I know the MTA isn’t wondering why their trains keep receiving terrible grades. In fact, NYCT President Howard Roberts admitted last week that delays during morning rush hour are increasing. But still, there is nothing more infuriating than standing on a crowded subway platform during rush hour for 10 minutes while three nearly empty Coney Island-bound trains go by on the other tracks. The third train picked up a whopping two passengers. Fix this problem already.
MTA debate moving from fare hikes to fiscal focus
During the CNN/YouTube Republican debates on Wednesday night, one YouTube user in Florida asked the candidates about their plans to invest in the nation’s aging infrastructure. Our illustrious former mayor drew the short straw, and in his answer, he claimed that he made sure the city invested heavily in its infrastructure. He claimed that he made sure the city’s vital parts were adequately funded and in good repair.
Mr. Giuliani, our subway systems beg to differ.
I was watching this debate with some friends of mine and sitting next to me were the documents I used yesterday in my post on the Capital future of the MTA. Those documents happen to have charts detailing the levels of state and city investment in the MTA, and these numbers — and our past reality — simply contradict Giuliani’s claims. During his terms as mayor of the City of New York, he took money away from the MTA that should have been going to fund our Transportation Authority. That’s not have I would define an investment in infrastructure.
But now, it seems like the fiscal tide is turning. As MTA CEO and Executive Director Lee Sander pushes his message and opens up the MTA’s books, more and more influential subway advocates and politicians are starting to support the idea that the state and city owe more money to the Transportation Authority.
We start with a piece in The Daily News by the Straphangers’ attorney Gene Russianoff and and Democratic State Senator Eric Schneiderman. The two give a more detailed economic breakdown of the way New York State and New York City withdrew their MTA funding obligations during the Pataki/Giuliani years. As these two subway experts paint a picture of impending financial ruin, they close with an optimistic statement on the future:
Fortunately, there now seems to be a new level of energy behind the idea of going beyond a short term fix to address these deeper problems. Members of the state Senate and Assembly are urging the MTA to seek state aid rather than raise fares. Newspaper editorial boards have been a strong part of the push as well. And Spitzer and the MTA have found $220 million in new funds to freeze the base bus and subway fare at $2.
That is a first step. Spitzer has a lot on his plate, but ending Albany’s systemic abuse of our 7.5 million straphangers should be at or near the top of the pile. He must work with the Legislature and the MTA board, both to avoid a fare hike in 2008 and to set a new agenda for our state’s mass transit program – an agenda that breaks with the unsustainable and inexcusable policies of the last 12 years.
Except for one philosophical point concerning the fare hike, I completely agree with Russianoff and Schneiderman. The MTA needs the money. But how much do they need?
Well, Crain’s New York Business Journal reports today that the MTA will ask for $23 to $28 billion for the next five-year Capital program. While this is a higher figure than the MTA originally reported earlier this year, it is in line with what officials were discussing at the Public Engagement Workshop. The budget projections have increased due to a slowing down of the U.S. economy and rising construction costs.
This request however is secondary and bound to earn state approval. The real substance of what the MTA needs comes in the additional $600 million annually that MTA officials say the state should give them. This is the money they need to avoid a fare hike and keep up operations and debt service payments.
Yet, Sander is not optimistic. He too has noted that the state, strapped for cash, may have a tough time coming up with more money. “Our concern, quite frankly, is that there is a limit in terms of Albany being able to respond,” Sander said. “Could you just give us your thoughts about how Albany can find the money?”
While Schneiderman claims that the state legislature is willing to close numerous tax loopholes, I bet the Republicans in the Senate won’t be too thrilled to follow through on that promise. So it all comes back to the fare hike.
Unlike Schneiderman and Russianoff, I don’t think the MTA is in a position to wait on the state to deliver the goods because Governor Spitzer and the individual Senators are just not in a position to make those promises on their own. People are starting to notice that the new fare plan put forward by Spitzer and Sander last week will still be a substantial fare hike, and that’s because the MTA needs those funds.
We can’t afford to watch our subways fall into a state of disrepair, and unless the legislature wants to hold an emergency funding session for the MTA, six or eight months is a substantial amount of time for the MTA to fall further into debt. I would be happy to see the fare hike dropped but not until a firm financial plan that puts the MTA back on the road to fiscal security is in place. Right now, I just don’t see that happening.
Photo of the old tokens and a Metrocard by flickr user MacRonin47.
As the subway romance turns
Remember the wide-eyed innocence during the early days of the Moberg-Hayton Love on the 5 Train story? Well, after a few weeks of speculation and rumors of a movie deal later, Matt Elzweig at the New York Press weighs in with a piece that examines the movers and shakers behind the subway romance. It sounds like Mr. Moberg wasn’t as earnest as he seemed at first, and unsurprisingly, the folks involved are very good at gaining attention for themselves. A few of this tale’s principles even conveniently forgot to mention how they knew each other. It’s a Web 2.0 world, and we just ride the subways in it. [New York Press]
SAS featured in the Manhattan User’s Guide
Unbeknownst to me until this afternoon, Second Ave. Sagas is featured in today’s edition of the Manhattan Users Guide. If you’re finding this site via Charlie Suisman’s MUG, welcome to Second Ave. Sagas. We’ve got more on the subways than you would ever dream possible from fare hikes to Rider Report Cards and with a little subway romance thrown in for good measure. So poke around and come back soon. [Manhattan Users Guide]
The MTA’s Capital future will not be free
During the Public Engagement Workshop two weeks ago, the MTA officials spent a fair amount of time speaking about the MTA’s plans for the future. The plans these officials presented were bold, necessary and, of course, expensive. In these plans is yet another reason why the MTA needs a fare hike more than most riders think.
Linda Kleinbaum, the MTA deputy executive director for administration, and Ernest Tollerson, the MTA director of policy and media relations, spoke during the session called The Future of our Transportation System: Capital Improvements. Kleinbaum discussed the current capital programs and the physical and investment plans for the next capital programs. Tollerson spoke more on the ever-expanding regional reach of the MTA and the technological and environmental challenges the MTA will face over the next 15 years.
To me, these 45 minutes were, at the same time, the most enlightening and most disheartening 45 minutes of the entire afternoon. They were enlightening because the MTA really opened up its planning to the public. The Authority has some very concrete plans concerning what they want to accomplish between now and 2020 when the Second Ave. Subway line should supposedly be complete. It was disheartening because the only subway expansion plans were for the Second Ave. Subway. In a time when the city could really use more subway lines, the MTA’s capital focus right now is on providing public transit access to the urban core for those living in the suburban sprawl of the Greater Metropolitan Area.
Right now, the MTA is working five major Capital Construction projects, four of which benefit New York City Transit. The East Side Access Project is a boon for the LIRR, but the Second Ave. Subway, the 7 Line Extension, the Fulton Street Transit Center and the South Ferry Terminal will all impact subway riders in the five boroughs. In addition to these projects, the MTA also has to maintain its visible aspects — railcars, buses and stations — and its invisible aspects — pumps, power substations, tracks, switches, etc.
With a price tag of $21.3 billion from 2005 to 2009, these projects and regular maintenance all cost a large chunk of change. Right now, the city and state are kicking in just 19 percent of that funding while the feds are throwing in 31 percent and the MTA through bonds and other funds sources is generating the rest. That 19 percent is up from 2 percent during the early years of this decade. No wonder the MTA is skeptical that the state and city will deliver on Spitzer’s promise of money.
The next found of capital improvements are due to the state by March 31, 2008, and the MTA has a good sense of what they want to do. Outside of the Second Ave. Subway and 7 Line Extension — still the biggest fiscal parts of the new capital plan — the MTA wants a third track on the main line of the LIRR, Metro-North tracks on the Tappan Zee Bridge, Penn Station Access for Metro-North (and Moynihan Station), a Stewart Airport rail connection, and computer-based train controls to allow for a higher train frequency. These proposals are estimated to cost at least another $22.278 billion over a four-year span.
Meanwhile, the subways have to keep up with the Jones’. MetroCard technology is woefully out of date, and touchcard entry systems are the wave of the present. Route signs with the times until the next trains are now standard in every other major subway system except ours, and as London and Paris, the MTA’s main competitors, if you will, invest in their systems, ours becomes more and more out of date.
All of this is to say that money does not grown on trees, and MTA CEO and Executive Director Lee Sander is well aware of the need to provide for the future of this city’s public transportation. As politicians continue to grandstand over the MTA’s fare hike, Sander has tried to go on the offensive with his justifications for a fare hike. Yesterday, speaking to the New York Building Congress, Sander discussed the billions of dollars required to ensure the MTA’s capital and fiscal future.
“That is how the MTA will be able to move the millions more that we expect in the region, and it’s critical we get the support from Albany to do that,” Sander said, referring to the plans I’ve detailed above. “I’m asking not just for the $600 million, but also billions of additional dollars that we have not asked from Albany before for our capital program.”
While Sander will indeed ask Albany for this money, he knows not to expect too much from the state or city. As long-time reader Julia noted a few days ago, how is the state, already facing multi-billion-dollar debt, going to find more money for the MTA? “I’m just not convinced that Albany, facing a $4.3 billion deficit, is supposedly going to find $350 million to use toward fares and tolls in the long-term as well as finding money for the capital program,” he said.
And that is why the fare hike is a necessary evil. The subways are cheap. For less than $2, riders can go anywhere in the city at any time and in a relatively timely fashion. A fare hike will provide a fiscal benefit to the MTA and a material benefit to the rider in the form of badly-needed capital improvements.
While Straphangers guru Gene Russianoff feels that the MTA is simply throwing flashy projects out there to justify a fare hike — “It’s not real,” he said. “It’s a plan. It’s an idea.” — we need to consider this fare hike in the larger picture of New York City. Instead of grandstanding for populist support, our politicians should recognize this reality too.
Mayor Bloomberg, one of New York’s most fiscally responsible citizens, hasn’t come out against the fare hike. He knows that the MTA needs this money, and he knows what they want to do with it. Others should follow his lead. Those capital improvements don’t fund themselves.
MTA fuel contracts lead to grandstanding
Did the MTA screw up a fuel contract and thus cost themselves a few million dollars? That’s the question on the minds of The Daily News and Metro today.
Let’s start with The Daily News. As part of their editorial-news Halt the Hike coverage, The News notes that the MTA clearly sacrificed a savings opportunity of millions of dollars when they neglected to purchase fuel in July at lower prices than today’s for use next year and the year after. Pete Donohue:
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board set aside $150 million in July to buy fuel to be used next year and in 2009.
Staffers didn’t realize until September that a key contract involving fuel delivery was expiring. By then, the lower-price deal couldn’t be locked in because a new contract would have to be put out for bid, a long process, MTA Chief Financial Officer Gary Dellaverson told board members at a committee meeting yesterday.
Prices have “skyrocketed” since July, Dellaverson said, and the MTA has all but given up on the idea.
In an article that rings a little bit like quote-mining, MTA Board Member Andrew Saul, who is firmly against the fare hikes despite missing every fare hike meeting, and Assemblyman Richard Brodsky were harshly critical of the Authority.
Brodsky, using the ever-popular royal we, was particular offended by the MTA’s blunder. “It looks like MTA lost millions of dollars in savings by not being light enough on their feet,” Brodsky said. “That money could have been used to save the fare, and we’ll be asking the MTA to explain how this happened.”
Saul meanwhile wasn’t sure how much of a mistake the MTA. “That was a huge mistake, though, right?” Saul said. “We would have had the July price, which was God knows how much cheaper than it is now.”
Now, based on these reactions, you would think we were talking about hundreds of millions of dollars that the MTA is flushing down the proverbial toilet. In reality, the difference in fuel costs, according to The Daily News, is $12 million. It’s not chump change, but in the grand scheme of the fare hike and the potential $6-billion deficit, that $12 million won’t exactly break the bank.
But wait, there’s more. Patrick Arden at Metro, in a poorly-edited article, notes that it probably isn’t too late to buy the fuel now. At that time, Saul’s fellow MTA board members expressed skepticism over the deal, and today, Wall Street analyst Jim Cramer feels fuel prices are still lower than they will be over the next months.
When all is said and done, it sounds like Saul’s and Brodsky’s finger-pointing will lead back to hesitant board members unwilling to hedge MTA money on fuel futures in a time of economic instability. That’s a fairly conservative investment approach but one that makes sense. Too bad we’re stuck once again with grandstanding politicians trying to make mountains out of mole hills.
Sprucing up the Second Ave. stations
The MTA’s Arts for Transit has put out a call for proposals for station art for the Second Ave. Subway stops. The public arts commissions for the stations at 96th, 86th, 72nd, and 63rd Sts. could cost as much as $1 million each and are expected to cover as much of the 2200 square feet of wall space at each station as possible. Submissions are due on Dec. 21 with the winners announced in the spring. At least we’ll have nicely-designed theoretical stations for the next six years. [New York Post]
As new fare plans arrive, hike honeymoon ends
Remember how excited New Yorkers were last week when the fare hike was seemingly rescinded?
Well, cancel those celebratory parties. As I noted, politicians shouldn’t play populist games with fare hikes when the MTA needs the money, and as Chris at East Village Idiot aptly noted, the fares for the Unlimited Ride MetroCards would increase such that those passengers who use them wind up shouldering much of the load for the fare hike.
Yesterday, the bad news started flowing straphangers’ way. The MTA has begun to unveil plans for Fare Hike ’08 Version 2. As you can guess, bridge and tunnel tolls will increase, commuter rail ticket prices will increase, and Unlimited Ride MetroCards will see a substantial increase. For many commuters — nearly half, in fact — those Unlimited Ride increases will hit them the hardest.
William Neuman at The New York Times has more:
Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s decision to freeze the base subway fare at $2 will not take the sting out of commuting costs for everyone: Yesterday, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority said commuter rail tickets and the city’s bridge and tunnel tolls will jump an average of 3.85 percent. And unlimited ride MetroCards and bonus pay-per-ride MetroCards possibly face even steeper increases.
“At the most basic arithmetic level, obviously if you hold constant one portion of your revenues, then by definition other revenues will have to be raised to make up that difference,” said the authority’s chief financial officer, Gary J. Dellaverson, referring to bus and subway fares.
Got that? The MTA is trying not to lose too much revenue to Spitzer’s pandering plan to scale back the fare hike. I now fully expect to see prices on the Unlimited Ride MetroCards jump substantially.
It will take at least a week for the MTA to formulate another plan, but it won’t look pretty. Right now, only 14 percent of riders pay the $2 base fare, and most of those folks aren’t regular subway users. Pay-Per-Ride discounts account for approximately 36 percent of the total fares, and Unlimited MetroCards make up a little less than half. We the regular subway riders will feel the burn on that one.
But, as I see it, that may not turn out to be a terrible outcome. I’m not flat out against the fare hike. If the MTA claims it needs money to stave off multi-billion-dollar debts, past ineptitude aside, I’m inclined to believe the new highly-qualified leaders now in power. Plus, the Unlimited MetroCards are a boon for the consumers.
Yesterday, I announced my MetroCard Challenge in which I figure out for this month how much per ride I pay on my 30-day Unlimited card. Already, after five days, I’ve taken 15 rides, and the cost per ride is down to just over $5. At my current pace, I’d be paying around $0.85 per ride, a far cry from the $2 base fare.
So if Unlimited Ride cards increase, riders will still see a benefit, but it won’t be as damaging to the MTA. And before we get all misty eyed over Spitzer’s supposedly riding the our rescue, did you really think he would be able to eliminate the fare hike? He just wanted to pay lip service to that notion and look good. Mission Accomplished.
Photo of the turnstiles courtesy of flickr user k8johnson.
London Underground fires Voice of the Tubes
Mike Nizza at The Times’ Lede blog has a great story about Emma Clarke’s recent firing from her post as the Voice of the London Underground. Clarke, whose voice is as recognizable to Londoners as those folks on the new trains telling us to “stand clear of the closing doors please,” was fired after she posted satirical Tube recordings on her Website and called Tube service “dreadful.” The truth will indeed set you free. [The Lede]
Introducing the MetroCard Challenge
With all of talk swirling about $2 base fares and Unlimited Ride MetroCard cost increases, I thought it would be fun to see just how much per ride I pay for my 30-day Unlimited Ride MetroCard each month. I take at least two rides a day during the work week as I commute to and from my job. I lead a fairly active social life as well. Since I started a new card on Wednesday, this month is a great time for my experiment. I’ll update my data – which you’ll find in the center column at top – each day and chart my progress. My guess is that I get a pretty sweet deal.