Home MTA EconomicsDoomsday Budget Blaming the Senate for MTA failures

Blaming the Senate for MTA failures

by Benjamin Kabak

As the MTA bailout plan dies its slow death and the MTA Board prepares to move forward with its Doomsday budget plan, city commentators are gearing up to wage a war of words against the New York State Senate.

Nicole Gelinas, an editor for City Journal, roundly criticized the Senate in today’s Post. While the Senate, she notes, wants to exact concessions in the form of MTA CEO and Executive Director Elliot Sander’s job, the Senators are the ones who should losing their jobs. She writes:

So after months of stalling, Albany has reportedly decided that the problem with the state-controlled Metropolitan Transportation Authority is its management. If so, it’s a fatal misreading by Gov. Paterson – and New Yorkers should start to worry fiercely about the subways and the rest of our transit infrastructure…

This is simply bizarre. By any fair reading, the MTA’s woes aren’t current management’s fault. The authority’s biggest problem is the massive amounts of debt it took on years ago, in the Pataki era. Politicos, including then-Executive Director Marc Shaw, forced that debt to bloat knowing full well that it would blow up after they had left.

At the time, everyone – from liberal transit advocates to conservative fiscal watchdogs – warned unanimously that this debt was a disaster scheduled to blow up around . . . now. Yet the MTA willfully hurt itself, its riders and the city to keep the pols happy.

In fact, current management has been making a good effort to cut back costs to pay all of that debt without hurting customers too much – making the back office take twice its proportional fair share of cuts, for example. And the MTA, over the last two years, has credibly started long-overdue savings reforms, like merging back offices that were the legacy of the separate transit systems New York used to have before creating the MTA – four decades ago.

More alarming to Gelinas is what this bit of politicking could mean for the future of the MTA. She worries:

If the talk is true, the immediate danger for the city is that Albany won’t be able to find someone to head the MTA with any real “experience” – because people with Pataki-era experience are those most responsible for commiting malpractice on the MTA via that horrible debt albatross. (Of course, Albany could hire these people back – but that would be worse than no experience.)

The longer-term – and graver – danger is that part of the reason that Paterson and the Legislature may force Sander out is that they just want someone to be much quieter about the region’s biggest risk: not fare hikes, but the MTA’s unfunded capital plan.

Her conclusion too is strong. “The bottom line,” she writes, “is that New York will never get the modern transit it needs unless some governor (likely pressured by a mayor) makes it clear to the public that it’s a huge priority for him – and then gives someone like Sander the years, resources and reasonable, accountable independence to do the job.”

There is absolutely nothing else to say here. The state’s system for dealing with the MTA is so far broken that the State Senators are considering doing something to “save” the MTA that would harm the agency for years to come. Until New Yorkers realize this and hold our elected responsible, we may as well get used to the idea of a $104 30-Day Unlimited Ride MetroCard.

You may also like

7 comments

MAL March 12, 2009 - 12:49 pm

While service cuts and multi-fare rate hikes pose serious threats to the state of transit in the city, the $104/mo Unlimited, with which you close your post, is quite reasonable. The fact is that Albany’s recalcitrance does not give straphangers an excuse to shirk from their own responsibilities. Spread out over 30 days, the Unlimited’s hike is extremely modest for a daily commuter. All sides should be making at effort at closing the gap. Anything else is just another attempt to pass the bill around the table without contributing more to the tab.

Reply
Benjamin Kabak March 12, 2009 - 12:51 pm

I certainly don’t disagree, but the MTA is going to institute a fare hike no matter what. It just depends if we get stuck with an 8% hike that raises the costs a little while drivers spend on tolls or if we get stuck with a 23% hike and service cuts while getting nothing in return.

Reply
rhywun March 12, 2009 - 1:29 pm

[What happened to “What’s in a subway station name?” I really wanted to comment on that….]

Reply
Benjamin Kabak March 12, 2009 - 1:34 pm

Rhywun: It’s coming back at 3:30. I pressed publish before setting the appropriate time for it! Comment then.

Reply
rhywun March 12, 2009 - 1:36 pm

Ah, cool.

Reply
Scott C March 12, 2009 - 2:12 pm

Ah, the New York Legislature – it puts the fun in dysfunctional.

Reply
Ray March 12, 2009 - 8:17 pm

Another example of Republican deficits blowing up on Democrats. Fortunately Obama isn’t afraid to do what it takes.

Get some spine Paterson! And shame on you New York Assembly and Senate Dems. You control all branches of government and have solid electoral support and you can’t come up with a stable mass transit funding model? Give me a break.

In this environment of weakness, giving the free Bridges to the loosers in Albany is a mistake. The Senate shows every day they don’t act they don’t know what to do.

Instead, let’s give the MTA to Michael Bloomberg. He knows whats necessary and has been willing to take the political hit to get it done. He stuck his neck out and said yes to Congestion pricing when Bush was in office. It was genius then and it is now. Pure and simple.

Do we have the ability to put forth a Constitutional Referendum in NY State to move the MTA to Mayoral control? If so, I’ll be the first to sign it.

Reply

Leave a Comment