The Commute: More Government Hypocrisy

THE COMMUTE: The big news headlines this week were that subway ridership reached a new record level on September 23rd, with more than 6.1 million paying swipes, and the budget shortfall in the MTA’s new capital plan. (Notice I did not say paying customers as the MTA did, because I consider a customer as someone making a round trip. The correct term for someone making a one way trip is “passenger.” However, the MTA refuses to use that term as if it were a dirty word and now considers everyone a “customer.”) The headline only refers to subway riders; bus ridership reached its peak ten years ago.

The MTA’s Capital Budget needs $32.1 billion to complete its five-year capital plan beginning in 2015 and is $15.2 billion short. So why did the MTA chairman proclaim last March that the MTA needs were being met? He obviously was not referring to the Capital Plan. The federal government is expected to contribute $6.8 billion. The city will contribute a mere $657 million and thus far no state funding has been identified, according to the Comptroller’s Report (Page 6). The MTA is contributing $8.5 billion, mostly by issuing more debt. That means if no state funding is forthcoming and no other sources of revenue could be found, the MTA will be forced to severely cut back the capital program or resort to additional borrowing, which puts further pressure on increasing fares and tolls.

It’s easy to say that the state should make up the shortfall the MTA needs to fulfill its Capital Plan, but it is not that simple. Other questions need to be asked such as is the MTA doing everything in its power to keep costs down and to maximize revenue? Have they chosen the right projects?

According to the comptroller, “The MTA is making progress toward its goal of generating recurring savings of $1.5 billion by 2017. However, potential liability for personal injury claims and property damage has nearly doubled in the past eight years from $1.2 billion to $2.3 billion. Is this a case of more unscrupulous lawyers or the system decaying faster than repairs can be made causing more preventable accidents?

Additionally, a policy brief by the Citizen’s Budget Commission stated on Page 10:

“The MTA’s expansion proposals have two deficiencies—lack of clear priorities for selecting projects and weak capacity for implementing projects efficiently. Given the multiple possibilities for beneficial expansion of the transit system, explicit criteria should be established for selecting priority projects and evidence should be considered as to how well a range of potential investments meet these criteria.”

The state’s Capital Program Review Board also rejected the MTA’s Capital Plan.

Last week I mentioned using existing underutilized rights of way for rail transit as getting the most bang for the buck and the need to utilize the abandoned Rockaway Line. Instead the MTA and DOT are considering spending at least $200 million to construct a bus rapid transit line (BRT) on Woodhaven Boulevard, without studying alternatives including comparing costs and benefits of utilizing the abandoned rail line for BRT, rail, or a people mover. They asked the community how Woodhaven Boulevard should be redesigned for Select Bus Service or Bus Rapid Transit after predetermining that decision.

The proper question to have asked if they wanted real community input was should we spend our funds rebuilding Woodhaven Boulevard or should we first study the available alternatives.

Responsible planning studies the traffic effects of reducing roadway capacity by as much as 50 percent for other users and first ensures suitable alternatives exist for displaced traffic as well as considering the long range economic benefits of alternative measures. None of that has been done. Instead the MTA will first sink money into BRT or SBS and then decide when the exclusive lanes will be in effect and if any bus routes will be modified or bus stops eliminated. Giving a false impression of community input while ignoring the questions of the Queens Public Transit Committee is government hypocrisy.

Other Examples Of Government Hypocrisy

Should a midtown Manhattan station receive its second rehabilitation when many stations in the outer boroughs have not received their first and some stations still look like this? As part of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s affordable housing plan, the city wants to upzone 15 neighborhoods where there is supposedly excess subway capacity. According to one blogger, our subways are not crowded enough during rush hours and additional riders would be welcome without system expansion. He cites the Brighton line as underutilized during peak hours because the crowding guidelines have not been achieved.

There are so many things wrong with this analysis; I hardly know where to begin. The incorrect peak load point of 7th Avenue is used where crowding is at 65 percent of the guideline capacity during the morning peak. Either Atlantic Avenue or DeKalb Avenue is the peak load point, which could be 20 percent higher. Second, he is assuming loads are equally spread throughout the train, which they are not. Some cars may be more than 100 percent capacity, meaning you may not be able to board the first train. No delays are also assumed. Also, the guidelines were established to make sure trains do not get too crowded. They were never intended to be used to ensure maximum crowding. Eliminating any cushions that may exist in case of delays is not sound planning.

Conclusion

The first priority of the Capital Plan has to be that the existing system is adequately maintained. System expansion is secondary, but also important. However, does that mean that all we concern ourselves with is the Second Avenue Subway and East Side Access for the foreseeable future? The outer boroughs, where the jobs are moving to, need more attention.

Simply throwing more money at the MTA with no oversight would not be wise. Criteria for clear priorities, as the Citizens Budget Commission pointed out, is a necessity. The system needs to be expanded and all levels of government need to fund it. The state must make a substantial contribution so that riders are not unfairly burdened by having to pay for the Capital Plan through higher fares. The city must also increase its meager contribution and should not cause more crowding by upzoning while trying to convince us that expansion is not needed because the trains are not crowded enough.

The Commute is a weekly feature highlighting news and information about the city’s mass transit system and transportation infrastructure. It is written by Allan Rosen, a Manhattan Beach resident and former Director of MTA/NYC Transit Bus Planning (1981).

Disclaimer: The above is an opinion column and may not represent the thoughts or position of Sheepshead Bites. Based upon their expertise in their respective fields, our columnists are responsible for fact-checking their own work, and their submissions are edited only for length, grammar and clarity. If you would like to submit an opinion piece or become a regularly featured contributor, please e-mail nberke [at] sheepsheadbites [dot] com.