A meeting of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee (PCAC) to the MTA was convened at 12:00 noon on September 2, 2010, in the 5th floor Board room, at MTA Headquarters, 347 Madison Avenue, New York City. The following members were present:
• Andrew Albert
• Ira Greenberg
• James F. Blair
• William K. Guild
• Gerard Bringmann
• Matthew Kessler
• Sheila Carpenter
• Trudy Mason
• Richard Cataggio
• Maureen Michaels
• Francis T. Corcoran
• Edith Prentiss
• Owen Costello
• Larry Rubinstein
• Shirley Genn
• Michael Sinansky
• Randy Glucksman
• Burton Strauss, Jr.
• Stuart Goldstein
• Toya Williford
• Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas
• Neal Zuckerman
• Sharon King Hoge
The following members were absent:
• David Buchwald
• Marisol Halpern
• Mark Epstein
• Rhonda Herman
• Thomas Jost
In addition, the following persons were present:
• William Henderson – PCAC Executive Director
• Jan Wells – PCAC Associate Director
• Karyl Berger – PCAC Research Associate
• Alan Kritzler -MTA IG
• Elizabeth Shields -Concerned citizen
• Matt Shotkin -Concerned citizen
• George Haikalis -Concerned citizen
• Ken Stewart -Concerned citizen
Approval of Agenda and Minutes
The agenda for the September 2, 2010 meeting was approved. The minutes of the June 3, 2010 meeting were approved.
Chairs’ Reports
The PCAC, LIRRCC, MNRCC and NYCTRC Chairs’ Reports are attached to these minutes.
Edith Prentiss noted that subway station emergency gates used to have bars so that persons using wheelchairs were visible to the booth agents, but now their view is now blocked by panic bar hardware on the gates. Ira Greenberg noted that at some stations, notably the 161st Street –Yankee Stadium station, a large number of riders use emergency gates to exit the station.
Michael Sinansky said that he recently read that NYC Transit’s trial of seatless subway cars would not go forward and thanked Andrew Albert for his work on this issue. Ms. Prentiss remarked that the cars that would have had seats locked away were the center cars, which are the cars that persons with disabilities are told to use.
In response to Maureen Michaels’ discussion of capital issues in the LIRRCC Chair’s Report, Mr. Greenberg noted that despite a series of Capital Programs since 1982, chronic repair needs remain. He said that there are political pressures to agree that the status quo is acceptable.
Mr. Albert said that Ms. Michaels statement that MTA Board Members are not forceful advocates for the system points to a significant part of the MTA’s funding problem.
In response to Ms. Michaels’ discussion of the LIRR’s Hall Tower signal fire, Mr. Bringmann noted several examples of century old technology that is currently or was until recently in use. Mr. Sinansky stated that there is old technology in the subway system as well and that the PCAC should emphasize that this old technology must be examined. Mr. Greenberg said that conditions in MTA agencies would not be tolerated in other contexts, such as the air traffic control system. He said that improvements and repairs are put off, particularly when they are behind the scenes. He questioned whether the PCAC should be doing more in this area. Trudy Mason said that the last time that the state of good repair was a priority was under Richard Ravitch and that the current MTA Chair emphasizes high tech over the basics.
In response to Randy Glucksman’s discussion of public meetings on the Tappan Zee bridge replacement, Mr. Sinansky asked whether current plans include rail on the bridge. Mr. Glucksman responded that the capacity for rail service would be included, even if rail service is not provided immediately after the opening of the new bridge.
Old Business
No old business was discussed.
New Business
The Committee discussed the proposed MTA fare increases. Ira Greenberg gave a brief summary of the fare proposals and asked for the members opinions. Andrew Albert said he believes that it is reprehensible for the MTA to issue fare hearing notices that include the maximum possible increase without any comment that the actual increases may be well below these levels. He said that the State’s revenue estimates have been wildly inaccurate and that the MTA is bearing the criticism for the State’s failings in this area.
Mr. Albert said that there is a lot of anger about the possibility of fare increases, but that the alternative to fare increases is a package of more severe service cuts. He asked what the PCAC would propose as an alternative if it opposes the fare increases. The one part of the fare proposal that is an easy call is the decision between capped and uncapped time-based MetroCards, on account of the positive effects of an uncapped card on retail businesses, the entertainment industry, and the general economy.
Mr. Greenberg stated that the PCAC members have to remember that they represent the riders. He said that in terms of being responsible, the PCAC has long advocated for new funding sources for the MTA as it understood that the current mix of funding is not stable or sufficient. Mr. Greenberg said that it is time for the PCAC to stand up and tell the Legislature that it must step up and fund transit as it ought to be funded.
Jim Blair stated that the MTA had embarked on a path where fare increases are tied to inflation, but that financial strains had led to an intervening fare increase and service cuts that took the place of further fare increases. He said that this history makes it difficult to support the current fare increase and suggested that the PCAC may want to distinguish between its historic support for a program of regular fare increases and the current situation. He said that we may have to support this in the end because of the lack of acceptable alternatives.
Ms. Michaels said that she is not willing to support this fare increase. She said that riders were promised more support for the MTA and more effective fare collection. She said that the fare increase places the MTA on a downward spiral which will result in people choosing to drive rather than use MTA services.
Sheila Carpenter said that the fare proposals must be evaluated in light of the limited service that is available in many cases. She said that Ronkonkoma is a major station that draws riders from both the North and South Shores of Long Island, but that after 4:15 p.m. there is a 3 hour gap in westbound service. She said that without additional capacity people will not have the option to use the LIRR.
Mr. Blair said that Jay Walder feels that the MTA has to make it through the current financial crisis on its own. He said that the Chairman wants to keep faith with the riders by not increasing fares more than 7.5 percent and that Board members have questioned whether this increase should not be greater. Mr. Blair said that the MTA must avoid the appearance of acting in an underhanded manner, and that the PCAC must craft its position carefully to avoid becoming irrelevant to the final decision.
Ms. Michaels said that the whole system of revenue generation for the MTA must be reconsidered. She said that pricing per zone is an old way of looking at pricing and that the MTA needs to look at pricing and operations creatively.
Ms. Mason said that it is no coincidence that the Manhattan fare hearing is being held the day before the primary election, as many politically active persons will be otherwise engaged. She said that public uproar has led to the reversal of decisions by State government in other areas and that there are other ways of raising money than through fare increases. She said that PCAC will be irrelevant if it supports the fare increase, and that the Committee should be calling on the Legislature and the MTA Board to find other ways to bridge the gap. Ms. Mason said that the PCAC stance should be “enough is enough.”
Ms. Prentiss said that with the cuts in bus transit, the cost of using the system will increase more than 7.5 percent for persons with disabilities. She pointed to the increase in Nassau County Able-Ride fares as a place where persons with disabilities face large fare increases.
Larry Rubinstein said that the PCAC’s statement should include a call for internal efficiencies at the MTA. Stuart Goldstein said that the PCAC should be very aggressive in calling for additional administrative cuts at the MTA, going beyond steps such as the consolidation of press operations at the operating agencies.
Ms. Mason said the PCAC should have a unified position and proposed a resolution in which the PCAC would oppose any fare increase and look to administrative reductions within MTA Headquarters, as well as calling for alternative sources of funding at the State and federal levels, including the possibility of federal operating assistance.
Francis Corcoran said that the PCAC has historically supported moderate fare increase and that to maintain relevance in the process should be willing to accept a moderate fare increase that is coupled with internal efficiencies. Mr. Albert stated that the PCAC should oppose the fare increase as proposed because it provides no hope for improvement of the system. Mr. Greenberg proposed that a moderate fare increase may be acceptable if the MTA’s funding partners similarly increase their support of the system and the MTA makes real cuts in the fat in its operation.
Matthew Kessler suggested that the PCAC also focus on the funding that was intended to flow to the MTA but instead was diverted to the State’s general fund. Shirley Genn said that the PCAC should demand that the funds intended for the MTA should be restored to the MTA. Trudy Mason suggested that the PCAC call on the MTA Board to go to the State Legislature to explore other sources of revenue for the MTA system.
Ms. Mason made a motion that the PCAC adopt a resolution on the proposed fare increase, seconded by Edith Prentiss. The final form of the resolution is as follows:
The PCAC opposes any fare increase as presently constituted, as it gives riders no hope that conditions will be improved. This fare increase was the third piece of an agreement, whereby the State, the ridership, and the MTA would all contribute to the MTA’s ballooning deficit. The State imposed a Payroll Mobility Tax which was supposed to bring a level of support that has yet to materialize. Coupled with the worst service cuts in over 35 years, riders are now being asked to pay more for less, a lose-lose situation. The PCAC demands that the members of the MTA Board and MTA Senior Management work vigorously with our State and Federal elected officials to find alternative means of filling the gap between costs and revenues, including, but not limited to:
• Restoring State funding promised, but not received by the MTA, including $143 million dedicated to the MTA and its operating agencies, but diverted to the State’s general fund.
• Pursuing currently available sources of Federal funding for the MTA’s operating budget, and calling on our Federal representatives and Senators to enact legislation to provide operating assistance for large public transit systems in urban areas.
• Launching an internal examination of hiring, staffing, and salary policies within the MTA and its operating agencies, seeking to eliminate duplication, unnecessary overhead, and unproductive expenditures.
• Advocating new revenue sources, including congestion pricing, tolling the free East and Harlem River bridges, and a gasoline tax, all placed in a “lockbox” that could not be used for other purposes.
The Committee voted to adopt the resolution as the official position of the PCAC by a vote of eighteen in favor, one opposed, with one abstention.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
William Henderson
Executive Director