In the great meeting room of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Mayor Bloomberg and the chairs of many NYS Assembly Committees engaged in a snappish battle of wits in which the citizens were losers. Richard Brodsky and Denny Farrell scored imaginary talking points off the Mayor. Even if you have a horse in this race (and I do), it was difficult to declare a winner. (After the jump, a possible fatal flaw in Mr. Bloomberg's plan and a chance to lobby in Albany if you support it.)
UPDATE: Rep. Joseph Crowley, chair of the Queens Democratic Party, (whose district includes a portion of the Bronx) endorsed [1] the Congestion Pricing Proposal. In a complete coincidence, Mayor Bloomberg promised to pay [2] for two new Queens LIRR stations (and two Bronx Metro North Stations).
2nd UPDATE TUESDAY: Sheldon Silver is not convinced here [3] and here [4].
The Mayor, of course, knew the details of the proposal and no one else did. The very long bill, introduced in the Senate only a few hours before, as it turns out, is just a bargaining chip. So, while the Assembly members sounded smart, they couldn't compete. It was as though the Assembly members were playing poker blindfolded. The odd thing was that Mr. Bloomberg was as snappish as the Assembly members and he was the one trying to force them to buy a pig in a poke (Mind you, a very nice pig, in my opinion -- but you can't see it.)
The Assembly Members had one very big surprise from the Mayor's presentation. The Mayor says that his congestion pricing proposal is a three-year pilot. It's an experiment. No final decision has been made about congestion pricing. To those of you who remember environmental law, a bell should now be ringing. If no final decision has been made, or will be made until the data from the "pilot" (paid for, Mr Bloomberg hopes, by a $500 Million challenge grant from the US Dept. of Transportation) no environmental impact statement or analysis is required. The point of the EIS is to inform the decision maker before a final action.
Thus, the proposal, claimed to be temporary, would expire at the end of three years unless reauthorized. (The current bill says nothing of this). Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff suggested the program would throw off $400 Million per year for capital improvements for mass transit. Can you imagine a legislator voting to cut off a money spigot that big?
I think this could be a fatal legal flaw. Buying all the equipment and running the program for three years, under these circumstances, seems to me to be a pretty final action. On the merits, it seems to me, both state and federal law require environmental impact analysis before going ahead. Every argument in favor of this proposal promotes its environmental benefits. But no assessment of the environmental costs and benefits has been done. A challenge to the Bloomberg proposal is not a slam-dunk but could win.
A smaller surprise was that our friends at the Drum Major Institute were cast, by the Mayor, in a major supporting role. Over and over again he touted their report which is here [5].They found that congestion pricing would be good for middle-class New Yorkers. Each time Mr. Brodsky brought up the regressive character of the plan, Mr. Bloomberg hit him with the DMI. After his testimony, the Mayor held a press conference with new favorite friends Scott Stringer and Betsy Gotbaum, surrounded by green t-shirted supporters. It was a wonderful sight.
The Apollo Alliance, a labor, community, environmental alliance has scheduled a lobby trip to Albany on behalf of Mr. Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan.
Campaign For New York's Future - State Capital Advocacy Day (Carry the campaign's message to Albany and educate legislators on PlaNYC)
Tuesday, June 12th, 2007
Details: Buses will leave for Albany early, the morning of June 12th. Details will be sent in a follow-up email.
To RSVP, call: Yating Liu (212.764.3878 ext. 245) or Edymari De Leon (212.764.4298)
or click here [6]
[7] | 
[8] | 
[9] | 
[10] | 
[11] | 
[12] | 
[13] | 
[14] | 
[15]