The Transportation Bond Act: Vote Yes
Unless you are a real policy wonk, you probably are not aware of the most important transportation issue in New York City this election season. No, it is not the well-publicized debate over metered parking on Sunday, an issue that has a relatively tiny impact on the daily lives of New Yorkers and even less on the growth of our economy. The far more pressing issue is a transportation bond act that is vitally needed to restore, maintain and expand the transit system. But, unlike Sunday parking, it has garnered almost no attention just weeks before the election. On behalf of the large and diverse Vote Yes for Transportation Campaign, I urge you to do just that on Proposal 2 this Election Day.
The Rebuild and Renew New York Transportation Bond Act of 2005 is critical to funding the state’s five-year transportation needs, helping to provide congestion relief, safe roads and expanded public transportation service for all New Yorkers. The $2.9 billion act is split evenly between Metropolitan Transportation Authority transit improvement and highway projects that touch every corner of the state, improving mobility while fueling economic growth, creating jobs and protecting the environment. The state’s 2025 Transportation Blue Ribbon Panel warned last year that the entire transportation network is in danger of deteriorating without significant funding, and the bond act is a key part of that funding package.
That is why nearly every elected official in the state -- including Governor George Pataki and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and challenger Fernando Ferrer, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, and City Comptroller William Thompson – supports the bond act. Other backers include labor, business, civic and environmental organizations, from the state AFL-CIO to the Partnership for New York City, from the New York Building Congress to the Regional Plan Association and the League of Conservation Voters.
HELP FOR MASS TRANSIT
There are plenty of reasons why New York City residents should support the $2.9 billion act. First on the list is $450 million to restore and maintain the aging transit system that makes the city possible. This money will pay for new subway cars and buses, track repairs, tunnel lighting, a bus locator system, and Staten Island Railway bridges. The past year has brought numerous examples of the system’s fragility, from track fires to derailments, and the safety of all straphangers is at stake.
The second reason to support the bond act is the $900 million it will provide toward the first significant expansion of the subway system in more than 60 years. These funds will be split between East Side Access (which brings Long Island Rail Road trains into Grand Central) and the first phase of the Second Avenue Subway, two projects that will greatly expand the capacity of the transit system and provide critical redundancy in case of natural or manmade disaster. For example, if there were an incident on the East Side today, the entire Lexington Avenue line would be shut down, crippling movement and the economy. But in the event of such a problem, the 2nd Avenue Subway could continue to carry passengers along the East Side. Similarly, the Long Island Rail Road extension would provide back-up commuter rail service during a major disruption at Penn Station. Both of these projects have languished for decades, but that should not be an excuse to reject them. They are critical to the growth of the region’s economy and our safety, and their completion will be nearly guaranteed if the bond act passes.
THE DANGERS OF DEFEAT
Finally, we must consider what would happen if the bond act does not pass. The $450 million for maintenance of the subway system would have to be found elsewhere. That would likely set up a choice between two unpleasant options. On the one hand, the MTA could fill the gap by issuing more of its own debt, putting further pressure on its operating budget and leading to even more fare hikes. On the other hand, the MTA could fill some of the gap by choosing not to fund other items already in its capital plan, such as the station rehabilitations that are so important to many city neighborhoods. In either case, an already decaying system will become more vulnerable and slide further toward the disrepair that plagued it in the 1970s. No one wants to go back there.
The $900 million that the bond act sets aside for expansion is unlikely to be replaced if it fails, causing the state to lose $4 billion in federal funds that were headed our way. Washington is waiting for the state to match some of that money, and, if we don’t, the federal funds will then go elsewhere. More importantly, if voters reject the bond act, we would lose the opportunity to expand a transit system that is no longer able to accommodate its current ridership and is certainly not prepared for the economic and population growth that the city envisions -- on the Far West Side, in Lower Manhattan, East Harlem, 125th Street, Downtown Brooklyn, Greenpoint/Williamsburg, Flushing and in so many other places.
A REASON TO BORROW
Some people will undoubtedly argue that the state’s system of borrowing money is in need of reform. They are absolutely correct. New York must address “back-door” borrowing, where the state’s public authorities pile up debt with no voter approval and little involvement from elected officials. But this bond act is different. Long-term borrowing for transportation infrastructure will always be appropriate, and the needs of our transportation system are too urgent and important to hold hostage to a reform effort that will be not be completed this season.
We have much to gain from a healthy and growing transportation system and too much to lose if we fail to keep that system running at a world-class level. On November 8, New Yorkers have a chance to show how important transportation is in our daily lives. Vote yes for transportation. Vote yes on Prop 2.
Jeremy Soffin is director of public affairs for the Regional Plan Association
• • • • • • •
• The Transportation Bond Act: Vote No by Nicole Gelinas
• • • • • • •
For more information in favor of the Transportation Bond Act:
• Vote yes for Transportation
The coalition supporting the act
• Transportation Bond Act
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority information page on the act
• Vote Yes on Ballot Proposal Two: Transportation Bond Act (in .PDF format)
Information from the Straphangers Campaign, the advocacy group for subway riders
• Governor Pataki Announces Support For $2.9 Billion Transportation Bond Act
• Debt We Can Live With: Front-door Borrowing for Transportation
A Newsday editorial
• Transportation Bond Act is Good Move
By Newsday columnist Joseph Dolman
• New York Voters Back Transportation Act: poll
Â
The Transportation Bond Act: Vote No
Gotham is an old city with an aging physical infrastructure. But the state’s $2.9 billion Transportation Bond Act, which will be on the November 8 ballot as “Proposal No. 2,” is not the best way for New York City to get the money it needs for its vital transportation assets.
The city certainly does need money for its mass transit, roads and bridges. New York’s subway system, parts of which turned 100 years old last year, needs $18 billion in investment over the next four years just to maintain its current state of repair. More than half of the city’s bridges are considered to be in less-than-stellar condition, and some are actively deteriorating.
But the transportation bonds on the ballot, if approved, will be issued by the state, not the city. The state doesn’t have infinite funds, and thus should make each dollar go a long way. But, despite this, it has not prioritized its proposed transportation-infrastructure investments according to urgent need.
THE CITY’S SHARE
What does this mean for New York City?
The city’s subways, roads and bridges will receive about $1.6 billion of the bond proceeds. At 55 percent of the total, this doesn’t sound like such a bad deal – especially in light of the fact that city residents, workers and businesses pay a little less than half of state taxes.
But the problem is that of that $1.6 billion earmarked for New York City, the bonds provide only about $700 million in funding for projects that the city needs completed now. So, in effect, New York City taxpayers will pay about $1.3 billion (their share of state taxes to fund the bond issue) in order to get back about half that in investment so critically necessary that it justifies new debt.
To wit: The bond act would provide the state-run Metropolitan Transportation Authority with $450 million to maintain the MTA’s core infrastructure, much of it within New York City. This means hundreds of millions of dollars for such mundane but crucial investments as new subway cars and buses, track replacement, tunnel lighting and other maintenance.
BIG TICKET ITEMS
But the bond act would provide a further billion dollars for several pie-in-the-sky expansion projects at the MTA: $450 million each for the Second Avenue subway (from the Bronx to Lower Manhattan) and for the East Side Access project (to connect Long Island Rail Road commuters to the East Side of Manhattan), and $100 million for a rail link from Lower Manhattan to Kennedy Airport.
Any one of these expansion projects might be worth seeing through to completion – but neither the city nor the state has committed to doing that. The Second Avenue subway, for example, will cost $16 billion.
In a rational world, the city and state would pick one of these projects – and make room in the budget to raise the capital necessary to build it. But each Albany official has his pet New York City project (Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver likes the Second Avenue Subway, while Governor Pataki likes the rail link to JFK), so no single project ever gets enough funds to make real progress.
Until the state and the city can figure out which of these three multibillion-dollar projects it likes best, the MTA would do better to commit the entire $1.45 billion raised through the transportation bond act to making critical investments in the assets it already has, to ensure that New Yorkers can depend on a reliable transportation system.
IMPROVING ROADS
What about roads? Of $1.45 billion earmarked for roads and bridges statewide, the city will get $273 million, or 19 percent. Some of the projects involve work on critical arteries in and out of the city: $81 million to rehabilitate the Van Wyck Expressway in Queens and $23 million to make repairs to the Henry Hudson Parkway between Manhattan and the Bronx. But at least one major project is not quite so critical: $19 million for a “green oasis” in the Bronx.
And to get its $273 million, the city must help pay for $1.2 billion road projects outside the city, including $21.5 million for 11 miles of new hiking trails in Washington County and a new pedestrian bridge near the Erie Canal.
CONTROLLING STATE SPENDING
These initiatives, and dozens of relatively small upstate road projects, may indeed be worthy – and no one is suggesting that upstate be deprived of infrastructure critical to its economy, or that the congested Bronx be deprived of green space.
But the state has so badly mismanaged its finances in recent years that it already has far too much long-term debt: more than $48 billion, which puts it fifth in the nation in terms of debt per person. According to state Comptroller Alan Hevesi, only about half of that debt was for prudent investment in long-term capital assets like transportation infrastructure – another 20 percent was for day-to-day operations, and another 25 percent was to fund state and local programs that should be paid for upfront.
Thus, it is not prudent for the state to raise new debt for worthy “extras.” Every penny should go toward the critical infrastructure that is badly in need of maintenance and repair.
Hiking trails and greenways are great – but the taxpayers who want them should pressure their local politicians to pressure Albany to get the state budget under control, so that we can afford to help pay for them without breaking the bank. If Albany were to cut its bloated and fraudulent Medicaid program by 15 percent, for example, state and local governments would have an extra $3 billion each year to fund smaller capital projects upfront.
Until then, city taxpayers would do better to vote down the Transportation Bond Act, and Gotham would do better to raise $700 million in debt on its own to pay for critical investments in its roads, and to help the MTA pay for critical investments in the subway.
This would send Albany a message: No more debt until state leaders reform the budget to get the debt we have under control.
Nicole Gelinas, a chartered financial analyst, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor to City Journal magazine.
• • • • • • •
• The Transportation Bond Act: Vote Yes by Jeremy Soffin
• • • • • • •
For more information against the Transportation Bond Act:
• CBC Announces Opposition To Transportation Bond Act (in .PDF format)
A statement from the Citizens Budget Commission
• New York's Endangered Future: Debt Beyond Our Means (in .PDF format)
A report on state borrowing by the Citizens Budget Commission
• Vote No
A position paper by the Conservative Party of New York
• Staten Island Borough President Opposes Transportation Bond Act
• No on Prop 2
A New York Post editorial Â
Transportation Bond Act
With mayoral candidates giving little attention to transportation issues, voters' biggest choice in the transportation arena will be their vote on the 2005 Transportation Bond Act. The bond act, approved by the Legislature this spring as part of a 5-year, $36 billion capital plan, would authorize $2.9 billion in state-backed borrowing for transportation, to be repaid through general revenues. One-half of the bond act funds would be dedicated to public transportation in New York City and its suburbs. Projects to be funded include:
• $450 million to move ahead with the Second Avenue Subway
• $450 million for the East Side Access project, connecting the Long Island Rail Road to Grand Central Terminal;
• $100 million for a rail link between lower Manhattan and Kennedy airport;
• $115 million for purchase of new subway and commuter railroad cars;
• $90 million for new buses; and
• $161 million for track replacement and tunnel lighting. An additional $235 million is set aside for upstate public transportation systems.
Although many people think of New York City as synonymous with transit and upstate as synonymous with highway spending, in fact, a substantial amount of statewide highway spending goes to New York City projects. Twenty-three percent of the bond's highway funding will be spent in the city. New York City highway projects (In PDF Format) include:
• $81 million for Kew Gardens Interchange/Van Wyck Expressway Improvements;
• $30 million for closed circuit television cameras, electronic message signs, vehicle detection devices and highway advisory radio on the FDR Drive and Henry Hudson Parkway;
• $23 million for Henry Hudson Parkway Rehabilitation;
• $25 million for West Shore Expressway Access and Safety Improvements;
• $19 million for the Bronx River Greenway; and
• $11 million for Long Island Railroad Bridge Upgrades to allow heavier, larger rail cars to access the Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island market areas.
Bond act spending also aims to maintain the percentage of state highway bridges in New York City that are rated as in good or excellent condition and slightly improve the proportion of interstate highway lane mileage in New York City that is rated as in good or excellent condition.
No one seriously disputes the importance of maintaining and upgrading the state's transportation system. The Bond Act has thus attracted a long list of supporters including Governor George Pataki, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, State Comptroller Alan Hevesi, and transit advocacy, environmental and civic groups, including the NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign and the New York Public Transit Association. Both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his opponent, Fernando Ferrer, support the bond act.
Supporters say that the Transportation Bond Act funds are vital to maintaining the state's sprawling and aging transportation infrastructure. The funding is also critical to construction of the Second Avenue Subway and East Side Access -- projects long discussed and planned but only now garnering the necessary funding. As much as $4 billion in federal funding is contingent on the bond act passing since the federal government evaluates projects on the level of local financial support. Supporters also point out that bond act spending will create construction jobs in the short term and spur economic growth for years to come.
The bond act has also attracted opposition, primarily from groups that feel the state already has too much debt. The Citizens Budget Commission (In PDF Format) says that the state is poised to take on $19 billion in new debt in the next five years. Only the $2.9 billion in the bond act requires voter approval, however. The budget commission argues that voters should reject the bond act as the only way to say no to the overall growth in borrowing.
The Automobile Club of New York also urges voters to reject the Transportation Bond Act. The Auto Club criticizes the state for raiding the highway trust fund, whose revenues come from the gas tax and auto registration fees. The Auto Club says that the state has used trust fund revenues to plug general budget shortfalls. The Auto Club argues that instead of borrowing to pay for transportation improvements, the integrity of the trust fund should be maintained and used for these projects.
Supporters reply that the real choice -- aside from underfunding transportation -- is between state-backed borrowing and borrowing that would be paid back through transit fares. They point out that after the 2000 Bond Act failed, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority borrowed heavily, leading to two fare increases since then.
In 2000, a $3.8 billion Transportation Bond Act narrowly failed to win voter approval. Prospects for this year's proposal are uncertain. A recent Quinnipiac University poll found voters statewide supporting the measure by a 56 percent to 36 percent margin. New York City voters supported it by 67 to 26 percent and suburban voters by 60 to 32 percent. Upstate voters were about evenly split.
While encouraging to supporters, these poll numbers also provide reason for caution because polls before the 2000 election also showed a majority in support. On election day, many New York City voters "who would be expected to vote favorably" overlooked the proposition in the lower right corner of the ballot. In fact, had the dropoff from the presidential vote to the bond act vote been the same downstate as upstate in 2000, the measure would have passed.
Supporters are aiming to heed the lessons of 2000. A group of business and building associations has funded a statewide Vote Yes for Transportation campaign. The $1.5 million campaign will include door to door canvassing and upstate radio ads.
Supporters have also moved to shore up support on Staten Island. The MTA recently shifted funds to build a third MTA bus depot on the island after the borough president, James Molinaro, criticized the measure.
Chances for passage of the 2005 Bond Act appear to be better than the 2000 measure, which failed narrowly, but are not assured. Voters thus have an important and very real choice to make on November 8.
Bruce Schaller, who has been in charge of the transportation topic page since its inception in 1999, is head of Schaller Consulting, which provides research and analysis about transportation. He is also a Visiting Scholar at the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University.Â
|
Tweet |
