Archives
Categories

Winners and Losers

Councilman James Vacca supported better traffic safety enforcement

Your weekly guide to heroic and villainous actions in tri-state transportation and development.

Winners

New York State Senator Daniel Squadron (D-Brooklyn), New York State Assemblyman Brian Kavanagh (D-Manhattan), New York City Councilman James Vacca (D-Bronx) and New York City Councilman Peter Vallone (D-Astoria)—Up in Albany, Senator Squadron and Assemblyman Kavanagh are working to close a loophole in Hayley and Diego’s Law, a piece of legislation that seeks to hold drivers accountable when they injure pedestrians and cyclists. The revision would clarify that police officers do not need to witness an instance of driver carelessness in order to give a ticket. Streetsblog reports that the NYPD has “instructed regular cops not to issue tickets under Hayley and Diego’s Law after judges threw out arrests where the officer didn’t witness the violation directly.” This week in New York City, Councilmen Vacca and Vallone led a hearing on traffic safety and came out in favor of the change.

NYSDOT Commissioner Joan McDonald and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY)—Commissioner McDonald, in response to years of Tri-State’s advocacy and a recent Newsday series highlighting pedestrian fatalities on the Hempstead Turnpike, has called on her department to propose changes that would make our region’s most dangerous road safer. Yesterday, Senator Schumer said that he would introduce an amendment directing a portion of federal highway money towards hazardous roads like this one.

New York State Senator Fuschillo (R-Merrick)—Once again, Senator Fuschillo comes to the aid of transit riders. A bill introduced by the Senator, which passed through the upper chamber this week, would restore the state’s portion of the transit commuter pre-tax benefit. While the legislation doesn’t fully restore the federal benefit—it only applies to New York State income taxes, not their federal counterparts—the measure would give much-needed relief to New York transit commuters.

Ocean City and Maplewood, New Jersey—Tri-State has just learned that Ocean City has passed a complete streets resolution. Meanwhile, in northern New Jersey, Maplewood plans to vote on a complete streets resolution at its next Township Committee meeting.

Connecticut State Representative Gail Lavielle (R-Norwalk/Wilton)—Governor Malloy has proposed a rail and bus subsidy reduction in Connecticut after a January 1st fare hike. Why? “Annualized savings due to [a] January 1, 2012 fare increase,” according to the budget. To address this, Representative Lavielle, along with a bipartisan coalition of 26 legislators, has introduced legislation requiring that fare hike revenue be used to improve transit in Connecticut.

Losers

Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy—As noted above, Governor Malloy’s proposed midterm budget adjustments would cut the state’s support for rail and bus operations by $12.2 million. The budget argues that increased fare revenue from a January 1 fare hike justifies the funding reduction. This is misguided—the state would be balancing its budget on the backs of bus and rail commuters.

MTA Chairman Joe Lhota—After New York State Senator Bill Perkins (D-Harlem) introduced legislation that would ban eating on the subway, Chairman Lhota, who opposes the law, insulted him. Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign told Crain’s that “this is not an issue to lose it over; it’s not about their funding…the last thing he wants to do is tick off people in Albany.”

Veolia—after just six weeks on the job, the new operator of Nassau County’s bus system has called two community meetings to discuss “service reductions and reconfigurations” because of “a budget shortfall.” And yet, the body that was responsible for addressing service cuts and fare increases according to Veolia’s contract—the Transit Advisory Committee—has not yet been created. Furthermore, without the existence of another Veolia-promised body, the Customer Advisory Committee, NICE bus riders will be even more vulnerable in the weeks ahead.

 

Share This Post on Social
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Clark Morris
Clark Morris
12 years ago

Why shouldn’t the riders pay at least operating costs? Under that assumption they get the vehicles and the rights of way (paved highways or rail tracks) for free. We subsidize mobility far too much be it automobile, truck, passenger rail and bus, air, harbors and waterways. This in turn encourages sprawl and excessive fuel consumption. Does it really make sense to subsidize a 70 mile trip from Danbury to Grand Central Terminal? If someone wants to live that far away shouldn’t that person pay the full cost of doing so? We are not talking about poverty stricken people here.

1
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x