“Some studies have reported that Rockland County pays $42 million more to the MTA than the service it receives is worth. Orange county carries a similar burden.”

What studies?

I’ve tried to get data on the amount of taxes that these districts pay into the MMTOA account. I talked to the MTA who said they only get a check from the state. I talked to the Office of the Budget at the state and they told me that they do not have that data broken down by county.

If Orange and Rockland were smart, they would insist that their tax revenue to the MTA be put toward projects that benefit their counties, such as the rail portion of the Tappan Zee bridge.

I’m all for such an arrangement. While we’re at it, let’s also ensure that money from New York City stays in New York City, instead of being siphoned to Washington and Albany to the tune of $10 billion a year each. $20 billion dollars adds up to a lot of new subway miles, a lot of pay raises for teachers, and a lot of new cops.

When I said I was wondering what the point of the post was, I guess I was asking if you personally prefer any particular solution to the problem. You offered a few ideas, but you didn’t seem satisfied with any of them, and suggested all the future holds is a few counties of embittered MTA contributors (of course, what county isn’t?)

I don’t think you would prefer the counties secede from the MTA, but you don’t seem to think they will get a fair deal from Albany. What do you think would be an equitable amount of service for these far flung low density areas? Would it be enough to run more frequent trains or will they need major improvements such as commuter rail from Suffern to Grand Central and Port Chester? Maybe their contribution to the payroll tax should be reduced somehow?

I’ve never heard of a suburb that doesn’t resent something about the city center or vice versa, but certainly agreements have been reached.

And since the MTA is there primarily to pay pensions, retiree health care, and debt service, not to provide transportation, you don’t know who is subsidizing who until you know where the employees, ex-employees and bondholders live.

My guess is the suburbs want something for nothing. My observation is that everyone in Generation Greed wants something for nothing, no matter where they live.

They have gotten it by selling out the future, which is now here. So everyone is being ripped off by definition. They were happy to be in the MTA while debts were run up, but now they want out when debts need to be paid back. Surprise.

Access to the Region’s Core, while NOT YET funded by the MTA Capital Plan will directly benefit Rockland and Orange County commuters by offering them a one seat ride to Penn Station. Perhaps the MTA should contribute to ARC by funding its extension to Grand Central?

Right now the heavy lifting is being done by NJ Transit, the Port Authority and the USDOT and it gets us only as far as 34th Street/Herald Square.

And the flow of money has been mostly in the opposite direction, largely at the behest of the Federal government. Methinks the counties doth protest too much.

To identify and discuss a source of conflict within the state legislature as it pertains to the MTA.

It seems the problem is more cultural. City dwellers need transit and will do a lot more to maintain it. Suburbanites, in particular the ones farthest out, don’t want to pay taxes for something they don’t need as much. What should we make of this? Perhaps there be a tiered membership with different levels of taxes and service provided or should it be an all or nothing deal? These city vs suburb issues have been going on since suburbs first existed.