URBAN AGENDA: Pros of Congestion Pricing and Expanded Fair Fares Outweigh Cons
Congestion pricing is set to go into effect next month in Manhattan’s central business district. It’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fund upkeep of New York City’s public transportation, clean our air and even reimagine traffic and pedestrian flows citywide.
Just after midnight on June 30th, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) plans to switch on the nation’s first congestion pricing zone, which is expected to raise $1 billion annually for MTA capital improvements and encourage commuters to find a different way into central Manhattan, one of the world’s busiest commercial districts.
This sea change, expected to increase subway ridership, is also a great time for the New York City Council and Mayor Eric Adams to expand Fair Fares, the program that provides 50 percent discounts on Metro Cards for low-income households. Let’s make the discounts available to households with annual incomes of up to 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL), which is about $62,000 for a family of four. Currently, the program’s income eligibility threshold is 120 percent of FPL, or $37,440 for a family of four.
Expanding Fair Fares would add to congestion pricing’s implementation in a way that emphasizes equity and fairness, particularly for lower-income individuals struggling to pay transit fares. The MTA offers congestion zone discounts for drivers making less than $50,000 a year, and an array of exemptions for emergency vehicles, commuter buses and drivers with disabilities.
Congestion pricing represents a huge opportunity for New York’s political, business and nonprofit leaders to hold hearings and take actions that transform the citywide coexistence of pedestrians, private cars, trucks and MTA buses. For instance, how about making outer-borough intersections more pedestrian-friendly, Manhattan sidewalks cleaner and reining in the explosion of package delivery trucks blocking the streets everywhere?
The Manhattan congestion pricing zone, which will charge a base rate of $15 a day for motor vehicle access to Manhattan below 60th Street, makes businesses and well-heeled commuters who drive into lower Manhattan pay the higher tolls. It will give the MTA badly needed revenue to improve train and bus services for students, workers, the poor and low-income people who depend on the system.
The proposal is not a sure thing. Although the MTA expects the plan to go forward, there are ongoing legal challenges from New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, as well as a consortium of public-sector unions and city residents. U.S. District Court Judge Leo Gordon, who is presiding over New Jersey’s congestion pricing lawsuit, has said he will rule on the case in early June, just days before the MTA hopes to turn on the tolling system. The lawsuits –– they should fail –– falsely argue congestion pricing is unfair to drivers because public transit isn’t robust enough to serve their needs.
Ample evidence overseas suggests otherwise. New York City is following in the footsteps of London in 2003, Singapore in 1997 and Stockholm in 2006, which have all shown that congestion pricing is effective. In those cities, it encouraged carpooling, use of public transportation and traveling at off-peak times. It also resulted in shorter travel times, improved air quality and less traffic, according to a U.S. Department of Transportation study.
Small businesses are sure to benefit from less traffic and an increase in the number of pedestrians riding buses and subways. It will make their locations more attractive by driving foot traffic to pre-pandemic levels, which in turn increases sales and employment.
Another concern of opponents –– that congestion pricing would unfairly impact the poor and low-wage essential workers –– is misguided. A study by my organization, the Community Service Society of New York, found the impact on poor and low-income people is not as severe as naysayers suggest. The study showed 57 percent of outer-borough residents depend on MTA commuter bus and rail service, and would directly benefit from system repairs and upgrades.
Moreover, the CSS study found only four percent of outer-borough workers (about 128,000 people) would pay congestion fees as part of their daily commute, and only two percent of those workers living in poverty (about 5,000 people) would be asked to pay congestion fees as part of their daily commute. This is also a target audience for expanded Fair Fares. It would help their transition to public transportation.
There are, indeed, legitimate concerns about gridlock in Harlem and the Bronx as some drivers inevitably maneuver outside the congestion zone. But this is nothing the New York Police Department traffic division cannot handle.
It’s not a stretch to believe New Yorkers want congestion pricing. If the MTA delivers better service, NYPD protects the Bronx and Uptown and it includes steps to improve traffic in the boroughs, city dwellers will overwhelmingly support Manhattan tolls that improve mass transit and reduce traffic choking New York City streets.
David R. Jones, Esq., is President and CEO of the Community Service Society of New York (CSS), the leading voice on behalf of low-income New Yorkers for more than 175 years, and a member of the MTA Board. The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer. The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org.
The post URBAN AGENDA: Pros of Congestion Pricing and Expanded Fair Fares Outweigh Cons appeared first on New York Amsterdam News.