Commuter Tax, Congestion Pricing
November 15th, 2005
At the same time that Mayor Michael Bloomberg said that, contrary to recent reports, he was not considering “congestion pricing” — charging vehicles a fee for using certain traffic-clogged streets during certain periods of the day — he announced that he WOULD be pushing the state legislature to reinstitute the commuter tax. The announcement has inspired a critical editorial in the New York Post today, entitled Bloomy’s Broken Promise. (The reference is to the mayor’s promise not to raise taxes). “Mayor Mike has never understood the fundamental problem with the city’s budget. It’s quite simple, really: The budget is too high! ” The answer is “curbing the city’s financial obligations Not forever scrambling for new streams of revenue.”
Of course, the commuter tax isn’t exactly “new.” Garth Johnston of Gothamist expressed a preference for reinstituting “the tax of 0.45% that commuters had to pay from ‘69-’99,” and so did readers who commented on his post: “This is a no brainer for any NYC resident,” someone named J wrote. Commuters “who use our services, should pay a fair amount for those services.”
Meanwhile, in her blog, Miss Representation makes the case for congestion pricing. “Given what a hard sell it was in London, it nonetheless deserves fuller consideration here,” since it is an “eminently sensible plan” that will reduce traffic and provide other benefits as well (such as ” improved response time for emergency dispatch, less noise, less pollution, and a net savings in economic efficiency.”) “I can’t find a reason to not support this. Anyone vehemently opposed will be, by definition, a non-resident, slipping out of the city at the end of the day, likely blaring a horn and driving dangerously on their way to some distant suburb, siphoning off tax dollars and giving nothing back to the life of the city.”
By Jonathan Mandell on November 15, 2005, 10:59 amIn category: Public Finance, Transportation | 2 Comments »


November 15th, 2005 at 12:12 pm
(“This is a no brainer for any NYC resident,� wrote J. Commuters “who use our services, should pay a fair amount for those services.�)
NYC has been ripped off by the rest of the state in 1,000 ways, but the lack of a commuter tax isn’t one of them. The taxes paid by the businesses commuters work in and patronize more than offset the services they require. We make a big profit on them.
That’s why suburban jurisdictions throughout the Northeast over-zone for business “ratables” — and try to keep out less well off residents. They want the business taxes, but not the residents who require the services, so that current residents get better services for lower taxes.
If NY is being cheated, it is by those suburban jurisdictions who keep out the working class, who face long commutes from the city, and do not provide services for their needs. They benefit from the labor, but the city educates their children, and cares for them when they are laid off or sick. The suburbs pocket the profit.
It isn’t the commuters who burden the city. It is their cars. That’s why congestion pricing makes sense, and would benefit the rich who could afford to pay it, the majority who use transit, and everyone else in the affected area. But it would hurt those with middle incomes but political clout to get free on-street parking in Manhattan. And that’s the problem — those are the people who matter politically.
November 15th, 2005 at 3:20 pm
Not that this excuses Sheldon Silver for repeal. In return, he should have insisted on removing one of the 1,000 was the rest of the state is unfair to NYC, beginning with the school aid forumula.