Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

Tracking and Video: Coming Soon to a Taxi Near You


In a matter of months, New Yorkers riding in taxicabs will have more to look at than the view. The constant media buzz of modern life – television programs, sports scores, advertisements – will invade the back of cabs starting in October, the result of a new city regulation requiring that all yellow cabs be equipped with global positioning systems and video screens.

The city Taxi and Limousine Commission says it simply wants to make cab rides safer and more enjoyable for passengers. But the drivers of the city’s 13,000 yellow cabs have protested, arguing that the new technology will cost them money and impinge on their privacy.

WHAT THE SYSTEM WILL DO

Through the GPS system, taxi passengers will be able to know where they are at any moment. For New Yorkers who never want to be out of touch, the monitors and tracking system will make a cab ride -- 13 minutes on average -- more enjoyable. Passengers will be able to follow sports scores, get up-to-the-minute news, weather and more. (Those who want some peace and quiet will be able to turn off the monitors.) The driver will also notified of traffic congestion in the area and of large parties or concerts that are ending – and could be fertile ground for finding fare-paying customers. With the new system, passengers can pay their fares using credit or debit cards.

Taxi and limousine commissioner Matthew Daus has called the tracking and the monitors “nothing short of revolutionary and evolutionary for the taxi industry" and has written that the technology “will benefit both drivers and customers.” The commission believes it will make it easier for tourists, who may not want to carry much cash, to use cabs. And the system believes such high-tech taxis will enhance New York’s image as the "city of the world.”

But cab drivers are not convinced. They worry that the tracking system will enable the police department and traffic agents to follow the cabs and prosecute drivers for violating traffic laws. “For myself, I am not against it, but I can see my fellow drivers being angry for being dictated to sacrifice for other people's extra entertainment," said one driver, Ibrahim Jane.

Some cab drivers question whether it is proper for the city to require private business owners to install a system that would monitor their activities. “We are not paid by the cab companies or the city. We rent these vehicles for over $100 per 12 hour shift,” a cab driver who identified himself as Jose wrote on the blog. “Why should we be tracked? Not even the city buses are tracked this way….What benefit is there to the driver?

The debate over the system derives to some extent from the fact that drivers and passengers do not always share the same interests. One of the supposed benefits of the technology is that it will make it easier for passengers to locate any items they mistakenly left in a cab, even without a receipt. The passenger will call a hotline, say where he or she was, and the tracking systems will determine which cabs were in that location at that time. A message will then go out to the drivers in that area to check their back seats for the lost goods. Certainly, if this works as advertised, it will benefit passengers. But cab drivers worry about lost time checking for items and then delivering them to their owners, particularly if the item involved is of little value, such as an umbrella.

THE COST OF TECHNOLOGY

The new system will cost an estimated $3,000 to $5,500 pr cab. This cost will be borne by the taxicab owners. Individual drivers fear the medallion owners could pass the costs on to them and that they could end up paying maintenance costs as well.

Beyond the initial cost, cab drivers fear fixing and maintaining the high-tech machines will take up precious time and hard-earned money.

But Daus, the taxi commissioner, has said the drivers were already compensated for some of those expenses when they city approved a 26 percent fare increase in 2004. And according to some reports, the drivers could get a commission from the advertising profits.

Tallying the financial costs and benefits of the plan for drivers is difficult. On the one hand, the technology will benefit the drivers because once they can pay with credit and debit cards, people may take more cab rides and give bigger tips. Since the fares will not be paid in cash, the money cannot be stolen from drivers. But the credit system will require the owners to pay processing fees. No one can yet determine what the bottom line will be.

THE NEXT STEP

The taxi commission wants the new systems to be in all yellow cabs by January 2008. But cab drivers have other ideas.

A strike is a possibility, according to the executive director of the Taxi Workers Alliance, Bhairavi Desai, "Drivers are angry and ready to take action," Desai, whose group represents about 7,000 cab drivers, said. Some protests have already been held. At one, in front of the Taxi and Limousine commission headquarters on Rector Street, about 100 demonstrators said they would take action to block the installation of the new technology.

But barring something unforeseen the high tech cab will be a mainstay of city streets by next year. And riders who want peace and quiet will have to turn off their monitors.

 

Will the Critics Kill Congestion Pricing?


Mayor Michael Bloomberg proved prescient when he introduced congestion pricing in his Earth Day address as “the elephant in the room.” Before Bloomberg even delivered the speech outlining ways to make the city more environmentally friendly, some politicians shot down the most controversial idea: charging drivers $8 to travel below 86th Street during rush hour.

"I think congestion pricing is a non-starter," said State Senator John Sabini prior to the speech. "We're one city. I don't think we should penalize people for where they live."

The criticism, mainly from representatives of areas outside of Manhattan, hasn't subsided.

U.S. Representative Anthony Weiner, who plans to run for mayor in 2009, charged that the proposal "creates class conflict" and constitutes a "regressive tax on working middle-class families and small-business owners."

In a press release provided by the Queens Chamber of Commerce, City Council Finance Chair David Weprin called the proposal "another unfair tax which would hurt working-class people."

Walter McCaffrey, a former City Council member and spokesman for the Keep NYC Congestion Tax Free Coalition, said the idea that the fee would be kept at the mayor's proposed level of $8 per day is a myth. "Anyone who thinks it's going to be $8 is either delusional or they are trying to deliberately hoodwink the public," McCaffrey told the Daily News.

On the Fence – Or in Favor

So is the mayor's plan for congestion pricing dead on arrival?

Don't count on it. Some elected officials such as Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, who has vehemently opposed tolls on the East River bridges, and Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion are keeping an open mind. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said he would like to see "what the proposed benefits are, and I'd like to see what the impact on business is projected to be."

The proposal has substantial support from business groups such as the Partnership for New York City. A coalition of 70 organizations and individuals ranging from the American Lung Association to the Citizens Budget Commission and General Contractors Association came out strongly in favor of the mayor's plan.

The plan can also attract federal funds to pay for the fee-collection system. U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters, in a statement following Bloomberg's speech, said the congestion pricing plan "is the kind of bold thinking leaders across the country need to embrace if we hope to win the battle against traffic congestion."

It is important to remember that this is just the start of the debate.

The mayor is clear about his commitment to his plan. He has prevailed in other areas where his predecessors failed, such as taking over the city school system. In cities such as London and Stockholm that have adopted congestion pricing, the idea gained support after strong initial opposition.

What the Charge Will Buy

As the debate continues, it is likely that New Yorkers will focus more on the benefits to them personally and the city at large. The mayor's proposal is not just about charging tolls.

Congestion pricing fees, combined with city and state contributions, would underwrite a new transportation financing authority that would fund $31 billion in transit projects in the metro area. The list of projects includes completing the Second Avenue subway, bringing the transit system and city roads and bridges to a state of good repair, implementing a total of 10 bus rapid transit routes, building a new rail tunnel from New Jersey to Manhattan and adding bus lanes to East River bridges.

Far more people will benefit from the mayor's plan than will be affected by the congestion fee. The mayor correctly pointed out that only 5 percent of New York City residents drive to work in Manhattan.

Even in outlying areas of the city that lack subway service, public transit commuters outnumber auto commuters by two to one or even three to one.

Transit commuters who currently endure hour and a half commutes can greatly benefit from the mayor's proposed upgrades to transit services, ranging from express buses to better utilization of the commuter railroads' city stations. If New Yorkers understand the benefits to their commutes, won't these folks weigh in with their elected officials?

Perhaps the most biting criticism is the claim that a fee is an unfair tax on the working person. Yet the fact is that outer borough auto commuters tend to have higher incomes than subway commuters, so a fee that improves transit is actually more equitable than the current system. In fact, auto commuters who use the free bridges are being subsidized by transit users whose taxes pay for bridge reconstruction and maintenance. Is that equitable?

What’s the Alternative?

Opponents will also have to respond to the public's increasing focus on environmental aspects of this issue. The mayor pointed out that childhood asthma rates are four times higher in the city than nationally. How unfair are steps to reduce vehicle emissions that carry these severe health effects?

Given the public's desire to see something done about traffic congestion, opponents will also have to convince people suggest that they have a better idea.

Councilmember Weprin called for "simple traffic mitigation alternatives to reduce congestion," but the city has made major avenues one-way, timed signals to maximize traffic flow, restricted turns and taken numerous other auto-friendly steps. Will the public buy the idea that a few more tweaks will significantly reduce congestion, especially in light of the anticipated city's growth?

Congestion pricing clearly faces an uphill climb. But the more New Yorkers understand the benefits of the mayor's entire plan, the more support congestion pricing is likely to increase.

Bruce Schaller, who has been in charge of the transportation topic page since its inception in 1999, is head of Schaller Consulting, which provides research and analysis about transportation. He is also a Visiting Scholar at the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University. 

Taking on the Traffic


There are powerful economic reasons for adopting Mayor Michael Bloomberg's congestion pricing policies. Thirty five years ago, I wrote a plan for the Lindsay administration that included tolls across the East and Harlem rivers. But to avoid the political heat of instituting tolls, our congressional leaders proposed to meet federal Clean Air Act's requirements to reduce auto use by making a serious commitment to capital financing for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. However, the investment of $40 billion in transit has demonstrated that transit improvements alone do not sufficiently curb auto use.

Now, 35 years later, we finally have a mayor with the insight and guts to take on the "elephant in the room" -- our failure to charge drivers more than a fraction of the costs they impose by using their cars. Motorists who gripe about raising their cost to drive don't appear to realize that car and truck travel create huge public costs-lost productivity from congestion, traffic accident costs not covered by insurance, environmental damage, air and water pollution and noise.

This is not trivial. In the New York metropolitan area, the costs related to cars and trucks total more than $40 billion annually. Every time someone drives into Manhattan it costs the rest of us $30.

The addition of the million more residents and 750,000 more workers envisioned by plaNYC will increase car and truck use by 2 million trips a day in New York City and add millions of daily riders to our subway system. Accommodating this growth will take billions of dollars of investment. It will cost even more if we are to meet the mayor's goal of cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 30 percent.

At the same time, auto-centric mega-development like Gateway Center and Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn and the Bronx Terminal Market will further clog our roads and subways. New York can do better. The plan that I proposed 35 years ago recommended creating what we then called "urban activity centers." These were to be new communities within New York City where people could live, work, shop and play within walking distance without having to drive or even depending on transit. Cobble Hill in Brooklyn is such a community. Bloomberg's plaNYC overlooks this approach to real sustainability.

The other key to a successful plaNYC is congestion pricing. While the system the administration has proposed is unnecessarily complex and costly, those features are negotiable. What is important is that we finally have a mayor with the vision and persuasiveness to embolden timid elected officials to see the true equity of congestion pricing and give it a try. This took great courage.

Motorists cannot defend getting a free ride into Manhattan and imposing huge costs on everyone else, including other drivers stuck in traffic. Congestion pricing is the only fair way to level the playing field. It is also one of the few ways left to secure funding to expand and improve public transit.

Brian Ketcham is a traffic engineer who lives in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn.

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years