Gridlock Mike?

The NY Post editorializes today about the proliferation of government parking passes, and the contribution that the passes make to the city's traffic congestion problem. As the paper points out, "It's bad enough having the extra cars on the road, but the illegal parking can cause major tie-ups-not only wasting motorists' time, but also adding to the pollution that supposedly vexes Hizzoner so."

The Post also points out that the placardization of Manhattan, unlike his congestion pricing tax, is something that the mayor can do something about without having to wait for any legislative approval. His foot dragging on the issue, however, highlights the extent to which the administration is talking out of both sides of its mouth on the congestion tax issue.

Placards account for an additional 20,000 cars a day on the city streets and the mayor fails to act. Similarly, he continues to promote the building of malls and calls for the entry of box stores like Wal-Mart that are almost entirely auto-dependent.

If we are going to really promote sustainability, than we need a better plan than the current PlaNYC; one that looks at all of the city and not just the Manhattan that is the entirety of the Bloombergistas' vision. In order to get that plan, however, we need to defeat the current one so that we can examine PlaNYC for the flaws that it has already exhibited.

We do not need, as Newsday suggests editorially in today's paper, to rush ahead accepting the tendentious arguments of a NYC Partnership that is in the tank for the administration for clearly non-environmental reasons. And isn't it interesting that Newsday, which takes pro business stances about as often as the Times supports the Bushes, feels it can cite this one business group in support of the congestion tax. All of which makes it even more important to carefully analyze the mayor's plan, and not move forward so percipitously.