Chairman Degnan, Director Foye. Commissioners.
The port Authority’s plan to allocate 3700 cyclists per day (and growing at 10% per year) a single 7 foot path “collars the baby.” Bike travel across the bridge will choke on its own growth, jeopardizing the growth of cycling across the region and enhancements to sustainability, resilience, tourism and public health well annually exceeding the cost of widening.      
Key beneficiaries of widened paths are working class, minority communities whose residents have borne the brunt of bridge congestion, unsafe streets and degraded air quality for generations.
The Authority would align itself with cities like Baltimore; Los Angeles, which will spend $100 million a year over the next 40 years to extend cycling infrastructure to its transit deserts; and San Francisco-Oakland, whose expansion of the longer, more costly Bay Bridge provides a critical waterway link where no other option exists.   
New Jersey residents, impatient for upgrades to Penn Station, the 8th Avenue Bus Terminal and PATH, will see little actual improvement in their daily travel routine from Capital Plan expenditures for a decade. Nor will New Yorkers, who, on the whole, frequent PA facilities less often than their NJ counterparts. 
A revitalized GWB would draw bike share up to Washington Heights, a grid across Bergen and resuscitate dormant projects like Hudson Valley Greenway through the Bronx and River Road through Edgewater.  
In his commentary on the 2017-2026 Capital Plan, PA Commissioner Lipper remonstrated the Agency for allocating $4.2 billion to build new rail links to Newark and LaGuardia airports that would move 10,000 riders per day at an operating subsidy of $100 million per year.  Wider GWB paths could add comparable trans-Hudson capacity for 2% of the cost and no subsidy. 
In 1931, when the PA set bridge tolls to compete with local ferry service, cyclists paid $0.25. Or $4.00 adjusted for inflation. As cycling mode share reaches regional targets of 6%, the nominal value of that travel would approach $26 million per year.  
It would be highly counter-productive to exact a toll in the foreseeable future – the benefits from expanded bike travel far exceed potential revenues and the effects would fall hardest on low-income users that should be some of the paths’ principal beneficiaries. Rather, the PA has a compelling value proposition upon which to seek funding and/or negotiate forgiveness of other obligations.  
During a recent segment on The Brian Lehrer Show, a cyclist named Lindsey called to say she stopped bike commuting between Manhattan and Weehawken, because she found cycling on the GWB paths to be too dangerous. Lindsey now spends $18 per day on ferries. 
Dyckman St. Ferry. Source, My Inwood.
 Anecdotally, the PA’s incremental cost to widen the paths is $90 million.
 “PA Capital Investment by Primary Business Segment,” PANYNJ.
 Hudson River Bridge Progress Report, 1928, Port Authority of New York, http://tinyurl.com/hsdku9z
 110 million trips per year times 6% times $4.00 = $26.4 million
 The Port Authority should not levy a toll on peds-cyclists:
- The benefits to the region in terms of resilience, sustainability, tourism and public health from growing the constituency for cycling far exceed potential revenues.
- It conflicts with USDOT guidance to transport agencies to adopt policies that expand biking and walking. US DOT Bicycle-Pedestrian Policy, 2010, http://tinyurl.com/h3dfg92
- It would comprise a regressive tax, falling hardest on low-income residents that should be some of the paths’ principal beneficiaries.
- If accorded subsidies similar to low-emission vehicles under Green Pass ($2.75-$6.75), that alone would offset any reasonable toll. EZ-Pass/Green Pass, PANYNJ, http://tinyurl.com/ctx9ngy
 Alternate revenue sources:
- Benefits to the region easily justify application for a US DOT TIGER grant., http://tinyurl.com/zchdu94
- Alternately, to negotiate arrangements with the NY/NJ that included elements of “tax incentive financing” and offset of other PA “payments in lieu of taxes.”
- If a user fee were instituted as part of a comprehensive “per person” vs. “per vehicle” overhaul of trans-Hudson travel pricing, active transportation fees could be offset with individual tax rebates and reimbursement by private health insurance, comparable to membership in health clubs.