Weprin, Others Bash East River Tolls Idea
BY JOHN TOSCANO

City Councilmember David Weprin, joined by other public officials and community leaders, spoke out loud and clear last week against imposition of tolls on the four East River bridges.

Addressing his remarks at a City Hall rally to the New York City Traffic Mitigation Commission and its chairman, Marc Shaw, Weprin declared: "Charging a toll on any of the four bridges [is] equivalent to charging residents to cross the street, in this case a river."

Weprin (D- Hollis), a frequent critic of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's congestion pricing proposal, also called on city residents to reach out to their representatives, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and to Bloomberg's office to register their opposition to any bridge toll proposal.

"It doesn't matter if you come from Queens or not, you might even be from Brooklyn, Staten Island or even Manhattan- when it comes to implementing tolls on the East River crossings, we do a disservice to all New Yorkers. In essence, we are taxing our residents to drive within their own city," Weprin declared.

Supporting Weprin in his opposition to the tolls were Queens Borough President Helen Marshall, her Brooklyn counterpart, Marty Markowitz, and Councilmember Eric Gioia (D- Long Island City).

The latest campaign against charging motorists to drive across the Brooklyn, Manhattan, Williamsburg and Queensboro Bridges was sparked by Shaw's statements that bridge tolls could be part of the congestion pricing idea.

Bloomberg has proposed charging motorists $8 to enter Midtown Manhattan south of 86th Street. Shaw and his commission have been holding hearings on the concept and must present a plan for approval by the state legislature next month.

Shaw said recently that he had made it pretty clear that bridge tolls would be considered by his commission as part of the mayor's plan to reduce traffic congestion in New York City. Weprin is also strongly opposed to the plan because it would negatively impact Queens motorists.

Markowitz said at the City Hall rally, "As far as I'm concerned, any proposal to charge motorists to use the East River bridges is dead on arrival."

He added that it adds to motorists' living costs. "The last thing we need is another tax. Also, it would be absolutely discriminatory against residents in the boroughs outside Manhattan, especially Brooklyn."

Gioia, who represents Long Island City, Woodside and Sunnyside, said, "Tolls on the East River bridges are a more expensive, more aggressive and more burdensome option than what was originally proposed. This process is moving in the wrong direction. I am glad the commission is exploring multiple ways that we can reduce congestion, increase productivity and improve our air, but this is one option that has already been explored and rightfully dismissed."

Another objection raised by Weprin is that any modest reduction in the number of cars could cause a decline of well over $1 billion annually in economic activity and a potential loss of 15,000 jobs.

Weprin, council Finance Committee chairman, also said, "The cost of installing, implementing and maintaining toll booths would far outweigh the benefit of such a proposal."

Bloomberg had called for bridge tolls in 2002 when the city was facing a $3 billion budget gap, Weprin recalled. He pointed out, "It's interesting that as talks of budget woes ahead begin due to the mortgage crisis, the decline in the housing market and less than a stellar year on Wall Street, the proposal of [putting tolls on] the four bridges pops its ugly head again."

Also coming out against the tolls, Councilmember John Liu (D- Flushing), council Transportation Committee chairman, stated: "Wild and crazy ideas about [installing tolls on] the East River bridges have surfaced every so often for 80 years and it appears to have surfaced again in discussions of the traffic mitigation commission."

Liu said while he and others support congestion pricing, "We would never go along with just [putting tolls on] East River bridges." He said the plan was "divisive and does not enhance the public debate".