The Commute: Reinventing The MTA – Part 3 Of 3

THE COMMUTE: Last week, we criticized the MTA Reinvention Commission Report for the lack of specifics it provided. Rather than discussing how to reinvent the MTA, the report provided justification regarding past and current MTA projects and suggested some new directions the MTA should take. This is hardly a reinvention of an agency that was conceived with the notion of integrating regional transportation, which it largely has failed to do. Most recently, it ceded back control of Nassau County’s buses to that county, hardly the direction of integrating regional transportation. The report suggests better coordination with the Port Authority, but again fails to provide the specifics on how this would or should be accomplished.

There isn’t a greater discussion of how to reinvent the MTA because the committee members are themselves confused as to the purpose of their mission. The governor asked the committee to have the MTA reinvent transportation. They replied in their letter to the MTA chairman that the MTA itself needs to be reinvented. The two are not synonymous. The former implies the MTA needs to take a new direction. The latter implies that there is something fundamentally wrong within the MTA and they must find those problems, and acknowledge and correct them.

I began this series stating that the MTA is like a lumbering elephant slowly moving forward. Well, that is true most of the time, but not always. The MTA can move at lightning speed when it wants to. That happens when the MTA is operating in crisis mode, such as after 9/11 or Superstorm Sandy. Then the agency becomes a model of efficiency. Why is that so? It is because everyone has a common goal, which is to solve one specific problem. When that happens, all fighting between departments ceases and everyone cooperates. Management and the unions become one and everyone works toward that common goal. We have seen the results: the Montague Street tunnel restoration completed ahead of schedule, subway cars transported to the Rockaways to resume service, and MTA personnel greatly contributing in the aftermath of 9/11.

However, the rest of the time, the MTA has some serious inefficiency problems, which they have presently attempted to correct, but they still have a long way to go.

Recognizing The Problem

In order for the MTA to change, they first must recognize the problems they have within the agency. Yet, they do not believe that is the case. All their problems are blamed on inadequate funding and the unions — not on their own operations. This is evidenced in how the MTA references the Commission’s report. Instead of referencing the report by its proper name, “MTA Transportation Reinvention Commission Report,” the MTA keeps referring to it simply as the “Transportation Reinvention Commission,” omitting the word “MTA” from the title. The implication is that transportation needs to be reinvented, not the agency. Only once, in its press release, is it correctly titled.

How To Reinvent The MTA

You do it by finding out what is right and wrong about the MTA, what they do well and what they do poorly. Then you study the reasons why that is the case. You do that by studying past projects and operations and by speaking with those who know the most about how the MTA operates. Those are its employees and its users. You do not appoint a bunch of supposed outside experts who have no specific knowledge of how the New York transit system and rails operate by asking them to develop recommendations. If you do decide to incorporate ideas from around the world, by soliciting the advice of experts, you at least make sure that they speak with employees throughout the MTA system, not only its upper management. You do not fill your report with experiences in 20 other cities and just imply that what works there would also work here. You study those experiences after you gain a thorough knowledge of our system and its history and incorporate only what would be relevant here.

So what does the MTA do well? For one, they move millions of people, everyday, fairly efficiently in a city that is more transit-dependent than any other. They react very well to a crisis. However, that is not the norm. Capital projects take forever to complete and are frequently over budget. Subway stations are falling apart although much progress has been made during the past 30 years to rehabilitate them. Still there is room for much improvement. Virtually every subway station has peeling paint somewhere. Local bus routes are severely ignored.

Infighting between departments must be reduced. Each MTA division virtually operates as its own separate agency under the MTA umbrella. Couldn’t the MTA operate more efficiently by combining some LIRR and Metro-North Railroad functions? I know that there are efficiencies to be gained by fully combining MTA Regional Bus Operations (also known as the MTA Bus Company) with MTA New York City Transit’s (NYCT) Department of Buses (DOB). Here is just one example. The B100, operating from the Brighton Line’s Kings Highway subway station to Mill Basin, passes directly in front of NYCT’s Flatbush Depot on Fillmore Avenue. Yet its buses originate from a depot in Spring Creek, requiring miles of unneeded, non-revenue travel just for buses to travel to and from the route. That doesn’t sound very important, but these are unproductive miles each and every day and over time they add up. Multiply that by the number of routes that could benefit by being assigned to a depot closer to their route. No one expected the MTA to immediately fully integrate MTA Bus into its operations, but it has now been 10 years since the MTA took over operations from the former privately-operated bus companies and all that MTA Bus DOB share is a common leader

. I believe the planning and scheduling functions are still separate. It has been more than 50 years since NYCT absorbed the Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority; and it still has not been fully integrated within the MTA, much of it for legal reasons.

The MTA needs to operate more efficiently. How long will the real estate space at the Fulton Transit Center remain unrented? It took three years to rent out the new Stillwell Terminal. Another example of a lost opportunity is the fact that for the past 50 years there has been little or no bus advertising inside of city buses. The MTA simply states that no one wants to advertise inside a bus. When was the last time someone looked at the rates and terms to determine why it is so unappealing?

Trying to get the MTA to be responsive and to be more transparent and accountable are monumental tasks. The MTA only tells you what it wants you to know. It is exceedingly difficult to locate a past study or public hearing on the MTA website unless you know a specific date or document where the item appeared. Often you have to manually search hundreds of pages of Board reports. That is not transparency.

How we think about transportation needs to be reinvented. As the report states, that is key to the success of this region and that is why it is so important to provide an adequate and steady funding stream. However, that alone is not enough. The MTA itself must also be reinvented. Its hands must not be tied, but it also needs more oversight. The composition of the MTA Board must be changed. Instead of mostly bankers and real estate interests, there need to be members from the specific areas the MTA serves. Public hearings must not be a sham. Employees need to be rewarded for doing a good job with cronyism eliminated to keep up morale. The MTA must be open to suggestions from the public and its own employees. They must not misplace priorities, and remember its prime purpose is to serve the customer. Shortsightedness often prevails with the budget being its number one concern. The Commission ignored most of these issues.

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.