>> Tonight, congestion pricing.

Starting next spring driving into Manhattan will cost you, and with the future in the balance and the pros and cons of the been are debated, MetroFocus starts right now.

♪ >> This is "MetroFocus," with Rafael Pi Roman, Jack Ford, and Jenna Flanagan.

MetroFocus is made possible by The Peter G. Peterson and Joan Ganz Cooney Fund.

Filomen M. D'Agostino Foundation.

Barbara Hope Zuckerberg.

And by Jody and John Arnhold.

Dr. Robert C. and Tina Sohn foundation.

The Ambrose Monell Foundation.

Estate of Roland Karlen.

>> Good evening and welcome to MetroFocus.

I am Rafael P were among.

-- Is said to become a reality.

If it does, drivers going to certain parts of Manhattan will have to pay for the privilege.

There is still many details that need to be worked out for the policy goes into effect.

For example, how much will motorists be charged?

Who if anyone will be exempted from paying?

And where will the revenues go to?

Joining us now to discuss and debate as hard as you are the Staten Island borough president who was supposed to congestion pricing plan.

A Monty Williams who supported, and journalist Ben Max who has been covering the story from every angle as host of the podcast.

Pleasure to have you here is always.

Ben, let me start with you.

I wonder if you could give us some of the basic facts about the congestion pricing plan.

I know they have not been finalized, but to the degree that you know.

Exactly what part of Manhattan will it cost more to drive into under the plan.

How much will it cost, and what are the expected benefits that congestion pricing will bring to the city?

>> So we are still waiting on some of the details as you mentioned, and there is a board in charge of setting the rates and they could be quite variable.

There are a lot of different ways to design a program like this, but they are expecting the toll to be between nine dollars and $23 with a lot of variation in that they could be based on time of day, day of the week, type of vehicle and much more.

The toll will be in place in Manhattan south of 61st St, so 60th St and southward will not catch drivers on the east or west side highways, but once drivers enter the core of the Manhattan business district it will charge them either through their EZ pass or by sending a bill in the mail by registration.

In terms of the benefits expected, it is aimed to first and foremost produce revenue to help the MTA to help with its plan to go toward mass transit and other uses.

Less congestion, less traffic, helping those drivers that do wind up on the road to move quicker and help the buses move along as well, and with less traffic and less congestion cleaner air for people to breathe and more space to get around.

>> One quick question.

The people who live in the area, are they exempt or if they go in and out will they have to pay as far as we know?

>> There are dozens and dozens of requests for the board in charge of coming up with the details to provide exemptions, so we are still waiting to see what the full exemption system is going to be.

There are a lot of voices you want exemptions and there are people who say the more exemption to give the higher the overall toll will be for those who pay.

Inside the zone right now we expect people will get rebates if they make $60,000 per year or less, and that is all we know right now.

People will have to pay once they come back into the zone.

>> You are one of the key players still hoping that this will never come to pass.

You are still fighting it, but if as promised the plan reduces congestion, improves air quality while reducing the city's carbon footprint and creates a dedicated source of funding for public transportation, why do you want to stop it?

>> So just a little history I think has to be in order, and that is Staten Island, one looks at the MTA for the systemwide map to give a glaring illustration.

The city and region has a solid footprint of subway systems, Metro-North and the railroad, and on Staten Island you have a little train, and I use that to save over the years, 30, 40, 50 the MTA has not made adequate investments in Staten Island for mass transit options for residents and commuters which is why Staten Islanders are so car dependent.

Currently if you work in Manhattan and you do not have the option of a bus, you have to drive, and you have to pay a toll on the bridge and you have to pay a toll at the tunnel, so we remain the only borough in the city of New York that you have to pay a toll to go on and off the island in every direction, but more specific here with respect to this plan, the MTA was required to do a study on a number of what is called dangerous gases and toxins, and in each one of those they had to do a baseline with 2023, 2024 and they project out to the year 2045.

In each instance the air on Staten Island will get worse under the proposed congestion pricing plan, and traffic will get worse according to their own study, so if you back up a step.

We have to pay once, twice, and a third time.

You will decrease the quality of air for many people on Staten Island, and it will add more traffic.

We do not want it to succeed in its current form.

>> I would like you to respond to what the borough president said, especially to his basic point, which seems to be congestion pricing is not going to eliminate congestion or air pollution.

It will only redistributed to Staten Island and others are due to mostly poor neighborhoods of color around the city.

Tell us why?

>> I am proud to have been supporting this.

Thankfully it has gained popularity, but even when it first came out not so much but I was supporting it even then, even though I come from a car centric district.

We also live in a city that does not want so much congestion.

We are mad at the congestion, the traffic, and what is happening with climate change, so what I have seen it what I know from people in general is they want things to change.

They just do not want it to change around them.

It is important we take these things and do the changes equitably as possible.

I do not want to speak for the borough president but my guess is the borough president would not support any congestion plan regardless of what the studies show, because there are people who just do not want it to happen.

In terms of Staten Islanders I think there should be a particular discount for Staten Islanders because of the bridge.

When you start giving exemptions that loophole gets very very large, and for the reasons that I mentioned at the top of my response, we have to move forward with this.

I too have had reservations and hope when the answer and for response comes from the MTA they would have addressed some of the issue you are bringing up, particularly the ones that say we may have higher traffic in particularly black, brown, working communities and people who were trying to avoid the toll, because that is something we do not want to happen.

We cannot so this down because of all of the things we spoke about before, and it is way past its time.

>> Would you like to respond?

Would you be against any plan whatever the study said?

>> I think that is too broad of a blanket statement, because under the right set of circumstances who knows?

I might be open to it, but we do not have a choice right now, and I want to expand on what I said before is that we have issues with asthma and respiratory illnesses that are documented by the city Department of Health among others that these areas have Staten Island are already worse than in most of the city and they project that they will get worse, so I just do not get it.

Fast-forward, and this is my experience.

I will lend and predict what will happen is what will happen if this gets into play and the MTA will get its money.

It will take the position that we have to invest in existing infrastructure and double down.

I am not being critical of them for Wendy to do this, by the way, or winning the money but they will prioritize existing train routes, subway systems, and once again, Staten Island does not have much of that.

Whenever the money comes out, we are not going to see it.

So we are going to pay for it.

It is going to get worse, and you allude to it they are saying traffic on Staten Island, which is already bad, it will get worse, so how in good conscience under the set of circumstances should we intentionally say we are OK with it?

I just do not see.

For example, and other parts of the city where they recognize there may be issues with the air quality, mitigation with the money that has been spread around.

We have not seen a penny.

On so many different levels we feel very strongly that this current plan does not benefit the people of Staten Island.

>> Mr. Williams, a lot of the people who support congestion pricing have the same concern just outlined, and you do as well that the money is not in effect sent to those transportation deserts and many poor neighborhoods are also transportation deserts, and some poor neighborhoods are not transportation deserts but they need extra help, and even some of the MTA board members are concerned about that.

How do you address that?

>> I absolutely do have some of those concerns and even places like the Bronx that have some of the highest asthma rates in the country, and I also come from a district that is transportation starved.

Not as much a Staten Island.

There are major concerns that are correct.

I would love for the borough president and others to say if there is a plan that you could possibly support.

What does that look like?

Because maybe we can aim toward that.

What are the set of circumstances that would make it acceptable and we can start from there, and there is a concern about where the money will go.

Those things are always concerns, but what we do know right now is we cannot accept the way traffic patterns are in New York City and what comes with that and the lack of investment in mass transit.

The vast majority of people, that go into the city every single day do that by mass transit, because they cannot afford a vehicle and cannot afford to pay parking.

I just want to be clear about who we are talking about because sometimes those issues get conflated.

If you can drive in, there may have to be an additional fee for the privilege to be able to drive in during the day during peak times.

>> According to the MTA itself, they have been losing more than $600 million per year because of out-of-control fares on the buses and subways.

Do you agree with those who argue the MTA should not get one more penny of revenue until the MTA deals with this along with the Manhattan D.A.

and NYPD?

>> I think it is very fair point.

You have someone who comes to you and says I need $100 and they have wasted 90 and they keep asking you for more money, and they say timeout.

Why don't you just try to get the money that you were old already before you come back to me to arrest me for more money?

And I appreciate what the public view was coming from.

Tell us the plan that you want.

We sit here today.

The MTA other than just a couple of conversations have not asked us what they want to develop.

They know what they want to do.

They have it in their mind of what they're going to do, and frankly, as of now, and I recognize -- represent have a one million people on Staten Island.

I have not been given one reason to support this on their behalf.

You make a very valid point of why would you go after seeking more money when there is a bunch of money sitting at the table, and by the way, they say we will get all of this money from congestion pricing so fare evas ion is less of a priority.

I do not like making predictions, but whatever the initial cost is, the fee will jump dramatically over the next 5 to 10 years.

>> Mr. Williams, what is your take on the money the MTAs losing?

>> We lose money from cars who do not pay tolls as well.

We sometimes focus on mass transit, but there is a lot of money lost from the transportation system that we should try to secure, but I want to be clear.

Mass transit is a service, so we should figure out to reduce the need for people to obey, particularly working people.

The city does not operate, businesses do not succeed if we do not have a mass transit, so we should be trying to figure out how do we increase fair fa res, how do we decrease the fares working-class people pay?

That is the question we should be having.

One way we can do that is by resting.

Most of our conversations are around vehicles and cars, which carry the least amount of people , harm the most people, and have the most protection.

And that has the most infrastructure, so that is something we have to think about, and I am saying that as a driver and so that comes from a car-centric space in the city, but we have to look at this from a birds eye view.

>> Let's talk about congestion itself.

One of your Democratic colleagues made the point recently that congestion in Manhattan before Covid in 2019 when the law was passed was a lot different than congestion today after Covid.

He says that the biggest problem in Manhattan is repopulating it, the need to repopulate and get people back in the offices, get those businesses in Manhattan working again.

And he fears congestion pricing will create a disincentive for people to go back to work in a Manhattan, and he is suggesting a pause on this.

Your response?

>> That has not happened in other cities in the world that have done this.

If you go to Manhattan, you will see that there is pretty much congestion when it comes to cars, and I will add -- and this is part of the conversation, uber and lyft where huge part of pushing that congestion, and I do not think we are saying we will go back to five days a week and eight hours a day of people in offices.

We are trying to push hybrid so everyone in the city from Annette to Brooklyn to Staten Island can succeed locally and in the city.

What I think it would be a hard sell to say there is no congestion in the city and what those fumes bring, as well as there is not the need for the money that will come to be put in the mass transit system.

The more you will have people riding.

>> Let me get to Ben.

Maybe you have facts and figures.

Contrasting minute before and after Covid, that I can tell you from my perspective I think there is a lot more congestion in the part of Brooklyn that I live in, the Prospect Heights area, than there is where the station is located in midtown Manhattan.

>> I can say I do not know exactly about certain zones or geographies, that I can say the data certainly shows that driving around to the city is back at or above pre-pandemic levels, because there are people who got used to driving for whatever reasons during pandemic times and have continued to do so, or people have concerns about mass transit that have led them to driving or there are more of the for hire vehicles.

I do not think the council members point holds a lot of water in terms of congestion if you were trying to enhance economic activity.

Perhaps you do not want to create disincentives there, a part of the point of congestion pricing is to say if you absolutely necessarily have to drive, will have a good trip -- quicker trip to where you have to go.

This number sounds way too high to me but they are estimating a roughly 15% reduction in traffic in the congestion Joan.

I would be shocked if that comes to fruition, even an 8 to 10% reduction would be immense.

I think the public advocate and borough president right up really important points tickets to the fact that the state, the MTA, and the city are simply not giving enough of the things they could be doing to prepare the city for a congestion pricing program.

Now there are discussions to be had on Staten Island to about what are you willing to do to increase bus ridership and bus speeds?

How do you get people on the Staten Island ferry, which is free by the way.

I love riding it.

That is part of the discussion too.

How did we just four Staten Island islanders and others in the city to encourage more mass transit use and show people that this program is actually going to have the benefits that people wanted to have?

Right now it is a lot of quiet on that front, and that is why you get more and more people concerned about what this program will mean.

>> I want to move onto to another topic.

In July Governor Murphy of New Jersey sued the federal government over New York's congestion pricing plan, a plan that both Democrats and Republican politicians oppose in New Jersey because of the effect it has on New Jersey commuters coming to work mostly.

Why is the governor suing the federal government instead of Albany or the MTA?

What is the complaint of the suit and what is the remedy they see?

>> I do not have all of the legal arguments in my fingertips , but because the federal government has given the final sign off on the program and that is what moved it ahead, I believe that is the strategy.

It also could relate to getting certain friendly venues and courts, which is also a legal strategy, but the federal approval they came down was really the last big hurdle barring the lawsuits that are now in place.

Very quickly I wanted to add to the discussion from earlier about the MTA and the finances.

Most of the money from congestion pricing is supposed to go to the capital plan, which is as the borough president was saying, is for upkeep, it also re-signaling of the subways that existing, and part of the reason this passed is because the city and state were having problems finding the capital plan.

There are discussions to F about how wasteful the MTA is about the capital and operating side, and that should be part of this discussion as well, no question about it as the MTA is bringing in billions more for its capital plan, very important projects, there is lots of evidence the MTA is very wasteful.

>> Absolutely.

>> Staying on lawsuits, in July you also said you were planning to sue in your case the MTA over this congestion pricing.

What is the status of that lawsuit?

And what do you hope to achieve?

>> We are still pursuing it.

Those of you who have seen the study, almost 5000 pages, so we have been going through to identify what we think are our strongest legal arguments.

There are a couple of things that pop up in a useful conversation to have.

The people of Staten Island in the region would benefit from more conversations like this frankly.

Many years ago on the South Shore of Staten Island, the fastest growing area in the state of New York, and yet there were no express buses.

When we met at the time, we were told we did not have had --capacity.

It took years and years just to get a bus depot to accommodate us.

The people on Staten Island to have some of the longest commutes in the country, and the reason why they have some of the longest commutes in the country is because they do not have mass transit options.

The mass transit option should be divided by the MTA, and it has failed to do that, so I get back full circle.

Why would we encourage and support an entity that is denied Staten Island adequate options all of these years, and a very valid point about the Staten Island ferry being free, that is run by the city, the Department of Transportation.

That is not the MTA at all, so we have been given no assurances whatsoever that something is going to come and it is going to benefit us, if you will.

The Arizona toll implemented in 1964 is now one of the highest tools in the United States -- tolls in the United States.

You will drive people from Staten Island out.

Congestion in this area of Manhattan, Staten Island Expressway is a parking lot most of the day because of inadequate capital investment, so now we have congestion, but it does not matter.

Nobody is coming to us to say how can we help you with your congestion?

We just have to take it, and on so many different levels we have no reason to support this plan.

>> One quick question, if the lawsuit does not stop it working this, it does not look like anything is going to stop it realistically.

What is the alternative?

What is your game plan?

>> I would hope at this point that the MTA or somebody steps forward and says, you know what, we reviewed our own study and we realized Richmond County, otherwise known as Staten Island, is the only county in the region that will see a dramatic decrease in the quality of their not just in 2023 but it will get worse by 2045.

We see it in our own study that Staten Island's traffic will get worse in 2023 and will get even worse over the next 22 years.

Maybe we should sit down with the people of Staten Island and figure out a way to make it better or to bring them on board.

>> I went to get Mr. Williamson, your last point.

What will you be looking at it this is implemented to make sure it is working in about 20 seconds?

>> I am looking for some of the things that the borough president has brought up.

There are some valid points there, and they have not invested as much as Staten Island, and that should be part of conversation and they should be speaking to Staten Island.

My hope is they do that to answer some of the questions that they have, but from my point of view.

>> We will have to and that there because we are out of -- end it there because we are out of time.

Thank you for joining us today.

>> Have a good night.

>> MetroFocus is made possible by The Peter G. Peterson and Joan Ganz Cooney Fund.

Filomen M. D'Agostino Foundation.

Barbara Hope Zuckerberg.

And by Jody and John Arnhold.

Dr. Robert C. and Tina Sohn foundation.

The Ambrose Monell Foundation.

Estate of Roland Karlen.

♪