Bridge Tolls
Advocacy Project

What They're Saying

'Highway Robbery'

Your editorial knocking congestion pricing went off the rails when you dubbed it a fee on drivers ["Highway Robbery," November 22, 2005].

Congestion pricing is a fee on driving - and not just any old driving but driving where gridlock is worst, when driving's theft of time from all reaches its maximum.

Which makes congestion pricing an anti-tax seeing as how what it taxes, gridlock, is itself a tax. So what if the spearhead of London's successful congestion charging scheme is a socialist?

"Red" or not, Mayor Livingstone's imposition of a toll to drive into London's center has boosted car and bus speeds by 30%. The inconvenience to drivers "tolled off the roads" is offset many-fold by the added convenience (quicker arrivals) for drivers, passengers, bus riders, etc.

As for your urging that New York instead expand its infrastructure to make driving and parking easier: Isn't that what's been tried for the past century? Haven't we, at staggering expense, constructed bridges, tunnels, parkways, and expressways, and appropriated car lanes from sidewalks, parklands and trolley routes? And hasn't the result been to metastasize gridlock from a few hot spots to vast swaths of the city?

Isn't the way out to do with roads what is done in every other sphere of activity - use prices to mesh supply with demand?

CHARLES KOMANOFF
Bridge Tolls Advocacy Project
www.bridgetolls.org
Manhattan

... The mayor floated the toll idea early in his first term but was quickly slapped down by pols from Brooklyn, Queens and the Lower East Side who hate the idea. The bottom line is the poor and working class pay up to $2 to take the subway into Manhattan while those who can afford cars are encouraged to pollute our air and clog our streets by driving in toll-free. Congestion pricing and technology that surpasses E-ZPass would make tolls less painful, would reduce pollution and congestion in Lower Manhattan, and would provide valuable municipal revenues. Wed love to see the mayor take another crack at this one.

Here's how Newsday's redoubtable Ellis Henican (March 14, 2005) and the New York Press's brilliant upstart Aaron Naparstek (March 16, 2005) took on Ferrer's demagoguery, with assists from BTAP's Charles Komanoff.

Times Backs CBD ("Cordon") Pricing
After a 2-year hiatus, the editors of The New York Times have re-declared their firm support for congestion pricing in New York City.

Reacting to the disastrous fire that has decimated the A and C subway lines, the Times stated in "Saving the Subways," (Jan. 29, 2005), "Business leaders should tell the governor what new taxes they would be willing to accept to save public transit."

"We like one idea being floated by the Partnership for New York City," the editorial said, "which would build on London's model of imposing a surcharge on anyone driving into the city's business district. The plan could generate up to $390 million by taxing those who drive private vehicles below 60th Street during working hours."

You have to go back at least two years, to Nov. 13, 2002, for a comparably clear expression in a Times editorial: "[Bloomberg] should begin with those who are carrying less than their share now. There is no good reason, for instance, that the East River bridges should continue to be toll-free."

We agree. While cordon pricing differs somewhat from East River bridge tolls, the two share philosophy and objectives: keeping congested roadways free is bad for mobility, and toll revenues are key for financing better transportation. Whether the first stone is cast in the CBD or on the East River bridges is unimportant. What matters is to get started on serious road pricing in New York City.

Regional Plan is Right On
If there's a better-informed or more widely respected transportation savant in the NY area than Jeff Zupan of the Regional Plan Association, we'd like to know about her! In a sobering new report card on RPA's work over the past decade, Jeff writes:

The failure to move toward tolling at the currently free East River bridges may be the single greatest failure to date.

Hear hear! For the text of Jeff's "Spotlight On The Region" (Vol. 4, No. 1), go to the bottom of RPA's homepage.

Purnick Pushes Tolls
East River bridge tolls head the 2005 New Year's wish list of The Times' veteran metro columnist, Joyce Purnick:

"Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg ... resolve to design a new agenda to improve New York's quality of life, showing real courage on the way to Election Day. Revive the idea to impose tolls on East River bridges."

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/06/nyregion/06matters.html

No Sacred Cows
Dick Anderson, president of the New York Building Congress and a long-time presence in NYC public policy, called for tolling the East River bridges to help finance the MTA capital plan in an op-ed in today's Daily News.

"There must be no sacred cows," Anderson wrote. "All possible revenue sources must be on the table, including tolling East River crossings and reinstating the commuter tax. These measures, together with fare increases and local surcharges, would ensure residents, commuters and businesses alike pay a share roughly equivalent to their overall usage of the transportation system."

The complete Anderson op-ed, "Taxes for Transit? Yes," is at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/267246p-228955c.html (Jan. 2, 2005).

Bridge Tolls Boomlet Brewing?
Bridge tolls seem to be inching back onto the NYC political agenda. In early November The Times smartly portrayed East River tolls as "the cash cow that nobody dares to milk." The latest to raise the banner is The New York Observer, with an editorial today calling the bridges an "untapped resource" that could contribute a cool $700 million to fund transit and other city services.

Also weighing in for tolls this week: the influential Long Island Association. Speaking at the "Challenge of Congestion" conference at the NYU Wagner Rudin Center on Nov. 16, LIA V-P for government affairs Mitch Pally said his organization, a business powerhouse on Long Island, now backs tolls. To be sure, Pally assured the Long Islanders in the audience that they account for only 5% of East River trips; the true figure is several times larger -- 13.0% for Nassau residents plus another 5.4% for Suffolk, according to BTAP's Who Will Pay report.

Still, we take heart in these pro-tolls declarations. Who's next?

Charles Komanoff
Steve O'Neill
Nov. 17, 2004

Bridges Loom as Cash Cow That Nobody Dares to Milk
How's this for poetry: "There they stand, glinting in the sun, hanging off the shore of Manhattan like fruit-laden branches of a money tree: The free bridges over the East River to Brooklyn and Queens."

No, it's not Hart Crane, but reporter Andy Newman in the Sunday Times (Nov. 7, 2004), describing renewed interest in tolling the East River bridges to raise revenue for the financially strapped Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Newman cites reports by the city's Independent Budget Office and the Regional Plan Association that have officials talking about tolls as an MTA budget fix--barely.

(He might also have cited BTAP's authoritative report on toll revenues, The Hours, but who's complaining?)

Ironically, Newman quoted Mayor Bloomberg's plaint that "Both the commuter tax and tolling East River bridges have proven to be impossible to enact." Had the mayor really pushed for bridge tolls during the 2002-2003 city budget crunch instead of just paying lip service, we might be further along that path. Offering transit improvements for gridlocked downtown Brooklyn and Long Island City, as urged by Community Consulting Services (see their proposed Brooklyn Transit Agenda) would also help with the political heavy-lifting.

Tolls, Not Sponsors
"To the Editor:

"The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's plan to sell naming rights to its subway stations, bridges and tunnels ('Now a Message From a Sponsor of the Subway?,' front page, July 27) is among the worst and most insulting ideas I've heard in a long time.

"It is not only a bellwether of the creeping corporatization of our society, but it also represents a failure in state transportation policy.

"Instead of selling our landmarks to the highest bidder to close a budget gap, officials should place tolls on the East River bridges and raise gas taxes, and dedicate this money to mass transit.

"Michael J. Infranco
New York, July 27, 2004"

Published in the New York Times

Downtown Brooklyn Needs Tolls
More and more urban experts are pointing out the gridlock time bomb if downtown Brooklyn is re-developed (vastly increasing traffic) without tolling the East River bridges (which would reduce it). The latest example is CUNY Urban Affairs guru Tom Angotti's broadside in Gotham Gazette. Angotti also skewers "Brooklyn elected officials who defend the interests of the elite school of bridge commuters [while] cheerleading for the downtown rezoning, compounding the damage." As BTAP showed in our Who Will Pay? report, East River bridge commuters earn, on average, almost $15,000 a year more than their neighbors who don't enjoy the daily subsidy of a free drive on an East River bridge. (January 16, 2004)

Remember Gridlock?
Sam Schwartz imagines a glimmering future:

Remember Gridlock? Way back at the start of the 21st century? Ever since capitalism was applied to the city's most precious resource -- space -- traffic congestion has gone the way of the VCR. Every car now has its own "signature," a complex code imbedded in the car that allows for e-license plates. No more toll booths. Drivers are invoiced for the amount of time spent on city streets. Rates vary by time of day, day of week, and season. [In New York,] Fifth Avenue by Rockefeller Center now costs $25/minute once the [Christmas tree] is lit. Central Park costs $5/mile, with revenue going to maintain the park. There's so much revenue bridges and roads are kept in pristine condition and the extra money keeps the subway fare at 50 cents! For the business man or woman on the go, first-class lanes on the bridges and highways keep traffic moving at 40-50 mph for just $10/mile. For those nostalgic for the paralyzing traffic, just visit any nearby suburb.

Source: Metropolis Magazine, January 2004

A Moving Solution: Second Avenue Buses
A local columnist bemoans Mayor Bloomberg's failure to seize the transportational zeitgeist he set forth in his campaign material, saying (in part):

Mr. Bloomberg recently made another environmental and economic blunder by lifting the restrictions on single-occupancy vehicles entering Manhattan, thus giving one person in a car the same rights as 55 passengers on a bus. This disastrous decision -- do we need to inhale even more fumes? -- came on the heels of his abandonment of a plan to charge tolls on East River bridges, which could have easily raised $800 million a year. It could also have served as a substitute commuter tax, by using technology to charge suburbanites more for bringing their cars across the East River.

-- Jim Callaghan in the New York Obsever, December 11, 2003

Drivers should pay fare share
An astute pro-tolling editorial in Toronto's Eye, a weekly often compared to our Village Voice: "The city should take a closer look at road tolls as a way to generate revenue, to calm traffic, to reduce sprawl, to protect the environment and to give a boost to public transit." Looks like the Eye is a few steps ahead of the Voice on tolls. (November 13, 2003)

New Report Extols Tolls
A report released by Transportation Alternatives shows that tolls would reduce traffic and raise money (September 28, 2003).

Post: Let the Tolls Roll
The New York Post highlighted BTAP's report, The Hours, in a page 2 story (September 15, 2003).

Tolls, But no Tollbooths
This Boston Globe column explains the logic behind road pricing easily and humorously. (September 4, 2003)

Tolls Still Kicking

• Brooklyn Daily Eagle calls "BTAP Report Hard to Refute" (July 23, 2003)
• Downtown Express says "Time Will Come for Tolls" (July 15-21, 2003)
• Sam Schwartz agrees that "The Hours" report "makes the case to return tolls to [the East River] bridges" (Daily News, July 20, 2003)