MTA Politics

A deal to save Student MetroCards but few winners

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 18, 2010

After months of political threats and public outrage, the MTA and New York State have tentatively come to terms on a deal that will save the free Student MetroCard program, numerous sources say this evening. According to reports, the state will kick in just $25 million and provide the MTA with a few more incentives — including a higher cap on borrowing and a watered down bus lane enforcement measure — while the city will maintain its $45 million contribution. The deal comes just six days before the MTA Board was set to vote on a plan to phase out the free rides. Instead, the MTA will cash in its biggest political chit while getting too little in return.

News of the deal first broke late this evening when the Daily News spoke with the legislatures involved. At the time, those in Albany hesitated to confirm the details. “There’s no deal, but we’re getting close,” Richard Brodsky said. He later told NBC New York that the two sides were trying to agree on a dollar figure and “some other things the MTA says it wants.”

Shortly after midnight this morning, however, the MTA released a statement proclaiming that the Student MetroCards had been saved. To fund the student cards, the city and state will pay the MTA a combined $70 million. One year ago, before the state unilaterally cut its contributions, the MTA could count on $90 million from Albany and City Hall — the same amount it took in when the program first started in 1996. The MTA had maintained that the cost of providing free rides along with the revenue opportunities lost by not charging students amounted to well over $200 million, but with the state suffering through its own financial crisis, the MTA will have to pick up the difference for now.

Said the Authority in a statement:

The MTA believes that school children should not have to pay to travel to school,” the authority’s statement said, “but that funding this transportation is the responsibility of the State and City, as it is throughout the state…

While we had hoped that the State and City would pay the total cost of this program, we recognize the very difficult financial environment for not only the State and City, but for the hundreds of thousands of families in New York City who frankly could not afford to pay the added cost of transit fares for school transportation. We heard loud and clear at our public hearings, in meetings with student leaders and in protests around the city, that charging students would have a life-changing impact on the ability of New Yorkers to receive a quality education.

In light of these unbearable impacts, the MTA has decided to abandon the proposal to charge students for travel to and from school. As a result, the budget deficit that we are facing will increase, but the alternative is worse. Further actions needed to close this gap will be addressed when our preliminary financial plan is released in July.

What the MTA wanted though it won’t get. The MTA wanted a fully-funded program. The MTA wants a fully-funded capital plan, a source of revenue to avert service cuts and the same commitment to transit that Albany is willing to give to the state’s roads. Instead, the MTA will get less money from the state for Student MetroCards in 2010 than it did from 1996-2008.

Meanwhile, in Albany, the politicians continue to miss the point. Brodsky bashed the MTA for “using” students as a political pawn, one of the few options actually available to the beleaguered authority. “These kids should never have been used as a pawn in a larger dispute about MTA funding,” he said to The Times. He later qualified that statement and recognized that the MTA is in a dire financial situation as well. “The MTA needs and deserves more money, but using the students as a bargaining chip,” he said, “was never a good idea.”

In actuality, using the Student MetroCards was a great idea. What Albany or City Hall has never addressed is the why of it. Why should the MTA pay for the city and state to lean on the subways as a glorified free school bus without paying for the costs of it? The MTA should not be a pawn of the sagging public education system; it is a transit agency. Running trains frequently and on time should be more of a priority than free travel for 585,000 students. If the city and state will pay, the program should survive; if not, the MTA should cut it. It shouldn’t let the state short-charge them in exchange for meager political promises.

So where does this tentative deal leave the MTA? On the plus side, the authority will be allowed to use cameras to guard the new bus lanes. The latest measure, however, is a half-hearted excuse for true enforcement, and it covers only 50 miles of bus lanes. Financially, the authority will be permitted to up its borrowing level. This financial flexibility may help it cover some capital costs in the short term, but with $2 billion in debt service currently due, the MTA is learning first hand how harmful short-term borrowing can be to the bottom line. The students don’t have to pay this year, but the rest of us will foot the bill in the future as it comes due.

Finally, the kicker: Albany doesn’t expect the MTA to keep the Student MetroCards free for more than just another year. Since the MTA evaluates its budget on a year-to-year basis, it can threaten to revoke the program all over again in 2011, and it makes little financial sense for the authority to provide free rides. As Brodsky said to NBC, “All [the MTA] can guarantee legally is a year. I think you’re going to see them take the whole thing off the table. The MTA needs more help than we’re giving them.”

Keeping an even keel about her, Neysa Pranger of the Regional Plan Association called this deal “good news for students” and “questionable news for riders and the fares.” That it is. That it is indeed.

18 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesBuses

Report: Select Bus Service fare-beating under control

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 17, 2010

Throughout the spring, the Daily News has seemingly slammed the MTA for its failure to crack down on fare-beaters along the Bronx’s Bx12 Select Bus Service route. With the MTA and New York City’s Department of Transportation set to introduce pre-boarding payment methods to various Select Bus Service routes throughout the city, bus riders and, more importantly, city politicians were up in arms over these developments. The mass screamed: How could the cash-strapped MTA be giving rides away with this new-fangled pre-boarding payment thing? Rabble rabble rabble.

What if, though, this supposed fare-beating problem is a myth that just isn’t true? In today’s Daily News, Pete Donohue presents the other side of the story. He profiles Transit’s Eagle Team of fare inspectors as they combat fare-beaters and check for proof-of-payment tickets in the Bronx, a job they will soon carry out in Manhattan as well. While Transit proclaims fare-beating to have declined from 13 percent in the early days of the Select Bus Service experiment to 10 percent, Eagle Team inspectors say they found just 3.7 percent of nearly 18000 riders without fare confirmation receipts. The team of enforcement officers either issues summonses or directs passengers to pay their fares.

With this article, then, the Daily News is seemingly attempting to put out a fire its original coverage started. Donohue makes it sound as though neither Transit nor the tabloid’s editors believe fare beating to be a major problem. As with any business, some revenue loss through fare-beating is bound to happen, but if those running this pilot believe the problem to be within acceptable parameters, the paper’s coverage shouldn’t give politicians who fail to understand even the most basic of transit issues another platform for outrage.

9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Absurdity

From FML to something mundane

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 17, 2010

We had a good chuckle on Tuesday when the FML Internet meme popped up on Transit’s new subway signs. Predicted as a possibility in late March, with the M destined for 6th Ave., the BMT/IND connection at 14th St. became a hotbed of humor (and some inappropriately self-righteous outrage) for a day before the MTA quenched the blog-fueled fire. They would, said Transit officials, change the signs as soon as they can.

And so, via SAS reader Robert C. comes visual proof that the MTA did indeed follow through on their promise. Nothing, it seems, inspires actions quite the threat of some inadvertent profanities in the subway system. Anyway, all’s well that ends well, and without further ado, the before-and-after:

20 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Technology

In praise of the countdown clocks, guardedly

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 17, 2010

At Spring St., the PA/CIS countdown clock reminds straphangers that the system is still in the testing phases. (Photo via New York City Transit)

New York City Transit’s efforts at bringing late-20th century technology to its decidedly early 20th century subway system hit a milestone this week as the agency turned on the PA/CIS countdown clocks at the 40th station. The rollout will eventually include the 152 numbered line stations that make up the A Division, and Transit is now more than halfway to its goal of 75 stations for 2010.

“These countdown clocks are another way we are fundamentally changing the customers’ experience using our system by connecting them with 21st century technological advances,” MTA Chairman and CEO Jay H. Walder said in a statement. “Despite tough economic times, we continue to move forward in modernizing our communications network, finding creative and affordable ways to better service the riding public.”

In the release touting this progress, the MTA ran through the typical lines. The screens are located before the turnstiles and on platforms. They take the guesswork and the age-old technique of peering down the track into a dark tunnel to discern the lights of an approaching train. The screens provide a way for the MTA to communicate with its riders in case of emergency or unscheduled delays. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

The real benefits are psychological, and Transit president Thomas Prendergast touched upon this aspect of the project. “We are moving ahead steadily with this vital customer information initiative,” he said. “With the PA/CIS screens activated on a regular basis across the system, more and more subway riders will be able to just look up and see when their train will arrive.”

It’s tough to underestimate how comforting it is to be able to just look up and know when the next train is coming. I know from experience. Since my semester ended and the summer job started, I’ve gone from taking B Division trains from Brooklyn into Manhattan to riding the 2/3 from Grand Army Plaza to the 4/5/6 stop at City Hall/Brooklyn Bridge. The countdown clocks at Grand Army Plaza were activated in early June, and they have been a calming revelation.

When I get to the station now, I can check the sign before swiping in, and when I alight on the platform, the sign is right there counting down the time. I don’t have to peer, and I find myself growing much less impatient with the wait when the minutes are melting away. It’s still a novelty to see the train arrive on time, but it’s much less stressful to know that the train that is supposedly three minutes away will actually arrive in three minutes. No more waiting for the piercing shrill of the sign informing us that a Brooklyn- or Manhattan-bound train may be approaching; no more hoping for the lights in the tunnel to grow brighter. I don’t have this luxury at City Hall, and I find myself tapping my toe more often than not before the packed rush hour trains arrive.

Of course, the system isn’t quite perfect, and that’s why I say I’m guardedly praising it. The signs at both Nevins St. and Grand Army Plaza are bugging. The Nevins St. signs present a challenge for the MTA because it is one of the few express stops where the PA/CIS system has been activated. With the 4 and the 5 arriving across the platform from 2 and 3 trains, the signs often contain bad information, and when a train is nearly about to enter the station, the numbers start jumping around. Furthermore, during special announcements from the NYPD, the countdown for the next train freezes. The MTA assures me they will examine this issue, but it’s an alarming one nonetheless from an organization that has struggled with technological adaptation.

For now, the MTA remains on track to bring this technology — one enjoyed internationally for decades — to the IRT lines by mid-2011. The B Division stations remain in limbo as low-budget tests continue while high-tech solutions remains impossibly expensive. Until that day arrives, I’ll stick with my stress-free waits along the A Division. For all the bugs, the signs, promising an end to a long wait on a hot, sticky platform, truly do make traveling slightly more pleasurable.

22 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Metro-North

Musings on the middle seat

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 16, 2010

Even when empty, the middle seat on the MTA’s commuter rail cars looks unappealing. (Photo via flickr user roboppy)

Metro-North this week announced new schedules that go into effect on Monday. By and large, the service changes are minor with a few peak-hour trains eliminated and a few late-night trains combined into local routes. The MTA is also threatening to run shorter cars in order to save on money, and as such, the agency put out an amusingly-worded statement yesterday.

“With this schedule change, the number of cars on select trains will be reduced wherever possible to save money on propulsion costs,” it read. “These changes will be made to meet our standard occupancy rate for our trains, which we monitor carefully. Initial reductions will occur on the Hudson and Harlem lines. This means there may be fewer seats available on your train, but there will be adequate seating. You may have to move to another a car for a seat, or you may want to consider sitting in that middle seat.”

That middle seat. The phrase itself is so full of contempt, and the MTA finds it necessary to urge riders they might want to consider that unappealing and unwanted piece of property. Please, take the reject seat; it’s your only hope for a sit during a crowded commute.

The hate for that middle seat is obvious. Particularly on Metro-North and LIRR trains, the middle seat is a cramped nothingness in between two seats with arm rests and an aisle or window, the sheer sign of luxury. Just as no one wants to sit in the middle of a three-seater on an airplane, so too do few want to sit on that slippery third seat on a commuter train. Our sense of personal space is violated, and our sense of societal proprietary suffers. People just should not be thrust into such awkward interactions with strangers.

This straphanger has solved the subway's middle-seat problem by taking up those surrounding it.

That middle seat problem though isn’t one unique to the commuter rail cars. In the subway — particularly those trains running R46s and R68s — the middle seat rears its ugly head. In those cars, the three seats flush with the train wall nearest the doors are highly problematic. Designed for people with rear ends significantly smaller than your average New Yorker’s, the bucket seats dictate that three people should fit with no problem, but in reality, three people can fit only if the one in the middle doesn’t mind getting shoved in the ribs or sat upon by those sitting in the outside seats. There ain’t no such thing as personal space for the unlucky SOB stuck with that middle seat.

So we’re stuck with middle seats, and an agency that must remind its riders that, when train cars are crowded, instead of standing, it’s acceptable to “consider sitting in that middle seat.” Just be wary of what happens when you sit down; the people next to you might not appreciate being the bread of that commuter sandwich.

Photo at right via flickr user moriza.

9 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
AsidesBuses

Bus cam legislation clears Gantt’s transportation committee

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 16, 2010

A watered-down version — but a version nonetheless — of legislation granting New York City the ability to use cameras to enforce bus lanes has passed the New York State Assembly transportation committee, and transit advocates, as Streetsblog explains, couldn’t be happier. The bill itself has a long way to go before becoming law; it has to pass the Codes and Rules Committees and then suffer through full votes in both the Assembly and State Senate. However, as Ben Fried notes, considering how David Gantt, chair of the transportation committee, has killed similar measures in committee before, it appears as though Sheldon Silver is finally willing to allow the Assembly to pass this legislation.

On the surface, then, this development is a positive one. After all, if bus lanes aren’t going to be physically separated, the city needs some sort of effective enforcement technique. The bill, however, isn’t very strong. It allows for only limited use of cameras. While the photo devices can be fixed-location devices, mobile units or bus-mounted cameras, the entire camera enforcement program can “cover no more than 50 miles of bus lanes and operate only on weekdays from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm.” The MTA and DOT plan to roll out far more than 50 miles of bus rapid transit lanes over the next few years, and these limitations are disappointingly short-sighted for a change.

6 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
View from Underground

Breaking: There are rats in the subway

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 16, 2010

A new study has found the subways infested with rats. I’m shocked. (Photo via flickr user timmurtaugh)

The New York City Department of Obvious released a study on sanitary conditions in the subway system yesterday, and the findings are incredible. Trash is everywhere! The subways are unclean! Rats have taken over! I had no idea.

Okay. Okay. Let’s try that again with a little less snark.

In an effort to improve health and sanitation conditions in New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Department of Health has released a report highlighting the extreme numbers of rats in the city’s subway system. With the MTA strapped for cash and constantly reducing the number of employees available to clean stations, rodents have feasted on garbage that is allowed to fester, and city health officials want to begin the Sisyphean task of combatting the rats.

“We’re actually trying to measure what the factors are directly that cause rats to take advantage of certain stations and not others, so we’re putting some science into this,” Robert Corrigan, a DOH research scientist leading the city’s effort, said yesterday.

For anyone who rides the subway, rats are simply a fact of life. We see these rodents scurrying along the tracks — and sometimes station platforms — searching for something to eat and oblivious to their surroundings. We see families hunt together, and we see rats shimmy themselves into spaces seemingly too small for any living creature. Tales of mutant rats the size of squirrels are passed down as true urban lore, and New Yorkers simply live with the idea that disease-carrying rodents are a New York fact of life.

If the Department of Health has its way, though, the rat population — estimated to be greater than the city’s human population — could start to dwindle. The Times has more on the study:

Rodents, it turns out, reside inside station walls, emerging occasionally from cracks in the tile to rummage for food. The legend of teeming rat cities tucked deep into subway tunnels is, in fact, a myth. The electrified tracks, scientists said, are far too dangerous.

Not every station has rats, although plenty do. Of 18 stations examined in Lower Manhattan, about half of the subway lines got a fair or poor rating for infestation, meaning they exhibited the telltale culprits — overflowing trash cans, too much track litter — that can lead to a rodent jamboree.

But befitting a creature that has evaded annihilation for centuries, officials found no obvious solutions: poison packets and traps have proved no match for an agile mammal known to be diabolically clever.

Rats are and always have been a problem underground, and with trash collection posing problems for the MTA, rats live the good life. Corrigan claimed that trash storage areas where garbage may site for a few days are breeding grounds for the rodents. One family of 8-12 rats can live in one cinderblock in the wall of a storage site, and every wall, he said, can be chock full of rats. As many as 150 rats can live off of the trash found in a storage room with no problems.

Corrigan’s suggestions seemed sparse. As The Times noted, few solutions work, and the scientist wants better insulation that more effectively seals trash rooms and “advanced poison bait technology.” Everyone wants to build a better mouse trap, but the obvious solution, though, is one often left unsaid: Don’t allow people to eat in the subway system.

Rats live off of human garbage and the remains of a sandwich, a french fry or even a speck of chocolate stuck to the wrapper of a Milky Way. Even those pieces of trash that aren’t discarded as litter and find their ways to trash receptacles are fair game for rats that can sneak into garbage cans. But if people aren’t bringing food on their travels, the rats will find less sustenance in the subways. Now who wants to the start the No Food Underground movement?

17 comments
1 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Technology

NYFI aims for free WiFi for commuter rails

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 15, 2010

While Cablevision and its proposal to equip the LIRR and Metro-North with WiFi carries with it a big brand name — and many skeptical engineers — another wireless provider has announced details of its proposal to bring wireless connectivity to the area’s commuter rails. NYFI, a self-proclaimed “neutral host” provider, says it will bring free WiFi to Metro-North and the LIRR, something Cablevision has not promised.

The details of NYFI’s proposal are scarce. Noting, however, that its service would “not require users to subscribe to a service like Cablevision to access the system without paying,” the company had the following to say in a release this afternoon:

Rather than using a pay-for-service model where user fees fund on board Wi-Fi, the NYFI approach would first assist the MTA by paying for an operational revamp of the MTA’s revenue generating activities, like advertising. The revamp would be led by highly experienced firms. The results are expected to more than cover costs associated with the free Wi-Fi system, yielding increased annual revenue to the MTA, while reducing costs.

NYFI, according to the release, is a free service sponsored by Mobilite, a leading private telecom infrastructure company. It owns one of the largest fiber optic networks in Manhattan and wireless assets nationwide.

As of now, only NYFI and Cablevision has announced their intentions to compete for the MTA’s contract publicly. Reportedly, AT&T, RailBand Group LLC and Mastech Enterprises submitted proposals prior to the RFP’s June 2nd deadline. The MTA has not set a timeline for awarding the contract and has yet to comment on these proposals.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Second Avenue Subway

As 2nd Ave. businesses suffer, MTA toes the 2016 line

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 15, 2010

The first phase of the Second Ave. Subway will be open for business by the end of 2016, Michael Horodniceanu, president of MTA Capital Construction, promised at a City Council hearing yesterday afternoon. Even as tunnel boring has faced some difficulties, even as the federal government doubts the MTA’s own projections, the authority has continued to assert that these $5 billion subway extension will open in 78 months.

Pledging that this projected date is “set, as far as I’m concerned, in stone,” Horodniceanu hedged his bets. “You should understand one thing: We have a variety of factors that many times are unanticipated.”

Despite this seemingly firm timeline, the MTA currently has no idea when future phases of this not-so-ambitious and long-awaited subway line will see the light of day. Originally, the MTA had anticipated a full line by 2020, but now, Horodniceanu does not know when or if the authority will begin to make plans for Phase 2. For what it’s worth, Phase 2 will rely on some preexisting tunnels north of 96th St., but construction, according to MTA documents from the early 2000s, will rely largely on disruptive cut-and-cover techniques. The price tag should be lower, though, than the fully-funded $4.45 billion figure for Phase 1.

While some of Horodniceanu’s testimony can read as good news from an agency notorious for finishing projects years late, the main purpose of the Council’s hearing concerned Second Ave. businesses, and on that front, the MTA has taken an approach worthy of Mr. Spock. The long-term needs of the subway-riding many outweigh the temporary needs of the few.

As Heather Haddon and Gabriela Resto-Montero note not for the first time, construction along the East Side has been catastrophic for businesses. Eighteen restaurants and shops along the avenue have gone out of business, and others further south are without their sidewalk cafes this year due to construction.

What will the MTA do about this economic issue, the City Council wanted to know. The answer: nothing. “We have no way of determining which businesses have closed as a result of construction. Businesses close and open for a variety of reasons,” Horodniceanu said. “We are not in a position to provide any financial help. We are not going to look at claims unless there is a claim related to something we have done.”

When asked if the cash-starved MTA could set aside money in the project’s very lean budget for reimbursement expenses for suffering businesses, Horodniceanu replied simply, “Absolutely not, sir.” What more is there to say? During massive street construction, businesses will suffer, and neighborhoods will carry the weight of a megaproject. In six years, if all goes according to plan, Upper East Siders living on Second Ave. will enjoy a quality of life better than they’ve known in the decades since the Els came tumbling down. For now, the temporary loss of business is but the price of progress.

“We are acknowledging that construction impacts the businesses and the residents’ quality of life,” Horodniceanu said. “But at the end of day, this area will be better off because we are providing transportation to their front door.”

28 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
MTA Absurdity

An Internet meme derails Transit’s new signage

by Benjamin Kabak
written by Benjamin Kabak on June 15, 2010

At 14th St., the new signs express how many feel about the MTA’s upcoming service cuts. (Photo courtesy of Twitter user @kc2hmv)

Back in March, as the MTA announced the impending end of the short-lived V train, we remembered its origins in what was at the time a rather innocuous post. The comments to that post predicted the future though, and this week, the MTA is finally realizing what happens when Internet humor and sign changes mix.

As we discussed the V train, we started pondering how the new signs would read. As I said then, “The [new] FML combination at 6th Ave. and 14th St. is my favorite.” Because the MTA groups its subway bullets via trunk line on all of its signage — hence, ACE BDFM at West 4th St. — the signs at 14th St. where the L stops at 6th Ave. would all read FML, or Internet shorthand for, well, you know.

“Oh man, FML is priceless,” frequent SAS commenter AK said in March. “It is particularly apt for those poor souls on the 1,2,3, who get off at 14th believing there is an easy transfer only to find out that the transfer requires a 1100-foot walk. FML indeed.”

This little bit of online humor was all well and good in March, but apparently, no one was paying attention at the MTA. Over the weekend, as the new bullets went up at 14th St., the Sixth Ave. local/BMT Canarsie line combo signs all read FML. Immediately, New York City-based blogs, those bastions of maturity, had a field day with Transit’s profanity-laden gaffe. Take a peak at City Room or CNet or the Huffington Post or The Village Voice or Guest of a Guest or DNA Info. Ha. Ha. Ha.

By the end of the day, the MTA had already promised to change the sign. Apparently, juvenile Internet humor that relatively few riders will understand runs policy over at Transit. “As soon as we became aware of it, we were going to change it,” Charles Seaton, an agency spokesman, said to The Times. “We thought there was a certain population out there who might recognize it, even though we didn’t, obviously.”

Transit claims the costs will be low because the new signs will simply involve rearranging cheap vinyl stickers. Generally, the L will move to one side or another, and the signs will either say LFM one one line or feature two rows of bullets with the L under FM. The FML fiasco will be lost to transit lore. What makes this whole saga particularly absurd, though, is the fact that, according to Transit, the blogger outrage forced them to make the change. No rider had complained; a few had probably chuckled; but only the blogs had noticed, said Seaton. When the Internet denizens of New York picked up on something that was, three months ago, a faux pas waiting to happen, a change had to be made. If only Albany would respond that quickly to New Yorkers’ demands about their transit system, then perhaps we wouldn’t be suffering through service changes at all.

While we’re on the subject….

Since we’re nitpicking Transit’s new approach to signage by public fiat and the trials and travails of the new Sixth Ave.-bound M train, I wanted to take a minute to bring up something that’s been bugging me about the new map. Take a look at this section:

Now, as I noted above, the MTA’s practice in the past has been to group subway bullets at train stations and on the maps by trunk line. It helps riders understand which platforms they want and where particular subway routes go. But when the MTA released the new map a few weeks ago, the six stations the M will soon share with the J and Z violated that convention. Instead of listing the trains as the J/Z/M with the two Nassua St. routes grouped together, the old J/M/Z alphabetic listing ruled the day. It should not.

Either the M should be on the other side of the lines from the J/Z bullets or the M should precede or follow the brown lines. Anything else is just inconsistent. Or as the mapmakers might say, FML.

31 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Load More Posts