At the end of last week on a Friday during the summer, a few anonymous MTA officials dropped a story on Pete Donohue. The MTA, they said, is not-so-quietly considering a fare hike for 2009 to meet operating budget deficits that will exceed tens of millions of dollars.

On Wednesday, with MTA CEO and Executive Director Lee Sander testifying in front of the New York State Assembly’s Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions, agency officials dropped any pretense of anonymity and flat-out toward the gathered assembly members that a 2009 fare hike will be necessary if the agency doesn’t see more money flowing its way.

Times reporters William Neuman and Jeremy Peters tell the sad but expected tale:

The executive director, Elliot G. Sander, said that the transportation authority faced an operating deficit of as much as $500 million to $700 million next year and that it would “have no option” but to raise fares in 2009 if it did not receive considerable outside financial assistance.

“Our hope is for additional support from Albany and other partners,” Mr. Sander said, speaking in Albany at a hearing of the State Assembly’s Committee on Corporations, Authorities and Commissions. “If we do not have funding from our outside partners, then the only recourse the M.T.A. has is to raise fares, engage in service cutbacks and cutting staff.”

The authority previously proposed raising fares in 2010, as part of what it said would be a series of regular, moderate increases every two years. But an increase next year would disrupt that initiative before it even started.

Now, MTA haters will be quick to unleash familiar refrains: The MTA has no budget accountability; the MTA has no idea how to balance its books. And while I’m not usually one to leap to the MTA’s rescue, it’s clear from Sander’s testimony that this was a largely unexpected fiscal problem (and one that could have been averted through congestion pricing).

As I’ve noted before, the MTA’s expected revenue from the real estate tax is nearly $100 million below expected levels, and as Sander said today, their fuel expenditures are already 17 percent over budget. Oil prices are heading in only one direction these days, and it isn’t down.

So the MTA has a valid excuse. Now though the ball is firmly in the Assembly’s court. During the congestion pricing debate, numerous elected representatives — and, most vocally, Richard Brodsky — told the MTA that, to get more money from the state, all Lee Sander had to do was ask. As Jay Gallagher at The Journal-News’ Politics on the Hudson blog reported yesterday, that’s exactly what Sander did. “I am asking the Legislature and the governor for more financial support,’’ he said to Brodsky’s committee.

So what say you, Mr. Brodsky? The MTA has laid out its case, and the city’s vital transportation authority has found itself up the proverbial creek with nary a paddle in sight. Will Brodsky keep his word or will he just renege on yet another transit-related promise in the area?

Fare hike 2009, here we come.

Much like every other straphanger in the New York area, the Daily News editorial board isn’t too thrilled with the news that another fare hike may head our way next year. The board issues a stridently worded editorial blasting MTA Chair Dale Hemmerdinger and CEO Lee Sander for breaking their fare hike and fiscal promises.

Take a look:

Back in March, the MTA socked riders with another fare hike for subways, buses and commuter rail. The salve was a pledge that there would not be another increase for at least two years.

Chairman Dale Hemmerdinger and CEO Lee Sander promised to get the agency’s fiscal affairs in order. They promised they were starting an orderly program of fare increases: Riders would pony up every other year, with hikes in line with inflation. They promised they would get whatever additional money they needed – and it would be a lot – from state and city governments.

“Trust us,” harrumphed Hemmerdinger and Sander.

And they took the public for a ride. Barely three months after giving their word – and pushing through a hike with the blessings of then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Mayor Bloomberg – the MTA is floating the prospect of another increase as early as next year.

All of a sudden, the agency is broke, suffering from declining revenues while costs are climbing. Real estate-related taxes dedicated to the MTA are plummeting, thanks largely to the subprime crisis. Next year’s budget gap won’t be $220 million, but as much as $700 million.

The editorial ends with an exhortation to Sander and Hemmerdinger to “shoot straighter.”

Now, that’s all well and good except there’s a problem: Sander and Hemmerdinger did shoot straight last year, but they were trumped by then-governor Eliot Spitzer who lessened what would have been a substantial fare hike.

This is not a new story. In November, when Eliot Spitzer spoke out against the fare hike, I lambasted him for ignoring the financial realities of the MTA’s situation, and I wrote about how Spitzer’s pandering was reminiscent of the five-cent fare follies of the early 20th Century. I still think this current debacle is Spitzer’s fault.

To anyone watching our economy and the MTA’s books, disaster was looming in November. The MTA was relying on real estate tax revenues to cover its operating deficit, and Sander routinely stressed, rightly so, that this revenue stream was in danger of drying up as soon as the economy went south. Well, the real estate market went south in a big way, and the MTA is seeing its worst fears realized.

Had the MTA been allowed to implement its desired fare hike at the end of the 2007 instead of Spitzer’s reduced hike proposal, we wouldn’t be discussing a potential 2009 fare hike. As it is, Spitzer’s proposal benefitted cars and tourists more than anything else, and we and the MTA are still paying the price.