“Nobody thought it had any legs,” Ms. Hirsh said. “But because of the advocacy and the organizations involved, it made it into the budget. It passed. And again, Shelly was a roadblock.”
But so far, Mr. Silver and his members show no signs of yielding.
Assemblyman Richard Brodsky of Westchester, who has raised questions about the plan, said he couldn’t vote for it even if he wanted to.
“Give us a passable bill,” Mr. Brodsky said.
The bill submitted to lawmakers in Albany, Mr. Brodsky said, made no mention of the fact that the program is up for renewal in three years, has no safeguards to protect drivers’ civil liberties, and doesn’t offer a provision for residential parking.
Oh, and Mr. Brodsky doesn’t like the process, either.
“What happens the next time there is a coal plant suggested for the Upper East Side, and proponents say, ‘We’ll construct it, run it for three years and see what happens,’” he asked. “There has got to be some principle to this stuff.”
As for Mr. Silver, he appears to be tuning out the whole public debate completely. “I think the process we’re involved in doesn’t speak to what the ads are about,” said Charles Carrier, a spokesman for Mr. Silver.
He said that the Assembly will hold further hearings on the matter in hopes of coming to a consensus. But, he said, “A lot of questions continue to be raised about the program.”