Great stuff, as always. Any thoughts on what engaged transit users in NYC can do to move the needle, even in the very slightest way, toward the "first way"?
I'm not an expert on what makes for the most effective advocacy measures, but here's a list of things to consider (aside from voting). First, I will note that this is one of the most common requests I get and the answers aren't great because the whole point of the MTA was to obstruct voters like you and me from influencing their decision-making.
That being said, here are a few options:
-Write to your elected officials. I am deeply skeptical of the impact tweeting angrily at Cuomo, the MTA, or other elected officials can have. Instead, do something that takes only a tiny bit more effort and write to them through more formal channels. The State Senate website (https://www.nysenate.gov/find-my-senator) makes it very easy to find out who your senator is and to write them. The state assembly website is a little less user-friendly but their email addresses are right there: https://nyassembly.gov/mem/
-For surface-level transit issues like bike and bus infrastructure, write to your city council member. The city council home page has a handy searchable map for finding out who yours is and how to contact them. https://council.nyc.gov/ This is particularly important if you’re into bus-only or bike lanes.
-There are a number of transit advocacy groups you can consider donating to or volunteering for, such as Riders Alliance, the Straphangers Campaign, and Transportation Alternatives. I will note that they tend to focus less on good governance reform and more on increased funding and better service.
Cool. Already doing most of that, but will redouble efforts as a first step. Seems like we're desperately in need of a coordinated effort of well-informed citizens to push for "first way"-style reforms...
Indeed. If you haven't read the Sustainability Working Group report that came out this week yet, I highly recommend doing that. I think it's purpose was to get some of these conversations going, if not with the public than with politicians and decisionmakers.
I don't know how much time you have to dedicate to these things, but another possibility is reaching out to the offices of politicians who have made MTA reform a part of their platforms, such as Amy Paulin or Jessica Ramos, to see what they recommend.
Btw, sorry to risk overtaxing your generosity, but while we're here, might you be able to clarify: When people (including the Workgroup) say that the MTA risks running ~$1B annual deficit by 2022, they are including the $2B+ in annual debt service to which the MTA is subject, no? Obviously, the debt is not going to evaporate (though we can dream) but that suggests to me that the MTA would actually be ~$1B in the black annually, if not for the burden of a debt which is largely a function of decades of political malfeasance rather than operational incompetence.
Yes, debt service is part of the operating budget so it's included in the annual operating budget. But your characterization of the debt is not quite right. One of the MTA's strengths, as an entity, is that it can borrow against toll revenues to raise funds. In fact, I would go as far as to say it would be *bad* if the MTA didn't have any debt, because it ought to be using its significant borrowing power to invest in the system. Of course, 16% annual debt service is a lot, and it needs to go towards worthy, cost-effective projects, which this debt largely has not. There are lots of other complexities to the makeup of this debt, too. I would love to see someone with a strong finances/accounting background do a deep dive into all this, but unfortunately I just don't have that and am worried I would misinterpret a lot of what's going on.
Not defending the MTA wholesale or arguing against necessary reorganization, but concerned about the seeming lack of context in this particular critique as I fear it lends itself to a pro-privatization argument.
Great stuff, as always. Any thoughts on what engaged transit users in NYC can do to move the needle, even in the very slightest way, toward the "first way"?
I'm not an expert on what makes for the most effective advocacy measures, but here's a list of things to consider (aside from voting). First, I will note that this is one of the most common requests I get and the answers aren't great because the whole point of the MTA was to obstruct voters like you and me from influencing their decision-making.
That being said, here are a few options:
-Write to your elected officials. I am deeply skeptical of the impact tweeting angrily at Cuomo, the MTA, or other elected officials can have. Instead, do something that takes only a tiny bit more effort and write to them through more formal channels. The State Senate website (https://www.nysenate.gov/find-my-senator) makes it very easy to find out who your senator is and to write them. The state assembly website is a little less user-friendly but their email addresses are right there: https://nyassembly.gov/mem/
-For surface-level transit issues like bike and bus infrastructure, write to your city council member. The city council home page has a handy searchable map for finding out who yours is and how to contact them. https://council.nyc.gov/ This is particularly important if you’re into bus-only or bike lanes.
-There are a number of transit advocacy groups you can consider donating to or volunteering for, such as Riders Alliance, the Straphangers Campaign, and Transportation Alternatives. I will note that they tend to focus less on good governance reform and more on increased funding and better service.
Cool. Already doing most of that, but will redouble efforts as a first step. Seems like we're desperately in need of a coordinated effort of well-informed citizens to push for "first way"-style reforms...
Indeed. If you haven't read the Sustainability Working Group report that came out this week yet, I highly recommend doing that. I think it's purpose was to get some of these conversations going, if not with the public than with politicians and decisionmakers.
I don't know how much time you have to dedicate to these things, but another possibility is reaching out to the offices of politicians who have made MTA reform a part of their platforms, such as Amy Paulin or Jessica Ramos, to see what they recommend.
In progress on the SWG report! Find I have about five pages of patience at a time for these things...
Good idea on the pols. That would be a new step, but I suppose more of us could stand to be taking those given that 2019 is "make-or-break."
Btw, sorry to risk overtaxing your generosity, but while we're here, might you be able to clarify: When people (including the Workgroup) say that the MTA risks running ~$1B annual deficit by 2022, they are including the $2B+ in annual debt service to which the MTA is subject, no? Obviously, the debt is not going to evaporate (though we can dream) but that suggests to me that the MTA would actually be ~$1B in the black annually, if not for the burden of a debt which is largely a function of decades of political malfeasance rather than operational incompetence.
Yes, debt service is part of the operating budget so it's included in the annual operating budget. But your characterization of the debt is not quite right. One of the MTA's strengths, as an entity, is that it can borrow against toll revenues to raise funds. In fact, I would go as far as to say it would be *bad* if the MTA didn't have any debt, because it ought to be using its significant borrowing power to invest in the system. Of course, 16% annual debt service is a lot, and it needs to go towards worthy, cost-effective projects, which this debt largely has not. There are lots of other complexities to the makeup of this debt, too. I would love to see someone with a strong finances/accounting background do a deep dive into all this, but unfortunately I just don't have that and am worried I would misinterpret a lot of what's going on.
Not defending the MTA wholesale or arguing against necessary reorganization, but concerned about the seeming lack of context in this particular critique as I fear it lends itself to a pro-privatization argument.