Opponents of New York City's congestion pricing plan have seized on a recent Department of Health report that found no measurable reduction in air pollution within the congestion zone, despite a decrease in vehicle trips. Critics argue this outcome proves the $9 toll was a "money grab" by transit authorities rather than an environmental initiative.
The report stated that air quality in the congestion zone, south of 60th Street, did not improve even with an 11% drop in car trips since the toll's implementation in January 2025. "Did congestion pricing affect air quality in the congestion relief zone? No," the report concluded.
Kathryn Freed, a resident and member of New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax, which previously sued to block the toll, expressed skepticism about the stated environmental benefits. "There hasn’t been any change. Supporters said there would be less pollution if traffic went down in Manhattan. Apparently there’s no environmental benefit at all," Freed said.
This finding contrasts with earlier statements from officials. In January, Gov. Kathy Hochul had claimed that pollution had decreased significantly due to congestion pricing. Hochul initially paused the program in 2024 but later approved it after the November election.
Business owners and drivers also voiced frustration. Vinnie DiMino, owner of Sea Breeze Fish Market, stated, "It was all bullsh-t. It was to put money in the MTA’s pocket." He added that the daily cost of the toll for deliveries is impacting his business. Jill Bowman, a Manhattan resident who drives frequently, echoed this sentiment, saying, "It’s not about saving lives. It’s about making money."
Alex Pichado, an Uber driver, suggested that the program should be halted if no air quality improvements are observed. "If there is no change [in air pollution], they should stop it. There is no reason to continue with it."
The DOH report also noted that pollution levels in environmental justice zones outside Manhattan, such as the South Bronx, were not significantly different. Supporters of the toll had previously expressed concern that traffic diversion could worsen pollution in these areas.
However, some proponents suggested that the lack of increased pollution in these outer boroughs is a positive sign, contradicting predictions of pollution hotspots. John Kaehny, executive director of Reinvent Albany, noted that opponents' concerns about increased pollution in areas outside the zone have not materialized. Kaehny’s group supported congestion pricing for traffic reduction and MTA funding, not primarily for air quality benefits, citing that auto emissions constitute a relatively small percentage of overall particulate matter and nitric oxide emissions.
Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella, a plaintiff in a lawsuit against the congestion pricing plan, remained unconvinced. He pointed to an increase in truck traffic in his borough and questioned the report's findings on pollution levels.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), which collects the revenue from the toll, defended the program. MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber stated that the report confirms concerns about increased pollution from drivers avoiding the toll did not materialize. "As this study confirms, that didn’t happen, and congestion pricing is already funding additional investments to further improve air quality," Lieber said.
The congestion pricing toll is scheduled to increase in the coming years, rising to $12 in 2028 and $15 in 2031.