The NY Times is also weighing in on all of the congestion alternatives: "You wouldn’t be able to hail a cab in Manhattan below 86th Street, where cabs would be allowed to pick up passengers only at taxi stands scattered throughout the area. You wouldn’t be able to drive in Manhattan on the 5th, the 15th or the 25th of every month if your license plate ends in a 5. And parking on the street would cost you as much as parking in a garage. These are some of the proposals under consideration by the state commission evaluating how best to combat traffic in Manhattan. The ideas may seem fanciful, futuristic or simply far-fetched."
All of which underscores what we have been saying ad nauseum: try any number of creative things before you tax the public more. And with all of the vitriol being leveled at the MTA isn't it ridiculous to give the agency another revenue stream? We're back to Melinda Katz's call for a more global approach to the problem.
Here's the relevant Katz passage: "THE MTA, IN CONTRADICTION TO ALL OF THEIR PUBLIC EXPRESSIONS ABOUT THE USE OF CONGESTION TAX REVENUES, IS PLANNING ON USING THESE DOLLARS FOR OPERATING EXPENSES. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE HAVE A FULL ACCOUNTING OF HOW CONGESTION TAXES ARE MEANT TO BE SPENT, AND THE METHOD FOR UTILIZING THESE FUNDS SHOULD BE MEMORIALIZED IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT."
More and more it looks as if the whole tax idea is about to die the death of a thousand cuts. Which means to us that it's time for a transportation alternative.