Port Authority Pledges Reforms After Audit Findings

[cpzilliacus]

WCBS-880 Radio: Port Authority Pledges Reforms After Audit Findings; Calls Continue For Toll Hike Rollback Report: PA 'A Challenged And Dysfunctional Organization' In Need Of Overhaul

TOLLROADSnews: PANYNJ - management consultants say is poorly managed, very high cost, and in separate 'silos'

[MrDisco99]

That organization is begging to be broken up.

I say keep PATH and bridges and tunnels together since those are the only areas that actually require interstate cooperation.  Get rid of the PD, and spin off the rest.

[Alps]

PATH ought to be part of MTA, in my opinion, especially considering they might extend the 7 train to Secaucus. Whatever agreement would allow the MTA to operate in NJ, apply it to PATH. There are great economies of scale to be had there.

The airports and seaports should be consolidated under a revamped Port Authority. That's their name, after all, and it makes sense to have them under one umbrella. (I do think it's advantageous to keep air and sea together, though they should hire an auditor to figure that out.)

In terms of the roads, I would consider turning the GWB, LT, and HT over to the Turnpike Authority. All three are just outside NJTA jurisdiction. Put NJ 495 and the east end of NJ 139 under the NJTA, and figure it out from there. The Staten Island bridges would go over to the MTA, since they already operate the Verrazano tolls on the island and all of the other bridges' tolls are on the island. Far too many agencies in far too small a space. I would also ultimately look to fold MTA's toll road arm into NYCDOT.

[Duke87]

Considering that they mostly carry major highways, I would rather absorb TBTA into NYSDOT than NYCDOT.
'course, that would end the MTA's ability to subsidize transit with the profit from their tolls, so it won't be happening.

Generally agree on the other ideas, though.

[Alps]

Considering that they mostly carry major highways, I would rather absorb TBTA into NYSDOT than NYCDOT.
'course, that would end the MTA's ability to subsidize transit with the profit from their tolls, so it won't be happening.

Generally agree on the other ideas, though.

Possibly. The dynamics would need to be explored further. What happened is that the MTA took in the TBTA, which was only a highway agency until that point (and MTA had no highways). The TBTA culture still pervades, much as the Parkway and Turnpike people in NJ remain distinct within the mixed NJTA. I look at the TBTA as a semi-autonomous city-area agency, which is why I proposed NYCDOT - keep in mind they do as much as state DOTs, far beyond what most cities try to manage or are capable of. They can definitely do it. I considered both options, it's probably a matter of opinion at our level. Only insiders would know what would work best.

[MrDisco99]

The problem with rolling PATH and/or bridges and tunnels into MTA is you'd essentially have to restructure the MTA to be an interstate organization.  You'd have to have appointees from both states on the board, figure out how to share revenue, etc.  New Jersey isn't going to give up half their stake of those things to a strictly NY based entity.

Airports, seaports, bus terminals, real estate, can all be spun off easily to operations based in one state or the other, or even privatized, without nearly as much political headaches.

[mightyace]

Well, the Metro-North commuter trains component of MTA operates in Connecticut and New Jersey in addition to New York state.  The CT operations are run under contract with CDOT.

The NJ operations (west shore of the Hudson and the line to Port Jervis, NY) are run jointly by MTA and NJDOT as well and the lines terminate in Hoboken.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-North_Railroad

So, MTA already has experience with out of state operations.  Couldn't the Port Authority stuff be run similarly?

[MrDisco99]

Well, the Metro-North commuter trains component of MTA operates in Connecticut and New Jersey in addition to New York state.  The CT operations are run under contract with CDOT.

The NJ operations (west shore of the Hudson and the line to Port Jervis, NY) are run jointly by MTA and NJDOT as well and the lines terminate in Hoboken.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-North_Railroad

So, MTA already has experience with out of state operations.  Couldn't the Port Authority stuff be run similarly?

Well, sort of.  The main difference is MTA depend cooperation with CTDOT and NJDOT to operate and maintain those operations outside NY, whereas PANYNJ operations actually span both states.

Really, I'm not saying MTA can't do stuff outside NY, but more that it would be politically difficult to take something that's already managed by a special cooperative NY/NJ agency and move it to an agency that is only really responsible to NY... i.e. NJers would need to be bought out of the partnership somehow.

[MrDisco99]

Former NY and NJ governors call out Port Authority for becoming too political...

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5805

[Alps]

Former NY and NJ governors call out Port Authority for becoming too political...

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5805

Anyone have a real news link corroborating this?

[mc78andrew]

Former NY and NJ governors call out Port Authority for becoming too political...

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5805

Anyone have a real news link corroborating this?

Not exactly a news link, but it gets the point across about how politically connected its leaders have been.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_M._Eisenberg

[connroadgeek]

Why is this so complicated? I get it, there are multiple states involved, but I never understood why the NYC area has so many little pseudo-government agencies to manage transportation facilities. Just collapse them all into the DOTs of each state and be done with it. Every major city in America has multiple airports, train lines, bridges, tunnels, etc. This really doesn't have to be that hard. The only thing stopping a simpler set up is politics and the histories behind all the different agencies.

[DeaconG]

Port Authority, meet DRPA.
DRPA, meet Port Authority...

[deathtopumpkins]

Why is this so complicated? I get it, there are multiple states involved, but I never understood why the NYC area has so many little pseudo-government agencies to manage transportation facilities. Just collapse them all into the DOTs of each state and be done with it. Every major city in America has multiple airports, train lines, bridges, tunnels, etc. This really doesn't have to be that hard. The only thing stopping a simpler set up is politics and the histories behind all the different agencies.

The problem with that suggestion is that a significant number of these transportation facilities in the NYC area cross state lines. Therefore which DOT would take them over, NJ or NY?

Then beyond that you have things like MTA Bridges & Tunnels, which exists because it has historically used the toll revenue to subsidize transit services. It's much simpler to have the agency just run the facilities itself rather than another agency running them and then transferring the money.

[MrDisco99]

There are two things that make PANYNJ different from any old DOT...

1. It generates revenue (tolls, PATH fares, WTC rent, airport landing fees, etc).  Keeping it a separate organization makes it so self-generated revenue and tax revenue stay separate, and are spent appropriately.  For example, NY taxes won't get spent on a construction project at JFK, which already generates its own revenue, and they can't up the rent on WTC office space to pay for some highway project in Buffalo.

2. It's an interstate body, with board members chosen by both states to represent each of their interests.  You can't just manage the GW Bridge from NY DOT and leave NJ hanging.  Both states have an interest in it, particularly since it generates toll revenue (and a LOT of it).  You'd have to buy one state or the other out of the partnership, which simply won't happen.

I imagine DRPA in Philly has similar structure (and similar issues) though they're not quite as diversified as PANYNJ is.

Here's a list of transport-related interstate compact agencies similar to PANYNJ.  There aren't very many of them, but they all exist for similar reasons, i.e. to manage and collect revenue on facilities which span multiple states:

Bi-State Development Agency (St. Louis Metro)
Delaware River Port Authority (Philly bridges, PATCO trains)
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (I-78, I-80, plus many others)
Delaware River and Bay Authority (Del Mem Br, Cape May ferry)
Washington Metro Area Transportation Authority (Washington Metro)


It boils down to keeping the revenue separate, to prevent misappropriations, and to keep things fair between the states.

Of course PANYNJ is so ridiculously diversified that you have bridge toll increases being used to fund real estate ventures, like the WTC construction project, which to me is kind of bogus.  Hence why I think it should be broken up, though I do think it needs to continue to exist for some facilities.

[Alps]

Then beyond that you have things like MTA Bridges & Tunnels, which exists because it has historically used the toll revenue to subsidize transit services. It's much simpler to have the agency just run the facilities itself rather than another agency running them and then transferring the money.

... You just demonstrated that you don't know the history around here. This is the former TBTA. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. Bridge. Tunnel. No transit.

[MrDisco99]

Then beyond that you have things like MTA Bridges & Tunnels, which exists because it has historically used the toll revenue to subsidize transit services. It's much simpler to have the agency just run the facilities itself rather than another agency running them and then transferring the money.

... You just demonstrated that you don't know the history around here. This is the former TBTA. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. Bridge. Tunnel. No transit.

To be fair, while Robert Moses had TBTA to himself for the 35 preceding years, it's been subsidizing transit since it was absorbed by MTA in 1968.

[Alps]

Then beyond that you have things like MTA Bridges & Tunnels, which exists because it has historically used the toll revenue to subsidize transit services. It's much simpler to have the agency just run the facilities itself rather than another agency running them and then transferring the money.

... You just demonstrated that you don't know the history around here. This is the former TBTA. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. Bridge. Tunnel. No transit.

To be fair, while Robert Moses had TBTA to himself for the 35 preceding years, it's been subsidizing transit since it was absorbed by MTA in 1968.

1968? Talk to people at the MTA, they'll still call it TBTA.

[mc78andrew]

Then beyond that you have things like MTA Bridges & Tunnels, which exists because it has historically used the toll revenue to subsidize transit services. It's much simpler to have the agency just run the facilities itself rather than another agency running them and then transferring the money.

... You just demonstrated that you don't know the history around here. This is the former TBTA. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. Bridge. Tunnel. No transit.

To be fair, while Robert Moses had TBTA to himself for the 35 preceding years, it's been subsidizing transit since it was absorbed by MTA in 1968.

1968? Talk to people at the MTA, they'll still call it TBTA.

They still issue revenue bonds under the triboro bridge and tunnel authority too.  http://nymunicipalbonds.com/ny-municipal_bonds/triborough-bridge-and-tunnel-authority-mta-bridges-and-tunnels-general-revenue-refunding-bonds-series-2011a

These are referred to as "tribes" in the muni bond market.

[NE2]

It's the same way for the MTA transit agencies; they still have their old names (e.g. Metro-North Commuter Railroad Company, New York City Transit Authority, Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority, Staten Island Rapid Transit Operating Authority).

[deathtopumpkins]

No, I don't know much about the history of those agencies, but if those tolls have been subsidizing transit since 1968, my point still stands. Regardless of the fact that the bridges and tunnels were initially built without the intent of subsidizing transit if they've been subsidizing transit for 44 years then it is still easier to lump them together with transit than with the DOT.

[Alps]

No, I don't know much about the history of those agencies, but if those tolls have been subsidizing transit since 1968, my point still stands. Regardless of the fact that the bridges and tunnels were initially built without the intent of subsidizing transit if they've been subsidizing transit for 44 years then it is still easier to lump them together with transit than with the DOT.

You're right on that - the agency is so disjointed within* that it never occurred to me just how long it's been since they agglomerated. I would've said about 10 years tops. Parkway/Turnpike are doing quite well at integrating after just 9 years.

* Disjointed only refers to the fact that 44 years later, all of the old components are still distinguishable. I hereby disclaim any knowledge as to how the parts actually interface - it could be very efficient, in fact. (Actually, it probably is quite efficient, given how much more they're able to do with their money than a certain other agency in the immediate area that collects tolls.)

[Duke87]

My understanding is that the various sub-agencies in the MTA haven't really integrated well since each came with their own separate union and their own separate work agreements with the union. So, policies from branch to branch vary considerably and since nobody in any of the unions wants their policy changed, integration has been impossible.

Even within the subway itself, there is still some under the hood distinguishing between IRT, BMT, and IND, since each system was built with its own different infrastructure that operates somewhat differently. Although they at least ditched distinguishing between them publicly in the the 70's. Mention "IRT" to anyone who's lived in New York for 35-40 years or more and they will know exactly what you mean. Ask anyone younger than that and they will likely have no clue what you're talking about unless they're a railfan.