February 2010

Meet Felix Ortiz, Democrat and Assembly representative from New York City’s 51st District. A member of the Assembly since 1994, Ortiz represents an area of Brooklyn that encompasses Boerum Hill, Borough Park, Gowanus, Red Hook, South of Park Slope, Sunset Park, Windsor Terrace and Wyckoff. As a 16-year Assembly veteran, he keeps a rather low profile but was instrumental in getting the nation’s first ban on hand-held cell phone use while driving approved by the state.

This week, he entered the MTA fray when Gotham Gazette’s David King talked to him for an extensive piece on the state of the MTA’s finances. King’s thoroughly examination of the current financial crisis summarizes the various proposals and issues, and it covers ground I’ve been focusing on for the last few months. He did, however, get some choice quotes from Felix Ortiz on the Student MetroCard issue. Take a look:

“Our working and lower-income families will not be able to absorb these additional costs, especially in the current depressed economic state we are in,” said Assemblyman Felix Ortiz. “This cut is discriminatory in that it affects minority communities to a much higher degree. Everyone is entitled to an education; it should never become a privilege for those who can afford it.”

Ortiz said he can’t see providing the MTA with more funding until the agency makes its accounting more transparent. “Until they reveal their two sets of books and say here is book A and book B, we can’t listen to the MTA. We need to fire everyone, restructure and reorganize,” Ortiz said. “The MTA needs to get rid of the fat at the top.”

The emphasis in there — highlight to show the sheer ignorance in Ortiz’s statement — is mine. Here is a man elected every two years to represent New Yorkers in the state Assembly, and he is not versed in the issue of the day. He is dragging up a seven-year-old charge, one levied at the MTA by a corrupt state comptroller and eventually disprove in a court of law, as indication that the MTA is not to be trusted or even funded. He wants to break labor contracts and break down the city’s transit system before he would even deign to fund the agency.

If only Ortiz were a lone insane voice amidst a sea of MTA sanity, I wouldn’t be so concerned with him. But he joins a long list of elected representatives — including current city comptroller John Liu, Peter Vallone and Aileen Gunther — who bring up trumped up charges as a way to eschew responsibility over the need to fund the MTA and student travel in New York City. This is a failure of government to an extreme.

At the end of the day, Ortiz’s statements aren’t completely about the alleged corruption at the MTA. No one is saying it’s a well run organization, but they don’t have two books and have vastly improved the transparency of their finances. Instead, it’s about an Assembly representative who won’t find money for student transit foisting the state’s problems onto an easy scapegoat. As the MTA said in a statement to me last week, “We agree that school children should not have to pay to get to school, but funding this service is the responsibility of the State and City. The MTA has been called the yellow school bus for New York City, and that’s a good analogy. All over the state school kids get picked up by yellow school buses, and they don’t pay to ride. But the bus doesn’t show up unless state or local government pays the bus company.”

If Ortiz or Liu or Gunther or Vallone want to waste his or her time blaming the victim, so be it. The MTA will turn to its last recourse and cut the services that matter to these officials’ constituents.

When Eliot Spitzer won the governship in 2006, David Paterson, then Lieutenant Governor, never expected to wind up as the state’s chief executive for the better part of Spitzer’s term. Felled by a sex scandal in early 2008, Spitzer had to give way to Paterson, and since then, Paterson’s approval ratings have plummeted. Late last week, The Times, in a well-reported piece, accused him of being aloof, disinterested and simply bad at his job. It was, in my eyes, a worse indictment of his ability to govern than any uncovered scandal could have been.

Yet, Paterson will truck on. He announced this weekend that, despite rumors of a primary challenge from fellow Democrat Andrew Cuomo, Paterson will take his 26-percent approval rating on the road from Niagra to New York and Nassau in an effort to win the governorship in his own right. In his announcement speech on Saturday, he appealed to the MTA’s political and economic woes as a sign of the need for his leadership.

Claiming, in a positive light, that he has “done more in my two years of governor than most governors have done in two terms,” Paterson jumped into the fray. “So,” he said, “if you want a candidate that’s always telling the special interest what they want to hear but has never told the people of New York what they’re going to do about the problems of our time, balancing the budget, balancing the M.T.A. budget, rebuilding Ground Zero, stopping the violence among teenagers, then, don’t pick me as governor.”

Explicit in that statement is the claim that Paterson has told us what he plans to do about the problems of balancing the MTA budget. Implicit in that statement is the claim that Paterson is on the side of the MTA and will help balance the budget. As far as I can tell, neither of those statements are true.

So what, then, has David Paterson done for the MTA since taking over for Eliot Spitzer on March 17, 2008? He started his tenure off on the right foot when he announced support for congestion pricing. That, unfortunately, went nowhere. Paterson didn’t offer up much leadership on congestion pricing, and although congestion pricing remains one of the better solutions to the MTA’s woes, Paterson has not raised the issue since he endorsed the Ravitch Plan in early December 2008.

Since then, Paterson hasn’t offered up much of anything for the MTA. He dithered as the State Senate bickered and provided little leadership as the MTA faced its Doomsday last spring. His great compromise was one that simply promised schools a tax rebate. More problematic though are his recent positions and moves that have actively eliminated funding for MTA programs. He rescinded $140 million in state appropriations and has cut state Student MetroCard contributions from $45 million annually to just $6 million. His representative to the state’s capital review board torpedoed the MTA’s latest five-year plan.

Paterson is a born and bred New Yorker. He grew up in Brooklyn, went to Columbia and studied law at Hofstra before working in Queens and representing the Borough of Kings in the State Senate. He knows how valuable the MTA is to the city, the metropolitan area and the state at large. Yet, his record on the MTA is one that should not inspire the belief that he can, as he claims, balance the MTA budget.

As he gears up his run for governor, David Paterson is asking us to trust him on issues of transit while his record speaks to two years of last chances and lower state contributions. With Election Day nearly eight months away, Paterson can change his record on the MTA with one strike of the pen and some good old politicking. Right now, though, as the MTA moves into the political forefront of what promises to become a tedious race for the governship, Paterson has a long way to go.