The need for traffic relief notwithstanding, the question for many Queens residents is whether city officials know what's best for their borough.During last Tuesday's hearing before the New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission, which took place at the York College Performing Arts Center, politicians and private citizens took turns arguing for and against the city's congestion pricing plan.On the whole, there appeared to be a greater number of naysayers than proponents, and nearly all elected officials who offered testimony were less-than-satisfied with the Bloomberg administration's prescription for traffic mitigation.Certain speakers, like Assemblywoman Catherine Nolan, argued the city's plan would not provide funding for mass transit improvements, despite claims it would. Without those funds, she argued the mayor's proposal should not be considered."Legislators and those appointed to a commission like this one face an obligation to embrace sound, workable funding plans to ensure our transit system gets maintained in a state of good repair and improved," she said.Others, meanwhile, claimed the proposed tax on vehicles entering Manhattan's Central Business District at specific hours would punish middle-class and working families. As such, Councilman David Weprin proposed an alternative ten-point plan to make traffic run more smoothly.Implementing red-light cameras within the CBD, hiring additional traffic officers, and changing current law to allow them to issue traffic violations, and enforcing the Taxi and Limousine Commission code more strictly are all part of Weprin's plan.In addition, there would be a "Flex Commute" component aimed at increasing tolls on bridges and tunnels during peak hours, and reducing fares for buses and subways, making mass transit more inviting.Overall, Weprin said his proposal would penalize those who violate the law, leaving working-class New Yorkers relatively unscathed."The current plan, as proposed earlier this year by the mayor, is a regressive tax that punished the middle class and working families - individuals that are already struggling to survive and live in New York City," he said.A few non-elected officials also harped on the Bloomberg administration's plan, claiming it does not do enough to increase either mass transit infrastructure or ridership.With regards to the former, Kevin Forrestal of the Hillcrest Estates Civic Association predicted targeting the CBD would negatively impact other areas of the city, where subway resources and public utilities have proven inadequate."Adding 9,000 extra riders with [only] the hope of improved service would be a disaster," he said.And Jim Trent, treasurer for the Queens Civic Congress, suggested tossing out congestion pricing altogether and improving what exists. His proposals include full-time G-service to Forest Hills, extending Long Island Railroad service in Queens, and utilizing buses that run on non-polluting fuels."New Yorkers consider the congestion pricing tax an aggressive tax and want to hear more alternatives before being hit by another expense they can't afford," Trent said.OTHER SIDE SEES GREATER GOOD, SUPPORTS LOCKBOX.Although a larger number of speakers appeared to be opposed to congestion pricing than in support of it, some claimed the city's plan would provide much-needed revenue to finance bus and subway improvements.In contrast to Weprin, Daniel Hendrick of the New York League of Conservative Voters characterized the proposal as helpful to the middle and working classes, since it would tax wealthier individuals who drive to Manhattan.An estimated 4.5 percent of Queens' workforce drives through the proposed congestion pricing zone, and 62 percent of those who choose to travel through the zone by car actually live within five to ten minutes of the subway or Long Island Railroad."A small percentage of the wealthy would pay, while the majority would finally see improvements to mass transit," Hendrick said.Another voice in favor of congestion pricing was Karla Quintero, deputy director of Planning for the non-profit group Transportation Alternatives, who predicted an increased number of mass-transit users would reduce the number of car crashes, thin traffic across the city, and improve the quality of life for everyone."We need fewer cars driving down our streets," she said. "We need funding to increase subway and bus service, to reduce waiting time and lessen delays so that we can spend more time visiting our friends and families, breathe cleaner air and improve the vitality, health and economies of our neighborhoods."Quintero also said three express buses would immediately begin servicing the east and northeast sections of the borough after the congestion pricing plan is approved.The Transportation Alternatives official did suggest any funds collected through congestion pricing be put inside a lockbox, "so they won't be wasted on the rest of the state's needs."