Here’s when commuters can expect a decision on NYC’s controversial $15 congestion pricing toll
A potentially precedent-setting decision in the legal battle to block New York’s congestion pricing plan will come sometime before the controversial $15 toll is set to take effect in mid-June, a New Jersey federal judge said Thursday.
Judge Leo Gordon made the promise at the end of a two-day marathon hearing to try to render his ruling with time to spare before drivers start getting hit with the new toll when they enter Midtown Manhattan below 60th Street.
“I will do it in sufficient time for you all to figure out what happens next,” Gordon told lawyers for New Jersey, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Federal Highway Administration late Wednesday afternoon.
“I can’t tell you if that’s May 1, May 15, May 30, June 1, or June 10,” Gordon said, adding that if he couldn’t keep his promise on timing he would let the lawyers know.
The case is one of five suits opposing congestion pricing — and Gordon’s decision could set a precedent in those cases.
It could also impact potential future similar proposals around the country, as New York is the first state in the nation to come up with such a plan.
Lawyers for New Jersey want Gordon to hit the brakes on the toll — set to go into effect June 15 — by arguing that the MTA’s plan, which was only finalized last week, didn’t sufficiently consider how Garden State residents would be impacted.
Over the course of Wednesday and Thursday, Randy Mastro, who represents the Garden State, argued for Gordon to overturn the FHWA’s finding that the MTA’s toll plan would have “no significant” environmental impact.
“New Jersey will suffer environmentally in so many communities and we implore you to put a stop to this and make the Federal Highway Administration and the MTA do [the environmental review] the right way,” Mastro said in his closing arguments.
Mastro said Jersey would bear the brunt of an increase in traffic congestion and in pollutants as a result of the Manhattan toll.
He also repeatedly criticized the MTA’s plan, saying it didn’t offer mitigation solutions and didn’t allot any mitigation funding to the neighboring state.
MTA lawyers promised that while a specific dollar amount may not have been set aside for New Jersey mitigation, the agency fully intended to offer funding and plans for any mitigation that would be needed in the future.
They also argued that the toll — which is slated to raise $15 billion in funding for the MTA — is essential to help decrease traffic congestion, lower greenhouse gases and help pay for desperately needed improvements to the ailing transit system.
“This is a critical project for the region,” MTA lawyer Mark Chertok said in his own concluding arguments.
He contested Mastro’s claims that only the Big Apple would benefit from the project, saying it “benefits the entire region.”
Chertok said there was no “conspiracy theory” to cut Jersey out of mitigation plans.
On Wednesday, Mastro pointed out the MTA’s report allotted mitigation funds to parts of New York while failing to allot a single “dime” to the Garden State, noting for example that $35 million had been earmarked to mitigate the environmental impact on the Bronx.
Mastro also claimed the FHWA “fast tracked” the project merely “rubber stamping” MTA’s proposal without taking a “hard look into the adverse environmental impact” as the law requires.
He argued a totally new review was warranted because the environmental impact studies only weighed the effects on four cities in two Jersey counties — Bergen and Hudson.
Lawyers with the FHWA promised they would be carrying out a supplemental review in light of the final MTA plan from last week.
But Mastro said the initial review was so problematic that Gordon should throw out the whole thing and order the MTA to start from scratch.
Chertok Wednesday accused Jersey of trying to “delay, delay, delay” the congestion pricing plan by seeking for the agency to start from square one with its review.
