Over the past few months, Gov. Kathy Hockle has privately discussed her concerns about moving forward with congestion pricing with business leaders, political advisers and, as the governor puts it, plenty of ordinary New Yorkers in restaurants.
But she never revealed her plans to the group most affected by them: the general public, who have every reason to believe that a new tolling system will be implemented in Manhattan later this month.
The move to abandon a plan decades in the making up upset lawmakers, the real estate industry, transportation advocates and other stakeholders. The governor said he was reluctant to discourage people from driving to New York City at a time when the economic recovery is still fragile. Critics called it an election-year ploy to help Democrats in suburban districts where congestion pricing is deeply unpopular.
Hokell’s announcement was particularly shocking given that he has supported the plan in the past — in fact, as recently as this year he had stressed the need to remove cars from the roads — and the inconsistency has created a sense of duplicity and betrayal among some who thought they were on his side.
John Orcutt, a longtime congestion pricing advocate and consultant to Reinvent Albany, described Hawkle’s change of heart on Friday as “a profound, fundamental feeling of betrayal.”
“It would be different if she had inherited it and said, ‘This is not my priority,'” he added. “But we had to do it 10 seconds before midnight, not 11 hours ago.”
The impact of Haukl’s decision was immediate: New York City was left without a plan to address the terrible traffic congestion that has long clogged its streets and polluted its air.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the state agency that was supposed to receive congestion pricing funds, suddenly found itself with a $15 billion hole in its budget, forcing it to shelve long-planned capital projects like traffic light upgrades and focus on bare-bones operating needs.
And in a scathing rebuke to the governor, the Legislature left Albany that year without heeding his request to put in place some sort of interim funding structure for the transportation department.
Hawkle again voiced concern Friday about New York City’s pandemic recovery, telling reporters that she believes her interactions with business owners and restaurant patrons will “give you a true sense of what New Yorkers are thinking” rather than any specific data or study.
“Come along to the next dinner and I’ll probably be there in the morning,” she said, “sit with me and watch people come up and thank me.”
Polls back up her view: A Siena College survey conducted in April found that New York City residents oppose congestion pricing, 64% to 33%, and suburban respondents dislike it even more.
But public opinion is improving in the wake of congestion pricing in other cities, and even her attempts to emphasize her connection to ordinary New Yorkers seem rooted in an old city where diners still reigned, reinforcing the perception that her Western New York roots have shaped political views rooted in the past.
In fact, the governor’s seemingly sympathetic attitude toward motorists has something of a history: Twenty-six years ago, as a city councilman in Hamburg, a Buffalo suburb, Mr. Hoffle gained notoriety for opposing commuter and school tolls on New York State Thruway systems.
“They say walking a mile in my shoes will generate empathy, but in this case, driving a mile in my minivan will hopefully generate action,” she wrote in a 1998 opinion piece in the Buffalo News.
As governor, Ms. Hokel’s stance toward motorists has appeared more nuanced. Those closest to her and officials who were briefed on the congestion pricing plans in advance insisted in interviews that she believes in her mission to ease congestion, improve air quality and generate billions of dollars for the city’s public transportation system.
For example, in December, Hawkle spoke at a rally in support of the toll road policy, telling supporters he was proud of the transformative policy.
“Sometimes leaders are called upon to envision a better future, to be bold in implementing it, and to not back down in the face of opposition,” she said with pride, adding, “These are our moments of leadership.”
But already at that point, some of her allies said she worried the timing of the program was off and it could stifle New York City’s economic recovery. Her biggest concern, they said, was data showing many New Yorkers had not yet returned to City Hall.
For a while it looked like Haukle might have to step in to stop the congestion charge — there are now eight lawsuits seeking a delay — but as April turned to May and May turned to June, that looked less likely.
By the time Haukl embarked last month on a trip to Europe aimed at cementing his role as a climate change leader, he had begun to steer clear of the term “congestion pricing.”
At the Climate Change Leaders Conference in Italy, Haukl decided to change some previously unreported remarks he made, omitting a clear pitch for New York’s nation-leading congestion pricing plans.
Haukle spoke of the need to get more cars off the roads and improve public transportation, but argued those improvements couldn’t come at the expense of people struggling to pay their bills — a claim he repeated Wednesday when he announced his decision to postpone the plan.
State Democratic Party Chairman Jay Jacobs defended Governor Hockle’s decision, saying congestion pricing was “the right policy” but “the timing was bad.” When asked why the governor waited so long to announce the hold, Jacobs said, “It was supposed to go into effect on June 30th, and we just can’t wait any longer.”
Still, the timing of Haukl’s decision – five months before a pivotal general election and just after a visit to the White House – has raised suspicions that political concerns may have outweighed policy objectives.
Both Horckle and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who is leading the effort to take the House back to Democrats, have vehemently denied that there was any political collusion preceding the decision.But it’s little secret that Horckle’s stiff performance as a leading candidate in the 2022 midterm elections coincided with Democrats losing four House seats, losing control of the chamber and leading the governor to a humiliating rebuke from then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Since that election, Hawkle has focused on the issues Republicans have deployed against her, particularly crime and rising housing prices, which are consistently cited as top concerns for New Yorkers.
The same poll shows congestion pricing is unpopular with majorities of voters in both parties.
It’s difficult to estimate the exact costs of ending the tolling program, which would charge E-ZPass drivers as much as $15 to enter Manhattan’s central business district, and the city’s Independent Budget Office said the amount of time, money and other resources already spent preparing for its implementation is “immeasurable.”
Among the more explicit costs is $427 million the Met has already allocated for physical infrastructure, such as cameras currently installed on Manhattan streets.
The decision to shelve the plan means the agency, which oversees the city’s subways, buses, bridges, tunnels and two commuter rail lines, will lose $1 billion a year in congestion toll revenues that would have been used to fund $15 billion in capital projects, including an expansion of the Second Avenue Subway, new subway cars and new subway elevators to make them accessible to people in wheelchairs.
There are also legal costs to defend the MTA against eight lawsuits brought by plaintiffs ranging from truck drivers to the governor of New Jersey.
The economic impacts of eliminating congestion pricing would include the environmental costs to communities caused by continued internal combustion engine congestion, as well as the economic damage caused by transit delays: The Independent Budget Office estimates that rush-hour subway congestion costs riders as much as $390 million a year.
Hokell’s decision is sure to please car commuters, who number far fewer than those who use public transportation to Manhattan and who are generally more affluent than those who use the subway or bus, and it also pleased about two dozen council members, mostly from Queens and Long Island, who issued statements of support.
Politically, that may not be the worst thing, says Stu Loeser, who was Michael R. Bloomberg’s chief communications officer 17 years ago when he tried to push congestion pricing as mayor.
“Since then, there’s been great work done to implement congestion pricing, but one harsh reality remains: Congestion pricing is really unpopular among people who live in Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Putnam, Dutchess, Orange and Ulster counties and who drive into the city more than a few times a year,” he said.
“These are the same counties in New York state whose voters could decide whether the House of Representatives maintains a slim MAGA majority.”
