In 2010, the State Should Stop Its Criminal Neglect of the MTA

One other thing (4.00 / 1)

The city's contributions to the MTA have continued to fall over the past decade.  We need to increase that revenue stream as well as guaranteed state streams through either a modified commuter tax plan or an East River bridge toll.

---

by: BingChester @ Mon Jan 04, 2010 at 23:07:07 PM UTC

Where should the money come from? (0.00 / 0)

For a long time, NYC residents have paid far more of their "fare share" than out-of-town commuters have paid.  The end of the commuter tax is only part of the problem -- LIRR and MetroNorth are subsidized to a far greater extent than the city's buses and subways.  Tolling the East River bridges and congestion pricing are interesting topics, but won't balance that load; we need a restoration of the commuter tax, with all of the money going to the MTA.

Meanwhile, we need to open the MTA's books.  As a "public" authority, the MTA is anything but public.  i haven't looked at the specifics of the so-called "public authorities reform" bill that was passed last year, but it is clear that we need more public oversight of our public authorities.

I'll give one reductio ad absurdum example -- the "Overcoat Development Corporation."  This is a Class-A public authority, created in the mid-1980s for the sole purpose of convincing an overcoat manufacturer to move his factory from Indiana to New York.  The manufacturer is no longer in business, but the authority continues to take up office space, sharing it with another authority (I forget which one) in Manhattan -- and possibly spending money that it gets from ... where?

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Mon Jan 04, 2010 at 23:30:53 PM UTC

Yes (0.00 / 0)

but let's be clear about the language.  A commuter tax, NOT a congestion pricing plan.  I hated Bloomberg's congestion plan because tolling one specific area of Manhattan just doesn't make sense for a host of reasons.  If the proposal is a commuter tax then I'm all in, but if we're just going to rehash the congestion pricing plan then color me skeptical.

---

by: BingChester @ Mon Jan 04, 2010 at 23:34:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just tolling the East RIver bridges would be acceptable (0.00 / 0)

It makes no sense that some routes into mahnattan are free while others cost money

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 06:23:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Overcoat Development Corporation (0.00 / 0)

is no longer renting office space. Thankfully, in the last few years it has wrapped up - but of course, as a state authority, it still exists on paper and at least a few gallons of ink are wasted on it every year.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 03:57:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The state should stop subsidizing regional transit. (0.00 / 0)

Do what the WMATA does (in theory at least) and get it from the counties it services using a mathematical formula.

Same with the NFTA up here. No reason to set up state authorities that have no oversight and then charge people in Wayne County for stuff that doesn't benefit them.  

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 03:56:17 AM UTC

Speaking of the WMATA (0.00 / 0)

I think that NYC should (and soon will) take a cue from them and start charging by distance. Taking the A from the Bronx to Rockaway shouldn't cost the same as taking the 1 from 42nd to Houston.  

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 04:05:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah but (0.00 / 0)

that is a time-honored right of New Yorkers- it actually makes the system very democratic

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 06:21:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not gonna work (0.00 / 0)

Within the city, poor people tend to need to travel farther to get to work because they usually live farther from the main business areas.

Obviously, those who can afford the suburbs tend to move out of the city -- which is why they should pay their share of the cost of mass transit.  But within the city charging by distance is essentially a regressive tax.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 19:21:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Indeed (4.00 / 1)

And in fact New York City has developed based on our flat fare system.  The only reason the poor could afford to move to the outskirts was the subway system.  Traditional urban development in this country sees highly urban cores and more suburban outskirts.  What we've increasingly found over the past decade is a highly developed wealthy core, a more urban and lower income outskirt, and then the suburbs.  Zone pricing in New York would penalize the poor for something that occured exactly because there was no zone pricing in the first place!

---

by: BingChester @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 21:05:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So you want to cut off state money for roads and bridges? (0.00 / 0)

Or should people in NYC keep paying for regional transit that benefits you?

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/SteveinNYC

---

by: SteveinNYC @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 16:37:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Like I said (0.00 / 0)

I think the state should stop paying for local transit. That includes highway improvement projects for local roads, bridges and like I said, the NFTA. Its ridiculous. My county has repeatedly begged the state for $$$ to fix county owned roads and (correctly) been told no, because the net benefit to the state is less the the net benefit to the local community, therefore the local community should pay for it (sadly for governmental integrity, our congressmen eventually slipped the money into some federal bill).

I don't care much for when money gets filtered up, it creates new and unnecessary levels of bureaucracy. Why should the taxes I pay for NYS pay for Long Island schools or New York Transit, and why should yours subsidize my electric bill and my waterfront project? If more local money stayed local, things would be more efficient and we'd all wind up paying the same in taxes as we do now, it would just go to local government instead of state government.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 17:16:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What about the rest of the state? (0.00 / 0)

I hear about MTA as if the state line were drawn somewhere in Westchester County.  What about the rest of the state?  Don't we get mass transit?  Why is it that we Upstaters drive out of necessity while those living in the City get to take the train?  What happened to the Buffalo to the Bronx high-speed line?

---

by: Steaming Pile @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 13:24:37 PM UTC

I'm all for transit spending all over the state (0.00 / 0)

But I don't know much about the details outside the NYC metro area- care to educate me on the issues?

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 18:42:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can give you Buffalo-Niagara (4.00 / 1)

The NFTA, a state authority, owns the Buffalo Subway, WNY Bus system, and the Airports. We are the smallest city in the US with a subway. It is one line running from University of Buffalo South Campus to Downtown, where it goes above ground and connects to Chippewa,  our big nightlife area, UB Medical Campus, the waterfront and the arena. If you ride it only above ground it is free.

However it does not connect to the Airport, the football stadium, any suburbs, Niagara Falls, or UB North Campus, where nearly all of the students live. Allegedly, the tunnels already exist into Amherst, Buffalo's largest suburb and the home of UB North.  If Buffalo is ever going to have functional rail, we need to add at least the Airport and UB North to the rail system.

Bus transit is popular with most city residents. However, it is far more practical to own a car here than in NYC, so even most poor residents own something - or at least have access to a car from a neighbor or family member. In many areas of the city the buses are used by students (for free) who can not get school bus transportation. There are very few markets in the city, so some sort of transit is necessary for most people. There are few direct lines from the city to the suburbs, usually multiple connections are needed. Many believe this is racially motivated, and this has caused some pretty awful problems in the past. Very few suburban people (who are 80% of the county's population) take the bus, however, as a)the buses run infrequently b)they generally do not run through suburban developments, but merely past them, if anywhere's near them at all and c)we have cars. The buses do go to the airport, the football stadium, and North Campus, and these are probably the best used non-city lines.

The price has doubled in 5 years or so. The buses do okay but the rail hemorrhages money. They need billions to extend the rail to make it practical. Much of it could be done above ground on former railroad lines.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 19:24:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thank you, that was excellent (0.00 / 0)

From what I have heard about Buffalo's light rail system, the original plan called for several lines, but only one got built.  Is there any possibility for expansion anytime soon?

---

by: Roatti @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 20:44:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

what's awful (0.00 / 0)

is that we could have a light rail running from downtown up the city's west side (a poor area) to the Falls by the end of the year if we had 1) approval and 2) cars. The lines and a few platforms are there.

You are right on your first assertion. We ran out of money in Carter-era financing rates. The airport line exists already on paper, it needs to be built. UB also has plans to build their own line if no one else will. For more on the rail see http://www.citizenstransit.org/

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 21:13:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes! (0.00 / 0)

Let's spend a LOT of the so-called "federal stimulus money" on intra- and inter-city mass transit all over the state.  Better bus (and perhaps light rail) systems in Buffalo, Ithaca, Syracuse, etc., would only enhance those cities' ability to compete for jobs with Youngstown, Erie, Grand Rapids, etc. -- or Singapore and Bangalore.  And inter-city rail systems, both for passengers and freight, would make upstate New York a much more attractive place for manufacturing.

I miss the ILGWU commercial!

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 19:25:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Split the Difference (4.00 / 1)

Might I suggest dividing the MTA into its 2 naturally ocurring parts: NYC subway/buses; and MetroNorth/LIRR? Once this is accomplished, reconciling revenue shortfalls can be system specific.

To keep NYC Transit affordable and avoid a slip back into the 1970s, reinstitute the commuter tax with ALL revenues going to NYC Transit. City residents already foot the bill on services provided to our commuting brothers and sisters (garbage pick-up, police, fire, EMTs); a renewal of the commuter tax directed at mass transit will keep the system functional, affordable, and help expand its services for an ever increasing population.

MetroNorth/LIRR can be subsidized with revenue from tolls placed on East River bridges. This is an idea whose time has come. Directing toll revenue to commuter railroads for their maintenance and expansion makes sense.

These 2 "added" revenue streams would go a long way towards curing the ills now facing the MTA. Congestion pricing could be put in place also, maybe using that revenue to finally deliver a first-class, modern transportation network to the world's greatest city.


Tax the Church.

---

by: furiousdee @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 19:36:22 PM UTC

Not bad, but... (0.00 / 0)

Tolling the East River bridges will hit NYC residents who don't have access to the subway system as much as it hits suburban commuters.  Before tolls are instituted, we should create Bus Rapid Transit to those underserved areas of NYC (perhaps the commuter tax can help pay for that).  Then we can institute tolls because NYC residents will have a mass transit option.

---

by: Dan Jacoby @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 21:05:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nice post (0.00 / 0)

Thank you for the information, it will surely help me a lot. Cheers!!!

freelance writers

---

by: polituned @ Tue Jan 05, 2010 at 20:13:29 PM UTC