NYC Congestion Pricing Set to Take Effect After Years of Delays

Apparently NJ turned down an offer of $100M+ per year: https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2024/12/18/nj-refusing-generous-...

Cab drivers will pass it on to passengers as part of the fare, and those passengers probably tend to be wealthier. Those who can't afford cabs, and many who can, will be more likely to take public transit (which is the point).

If it actually makes more money for better public transit I would consider it a success. And whether or not that happens, it'll reduce traffic in Manhattan which I think most people would also agree is welcome.

60% of people commuting to Manhattan use public transport.

And the percentage driving into this slice of Manhattan, which is probably among the most transit dense in the world, is likely even tinier.

For context, the highest congestion pricing toll is equivalent to 2 hrs of subsidized metered on street parking in this area.

The idea that the $9 congestion price is regressive needs to eliminate the 60% of people who don’t drive into the area at all.

It is regressive in the sense that car owners will now need to take public transportation. Said public transportation also gets more funding. This is perfect for a city with 5 min subways from NJ to Manhattan. More people should be taking this.

I would argue that this is the perfect kind of tax - if the city already has a robust public transportation system.

… Wait, how many blue collar workers are commuting to Manhattan by car? Where on earth are they parking?

> every single cab driver […] will have to deal with this

>riders in taxis will pay a 75-cent fee

It may end up easing traffic for billionaires :).

> The MTA has more than doubled fares in recent years[1][2], yet has nothing to show for it.

The current MTA fare is $2.90.

For it to be more than doubled it needs to have been lower than $1.45.

The last time the fare was lower than $1.45 was 1995. That’s hardly “recent years”.

Cumulative inflation since 1995 has been 107%, so basically the MTA hasn’t increased inflation adjusted fares since at least 1995.

> In particular, (from the article) the MTA claims that the money will fund the 2nd Avenue line extension. Another important piece of context is that the 2nd Avenue line extension has had a terrible track record. It's been start-and-stop for many years. Earlier phases have come in behind schedule, over cost, and covered less distance than originally promised[5][6].

They don't have to claim anything. Congestion pricing revenue is allocated, by law, to capital projects. They can't spend it on trips to Miami, at least until we annex it as the 6th borough.

It's also worth noting that the SAS's plodding pace is largely a political manner, not matter of institutionally wasteful spending: it's a massive capital project, one that has consistently been first on the chopping block during cuts over nearly a century. That means starts and stops, which are always expensive. It also runs under one of the busiest and densest stretches in Manhattan, which makes its construction a political manner: the line runs deep, includes massive station cavities, and cuts through hard Manhattan bedrock to avoid disturbing the buildings or road surface above.

> The new OMNY "tap to pay" system is also less generous with its weekly discounts than the previously weekly MetroCard discounts. In practice, that's a further price hike for weekly commuters, above and beyond what the single ticket list price captures.

How? The 7 Day Unlimited MetroCard is $34, which is the weekly fare cap in OMNY. Did you mean monthly? I do believe some people in certain situations will pay more with OMNY compared to a 30 Day Unlimited MetroCard due to OMNY fare caps only being counted weekly. Someone who consistently hits the $34 OMNY weekly fare cap pays $4.85 per day on average, but a 30 Day Unlimited MetroCard is $132 ($4.40 per day).

> Plenty of cities, internationally, demonstrate this time again, particularly in much of Europe and East Asia, and even some domestically in the US.

I agree that NYC's transit system is significantly worse than most European and East Asian transit systems. But I'm curious what US cities you had in mind that demonstrate the value of public transit better than NYC?

In my case, I have ridden transit systems in the US that are slightly cleaner (e.g. DC), slightly cheaper (e.g. LA), feel slightly safer (e.g. Boston, Seattle, DC), but I'd consider NYC the overall best transit system in the US by a significant margin.

[3] shows increasing satisfaction across the board as the system recovers since the issues caused due to the pandemic. Further, most of the concerns lie around perceptions and fears of safety, which is a broader citywide (and nationwide) issue than something limited to the MTA.

The MTA has a lot of issues, but frankly they’re doing a good job addressing some of them. For example, independent analysis of the high costs around the 2nd Ave subway extension found that part of the high costs were because of stations being unnecessarily deep. The MTA incorporated changes based on those analysis in the next phase of the extension and has already reduced costs by over half a billion as a result.

Similarly, the MTA changed its Sandy recovery plan for the L line tunnel fixes to both complete the changes faster and at a significantly reduced cost saving tens if not hundreds of millions, and avoiding 100% closures.

The MTA costs only $162/28d full fare and seniors and others get it for half that. I conveniently pay by swiping my Apple Watch. This is for transfers throughout the entire system. Compare with the price of Washington DC, a far, far smaller system than NYC and compared with other US cities. Moreover, the NYC subways do not stop at night like almost all world subway systems.