Kathryn Wylde says she thinks the stars may have aligned in favor of congestion pricing, a program Mayor Bloomberg recently endorsed as part of his grand plan to provide for the city’s future transportation needs.

Ms. Wylde is the president and CEO of the Partnership for New York City, an association of business leaders originally founded by David Rockefeller to encourage corporate support for the city. It was Ms. Wylde’s group that first made an economic case for congestion pricing, responding to anecdotal evidence of the program’s success in London.

The partnership’s report was released in December and concluded that traffic snarls in the New York area cost the regional economy more than $13 billion a year and more than 50,000 jobs. The study determined that congestion in New York had passed a tipping point and had become a significant chokehold on further economic growth.

The report reviewed London’s experience with congestion pricing, which it found to have reduced traffic by 17% and caused an increase in bus ridership of 37% and a drop in carbon dioxide of nearly 16%. While stopping short of recommending congestion pricing, the report left no doubt that New York would be better off with fewer vehicles traveling in and around the city.

Despite nearly universal appreciation for the goals of reducing the traffic in the city, the notion of imposing a congestion fee seemed for some time to be dead on arrival. The fee has been considered by many to be just another tax, and one imposed initially by the leftist mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. Hopes were not high for its adoption in New York.

Times have changed, and while sizable hurdles are still ahead for Mr. Bloomberg ‘s proposal to charge automobiles $8 and trucks $21 to travel in Manhattan’s central business districts ( below 86th Street), Ms. Wylde is optimistic.

She points to our increasing competition with London and efforts to stave off that city’s quest to become the world’s pre-eminent financial center. Also, concern about the environment has become intense. Voters are increasingly looking for leadership on climate change, and expanded public transportation is thought to be central to the issue. And continuing high oil prices may have been folded into the economy, but many people are critical of the country’s ongoing reliance on imported oil for our transportation system.

At the same time, the federal Department of Transportation has set aside $1 billion to finance a pilot congestion-pricing program. Numerous cities are gearing up to apply for the grant, including San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Chicago, Ms. Wylde says.

“The objections have always been political,” she says. “The current focus on climate change and the increased consciousness that we can control carbon emissions have changed attitudes. Over the past several years, people have realized how important mass transit is to the city’s economic growth. Subway ridership is at an all-time high; people are excited about expansions to the system.

“There will be an additional 1 million people living in New York City over the next 25 years. There are 8.2 million now; the city’s infrastructure was built to accommodate 8 million,” she said. “We’re looking at $50 billion of badly needed new transit projects, and we only have $20 billion committed now to pay for them. Everyone is concerned that fares cannot even cover operating costs. We need a new source for capital costs.”

It is this need that the congestion fee would meet and that may bring the state’s legislators on board. Revenue, including a promised additional $200 million a year from the city, would flow to a new agency that would be responsible for allocating the collected dollars to transportation projects. Representatives from surrounding boroughs and towns will likely prove eager to share in the transit improvements planned. New subway stops, disability access, and cleaned-up train stations are all included in the overall plan.

Perhaps at the end of the day, one of the most convincing incentives will simply be the desire to be seen as a forward-looking city. Stockholm, Sweden, has adopted congestion pricing and Copenhagen, Denmark, is studying it, as are many other cities around the world.

“The Partnership for New York City’s position is simple,” Ms. Wylde says. “We’ve seen it work. If all these other cities can do it, why not New York?”

peek10021@aol.com