For Select Bus Service to Succeed, Bus Lanes Must Be Separated
January 21, 2010
The Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently presented preliminary designs for Select Bus Service along First and Second Avenues at a Community Advisory Committee meeting.
Last fall when the New York City Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced the proposed stops for Select Bus Service on the Upper East Side, I was concerned about the siting of stops on First and Second Avenues at East 79th and 86th Streets. The original proposed SBS stops were set to be across the street from existing local stops.
In September, I wrote to the DOT and MTA and asked them to find a way to ensure that future SBS and existing local stops were on the same block on these routes (see the 2009 Publications section of this website). I was therefore very pleased to see that in the draft designs that were unveiled at last week’s Community Advisory Committee meeting the design proposals included that SBS stops would be sited on the same block as existing local stops. This goes a long way in promoting pedestrian safety.
My remaining concern is the lack of physically separated bus lanes in the agencies’ design schematics. This is a big negative impact on the quality of service that SBS can deliver. Last month, I joined with Assembly Member Brian Kavanagh in sending a letter to the DOT Commissioner in support of physically separated bus lanes (this letter can also be found in the 2009 Publications section of this website).
While I appreciate the need to address the needs of businesses that rely on deliveries, there are other ways to do this besides sacrificing separated bus lanes. The primary goal of SBS must be to provide mass transit consumers with uninterrupted, speedy service along the First and Second Avenue corridors–this should be the priority over all other small inconveniences.
Fighting for the Rights of People with Disabilities
January 17, 2009
As many of you know, advocating on the issues that impact people with disabilities is very important to me. Last week was very busy on the disabilities rights front, and I wanted to give a brief update about what I’ve been up to.
On January 14th, I testified at the MTA hearing in Manhattan in opposition to the fare hikes and service cuts being proposed. I urged to give the state legislature and the federal government the time we need to come up with the funds that are needed. Paramount in my testimony was my opposition to fare hikes proposed for Access-A-Ride riders. While the MTA is considering raising the fare for those straphangers who are physically able to use the regular mass transit system by as much as 50% (from $2 to as much as $3), they are asking riders with disabilities to absorb an outrageously disproportionate fare increase of as much as 300% (from $2 to as much as $6).
Affordable and accessible transportation is a lifeline for people with disabilities and the frail elderly. 64% of Access-A-Ride users have total household incomes at less than 250% of the federal poverty level. It is a matter of simple mathematics. The many riders who depend on Access-A-Ride will literally be unable to leave their homes under this proposed fare structure. My testimony can be found in the Publications area of my website.
I am pictured here with Paul B. Feuerstein, Board Chair of the Disabilities Network of NYC and President/CEO of Barrier Free Living
(left) and Lawrence Carter-Long, Executive Director of DNNYC (right). Note: We are standing in front of the VISIONS banner, the organization which hosted the meeting. VISIONS is a tremendous organization serving and advocating for people who are blind or visually impaired.
I had the great pleasure of addressing the Disabilities Network of New York City at their visioning meeting on January 15th. This is a truly diverse organization representing people with physical, vision, and hearing disabilities. The community gathering’s purpose was to determine the shared vision for advocacy goals of DNNYC. I delivered welcoming remarks at the event. Here is a brief snippet of those remarks:
As someone with a mobility disability myself, I understand from firsthand experiences the myriad of challenges that people with disabilties face. We need to ensure that all New Yorkers have access to transportation options that serve them and the MTA and the TLC won’t do this without our continued advocacy and creative thinking. We need to ensure that all New Yorkers have access to affordable, comprehensive, and quality health care. And this will not happen without our vigilance and persistence. The secret of effective politics is participation. That’s it. And is must come from people with disabilities in order for our issues to be at the forefront. It is the task and the responsibility of everyone here to make your voice heard by those that represent you, be they in City Hall, Albany or Washington, DC.
We are not an insignificant minority that can brushed aside. We are 20% of the general population and the attention the media has given to our issues while increasing, has never matched our numbers.
In less than a week we will be witnessing a changing of the guard in Washington, DC and last week we saw one in Albany —now is the time for DNNYC to make a coordinated effort to ensure we leverage our community’s growing political strength.
If you are interested in getting involved in advocating for the rights of people with disabilities, I highly recommend giving your time to this important organization.
Assembly Member Alan Maisel and I talking about health policy with PJ Weiner, Manager of Advocacy Programs for the MS Society of NYC (far right) and Robin Einbinder, Vice President of the MS Society of NYC (second from the right).
After the DNNYC event, I headed over to the Multiple Sclerosis Society of New York City inaugral legislative reception. I had the great honor of being asked to co-host this event. An impressive gathering of members of the MS Society met with their legislators including the newly minted Chair of the Senate Health Committee, Tom Duane, Assembly Members Linda Rosenthal and Alan Maisel, NYC Council Members John Liu and Gale Brewer, and representatives from the offices of Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, Senator Daniel Squadron, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Assembly Member Jonathan Bing, and Council Members Jessica Lappin and Oliver Koppell.
There were many issues discussed at this event, but paramount on the minds of the MS Society members I spoke to was the issue of Tier IV pricing — and the need for support for a ban on this practice in New York. The MS Society has worked with Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith on legislation that would ban Tier IV drug pricing, a bill that I am excited to support in the New York State Assembly.
The proposed legislation would ban the creation of a fourth tier in a company’s prescription drug pricing forumlae. In states where this has been allowed to happen, medication treating diseases such as anemia, cancer, MS, and hepatitis C are categorized separately from other prescription drugs and co-payments have amounted to up to 33% of the total cost of each prescription. Patients with chronic diseases are seeing fees dramatically increase to hundreds or even thousands of dollars per prescription per month. This can never be allowed to happen in New York and I am greatful to the MS Society of New York City for raising this important issue and working with the legislature to protect all New Yorkers from this unacceptable threat to access to health care.
Increasing Driver License, Car Registration Fees Could Raise $550 Million for Cash-Starved MTA
December 1, 2008
So it’s “official,” our country has been in a recession since December, 2007, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, which announced the non-news earlier this morning.
Of course, we already knew this to be true for many months. On November 20th, MTA CEO Elliot Sander told the MTA Board, that new economic forecasts show projected deficit gaps of “$383 million for 2008, $1.441 billion for 2009, $2.394 billion for 2010, and nearly $3 billion in 2012, before prior-year carryover or gap closing actions.”
As I’ve blogged before, I am very concerned about the fiscal outlook for the MTA and how cuts to services, capital projects, system maintenance, and increased user fees will impact riders. But the negative effects spillover beyond transit users. The MTA is the lifeblood of the New York metropolitan area and when it suffers, so does the regional economy.
On September 15th, the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) testified before the Ravitch Commission and outlined a number of practical suggestions for how to increase dedicated mass transit revenue.
Today, I wrote to Governor Paterson to urge that two CBC proposals be included in his 2009 Executive budget: Raising car registration fees and driver license fees by at least $50 annually.
When CBC President Carol Kellermann testified before the Ravitch Commission she noted that today the cost for a driver license in New York is under $6 annually. Raising annual fees for driver licenses to $50 would yield nearly $300 million. New York has the 8th lowest vehicle registration fees in the country (according to the CBC’s 2006 study South Carolina has the lowest at $12, and Maine has the highest at $435), and raising the vehicle registration fees would net an additional annual revenue stream of $250 million.
With the Ravitch Commission’s report due to be released on Friday, now is the time to be examining all the options including this one and other good ideas like reinstituting the commuter tax.
Recently, New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr. outlined a proposal to impose a weight-based transit-dedicated assessment of $100 for vehicles weighing 2,300 pounds or less, plus $.09 for every pound of curb weight over 2,300. This is an interesting idea that I believe merits further study. It differs from the CBC proposal which would see a flat fee increase for car registration fees.
In these tough financial times, I believe that it makes sense that those who choose to drive should help bear the costs of maintaining our public transportation infrastructure. These two new recurring revenue streams would constitute a good start in getting the MTA’s finances back on track.
In my letter, I suggested that during the first two to three years of this budget crisis, the MTA be given the flexibility it needs to put this revenue towards its operating deficit. But in the long term this money should be used for capital needs. After the third year I suggested that these recurring funds be dedicated 70% towards the MTA’s capital plan and 30% towards the NYS Department of Transportation Five Year Capital Plan - a fund which finances highway, tunnel, and bridge projects across the state.
I told the Governor that if these proposals were not included in the budget, I was prepared to introduce them as a separate piece of legislation. My letter to Governor Paterson can be found in the Publications area of my website.
Heartless Proposal by MTA to Double Access-A-Ride Fares is Discrimination, Plain and Simple.
November 24, 2008
I am thoroughly disgusted with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s proposal to double fares for Access-A-Ride users. While the MTA is considering raising fares for able-bodied straphangers by as much as 50% (from $2 to $3); they are asking riders with disabilities to absorb an unprecedented 100% fare increase from $2 to $4.
This past weekend, I joined Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, State Senator Eric Schneiderman, Assembly Member Jonathan Bing, and Councilmember Gale Brewer at a press conference along with advocates representing Disabilities Network of NYC, Cerebral Palsy Associations of New York State, Center for Independence of the Disabled NY, Disabled in Action, and the 504 Democratic Club. At the press conference we collectively denounced the proposed fare hike. Access-A-Ride is critical to those who need it, and the revenue that doubling this fare will bring is comparatively unimpressive.
The current standard of fare equity is the minimum a just society should expect. Like a good old fashioned train robbery, the MTA is ambushing paratransit riders because they know that people with disabilities have no other transportation options. This is the most regressive fare hike the MTA has ever proposed because those who can least afford to pay are being asked to shoulder the greatest burden.
I am also not convinced that this is a legal proposal. The transportation provisions of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act cover public transportation services, like the MTA system. Public transportation authorities may not discriminate against people with disabilities in the provision of their services. So if a local authority like the MTA chooses not to adequately serve clients with disabilities in its regular system, it is instead required by federal law to create a parallel paratransit system. Decades ago when the ADA was passed, the MTA chose not to make the regular transit system accessible (today there are just over 50 subway stations of 468 that have elevators), so it was required to create the Access-A-Ride service. It goes against the spirit of the ADA to charge people with disabilities more to use a system designed to compensate them for not having access to the regular mass transit system.
I will be doing everything I can to oppose this proposal and I will continue to keep you updated. My press release on this topic can be found in the Publications area of this website.
Another MTA Fare Hike: It Doesn’t Have to be Déjà Vu (all over again)
July 22, 2008
Just last year, I stood on the steps of City Hall with Gene Russianoff of NYPIRG’s Straphangers Campaign to protest an MTA fare hike. Now it’s happening all over again.
It came as no surprise to me when a MTA official leaked to the New York Times that once again the MTA is facing widening budget deficits. New York State has all but abandoned its fiscal responsibility to the MTA for the last decade and a half, leaving the Transit Authority’s fiscal health up to the volatility of real estate taxes, while forcing the MTA to balance shortfalls on the backs of middle and low-income straphangers through repeated fare hikes. The MTA is once again looking at another fare and toll hike, which would be only the second time in the 100 year history of the subway that fares are raised in back-to-back years.
While the MTA’s budget deficits look grim, and a fare hike seems unavoidable, it is only because New York State refuses to unshackle itself from one of the most regressive income tax structures in the country. What most New Yorkers don’t even realize is that if they make $45,000 a year they are in the same income tax bracket as New York’s elite millionaires and billionaires.
Last March the Assembly Democratic Caucus announced a plan to raise $1.5 billion in revenue for transportation through a less than 1% income tax surcharge on those New Yorkers earning over a million dollars. While Governor Paterson and the State Senate did not embrace this plan at the time, I believe the current state of the MTA’s finances demand that the Governor take a second look. If Governor Paterson has the foresight to call the legislature back to Albany to pass some form of the millionaire’s tax he would break the cycle of balancing the MTA’s budget on the backs of straphangers who can least afford to pay.
But an income tax surcharge on those earning over a million dollars is only a short term solution. If Governor Paterson has the vision and the fortitude he should champion a more progressive income tax structure as the centerpiece of his 2009 legislative agenda, such as the Working Families Party has put forward, we should go far beyond just plugging the MTA’s budget gaps and instead reinvigorate our State’s fiscal health, while giving millions of middle- and low- income New Yorkers tremendous tax savings.
