Congestion Pricing for NYC Is a Fraud - 80 Other Ways to Stop Traffic
Congestion [Carl E Person]

First Published 07/09/07 11:55 a.m. - last revision: 11/12/07 12:10 pm

Congestion Pricing Is a Tax on the Wrong People -- AND A FRAUD.

I'm a resident in the "congested area" as well as a motorist, and
have given much thought to the so-called congestion problem and the
currently-offered cure: "congestion pricing".

I have developed an extensive counter argument below, in 3 parts. The
first part gives some basic facts about NYC; the second part shows the
main causes of congestion and NYC's failure to deal with the obvious
cures for congestion; and the third part outlines some possible unintended
consequences which may result from congestion pricing.

However, before going into these matters, I want to discuss some
important matters: (i) the unconstitutionality of congestion pricing;
(ii) how the voters of NYC can undo any congestion pricing plan imposed
by NYC officials; (iii) the creation of 2 new types of jobs in NYC:
Intersection Controllers and Intersection Ticketers; (iv) appointment
of an investigative commission to look into the causes and cures for
traffic congestion in NYC; (v) a variant on "following the money" -
by that I mean follow specific vehicles during their movement in NYC to
actually estimate the amount of congestion they cause by the way in which
they move, park, stand, unload, load, wait, etc.; and (vi) Why should
the federal government offer NYC $350 million to impose a multi-billion
"congestion tax" on motorists? What is the federal government's interest?

1. A Constitutional Argument Against Congestion Pricing

When I first heard about the possibility of congestion pricing for NYC, my
first thought was that similar schemes for taxing outsiders have been held
unconstitutional. I'm thinking of the New Jersey beach access cases, such
as Borough of Neptune, 61 N.J. at 303, citing Brindley v. Lavallette, 33
N.J. Super. 344, 348-349 (Law Div. 1954), which held that it was illegal
for towns, boroughs or villages in New Jersey to charge higher beach
access fees to non-residents than were being charged to residents. The
theory was that beach access is a public trust and that the public at
large (not just local residents) have the right to use the beaches on
equal terms, so that discriminatory fees to discourage non-residents
were illegal.

You can view midtown and lower Manhattan as an economic and entertainment
"beach" or "oasis" luring millions of visitors during prime hours each
week, and that it is unconstitutional to charge them an additional fee
to visit the oasis, while the persons already within the oasis are not
required to pay the same fee. All this congestion pricing fee amounts
to is a discriminatory tax on non-residents, essentially, which should
be declared unconstitutional, as a denial of equal protection of law,
and as an unreasonable (unconstitutional) burden on interstate commerce.

2. NYC Voters Can Undo Congestion Pricing by Voter Initiative

New York voters have done very little over the years to defend their
interests against politicians who give away New York City and taxpayer's
money to the real estate interests and other vested interests, mainly
the interests who put up the huge funds needed to win election campaigns.

New York State is not fortunate to have much in the way of voter rights,
particularly the rights of impeachment, recall, initiative and referendum,
but cities, towns, villages and possibly counties in New York State have
the right to pass laws under Section 37 of the New York Municipal Law (or
as to NYC, sometimes under Section 40 of the New York City Charter). Thus,
if voters in The Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island and the upper
part of Manhattan (north of 86th Street) feel that congestion pricing is
outrageous and discriminatory against them, they can put a NYC proposed
statute on the ballot during general elections and obtain enactment of
the proposed statute by a simple majority of the voters. This process
is called a voter "initiative" to enact legislation, and it is a most
powerful weapon for voters. I wrote the petition for a current voter
initiative to set up a Commission to Investigate 9/11 with the power
of subpoena, and to name me as the New York City Attorney General, to
enforce the Commission's subpoenas and, quite independently, to finance
the work of the Commission pursuing litigation for NYC, and to enforce
the rights of New York residents, voters, homeowners, workers and small
business persons at public expense, such as the right not to have their
jobs sold out from under them and the right to acceptable air quality,
and the right of 9/11 first responders to obtain appropriate relief. A
copy of the petition is available at Website with Copy of Petition for
9/11 Initiative. A copy of a petition to create a NYC Attorney General
with subpoena power (but without a 9/11 Commission) can be seen at 29 NYC
Ballot Initiatives for Use as Forms for Any City, Town or Village in NYS.

One of the most interesting things about this initiative process (similar
to the "referendum" process in other states, including California),
is how it contrasts with the process for electing candidates to public
office. We know that candidates make promises, convince voters to vote
for them, and then never fulfill or even try to fulfill their promises
after they are elected. We are used to that, but fall for the same ruse
over and over again. The difference with the initiative or referendum
process is that if the voters vote for it, they get whatever it is they
voted for! That's an amazing thing to happen in this era of wholesale
voter fraud by the candidates and their handlers. Although you won't get
lower taxes when you vote for a candidate who promises to lower your
taxes, you and the candidate realize that this could be the case. The
one candidate does not have the power himself/herself to lower taxes. It
takes a cooperative effort. So the politicians when running for office
cooperate with each other by lying all over the place about what they
plan to do, and then when the election is over the winners then proceed
to do almost anything but try to enact what they promised the voters.

With congestion pricing, we can overturn it at the ballot box, not by
voting for a different mayor or city council membership, but by voting
for an initiative which declares congestion pricing to be illegal,
or not to be used in NYC.

Also, we can do the same as to other rules and regulations which are
detrimental to voters, such as the proposed rule that would require a
video or camera team to have insurance (costing tens of thousands of
dollars) if they set up to shoot on a public sidewalk or street for 10
minutes or more. This would prohibit anyone from obtaining pictures of
disasters or police brutality, which perhaps is why the rule is being
proposed.

Also, we can pass one or more NYC statutes to cure many of the
government-created causes of traffic congestion. See the list below.

3. 2 New Types of Job in NYC - Intersection Controllers and Intersection
Ticketers

One last point before going to my list below. My car has been heating up
because of getting stuck in traffic in NYC and I've had a lot of time
to observe how some congestion could easily be eliminated. Just today
(when writing this web page), it took me 30 minutes to travel about 25
blocks heading south on Fifth Avenue, in the 50's through 30's, yet
when I looked ahead I saw that there were no cars for about 6 blocks
ahead. The reason for this is that buses, trucks, taxis and cars going
cross town (from east to west or from west to east) were moving into
the intersection and stopping there, so that the southbound traffic
(including my car) couldn't move.

All it would take is human beings to control the intersections (and have
one or more other persons available at the intersection to issue tickets
when appropriate or perhaps be able to impound the car for a penalty
1/2 hour or full hour). It is possible to stop vehicles from entering an
intersection when it is clear that the vehicles have no room on the other
side to get out of the intersection. Who would we get to do this, and
what would be the cost? What is the cost, by the way, of not doing this?

The cost of this artificial traffic congestion we are experiencing is in
the hundreds of billions of dollars, of pollution effects, higher gas
prices, higher vehicle repair costs, asthma and other health related
costs, and the waiting time (such as my waiting time of about one hour
on Sunday, August 12, 2007). I am only one of 1,000,000 persons each day
who have to wait an unnecessary hour or two by reason of the NYC "traffic
congestion". Let's assume for the sake of argument that we have 1,000,000
hours per day times 365 days per year, for a total of 365,000,000 wasted
hours per year (times 2 for an average of two occupants in the car),
which amounts to a loss of $100 per hour, or a total loss of $36.5 billion
($36,500,000,000).

Now, let's see who is available to do this work. There are about 10
avenues in Manhattan, and about 100 cross streets needing "Intersection
Controllers" (a name I'll give to this new group of workers), for a
total of 1,000 intersections (100 times 10).

At $10/hour per intersection controller, the cost would be $10,000 per
hour, or $100,000 per 10-hour day, or 36,500,000, which is about 1/1000
of the loss-of-time cost, which seems like a pretty good bargain.

Is there anyone in New York who would like to get a job for $10/hour,
especially as a "law enforcement official"? Many retired persons
might like the job; many unemployed persons might also like the job;
many persons who are losing their homes and who can't pay their credit
cards might like the job; many students might like the job to be able
to pay school expenses; many public-assistance recipients might like
the work. And then we have our local courts pumping out jail sentences
so that the upstates existing (and planned) jails will remain full,
as NYC's contribution to the economic well-being of upstate NY, to
help them pay the NYC congestion pricing tax to some extent. Why not
use non-violent prisoners who have been sentenced by our local courts
to do this job. We already have them emptying garbage cans in the area;
perhaps we should stick a red flag on the end of their broom and convert
them into Intersection Controllers, and leave the garbage pickup to the
Sanitation Department.

Let's look at the cost and savings relating to use of a single
Intersection Controller. If the Intersection Controller is paid $10 for
one hour's work, he/she might be able to save the occupants of 50 cars
(or 100 persons) an hour each of their time, for a saving of 100 hours of
time. At $50 per hour in value, we can save $5,000 per hour in time at a
cost of $10 in labor. If one ticket per hour is issued by the accompanying
Intersection Ticketer (another type of job), for a fine of $100 (for
blocking the intersection), such single ticket per hour (issued to the
worst offender, and not intended to be a program to ticket everyone),
would produce revenues of about $60 per controlled intersection in excess
of the $20 labor cost (building in $20 for ticket non-payment and costs of
administration of the ticketing process). Thus, the cost of eliminating
or substantially eliminating perhaps the greatest contributor to the
congestion problem would be less than zero (if you disregard the revenue
NYC would lose from creating and maintaining the congestion problem).

Also, as a highly beneficial by-product, the intersection controller
would be able to stop pedestrians from standing in driving lanes;
and crossing a street when the light is yellow or red. In addition,
the Intersection Controller would be able to speed up both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic by disabling (or disregarding) the traffic lights and
directing traffic using techniques designed to maximize the flow of both
vehicles and pedestrians as to all directions of traffic.

New York Port Authority Should Immediately Employ Intersection Controllers
at Its Intersections

The New York Port Authority should immediately implement this website's
suggestion that Intersection Controllers be hired, for the intersections
between the Lincoln Tunnel (or its approaches in Manhattan) and the
various vehicle entrances to the Port Authority buildings between 8th
and 9th Avenues, and 42nd through 40th Streets. It is outrageous that
the NYPA does not stop the cars and buses from blocking the various
intersections, especially the one at 9th Avenue and 40th Street, and
the 9th and 39th street approach to the outgoing Lincoln Tunnel.

4. Appoint a NYC Task Force on Traffic Congestion

Another thought. Why not have a task force on Traffic Congestion and
invite motorists in to explain how they see congestion occurring and
what they see can be done about it. Drivers in NYC, including myself,
can see what is happening and we should be given a chance to be heard,
and to recommend new rules to cure this "congestion", without imposing
the odius congestion pricing tax on motorists.

Do we need to have bus tours adding to the congestion in midtown
Manhattan? Do we need two lanes occupied by a truck hoisting a window
washer? Do we need delivery trucks during the congestion period? Can't we
tell people coming into Manhattan the best way to get to their destination
(identified by a EZ-Pass type device which can indicate the vehicle's
ZIP Code destination (and a printout at the toll booth telling the driver
the best way to avoid congestion on his/her way to the destination?

Also, have you ever heard of any prior NYC Administration placing a
parking lot in the middle of one of the avenues in Manhattan (or anywhere
else in the five Boroughs)? During October, 2007, I was driving down 9th
Avenue, south of 23rd Street, and saw a most amazing construction job
taking place. NYC was building a parking lot with meters in the middle
of 9th Avenue (in lane 2 of the 5 lane avenue, counting from east to
west). The new parking lot extends to about 17th Street. Unbelievable! But
fully understood as just another means by which NYC creates the congestion
deliberately, for the purpose of being able to enact a congestion pricing
tax. We can't let NYC get away with this.

5. Track Specific Vehicles in NYC to Estimate Their Contribution to
Congestion

One frequent way for police to solve a crime is to "follow the money". To
some extent, congestion is caused by crime - the failure of drivers and
pedestrians to obey rules designed to benefit the majority, beause of the
immediate gain in saving of time and/or money resulting from individual
drivers and pedestrians disobeying the rules. So, why not follow a number
of these violators, to see how much each of them contributes to traffic
congestion in NYC. This could show that we are attempting to penalize
the wrong people.

We should actually follow (without disclosing this) specific selected
vehicles during their movement in NYC to actually estimate the amount of
congestion they cause by the way in which they move, park, stand, unload,
load, wait, etc. I would take 3 specific Gray Line NYC Sightseeing Tour
buses; 10 yellow cabs (i.e., cabs with medallions); 3 black cars (taxis
licensed by the NYC TL&C without a yellow-cab medallion); 5 NYC buses
(different routes); 20 large delivery trucks and 20 small delivery
trucks (covering different industries); 3 pedicabs and 1 octopus
bike used simultaneously by up to 7 peddle-pushers; 30 non-commercial,
private vehicles and 10 private limousines; 10 police cars and 5 Cushman
scooters (from different precincts); 6 NY Police Dept. towing trucks
(from different areas or home bases); various construction vehicles such
as cranes and materials delivery trucks; and 3 sign rigging trucks (from
the largest sign rigging companies). The information to be collected
should include alternatives that were available but not used by the
vehicle driver being followed. Let the results be given to economists,
business professors and business students to analyze what such information
reveals about the causes and cures for NYC's "congestion" problem. We
should be able to determine a substantial part of the causes and cures
of NYC's "congestion" problem in this way.

6. Why Should the Federal Government Offer NYC $350 million to Impose
a Multi-Billion "Congestion Tax" on Motorists? ANSWER: to turn the
Transportation System over to private enterprise for their ownership
and profit as a monopoly.

The 8/14/07 New York Post, at page 2, in a story entitled "DECONGESTION! -
Feds OK $350M for mass transit but tie it to midtown toll plan". What
is the federal government's interest in having New Yorkers pay an
increased tax? Why does NYC have to be bribed to impose the tax if the
tax is so good for New Yorkers? The U.S. Department of Transportation is
announcing the grant on the same day, in Washington, D.C. The grant falls
short of the $536 million that Mayor Bloomberg sought from the Feds,
but the $350,000,000 is amount is sufficient, according to the NYPost,
to convince NYS lawmakers to approve the project.

Why do New York State lawmakers have any say in the amount of tolls on
NYC's roads, and who gets this money? Does NYS take any part? If so,
why and for what? The Feds apparently are insisting that there be an
express bus lane built over the East River, according to one "source"
(apparently in the federal DOT). The next step, according to the NYPost,
is that a 17-member commission will study ways to decreate traffic,
including congestion pricing. I hope they take a look at this website,
because congestion can be eliminated in the same way that it is being
caused, by NYC government action. Finally, the NYPost article states
that the Commission's findings must be approved by the Mayor and City
Council before going back to the NYS Legislature for a vote by March
31, 2008. What would happen if NYC voters reversed the Mayor and City
Council by passing a ballot initiative withdrawing NYC's approval for
congestion pricing? See point 2 above entitled "NYC Voters Can Undo
Congestion Pricing by Voter Initiative".

In answer to the question of why the feds are getting involved, my
conclusion is that they are doing it for no legitimate reason. Or to
put it another way, the federal government appears to be creating a
means for consolidating into PRIVATE OWNERSHIP the northeastern corridor
transportation and eliminate local and state boundaries and interests in
this for-profit transportation grab. Remember the book Confessions of
a Hit Man by the former head of the World Bank, who confesses that the
U.S. government policy was to put third-world countries into default
and have private enterprise in the U.S. take over ownership of their
natural resources. Now, the federal government seems to be doing something
similar in the U.S. The Feds are merely acting for the private interests
waiting to come in and own and profit from the consolidated transportation
system. The Feds mislead the public by conveniently overlooking that there
is no real congestion; it is congestion created by government to increase
federal governmental authority over local and state interests, to be able
to hand the transportation system over to private interests. The Feds
will be as successful with regional transportation policy as they have
been in trying to put New Orleans back together again after Katrina. The
fact that Singapore and London have imposed congestion pricing doesn't
mean we have to do the same in NYC.

For more information see Regional Planning Association Website,
the Regional Planning Association functioning as a behind-the-scenes
government.

Another Swindle similar to the "Security Prosperity Partnership of
North America"

If you think that the present federal government is not attempting to give
away your country to private interests, take a look at this "government"
website created and owned by private, undisclosed interests: Security
Prosperity Partnership of North America Website, the primary focus of
which faceless group is to create, own and run the "The Trans-Texas
Corridor of the NAFTA Super Highway", under construction now, part of a
NAFTA super highway, running from Mexico, through Texas and north through
states north of Texas, into Canada, as a privately-owned toll road,
presumably being built with non-American (lower-cost) labor and materials,
with the highway being owned by the King of Spain, Juan Carlos. For
more information read Human Events Article by Jerome R. Corsi entitled
"Texas Segment of NAFTA Super Highway Nears Construction".

For forther information see the Regional Planning Association's website
at Regional Planning Association Website.

Incidentally, Rudy Giuliani (through his Texas law firm, Bracewell and
Giuliani) is promoting the interests of the SSP. At Rudy Giuliani's
Interest in the Security Prosperity Partnership, it was stated:

    Guess who's company is involved in lobbying for
    the Texas segment of NASCO? Rudi Giuliani's Texas
    lawfirm, Bracewell and Giuliani! See their press release,
    http://www.bracewellgiuliani.com/ind...d_in_Texas.cfm. See also:
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=55695

Now, that I've thrown out these ideas, here is more information about
the alleged congestion problem.

Part I - Basic Facts about NYC

There are 18,000 miles of highway with parking potential (after
eliminating more than 1,000 miles of "arterial highways"). [See
http://bikeroute.com/NBGBikingCities/NewYorkCity/NYCBiking.php] There
is a potential, at 50% utilization, for parking to accomodate 8 million
cars at any one time. In contrast, NYC maintains only 62,000 single-car
parking meters.

There were 1,653,193 "standard series" (i.e, passenger-car) vehicle
registrations in force during 2006 and a total of 1,833,370 vehicles of
all types (including standard, commercial, trailer, motorcycle, moped,
bus, taxi, ambulance, rental and farm). These are figures published by
the NYS Department of Motor Vehicles.

About 310,000 cars (including taxis) come into the congested area of
Manhattan each day through one of the free bridge crossings or one of the
toll bridges or tunnels. An additional number of cars (guesstimated by
me to be an additional 30% also come into such area, through the Bronx),
for total of about 400,000 cars each day (including taxis). Taxis often
make multiple trips, and I’m going to assume that 25% of the 400,000
cars are taxis, so that only 300,000 cars enter Manhattan each day for
which parking is needed.

"There are over 2,000 garages and lots
licensed by DCA in New York, and over 305,000 spaces."
[http://webdocs.nyccouncil.info/attachments/60313.htm?CFID=2505020&CFTOKEN=99659943]
I think it is a safe assumption to say that most of these 305,000 parking
lot spaces are in the congested area. Let’s assume 60%, or about 180,000
of these spaces. [The NYC Department of Consumer Affairs licenses parking
lots and should be able to provide an accurate figure.]

With all of these facts, it seems to be simple to conclude that NYC
could find ample parking and eliminate congestion without imposing the
planned congestion pricing tax. The congestion pricing plan is actually
a fraud. NYC has the ability to cure congestion in a variety of ways. I
explain what these ways are in Part II below.

History of Congestion Pricing:

London - started at 5 pounds (@ $1.58 = $7.90), and now increased to 8
pounds = $14.64, with additional increases undoubtedly coming.

Effort by NYC to obtain $500 million federal grant, or so it is
claimed. Who is the federal bureaucrat making such enormous decisions
for the people of NYC? Or is NYC creating a false sense of urgency by
getting a federal official to create a sham deadline for NYC action?

REAL PURPOSE:

To place an unfair tax on motorists and consumers who would be most
directly affected by the congestion pricing, through payment of the
additional prices to enter NYC and to pay a higher amount for goods that
are trucked in to mid-Manhattan. Also, the purpose is to drive middle
class and lower-class residents out of NYC, and increase the occupation
of NYC by the wealthy corporations and their officers, directors and
employees, for whom the added expense would be a minor deductible expense.

Part II. - Numerous Ways to Cure the "Congestion" Problem without Taxing
Motorists

The current proposal to adopt congestion pricing - $8 for cars and $21
for trucks -- estimated $500,000,000 per year - South of 86th Street
between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Alleged Purpose: to reduce traffic in lower Manhattan; obtain up to
$500,000,000 in Federal funds; and obtain additional revenues for NYC
from the persons least able to pay, without calling such revenues taxes.

The causes of congestion should not be blamed on the motorists who drive
to, from and within NYC. There are perhaps 70 to 100 other reasons,
a number of which I outline below. By dealing with the problems below
directly, we can get at the causes of congestion, rather than imposing
a tax on motorists coming into NYC (similar to NYC's effort to tax
commuters).

Causes of Congestion:

      A.. Buildings/Construction (8)

   1. New buildings that don’t provide sufficient in-building parking
   for the tenants 2. New buildings adding to people congestion in the
   area 3. New building construction blocking lanes 4. Stopping traffic
   to speed up construction 5. Double-parking line of construction trucks
   for excavation removal 6. New buildings that eliminate some roadways
   7. Stationing a sizeable sign-installation truck (with 2 stabilizing
   extensions) in 1.5 lanes of the 5-lane 9th Avenue (at the NW corner
   of 55th Street) during the entire work day on or about July 19, 2007
   to enable a single window washer to be elevated throughout the day to
   each floor of the 12-story building where he carefully cleaned each of
   the approximately 100 windows on the 9th Avenue side of the building,
   thereby imposing congestion on motorists while saving money for the
   building owner and window-washing trucker 8. Metropolitan Lumber's
   continual use of 11th Avenue and 45th Street in the loading and
   unloading of a fleet of trucks throughout the day, causing a loss of
   lanes, 2 bottlenecks, and a buildup of traffic at the bottlenecks,
   thereby saving money for Metropolitan and its construction company
   customers by enabling Metropolitan to use 11th Avenue and 45th Street
   as an integral part of its construction materials distribution business
   without being required to rent the necessary space, which creates
   daily congestion and loss of time for NYC motorists, and "justifies"
   NYC adding a "congestion pricing" tax to such innocent motorists,
   and doing nothing at all to cure the real cause of such congestion.

      B.. NYC – Failures - NYC Failures Having Greatest Impact on NYC
      Congestion (29)
   9. Failure to appoint anyone to try to reduce congestion in other ways
  10. Failure to view congestion as a bureaucracy-building opportunity
  to solve the congestion problem in available ways other than by
  creating a bureaucracy to raise additional taxes from hapless
  motorists 11. Failure to have an investigation by a NYC agency or
  official into the causes of congestion 12. Failure to reduce the
  required 15-foot no-parking zone on either side of NYC’s 108,000
  hydrants to 7.5 feet on either side, thereby losing 15 x 108,000 or
  1,720,000 feet of parking space, which at 16 feet per car (enough
  space for medium-size cars) amounts to a loss of parking for 107,500
  cars. Note: "Australian cities such [as] Adelaide allow parking
  within one metre [i.e., 3 feet, 3.4 inches from the] fire hydrant
  – plenty [of] room [for the] burliest firefighters [to] get through."
  [http://www.urban-renaissance.org/urbanren/index.cfm?DSP=content&ContentID=8914]
  13. Failure to move fire hydrants to end of block where there would be
  no parking on the intersection side of the hydrant, thereby saving 15
  feet of parking space times 108,000 fire hydrants, enough for 107,500
  cars 14. Failure to reduce the typical distance of perhaps 22 feet
  between NYC’s estimated 62,000 "single-space" parking meters to 16
  feet, thereby obtaining as much as 1,000,000 feet of additional parking,
  for approximately 23,250 medium-size cars (at 16 feet per car). Cars
  unable to fit in these smaller spaces would have to find commercial
  parking, which would be a major inducement for NYC residents to switch
  to smaller vehicles 15. Failure to optimize the number of parking
  spaces on each block by adjusting the size of each space taking into
  account driveways, fire hydrants (repositioned to the end of each
  block), and an emphasis upon smaller spaces at a suggested ratio of
  3 small spaces to every large space. As pure guesswork, this could
  create 50,000 more parking spaces in addition to the spaces discussed
  above 16. Failure to distribute government agencies and offices to
  other boroughs and other parts of Manhattan 17. Failure to provide
  means when cars/trucks enter NYC to have roadmap showing them the
  fastest (least congested) way to get to their destination, such as a
  printout showing best way to a specified ZIP Code in NYC, which ZIP
  Code could be provided by an EZ type pass transponder with the printout
  provided at the toll booth or to a receiving screen in the motorist’s
  vehicle 18. Failure to have a real-time warning and detour system to
  enable motorists to know where congestion, obstructions, and road or
  bridge closings exist and the best routes to avoid them 19. Failure
  to establish and maintain a system of traffic-obstacle/congestion
  reports and a publicly accessable website enabling motorists to get
  a printout of directions to their destination taking into account
  (i) the current obstructions and congestion, and (ii) anticipated
  congestion near any stadiums or Madison Square Garden when events
  are being held 20. Failure to enable Intersection Controllers or
  intersection police or a computerized means to temporarily change
  the setting of traffic lights at an intersection to enable the flow
  in a North or South direction to be increased by decreasing the East
  and West flow, or vice versa; the Intersection Controller could work
  more efficiently if he/she had the capability of changing the traffic
  lights to coincide with the controller's desired directions to drivers
  and pedestrians 21. Failure to allow 15-minute parking with headlights
  and flashers on at fire hydrants and driveways 22. Failure to paint
  a stripe on either side of NYC’s 105,000 fire hydrants to indicate
  the point up to which parking is or at designated time is legal (i.e.,
  15 feet away from a fire hydrant – outside edge or center?), thereby
  requiring most drivers to give excessive distance from the hydrant
  when legally parking - averaging about 4 feet – causing a loss of
  parking space amounting to 8 feet x 105,000 hydrants or 840,000 feet
  (which is about 160 miles of additional parking space, or space enough
  for 52,500 cars up to 15 feet in length with 1 foot of distance from
  the next car (which nearby car would also have 1 foot of space, on the
  average) 23. Failure to adopt meter and toll-booth pricing based on the
  length of the car, with the shortest cars (contributing the least to
  adverse air quality, traffic congestion and parking congestion) having
  low or no-fee rates, with the rates increased as the cars get longer
  24. Failure to adopt rush-hour congestion parking prices at municipal
  meters and parking-meter payment boxes to discourage feeding of the
  meters by local merchants and employees 25. Failure to identify road
  closings (such as for fairs, parades or emergencies) or bridge closings
  a sufficient number of blocks ahead of the closing to enable motorists
  to detour. Perhaps the fair industry should provide portable electric
  signs to be placed at strategic points around the fair-closed road(s) to
  warn and redirect motorists 26. Failure to have community, non-profit
  program for local or non-profit ticketing of intersection-rule
  offenders, with the ticketing proceeds to go for community improvements
  (through a democratic process involving voters and their preferences) or
  to non-profit organizations meeting specified standards 27. Failure
  to use congestion pricing in the public transportation system
  to lure motorists away from their vehicles 28. Failure to use
  satellite images, helicopters and strategically-placed traffic
  cameras to determine the place where stalled traffic begins, and to
  deal with the problem at the source. Often, you can identify this
  precise spot by seeing the point at which there is no traffic ahead
  (similar to the way traffic opens up after rubber-necking drivers
  pass a highway accident scene) and can resume their 70 MPH speed.
  29. Failure to provide free public transportation at all times or
  during designated hours (such as rush hours) to lure motorists away
  from their vehicles 30. Failure to limit pedestrians to first 33%
  of green-light time at intersections 31. Failure to have Intersection
  [traffic] Controllers to manage pedestrian movement at intersections
  [see no. 3 heading above for further development of this point,
  including the use of Intersection Ticketers - the proposed use would
  be mainly for vehicles.]  32. Failure to use municipal employees,
  welfare recipients, local residents and non-profit organizations to
  direct traffic at intersections 33. Failure to input into a computer
  database the existence of all traffic-obstructing situations such as a
  pothole, recent road repair with a barrier still obstructing traffic,
  lane or road closed for repairs – with follow-ups to ensure the
  barrier is removed on a timely basis. NYC failed to learn from the
  highly effective pothole registration activities of the NYS Trial
  Lawyers Association how timely reports on road conditions can be
  obtained and inputted, with the added feature of monitoring these
  traffic obstructions to do what is necessary to eliminate them (and
  their existence in the database) as quickly as possible
      B-23.. Failure to ticket all city-owned vehicles and require their
      drivers to personally pay for violating NYC’s parking laws,
      with free parking violation passes issued to a limited number
      (such as 150) NYC vehicles and distributed to the vehicles having
      the greatest need to violate the parking rules. Fire trucks,
      ambulances, police and other emergency vehicles would be exempt
      from parking tickets (without any such free pass) when the vehicles
      are actually being used for an emergency.
  34. Failure to use police or parking enforcement agents to direct
  traffic, especially at intersections; they are used instead
  to issue tickets which creates more congestion 35. Failure to
  eliminate free parking for NYC police, teachers, commissioners,
  assistant commissioners, their drivers, and others, and convert
  their existing parking spaces to public parking spaces 36. Failure to
  give bounty to NYC residents who issue tickets to motorists blocking
  intersections 37. Failure to use city-owned lots and other property
  for parking 38. Failure of NYC to require parking lots in proportion
  to traffic, while allowing additional buildings which add to the
  congestion 39. Failure by NYC to have incentives to convert unused
  land or condemned or uneconomic/unused buildings into parking places
  (through direct grants; faster approval for building permits; or other
  tradeoffs) 40. Failure to consider where NYC could and should set up
  free parking facilities in areas away from the traffic congested to
  encourage motorists to complete their trip to the congested area by
  means other than private motor vehicle

      C.. NYC - Failures - Lesser-Impact NYC Failures (4)

  41. Failure of police to pull to curb when stopping motorists
  42. Failure to remove traffic-blocking vehicles (even if by helicopter)
  from accident scene to a less-used location 43. Failure to have
  timed lights in proper order - should have private companies be
  able to compete for repair and use fines from citizen ticketing of
  intersection blocking to pay for private companies to fix on expedited
  basis 44. Failure to immunize from issuance of parking tickets to
  motorists who squeeze between two cars lawfully parked in two large
  metered parking spaces. The uncertainty of legality (both as to being a
  3rd vehicle and time running out on either or both meters) discourages
  such type of parking. This would free up an additional 4,000 parking
  spaces, it is guesstimated

      D.. NYC – Other (20)

  45. Tunnel congestion, cured by tunnel congestion pricing (lower or Zero
  prices during non-congestion periods) 46. Failing to provide for rapid
  dispersion of rush-hour traffic at streets and avenues nearest tunnel
  exits in NYC and exits in NJ 47. Unnecessary denial of standing or
  parking, which causes cars and trucks to be on the street instead when
  they desire to stand still 48. Overly aggressive parking enforcement,
  driving persons into moving traffic to avoid tickets 49. Street
  Fairs, not wanted by residents or local merchants 50. Bicycle lanes
  51. Ticketing productivity requirements causing slowdowns by reason
  of the slow-moving enforcement-related vehicles (police cars, police
  scooters, police bicycles, police horses, police vans, police unmarked
  cars, police yellow cabs, TLC enforcement vehicles, police tow trucks,
  and other enforcement persons looking for violations 52. Deliberately
  slowing down of traffic at NYC toll booths (in contrast to EZ pass toll
  collection at 65 MPH on New Jersey Turnpike) 53. Slow moving police
  and other enforcement vehicles causing backup of traffic behind them
  54. Towing of vehicles causing lane blockage for the circling of 1,000
  tow trucks, the hitching-up operations, and the tow itself 55. Free
  parking for NYC employees, police, school, others (which also reduces
  any desire for public servants to cure the congestion problem) 56. Motor
  vehicle traps causing lineups of vehicles 57. 16-car police convoys with
  flashing red lights tying up traffic each day 58. Building sites for
  non-New Yorkers to visit without providing sufficient parking (e.g., the
  Javits Convention Center) 59. Closing down Central Park to motor vehicle
  traffic 60. Road repair delays 61. Antiquated and broken traffic light
  systems 62. Total number of government vehicles on street 63. Parking
  NYC vehicles (e.g. garbage trucks along Amsterdam Ave. in 90’s)
  64. If a congestion plan is adopted, contrary to the best interests of
  New Yorkers, it should (i) remember that the London plan provided a 90%
  discount for London residents; (ii) give congestion-area motorists a
  100% (or $8) credit for taking the car outside of the congested area
  during the congestion period, and take away the credit if the car is
  brought back in to the congested area during the same congestion period

      E.. Cars/Trucks/Taxis/Pedestrians/Others (6)

  65. More and more residents occupying new and reconverted buildings –
  creating pedestrian/intersection congestion 66. Delivery trucks during
  rush hours instead of non-rush hours 67. Use of road by Pedicabs,
  horsedrawn carriages, and bicycles 68. Double and triple parking
  delivery trucks 69. Circling of cars to find parking 70. Circling of
  cars to avoid fines for "standing" or illegal parking

Part III - Unintended or Secretly-Desired Consequences of Congestion
Pricing

    * More parking available so fewer parking tickets and
    congestion-related moving violations (offsetting the dollar gains with
    dollar losses) * Would keep vehicles in areas (particularly The Bronx)
    where respiratory diseases including asthma exist to a substantially
    greater extent than in lower Manhattan * Additional vehicles will pour
    in anyway, so that nothing changes except a tax on cars and trucks,
    increasing the cost of living for those persons * Failure to impose
    congestion pricing on the real culprits (see Part II above) * NYC
    fails to get the $500 million from the Federal Government, or would
    have obtained such amount anyway, without imposition of congestion
    pricing * Avoids dealing with the real reasons for congestion and
    placing the blame on the wrong people to impose additional taxes on
    them instead of the public as a whole (or the major corporations that
    fail to pay their fair share of NYC taxes).  * Make lower Manhattan
    too costly for residents of NYC and thereby put a fence around lower
    Manhattan to discourage many New Yorkers and residents of Long
    Island, Westchester County and New Jersey from visiting, working
    or living in lower Manhattan * Maintaining the existing system of
    inadequate number of parking spaces to require motorists to double
    park, slowly circle the block, feed meters and create congestion
    while trying to find a parking place, and maintaining the motorists'
    exposure to various types of fines and towing charges, which is one
    of NYC's main purposes in not wanting to provide adequate parking
    for motorists and creating a sham "congestion" problem.

Carl E. Person, LawMall Editor, carlpers@ix.netcom.com