Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Council Cracks Down on Pedicabs Again


Photo (cc)

The City Council tapped the brakes on New York's pedicab industry Thursday by approving legislation to further regulate the sometimes rogue, tourist-friendly tricycles rampant in Midtown.

The council capped the number of pedicabs at 850 and made it easier for the city to suspend pedicabs' licenses after drivers receive multiple violations.

The move was the second attempt by the City Council in two years to curtail the growth of pedicabs, which up until 2009 were completely unregulated.

"We are at our saturation point with pedicabs," said Councilmember Dan Garodnick, the bill's sponsor, who represents Midtown East. "This is not the appropriate time to issue new licenses.

In addition to the pedicab proposals, the council also approved legislation that could ease alternate side parking regulations across the city.

A spokesperson for Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the administration supported both measures.

Pedicab Problems

Stop by Central Park and you can't miss them.

The oft-colorful wheeled wagons shuttle tourists and Midtown revelers from the park to Broadway to restaurants. While the human-powered taxis are often full, residents and the taxi industry have complained about them for years, citing safety hazards.

The council initially attempted to regulate pedicabs in 2007, but the rules were struck down in state court.

In 2009, the council successfully established a licensing system for the industry for the first time.

Under the current system, pedicab operators had a limited time frame to apply for a pedicab license at the Department of Consumer Affairs. The pedicabs must stay out of bike lanes, pass inspection, and have seatbelts, tail lights and insurance.

On Thursday, the council went a step further. Under the legislation, which was approved by a vote of 44 to 1 with Councilmember Charles Barron dissenting, the city will not issue new pedicab licenses unless the number of vehicles falls below 840.

The new proposal would rescind a pedicab's registration plate for a year if it receives three violations within one year. Those violations could include broken seatbelts or brakes.

The Department of Consumer Affairs also would have the power to revoke a pedicab driver's license if he or she operates the vehicle twice in one year without a valid driver's license or with a suspended license.

The council also approved legislation to force pedicabs to abide by the city's parking regulations. Pedicabs would no longer be able to park in no standing or no parking zones, and they would have to steer clear of fire hydrants.

The city's leading pedicab association, the New York City Pedicab Owners' Association, testified in favor of the proposals.

But not everyone in the industry has lent their support.

"I think its pretty unnecessary," said Robert Tipton, the owner of Mr. Rickshaw, a pedicab company, of the parking regulations. "There are other issues that are more pressing, one being the driver's license issue."

Currently, to obtain a pedicab license you only need a driver's license that is valid in New York State, which would include those issued in other countries. Tipton suggested the city should only allow drivers with U.S. driver's licenses.

From Pedicabs to Parking

Moving to the curbside, the council also approved legislation to allow community boards to reduce the number of days for alternate side of the street parking if the neighborhood meets certain cleanliness standards.

The street would have to obtain an average 90 percent cleanliness record for two consecutive years before the community board could move to reduce the number of alternate side days.

Under the legislation, which was passed by a vote of 44 to zero with one abstention, no street would be allowed to go below one alternate side day per side.

The city initially piloted reduced alternate side in Brooklyn starting in 2008. The council also approved legislation to require the Department of Information, Technology and Telecommunications to create an interactive map that would keep track of all street closures.

Republicans Look to Trade Payroll Tax for Bridge Tolls


A proposal by some upstate state senators would allow the City Council to place tolls on the Brooklyn Bridge and other East River crossings.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has been conspicuously absent from the Albany debate this year. But as the session winds down slowly, the MTA and its issues are creeping back to the forefront, thanks to a group of upstate and Long Island Republican senators who want to drastically cut back the payroll tax that helps pay for mass transit and commuter rail. At the same time, they would pave the way for tolls on the East River bridges, an idea that has been touted as a solution to both the MTA's chronic fiscal woes and Manhattan's traffic congestion. This time around though, even some supporters of the tolls have their doubts.

The Tax

In 2009, with the MTA facing a huge budget gap, the state government enacted a tax in the city and counties serviced by the MTA including Putnam, Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Suffolk, Dutchess and Nassau. The tax as it stands raises $1.34 billion annually for the MTA. Although it amounts to only 0.33 cents on every $100 dollars paid by employers, many politicians from these areas have opposed it, saying the MTA provides limited service in their districts and most of the businesses in their counties don't benefit from it.

Sen. John Bonacic, whose district encompasses Delaware County, Sullivan County and parts of Ulster County and Orange County, has introduced a bill that would do away with the payroll tax in all counties except New York City. To make up the revenue he would allow -- but not require -- the New York City Council to set tolls on the East River Bridges: the Brooklyn Bridge, the Manhattan Bridge, the Williamsburg Bridge and the Ed Koch Queensboro Bridge. The charge could be between $2.50 and $5. This idea has been frequently proposed before -- most recently in 2009-- and has always failed.

Bonacic has the support of fellow upstate Republican Sens. Gregory Ball, William Larkin, Stephen Saland and Lee Zeldin. The bill does not have a sponsor in the Assembly as of this writing, although Bonacic has reached out to possible sponsors and notes that a number of Assembly Democrats y voted against the payroll tax in 2009.

Time for Tolls?

Although some transit advocates have supported tolls or charging people to drive into Manhattan in the past, they expressed reservation about Bonacic's plan.

Advocates like New York Public Interest Research Group's Gene Russianoff say there are simply too many variables that could leave the MTA with a gaping financial shortfall. If the council decided not to implement tolls or implemented very low tolls the MTA would end up losing money. "The bill does not set a toll rate," says Russianoff. "It only allows the council to implement them." He added that some studies concluded that a $3 toll, such as one previously recommended by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, "would cost us money."

Neysa Pranger of the Regional Plan Association says that the MTA's finances are not particularly strong especially when it comes to its capital plan. "We need to be looking for new sources of funding not getting rid of them," she said.

Bonacic, however, thinks the tolls would provide more than enough money. He says that the payroll tax in the suburbs is supposed to generate $343 million a year, while the tolls could generate as much as $533 million annually. "I think the revenue stream from tolls would generate about a $200 million surplus. It's a revenue enhancer they can spend as they see fit." Bonacic did not say how much he thought motorists should be tolled.

The debate revives talk of congestion pricing, which many transportation advocates, including Russianoff, favor. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has reportedly been working on a revamped version of congestion pricing called "traffic pricing" as a way to better fund the MTA and perhaps reduce fares. Bloomberg's plan, however, supposedly would not roll back the payroll tax. Bloomberg recently talked about funding mass transit through "pilot technology and pricing based mechanisms," while introducing his environmental plan earlier this month.

The City vs. The Suburbs

For Bonacic the debate comes down to one of usage and services. He says train service in the small part of Orange County that he represents has not improved since the tax was implemented. He describes the situation as, "taxation without transportation."

At the same time, Bonacic says the payroll tax hurts not-for-profits and businesses. "This stunts job creation," he said. He said that the payroll tax raises $18 million per year in Orange County where only 2 percent of resident use MTA services. "The legislature implemented this when everything was controlled by Democrats from New York City. The passion against it has not subsided," he said.

But Russianoff disagrees. "People may say, 'Well, I don't take the train,' but the people who go to the florist may come up on one, the people pushing the shopping carts may have gotten there thanks to MetroNorth or the subway or bus."

Russianoff described the situation as a slippery slope. "If they think it isn’t worth paying for the service then what about the other MTA taxes, like the sales tax? I don’t think it would be fair for subway and bus riders. I think in the end it would cost the MTA funding."

Pro and Con

Meanwhile, city legislators say that tolls on the East River bridges would hurt their middle class constituents. Sens. Tony Avella and Toby Ann Staviskyissued a press release slamming the plan. "Tolls are a tax, and middle class families can’t afford to keep paying more while getting less in return. The legislation proposed by Long Island and upstate Senate Republicans to place tolls on the East River bridges will adversely affect commuters, small businesses and working families in outer-borough communities who have very limited access to public transportation," it said.

Bonacic is trying to sell the plan as environmentally friendly. His arguments for the tolls are similar to the ones made for congestion pricing. "Everyone who goes into New York should pay their fair share. It would reduce traffic and be better for the environment if people started using public transportation more."

But the truth is any bill that features bridge tolls faces an uphill battle in Albany, and Bonacic does not yet have bipartisan support on the bill, although the first supporter he wants to bag is a big one. "I need [Gov. Andrew] Cuomo to get behind this, because he has said he doesn't like the payroll tax. But this is just the beginning," the senator said.

During a visit to Poughkeepsie in January Cuomo called the levy on payrolls "a very onerous tax.' He went on to tell reporters, "It's not just in this area; people are complaining about it on Long Island, the entire metropolitan region. ... I understand the need to finance the system. If we can find a better way to do it, I’m open."

The Independent Democratic Conference, made up of Sens. Diane Savino, David Carlucci, David Valesky and Jeff Klein, also has made repealing the payroll tax part of its agenda. Klein, the leader of the breakaway group, listed the payroll tax as one of the biggest mistakes the Democrats made while they were in the majority. However, Savino and Valesky voted for the tax in 2009.

It's not clear if the four would support tolls. The group has said it blames gross mismanagement" for a third of MTA’s current fiscal debt." In its agenda, they say, "Our goal is to conduct a comprehensive forensic audit of the MTA to find areas of waste and corruption and determine the need and the efficacy of the current MTA tax."

Whether or not his bill gains traction, Bonacic expects the next two months will see more legislation that will propose other ways to fund the MTA and do away with the payroll tax on upstate counties. "There are enough upstate legislators who recognize this is simply unfair," he said.

Russianoff also anticipates major debate over how to fund the MTA before the end of the session. As for Bonacic's bill, he said, "We don't support it, but I think it raises an interesting question about what would it take to get the legislature to seriously consider bridge tolls, whether they were connected to payroll tax or not."

City Again Tries to Get New Yorkers to Board Ferries


NY Waterway
Photo (cc) Walter Burns
NY Waterway's plan to provide ferry service along the East River is the latest effort to get more New Yorkers to commute by boat.

Instead of packing onto crowded, often delayed and inconvenient subways, commuters along the Brooklyn/Queens waterfront will have an alternative way to travel when a new ferry service begins making stops along the East River later this year.

The service is the latest in a long line of attempts to boost commuting by water in New York in an effort to revitalize the waterfront and ease congestion. It comes in the wake of a few successes and many failures. The ferries, which will serve Greenpoint, Williamsburg, DUMBO, downtown Brooklyn and East 34th Street, will be operated by BillyBey Ferry Co., which contracts with NY Waterway and whose boats bear the NY Waterway logo.

"You can see from Edgewater to Weehawken all the way down to Hoboken and Jersey City that development has occurred on the Jersey side where the ferries were helpful to developing, and that's the development the city is trying to encourage on the Queens/Brooklyn waterfront," said Paul Goodman, co-owner and CEO of BillyBey Ferry said.

According to the city Economic Development Corp., the East River ferry system will cost passengers $3 to $5.50, depending on distance. Currently, the city is constructing piers for the new service, and hopes to have them operating by the time boats are ready to take passengers -- probably by June, although no date has been announced. According to development corporation spokesperson Julie Wood, if the new service becomes a success, the city will look to expand ferry service in other places.

Better by Boat?

The development corporation has been analyzing over 40 sites around the city to see if ferry service is feasible. According to its Comprehensive Citywide Ferry Study, new ferry service could serve a number of locations throughout the city including LaGuardia and Kennedy airports, Coney Island, Bay Ridge, Soundview, Hunts Point and City Island.

Gotham Gazette: Affordable housing

This 2009 plan by the Economic Development Crop. envisions an entire network of ferry service for the five boroughs. (Click on the map to see a larger version of the graphic.)

"Using the waterway to connect New Yorkers to business districts as well as recreation destinations will encourage economic activity and growth on both sides of the East River," said development corporation president Seth Pinsky in a press release.

The project is part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Waterfront Vision and Enhancement Strategy (WAVES) initiative for the revitalization of 578 miles of city waterfront. The initiative calls for the redevelopment of the city waterfronts. One of WAVES' goals is to promote increased use of New York waters for transportation. Woods said the new ferry service will be part of that. "It's activating the blue network, it's consistent with all of the goals of waves to increase waterborne transportation," she said.

WAVES also aims to restore the natural habitats of wetlands in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Manhattan, and encourage and improve maritime commerce. The WAVES initiative, according to the city, reinforces some of the goals of the PlaNYC 2030 initiative, which has sought to encourage alternate modes of transportation including ferries.

"Many of New York City's fastest growing neighborhoods, like Williamsburg and Long Island City, have tremendous waterfront access, and we want to capitalize on that by providing a new, sustainable transportation option for residents," said Deputy Mayor for Economic Development Robert Steel in a press release.

The service will run every 20 minutes during the day and evening, serving seven stops year round and two additional stops -- at Governors Island and Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn -- during the summer. This, Steele said, will "create a transportation alternative while spurring private investment along the waterfront."

Beached!

The new ferry service comes after years of unsuccessful effort to promote ferries. In the mid-1990s, then Gov. George Pataki and then Mayor Rudy Giuliani asked NY Waterway to provide service between Hunters Point and East 34th Street. The ferries ran between every 15 to 20 minutes, but only carried 135 people per day at its peak. The service was not subsidized by the city and ended in 2001.

In 2002, NY Waterway once again tried to bring ferries to the East Side of Manhattan. The ferry served the 90th Street pier on the Upper East Side, Long Island City, 34th Street and Pier 11 in Lower Manhattan. Costing only $5 per trip, the ferries operated every 30 minutes during rush hour and had no off-hour service. The second attempt faltered due to low ridership, having only carried 150 people per day. Upper East Side opposition to shuttle bus service NY Waterway provides to its terminals further complicated matters, and low ridership from Long Island City resulted in the service ending once more in 2004.

The administration also has attempted to bring ferry service to other parts of the city. In May 2008, NY Water Taxi offered service from Breezy Point in The Rockaways, to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan. Despite having community support, the ferry only served 160 people per day and cost the city $1.5 million in subsidies. The service endedlast year 2010.

If at First You Don't Succeed...

Goodman and others hope this time will be different. Previous attempts, according to Goodman "were not the same effort as the one were doing. ... This time around, there are half a dozen departure points. ... It's a very robust schedule -- a degree of frequency at different locations on a scale never been attempted before."

In addition, the ferries will link up to a free bus service in Midtown as well as to the M34 bus. The ferries also will accommodate bicycles.

"This robust, regular service will be well-integrated with existing transportation options, providing a new sustainable and enjoyable way for commuters and tourists alike to get around the city," said Pinsky.

Despite all this Goodman warns that ridership levels could be low in the beginning, although he expects that to change. "It could take time for the ridership to develop as communities along the waterfront develop," he said, adding, "We think in the long term that it' s going to be viable. ... Access to ferries should enhance development on the waterfront, which should increase ridership."

According to NY Waterway spokesman Pat Smith, the city has dedicated $3.1 million in funding per year, over a three-year period.

"In order to make it affordable to the potential riders, the city is subsidizing. It is priced at a point that makes it attractive with other subsidized transportation," said Goodman.

NY Waterway and BillyBey already operate ferries across the Hudson River between Manhattan and New Jersey. According to New York Waterways, its ferry system helps to keep 7,000 cars off the road, and carries 30,000 passenger trips per day.

Push for Bike Lanes Hits Some Bumps


bike lane
Photo by bitchcaksny

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the Department of Transportation have made a strong push for expanding bike lanes throughout New York City, but as more streets boast a special area for cyclists, a backlash has emerged.

While opponents have long tried to block plans for specific lanes, now critics are taking on the program as a whole. Some community boards and politicians express concern that the lanes have been developed too quickly and say they make it harder to walk and drive around the city and can pose a safety hazard and hurt businesses. They attack the administration for what they see an anti-car bias. A numbers of these critics have mounted efforts on a variety of fronts to try to slow down the Bloomberg administration's cycling plans.

To dramatize his increasing skepticism about bike lanes, Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz rolled into his State of the Borough speech this year on a tricycle, and then blasted the city's cycling initiatives. "For the majority of New Yorkers, it is simply not feasible to make bicycles their primary mode of transport, and unfortunately that's the direction I believe the city's policy is heading," Markowitz said.

On a more serious note, the City Council last week unanimously passed bills requiring that the police update statistics on bicycle and pedestrian traffic violations and accidents, as well as those involving cars and trucks, and that the Department of Transportation keep track of bicycle crashes. Advocates for cycling endorsed these measures. The council also approved Intro 377, which will require the Department of Transportation explain to council members and community boards why it has rejected certain suggestions to ease traffic.

These initiatives, however, seem unlikely to end the debate over bike lanes.

Full Speed Ahead

The city sees bicycles as a way to "reduce traffic and reach our clean air and greenhouse gas reduction goals," according to PlaNYC, its sustainability initiative.

Since Mayor Michael Bloomberg took office in 2002, his administration has designated 373 miles of bike lanes throughout the city. Under PlaNYC, New York City will have 1,800 miles of bike lane by 2030. By the Department of Transportation's calculations, which some dispute, the number of people commuting by bike in the city has doubled since 2006.

That represents a major expansion. And to some critics that alone is a problem.

Councilmember James Oddo of Staten Island, said he has problems with the process the city uses to create bike lanes. "It's in the presentation. It's heavy-handed and has alienated people who may be a natural ally,” said Oddo. "No matter how powerful you are, no one likes the sense that they are being dictated to in that manner."

Oddo and fellow Staten Island Republican Councilmember Vincent Ignizio wrote an open letter to Deputy Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan last month questioning the administration's authority to expand bike lanes without first conducting a review to determine whether the change would adversely affect the environment.

They also challenged Sadik-Khan's authority to make decisions on bike lane. "The City Charter does not identify the creation of bike lanes as a stated power or duty of the commissioner," the council members wrote.

The Department of Transportation did not respond to repeated requests to comment on this.

Oddo also questions the priority the department has placed on bike paths while, he said, Staten Island streets are "not drivable." Whatever cycling's benefits, he said, it is not practical for Staten Island. "We're addicted to the automobile," he said. "We don’t have an alternative [public transportation] like the other four boroughs do."

Oddo is scheduled to meet with the deputy mayor in early March to discuss environmental review changes.

Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group that enthusiastically supports bike lanes, bemoaned the expenses the city might incur if every bike lane prompted the kind of review that road changes face. It would be "an enormous waste of resources for the city," said Caroline Samponaro, director of bicycle advocacy at Transportation Alternatives.

Reflecting concerns similar to Oddo's, Councilmember Lew Fidler of Brooklyn has proposed that the Department of Transportation notify the relevant community board of any proposed bike lanes within its border, enabling the board to hold hearings on the plan.

"Bike lanes drop out of the sky without any notice to the community and they're based on a master plan that's more than 10 years ago," Fidler told a meeting last year.

Last year Fidler blocked -- at least temporarily -- a planned bike lane in Canarsie.

Making Streets Safer for All

Samponaro thinks traffic laws offer a better was best way to address any safety concerns. "Enforcement is the way to address bike behavior, not red tape," she said.

Evidence does seem to indicate the bike lanes have created safety problems, caused by motorists and cyclists. Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer recently released a study, conducted from Oct. 5 to Oct. 7, 2010, that documented hundreds of traffic violations at 11 different locations citywide involving motorists, cyclists and bike lanes, including vehicles parking in bike lanes and cyclists riding the wrong way. The report fond, for example, 42 instances of cyclists riding the wrong way on the street on Centre and Chambers streets.

Vincent Tedesco, a South Street Seaport resident who commutes on his motorized scooter, believes that bike lanes only make roads safer if cyclists obey the rules. "Sometimes you get somebody who doesn't have any experience riding bicycles in the street," he said. "It's kind of dangerous. I've come close to hitting cyclists."

To rein in bad behavior on the part of the cyclists, Councilmember Eric Ulrich has proposed that people be required to post an identification tag, purchased from the city for a small fee, on their bikes. This, he has said, would end a "double standard when it comes to enforcing traffic laws"

Transportation Alternatives has mounted a campaign to stop this idea from ever becoming law. "Practically speaking, bicycle registration would criminalize bicycling, waste valuable city resources and erect yet another obstacle for those seeking to ride a bike. It would do nothing to improve safety or enforcement," the group's web site says.

Samponaro maintains that bicycle riders already are held responsible for their actions, noting that all cyclists must carry identification and can be taken into police custody if they are caught without it. "There’s already accountability. It's a point that is really lost in the public," she said. "We should be having a conversation based in fact."

She said the Department of Transportation has found that bike lanes make commuting safer. According to the department's web site, streets with bicycle lanes have 40 percent less fatal or injurious accidents than roads without them. "Bike lanes are necessary for street safety. It's essential," Samponaro said.

Jesse Smith, a Queens College student who both rides his bicycle and commutes by car, agrees bike lanes are essential. However, he thinks only experienced cyclists should use them. "It would be ill-advisable for a family to bike down a lane during rush hour," he said.

Street Fight

Noah Pffeferblit, district manager of Community Board 1, which covers Lower Manhattan, has heard complaints that the bike lane that cuts through City Hall Park is dangerously close to kids walking to school with their parents. "There is no dedicated space for them [pedestrians] specifically," said Pffeferblit.

He also hears gripes that, despite the bike paths, some cyclists still ride on the sidewalks. It is a violation, punishable by a fine of up to $100, for a cyclist over 12 years old to ride on a sidewalk.

But Pffeferblit supports adding more bike lane in his community "given that the Department of Transportation and other agencies consult with us before they are installed."

Transportation Alternatives has recognized that cyclists can create problems -- and wants bike riders to address the concerns.

"Everyone from the local crossing guard to our grandma has been complaining about bicyclist behavior. Every elected official in the city has gotten the call," it says on its web site. "Now is when we need to do better. Give pedestrians more space. Make eye contact and smile. If you screw up, or startle someone, apologize.

Bikes and Business

Then there are the economic issues. Some businesses say bikes infringe on their work and hurt sales. The Columbus Avenue Working Group, a business advocacy group from the Upper West Side, found that 72 percent of the 36 businesses they surveyed said the protected bike lane between West 77th Street and West 96th Street negatively affected them, according to a survey released by Stringer early this month.

The business operators complained about a lack of space to load and unload materials, difficulty receiving deliveries and more vehicles getting ticketed in places where they were previously able to park. Fourteen percent of the affected businesses believe that the lack of parking space has decreased revenue.

On Feb. 6 Community Board 7, which represents that area, recommended that the Department of Transportation establish clearer traffic rules to reduce the number of tickets.

Samponaro contends that the Columbus area does not reflect the experience of businesses citywide. "Change takes some adjustments," she said.

Bike Bills Cruise through the Council


Photo (cc) Sailing Nomad

In the latest iteration of the bike lane debate, the City Council unanimously approved a package of legislation Wednesday to force the Bloomberg administration to report on pedestrian and bike-related accidents.

One bill requires the Police Department to update statistics on pedestrian or bicycle related traffic citations, accidents, injuries and fatalities online monthly. Another will force the Department of Transportation to track bicycle crashes for the first time.

The legislation is part of a larger citywide dialogue on bike regulations and the number of bike lanes the Bloomberg administration has created. While bicycle advocates claim the lanes have increased traffic safety and encouraged more New Yorkers to trade in their four wheels for two, some communities have vehemently opposed their construction, contending they take away parking and present a safety hazard.

Yesterday, Council Speaker Christine Quinn said the information gleaned from the legislation would help the city determine where bike lanes and other traffic calming measures should be.

"Getting people out of cars and on to bikes is a good thing," said Quinn. But, she added, "Bike lanes work great in some neighborhoods and don’t work well in others."

Bicycle Bills

Last year, Stuart Gruskin, then 50 years old, was walking to lunch in Midtown when a deliveryman on a bicycle struck him. Gruskin lost his life due to injuries from the accident.

His wife, Nancy, joined the City Council yesterday to applaud the approval of the bike bills package, specifically legislation (Intro 374) that would compile collision statistics involving bicycles, including those between bikes and pedestrians, in an annual report.

"There were no accurate bicycle versus pedestrian statistics," said Gruskin. "These statistics are the foundation on which policy is built."

In addition to the bike crash bill, the package (Intro 370-a) will require the police department to post moving violation data on its site every month. The data will reveal who was involved, whether bike, car or pedestrian, and what the contributing factors were.

The final bill (Intro 377) forces the Department of Transportation to explain to community boards why it rejects a certain traffic measure in a neighborhood, which was proposed by the board itself or a councilmember.

The bike debate has heated up in recent months as communities question whether the lanes actually make riders, walkers and drivers safe. Some residents have called for the removal of bike lanes, while at least one councilmember wants to force all adult bicyclists to register and have licenses.

On Wednesday, both the speaker and the council's Transportation Committee Chair Jimmy Vacca said once the data is released the city should consult it before installing any more bike lanes.

The city's leading bike advocacy organization, Transportation Alternatives, says studies have shows bike lanes actually reduce the frequency of reckless riding. The group supports all three bills and suggests once the data is released it will support their side.

"We're hopeful that many more will support bike lanes as a safety improvement," said the group's executive director, Paul Steely White.

Mayor to Propose Classier Black Cabs with Pick-Up Privileges


black cab
Photo by mandiberg
Currently so-called black cabs or gypsy cabs cannot pick up passengers who hail them on the street. A proposal by Mayor Michael Bloomberg seeks to change that.

Traveling in the back of elusive black cabs in the outer boroughs could become a lot more legitimate.

In his State of the City speech on Staten Island today, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is expected to call for a new class of black cab, better known as livery or gypsy cabs, which will be allowed to pick up passengers hailing on the street in the outer boroughs for the first time. In exchange, Bloomberg will require these livery cabs to have meters, GPS systems and a uniform color or marking, according to a memo on the proposal provided by the Taxi and Limousine Commission.

“And why shouldn’t someone in Queens, Brooklyn, the Bronx, or Staten Island be able to hail a legal cab on the street?" Bloomberg is expected to ask today, according to an excerpt of the speech. Currently, passengers in the outer boroughs must call a livery or black car in advance to arrange a ride. Jumping in one on the street is illegal.

"This year, we’ll establish a new category of livery cars that can make on-street pickups outside of Manhattan -- just like yellow cabs do," the mayor will say. "It will give New Yorkers in all five boroughs another safe, reliable and convenient option for getting around. Because whether you’re standing on 42nd Street in Manhattan, or 42nd Street in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, or 42nd Street in Sunnyside, Queens, you ought to be able to hail a cab."

Hizzoner will likely have an uphill battle. Already industry officials are pumping the brakes. Representatives of yellow cabs fear livery cabs could steal their fares, while livery cab companies are wary of the new regulations.

"Legalizing an illegal activity because it's been done for so long will immediately cut into fares, especially during the rush hours when yellow cab drivers who live in the outer boroughs pick up fares at the beginning or end of their shifts," said Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, a union that represents yellow cab drivers. "As liveries bring more riders into Manhattan, what guarantee do we have that the city will stop the illegal activities in Manhattan or the airports? Already, the city has turned a blind eye on such activity throughout Manhattan and the airports, which cuts deep into taxi driver incomes. This is a slippery slope with long-term implications."

Under the proposal, the new livery cab will still be banned from picking up fares in Manhattan and at the city's airports.

The Details of Legit Liveries

According to the Taxi and Limousine Commission, the city has nearly 38,000 "for hire" vehicles in the outer boroughs, including black cars, licensed liveries and limousines. Of that, between 26,000 and 27,000 are licensed livery cabs. In 2010, the commission issued 2,854 illegal hail summonses.

Under the mayor's plan, which has not been completely spelled out yet, passengers in the outer boroughs could still use any of those services. All they have to do is pick up the phone.

The proposal, which is cast as a sustainability initiative to get cars off of the streets, would create an additional class of vehicle. Cars already licensed by the Taxi and Limousine Commission could opt to join, but they would have to abide by the criteria, including the meter.

These new livery cabs would have to have credit card readers (now used in 40 percent of rides in yellow cabs). By requiring clearly marked cars, the proposed program would increase passenger and driver safety, according to the memo. It would also ensure passengers -- especially tourists -- get charged a fair fare.

Some livery companies, though, aren't buying it.

Anthony Amaro, an assistant manager at Arecibo Car Service in Park Slope, said it's safer and more economical for outer borough residents to call for his black cars.

"If you put in meters, it's basically going to be another yellow cab," said Amaro. His service provides outer borough residents a cheaper alternative, Amaro said. Arecibo charges a $16 flat rate from Park Slope, Brooklyn to Lower Manhattan. When asked if the service would support the program, Amaro said: "I don’t think so."

The preliminary proposal does not spell out whether the fare structure would be the same as a yellow cab. That would be established by the Taxi and Limousine Commission, according to the memo.

There has been no discussion of limiting the number of vehicles in the program, a TLC official said. An official also said these licenses would not be used in the same way as taxi medallions, which are expensive and limit the number of yellow cabs on the street.

To move forward, the proposal will have to have City Council approval.

In a statement yesterday, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said: "We look forward to the mayor's speech and look forward to closely examining this proposal."

The council's Transportation Committee Chairman James Vacca gave a similar response.

“He is proposing a transformation of the taxi industry, and I think this is a proposal that has to be looked at carefully," said Vacca. "Is the medallion as valuable as it once was?" he asked. "From the livery cab industry perspective, they are going to say, 'Our business is going to decline if all you have to do is go out on Queens Boulevard and hail a cab.'"

The city points out that the practice of illegal hailing black cabs is already rampant. Critics of the plan counter that that doesn't mean the city should make the practice legal.

Doing so would devalue the yellow cab medallion, said Ethan Gerber, the executive director of the Greater New York Taxi Association, which represents a coalition of taxi owners. "It ruins the credibility of the city going forward," said Gerber. "If the TLC would simply enforce its own rules, the problem would go away."

The proposal is one aspect of the mayor's annual address this afternoon at the St. George Theater. Yesterday, the mayor was mum on what else he might propose.

"But if you come," he said to reporters on the speech, "I’d be happy to have you."

Cuomo No-Tax Pledge Could Bring More Transit Cuts


subway
Photo by Laurent

They went down the line -- abolish it, audit it, let the public elect its leaders, put the governor in charge. One-by-one, each gubernatorial candidate castigated the Metropolitan Transit Authority during the New York gubernatorial candidates' debate on Oct. 18.

Almost lost in the shuffle of platitudes and rehearsed one-liners -- "The only difference between the MTA and my former escort agency," quipped former madam Kristin Davis, "is that my agency delivered on-time and reliable service" -- was the fact that, in his comments, Gov.-elect Andrew Cuomo refused to show his plan for the transportation agency.

"It's been unclear what Cuomo's policy priorities are," said Noah Budnick, deputy director of Transportation Alternatives, a New York City transportation advocacy group. "It's hard to know if that means that the door is open and he's willing to entertain ideas. He hasn't ascribed to specific beliefs nor has he said no to anything in particular."

But with the MTA facing ruinous finances, rising fares, reduced service and an unfunded future, the governor will have to take action sooner rather than later. The general consensus in the transit advocacy community is that trimming the fat and implementing more efficient business practices can only do so much to cut expenses.

andrew cuomo
 

"Cuomo unequivocally said he wasn't going look to raise revenue for the MTA, that the MTA was going to have to rely on cost cutting and efficiencies," said John Petro, an urban affairs policy analyst at the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy, adding, "I just hope that he has a more comprehensive plan than that."

The Gaping Hole

Despite a series of cost cutting measures and fare hikes, the MTA's budget crunch shows no signs of abating. A recent article reported that a series of moves aimed at bringing in more revenue will fall some $400 million short of what was anticipated. As the agency prepares to adopt an $11.7 billion operating budget , other problems loom, including rising pensions, employee heath care and debt service costs.

Petro, who profiled the decline in a 2009 report titled Solving the MTA Budget Crisis: A Capital Investment Strategy, estimates that the MTA will need to find an extra $1.3 billion annually "just to make sure the transportation system doesn't fall apart," not to mention the extra money needed to even consider expansion and modernization.

The MTA has offered a comprehensive capital program for 2010-2014 that covers all the bases, including needed upkeep as well as expansion projects to keep the MTA on par with other top-notch public transit systems. The price tag: $26.3 billion. Of that, it's estimated that funding will fall roughly $10 billion short over the final three years of the plan.

The plan does not lay out where the funds might come from.

"How the MTA ought to be funded is a question for the legislature," said Aaron Donovan, spokesperson for the MTA. "Our role is simply to make clear the needs that we face and to explain our efforts to overhaul the way the MTA does business."

The legislature, though, has been slow to provide any answers.

"I think the issues involving mass transit are immediate," said State Sen. Jose M. Serrano, whose district spans parts of the Bronx and Upper Manhattan. "I'm not saying I know what the answer is, though. I don't know if increasing streams of revenue is the answer."

The seven gubernatorial candidates offered various answers -- a restructuring of MTA management, increased tolls, raised taxes and fees on real estate developers, selling contracts to private companies, tax-free transit benefits for employers and lower cost transit options. Cuomo has not shown a preference for any of these plans.

Making Drivers Pay

Cuomo has, though, been adamant about not increasing any taxes.

"I have a feeling that for the first couple of years, the main agenda for the governor will be how do we turn this government around? How do we close the deficit?" Serrano said. "And I believe him when he says he's going to do it without increasing taxes."

That has transit advocates and others looking at alternative ways to raise money. One new form of revenue for the MTA is congestion pricing, which essentially charges people to drive into parts of Manhattan during business hours. When Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed it in 2008, the State Assembly failed to vote on it.

"It will be back," Budnick said. "No matter what financial crisis you want to look at -- the city the state or the MTA -- there’s a desperate need for new revenue sources."

Serrano thinks the legislature's perception of the bill as a rise in taxes might determine the fee's ultimate success or failure. Viewed as a new tax, congestion pricing would run counter to Cuomo's no new taxes stance. Serrano supports congestion pricing as well as levying tolls on certain bridges into Manhattan.

"I don’t know if it's viewed mainly as a revenue stream or mainly as a tax," Serrano said, adding that he would prefer "people view it more as a way to alleviate congestion in the city."

There are a few reasons to expect congestion pricing to factor into the MTA's future. Drivers commuting into the city benefit from having 5 million transit riders off the streets but do not contribute to public transit funding. Budnick calls them "the biggest free riders."

Jay Walder, the MTA's chairman and chief executive officer, oversaw the successful implementation of congestion pricing at his former post as finance director of Transport for London, which manages that city's subways, buses and commuter rails. Started in 2003, London’s congestion pricing reduced traffic by 20 percent in the city and raised 122 million pounds (roughly $183 million) in its second year. Walder avoided taking a stance on congestion pricing when he came to the MTA.

Petro estimates that, optimistically, congestion pricing could raise around $400 million a year. He warns against seeing it as a cure-all solution -- "It's vital … but we need to explore other options."

As an alternative, in 2008, Richard Ravitch, now the outgoing lieutenant governor, recommended the state put tolls on the free East River and Harlem River bridges to raise money for transit. That also failed to make it through the legislature.

At the time Ravitch released a report on the state of New York State's transportation infrastructure, which bluntly began, "New York State currently lacks the revenues necessary to maintain its transportation system in a state of good repair, and the state has no credible strategy for meeting future needs.".

In the past two years, little seems to have changed.

Who's in Charge

In not acting on any of the revenue producing measures, legislators have repeatedly charged the MTA with mismanagement. During the debate, Cuomo did appear to stake out a position on that. "I believe the governor should be accountable for the MTA," he said. "People have the right to know who's in charge and who's responsible, and I think it should be the governor."

What exactly that means in terms of a potential overhaul of the MTA's management structure remains unclear, though. While the MTA is considered a quasi-independent authority, the governor himself directly nominates six of the 17 members of the board of directors, including the chairman and CEO. The mayor recommends four to the governor.

"I think he can exercise leadership, but I don't think a restructuring of the board is useful in the long term," said Gene Russianoff, staff attorney for the Straphangers Campaign of the New York Public Interest Research Group.

The current chair, Walder, has been commended by transit experts for saving $525 million through consolidation of redundant positions, elimination of excessive overtime pay, pay freezes for management and other initiatives.

Historically, a new governor selects his own head of the MTA. Russianoff was one of 11 signatories on a letter sent to Cuomo urging him to retain Walder.

"I don't think much would be gained by replacing Walder with someone who would require a learning curve," Russianoff said. "We've had our disagreements with Walder, but he's been a candid professional and can remain on merit."

Plus, Walder's six-year contract, signed in July 2009, was cleverly constructed so it would be costly for any incoming governor to replace him.

Transit Transition

Cuomo's transition team on transportation could provide some clue of what the governor-elect might be thinking about any of this. Transit advocates are noticeably absent. The panel is heavy on representatives from the private sector.

"First and foremost I think they're about dollars and cents and jobs," Budnick said. "I think that gives an insight into where Cuomo's looking. If you look at the list of who's on the transition team, it's unclear what it implies in terms of his policy priorities."

Pundits point to the disparity between Cuomo's transportation transition team and that of former Gov. Elliot Spitzer, which featured more transportation advocates and labor union representatives. With the contract between the Transport Workers Union Local 100 and the government up in a year, Petro thinks Cuomo may be sending a message with his money-before-policy mentality.

"I think Cuomo thinks that talking about raising revenue before the contract renegotiations is a poor idea," Petro said. "Is that in the best interest for the city and transit riders and for the region's economy? No. The longer we wait, the bigger the hole is going to be. But Cuomo has drawn a line in the sand, so to speak, that he will not look to raising revenue for the MTA without [first] making the point to labor that he expects more efficiencies."

Russianoff, who served on Spitzer’s transportation transition team, believes Cuomo will continue to emphasize cost cutting and management "until the beginning of 2012 when they start running out of money. It's going to look a little different then."

During that span the $525 million Walder has already finagled in savings is expected to rise -- reaching $700 million by 2014, according to Donovan. Those additional savings would come from the deferment of roughly half of the 280 current construction and restoration projects and a thorough consolidation of maintenance operations, inventory management and operations support activities. The MTA already stalled expansion plans and eliminated two subway lines and 36 bus routes last year.

Other Options

In the search for a solution, Cuomo could look some less-discussed revenue options that other cities have tried with mixed results.

San Francisco requires developers to reimburse the government for at least a portion of the cost associated with providing additional public services to people who live in or otherwise take advantage of a new project. In New York, while real estate developers do contribute to transit funding, Petro believes they could afford to pitch in more.

Chicago and London both awarded special contracts to private businesses in return for transit improvements. In Chicago, the government gave Apple Inc. exclusive advertising rights in a station in exchange for the cost of refurbishing the stop. More recently, Chicago announced it is considering selling the naming rights to the various public train lines.

During Walder’s time in London, however, he witnessed the downside of privatization. The city signed a 30-year public private partnership with three infrastructure companies, charging them with maintenance and upkeep of London's underground train system, the Tube. This past May, however, the city bought out the remaining public private partnerships after one of the companies went bankrupt, losing several hundred million pounds of taxpayer money.

With Parking Tickets, New Yorkers Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent


parking ticket
Photo by Maulleigh

Some things are almost universally avoided whenever possible: jury duty, dental work, parking tickets.

While annoying, each of these serves a greater personal or social purpose. With parking tickets, there are policy considerations and revenue benefits, and the fines serve as an incentive for advancing those policies: keeping parking spots available, allowing street cleaning, helping traffic move.

That does not make anyone want to pay them, though. For many people the main experience they have with courts involves contesting or paying motor vehicle infractions, whether moving or parking. A judge attending a party of non-lawyers can always expect other guests to tell him or her about jury service or the terrible things that happened in traffic court.

With parking tickets, one issue revolves around the ability to plead "not guilty." New Yorkers can fight parking tickets, but until the final decision is rendered, they will be presumed guilty of letting the meter run out, parking on the wrong side of the street on alternative side parking days or having incorrectly interpreted the often confusing signs that mark streets in many of the city's businesses district.

Fighting the Ticket

A person can plead not guilty of a parking offense by mail, on the internet or in person. The problem though, is that the New York City Parking Violations Bureau and the Department of Finance require the driver or registered owner to pay the fine within 30 days. Pleading not guilty by mail or on the internet may result in a determination more than 30 days later. Paying the fine upon a finding of guilt then could entail a late penalty for the 30 days the not-guilty plea was under consideration. So someone who does not pay the fine, pleads not guilty and is found guilty must pay not only the original fine but also the penalty for late payment.

The Parking Violations Bureau adjudicated 1.27 million parking summons at in-person hearings in 2009, according to Dennis Boshnack, a Queens attorney with expertise in parking violations cases and a former Parking Violations Bureau administrative law judge or hearing officer. Writing in the New York Law Journal, Boshnack maintains that most drivers give up their fight because they are representing themselves and cannot continue litigation alone and/or pay lawyer's fees that can easily cost more than the fine itself. The small amounts of money involved in individual cases make suing the Parking Violations Bureau "unaffordable or impractical."

The Whole Truth?

In one case, Sanford Young, a lawyer, was ticketed for allegedly parking on Manhattan’s Upper East Side at 6:59 p.m. in a spot where parking was not allowed until 7 p.m. He did fight the case and estimated that he spent $10,000 of his own legal time on it.

A Notice of Parking Violation (the summons) was issued to Young’s vehicle as it sat parked across from 1330 First Ave. The summons charged violation of the weekday prohibition against parking in that area between the hours of 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. On Dec. 9, 2005, Young entered a plea of not guilty through the city's website and requested an online hearing. In the field provided to explain the asserted defense, he made the following statement:

"A New York Minute": The ticket, which says I was parked at 6:59 p.m. in a "No Parking ... 4P-7P" area is absurd and wrong! Knowing full well -- as a life long New Yorker and lawyer -- that it is not legal to park on the avenues until 7:00 p.m., and that some officers write tickets in the last few, I did not park my car until a couple of mins past 7:00. I am certain it was past 7:00 because I was watching my car clock -- which is in the instrument panel. I also know that the clock is accurate because I synchronize it with my cell phone which time is set by Verizon and my watch. Therefore, I respectfully ask that the summons be dismissed. Thank you.

By letter, the Department of Finance's Adjudication Bureau acknowledged receipt of the request for a hearing and offered to reduce the fine from $65 to $43. Young did not accept the offer. An administrative law judge issued a decision and order finding the petitioner -- Young -- guilty, saying, "Respondent is not persuasive that he did not park until after the restriction ended."

The Parking Violations Bureau suggested that the agent's sworn summons must prevail over petitioner's unsworn online statement. The city, though, allows written testimony to be submitted through its website, and that testimony is always unsworn. If the sworn summons of a traffic officer would, as a matter of course, prevail over the electronically submitted testimony, submitting it would then, regardless of the facts of the situation, be an exercise in futility -- an illusory alternative to a paper or in-person response. Young's summons was ultimately dismissed in State Supreme Court.

Another motorist received a "red-light summons" for being in a crosswalk after the yellow light turned red. This is not considered a "moving violation" because the offense was detected by photos taken by hidden cameras. The driver pled not guilty, by mail, contesting the position of her car in the photo. Upon a written finding of guilt, she sent a check for the full penalty, $50. However, the city added another $25 because more than 30 days had elapsed since she received Notice of the Violation.

Boshnack points out that when motorists do appeal, the agency may render the case moot by dismissing the ticket and refunding fines already paid. In that event, the case goes no further -- a good outcome for the driver that may reflect the city’s desire to avoid further litigation or to avoid determinations adverse to the Parking Violations Bureau.

Drivers though should not count on that and think they can skip paying the fine. Paying the penalty is a prerequisite for appealing a Parking Violations Bureau decision. The Rules of the City of New York read, "No appeal shall be permitted unless the fines and penalties assessed by the Hearing Examiner are paid, or the respondent shall have posted a cash or recognized surety company bond in the full amount of the final determination appealed from." In other words, payment is due before a determination is made. That might be called a presumption of guilt.

Emily Jane Goodman is a New York State Supreme Court Justice

MTA Moves Toward a 'Smart' Way to Pay Fares


metrocard

At around 8 on a hot July night, deep inside the Columbus Circle subway station, frustration was on full display. A small group gathered around a bank of MetroCard vending machines, toes tapping, eyebrows raised and arms across chests. While trains rumbled in and out of the station, three young women chatted as they struggled to insert cash into one of the machines. In front of another machine, obviously flabbergasted by what he saw, a thin bearded man exclaimed, "Can't you see it doesn't take bills!"

He continued, "Only one of these damn things does, this one here, I'm waiting for it."

Indeed the messages ticking across the tops of two of the three machines informed MetroCard buyers, this machine "does not accept bills at this time." One of the three also advised, no single ride tickets. All three card dispensers did welcome plastic.

New York's time consuming and often inconvenient fare collection lags far behind that of many other large cities, according to experts. Some might say the dysfunctional MetroCard vending machines reflect deeper systemic problems at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, one of the world's largest public transit agencies.

Change, though, might be on the way. Within the next few years, transit riders might be able to simply tap their cards and go, rather than having to swipe -- and sometimes swipe again and again. In addition, rather than purchasing a ticket from the transit authority, they could have their fares automatically debited from their bank accounts or charged to their credit cards.

The switchover, though, promises to be lengthy and cumbersome and could present straphangers -- and the authority -- with a new host of challenges.

Ticket Sales

As it stands now, fare collection and the processing of billions of dollars takes a significant financial toll on the transit budget. In 2010, the MTA said that, for every dollar it takes in from MetroCard sales, it spends 15 cents managing and administering the fare collection system. Shaving just one penny off that 15 cents could save around $55 million a year, according to the transit authority.

A team of 124 employees work around the clock to maintain the system's 1,650 MetroCard vending machines.

"We had 28,456 service calls" for machines in July alone, said Antonio Suarez, chief officer of fare collection equipment maintenance at New York City Transit. The machines, manufactured by Cubic Transportation Systems, a unit of the Cubic Corp. have been in operation since 1994.

Meanwhile, a separate revenue office picks up the cash that all the machines hold. The revenue collectors go into the system at various times of day, equipped with gun toting special officers. But the MTA says that budget constraints have "impacted" the frequency of those cash pickups as well as the actual restocking of new MetroCards.

Even though many machines only accept credit or debit card payment, cash accounts for 64 percent of all MTA transactions -- at machine and at ticket booths. The cash transactions are smaller, though, so account for only a third of the fare revenue.

Changing the System

MTA's current fare collection is "a generation behind places like Chicago, Atlanta and London," said Randy Vanderhoof, executive director for the Smart Card Alliance, a multi-industry association.

As riders know, New York City Transit has been slow to embrace many technological advances that could enhance the efficiency and speed of the system . "The MTA has expertise at building and maintaining, they have a poor record at implementing technology,” Said Neysa Pranger of the Regional Plan Association.

The current executive director of the transportation authority hopes to change that.

Jay Walder previously served as managing director for finance and planning at Transport For London. While there, he was widely credited for spearheading that system's wildly popular fare collection system known as the Oyster Card.

The Oyster Card The smart chip uses a secure micro controller, or equivalent device with internal memory, and a small antenna to communicate with an electronic reader through a contactless radio frequency. In London, as well as a bevy of other cities including Chicago, a rider simply taps a pre-paid, agency-issued card or key fob with a smart chip on a specially equipped terminal, like those seen in New York City cabs or at drug stores and fast food restaurants. The cost of the ride then is automatically deducted, as it is from a MetroCard today

Getting 'Smart' in New York

In June, New York's MTA, in partnership with the , New Jersey Transit and credit card issuer Mastercard, re-launched an earlier tap and go smart card pilot program. Plans are to phase in pay systems, first in on city buses and then subways.

In addition to making it easier to pay and collect fares, the plan also would make fare payment between agencies in the tristate area more seamless, helping customers who, for example, take the PATH into the city and then hop on a subway.

In London the transit agency issues a hard plastic prepaid smart card. But signs indicate that New York's MTA would like to get out of the fare card selling business and farm out most of those duties perhaps to the credit card or banking industry. This would happen under what gets referred to as an "open loop" system.

The MTA pilot project is testing whether bank and credit cards embedded with smart chips can be used to make direct payments into the transit system.

Essentially, a rider would no longer have to buy a MetroCard but would simply tap a debit or credit card at the turnstile. The MTA has said it will provide alternatives for cash paying customers but has not devised exactly what they will be.

If New York adopts an open loop system such as that, it "will leap frog other cities" that still issue all tickets themselves," said Vanderhoof.

The "open loop" appeals to public transit agencies, he said, because selling tickets is expensive. "Transit industries across the country are finding it costs them a lot of money, in machines and service, and collecting cash out of them, to be able to operate the transit ticketing and fare payment services they offer," Vanderhoof noted.

No Tickets Please

"Anything transit agencies can do to reduce the number of tickets they have to sell, and the number of machines they have to supply in the stations, will allow them to save money," he said, adding that after all, "people have the ability to pay already in their wallets."

Both London and Chicago are looking at potential open payment options.

The idea has obvious appeal for credit card companies as well. In a case study of the original MTA 2006 pilot program, Mastercard, which had partnered with Citibank, said "Citibank wanted to expand cardholder usage to a desirable everyday category like mass transit, part of the daily routines of million of people."

Columbia University Professor of Law Ronald J. Mann said the incentives for banks and issuers of credit cards to become involved in transit are even greater today.

"They will earn revenues of some sort from transactions on the cards," he said, "and in New York City, there would be a powerful incentive for individual consumers to obtain cards of the type that give them MTA access without having to buy a fare card."

Mann explained that the credit card "market is saturated, the overwhelming majority of people in this country that have any income or assets who want a credit card, have a credit card," so the card companies are looking for new places they can use those cards -- such as transit.

In New York City alone, around 7 million people ride the subway daily, and that could translate into a lot of transaction volume.

Customer Convenience

Vanderhoof of the Smart Card Association said the open loop system could offer added convenience for customers, even those from other cities. For example, he said, someone from San Francisco would be able jump on an New York City subway or bus by just tapping a card she already has in her purse -- "without having to deal with a MTA vending machine."

Mann predicted that "every large credit and debit card issuer will want to be allowed to issue smart cards in New York City.

"Because of the convenience that the ability to use smart debit or credit cards will offer MTA commuters," Mann added, "no one in New York City is going to want to be using plastic that they can't use on the subway. ... You're going to have to figure out which of the banks will give you a smart card, and you are going to go and get it."

Customer Inconvenience

But what about those customers who do not have debit or credit cards? According to the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, 13 percent of all city households do not have bank accounts -- the largest percentage of adults in any community in the United States.

Mann wondered how people without bank accounts would obtain cards to give them convenient access to MTA services. Will the cards have higher fees than the cards more well-heeled consumers already have in their wallets? And, if MTA completely migrates to the open loop system "will the transit agency move to make it less and less convenient to use cash or buy MTA fare cards?" he asked.

MTA figures for 2009 indicate the average cash purchase was $6.87 per transaction while credit and debit transactions averaged $19.71. That could indicate that some less affluent New Yorkers -- many of whom do not have bank accounts -- simply cannot afford to buy subway or bus rides in bulk.

Amy Linden, senior director of the MTA's New Payment Systems said that eventually, customers without bank accounts might be able to purchase and use pre-paid cards, as many do now for phones, although, she said the authority is not yet testing any of those methods. She said the authority would continue to accept cash on buses.

At some point, riders also many be able to use phones with Near Field Communication, or NFC, technology which might b able to connect to a pre paid account. With that, a transit rider could simply tap the phone on the reader and enter the system. This might help some people without credit cards because, according to Linden, more individuals own mobile phones than have bank accounts.

Even people with bank accounts could face increased risk of stiff customer fees from their banks or card issuer under a smart cart system. For example, customers who overdraw their bank accounts and have overdraft coverage, could be charged a stiff fee when they tap their bank cards to enter the subway.

Further, the plan raises questions about the MTA's fare structure and how the this new payment system might affect unlimited ride plans or volume discounts. For now, the MTA says packages will continue to be available.

Linden said the MTA will deal with all this but first needs to go first to an open payment system since the authority must reduce costs and make travel in the region more seamless.

Making the Change

Whether it can make that vision a reality remain in question. The man who would oversee it all, Executive Director Walder, has an extensive urban planning public sector resume and, as someone who worked for the MTA from 1985 through 1993, knows its complex culture . But, as the Regional Plan Association's Hope Cohen has written, Walder still will confront "interagency rivalries and contradictory union contracts and work rules."

How those pressures, along with public concerns and strained budgets will affect the move to a smart card -- and what the system might look like in the end, is still anyone's guess.

Already, though, the agency's plans appear to be encountering delays. Last year, news reports said a smart card plan would be in place by 2014, but now the agency is not sure when that might happen.

This month MTA spokesman Aaron Donovan would say only that "the new smart card program will see full subway and train implementation in the coming years." He did not provide any more specific information.

Wishing New York the best of luck in its new endeavor, Peter MacLennon of Transport For London said that city's of "tap and go" fare payment system, "has transformed the way passengers pay for journeys on London's transit network."

New Yorkers will have to wait and see if any similar transformations take place here.

New York Looks to Board High Speed Rail


high speed train
Will fast trains such as Spain's Velaro, be coming to New York?

Imagine making the trip from New York City to Albany by train in under an hour. For politicians, lobbyists, reporters and business people, it would be a godsend. Currently the trip takes two-and-a-half hours.

And there are grander reasons to hope cities across the state will soon be connected by high speed rail according to Sen. Malcolm Smith. First, he said, it will create jobs, some 200,000 of them by Smith's estimate, "from construction to finance and other things." Second he said, it will improve the environment. And lastly, he said, "This will bring the state together. It will make the concept that we have been talking about of one New York a reality. This will be one New York, for real."

To jump start this process Smith plans to introduce legislation as early as Friday to create a committee under the state Department of Transportation to recommend ways to fund high speed rail in New York. The committee would also determine the proper kind of entity to oversee high speed rail and possibly issue bonds to fund it.

Gov. David Paterson has his own bill that would accomplish the same thing.

Picking Up Speed

Smith's idea is not entirely new. Creating a high speed rail system across New York has been on the agenda for decades without getting anywhere. What’s put the project back on the agenda in Albany is the Obama administration’s offer of an incentive to kick start the development of speedier train service throughout the country. Earlier this year, the administration offered $8 billion in grants to states that want to update their rail systems.

When the grants were handed out, however, New York wound up getting only $151 million of the $4 billion it had applied for. California, a state with a well-crafted high speed rail plan, received over $2 billion; Florida and Illinois will receive around $1 billion, Wisconsin $822 million, Washington $590 million.

Although New York lacks the sort of comprehensive plan California has developed, officials here say New York is taking incremental steps toward initiating its plan. Legislators including Smith and U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter say they expect the state to apply for more federal money. They will have a chance to do that, as $2.5 billion in federal rail funding will be up for grabs this summer during another round of funding. Applications are due this summer.

Faster and Costlier

If $151 million doesn’t sound that paltry, a lot more is needed to move Smith’s vision toward reality: $90 million of the funds New York has been awarded will go just to build a second track from Rensselaer to Schenectady. The state is expected to spend $58 million to build an 11-mile high speed test strip in upstate New York.

Why was New York shorted during the first round of federal funding? Many rail experts say New York did not present a plan that met the terms of the available grants, didn't have a single agency taking charge of the project and lacked an agreement with CSX, the company that owns the rails along which the state would like to build its high speed system.

"There were a couple of conflicting factors," said Yoav Hagler, an associate planner with the Regional Plan Association. "They didn't have an environmental impact statement and the timelines didn't work."

A few weeks ago, New York and CSX came a notch closer to removing one of those impediments, as they agreed to allow the state to do an environmental impact study on running another line along the CSX routes. CSX has said in the past that adding a passenger line would be unsafe.

High speed rail would initially run somewhere around 110 mph. Eventually as the system improved, the speeds would increase. The goal would be to create a high speed corridor running from Buffalo to New York City. The fast trains would eventually run through the northeast corridor, making train travel between major northeastern cities much faster, cutting the trips from New York to Boston and Washington by hours.

How to Get Federal Funds

On Monday, over 200 people gathered in Albany for a high speed rail summit to discuss ways to fund the project and how it will help business in the state.

After the summit, Smith said mimicking California could help get the state more federal funding. That state has a complete plan as well as a separate entity that controls its high speed rail project. "I would like to follow the California model very closely," said Smith, adding, "At the summit we were talking to representatives from the Obama administration about what we need, if we are on track. There was no 'yes' or 'no,' but if we are doing the right things ... we do need a separate entity to take on this massive endeavor."

Bruce Becker of the Empire State Passenger Association agrees. "We support an independent board to oversee high speed rail. Nothing against the Department of Transportation, but they have other interests, and thruways are their main concern," he said.

Dennis Mullen, chairman of the Empire State Development Corp., said he thought a single entity overseeing the project could only help a massive undertaking such as creating a high speed rail system in New York.

Other funding ideas are also on the table. Smith said that a delegate from China who was visiting the Capitol this week told him that his country is interested in funding New York's high speed rail projects. He also thinks the possible authority which could be created by his bill could issue bonds to fund the trains.

Certainly, the project would require large amounts of additional funding. As of now, Paterson's budget contains only about $50 million in funding for all rail projects –- not just high speed -- to be stretched over the next two years.

The Economic Effects

At Monday’s summit, Mullen talked about how the Empire State Development Corp. could help businesses tap into the excitement high speed rail will generate. He noted that a number of employers around the state manufacture rail equipment. One company with a New York presence, Bombardier, has shrunk from 1,000 to 200 employees over the last decade. Mullen said he thinks that workforce could grow again if New York and the rest of the country get on the high speed bandwagon.

"I'm very optimistic," said Hagler about the prospects of developing high speed rail in New York and the Northeast Corridor. "We are certainly in a better place than we were two years ago. States are working together now."

If New York and surrounding states can establish a high speed corridor Hagler thinks the New York economy would benefit, as would the crowded transit system. "The New York region is the bottleneck in the system. Any plan that improves the rail system or installs high speed rail is going to benefit New York. Being able to reach Washington in an hour and a half is certainly going to benefit New York's downtown business district," he said.

A recent study by the U.S. Conference of Mayors backs Hagler up. The report states that high speed rail throughout the country could create 150,000 new jobs and $19 billion in new businesses by 2035. The report details how upstate regions could be sucked into New York's economic sphere thanks to fast travel times, with commerce spreading at faster rates.

The Long Road Ahead

While the northeast holds the greatest potential for high speed rail in the U.S., Oliver Hauck, CEO of Siemans AG, told the New York Times that the Northeast Corridor is the high speed route furthest from actually being built.

Politicians repeat their mantra that the progress toward high speed rail in New York is incremental. Existing rail lines need to be improved, studies need to be conducted, and the project needs funding. "Coming from the private sector into the public sector, I think we do a bad job of managing expectations," said Mullen. But, he added, "It's good that we have to follow the processes required by constituents. We have these processes for a reason."

Becker agrees, "We support incremental steps. Perhaps in scope we have to start small, but we can't wait for the first groundbreaking in the projects to signal to New Yorkers that the process has begun after decades of study and inaction."

Others, though, are concerned that New York is more concerned with getting federal money to maintain its existing rail structure than actually planning for high speed rail.

"We should be deliberate," said Hagler. "But I disagree with some folks who want there to be incremental steps but say we can't move ahead with high speed rail plans simultaneously. If we want to meet the demands of 2040 and 2050 we need to start planning now."



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years