When I started writing Second Ave. Sagas, Peter Kalikow was in charge of the MTA. Since then, I’ve seen Lee Sander and Dale Hemmerdinger take the reins; I’ve seen Helena Williams succeed them on an interim basis; I’ve seen Jay Walder come and go; and now Joe Lhota sits atop the agency. Depending upon how you wish to count, that’s six folks in charge over the span of five years and three months. With that kind of turnover, it’s amazing anything at the MTA gets accomplished at all.

The Port Authority has it worse. It must answer to two state governors and has a complex leadership structure that has seen seven executive directors since 2001 and frequent turnover in the chairmanship position as well. It was tasked with rebuilding the World Trade Center, and it recently enacted steep fare hikes and toll increases in order to fund an ambitious capital plan. It is a deeply dysfunctional and non-transparent bureaucracy that can’t even answer simple FOIA requests in less than four months.

Yesterday, Navigant Consulting released an independent audit of the organization, and its critique was a scathing one. Their preliminary review revealed ” a challenged and dysfunctional organization suffering from a lack of consistent leadership, a siloed underlying bureaucracy, poorly coordinated capital planning processes, insufficient cost controls, and a lack of transparent and effective oversight of the World Trade Center program that has obscured full awareness of billions of dollars in exposure to the Port Authority.”

The headlines today are all focusing on the World Trade Center. The Port Authority must contribute $7.7 billion — and perhaps a few hundred million more — to rebuild the felled towers, and no one can offer a regular accounting for the project. For those of us who have seen the costs of the Calatrava PATH terminal jump by a few billion dollars, this revelation can hardly be much of a surprise.

The more alarming lesson from the audit though concerns the Port Authority’s capital plan. As the PA is now, Navigant charges, a major real estate developer and holding company, it may not have the money or capacity to realize its ambitious capital plan. Navigant is urging further examination of the plan and process.

For now, though, what I read in the audit — available here as a PDF — reminds me, in part, of the MTA a whole bunch of years ago. The organization is overflowing with unnecessary and redundant positions while workers are making far too much money for their jobs, and no one really understands the organizational structure within the authority. Patrick Foye, a former MTA Board member, is now in charge, and he’ll have to do what Jay Walder spent a few years doing at the MTA. Cutting costs and reorganizing will become key buzz words.

For their parts, the men in charge seem to recognize this reality. “The consultant’s preliminary review underscores the need for the Port Authority to refocus,” Foye, the Executive Director, said. “A poorly coordinated capital planning process, insufficient cost controls and a lack of transparent and effective oversight of the World Trade Center program that has obscured full awareness of billions of dollars in exposure to the Port Authority all played a role in getting us to where we are today. Further, having the World Trade Center as the focal point of the agency’s work over the last decade has led to mission drift from our core role. We have much work to do to fulfill the agency’s mission as the provider of critical transportation infrastructure needs for the region and as an engine for economic growth and job creation. I am fully committed to working with the Governors and with Chairman Samson, Vice Chairman Rechler and the full Board to get this agency back on track.”

That’s a mouthful of buzzwords, but it has to become a reality. We’re too dependent upon Port Authority infrastructure for the agency to falter. It must move beyond the World Trade Center. It must address our 21st Century needs. It must find some stability at the top. As the MTA seeks stable funding sources, the Port Authority must become leaner. Not doing so puts our transportation infrastructure at a great risk indeed.

For a more skeptical take on the audit and the Port Authority’s work at the WTC site, check out this piece by Steve Cuozzo. Like I am, Cuozzo is highly skeptical of the billions spent on the PATH hub, few of which are going toward actual transportation capacity improvements.

A $3.4 billion PATH station will serve as a symbol for poor infrastructure investment strategies.

Back in early October, when opined on the way we spend transportation dollars in New York City, I railed against the $3.4 billion price tag attached to the Calatrava-designed PATH hub at the World Trade Center. In the comments to that piece, Charles Komanoff urged me to find a cost breakdown of the design elements, and that week, I submitted a FOIA request to the Port Authority for that information. If we knew just how much the Port Authority is spending on design, we would have a better platform from which to view the project.

It’s now mid-January, and I’m still waiting on those numbers. I’ve heard from the PA a few times. First, they promised me my documents in November, then in December and now next week. It can’t be that hard to drum up an outline of the dollars being spent on construction of the steel porcupine vs. the dollars spent on improving passenger flow and transit capacity. But apparently, those aren’t figures the PA is too keen on releasing.

Today, in The Wall Street Journal, Eliot Brown provides us with a glimpse into the inner workings of the construction at the World Trade Center site, and it seems that the steel demands for Calatrava hub are slowing down the works and causing costs to spike. He reports:

Long beset by delays and cost overruns, construction at the World Trade Center site faces another potential snag: the financial struggles of the company responsible for erecting the massive steel skeletons of two towers and a $3.4 billion transportation hub. For months, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been quietly advancing money to the contractor responsible for fabricating and putting up steel for the projects, which include One World Trade Center, according to people familiar with the matter.

The company, DCM Erectors, has more than $700 million worth of steel contracts at the site. The firm has told the Port Authority that it is facing cash-flow problems in part because of the project’s complexity, and also because of the amount of time it takes for the agency to approve extra costs…

The company’s troubles speak to some of the larger problems with the site’s redevelopment, which is running billions of dollars over original budget projections. The transportation hub alone has a price tag of $3.4 billion, up from an expected $2 billion in 2007. DCM’s woes stem largely from the station, which features giant steel arches that soar over a large train hall, and the 1,776-foot-tall One World Trade Center.

According to The Journal, DCM apparently “underestimated costs,” which goes without saying considering how the cost of the hub is up 70 percent over initial estimates and could climb even higher.

At this point in the process, no one will stop the Calatrava Hub or save the money. This is, however, a severely misguided project that is flushing transportation dollars down the drain. Between the Calatrava Hub and the Fulton Street Transit Center, various government agencies will have spent nearly $5 billion to deliver litle in the way of transportation capacity improvements. For that money, the feds could have guaranteed ARC Tunnel overruns or built another section and a half of the Second Ave. Subway. Misguided priorities indeed.

Patrick Foye, a current MTA Board member and one-team downstate head of the Empire State Development Corporation, has been picked to run the Port Authority, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced this morning. Koye is a lawyer who has worked for powerhouse law firm Skadden Arps and served as a Nassau County Deputy County Executive under Ed Mangano.

In announcing the appointment this afternoon, the New York Governor took another swipe at Ward. The two have been battling it out in the press since the outgoing Port Authority head slammed New York and New Jersey for playing politics with Port Authority budgets. “The Port Authority must meet its potential as a major economic engine that plans for the region and attracts business on an international scale,” Cuomo said. “We must also improve its operations and maximize the value out of every dollar spent so that it is financially responsible and respects the tax and toll payers.”

For transportation advocates, Foye’s choice sets a tone at the Port Authority that, at a time when concerns over Port Authority expenditures are running rampant, money management will trump development or growth. Foye, a lawyer with close ties to Long Island real estate industry, has worked in economic policy throughout his political career. A Spitzer nominee to the Empire State Development Corporation, he led the ESDC as it put forth controversial plans to redevelop the Javits Center and was instrumental in securing support and funding for the long-awaited Moynihan Station. The impact and expense of this new Amtrak depot are both hotly-contested issues.

Recently, Foye has served as one of Cuomo’s top economic advisers, and in a statement, he expressed his enthusiasm for the job. ““I am honored to be recommended for Executive Director of the Port Authority,” he said. “Under Governor Cuomo’s leadership, we have begun to re-energize New York’s economy and pave the way for job growth in the state. I thank Governor Cuomo for this opportunity and look forward to working closely with him and the Board of Directors at the Port Authority on maintaining and improving the New York metropolitan region’s vital transportation, infrastructure and economic development assets.”

At this same time, Cuomo announced today that he would be folding both the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and Moynihan Station Development Corporation into the Port Authority. “Too many different agencies doing the same or closely related work makes little sense,” he said in a statement. “The Port Authority is best situated to oversee the development at Moynihan Station and the orderly wind down of the LMDC and these changes will consolidate responsibility within the Authority.” Foye’s work then on Moynihan Station will continue.

As a transportation wonk, Foye’s experience has come via his time on the MTA Board. He was appointed by Mangano in 2010 for a term that ends in 2015, and it is unclear how this appointment to the Port Authority will impact his Board seat. Fellow Board members praised his service though. “He’s delved into operating details of the system, communication issues with commuters and fare structure,” Mitch Pally said to Transportation Nation.

Although I’m hesitant to read too much into one appointment, Cuomo’s decision to name an economics adviser to the PA’s top spot portends a similar outcome for the MTA. It certainly strengthens the rumors that Joe Lhota will be nominated this week, and it showcases how Cuomo seems more focused on budgetary and management issues than with transportation and transit operations. Yet, on the other hand, the Port Authority is more akin to a traditional economic development agency than the MTA is, and in that sense, Foye’s background makes him a fairly solid candidate for the post.

Former airline employees and urban historians were among those who descended upon the TWA Flight Center yesterday. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)

With its vast network of underground tunnels and hidden infrastructure, New York seemingly possesses a city within a city. For every public plaza and popular park, there are a number of off-limits locations that capture our imagination. For years, the West Side Line held the top spot in that category, but since the High Line opened, attention has shifted to the TWA Flight Center, a sealed off relic of another era in aviation now owned by Jet Blue.

The Eero Saarinen-designed building, with its sweeping curves and glamorous reputation, reminds us of a time when flying was a luxury and not a headache. It has been immortalized in film and screen, and as Jet Blue and the Port Authority work to renovate the headhouse, it will one day soon be returned to use in a yet-to-be-determined function. This weekend, the space was open to the public as part of the Open House New York event.

I journeyed out to JFK Airport this weekend to catch a glimpse of the interior of this iconic building. There’s something about off-limits infrastructure that brings out urban explorers who want to know more about the history of their city. By and large, transportation infrastructure isn’t opened up during Open House NY due to liability and security concerns. (I know I’d pay and sign a release to see the station shell at South 4th Street.) This weekend, though, I had to chance to explore.

What follows is a slideshow of my photos from the event. In various states of renovation and disarray, the Saarinen headhouse is a sight to behold. For more on the past, present and future of this historic building, check out New Yorkology’s coverage of the event.

When the MTA starts operating trains to 11th and 34th Street in a few years, it will be doing so to a station paid for by the City of New York and over tracks paid for by the same. It’s all well and good that someone else decided to foot the bill for this transit extension, but once construction wraps up, that’s all she wrote. For the rest of its existence, the MTA will have to pay the operating and maintenance costs for this extension of the subway system.

The same thing, of course, happens all around town. Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway will increase operating costs as the MTA will have to run trains to the Upper East Side while maintaining levels of service to Astoria and Brooklyn along the BMT lines. The East Side Access project will require more rolling stock, more personnel and more long-term upkeep for the LIRR as well. Even as the capital dollars stop, these projects still cost the MTA money.

Meanwhile, politicians are often arguing for an increase in the MTA’s expenditures without even realizing. Constantly, elected officials and community boards call upon the authority to increase bus frequency or add new routes to better serve neighborhoods. But who is going to pay? In an ideal world, any new fares generated by the increased service would cover its operating costs, but since we live in a world in which transit fares are kept artificially low to stimulate ridership while direct subsidies are eliminated, no one ends up paying the operating costs. The MTA’s expenses mount, and they have to cut from somewhere else in the budget.

Recently, we’ve seen a somewhat similar drama play out with the Port Authority. A few weeks ago, the PA proposed a massive increase in tolls and fares, and the proceeds were to go toward an ambitious ten-year capital plan that would have improved rivers airports, roads and rails throughout the region. After a faux-political uproar, the PA approved a reduced fare and toll hike package but had to scale back some upgrade projects as well. For example, upgrades described by the authority as “critically” at Newark and LaGuardia Airports will be delayed.

Earlier this week, Port Authority head Chris Ward lashed out at politicians who refused to accept the Port Authority’s budget on the one hand and want fancy new projects on the other. “The reality,” he said to the New York Building Congress, “is that you cannot always do more with less. Sometimes you simply must do more, and we’ll be playing catchup with the rest of the world until that reality becomes a part of our political conversation.”

During his speech, Ward also praised Governors Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo for ultimately accepting the Port Authority’s budget. “We live in the reality of practical decision making and decisions were made for what can in fact be a level of tolls that work within this region, and the governors showed their leadership,” he said. (For more on Ward’s speech, check out Transportation Nation’s coverage.)

Now, of course, Ward has to strike a conciliatory tone toward the two state executives, but his first statement bears a closer look. For years, we’ve heard a lot about doing more with less. The MTA is trying to make every dollar count, as they remind us frequently, and Albany is still pushing for a forensic audit. Some politicians want to roll back the payroll tax; others balk at tolling the East River; and everyone wants more, more, more.

At a certain time, though, more is going to cost something. If we want more reliable service, better airports or even a smoother ride into the Lincoln Tunnel, we’ll have to pay for it. As I wrote last week, decisions we make now burden the future and that includes decisions made to avoid funding a project. If we can’t stomach the costs now and the infrastructure falls into further disrepair, it’s just going to be more costly to fix it in the future. Chris Ward knows what he’s talking about, but does anyone controlling the purse strings see it that way too?