Home Congestion Fee Congestion pricing deal relieves MTA CEO

Congestion pricing deal relieves MTA CEO

by Benjamin Kabak

At 1:50 p.m. yesterday, the MTA breathed a sigh of relief. For now, it seems, there is a flicker of hope for the financial future of the city’s transportation authority. This relief came in the form of four words from State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno: “We have a deal.”

This deal, of course, concerns the now-dead/now-alive congestion fee plan. Three days after a deadline to secure federal funds, the state government agreed to establish a commission to study the congestion issue. In doing so, amNew York’s Tracker blog reports, they’ve put themselves back in the running for a grant of up to $576 million from the federal government.

A few days ago, I reacted with bitter feelings toward the opponents of the Mayor’s plan. Today, I’m guardedly optimistic that the state will still do the right thing when it comes to the congestion pricing plans. The Times has more about the deal:

A commission will be created to study congestion and come up with a plan to mitigate it. The commission would not be limited to considering Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s plan to charge a fee to drivers who enter Manhattan, and could also consider other traffic mitigation strategies.

The City Council would be required to approve whatever plan the commission recommends, and the Legislature would have until the end of next March to approve it, Mr. Bruno said.

The agreement appeared far more modest than what the mayor originally proposed. Still, state and city officials said they had been in talks with Bush administration officials and believed New York might still qualify for as much as $500 million in federal aid, despite the passage of an ostensible Monday deadline for cities to submit congestion plans to the Department of Transportation.

The commission, as Streetsblog reports, will consist of 17 members. The Mayor, Governor, City Council, State Senate Majority Leader and State Assembly speaker will all have three appointments to make. The Senate and Assembly minority leaders receive one appointment each. Considering the various viewpoints, you can bet that the plan the commission develops will be a watered down version of the Mayor’s original groundbreaking congestion fee plan.

Still, we have much to celebrate. The opportunity is there for New York to become a nationwide leading in combating traffic issues, and the state still has the chance to ensure financial support for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, one of the key agencies that can help combat congestion. While Sewell Chan at the CityRoom blog has the reactions from various city leaders, as this is a subway blog, I wanted to highlight MTA CEO Elliot “Lee” Sander’s statement.

“The MTA is thrilled that an agreement has been reached to advance congestion pricing, which is critical to funding the long-term needs of the transportation system. We look forward to working with the City, USDOT and the commission to pursue the goals of reducing congestion, protecting the environment and investing in public transportation, “Sander said. The CEO is still optimistic that a deal can be reached that satisfies us all, and so am I.

As an editorial in The Times noted on Thursday, New York needs to combat its congestion problem, and the federal government is willing to pay big bucks to make it happen. Finally, some common sense prevailed in New York State politics. For now.

You may also like

3 comments

Julia July 20, 2007 - 10:48 am

CNYF is happy and I suppose I should be, too, but I have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that a blue-ribbon commission is a good thing. Are we sure that it will qualify for the grant? What if we get the money after all and the commission uses it for something else?

Reply
Marc Shepherd July 20, 2007 - 2:40 pm

“Death by commission” is fairly common in politics. When the government establishes a commission to study a problem, it’s a fairly safe bet that nothing will be done. It is rare that a commission’s recommendations are implemented, and if they are, it’s usually in a vastly watered down form.

Maybe this commission will be the exception, but Bruno’s “We have a deal” was clearly an exaggeration. The only thing they’ve agreed is to study the problem further. Any recommendation will have to be submitted to both the City Council and the Legislature for approval. Which is exactly where we are now.

Reply
Benjamin Kabak July 20, 2007 - 3:00 pm

I too am wary about a commission. As Marc notes, death by commission is a common cause of bureaucratic demise. Hopefully, with the self-imposed deadline of March, the commission will actually produce a workable plan.

Reply

Leave a Comment