Nevertheless, Mayor Bloomberg has come out in favor of the Costco, the Sun reports:

At a press conference yesterday, Mr. Bloomberg said bringing the big-box warehouse chain to the city would help New Yorkers weather a difficult economic downturn. "Costco has a reputation of selling in bulk at very low prices, and given the economy today and the public's desire to buy things in bulk and buy them cheaper, it seems to me we should welcome any store that wants to come here," he said.

In light of the Mayor's own congestion reduction efforts, the endorsement makes little sense:

A spokesman for the Neighborhood Retail Alliance, Richard Lipsky, said the Costco store would run counter to another administration priority: reducing traffic.

"It is incongruous for the mayor, who supported congestion pricing, to support one of the most auto-dependent retailers in the country," Mr. Lipsky said.

Photo of Costco parking lot in Brooklyn: MaxKalehoff/Flickr

In his first piece Lipsky refers to all you Streetsbloggers as -- and I'll just mash up all of the descriptors into one set of quote marks -- "phony, invidious, self-righteous street corner ideologues and useful idiots." After that, Lipsky accuses congestion pricing advocates of "a level of vitriol" that is "so counterproductive" he'd almost believe it if he and Walter McCaffrey were running the traffic relief campaign themselves.

If anyone can find the vitriol in the original Streetsblog post that started all of this, let me know. 

In his second piece on the subject, Lipsky fleshes out the "useful idiots" concept and provides some pro bono strategic advice for congestion pricing advocates, otherwise known as Mayor Bloomberg's "dimwitted amen choir."

As we have said, the critics are not doing their cause much good. Over the top statements and personal invective, so characteristic of some denizens of the netroots, will only make the legislature that much more skeptical of a plan that they think needs a great deal more thought. This biting the hand that feeds you approach, which we can only hope will continue into total self-immolation, is not a very smart lobbying strategy.

7.23.07 Crain's NY Business page 3

Agreement gives supporters clout to undercut foes and win over public. Foes' main gripe has been lack of time to digest the plan

BY ERIK ENGQUIST

The agreement reached in Albany last week appears to set up a legislative gantlet through which Mayor Michael Bloomberg must run his congestion pricing plan. But details of the deal make approval of Manhattan driving fees a near certainty next year.

The reasons are both technical and political. The commission to consider the proposal and alternatives must approve a plan by Jan. 31, 2008, that reduces traffic by 6.3%, as the mayor's plan would. Analysts say only fees can accomplish that.

"We've looked around the world," says Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City. "Congestion pricing was the only thing that made a significant impact on traffic."

The political deck is likewise stacked in favor of congestion fees. The 17-member commission will recommend a plan by majority vote. Fourteen members will be appointed by pricing supporters: three each by Mr. Bloomberg, Gov. Eliot Spitzer, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, and one each by Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith and Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco.

The three named by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who remains dubious about fees, will be vastly outnumbered. Mr. Silver himself will have reasons to join the bandwagon, even though many Assembly Democrats have criticized the proposal to charge cars $8 and trucks $21 for entering Manhattan south of 86th Street. The fees will help fund the Second Avenue subway, which will serve the speaker's district.

The mayor unveiled his proposal three months ago, and foes' biggest gripe has been the lack of time to digest or amend it. The agreement's timetable, which requires a vote in the Legislature by next March, nullifies that objection.

Moreover, Assembly Democrats rely on those who endorse congestion pricing-unions, environmentalists, and transportation and goodgovernment groups-for campaign funding and volunteers. It will be difficult for members to break with their traditional supporters.

The agreement also gives backers time to build public enthusiasm and undercut Democratic Assemblyman Richard Brodsky's argument that charging people to drive on public streets is regressive and fundamentally unfair.

But those trying to block the plan claim that time is on their side.

"There are enough concerns that the Legislature has raised on this to question whether the mayor's plan will go forward," says Richard Lipsky, lobbyist for the Coalition to Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free. "We're hopeful that when the plan is reviewed, the reservations will increase."

Feds must give $200 million Their first hope lies with the U.S. Department of Transportation: If it doesn't give the city at least $200 million to help implement the plan, the agreement will collapse.

If the money comes through, it is unclear where Mr. Lipsky would find the allies he needs. The mayor can count on Republican support from the Bush administration and Mr. Bruno, and on Democratic backing from Mr. Spitzer, organized labor and progressive activists.

A broad, well-funded coalition of advocates will also keep pushing for fees to ease the congestion that the Partnership for New York City says drains $13 billion from the economy each year-a figure projected to increase with the population.

On Mr. Silver's insistence, the City Council must sign off on the plan for it to move to the Legislature. Only a few councilmembers have been highly critical, and Ms. Quinn has the clout to pull fence-sitters onto congestion pricing's side.

The deal's mass transit improvements- always popular with the electorate-will provide political cover to those who fear being the first elected officials in America to vote for fees to drive on city streets.

"Our arguments are the most forceful and will lead to congestion pricing," asserts Richard Schrader, state legislative director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "It is the key piece."

It turns out that pollution-related heart and lung problems aren't just for poor kids in the Bronx anymore. From yesterday's New York Times:

A study that used the mass of data included in the Women's Health Initiative found that women who lived in communities with relatively high levels of air pollution in the forms of tiny particles -- aka soot -- were far more likely to die because of heart attacks than women who lived in cleaner air. Results were published in February in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Cars, trucks, and diesel buses - the main culprits in the creation of particle pollution - spew untold millions of the microscopic pollutants into the air daily. Exercisers should take precautions against particles, experts said, by not exerting themselves near traffic, or, if they must use a path next to a highway, staying a few hundred yards away from vehicles.

Meanwhile, in related news, Bronx State Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr. and Richard Lipsky's Neighborhood Retail Alliance are holding a press conference on the steps of City Hall this Sunday, 11:30 am to protest "the failure" of Mayor Bloomberg's congestion picing plan "to address the air quality in those neighborhoods that are experiencing a severe asthma problem." Diaz, Sr. says:

With all due respect to environmentalists, I cannot understand how these plans can be made without an environmental impact study being conducted first. There are many questions that have been left unanswered, and we need to have a thorough review of the matter before implementing any plan of action.

Photo: Richard Perry/The New York Times