With Congestion Pricing Under Threat, NYC Should Consider Plan B

By Edward Yutkowitz

Donald Trump has threatened to end Congestion Pricing in New York City. The program is working well, reducing the number of cars entering Manhattan, collecting the expected revenue for mass transit, and improving traffic flow in the city.

Local officials are proud of the program’s success so far. But there’s no telling what Trump might do, and we should know by now to expect the worst from him. What if he does kill the program? Are there viable alternatives the city can pursue?

City officials and those running for office should be developing contingency plans in case he makes good on his threats. Unfortunately, neither they nor the public are addressing this issue.

They should. There are a number of steps the city and state could take to mitigate any punitive measures Trump might take. All have significant downsides. But some might actually complement the current Congestion Pricing program and should be considered no matter what he does.

---

Easing Congestion

In recent years, driving in New York City has become increasingly difficult.  The city has replaced miles of traffic lanes with bus and bike lanes and blocked off streets to create pedestrian malls. Fuel prices are higher than in most places in the country and gas stations are virtually nonexistent in Manhattan. Parking is increasingly hard to find.

While Congestion Pricing seems to have reduced the number of cars entering Manhattan, traffic is still at a virtual standstill on many streets even while bike and bus lanes are empty. Banned traffic on some streets makes it difficult to make deliveries and for seniors and people with disabilities to get around. A single truck double-parked in a vehicle lane can back up traffic for blocks.

We might:

• Allow cars and bike riders to use bus lanes if they’re empty. Discourage bus drivers from leaving their dedicated lanes.

• Remove physical barriers that force cars to make wide turns.

• Enforce “don’t block the box” rules.

• Encourage truck deliveries at night in low-residence business areas.

• Embark on a major education and enforcement effort to discourage pedestrian crossing — often while on the phone —against the lights.

---

Reducing Air Pollution

A heavily publicized effort to promote electric vehicles (EVs) would show the Trump administration and the nation that we’re willing to fight for a cleaner, healthier environment and hearten American companies whose commitment to electric vehicles may be wavering.

We could:

• Deploy hundreds if not thousands of electric chargers on the streets using available federal money (before Trump takes it away).

• Foster partnerships with California and other progressive states to boost the EV market and overcome the Trump administration’s effort to destroy it.

• Promote “battery swapping” technology, in which depleted EV batteries can be exchanged in minutes for fully charged batteries.

---

Funding

Taxes – New York City and State could impose a variety of taxes to replace or complement the revenue collected from Congestion Pricing. A tax of less than .2% on the wealthiest New Yorkers could easily bring in $1 billion or more a year, roughly the amount projected for congestion pricing, and might be a more reliable source of revenue. Raising MTA fares about 20 cents a ride would bring in about $500 million.

Fare Beating – Cracking down on subway and bus fare beaters could save the MTA more than $600 million every year. Fixing bus and subway entrance and egress infrastructure and more strategically deploying police would both reduce lost income and make passengers feel more secure.

Tolling – Tolling on inter-borough bridges, using technology similar to that used by the current congestion scanners, could reduce traffic volume and treat all vehicles entering Manhattan equally, while providing relief to drivers who’ve devised elaborate schemes to avoid the scanners. It might also help provide a sense of equity to commuters from New Jersey, who feel that they’re subsidizing New York City’s transit system, and obviate New Jersey’s lawsuits against the current program.

New York State should also consider tolls on roads outside Manhattan, including the outer boroughs. This would encourage people to forgo cars and take mass transit from Long Island and Westchester and alleviate regional air pollution and traffic congestion.

Even if Trump fails to stop Congestion Pricing, there’s reason for skepticism about the policy. We don’t yet know if current driving trends will continue to improve or if the policy will drive up the price of goods and services. We can’t yet be sure how the policy will impact regional air quality and the economy, especially restaurants, entertainment, and other commercial establishments, and the people who work in them.

With or without Congestion Pricing, the city needs a strong, long-term vision for mass transit to permanently improve the quality of life and ensure the city’s continued prosperity.

Our elected officials and transit advocates should work to expand rail service within and between the boroughs and implement direct service from Manhattan to John F. Kennedy and LaGuardia airports by taking advantage of existing but underused rail rights-of-ways. They should also consider bringing back trolley (aka light rail) service or developing innovative modes of “trackless trains” or autonomous (self-driving) buses to complement underground rail service.

Maybe President Trump won’t carry out his threats. But even if he doesn’t, can New York afford to delay considering its options? Congestion Pricing was developed to help promote the city’s future prosperity and quality of life. Our mayoral candidates should tell us their contingency and long-term transportation plans now – before it’s too late.