Streetsblog New York City

Albany’s repeated plundering of the MTA’s dedicated funds has robbed transit riders of more than $140 million in the past year alone. With a $9 billion budget gap looming, straphangers could end up paying again very soon. An impossible fix, you ask? I know the subject is Albany and we’ve all been conditioned to think that change is hopeless, but as it happens, all it takes is one person, the governor of New York, to say enough is enough.

For as long as he’s in office, Andrew Cuomo can put a stop to the practice of raiding dedicated transit funds, without waiting for the state legislature to take action. Not only would this policy change be good for transit riders, advocates say in a new report, it would be consistent with principles of good government.

Get the full report as a PDF

The report, released today by the non-profit Reinvent Albany, lays out 11 model executive orders that Cuomo can institute immediately to improve state government’s transparency, ethical standards, and spending practices. The orders are endorsed by a coalition of good government groups, transit advocates, and policy experts. Reinvent Albany is directed by former Streetsblog contributor John Kaehny, and Streetsblog publisher Mark Gorton is a principal funder.

“These orders are tailor made for Governor Cuomo to use to launch his campaign to transform New York government,” said Kaehny. “Governor Cuomo will have enormous unilateral power to make government more open and accountable. The ball is in his court to do that.”

So how can Cuomo preserve the integrity of transit funding and prevent NYC straphangers from footing the bill for the state’s budget problems?

From the report:

The governor orders his administration not to propose a budget, program bill or other legislation that would divert dedicated funds or revenue sources from their intended “sole purpose.” Since the governor originates the budget, and he can veto legislative budget additions, this has the effect of creating a “governor’s locked box” for dedicated funds. We created this model order because we believe that diverting dedicated funds is bad governance and violates the pledge to taxpayers that was made when the fund was created. Over the past three years, at least $1.8 billion has been diverted from dedicated funds, most without the knowledge or understanding of the public.

The Governor’s Locked Box has the backing of the Citizen’s Union, NYPIRG, the League of Women Voters, the New York State Council of Machinists, Transportation Alternatives, and the Tri-State Transportation Campaign.

The locked box proposal lays responsibility for protecting transit riders squarely on Cuomo, who hinted last week that he’s comfortable with the budgetary shell games that erode dedicated funds. In response to the report, a spokesman for Cuomo told the Times, “The governor-elect will consider executive orders at the appropriate time. The governor-elect’s policy views in many of these areas are quite clear from the policy books published during the campaign.”

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn called for the introduction of comprehensive, citywide ferry service at her State of the City Address a couple of weeks ago. That made John Kaehny wonder how the ferries would be paid for and how much they'd cost. This week's Queens Chronicle seems to have part of the answer:

"(This) is an absolutely great idea," said Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing), chairman of the council's Transportation Committee. "We need to rediscover and utilize this tremendous natural transportation resource to overcome many of the challenges faced by a growing city."

Operating costs for the five borough ferry service could reach up to $100 million annually, according to Liu, and will require the city to combine them with debt service on capital expenditures, like building docks. But when compared with other mass transit expansions, he added, "this is a very manageable investment for the long term."

Sounds expensive.

Hot on the heels of this week's neighborhood parking workshops, DOT and several members of Brooklyn's City Council delegation are hosting a forum about residential parking permits. An RPP program with teeth could go a long way towards curbing traffic in residential neighborhoods, and this event is a big opportunity for livable streets advocates to make their voices heard. The forum will take place Monday, 7 p.m. at the St. Francis College auditorium on Remsen Street in Brooklyn Heights. Brownstoner has the details:

The town hall-style meeting will focus on whether the permits, which would probably cost a small annual fee, could help alleviate curbside parking problems and traffic in Downtown. Council Members David Yassky, Laetitia James and Bill de Blasio have organized the event, which is expected to draw several hundred residents, and DOT commish Janette Sadik-Khan is scheduled to attend. Councilman de Blasio sees the forum as the first step in developing parking strategies for all of Brooklyn. "Lack of a coherent parking strategy has been an ongoing problem in Brooklyn," de Blasio told us. "I think this forum represents a step in the right direction, and I look forward to extending this conversation to communities throughout the borough."

As John Kaehny wrote on Streetsblog last month, bringing a different perspective to these events can change the tenor of the debate:

One person can make a big difference at these workshops.

At the first round of workshops held late last year, I was the only non-car owner at my table of eight at Harlem's Alhambra Ballroom. But me being there changed the discussion from one of endless demands for more free parking space -- which I heard at another table, as my group was being organized -- to a more considered discussion of the implications of DOT's proposed changes.

By the end, a majority of the motorists at my table supported DOT's suggested changes. More than half of the households in New York City do not have a car. But non-motorists should have a say in the parking changes that affect them as bicyclists, bus riders, pedestrians and people who breathe the air. Take a couple of hours and show up. Your voice will be heard.

If you noticed an increase in the quality, depth and number of my Streetsblog posts in recent weeks, it's not because I suddenly got smarter or started working harder. Some of the savviest and most interesting items that we have published in recent days had my byline on them but were, in fact, ghost-written by John Kaehny, the former executive director of Transportation Alternatives.

Kaehny has worked on transportation and livable streets policy for two decades, laying the groundwork for many of the policy changes currently underway in New York City. He is a great source of knowledge and historical perspective on the issues we cover here. While I'm sad that I will no longer be slapping my name on his stories and looking like a genius because of it, the Streetsblog team is honored that John will now be listed as an official contributor.

Here are all of John Kaehny's Streetsblog contributions to date:

• March 2: The Iris Weinshall Legacy: Queens Boulevard
• April 9: Pedestrian Safety: London Shows How NYC Can Do Better
• April 16: The Parking Dysfunction Meter: Fines Are Five Times Revenue
• April 17: City and State Pedestrian Safety Numbers Don't Add Up
  
• April 30: Five Small Steps to a More Effective, Progressive DOT
• May 4: Gene Russianoff on the MTA's Day of Reckoning
• May 11: PlaNYC Quietly Introduces "Safe Routes to Transit"
• May 15: The Quick and Easy First Step to a "Greater, Greener New York"

Three mornings a week I ride past the South Brooklyn Casket Company on Union Street with my two-year-old son strapped to the back of my bicycle on our way to the nursery school. Though the Casket Company always has trucks parked and unloading all over the sidewalk (and someone, I assume it's the boss, likes to park his Mercedes right next to the building's front door), I've always had a real soft spot for the Casket Co.. It is one of the last functioning light industrial companies in the neighborhood. And I know that my block, the stretch of little townhouses on the south side of Union between 4th and 5th was once filled with Italian funeral parlors. Bearing the pre-gentrifcation name, "South Brooklyn," the Casket Company is one of the last genuine remnants of the old neighborhood.

So, it was doubly depressing to hear that a Casket Company truck driver blew through a red light and ran over and killed a 6-year-old boy in Sunset Park yesterday. It is triple depressing that guy doesn't even get charged with anything. What is going to make New Yorkers stop driving like careless, sociopathic maniacs when there is absolutely no enforcement, no penalty and not a peep from the Mayor or any other elected official -- even when a child is slaughtered by a trucker who told police he was trying to beat a red light? 

Here is Gothamist's coverage of the sad, disturbing story:

Yesterday afternoon, a 6 year old boy was fatally hit by a truck in Sunset Park. The boy, Andy Vega, apparently ran ahead of his babysitter when crossing Third Avenue and 46th Street, and a truck carrying empty coffins from Milso Industries struck him. The driver stayed at the scene.

Another pedestrian, Randolph Charles, who was crossing the street at the same time told the Post, "The boy was on the other side of the street. We were both crossing. The truck was coming, and all I heard was a big bang. The truck ran a red light. We had the walk sign. I told him, 'You know, you just hit the kid.' And he said, 'I thought I had the green light.' Then he grabbed his head, and you could see he was in shock."

Granted, it sounds like this whole thing was a horrible accident and the driver is shattered. But why, in New York City, do killer drivers consistently walk away from the scene of the crime with little more than a summons? How in the world is that O.K.? In the Spring of 2004 Transportation Alternatives Magazine ran a Q&A with veteran Brooklyn prosecutor Maureen McCormick, head of the Vehicular Crimes Bureau at the Brooklyn District Attorney's office. Here is what she said:

T.A. Executive Director John Kaehny: Let's say a mom is walking hand in hand with her young son across the street. They are coming back from a nice morning in the park, it's broad daylight, they are in the crosswalk and have the walk signal. Suddenly, a motorist runs the red light and kills them both. The motorist pulls over and is found to be sober. Would that motorist be charged with a crime?

A.D.A McCormick: Limited to those facts, that motorist would be summonsed for running a red light. A criminal prosecution requires showing that the motorist ran the red light because of more than carelessness or inadvertence. The driver's behavior at the time of running the light is usually the only way to prove the driver's state of mind. The state of a person's mind is a difficult thing to prove. They don't generally yell out "I'm going through this light on purpose."

Photo by Venus in Furs on Flickr. 

The death of Derek Lake, killed one month ago at age 23 when his bicycle tripped a metal plate on Houston Street, hints at a tragedy shared by all New Yorkers: City Hall’s continued insistence that the ultimate goal of a New York City street is to move as many cars and trucks each day as physically possible.

Houston Street, from its ramps onto East River Park to its flow into kayak launches at the Hudson, is undergoing a $30 million reconstruction project. When it ends by 2008, it will add five left-turn bays for cars and slightly widen a few sidewalks where street vendors work the edge of SoHo. Transportation spokesperson Chris Gilbride says the project will cut a lane of traffic from some blocks and not eliminate any pedestrian refuge areas.

But Livable Streets advocates say the DOT’s approach to the project misses a historic opportunity to transform Houston into a truly great urban boulevard, designed not just to move motor vehicles, but to create space for pedestrians, bikes, buses, cafe tables, merchants and the full diversity of New York City street life.

Community members and former city officials say the Department of Transportation alternated between bullying and ignoring neighborhood pleas for bike and pedestrian safety during the reconstruction project. "The community expressed outrage repeatedly," says Dirk McCall, who headed City Councilmember Alan J. Gerson’s staff during meetings on the Houston Street project in 2001. "They wanted more crosswalks."

Charle de Cafiero, a former member of Community Board 2 who lives near the busy corner of Houston and Lafayette, echoes this. He says his neighbors’ insistence that Houston Street serves as a local "Main Street" and not just a regional truck conduit met scorn from DOT officials, prompting them to deride the community’s ideas as "anti-car." De Cafiero says the non-collaborative atmosphere poisoned hopes for innovations that could have made Houston a model "Livable Street."

There’s no lack of vision or precedent for how a "Livable" Houston Street could look.

Read more…