Jump to content

Mangano Selects Veolia to Operate Long Island Bus


PinePower

Recommended Posts

No one implied anything about pulling an opinion out of your behind.... I wasn't trying to attack you when I asked you what I did... Instead of having gotten defensive & sayin what you did in that last reply, this is all you had to say.......

 

 

 

Fair enough - sorry if I took your comments the wrong way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 238
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Mangano said he believed the MTA was not running the system efficiently and that the county was paying the authority more money than ever when considering the new employer payroll tax that funds the MTA.

 

not just "more money", but "more money than ever"... way to place emphasis...

 

smh...

 

so he (continues) painting the MTA out to be these crooks that ripped the county off.... I'm a firm believer in, you get what you pay for.... I'm also a firm believer in not accepting money from someone to perform a half assed job.... You end up gettin yourself in situations like this.... It's no different than asking an enabling/mooching relative for a little more money to help pay the rent... then said relative gets irate & vindictive b/c of the fact, and starts acting out....

 

What's upsetting in all of this, is that you put 100,000+ daily commuters in the middle of this madness....

------------

 

 

....and no prollem, Railbus63 & VG8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to all of those who are skeptical, of course you are. We've had no other show in town besides the MTA, which is pathetic because if anything happened to them, we'd be sh*t out of luck. You cannot rely on one agency to take care of the entire system. That's why we have the mess that we have now with the MTA. Simply too big to do what it needs to do.

 

My position is a little different, but separate at the same time.... What I mean is, I get the sense that the MTA stuck it out, b/c they didn't want to leave Nassau residents stranded (well, aside from RR service, that is)....

 

If Nassau county felt as if they were gettin robbed by the MTA, they should've been actively & persistently looking for another operator a long time ago...

 

I do agree with the notion of the MTA taking on more than what it needs to... Once upon a time, there were talks of possibly taking over bee line, and IINM they're considering taking over SCT (Suffolk county transit) still.....

 

I strongly disagree w/ the foamers out there that say MTA should be a statewide operation - they can't even sufficiently & adequately provide service in the boroughs, let alone some upstate NY.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My position is a little different, but separate at the same time.... What I mean is, I get the sense that the MTA stuck it out, b/c they didn't want to leave Nassau residents stranded (well, aside from RR service, that is)....

 

If Nassau county felt as if they were gettin robbed by the MTA, they should've been actively & persistently looking for another operator a long time ago...

 

I do agree with the notion of the MTA taking on more than what it needs to... Once upon a time, there were talks of possibly taking over bee line, and IINM they're considering taking over SCT (Suffolk county transit)..... I strongly disagree w/ the foamers out there that say MTA should be a statewide operation - they can't even sufficiently & adequately provide service in the boroughs, let alone some upstate NY.....

 

 

I mean just think about it. In just about everything else that we have here, we do not have anything really close to a monopoly with a few exceptions. It's interesting how up and arms people became when T-Mobile announced it was merging w/AT&T (which is still pending last I heard), but they have no problem with one agency running essentially what amounts to a monopoly in which the people really have no say in what happens. There is something really wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o thats not so bad veolia is a good operator. They did a nice job in MD with their shuttles and atlanta I wouldnt mind if they take over SCT also

 

Wow a bright excellent comment MC QJtrainmaster (what a name lol and still don't know much about him lol)That another story for later.

 

Back to Veoila also operates most of the public bus lines in Southern Calif. ie. MTS's San Diego area and LA's Southern Calif. MTA.

 

I saw this coming. Here my post from when the rumors started back in March.

 

"An update. Mangano has announced the '3' finalists to take over LIB on eve of the hearings.

 

Long Island Bus Plans to be Rolled Out

By Timothy Bolger Long Island Press

March 22nd, 2011

 

 

Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano is moving forward with plans to privatize Long Island Bus in the wake of a judge’s ruling last week affirming a state takeover of the county’s troubled finances.

 

The bus system’s 100,000 daily riders have been in limbo while MTA officials explore cutting up to 27 of the agency’s 48 routes and Mangano entertains offers from three private bus companies who are interested in replacing the MTA as the operator of LI Bus.

 

“With the Nassau Interim Finance Authority’s (NIFA) recent action to impose a control period over county finances, the county has no choice but to end its relationship with the MTA,” Mangano said in a statement last week.

 

 

advertisement Mangano had lost a lawsuit that attempted to block the move by NIFA, which was prompted by a projected $176 million deficit in the county’s $2.6 billion budget. Mangano has been planning layoffs and budget cuts and has refused to raise property taxes to solve the problem.

 

Brian Nevin, a spokesman for Mangano, said the county is studying final proposals submitted Monday by the three bus firms being considered— Veolia, First Transit and MB Transit. A decision is expected within days, Nevin said.

 

An MTA spokesman declined to comment on Mangano’s statement last week, which also criticized the state transit agency and the controversial MTA payroll tax.

 

Negotiations have not been fruitful between the county and the MTA over how to fund the $136 million bus system.

 

Meanwhile, MTA officials are hosting a public hearing Wednesday on the bus system quagmire.

 

Democratic lawmakers and labor leaders have criticized the privatization plan as unrealistic.

 

“Residents will finally have accountability for their tax dollars,” Mangano said. “The private sector will run bus service more efficiently and effectively while not holding our taxpayers hostage for increased revenue year after year.”

 

 

Read more here. http://www.longislandpress.com/2011/...be-rolled-out/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o thats not so bad veolia is a good operator. They did a nice job in MD with their shuttles and atlanta I wouldnt mind if they take over SCT also

 

LOL!!!

 

Veolia Transportation is one of the largest private transit system operators in North America, running bus, rail, paratransit, taxi and airport shuttle services in cities across the United States and Canada.

The firm, based near Chicago, is under the umbrella of Veolia Environnement, a massive French company that operates water, waste, energy and transport systems around the world. The parent company's annual revenue is $48 billion, according to its website.

Veolia Transportation, of Lombard, Ill., is the North American arm of Veolia Environnement's international transportation division, which until recently was called Veolia Transport.

In March, Veolia Transport merged with Transdev, a transportation company owned by French state bank Caisse des Depots. Now called Veolia Transdev, it operates light-rail systems in Barcelona and the acclaimed TransMilenio Bus Rapid Transit system in Bogota.

Veolia Environnement is traded on the New York and Paris stock exchanges.

In the United States, Veolia Transportation runs Boston's commuter rail, and bus systems in Phoenix, Denver, San Diego, Baltimore and Washington, D.C.

It employs some 18,000 people and manages more than 200 transportation contracts for cities, transit authorities and airports in the United States and Canada, according to its website.

Last month, Veolia Transportation lost its contract in Las Vegas, where for 19 years it had run a system carrying 67 million people per year.

Veolia was underbid by one of its national rivals, First Transit, of Cincinnati, which also bid for Long Island Bus.

The Las Vegas transit commission had been facing major service cuts, and hoped to avoid much of them by opting for First Transit, whose bid over a seven-year period was $50 million less than Veolia's.

In 2009, Veolia Transportation won a GOLD safety award from the American Public Transportation Association for reducing the risk of bus crashes in its Phoenix operation.

But Veolia's safety record in the United States has been marred by several fatal crashes and other incidents that spurred investigations.

In 2008, a Metrolink train collided with a freight train, killing 25 and injuring 135 in Chatsworth, Calif.

A federal investigation concluded that the engineer failed to stop at a red signal because he was sending text messages. Investigators also found that the engineer's managers previously had observed him using a cellphone while on the job.

In 2007, a Veolia Transportation subsidiary lost its airport shuttle-service contract in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., after two crashes -- including a head-on collision between two of its vans -- that resulted in a total of three deaths.

A Broward County, Fla., investigation found that 10 company employees should not have been allowed to drive vans because they had accumulated too many points on their drivers' licenses.

The same year, Veolia's bus system in Gwinnett County, Ga., was the target of a scathing audit after a five-month stretch in which three of its buses caught fire, one stopping traffic on an interstate for hours.

The county's audit, which Veolia officials did not dispute, found serious problems with the bus system's training, maintenance and safety. A year later, the county renewed Veolia's contract, saying the company had turned things around.

 

Link: http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/li-bus-operator-has-french-connection-1.2947475

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is one of the qualifications to be a Republican fully lacking an understanding of the U.S. taxation and public service system?

 

I don't know about that and I'm not a Republican. I'm an Independent that is conservative with fiscal matters, especially when it comes to the overtaxation issue. What makes folks think that folks with money out on Long Island can afford to pay more taxes to supplement a system that they're already supplementing as it is?? That's the real question. I suppose you're one of those socialist types who supports slamming the rich and other affluent folks, as well as the upper middle class and middle class over the head with taxes taxes and more taxes to supplement the poor. I'm sorry I don't. I'm a middle class professional and I am sick of my hard earned money supporting this and that because people are just too lazy to take care of themselves. Enough is enough already. Let people take responsibility for themselves and stop looking for handouts. :mad: :tdown:

 

I've worked two and three jobs when I was in my earlier twenties to get to where I am now and I never looked for handouts and made excuses, so what's with these people??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean just think about it. In just about everything else that we have here, we do not have anything really close to a monopoly with a few exceptions. It's interesting how up and arms people became when T-Mobile announced it was merging w/AT&T (which is still pending last I heard), but they have no problem with one agency running essentially what amounts to a monopoly in which the people really have no say in what happens. There is something really wrong with that.

 

I wouldn't really say the MTA is a monopoly. The purpose of a monopoly is to make yourself the only provider of a service, so you can charge as much as you want. If the MTA was truly a monopoly, they could raise the fare to whatever they want, and make all the service cuts they want.

 

The question is (and this is an honest question): Do you really think that a private company would be able to run the system better than the MTA? Private jitneys going to New Jersey manage to make a profit charging a lower fare than NJT, and their service is fairly good (of course, this is because they take popular routes, rather than low-ridership routes). If the private operator can run the service like that, that would be excellent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't really say the MTA is a monopoly. The purpose of a monopoly is to make yourself the only provider of a service, so you can charge as much as you want. If the MTA was truly a monopoly, they could raise the fare to whatever they want, and make all the service cuts they want.

 

The question is (and this is an honest question): Do you really think that a private company would be able to run the system better than the MTA? Private jitneys going to New Jersey manage to make a profit charging a lower fare than NJT, and their service is fairly good (of course, this is because they take popular routes, rather than low-ridership routes). If the private operator can run the service like that, that would be excellent.

 

 

That's the whole point. In many parts of the city they are the sole provider of transit. If I wanted to use transit and not deal w/the (MTA) I would have a hard time doing that, so if wasn't a monopoly, people would have the choice to choose other providers and currently in most cases, that is not possible, so if it isn't a form of a monopoly then I don't know what is. They raise the fare as they please, slash service as they please (be it officially or "unofficially") and so on so maybe they're not a monopoly by the true definition, but they're certainly not far from one. What is even more pathetic is that they have to have hearings which are nothing but a show before they make the cuts.

 

To answer your other question, if the (MTA) didn't run practically everything here, other companies could get the chance to prove themselves. Quite frankly, I do think a private company could do well, if they are run well. I see no reason why the (MTA) should control everything. They have shown that when you are too big and sloppy as they are that the other ones that suffer are the passengers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't really say the MTA is a monopoly. The purpose of a monopoly is to make yourself the only provider of a service, so you can charge as much as you want. If the MTA was truly a monopoly, they could raise the fare to whatever they want, and make all the service cuts they want.

 

The question is (and this is an honest question): Do you really think that a private company would be able to run the system better than the MTA? Private jitneys going to New Jersey manage to make a profit charging a lower fare than NJT, and their service is fairly good (of course, this is because they take popular routes, rather than low-ridership routes). If the private operator can run the service like that, that would be excellent.

 

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you will..... There are repercussions to unfavorable actions (such as jacking up the fare to "whatever they want"), and I'm not necessarily referring to fines & penalties either....

 

The MTA does act as if they're a monopoly.... that was his point... again, I mention the talks of takeovers of SCT & BeeLine..... I'm glad LL (liberty lines) didn't fold like a cheap rug, and I hope SCT doesn't do the same...

 

I'm not in the bus industry (or follow up enough on the ones I have heard of) to suggest/say if there's a better private company out there.... but I'm not goin sit up here & say the MTA shouldn't be runnin our system; it aint THAT bad (yet)....

 

Far as jitneys go, I honestly think if we ever were to go to a zone based fare, you'd see a hell of a lot more of them than you do now here in NYC (referring to the dollar vans & what not)... but since we have a flat fare, you're not gonna see an actual network of em (the way they have out in ft. lee, paterson, passaic, etc)... I know you're an advocate for free buses & what not, but let's not get ridiculous in actually showing zeal for jitney ran service on a large scale here in the boroughs.....

 

the dollar vans/cabs that run in Brooklyn & Queens, should remain serving the corridors that they do in their respective borough... not runnin to Manhattan like the jitneys out in Jersey do.... Be careful what you wish for....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you will..... There are repercussions to unfavorable actions (such as jacking up the fare to "whatever they want"), and I'm not necessarily referring to fines & penalties either....

 

The MTA does act as if they're a monopoly.... that was his point... again, I mention the talks of takeovers of SCT & BeeLine..... I'm glad LL (liberty lines) didn't fold like a cheap rug, and I hope SCT doesn't do the same...

 

I'm not in the bus industry (or follow up enough on the ones I have heard of) to suggest/say if there's a better private company out there.... but I'm not goin sit up here & say the MTA shouldn't be runnin our system; it aint THAT bad (yet)....

 

Far as jitneys go, I honestly think if we ever were to go to a zone based fare, you'd see a hell of a lot more of them than you do now here in NYC (referring to the dollar vans & what not)... but since we have a flat fare, you're not gonna see an actual network of em (the way they have out in ft. lee, paterson, passaic, etc)... I know you're an advocate for free buses & what not, but let's not get ridiculous in actually showing zeal for jitney ran service on a large scale here in the boroughs.....

 

the dollar vans/cabs that run in Brooklyn & Queens, should remain serving the corridors that they do in their respective borough... not runnin to Manhattan like the jitneys out in Jersey do.... Be careful what you wish for....

 

 

That's the thing he doesn't realize. He doesn't see how big and powerful the (MTA) is. It is difficult for anyone to really come in and be successful because the (MTA) can basically crush them with the resources both politically and financially that they have. When you think about it Mangano has a point. Let's forget about how little Long Island paid the (MTA) and so forth to run the system.

 

There really wasn't anything stopping the (MTA) from demanding more money from Long Island and even though they paid next to nothing for (MTA) to run their system, I still think it was wise to move away from them for the simple fact that you cannot let anyone hold you hostage. I really do hope and think that things go well. People need and deserve choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing he doesn't realize. He doesn't see how big and powerful the (MTA) is. It is difficult for anyone to really come in and be successful because the (MTA) can basically crush them with the resources both politically and financially that they have. When you think about it Mangano has a point. Let's forget about how little Long Island paid the (MTA) and so forth to run the system.

 

There really wasn't anything stopping the (MTA) from demanding more money from Long Island and even though they paid next to nothing for (MTA) to run their system, I still think it was wise to move away from them for the simple fact that you cannot let anyone hold you hostage. I really do hope and think that things go well. People need and deserve choice.

The rest of what you're sayin, I'm w/ you on....

 

However, I'm not as quick to push to the side, how Nassau shortchanged the MTA... That is a factor... It shows how buses are thought of in a nutshell, running in & through the county... If you place enough of an importance on something, you're gonna put more money towards it as possible...

 

Yes, people need change... I'm not up here advocating that the MTA should be the only operator out there.... but I'm not gonna advocate for another operator that's gonna perform (or try to perform) the same level of service (of what was LIB) til 2012, and after that point, a dropoff (in any facet), either..... That's what I would worry about... I'd also worry about stability, but it's too early in the game to start talkin about that....

 

Mangano has to show the people (of Nassau) that he does care about surface transit out there (including, ways to encourage ridership & improving of what will be, the service itself).... simply finding another operator is one step...

 

It's like a father wanting kudos for buying milk & diapers for HIS children....

You don't get attaboy's for somethin you're supposed to do....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the whole point. In many parts of the city they are the sole provider of transit. If I wanted to use transit and not deal w/the (MTA) I would have a hard time doing that, so if wasn't a monopoly, people would have the choice to choose other providers and currently in most cases, that is not possible, so if it isn't a form of a monopoly then I don't know what is. They raise the fare as they please, slash service as they please (be it officially or "unofficially") and so on so maybe they're not a monopoly by the true definition, but they're certainly not far from one. What is even more pathetic is that they have to have hearings which are nothing but a show before they make the cuts.

 

To answer your other question, if the (MTA) didn't run practically everything here, other companies could get the chance to prove themselves. Quite frankly, I do think a private company could do well, if they are run well. I see no reason why the (MTA) should control everything. They have shown that when you are too big and sloppy as they are that the other ones that suffer are the passengers.

 

You have to consider that one of the advantages of having one big provider of transit is that they are less hesitant on fare integration: I have my doubts that subway->bus transfers would've happened if the system was a bunch of private companies.

 

One of the advantages that I do see of having privately-run transit is that the private company has incentives to cut out waste, since that affects their profits. If they can pass those savings onto the taxpayers and riders while providing reasonable quality service, then I would support privatization.

 

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you will..... There are repercussions to unfavorable actions (such as jacking up the fare to "whatever they want"), and I'm not necessarily referring to fines & penalties either....

 

The MTA does act as if they're a monopoly.... that was his point... again, I mention the talks of takeovers of SCT & BeeLine..... I'm glad LL (liberty lines) didn't fold like a cheap rug, and I hope SCT doesn't do the same...

 

I'm not in the bus industry (or follow up enough on the ones I have heard of) to suggest/say if there's a better private company out there.... but I'm not goin sit up here & say the MTA shouldn't be runnin our system; it aint THAT bad (yet)....

 

Far as jitneys go, I honestly think if we ever were to go to a zone based fare, you'd see a hell of a lot more of them than you do now here in NYC (referring to the dollar vans & what not)... but since we have a flat fare, you're not gonna see an actual network of em (the way they have out in ft. lee, paterson, passaic, etc)... I know you're an advocate for free buses & what not, but let's not get ridiculous in actually showing zeal for jitney ran service on a large scale here in the boroughs.....

 

the dollar vans/cabs that run in Brooklyn & Queens, should remain serving the corridors that they do in their respective borough... not runnin to Manhattan like the jitneys out in Jersey do.... Be careful what you wish for....

 

I believe they charge $2.50 to go to Paterson and Passaic, which is less than half of what NJT charges with its zoned fare.

 

I know express bus riders would scream if the buses were replaced with jitneys, but do you think a way to keep costs down is to give the services to private contractors (like Atlantic Express) that would still use MCIs?

 

That's the thing he doesn't realize. He doesn't see how big and powerful the (MTA) is. It is difficult for anyone to really come in and be successful because the (MTA) can basically crush them with the resources both politically and financially that they have. When you think about it Mangano has a point. Let's forget about how little Long Island paid the (MTA) and so forth to run the system.

 

There really wasn't anything stopping the (MTA) from demanding more money from Long Island and even though they paid next to nothing for (MTA) to run their system, I still think it was wise to move away from them for the simple fact that you cannot let anyone hold you hostage. I really do hope and think that things go well. People need and deserve choice.

 

The private company can hold them as hostage as the MTA: If they don't pay them, they'll have to cut the service like the MTA threatened to.

 

The issue that I have isn't with the fact that he's privatizing the system: It is the fact that he's providing so little in subsidies. The MTA threatened to cut half of the routes with the subsidy levels they were providing, and Mangano wants to reduce that subsidy even further.

 

Like I said, if a private company can pay its workers reasonably, and keep decent-quality service while keeping the fares and subsidies the same, I'm all for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe they charge $2.50 to go to Paterson and Passaic, which is less than half of what NJT charges with its zoned fare.

 

I know express bus riders would scream if the buses were replaced with jitneys, but do you think a way to keep costs down is to give the services to private contractors (like Atlantic Express) that would still use MCIs?

 

I've never taken those things.... just like I wouldn't want to stuck on a highway in a dollar van, I wouldn't want to be stuck on those minibuses they run out there....

 

As far as the MTA handing over its express buses to private contractors... For discussion's sake (b/c we know that'd never happen), I'm kind of on the fence on that.... one, b/c I do think the current 5.50 fare is a bit much... and I do think riders would support (use) a private contractor's services if the fare was around, say, 4 bucks... but OTOH, it would be me succumbing to the idea that express buses are the reason that operating costs & what not, are as high as they are... and I wouldn't be in favor of eliminating jobs outright like that (even if you have some of those drivers working local routes, there would still be spillage/leftover drivers that would be screwed)....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to consider that one of the advantages of having one big provider of transit is that they are less hesitant on fare integration: I have my doubts that subway->bus transfers would've happened if the system was a bunch of private companies.

 

One of the advantages that I do see of having privately-run transit is that the private company has incentives to cut out waste, since that affects their profits. If they can pass those savings onto the taxpayers and riders while providing reasonable quality service, then I would support privatization.

 

The private company can hold them as hostage as the MTA: If they don't pay them, they'll have to cut the service like the MTA threatened to.

 

The issue that I have isn't with the fact that he's privatizing the system: It is the fact that he's providing so little in subsidies. The MTA threatened to cut half of the routes with the subsidy levels they were providing, and Mangano wants to reduce that subsidy even further.

 

Like I said, if a private company can pay its workers reasonably, and keep decent-quality service while keeping the fares and subsidies the same, I'm all for it.

 

The point was to have choice period not about whether the (MTA) or a private operate can hold them hostage. That's obvious. If you've got choices it creates competition, which currently doesn't really exist with the (MTA) as the main player in town.

 

As for Mangano, if he can get the service that Nassau needs paying little in subsidizes, then why shouldn't he??? Why should the taxpayers of Nassau pay outrageous tax rates just because folks like you don't think that Mangano is giving transportation companies a bigger chunk of taxpayer money, money that they're worked hard for and that belongs to them?? For someone who is supposed to believe in efficiency and less waste, your argument makes no sense. Like I said, we would have a better idea of whether the subsidy he is providing was sufficient enough or not if we have competition here to begin with. I am so hoping that this deal works out this way I can see what the nay sayers have to complain about then. I'm sorry, but there are other options besides the (MTA) and it is about time that folks exercise their rights to use them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.