As decades of mismanagement continue to wreak havoc on the city’s transportation infrastructure, congestion pricing has once again been touted as a viable solution, both for the crumbling subway system and for the gridlock that clogs the city on a daily basis.

The state legislature has until April 1 to decide whether or not to adopt a congestion pricing plan as part of the 2020 budget. It’s far from a done deal, but has gotten closer to becoming a reality than ever, with high-profile supporters such as the New York Building Congress, the Partnership for New York City, and Transportation Alternatives among the plan’s supporters.

Congestion pricing: quick facts NYC’s proposed congestion pricing zone would cover Manhattan south of 60th Street, not including the FDR Drive north of the Brooklyn Bridge. Taxis and app-based for-hire vehicles (FHVs) could be charged as far north as 96th Street.

Congestion pricing could generate $810 million to $1.1 billion annually while reducing congestion by 8 to 13 percent.

The city could lose $100 billion and 113.3 million annual hours if gridlock is not improved.

And, crucially, New York lawmakers finally seem to be in agreement that congestion pricing is necessary to help fund the city’s crumbling transit system and deal with the city’s intense traffic problem. In the past year, many members of the the state legislature, along with Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, have expressed their support for a congestion pricing plan.

Just this week, State Assembly speaker Carl Heastie signaled that the Democrat-controlled body has enough votes to pass a congestion pricing bill, paving the way for its passage in the state Senate, and, ultimately, Cuomo’s signature.

For those still struggling with the concept or looking for a briefing on its history and application, read on for a handy reference guide.

What is congestion pricing?

The concept is quite straightforward: Congestion pricing asks drivers to pay a surcharge to enter certain heavily-trafficked zones—typically a central business district (CBD)—during a particular period of time. (In New York City, that would mean a one-time surcharge in Manhattan south of 60th Street and north of Battery Park between 6 a.m. and 8 p.m..) The revenue generated could then be put toward other infrastructure repairs—e.g., the broken subway system.

How has congestion pricing worked elsewhere?

London, Singapore, and Stockholm are often cited as success stories, and the policy has been implemented in a number of smaller cities, too (though none so far in the United States). London began its program in 2003, and now, drivers pay £11.50 (around $16) to enter its CBD from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Stockholm’s program, which began in 2006 as a pilot, operates similarly, though drivers are charged a rate (between $1.10 and $2.68) depending on what time of day they enter the CBD.

In most cases, the surcharges were initially met with hostility, but the positive effects have been hard to deny: Immediately following the initiation of zone charging, London saw congestion reduced by a quarter, average speeds increase by 30 percent, and carbon dioxide emissions decrease by 20 percent, per the Fix NYC report.

A similar story played out in Stockholm; the city’s transportation director, Jonas Eliasson, noted recently that “If you survive this valley of political death, and people actually see the benefits, and also realize that, in addition to the benefits, it’s actually not as bad as you thought—it’s not so hard adapting to this—then support starts going up again.”

How would it work in New York?

The surcharge would be levied on all vehicles entering Manhattan below 60th Street, and would be collected via an electronic tolling system, similar to EZ Pass.

Right now, the fine details of the congestion pricing plan that lawmakers are debating are largely unknown. The New York Times recently spoke with Sam Schwartz, the traffic expert who was on Cuomo’s Fix NYC panel, who suggested that the fare structure could go as follows: “$12 to $14 for cars and around $25 for trucks entering the city during peak business (and traffic) hours, and less at night and on weekends.” But that’s not final—a panel convened by Cuomo would ultimately decide how much the surcharges would be, and how those would be implemented.

One small piece of a more comprehensive congestion pricing plan is already in effect: Earlier this month, a State Supreme Court judge ruled that a proposed surcharge on taxis and for-hire vehicles could proceed; that levies a per-trip fee of $2.50 for taxis and $2.75 for green cabs and other for-hire vehicles like Lyfts and Ubers making trips in Manhattan below 96th Street. The Taxi Workers Alliance is still challenging the surcharge in court.

The Tri-State Transportation Campaign, an advocacy organization, recommended four key principles New York should implement based on other cities’ systems:

“significant investment in transit before and during the implementation of congestion pricing; reinvestment of revenues generated directly into public transit; dynamic tolling that changes commuter behavior; and information campaigns that generate broad public support for congestion pricing.”

In 2018, Cuomo’s Fix NYC panel recommended a phased approach that takes these concerns into account.

Congestion pricing in New York: a history Congestion pricing as a solution to New York’s perpetual gridlock has repeatedly been suggested—but never tried—since at least the 1970s, according to the New York Times. The most recent attempt was in the late aughts, when former mayor Michael Bloomberg attempted to get a congestion pricing plan passed; but that died in Albany at the hands of Sheldon Silver in 2008. In 2018, a traffic advisory panel appointed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo—which included a number of former city and state politicians, the chairman of the Regional Plan Association, and the mayor of Yonkers—released a report outlining how congestion pricing could be implemented in New York City. The biggest takeaway: It could generate between $810 million and $1.1 billion annually, which could then be used to fund critical repairs to the New York City subway. It’s only gained steam since then.

The argument for congestion pricing

Those in the pro-congestion pricing camp argue that the policy is good for city streets, good for the environment, and good for the city’s economy. It’s estimated that it could generate between $810 million and $1.1 billion annually.

In a recent study, the Partnership for New York City found that congestion costs the city $20 billion annually in lost time and revenue; if nothing is done to “discourage cars and trucks from crowding the streets and highways of the region during the busiest times of the day,” that’ll be a staggering hit of $100 billion to the city economy over the next five years. (In terms of time, that’s 113.3 million lost hours annually, all due to out of control traffic.)

Reports have also found that the majority of NYC drivers won’t be negatively impacted by congestion fees. TSTC also released a traffic pricing analysis for New York State legislative districts, which determined a single-digit percentage of residents in every district in New York commute into Manhattan’s CBD—in other words, not many upstaters will be impacted.

Simply put, “congestion pricing … is the key to a progressive solution” to fix the city’s transit crisis, as Benjamin Kabak put it in a Curbed op-ed last year.

It also has the support of transit advocates—Transportation Alternatives has been one of the biggest boosters—and a diverse group of housing and social justice activists, who came together last year as the Fix Our Subway Coalition. It also has the support of the Real Estate Board of New York, the New York Building Congress, the Partnership for New York City, and others in the city’s business and real estate industries.

What about arguments against congestion pricing?

Mayor Bill de Blasio may have finally come around to the idea, but that hasn’t always been the case; in 2017, he explicitly said that he “does not believe” in the policy. One concern: that congestion pricing revenue may be allocated to the suburbs. To ensure that doesn’t happen he demanded a “lockbox” to ensure amassed funds go exclusively to city transit.

But suburban legislators, as well as those representing outer-borough neighborhoods, have argued that congestion pricing will hurt their constituents, and may not lead to needed transit improvements in areas outside of New York City. Detractors include state Assembly members David Weprin and Rodneyse Bichotte; City Council member Barry Grodenchik, for neighborhoods on the Long Island border; and several upstate lawmakers.

Critics have also argued that the plan will unfairly impact New Yorkers with physical limitations that make using public transit harder, i.e. seniors and those with disabilities. (In London, those who fit the bill can apply for an exemption.) Others have argued for hardship exemptions for low-income New Yorkers.

What comes next?

The state budget is due on April 1, so we’ll know within a few days whether or not congestion pricing will become a reality for New Yorkers. If it does, it will still take at least a couple of years for the plan to go into full effect.