Congestion pricing advocates said the mayor was making an erroneous point to defend what they view as an indefensible position. | Getty Depending on his argument, de Blasio's facts shift on cars owned by public housing tenants

Whether New York City's public housing residents own cars depends on when you ask Mayor Bill de Blasio.

To defend his position on varying controversial topics, the mayor has contradicted himself on the prevalence of vehicles driven by New York City Housing Authority tenants.


During an appearance on "The Brian Lehrer Show" on Friday, de Blasio said charging drivers more to enter Manhattan — a revived idea to raise money for the ailing MTA while mitigating traffic — is "regressive" because all car owners would pay the same fee regardless of income. Instead, the mayor has proposed an increase on income taxes for the city's highest earners.

To drive the point home, he added, "A lot of people in public housing own a car."

"A lot of working class people own a car and use it for work or use it because they have to get to a hospital or whatever it may be," he said. "What is going to be done to address their needs?"

In 2015, he declared the opposite when announcing plans to use the housing authority's parking lots for income-generating development.

After explaining that monthly parking permit prices were set to increase, he added, "Also, relatively few NYCHA residents have vehicles to begin with."

Asked about the discrepancy, his spokeswoman confirmed his earlier statement: Just 2.5 percent of public housing residents, about 10,000 people, have parking permits.

But the facts are secondary to the strength of his argument, she added.

"Upshot: This isn't about the relatively smaller portion of low-income New Yorkers who own and drive cars," the spokeswoman wrote in an email. "It's that low-income people in any proportion, and for that matter middle-class people, would be asked to shoulder the same costs as wealthy New Yorkers. Zero percent of low- and middle-income people would pay a millionaire's tax. Asking the wealthiest New Yorkers to pay a little more is the most progressive way to solve this problem."

Congestion pricing advocates said the mayor was making an erroneous point to defend what they view as an indefensible position.

"If you are talking about creating a policy that will affect millions of New Yorkers positively, you can't talk out of both sides of your mouth. Congestion pricing is clearly progressive," Nick Sifuentes, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, said.

He pointed to 2017 data released by the Community Service Society that found "only two percent of the working poor would potentially pay a congestion pricing fee."

The analysis concluded for every outer-borough commuter who would have to pay new tolls, 18 would benefit from transit upgrades — a margin that widens to 38-1 for poor commuters.

"It's pretty clear that the most progressive thing we can do in New York right now is fix the subways and the way to do that is congestion pricing," he added.

The mayor's push for a so-called millionaire's tax is "good public policy" but politically untenable, added John Raskin, executive director of the Riders Alliance, an advocacy group that also supports congestion pricing.

"The mayor keeps looking for facts to back up his assertion that congestion pricing is regressive, but the facts simply aren't there. Congestion pricing is a progressive policy that could help the eight million people a day who rely on subways and buses," Raskin said. "There's no more regressive policy than letting our public transit system deteriorate."

Gov. Andrew Cuomo is expected to soon release a plan related to congestion pricing. As POLITICO reported Wednesday, it will be a heavy political lift in the State Assembly.