MTA Politics

West of the Hudson River lies an area of New York State far removed from New York City. Rockland and Orange Counties have far more in common with Northern Jersey and Pennsylvania than they do with the other, closer regions in the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District.

For years, those two districts have had a love-hate relationship with the rest of the state over the MTA. The station at the rural end of the Port Jervis line is over two hours away from Penn Station, and the rolling stock belongs to New Jersey Transit. On paper, Metro-North is responsible for the stations and the service, and as such, Rockland and Orange Counties contribute generously to the MTA.

In fact, these two counties carry more than their fair share of the tax burden. 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.

Since these two counties have some access to Metro-North and general MTA services, the payroll tax soon to be levied among business in the 12 MTA counties is heading to Rockland and Orange as well. County representatives are very unhappy about it, and politicians in both Rockland and Orange Counties want out of the MTA.

Duchess County officials are not too happy about it either. Duchess County receives more service than Rockland and Orange Counties and won’t be able to talk their way out of this one. “The passing of the payroll tax is absolutely unacceptable,” County Legislature Chairman Roger Higgins said. “It’s the talk of the town and I think representatives in Albany rally need to hear from us.”

East of the city, the general consensus sounds similar. Officials in Huntington on Long Island expressed their dismay with the taxation impact of the MTA rescue plan as well.

This is, in the end, a messy political issue, and the two counties’ endgames are questionable. Rockland officials say the payroll tax will cost the businesses in the county $18.5 million a year. They want something in return. In the past, more service has been a good enough carrot for those counties, but this time, they may want out.

It’s highly doubtful that anyone in Albany will heed their complaints. The MTA, after all, needs the money, and as long as the state refuses to implement sensible transit reform within New York City, the counties outside of it will carry a disproportionate tax burden.

For now, this is just another in a growing line of stories about the flawed rescue package. Eventually, these pleas won’t make headlines, but the dissent will sit there. Next time the legislature has to address transportation issues, these upstate counties won’t be willing to shoulder more burden, and this problem will merely grow and grow and grow.

Editor’s Note: Don’t forget about the 10 a.m. liveblog. I’ll be covering the MTA Board as those overseeing the transportation authority vote to rollback the service cuts and fare hikes. I’ll be taking reader questions then as well.

As part of the political give-and-take between the state legislature and the MTA, the leadership structure of the transit agency will soon undergo a change. Right now, Elliot Sander is the full-time CEO and executive director of the authority while Dale Hemmerdinger is the part-time, unpaid chairman of the board.

The new scheme is part of the State Senate’s over-the-top and largely unnecessary effort to draw more transparency out of one of the more transparent public-benefit corporations around. Instead of two men sharing power, only one person will occupy the full-time paid position of chairman and CEO. If this streamlined leader so choose, he or she may bring on an executive director, but that executive director will be subordinate to the chairman/CEO.

With this framework on the way, the speculatin’ has begun: Who will stay? Who will go? Who will replace whom?

Right now, the answers to these questions are unclear. In March, I reported on a story concerning the future of Elliot Sander. At the time, anonymous whisperings indicated that Sander would lose his job and that David Paterson will appoint one of his own to fill the top slot. Remember, Sander is an Eliot Spitzer appointee.

Today, the news looks a little different. As the Daily News reports, the legislature has just killed Hemmerdinger’s job. While the real estate developer was to be in charge until 2011, the legislature has given him 30 more days on the job.

While transit advocates hope that Sander and his policy wonk background stay on the job, Bobby Cuza reported today that Sander’s fate is unknown. “I think it’s really up to the governor to decide. This is a really important position in terms of the State of New York, and I really think it’s up to the governor,” Sander said to NY1.

I’d stick with Sander. He’s become the face of a beleaguered transit agency, and I think he’s done an admirable job steering the MTA through an unavoidable and unsolvable crisis. He has a vision for the future and could produce a sound transit policy for New York City. Soon enough, though, we’ll see what David Paterson, the only man whose vote counts, has to say.

One of the sticking points in the Senate during the debate over the MTA has been the authority’s leadership. Many Senators believe that the MTA’s leadership doesn’t know what they’re doing, that they are misleading the public, that they aren’t cutting enough costs internally.

Reality could not be further from Albany, and a recent pro-MTA editorial in Crain’s highlights that point:

Some suggest the answer lies in firing another CEO, the MTA’s Lee Sander. He has become a target for those who believe the MTA is bloated and wasteful. In truth, Mr. Sander has wisely streamlined operations and cut costs in his two years in the post. He hasn’t solved all of the MTA’s problems. Who could in such a short time? And he hasn’t been the most effective politician in selling what he has done. But is that really a fault? Shouldn’t the job go to a seasoned transportation professional rather than a politician?

Meanwhile, Streetsblogs checked in with the MTA to find out just how the authority is streamlining operations. MTA spokesman Aaron Donovan told Brad Aaron about the changes:

Donovan points to the following efficiencies imposed “even as demand is at levels not seen since the early 1950s”: elimination of 410 administrative positions; establishment of Regional Bus Operations, merging three companies into one; creation of a Business Service Center to “consolidate duplicative back office functions”; assignment of managers to oversee individual subway lines; formation of a blue-ribbon panel to “encourage competition and increase bidding on capital construction projects”; and increases in advertising revenue “from $38 million in 1997 to $125 million in 2008.”

Furthermore, according to Donovan, Sander has saved the MTA 11 percent by mandating internal budget cuts. That’s solving — and not contributing to — the problem.

Of course, someone may have to be the political sacrificial lamb. While the Senators sadly won’t fire themselves, Sander’s days may be unfortunately numbered. He is a man with a vision for the MTA and would be by far the best choice to head a money-rich transit agency. But those times have never been, and Sander, like the rest of us, awaits word of the fate of what is for now his transit agency.