Christine Quinn wants city, not MTA, to control subway and bus systems in the five boroughs

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I think the MTA should remain as is but the Board Members need to represent more of the Cities interests. I liked Markowitzs position that each borough president and affected county representatives all being given positions on the Board. The union should also be represented. That makes more sense than having it composed of bankers and real estate interests not accountable to the riders.

lol... And lawyers...

[bobtehpanda]

I don't see the need for a breakup of the MTA, MBTA has a similar setup and they're doing fine.

 

MBTA doesn't have to deal with Long Islanders.

 

MBTA is also saddled with Big Dig debt and a "managed decline" mentality, but that's another story for another time.

[bobtehpanda]

I think the MTA should remain as is but the Board Members need to represent more of the Cities interests. I liked Markowitzs position that each borough president and affected county representatives all being given positions on the Board. The union should also be represented. That makes more sense than having it composed of bankers and real estate interests not accountable to the riders.

 

If the MTA was going to be split up like I described, the Mayor, the Speaker, the Borough Presidents (so they can have an actual function after that Supreme Court ruling on the Board of Estimate), and a elected Transportation Commissioner would run the city bits, and the country representatives would run their suburban railroads with the Bronx and Manhattan Borough Presidents for MNRR and the Queens, Brooklyn, and Manhattan Borough Presidents for LIRR.

 

The Transit Commissioner would run all city transport services on a day-to-day basis, similar to how the DA's are elected, and the MTA Board's 8 members would need a majority vote on budget decisions (the Commissioner would have 2 votes, with the others having one).

 

Obviously, this system is not perfect, but it's probably a better idea than subjecting the transit systems to NYCDOT given the broad spectrum of views that the heads of NYCDOT have had over the years.

 

(On an unrelated note, a lot of political structures need reorganizing to be more democratic, starting with the Community Boards.)

[realizm]

I did'nt look at all the comments in the thread but my take on this is this:

 

It's good to look back in time to see what happened historically during the last major transition of administration of this public tansportation network.

 

As we know the MTA took over operations from the NYCTA in 1968. ( The MTA actually had its start in 1965 to salvage the then bankrupt LIRR.) The NYCTA actually apparently did well in it's heyday, as even though they were also dependant on assistance from the state and city for capitol construction and payroll costs, they did well to allocate the funds properly so as to keep the system in relatively good working order. Initially when the MTA took over in 1968 they did well to jumpstart major new projects for expansion, however look at their record historically.... long years of infrastructure and rolling stock deffered maintainance,  The reason I believe that the NYCTA was killed was because of politics as usual, Governor Rockefeller, in the 1960s, withdrew financial support from the NYCTA. Not because of poor performance as an agency.

 

Sure there were other factors that led to the MTA's terrible record in the 1970's and 1980's but the recirds show the MTA did in fact did worse then when the city agency (NYCTA) assummed operations in 1953. I will have to say regardless, now the MTA is defenitely on the move with a much better performance record overall despite the bullshit we are seeing from Albany, the federal goverment, opposition from special interest groups etc.

 

Politics always shaped the the changes in administration of the agencies that was deployed to oversee the operations of this vast transportation network. And I agree a suddden change from one agency to another will cause for a certainty detrimental and disasterous problems. Enter the NICE takeover of the MTA Long Island Bus division. Total disaster initially. The private corperation is doing better now however look at what happened during the transition. That should give us a good guage to follow in what transistion to city takeover of the MTA public benefits corperation could look like, albeit probably with much worse problems.

 

OK. Now as for Christine Quinn she is defininitely making this proposal just to gain gravy points. Look at her initial boycott of the St Patricks Day parades in the past because of this controversy with the participation of the LGBT community to only for this year to advocate for the cancellation for the GO's this year for the St Patty's Day parade, Can she be trusted?!! What are her true motives here? Something we need to ask ourselves.....

 

Her support of Bloomberg's insane proposals which was revealed in past discussions. She does'nt care about the current happenings of this city, as her past record shows, obviously.

 

So all that said: Am I in support of this proposal for city takeover of the transit system in p[lace in NYC? Nope. That will result in a hectic transition that will be nothing short of disasterous. Period.

 

Am I in support of Christine Quinn and her policies in general? Don't make me burst out in hysterical laughter. Given her record as a two faced politition who will backstab New Yorkers with a smile in a heartbeat, I will never vote for this nutcase of a mayoral candidate. Never ever ever.

**@ Turbo16: My apologies for the late response in your thread. Still in the process of deploying 2000 computers and other equipment in the current IT technical project I am in with my team of computer techs. Building the new IT HelpDesk Dept alone, along with the HR dept, Finance Dept etc has my very, very busy this week.

[BrooklynBus]

If the MTA was going to be split up like I described, the Mayor, the Speaker, the Borough Presidents (so they can have an actual function after that Supreme Court ruling on the Board of Estimate), and a elected Transportation Commissioner would run the city bits, and the country representatives would run their suburban railroads with the Bronx and Manhattan Borough Presidents for MNRR and the Queens, Brooklyn, and Manhattan Borough Presidents for LIRR.

 

The Transit Commissioner would run all city transport services on a day-to-day basis, similar to how the DA's are elected, and the MTA Board's 8 members would need a majority vote on budget decisions (the Commissioner would have 2 votes, with the others having one).

 

Obviously, this system is not perfect, but it's probably a better idea than subjecting the transit systems to NYCDOT given the broad spectrum of views that the heads of NYCDOT have had over the years.

 

(On an unrelated note, a lot of political structures need reorganizing to be more democratic, starting with the Community Boards.)

 

 

I am not ruling out city control as a possibility.  It may make sense, but I think the key is finances.  If City control means less State funding, and I'm afraid that would be the case, the situation will only get worse.  It takes a lot of money to keep up the subway system. With less money available, the downhill slide will not be immediately noticeable, but eventually we will slide back to the dark days of the early 1980s. You really had to live through those days to understand how bad everything was. No air conditioned subways or buses that were working.  All the subway stations falling apart.  A 50% chance your train would be taken out of service before you got to your destination, etc. We are still  trying to catch up today.  That's why there is Fastrack. 

 

With less money, the City will have no choice but to raise taxes and institute congestion pricing in the City.  The results on the economy would be disastrous. Then the tolls on all the bridges and tunnels would be raised 50 cents each year. Service cuts would be reinstituted and that would mean less revenue. For City takeover to work, you would have to devise a new funding scheme.  Only Scott Stringer came up with a plan that I do not know if it would work since I am not a finance expert. Returning the control to the City without working out all the details beforehand is one of the worst things we could do. At least Albanese who supports City takeover has a plan, whether you agree with him or not.  Quinn has no such plan and I wouldn't trust her with anything, least of all our transit system.

[bobtehpanda]

I am not ruling out city control as a possibility.  It may make sense, but I think the key is finances.  If City control means less State funding, and I'm afraid that would be the case, the situation will only get worse.  It takes a lot of money to keep up the subway system. With less money available, the downhill slide will not be immediately noticeable, but eventually we will slide back to the dark days of the early 1980s. You really had to live through those days to understand how bad everything was. No air conditioned subways or buses that were working.  All the subway stations falling apart.  A 50% chance your train would be taken out of service before you got to your destination, etc. We are still  trying to catch up today.  That's why there is Fastrack. 

 

With less money, the City will have no choice but to raise taxes and institute congestion pricing in the City.  The results on the economy would be disastrous. Then the tolls on all the bridges and tunnels would be raised 50 cents each year. Service cuts would be reinstituted and that would mean less revenue. For City takeover to work, you would have to devise a new funding scheme.  Only Scott Stringer came up with a plan that I do not know if it would work since I am not a finance expert. Returning the control to the City without working out all the details beforehand is one of the worst things we could do. At least Albanese who supports City takeover has a plan, whether you agree with him or not.  Quinn has no such plan and I wouldn't trust her with anything, least of all our transit system.

 

There's nothing wrong with putting a toll on the East River bridges, especially when you consider that the neighborhoods immediately around the bridges have no direct highway access and suffer a lot of congestion and air quality issues on their streets. The current situation's ridiculous.

 

If the current dedicated MTA taxes were distributed by county (five borough taxes going to the new city authority), there might actually be a net gain, because the cost of operating NYCT+SIR per rider is comparatively low, and the five boroughs is essentially at least half of the state's (and definitely more than half of the metro area's) tax base. LIRR and MNRR would suffer immensely, however.

 

Also someone would probably need to look up the home rule stuff, and whether or not City Council has the authority to levy LA-style or Atlanta-style transport taxes. (It wouldn't be particularly onerous - most localities in the US fund their transit agencies with a 1/2-cent or 1-cent sales tax, and the current payroll tax is a mere fraction of a percent.)

[BrooklynBus]

There's nothing wrong with putting a toll on the East River bridges, especially when you consider that the neighborhoods immediately around the bridges have no direct highway access and suffer a lot of congestion and air quality issues on their streets. The current situation's ridiculous.

 

If the current dedicated MTA taxes were distributed by county (five borough taxes going to the new city authority), there might actually be a net gain, because the cost of operating NYCT+SIR per rider is comparatively low, and the five boroughs is essentially at least half of the state's (and definitely more than half of the metro area's) tax base. LIRR and MNRR would suffer immensely, however.

 

Also someone would probably need to look up the home rule stuff, and whether or not City Council has the authority to levy LA-style or Atlanta-style transport taxes. (It wouldn't be particularly onerous - most localities in the US fund their transit agencies with a 1/2-cent or 1-cent sales tax, and the current payroll tax is a mere fraction of a percent.)

I'm all for equalizing the tolls so that drivers don't try to avoid the Battery Tunnel, for example, but not at the current rates. If you toll the free bridges you need to cut the rates in half and not continue to raise them every two years. We also need assurances how the money will be spent. I just don't trust the politicians. Just like they lied to us with the lottery saying all the money will go to education when all they did was to substitute lottery money for money that previously came from the general fund.

 

If the free bridges are tolled, they will use the money to fix potholes, paint lines etc, when that money currently comes from the general fund. Little if any will go to mass transit. They won't fool me twice.

 

And most of the people who currently use the free bridges have little alternative. And there is no capacity on the subways anyway to absorb new riders. Remember, all the MTA was going to do if congestion pricing went through was to have one bus route operate every 30 minutes through the Battery Tunnel, not even every 5 minutes. So tell me how pollution would be reduced near the bridges. The only effects would be people would just be paying more because new subway lines would not appear overnight.

[bobtehpanda]

And most of the people who currently use the free bridges have little alternative. And there is no capacity on the subways anyway to absorb new riders. Remember, all the MTA was going to do if congestion pricing went through was to have one bus route operate every 30 minutes through the Battery Tunnel, not even every 5 minutes. So tell me how pollution would be reduced near the bridges. The only effects would be people would just be paying more because new subway lines would not appear overnight.

 

Well, less people would attempt to toll shop in the first place, so less people would be going through the neighborhoods and mucking up the air with their cars.

 

It also reduces overall air pollution, because all of the tolled bridges and tunnels link directly to highways, and you burn a lot more fuel doing stop-and-go traffic on city streets than when you're in constantly moving traffic on a limited-access highway.

 

In any case, the main constraint on car traffic into Manhattan these days is the total capacity of Manhattan streets and the lack of parking spaces. I've read somewhere that the taxi fleet in particular has an outsize effect on congestion since they're constantly driving, but I don't remember the exact figures of how many personal cars = taxis roaming around.

[Trainmaster5]

Well, less people would attempt to toll shop in the first place, so less people would be going through the neighborhoods and mucking up the air with their cars.

 

It also reduces overall air pollution, because all of the tolled bridges and tunnels link directly to highways, and you burn a lot more fuel doing stop-and-go traffic on city streets than when you're in constantly moving traffic on a limited-access highway.

 

In any case, the main constraint on car traffic into Manhattan these days is the total capacity of Manhattan streets and the lack of parking spaces. I've read somewhere that the taxi fleet in particular has an outsize effect on congestion since they're constantly driving, but I don't remember the exact figures of how many personal cars = taxis roaming around.

There is more congestion and pollution at toll booths/plazas and the surrounding area than other areas. The only way to avoid the pollution problem at the entryways is to restrict the amount of auto traffic allowed into Manhattan and that ain't gonna happen. This was told to me by a retired TBTA worker who said he was tired of attending funerals of his co-workers who died from respiratory illnesses or cancer. Just thought I'd pass this on.

[BrooklynBus]

Well, less people would attempt to toll shop in the first place, so less people would be going through the neighborhoods and mucking up the air with their cars.

 

It also reduces overall air pollution, because all of the tolled bridges and tunnels link directly to highways, and you burn a lot more fuel doing stop-and-go traffic on city streets than when you're in constantly moving traffic on a limited-access highway.

 

In any case, the main constraint on car traffic into Manhattan these days is the total capacity of Manhattan streets and the lack of parking spaces. I've read somewhere that the taxi fleet in particular has an outsize effect on congestion since they're constantly driving, but I don't remember the exact figures of how many personal cars = taxis roaming around.

 

I don't think personal autos account for more than 30% of the traffic in the CBD. I would say close to half the cars are taxis or limos with the remaining traffic split between buses and trucks.

[MTARegional Bus]

Thanks Christine quinn you won't be getting my vote   .

 

If the city couldn't maintain the PBL what makes you so sure they can maintain the hole system. 

 

 

[FamousNYLover]

I learned from Newsday, Christine Quinn is native of Glen Clove.

There's site called Vote Quinn Out and facebook page DEFEAT Christine Quinn, grassrot organization voting against her.

It's REAL FACT BEHIND CHRISTINE QUINN @ http://votequinnout.com/.

 

1. She block all Animal Protection Bill that suppose to prevent CitiPup from buying their puppies from puppy mill and Carriage Horse.

2. She also ignored cries of St. Vincent Hospital closure.

3. She don't care for union members, which union members represent city buses, school buses, hospitals, etc are much professional.

[FamousNYLover]

Just to let you know, there's Protest Against Christine Quinn this Sunday if interested.

 

The Victory Fund, a Washington, DC-based group whose mission is to elect gay people to public office, is blindly supporting Christine Quinn's mayoral

 

campaign. The Victory Fund urges LGBT's, who know nothing about Speaker Quinn's actual record, to attend fundraising events for Speaker Quinn. If you

have been wondering who has been propagating the emphasis of Speaker Quinn's identity over her dismal record, it is the Victory Fund. 

 

The Victory Fund doesn't care that Speaker Quinn is the biggest obstacle to social justice advances in New York City. 

If you want to help demonstrate that Speaker Quinn has lost support of the LGBT community right here in New York City, then please join us :

Date : Sunday, 21 April 2013
Time : 11:15 am - 12:30 pm
Place : Mandarin Oriental, 80 Columbus Circle at 60th Street

We are joining organisers from the Defeat Christine Quinn Facebook page at a protest against Christine Quinn this Sunday.

 

If You Have Facebook, RSVP here @ https://www.facebook.com/events/361152520672581/

[FamousNYLover]

I got facebook message from Queens Against Chrstine Quinn regardding this Sunday's protest at 11:15am-12:30pm.

 

This protest will take place outside, alongside the 60th Street entrance to the hotel, between Broadway and Columbus Avenue. Join us and invite your friends.  

 

[BrooklynBus]

Anyone go today? I was there for the last 30 minutes.

[FamousNYLover]

I was there from 11:15 to 12:10, and I had to head to MTA Rally near MTA Customer Service.

[FamousNYLover]

I found another article.

http://newyork.newsday.com/news/new-york/christine-quinn-wants-nyc-to-take-over-metro-north-1.5055700

[bobtehpanda]

I found another article.

http://newyork.newsday.com/news/new-york/christine-quinn-wants-nyc-to-take-over-metro-north-1.5055700

 

I can sort of see the rationale of city ownership of NYCT and MTAB, but why the hell does she want Metro-North?

 

She's out of her mind...

[Turbo19]

I can sort of see the rationale of city ownership of NYCT and MTAB, but why the hell does she want Metro-North?

 

She's out of her mind...

What rationale. She has none.

 

Unless you consider consuming to be a rationale.

 

 

Yeah, I went there.

[BrooklynBus]

Did anyone see any media coverage of the Quinn out rally and if so could you be kind enough to provide a link? Thanks.

[MTARegional Bus]

I found another article.

http://newyork.newsday.com/news/new-york/christine-quinn-wants-nyc-to-take-over-metro-north-1.5055700

 

 

 

 

LOL doesn't she realize Metro north runs outside city line? if that's the case then local government's for each county the MN runs on will have a long talks with her, She will destroy mass transit, 

[RTS CNG Command]

I found another article.

http://newyork.newsday.com/news/new-york/christine-quinn-wants-nyc-to-take-over-metro-north-1.5055700

 

Metro-North operates most of its time outside the city boundaries, and there are many local governments besides New York City that rely on Metro-North. Having MTA NYCT and MTA Bus operated by New York City is a bad enough idea. But this plan is even STUPIDER!

[FamousNYLover]

Here are the videos that BrooklynBus requested.

English

 

 

Espanol

 

[BrooklynBus]

Thanks for posting the You Tube videos, but that doesn't look like media coverage.

[FamousNYLover]

We even had NYPD and hotel security protecting us.