. Undeterred, Liu launched into a digressive speech about the city's lack of enforcement of "stoop-side stand" regulations. Claiming that sidewalk vending stands present a pedestrian safety hazard, he accused DOT of "inconsistency" for proposing to inspect bicycle access to buildings while leaving stoop-side stands unmonitored. Liu, it should be noted, has vocally opposed the pedestrian safety improvements underway in Times Square.

While the committee chair was dragging out the proceedings, two bike commuters sitting next to me left the council chamber before they had a chance to testify in favor of the bill. They had to get back to work.

During the MTA funding debate, Liu was also a vocal opponent of bridge tolls, a stark about-face given his early support for congestion pricing. Tonight you can see the new John Liu in action, when he makes an appearance on NY1's Road to City Hall at 7 p.m. The topic: Broadway's new pedestrian spaces, a transformation Liu pounced on as soon as the plan was announced.

If you're going to tonight's BRT workshop in the Bronx instead, you can catch the NY1 show again at 10:00 p.m.

Alan Gerson.

Itching to tell DOT what you think of recent changes to Lower Manhattan streets? You can tonight at 6:30, when the second installment in Alan Gerson's "Traffic Town Hall" series gets underway at Old St. Pat's Gym (near 275 Mulberry Street).

Fellow Council Member John Liu, running for citywide office in the crowded comptroller race, is also scheduled to put in an appearance, and Manhattan DOT Commissioner Margaret Forgione will be on hand to soak it all up.

Publicity materials for the event frame it as a chance to "present your views and ideas" to DOT. At the first Gerson town hall, this translated into griping about pedestrian refuges, bike lanes, and other safety measures. Tonight's agenda invites more of the same: The critical issue of "traffic islands" gets top billing on the docket.

Sidewalks where children's lives are at risk from reckless drivers, even when parents and teachers are right there next to them? That seems not to have made the cut.

Last Tuesday, May 5, in honor of World Asthma Day and Idle-Free NYC Day, clean air advocates gathered at City Hall to mark the passage of Council Member John Liu's Intro. 631, which limits the amount of time drivers are allowed to idle near schools to one minute. Streetfilms' Robin Urban Smith files this report, which includes details of an anti-idling curriculum for fourth and seventh graders from Livable Streets Education and Asthma Free School Zone.

In related news, Senator Daniel Squadron has announced a bill calling for a statewide one minute idling restriction for "heavy-duty vehicles." And today there will be a rally in Manhattan to celebrate the adoption of Intro. 631 and to launch the West Side Clean Air Campaign, which, among other goals, aims to ensure that charter buses and car services obey the new law. The rally kicks off with a press conference at 3 p.m. at the P.S. 111 playground on 52nd St. between 9th and 10th Aves.

It's safer to cross Grand Street. The arrogance!

Lower Manhattan City Council rep Alan Gerson held a "transportation town hall" Monday night, following up on his pledge last year to closely monitor creeping safety enhancements to New York streets. Fellow City Council member John Liu, a candidate for comptroller, also made an appearance at the forum.

Based on a report in the Lo-Down, a new blog covering the Lower East Side, the session successfully gathered up ideas from ill-informed cranks:

The Grand Street bike lanes and center islands installed last year were ridiculed by several residents of Co-op Village. Harold Jacob accused DOT Commissioner Margaret Forgione of lying when she told him the center median was installed because pedestrians had been killed by cars on Grand Street. Jacob said he believed the changes had, in fact, made the street more dangerous. Because there is less room to maneuver, Jacob claimed fire trucks and ambulances can't safely pass through. "You've actually put lives in danger," he told DOT officials.

Another resident contended the islands, opposed by Community Board 3,  were "arrogantly conceived and arrogantly carried out." More than one speaker blamed Mayor Bloomberg, accusing him of "destroying Grand Street." Some people demanded that the medians be removed -- others wanted the bike lanes eliminated.

A quick CrashStat check reveals that, contrary to Mr. Jacob's gut assertion, several people have been killed by autos while walking on Grand Street in recent years. Co-op Village, like many other housing developments in the area, is home to a big senior population. Those pedestrian refuges make Grand Street safer to cross and less intimidating to older New Yorkers. Rolling back critical safety improvements that improve seniors' quality of life -- is that really the kind of "community input" that Gerson wants to align himself with?

A reader who attended a CUNY forum on bridge tolls last week sent us this summation of Liu's remarks:

• The MTA doesn't need the money because it's for capital, not operating, expenses, and in any event is earmarked for bus improvements mentioned but not specified in the Ravitch report.
• The MTA hasn't bothered to itemize what they would do with the toll money, which they would apply to their capital plan.
• Making the MTA accountable takes precedence over bailing them out.
• Auto commuters to the CBD drive because they have to (ignoring, obviously, Bruce Schaller's "Necessity or Choice" report [PDF]).
• I supported Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal (true), because it was an excise tax (huh?) and offered drivers choices (huh?), but I can't support bridge tolls because that's not an excise tax and doesn't provide choices.
  
• The MTA, being run by the likes of Nancy Shevell, doesn't need or merit our money (begging the question, of course, that the MTA will in fact get our money -- it just won't be getting it from drivers).

This litany, while damning enough, doesn't do justice to the inanity, vehemence and shallowness of Liu's remarks. Indeed, there was a surreal riff in his remarks that we can and should punish the MTA, divorced from any impact on the human beings, communities and businesses that make up this city.

There's more. On his campaign website, Liu links to an MTA-bashing article in the Amsterdam News that says he "agrees" with City Council Member Charles Barron, who is quoted as follows: "I think the MTA needs to be dismantled. These are a bunch of rich white men who have no clue of the needs of the working class family. We are not sure about their books and they need oversight. The responsibility of transportation should be taken away form the MTA and given to the Department of Transportation."

Our tipster notes that at the CUNY event, Liu also spoke of "the need to have prices reflect costs, the value of social pricing, even the need 'to take away subsidies for drivers ... for drivers to pay their own way,'" but then "fell back into the tired riff of 'Bridge Tolls No, MTA Must Go.'" So how can Liu reconcile his obvious contempt for the MTA and suspicion of bridge tolls with his stated wish that drivers "pay their own way"? Is this the kind of intellectual inconsistency we can expect from Comptroller Liu?

Councilmen Weprin, Felder, and Gentile protest the injustice of enforcing the law. Photo: Daily Politics

A new bill has surfaced that would tack on a five-minute "grace period" to time restrictions on parking spots. It would codify the contention of a certain class of New Yorkers who believe the law doesn't really apply to drivers.

The anti-enforcement contingent behind the bill includes Vincent Gentile and Simcha Felder of Brooklyn, David Weprin of Queens, and James Vacca of the Bronx. Who are the people these elected representatives are sticking up for? The Daily News, in a story that openly cheers for the new bill to take effect, tells us about one driver who would love some extra time to drop off her pet for a doggie manicure:

Meryl Blackman, 57, a Realtor in Brooklyn Heights, says she needs even more time to unload her dog. She admits leaving her SUV in no-parking zones to deal with the pooch.

"A five-minute grace period is great, but we need more time," she said. "Ten to 15 would be fabulous. It would make the quality of life so much better."

Give 'em five minutes, they'll take an hour. I can already hear the whining about getting a ticket just after the "grace period" expires.

According to the Times, Council Speaker Christine Quinn has not taken a position on the bill, nor has transportation committee chair John Liu, whose support for other bills that let drivers off the hook has apparently given the lax enforcement movement some momentum.

Parking violators have something of a champion in Gentile, who wants to see enforcement relaxed all over his borough:

"We're under siege," he said. "It's high time for this mayor, who wants to get reelected, to ... step in and say cut it out, enforce the law in a reasonable manner."

Gentile may be getting a few calls from constituents (like the fellow who demands the untrammeled right to block the sidewalk because he has a curb-cutting driveway), but his so-called "slew" of ticketing is a mirage. Another story in today's Daily News reveals that parking tickets declined city-wide by a full 11.5 percent last year.

I don't usually get into New Year's resolutions, but there's one I'm considering for 2009. Every time I see someone double-park, overstay the allotted time at a meter, run a red light, pull an illegal U-turn, or speed like a maniac down the street where I live -- and not get a ticket -- I'm going to call my Council member.

City officials say their parking enforcement is not driven by revenue goals. But City Councilman Vincent J. Gentile said his district in southwest Brooklyn has been so overrun by traffic agents that it is hard to conclude otherwise.

"It's a growing recognition that the city is using parking enforcement as a means of revenue generation, not as a means of traffic management or safety management," he said.

City Council Transportation Committee chair John Liu went so far as to issue a press release calling on the city to scale back parking enforcement:

Liu said he and his fellow Transportation Committee members have worked to reduce unfair ticket writing, increase transparency in the world of parking enforcement and make parking in the city "a more predictable and civilized experience" through efforts like a bill that required DOT to post on its Website all parking restrictions for each block.

Here's another way to cut down on the number of citations for double-parking, blocking fire hydrants, and obstructing bus lanes: raise meter rates.

DOT is moving in this direction with its PARK Smart pilot program in Greenwich Village. Of course, higher meter rates would still raise revenue and depend on adequate enforcement to achieve the desired effect. This seems like a fair price to assess on vehicles that take up scarce public space and impose billions of dollars in costs on the population of New York. But if PARK Smart ramps up and expands to other parts of the city, will any New York pols be bold enough to recognize it as "civilized" parking practice, or will it, too, get branded as a cash cow?