Comments on: Five Ways to Stop MTA Service Cuts

By: Cathy

Cathy — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:19:08 +0000

To Saroyan: The Bx 34 bus is very far from “impotent”. It serves the entire Woodlawn area and is our only means of getting to the #4 subway. We have already suffered severe service cuts and eliminating this bus would devastate our community. Obviously, you have never ridden on the #34 bus, or you would know that it very heavily used and often has standing room only. Woodlawn residents are New York City residents and have a right to access adequate transportation. Our tax dollars and fare pay for it.

By: NYC Public Advocate Planning Actions on Student Passes | Mobilizing the Region

Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:55:02 +0000

[...] to call Gov. Paterson and legislative leaders to restore the free student cards, which the MTA will cut to plug its latest budget gap. The state and city used to fully fund student passes, but their [...]

By: Sen. Gillibrand, NY Reps. Offer Feast, Famine Proposals for MTA | Mobilizing the Region

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:13:16 +0000

[...] to use this money to reduce planned service cuts, which Tri-State and the Straphangers Campaign have said the MTA should do. The cuts would save $129 million [...]

By: Saroyan

Saroyan — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:21:28 +0000

Three buses, the BX 34, the B 25, and the BX 10, are making a comeback, ,it seems, according to Pete Donohue’s article in The Daily News (Tuesday). It’s not an erection year so it’s difficult to see why these impotent buses have been resurrected.

By: City and State Pledge to Partially Fill Up MTA Plate | Mobilizing the Region

Mon, 11 Jan 2010 21:01:01 +0000

[...] operating budget, instead of using it for capital projects as the MTA has planned. As Tri-State has said before, using capital dollars for operating expenses is neither a sound nor a sustainable funding practice [...]

By: Clark Morris

Clark Morris — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:06:16 +0000

To Bob: New Jersey and Connecticut are paying for the commuter service to New York from the respective states even though New York State gets the income tax revenue. Their subway and bus use is probably a net profit because for the most part they fill spaces on trains and buses that would be running anyway.

In regard to tolls, all tolls should go to street, road and bridge facility maintenance with the general funds currently allocated to these purposes being redirected to transit. Then we might be able to have a policy that streets, roads and other highway needs are only funded from vehicle associated taxes and fees with no money coming from general funds. This might require interesting techniques to get revenues from the bio-diesel and electric vehicle users.

By: Larry

Larry — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 04:53:21 +0000

As to the question of flexing capital dollars, consider that this is a crisis of a temporary nature. Billions is flowing from DC to sustain many operating functions in states/cities. Why should transit be excluded ?

There is an artificial distinction between the operating and capital budget anyway since the operating budget would be sustainable but for the debt service from the last three capital plans..

Only the federal government can provide the emergency relief we need. We need it now. If we need to slow down construction on transit improvements that come on line in 10+ years to sustain todays service—we should.

By: Transit Analyst

Transit Analyst — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:19:10 +0000

Many of the suggested solutions are problematic. Virtually all of them requiring taxpayers to pay more, something not to do in this economic climate. The only effective long-term solution is involving private enterprise in the system’s management and operation.

Increase City support to the MTA.
Increased City support is the same as raising taxes for City residents. Not an acceptable solution.

Push for federal transit operating support in the jobs bill recently announced by President Obama.
This would increase taxes across the entire United States. Also, history has shown that federal transit operating support has led to increased transit operating expenses (i.e., higher wages) without fixing the underlying structural financial issues.

Find real cost savings.
Always sounds good but rarely achievable, especially for a government-run organization. The only way this would work is if the operation were handed over to a private company and the private company were able to increase its profits based on squeezing out inefficiency.

Consider innovative tolling methods.
To the extent this provides additional transit funding it constitutes higher fees for motorists.

Flex 10% of the agency’s federal stimulus money from capital projects to operations.
Indeed a short term but unsustainable strategy.

By: bob

bob — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:54:06 +0000

Ray:
There is already a lot of outsourcing at MTA using consultant firms. Some of those people are good, some are not. But you lose institutional memory…you need long timers who know how the systems work and how to get things done. A lot of the systems in the subway are so old that only the career people know how to fix them. Outsourcing can’t do it, which is why companies that outsource find themselves in steep decline a few years later. And they aren’t any cheaper – you pay a higher cash cost to make up for benefits.

And when it comes to funding sources, lets not forget that all the people from NJ and CT no longer pay a commuter tax so they don’t pay the full cost of thier rides.

By: JebO

JebO — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:40:08 +0000

Niko, check your facts before you post. MTA board members are unpaid. They are volunteers.