Traffic in New York City is more than an inconvenience. New York City continues to report increased end-to-end response times from the NYPD, NYFD, and EMS year after year. According to a statement from a City Hall spokesperson, this increase in response times is largely due to increased traffic congestion. The latest effort to combat congestion and improve air quality comes in the form of congestion pricing, a controversial tolling program that will charge drivers entering Manhattan below 60th Street. The toll, which would charge passenger vehicles 15 dollars a day, with a nighttime discount, has received criticism for a multitude of reasons. While there is much public outcry at the establishment of what many see as yet another fee to pay while trying to live and work in the city, the plan has other significant drawbacks as well. According to critics of congestion pricing, it is a textbook example of environmental racism. It is hard to disagree with their assessment.
According to the nonprofit environmental advocacy group NRDC, the Natural Resources Defense Council, environmental racism is defined as the intentional polluting of areas and communities that are primarily populated by non-white or lower-income people. This encompasses a wide range of things, from Loiusiana’s so-called “Cancer Alley,” an 85-mile stretch of majority Black and lower-income communities that has some of the highest cancer rates from air pollution in the country, to an oil pipeline being constructed just upstream of the Standing Rock Sioux’s main water supply, to lower-income neighborhoods having roughly 15% less tree coverage than higher-income neighborhoods nationwide. Congestion pricing is the next instance of the race and class divide in the USA.
The main problem with congestion pricing is that people who want to avoid tolls won’t necessarily avoid driving. The nearly 4,000-page environmental assessment released by the MTA in 2022 on congestion pricing raises concerns that once the tolls are enacted, drivers will instead reroute through the South Bronx and Staten Island to avoid the tolls in Lower Manhattan. While this may still improve air quality and reduce gridlock in Manhattan, it may shift the burden of pollution onto other boroughs. According to the environmental assessment, congestion pricing could lead to over 700 more trucks on the Cross Bronx Expressway daily, increasing overall truck soot by 5 percent. Given that the South Bronx already has disproportionately high asthma rates, experts have raised concerns that this change in traffic patterns will likely compound health risks for Bronx residents. Francesca Dominici, a professor of public health at Harvard, says that “the South Bronx is an area with already high asthma rates and other pre-existing conditions, [and] even a small increase in long term exposure to particulate matter will exacerbate these health [issues].”
In an effort to address some of these concerns, the MTA has promised at least 30 million dollars worth of investments in the Bronx for communities most negatively impacted by congestion pricing. While their anticipated 20 million dollar program to fight asthma and 10 million dollar program to install air filtration systems in schools near highways in an effort to lower exposure to pollutants is a step in the right direction, it does not fully address the root of the problem. There’s no doubt that asthma care is beneficial, but it doesn’t change the fact that someone has asthma. Air filters in schools are good preventative steps, but will they be installed in houses? What about businesses, or on the open street? Additionally, the MTA aims to collect 1 billion dollars in tolls from congestion pricing annually, but according to their latest statements and guarantees, only roughly 3% of these proceeds will help minimize the negative impact on the people who are footing the environmental bill for the plan.
Some critics of the measure argue that congestion pricing will disproportionately affect people in lower-income neighborhoods where public transportation isn’t as readily available as it is in Manhattan – neighborhoods that include Staten Island and the South Bronx. These residents often are left to rely on driving as an alternative to public transportation as a result of this scarcity, but now that, too, is being made less accessible. A lawsuit has been filed by Staten Island leaders and the United Federation of Teachers, complaining that the lack of a subway or commuter rail means that, by necessity, most residents drive to work. To try and address this issue, the MTA has announced toll subsidies for people who earn less than $50,000 annually. They will be charged half price once they’ve paid their first 10 congestion tolls each month in full. Residents of the congestion zone who earn less than $60,000 annually are also eligible to apply for a state tax credit.
Despite these adjustments, there are still concerns about the economic drain inflicted by the tolls. Some of these concerns have been raised by taxi and rideshare drivers and small business owners. Taxi and rideshare drivers, specifically, have more to worry about, as trip fares increase by $1.25 and $2.50 respectively for rides entering, leaving, or within the tolled area. The executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, Bhairavi Desai, warned that this increase in fares will “devastate an entire work force.” When viewed in conjunction with another congestion surcharge imposed on taxis in 2019, and with the fact that the MTA’s environmental assessment predicted that the fare increases could drop demand for for-hire vehicles by up to 17%, it’s no wonder that taxi and rideshare drivers are concerned about their futures.
As the plan was being developed, many groups argued the new tolls should not apply to them. Teachers, transit workers, utility companies, electric vehicle drivers, and more had been looking to get an exemption, but no such concessions were granted. Farmers have also been advocating that they should be exempt from the tolls. Complaining that the fees will adversely affect them and their ability to deliver food to Lower Manhattan, they have found support among some Republican lawmakers who argue that New York state already charges its farmers more than many other states. As Republican Assemblyman Joe Angelino, who is one of the supporters of exempting farmers from the tolls notes, it’s time for New York to start supporting their farmers.
Other criticism regarding congestion pricing has arisen within the GOP, which has included skepticism at the MTA’s motives in implementing the plan. Republican New York State Senator Steven Rhoads warns, “This isn’t about cleaner air, this isn’t about less traffic. This is about nothing more than money – money being thrown into the black hole that is the MTA.” In Long Island, Republican lawmakers are pushing for New York Governor Kathy Hochul to withdraw support for congestion pricing.
Much of this opposition is now taking place in the courts. New Jersey Governor Phillip D. Murphy has announced a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Transportation, attempting to delay congestion pricing by forcing the MTA to complete requirements that may take years to accomplish. The United Federation of Teachers, the Staten Island borough president, the Rockland County executive, and more have also filed lawsuits attempting to halt the finalization of congestion pricing. The trial for the case brought by New Jersey, which the New York Times considers to be “the most significant legal challenge,” is scheduled to start in early April. Governor Murphy argues that “You are not eliminating pollution, you are just displacing it from Manhattan to New Jersey,” echoing sentiments from South Bronx and Staten Island advocates. He has also criticized the program for unfairly affecting New Jersey residents by charging them a toll they won’t see the benefits of. The MTA has responded by pointing out that New Jersey collects millions from New York drivers on the New Jersey Turnpike and Garden State Parkway.
Despite the flaws in congestion pricing, it remains a good idea conceptually. It is a noble and important goal to reduce reliance on cars and reduce traffic to speed up buses and emergency response. The plan would also provide much-needed revenue that would help improve an aging transit system that desperately needs it. However, the way in which the MTA is going about its goal clearly has cons and would result in significantly negative impacts, especially on lower-income communities. Again, these goals are admirable – but congestion pricing may not be the way to reach them.
