Guess What, NYC Taxpayers? The MTA Wants YOU to Pay Up for the Subway (Yes, Again)

[Q113 LTD]

 

Guess what, New Yorkers? The Metropolitan Transportation Authority chairman wants New York City taxpayers to pony up (yes, again) hundreds of millions more to pay for the completion of the 2nd Avenue Subway and to maintain its current, antiquated infrastructure. “Now, at this critical juncture, is the right time for the city to acknowledge the need for significantly increased investment in the M.T.A., and the city’s future,” Thomas Prendergast wrote City Hall on Monday. Prendergast just asked for an additional $1 billion to build out the new 2nd Avenue line and $300 million annually for its capital plan.

 

Read more: Source

[LTA1992]

Your copy paste style...I do not approve.

 

On topis, even I would support a transit tax. And make almost nothing. I doubt it'll be much considering the other taxes paid.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Your copy paste style...I do not approve.

 

On topis, even I would support a transit tax. And make almost nothing. I doubt it'll be much considering the other taxes paid.

There are already surcharges for transit, in fact SEVERAL of them... Cell phone bill, cabs, etc.  A transit "tax" would be yet another tax.  My cell phone bill, which is split for my side business as well averages roughly $140.00 a month before all of those lovely taxes, so I think it's enough. Besides, there was the commuter tax also, which I believe was defeated and rightfully so for penalizing suburban commuters.  Too much taxation with little to show for it.  The is a bottomless money pit that never gets enough. There's also the toll revenues that they constantly increase and they collect from that too....

[bobtehpanda]

The dirty secret of the MTA is that you can pick between a decent system, more tax, or more fare, because right now fares are actually historically low once you factor in unlimited cards depressing the average fare. Average fare is still below the fare prior to unlimited Metrocards once you count for inflation.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The dirty secret of the MTA is that you can pick between a decent system, more tax, or more fare, because right now fares are actually historically low once you factor in unlimited cards depressing the average fare. Average fare is still below the fare prior to unlimited Metrocards once you count for inflation.

Oh please.  Listen how else should the entice people to use the system?  Unlimited Metrocards should exist, otherwise what's the point?  If I didn't have an unlimited express bus Metrocard, I would certainly consider getting a car and driving into Manhattan, since 95% of my commuting consists of traveling to Manhattan or going through it.  At $57.25 a week, that's still $229.00 a month, not including any Metro-North trips to and from.

[LTA1992]

Yeah, uh, considering how important rapid transit has been to this city since it came onto the scene, many many people would still use it. It's either that or sit in traffic for half of your commute.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yeah, uh, considering how important rapid transit has been to this city since it came onto the scene, many many people would still use it. It's either that or sit in traffic for half of your commute.

That's not the point.  The point is the already taxes us several times over.

[LTA1992]

At least that money goes to an actual purpose and not used towards things that will never benefit the common man. (Looking at YOU Washington D.C.) The money has to come from somewhere. People are ready to complain but what are ANY OF YOU doing to help solve this problem? The people do have a voice. We always have. The subway has taken it's current shape partly because of this city's residents. Sadly, the fare issue of today is also partially the city residents' fault. If change is really wanted then this city needs to come together to figure out a solution. Go up to Albany. Go to D.C. It's not impossible, it just takes work. It also takes the right people to do it.

 

But where to begin. That is the question.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

At least that money goes to an actual purpose and not used towards things that will never benefit the common man.

Actually that has yet to be proven.

[LTA1992]

That's funny considering you mostly take the Xpress bus, right? So how could you know?

 

(I know what I spelled)

[B35 via Church]

“Now, at this critical juncture, is the right time for the city to acknowledge the need for significantly increased investment in the , and the city’s future,”

Corporate begging at its finest.....

 

 

Oh please.  Listen how else should the entice people to use the system?.....

By taking the seats out of the subway cars

 

(and on that note, I am out of here... LMFAO)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

By taking the seats out of the subway cars

 

(and on that note, I am out of here... LMFAO)

lol

[bobtehpanda]

Oh please.  Listen how else should the entice people to use the system?  Unlimited Metrocards should exist, otherwise what's the point?  If I didn't have an unlimited express bus Metrocard, I would certainly consider getting a car and driving into Manhattan, since 95% of my commuting consists of traveling to Manhattan or going through it.  At $57.25 a week, that's still $229.00 a month, not including any Metro-North trips to and from.

 

If the MTA is handling more people who are paying a lower cost than they were 20 years ago, with increased pension and debt obligations, and you expect them to be able to handle this well, you're going to have a bad time.

 

I'm not stating that unlimited cards are a bad thing, I'm just pointing out the obvious financial picture. All other things being equal, if there is less money in the system, the system is going to have less money. Keep in mind that the Unlimited was introduced when the MTA was running a $1B surplus every year.

[SubwayGuy]

There are already surcharges for transit, in fact SEVERAL of them... Cell phone bill, cabs, etc.  A transit "tax" would be yet another tax.  My cell phone bill, which is split for my side business as well averages roughly $140.00 a month before all of those lovely taxes, so I think it's enough. Besides, there was the commuter tax also, which I believe was defeated and rightfully so for penalizing suburban commuters.  Too much taxation with little to show for it.  The is a bottomless money pit that never gets enough. There's also the toll revenues that they constantly increase and they collect from that too....

 

Yet remarkably, few of these taxes actually go the MTA (which of course is their purpose). Instead, the state pilfers the money to plug its own budgetary incompetence.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yet remarkably, few of these taxes actually go the MTA (which of course is their purpose). Instead, the state pilfers the money to plug its own budgetary incompetence.

Yes, the state does, but so does the .  They also divert money from toll collections for other purposes.

 

If the MTA is handling more people who are paying a lower cost than they were 20 years ago, with increased pension and debt obligations, and you expect them to be able to handle this well, you're going to have a bad time.

 

I'm not stating that unlimited cards are a bad thing, I'm just pointing out the obvious financial picture. All other things being equal, if there is less money in the system, the system is going to have less money. Keep in mind that the Unlimited was introduced when the MTA was running a $1B surplus every year.

I'm sorry but the core riders should be paying less (those who buy passes) and they should raise the base fare accordingly.  They also need to enforce the fare.  Farebeating is rampant.  

[LTA1992]

If the MTA is handling more people who are paying a lower cost than they were 20 years ago, with increased pension and debt obligations, and you expect them to be able to handle this well, you're going to have a bad time.

 

I'm not stating that unlimited cards are a bad thing, I'm just pointing out the obvious financial picture. All other things being equal, if there is less money in the system, the system is going to have less money. Keep in mind that the Unlimited was introduced when the MTA was running a $1B surplus every year.

Wait, the MTA made a SURPLUS before the unlimiteds came onto the scene? Wow, this is news to me. I thought the last surplus the TA and its successors made was in 1943 because of the fare being raised waaaaaaaaaaaaay too late and costs skyrocketing after the second WW. Hmm.

 

Also, VG8, the fare is already extremely low. It's, in actuality, only about half of what the true fare should actually be. TFL just raised the fare in London again (It generally happens yearly to keep up with inflation) to what equates to $7.23 during peak hours. You also continuously forget with extreme hardheadedness what we get for this low fare.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Also, VG8, the fare is already extremely low. It's, in actuality, only about half of what the true fare should actually be. TFL just raised the fare in London again (It generally happens yearly to keep up with inflation) to what equates to $7.23 during peak hours. You also continuously forget with extreme hardheadedness what we get for this low fare.

It isn't extremely low when you consider the numerous surcharges that we pay that goes to the even when we aren't using said services.

[Roadcruiser1]

If the M.T.A. isn't functional properly maybe we should look into privatizing it. It can be maintained with a lot of Government inspections, but will have the benefits of a private corporation which will allow it to release shares to generate money for construction. I am going to get a lot of heat for this, but remember that our Subway System was ran well during the time it was private. .

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If the M.T.A. isn't functional properly maybe we should look into privatizing it. It can be maintained with a lot of Government inspections, but will have the benefits of a private corporation which will allow it to release shares to generate money for construction. I am going to get a lot of heat for this, but remember that our Subway System was ran well during the time it was private. .

lol... Of course you will... Privatizing the would certainly mean much higher fares, which some people wouldn't be able to afford. 

[bobtehpanda]

It isn't extremely low when you consider the numerous surcharges that we pay that goes to the even when we aren't using said services.

 

You pay for general transportation relief that the MTA provides. Remember the shitshow that was post-Sandy traffic on day 1 when the subway and railroads were pretty much out?

[Lance]

If the M.T.A. isn't functional properly maybe we should look into privatizing it. It can be maintained with a lot of Government inspections, but will have the benefits of a private corporation which will allow it to release shares to generate money for construction. I am going to get a lot of heat for this, but remember that our Subway System was ran well during the time it was private. .

I really wish people would actually think before making this suggestion. For any of the sub-agencies under the MTA umbrella to make it as a private entity, they would have to make a significant profit. Unless that hypothetical organization/company had some serious income to offset the costs of running any one of the transportation networks, it would never survive on the current $2.75 fare.

[161 New York]

It isn't extremely low when you consider the numerous surcharges that we pay that goes to the even when we aren't using said services.

 

The farebox recovery ratio, could go either way really (looking at revenues as a percentage of the current fare, which is being alluded to in the overall conversation), depending on what you include in the formula and your accounting basis - not necessarily solely per SEC financial reporting requirements (for financial statement purposes). The components of the farebox recovery ratio (below in italics) are quite variable and depending on business conditions you can get very different numbers. At the moment interest rates are low (lower interest obligations), if equipment is new/er (higher initial accelerated depreciation, lower total expenses at first) or older equipment (no depreciation, higher maintenance expenses) to name a few examples. But my point is that it is very difficult to calculate a number which would make sense - aside from those who can understand GAAP/GASB accounting. (At the moment, I don't know how labor costs factor into this ratio).The MTA defines farebox recovery ratio as follows:

 

"Farebox recovery ratio has a long-term focus. It includes costs that are not funded in the current year, except in an accounting-ledger sense, but are, in effect, passed on to future years. Those costs include depreciation and interest on long-term debt. Approximately 20% (and sometimes more) of MTA costs are not recovered in the current year from farebox revenues, other operating revenues or subsidies."

 

"Farebox operating ratio focuses on Agency operating financial performance. It reflects the way MTA meets its statutory and bond-covenant budget-balancing requirements, and it excludes certain costs that are not subject to Agency control, but are provided centrally by MTA."

 

Source: MTA [MTA 2015 Adopted Budget February Financial Plan 2015 – 2018] (p. II-9)

 

In a October 30, 2007 New York Daily News Article New Yorkers taken for a ride with transit costs - report when fares were $2.00 for local bus and subway, the press was lamenting that riders were paying a higher percentage 

 

"MTA subway and bus riders pay a larger share of the cost of a ride than passengers in any other big city.

 

Fares paid by NYC Transit subway riders, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's largest division, cover 68% of subway operating expenses, according to a Federal Transit Administration report.

 

Bus passengers here pick up 42% of expenses, the report says

 

The findings by the Federal Transit Administration, a division of the U.S. Department of Transportation, rely on local transit agencies' 2005 reports to the feds, the most recently available information

.."

 

Source: NYDN [New Yorkers taken for a ride with transit costs - report]

 

(I do realize that a lot has changed in those eight to ten years) The purpose of referencing the above was to express another viewpoint concerning perceptions.

 

 

As for the surcharges and dedicated revenue streams mentioned (by VG8), this amount is staggering. I did not realize how high it is. In August 2011, the Independent Budget Office stated:

 

"A review by IBO finds that dedicated taxes and fees are expected to account for $4.7 billion, or 40.1 percent, of all transportation authority fare, toll, tax, and fee revenues this year, up from $2.1 billion, or 31.0 percent, in 2003."

 

Even these numbers are quite variable. 

 

"As the list of dedicated taxes and fees has grown, the transportation authority has become increasingly dependent upon these revenues." (p. 2)

 

"Going forward, the MTA’s financial health will continue to be affected by the volatility of its dedicated taxes and fees, many of which closely track the ups and downs of the regional business cycle... Nonetheless, the MTA’s pool of dedicated tax and fee revenues will likely remain among the most important—and most volatile—sources of income for the authority for years to come." (p.12)

 

Source NYC IBO - Fiscal Brief, August 2011 [Budget Buster: For MTA, Tax & Fee Revenues Not Always on Track]

[bobtehpanda]

I don't think that the MTA should necessarily privatize, but they could definitely try contracting out operations in the manner that Transport For London does. Specify a contract with a certain amount of service miles, judge it against reliability, crowding, and customer satisfaction levels, and then pick the best bidder.

[Tomtoon]

Transport for London do seem to do a very good of running the underground despite their drivers wanting more than £45K a year to convert to 24/7. Average is about 35-40K a year... They should think of the NY drivers over the pond who must have it a lot harder especially as there's like a yearly strike over here due to the unions... So glad I don't live in London or work in it... I actually think because of the amount of funding TFL gets from the government (the bus services are run privately under TFL guidance) that the fares should be a bit lower.. As NY is a big city and when I was there you could tell the infrastructure was falling apart, the fare should be higher but not too high so people can't afford it...

[bobtehpanda]

The thing about striking is that MTA employees are actually forbidden to strike under the Taylor Law, which creates all sorts of perverse incentives and crap that never actually manages to solve the core problems in labor disputes anyways.