Ah, December. Remember how enthusiastic and naïve we were when the MTA told us that along with the fare hike, New Yorkers would enjoy much-needed service upgrades as well? Those were the days.
Just three months after announcing that the service upgrades were to be postponed, the MTA has shelved them entirely due to dire financial circumstances. What an utterly unsurprising turn of events.
Pete Donohue reports:
The cash-strapped will not launch a $60 million service improvement package because it doesn’t have the money, the Daily News has learned.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority last year unveiled plans that included more frequent bus, subway and commuter trains to soften the blow of fare hikes. The program was to be launched in phases starting this summer – if the authority could afford it.
It can’t, sources said.
“A final decision won’t be made on the enhancements until we report June revenue numbers next week, but revenues would have to turn around significantly as we are already $80 million behind in real estate taxes alone,” MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin said.
On the one hand, I’m sympathetic to the MTA’s financial plight. The agency has long been screwed over by Albany with the congestion pricing debacle just the most recent in a long line of injustices. Its biggest source of dedicated revenue — real estate taxes — is at the mercy of the housing market, and the agency is trying to meet the demands of a 21st Century city without nearly enough money.
But on the other hand, the public was somewhat more accepting of this most recent fare hike because we were going to get more service. Under-served lines were supposed to see more trains and more frequent service, and now, straphangers will see nothing but another fare hike in 2009 with empty promises behind that one too. No one will be held accountable.
Meanwhile, all of these upgrades was supposed to cost, when first reported in December, $16 million this year and $46 million next year. Now, the MTA is saying that these upgrades would cost $30 million this year and $60 million next year. That’s a $16 million-per-year increase in the span of six months. The U.S. economy just isn’t that bad, and I’m not alone in nothing that these flexible numbers are rather perturbing.
Token chocolates, above, available at the Transit Museum store.
13 comments
zzzzzzzzzzz what have i missed?
A poorly run agency isn’t helped by fare hikes – and congestion pricing wouldn’t have helped it either. I am glad it got voted down.
There isn’t a government agency anywhere that’s ever improved by choking it of funds.
Dissolve the MTA.
Split the system along the lines of the IRT, BMT, and IND. Lease their operations and maintenance to several private firms .
Bring in more ads inside. And outside.
Lease more space.
Sell naming rights to stations.
Hire Charmin, Lysol, Kohler et al to maintain restrooms.
The subway should be controlled by those who use it- by the riders. It would probably be more efficient (economies of scale) to have the city run it, rather than private firms. And Bloomberg should be assigned to lead it, if he doesn’t become governor.
I suppose, by that argument, the fare should still be capped at five cents. Remember what happened when they did that? The subway nearly collapsed. For a large rapid-transit system, our fares are among the lowest in the world, and we live in one of the world’s most expensive cities, and ours is one of the few that run 24/7. In modern times, farebox revenues have never—never—covered operating costs, no matter who was running the agency. Fact.
Marc,
This is true, our fares are pretty low, but they are fair. They match the level of service. What we need is service improvements first, and fare hikes later, not the other way around. This can be done by bond issues, good financial planning, and coordination with Albany.
Except that they’re not: Paris and Madrid have cheaper subways, especially relative to their overall cost of living, which is higher than New York’s. Of course, Paris and Madrid never underwent the same large-scale neglect as New York; in Berlin, which did, riding the U-Bahn costs slightly more in Euros than riding NYCT costs in dollars. But let’s not peddle the myth that NYCT is cheap for the average commuter.
Boris, the problem with that argument is that the MTA has incurred huge debt service to pay for what we have now. If service is improved, the funds to pay for it have to come from somewhere. If you increase service without increasing revenue, then you just increase a deficit that is unacceptable to begin with.
The subway should be controlled by those who use it- by the riders.
That’s a bit like an amateur baseball fan thinking he could manage the Yankees.
Come on, you know I meant ownership, as in owning shares, not being the management. You hire professional managers for that. Riders should have a voice the same way we vote for our politicians or buy stocks.
[…] 2nd Ave. Subway History « Planned service upgrades going… going… gone […]
[…] this morning’s item on the end of the planned service upgrades, it seems that the Daily News sources weren’t 100 percent correct. According to The […]