I could not agree more strongly with the Advance's editorial ("A transit trend," Oct. 7), which advocates greater investment in the Staten Island Railway. To paraphrase the ultimate conclusion of the piece, "If you improve it, Staten Islanders will ride it."Better mass transit options are key to reducing traffic on our roadways, along with the damage to our environment, health and quality of life such traffic produces. Of course, the issue of how to pay for transit improvements remains.We all want better mass transit; that's an easy argument to make. But to pay for it, we have three realistic options. The first is to increase property taxes. Property taxes in our city are already too high, so let's strike that option out of hand.The second is to significantly increase all mass transit fares. This option would hurt the middle- and low-income transit-taking majority, and would only discourage ridership on the SIR.The third option is to support congestion-pricing, whose fees are paid voluntarily by those who insist on driving into Manhattan during peak hours. Because existing tolls like those on the Verrazano Bridge and Battery Tunnel are deducted from the congestion charge, Staten Island drivers will only see a small increase in the cost of a daily commute (in the case of drivers taking the Battery Tunnel, the additional cost will be zero).Although we would love to have our cake and eat it too, to improve the SIR, we need to fund its improvements. Congestion-pricing is the fairest way to secure this funding, especially for Staten Islanders, who will reap significantly better transit at little cost.[The writer is executive director of Transportation Alternatives, a non-profit group that seeks to reduce traffic.]