I hope this pigeon paid its $2-fare to board this train. (Photo by flickr user mortimer777)

It’s all about the money these days with the MTA. In light of what many perceive to be an unfair fare hike, critics and newspapers alike are concentrating more and more on the little things that impact the MTA economically.

Today, we have two stories that everyone will use to slam the MTA. Let’s start with pigeon poop. New York City Transit recently lost a lawsuit filed by a man who tripped and fell in a pile of pigeon droppings. He emerged seriously injured and, nearly 10 years after the original 1998 accident, won over $6 million from New York City Transit.

In the case, Shelton Stewart, the injured party, claimed that NYCT employees knew about the dangerous pile of droppings but did nothing to clean it up. This negligence has cost NYCT as much as $6 million, but the agency plans to appeal. Simcha Felder’s plan to eliminate pigeons looks all the more appealing.

Right now, other than following through with an appeal, there’s not much the MTA can do. On more than one occasion, local politicians have criticized the Authority for not keeping their stations pigeon-free, and now the problem has come home to roost. Live and learn is the lesson here. Maybe now, outdoor stations will get the cleaning attention they deserver.

The second story gives a little more to the critics. The MTA is spending $2.5 million on new uniform for station agents. Pete Donohue from The Daily News reports:

Over the past several months, 3,500 workers in the subway stations department have been trading in their traditional work outfits – blue shirts, blue pants – for a more formal look: white shirts and gray trousers, or skirts for the ladies working behind the glass.

The men get gray and black ties; female workers ascots. The new wardrobe also includes a burgundy vest, burgundy sweater and burgundy coat.

NYC Transit spokeswoman Deirdre Parker said the per-worker cost was approximately $738, and the total cost $2,583,245.

The workers are less-than-impressed with the new digs because the white shirts get dirty in the subways. But the Daily News seems more concerned with the cost outlays for the new uniforms. In reality, that $2.5 million isn’t much in the grand scheme of the MTA, and despite the big debate on Subchat, as a few commenters noted, the cost per person isn’t that unreasonable for a week’s worth of work clothing.

As it will be for some time, it’s all about the MTA’s money. Who knows how long this microscopic look at the MTA’s finances will last, but it sure gets tiresome early.

When the MTA announced yesterday the service upgrades to go along with the fare hike, I applauded the agency for its fiscal restraint. The upgrades, you see, are being delayed until June or later so that the MTA can make sure its tenuous finances are in order.

But today, news emerged that shed some light on these delays, and word is that Mayor Bloomberg’s support for the fare hike was contingent upon the MTA’s delaying these service upgrades. His motives however may not be 100 percent pure. Is he really that concerned with the MTA’s financial health or does he have ulterior motives?

Metro’s Patrick Arden has more:

While the debate over the MTA’s finances has focused on wringing money from Albany, this push-back came from City Hall, when Mayor Michael Bloomberg decided to support the fare hike. In a statement, Bloomberg made clear he had asked “that next year’s service increase program will not be implemented until the first quarter’s tax and other revenues are reviewed.”

The mayor’s motivation may ultimately be political, as the MTA’s new $28 billion capital program gets submitted to the state Legislature just before it votes on congestion pricing. The mayor’s traffic fee would fund the MTA’s capital needs.

Now, I’m not quite sure where Arden is going with this line of thinking. On the one hand, it would behoove Bloomberg politically to support service upgrades. Every New York City politician supports more frequent subway service because, hey, that’s what voters like. And Bloomberg does seem genuinely concerned about the MTA’s finances.

But on the other hand — well, on the other hand, I’m drawing a blank. Arden notes that this could be a political gambit to pressure the state into approving the congestion pricing plan. But how? The congestion pricing money would go toward capital programs for the MTA and not the added train and bus service.

I could picture Bloomberg telling the legislature that, unless they approve more money for the MTA and the congestion pricing plan, the MTA will have to cut service and won’t be able to institute these service additions. Such an outcome would not endear state representatives to their constituents. But based upon the news reports about these service upgrades, it sounds like they aren’t related to the congestion pricing income as much as they are to the health of the MTA between now and May.

Bloomberg could be playing out a dangerous political gambit here, and I would hate to see these much-needed additions to subway service disappear if our mayor were to end up on the losing side of the gamble.