Sheldon Silver, the speaker of the New York Assembly and powerful leader of that body’s Democratic caucus, has a love-hate relationship with transit initiatives in New York City. He represents District 64 which encompasses Lower Manhattan, Chinatown and parts of the Lower East Side, an area very heavily dependent upon transit, and yet, his most notorious accomplishment over the last two years is the murder of congestion pricing when the MTA started warning about a looming debt crisis.
Unsurprisingly, then, Silver is at it again. This time, he has stripped a proposal to allow the MTA to implement camera enforcement of dedicated bus lanes from the state executive budget proposal. Gov. David Paterson recently proposed camera enforcement in his executive budget proposal two weeks ago, and the move was not without controversy. After all, the cameras for BRT enforcement purposes were originally shot down by David Gantt in 2008. Still, with the governor leading the charge, transit advocates had some hope this year.
The governor’s original proposal was, in the words of Streetsblog’s Noah Kazis, a “real game-changer” for bus riders. The bill would have allowed for camera enforcement on all 50 of the city’s bus lane miles and would have allowed for stationary cameras or those mounted on buses. Cars would receive summonses of up to $125 if they violated the bus lane laws.
The State Senate became the first of the state’s august legislative bodies to whittle away the camera proposals yesterday when they offered up a watered-down version of bus lane enforcement. Cameras, said the Senate, could be used only on existing bus lanes. The new SBS routes planned for the Upper East Side would not have been able to take advantage of these badly-needed cameras.
Advocates were unhappy. “Select Bus Service is the most important and promising project for bus riders in years,” Lindsey Lusher Shute of Transportation Alternatives said to Streetsblog. “The New York State Senate needs to revise their bus camera language and give SBS their full support. We expect the Assembly to do the same.”
The Assembly didn’t do the same; rather, the Assembly stripped the provision from the bill entire. Reports Ben Fried and Noah Kazis:
Chances to improve service on New York City’s dedicated bus lanes appeared to narrow yesterday, when Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and his Democratic conference rejected bus lane enforcement cameras in the chamber’s draft budget. Camera enforcement is one of the linchpins in the city’s strategy to put the “rapid” in Bus Rapid Transit. Without it, bus riders will remain stymied by traffic, even on Select Bus Service routes…
“Right now, bus lanes are routinely violated by many vehicles, resulting in chronic delays for hundreds of thousands of bus riders,” said Gene Russianoff, staff attorney for the Straphangers Campaign. “Using enforcement cameras in city bus lanes could turn that around, making bus service more reliable and helping to reduce congestion.”
Two years ago, bus cams died in the Assembly transportation committee, chaired by Rochester representative David Gantt. This time around, they were stripped out in the Assembly’s opaque budget process. One advocate in Albany told Streetsblog that rank-and-file Assembly members were unaware that the bus cam provisions had been slashed from the budget resolution as late as yesterday afternoon, hours before the resolution was unveiled and voted on.
Gantt has no veto power in the Assembly budget process, which the Speaker himself exerts enormous influence over. The budget resolution only had to clear a vote in the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Upper Manhattan representative Denny Farrell, before the Speaker brought it to the full floor last night. “It’s our view that Silver maintains pretty tight control over the budget process,” said Laura Seago, a research associate at the Brennan Center for Justice and co-author of the 2009 report on Albany dysfunction, “Still Broken.”
I’m holding out hope that, during reconciliation, the Senate’s version with the watered-down camera provisions will pass. Otherwise, New Yorkers will be left stranded yet again by Sheldon Silver. When I find myself sitting in traffic stuck on a bus that can’t navigate its bus lane and can’t enforce dedicated lanes, I’ll think of Sheldon Silver and again remember how he doesn’t support transit initiatives in his own home town.
12 comments
Like I said, throw ’em all out. This is just ridiculous. One incompetent fool controlling the destiny of so many. Hey, isn’t that a dictatorship?
It’s a misrepresentation to say that Sheldon Silver killed congestion pricing. What he did was decline to bring it to a vote, once it was clear that it would not pass. Whatever you think about that tactic, I don’t recall anyone claiming that a vote in the full assembly would have passed. It would merely have exposed the ‘no’ voters to greater scrutiny.
Silver didn’t “murder” congestion pricing. The ‘no’ voters in his caucus were the ones primarily responsible. All Silver did was to pronounce the patient dead.
The no votes in his closed caucus in which everyone agrees he wields all the power.
Maybe a stronger speaker with the guts to do something right would have worked with his caucus to find a way to pass congestion pricing. It had public support; it had a home rule request from the City Council; it failed his closed-door meeting. That’s on him.
He did, however, approve the repeal of the commuter income tax in 1999. I wonder how much that has cost the city.
Approximately $300 million annually.
“his closed caucus in which everyone agrees he wields all the power”
I guess you mean everyone except Marc Shepard and myself. Think what you will about Mr. Silver but like any other leader he has lots of people to satisfy in his conference. Like Caesar he needs soldiers in front of him and soldiers in back of him. Like a wagon train his conference can’t move faster than the slowest wagon. Right now he is probably the most powerful man in Albany until Mr. Cuomo takes over. Still, it takes a village.
I better stop before I use up my allotted metaphors.
“Many” would have been a better word.
Let me answer your valid metaphors with a question: What demands of his conference is he satisfying by blocking legitimate enforcement of New York City’s bus lanes? Should he be satisfying those demands through such an obstructionist effort?
Remember, the city asked for a home rule measure for bus lane enforcement two years ago. Our local officials want it, and the Senate and Governor are willing to give it to us in some form or another. But the Assembly isn’t. Why?
I’ll keep asking this question until I find an answer. Where is the lobbying effort on behalf of the MTA? Most State Senators have never ridden a city bus and rarely even come to New York City. Silver can speak against it on a cost-platform, but is anybody telling the senators why they should vote FOR bus lanes? It’s no wonder they don’t support it. I doubt the folks in Albany read Streetsblog.
The Straphangers campaign is very reactive, putting out analyses, opinions, and soundbites (all valid), but I don’t feel they are proactively reaching out for the ears of the lawmakers. In their defense, I don’t believe they are funded. Meanwhile, the MTA itself is very un-New York; they lack that aggressive, in-your-face, don’t-take-no-for-an-answer attitude that’s come to characterize this city. You can’t survive in NYC if you don’t constantly stand up for yourself. Maybe they’re afraid to bite the hand that feeds them, but the kid who just negotiated a nickel raise in his allowance could do a better job. (More metaphors!)
Which brings me to the TWU. They are outspoken group who knows how to get their message heard, has funding, and has the indirect influence to sometimes get their way. Bus lanes would result in better bus service, better fuel efficiency, and more ridership, all leading to more money for the MTA and, subsequently the TWU employees. Plus, it would make the jobs of the bus drivers much more pleasant, and would win some moral support from the often anti-union riding public.
Just some random thoughts off the top of my head. I’m sure I’ll see a long thread telling me why I’m wrong.
http://www.ny1.com/1-all-borou.....chair-says
While the state Legislature has approved the use of cameras at some city traffic lights, some Assembly members have been reluctant to approve the use of cameras in city bus lanes.
“I recognize the issues about privacy,” Walder said. “The Assembly, the legislature, has gotten over those issues with red light cameras. There’s no reason why we can’t get over those issues with the bus lane enforcement cameras.”
So Albany has no problems hanging NYPD cameras everywhere turning NYC into Oceania, the national guard policing the subways with dogs, and it has no problems putting redlight cameras everywhere, http://www.photoenforced.com/us.html and putting cameras on buses to watch the passengers, but they bring up “privacy” when it involved bus cameras to enforce bus lanes. Amazing. I’d like to know which legislator is talking about CCTV “privacy” in Albany.
Whatever Silver’s reasons for taking what appear to be car-centric and anti-transit positions and actions, it certainly isn’t the interests of his constituents in Lower Manhattan, Chinatown, and parts of the Lower East Side, very few of whom drive cars. I’m sure if you look at campaign contributions to him, you’ll find out where his car-friendliness comes from.
You’re right, supporting congestion pricing and ramming SAS through the legislature are car-centric, anti-transit positions.
[…] measure over what he said were civil liberties concerns. This year, the Assembly has, for now, removed a watered-down camera plan from the state’s 2010 draft […]