Bill Text: NJ AR169 | 2022-2023 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Expresses opposition to New York's congestion pricing plan and urges Federal Highway Administration to include New Jersey stakeholders in decision-making process.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2022-12-12 - Introduced, Referred to Assembly Transportation and Independent Authorities Committee [AR169 Detail]
Download: New_Jersey-2022-AR169-Introduced.html
Sponsored by:
Assemblywoman MICHELE MATSIKOUDIS
District 21 (Morris, Somerset and Union)
SYNOPSIS
Expresses opposition to New York's congestion pricing plan and urges Federal Highway Administration to include New Jersey stakeholders in decision-making process.
CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT
As introduced.
An Assembly Resolution expressing opposition to New York's congestion pricing plan.
Whereas, As a part of its 2019-2020 budget, the State of New York enacted several measures designed to generate additional revenue streams to fix various fiscal needs in the state, including a congestion pricing plan to generate $15 billion to fund the operations of and improvements to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) subway system, rail transit lines, and bus service; and
Whereas, The congestion pricing plan would include the establishment of tolls to charge motor vehicle drivers that enter Manhattan's central business district, which consists of the area of Manhattan south of and inclusive of 60th Street, with certain limited exceptions; and
Whereas, Though the concept of congestion pricing to reduce traffic congestion in New York City, while also helping to fund public transportation is not new, there is no consensus on the best approach for implementing a congestion pricing toll in Manhattan's central business district; and
Whereas, Accordingly, in August 2022, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released documents that presented seven central business district tolling alternatives, three of which provide no tolling credit for drivers using the Lincoln Tunnel or Holland Tunnel and six of which provide no tolling credit for drivers using the George Washington Bridge; and
Whereas, With no consensus on the best approach, the potential toll charges vary greatly, with one alternative that would charge an additional $23 peak toll to users of the George Washington Bridge that enter the central business district; and
Whereas, Even under the alternatives that propose a full credit toward the central business district toll for users of the Lincoln Tunnel, Holland Tunnel, and George Washington Bridge, those drivers would still be subject to a toll increase for motor vehicle travel into the central business district because each central business district toll under those alternatives is higher than the corresponding peak or off-peak tolls for those trans-Hudson crossings; and
Whereas, Like those in New York, the residents of New Jersey and its public officials understand the importance of reducing traffic congestion, adequately funding transportation, and strengthening the economic vitality of the region; and
Whereas, In prior years, officials from both states have collaborated in areas of common interest, particularly regarding transportation and infrastructure needs, which ultimately led to the creation of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Port Authority), the construction of most of the major trans-Hudson crossings for motor vehicles, and the operation of a trans-Hudson transit system that serves Manhattan's central business district; and
Whereas, For over a century, the two states have jointly made decisions through the Port Authority with the ultimate goal of doing what is best for the two states and the region, which is what makes it surprising that New York City, in conjunction with the State of New York and the FHWA, has been authorized to implement a congestion pricing plan that has the potential to significantly impact New Jersey residents and to undermine the long history of collaborative efforts on transportation, infrastructure, and economic development by the two states; and
Whereas, The impact that the congestion pricing plan will have on New Jersey residents, with no benefit to transit services such as New Jersey Transit or the Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH), combined with the fact that no New Jersey stakeholders have any input or decision-making power over the plan makes it clear that the State of New Jersey must oppose New York's congestion pricing plan; now, therefore,
Be It Resolved by the Assembly of the State of New Jersey:
1. This House opposes New York's plans to implement a central business district tolling program, commonly referred to as New York's congestion pricing plan.
2. This House urges the Federal Highway Administration to require the inclusion of New Jersey stakeholders in the decision-making process regarding the central business district tolling program prior to the final approval of the program.
3. Copies of this resolution, as filed with the Secretary of State, shall be transmitted by the Clerk of the General Assembly to the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, the Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation, the Mayor of the City of New York, the Governor of the State of New York, the Governor of the State of New Jersey, and each member of Congress elected from this State.
STATEMENT
This resolution expresses opposition to New York's plans to implement a central business district tolling program, which is commonly referred to as New York's congestion pricing plan. The resolution also urges the Federal Highway Administration to require the inclusion of New Jersey stakeholders in the decision-making process regarding the central business district tolling program prior to the final approval of the program.
