Riverdale hosts debate on congestion pricing plan

By Manny Grossman

About 100 people braved fierce thunderstorms on Oct. 11 to participate in a forum on congestion pricing held at Riverdale Temple. The event, sponsored by the Ben Franklin Reform Democratic Club and the temple, hosted two members of the 17-member commission created to recommend a final plan for the controversial proposal.

Speaking for the plan was Kathryn Wylde, president and CEO of the Partnership for New York City. Founded in 1979 by David Rockefeller, the partnership describes itself as a "nonprofit membership organization comprised of a select group of two hundred CEOs from New York City's top corporate, investment and entrepreneurial firms."

Speaking against was Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D-Westchester). He previously was the chair of the Committee on Environmental Conservation where he authored the Environmental Protection Fund bill as well as the Clean Air, Clean Water bond act.

Mr. Brodsky said that while he is concerned about the environment, he opposes congestion pricing not only because of the "particular concrete problems" of actually implementing the plan, but also because he "did not enter public life to enable essentially well meaning, very nice but wealthy people to decide that there are some places people cannot go," within a city.

"The mayor is right," he said. "We have congestion, and we don't have enough money in mass transit, but the market shouldn't decide who gets into Manhattan." He also said he had a real problem with government setting up cameras to "spy on people," and that the plan would turn the Bronx into a parking lot for those who seek to avoid paying the fee. He called the plan a "regressive class-based model that says we're not going to let the Chevrolets in town, but if you have a BMW, come on down."

Ms. Wylde said, "We want to move people out of cars into mass transit." She cited statistics that said that the cost to New York City because of traffic is $13 billion a year, and "more than half of the economy of New York City takes place in Manhattan below 60th Street." She wants to "discourage traffic into this center core, and cited London and Stockholm as success stories, saying that London experienced a "20 percent reduction in traffic and 37 percent increase in bus ridership."

While Ms. Wylde was careful to point out that the plan still needs a lot of tweaking before it can be enacted, "one way or another we have to get funds to improve mass transit and those who drive into Manhattan should pay."

Mr. Brodsky demurred, "By the mayor's own calculations, if he gets everything he wants, traffic only improves by six-tenths of one mile an hour, but what you get is a new principle between government and the governed which is 'we're going to start charging you for access to public goods.'"

When the meeting was opened to the floor, the speakers were peppered with statements and questions. Jessica Haller, a local environmentalist, was curious as to how pollution would be reduced. Mr. Brodsky said that it wouldn't, instead saying "the scheme moves it from parts of wealthy Manhattan into working-class Bronx." Ms. Wylde countered by saying that Stockholm experienced doubledigit reductions in pollution all over the city.

Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz stated his opposition, citing the demographic disparity of people from New Jersey paying less than Bronxites as well as the potential for the "Bronx to become a parking lot."

But he also cited a recent MTA plan to improve service, in which there was only one improvement to service in the East Bronx. "No incentive means people will be trapped into paying the fee," which he warned, and was backed up by Mr. Brodsky, would quickly go up to perhaps as high as $20.

"Maybe we should go back to the drawing board and come up with something totally different that raises revenue for mass transit but does not enact provisions which are extremely unfair to people in communities in the Bronx," he concluded.

Assemblyman Ruben Diaz Jr., took the floor to request that a full environmental impact statement be conducted before implementation and to ask that the Legislature be given the authority to determine whether the plan - which is a three-year pilot project - be continued or not. Currently, only the mayor has that authority.

Jeffrey Oddo, a resident of Kingsbridge, spoke in favor of the plan. Taking cars away from the Major Deegan Expressway or the Henry Hudson Parkway would help his kids breathe easier, he said.

Proposals from the audience ranged from investing in a ferry service or reinstating the commuter tax to opening up the West Side of Manhattan to Metro-North commuter trains.

Jamin Sewell, counsel to Councilman Oliver Koppell, proposed dedicated high speed bus lanes and improving the "crumbling D and 6 lines," that are consistently rated the worst subway lines in studies but are not in the current MTA capital plan.

Ms. Wylde concluded by saying that the "mayor's proposal is just that, a proposal. Plans may change."

"If this doesn't work, it will not be continued. It's a pilot project," she said.

This is part of the October 18, 2007 online edition of The Riverdale Press.

Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you. Click here.