|
|
| M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 (638852) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
| (638866) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jun 24 06:40:00 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Nah, I'll side with the experts. And we need the SAS. Ventilation projects can wait until 2010, IMO. And I'll keep riding the subway every day. |
|
|
| (638881) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Bingham C50 on Tue Jun 24 07:43:15 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. The MTA should never have made those service improvement promises of theirs. The press and public will have a field day with this. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (638908) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 09:06:18 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Bingham C50 on Tue Jun 24 07:43:15 2008. They THOUGHT they had the money until the budget office came in with REAL numbers ... and so it goes. Agencies know to pyth away ALL allocated funds before end of Fiscal Year, lest stuff like THIS happens. New fiscal year is "random." Been there, done that. :(Bottom line, "Division of the budget" TOLD them they had money, then after they were given their account information, it changed. I've worked for agencies and saw the exact "game" played for 11 years before I finally got tired of being blamed for what political appointees blew. :( |
|
|
| (638918) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Jun 24 09:52:46 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. It's Doomsday '08. Hopefully, they find the money somewhere under a board members bed like they do every year.If not, hello 1980! |
|
|
| (638920) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by DCmetrogreen on Tue Jun 24 10:06:36 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Don't look now, but Russianoff is right...this will be deferred into no-man's land. (Hey look, it's our old friend deferred maintanance! How ya doin' buddy!;) |
|
|
| (638921) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 10:09:21 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 09:06:18 2008. They THOUGHT they had the money until the budget office came in with REAL numbers ...I'd like to believe that, but Elliott Sander was very explicit that he was relying on 2008 numbers and as late as mid-March, he endorsed service increases. It is very clear that Sander was merely using a carrot on a stick to get the fare increase passed. As soon as the fare increase was approved, lo and behold, there was no money for service increases! Remember, this is what Sander said on March 3rd: Here on the occasion of the MTA's 40th anniversary I have a lot of good news to share with you on that front. I have reviewed our 2008 revenues to date, which are in line with our budget projections. As a result, I will recommend to the Board that we move ahead with the service enhancements included in the financial plan. That means $30 million dollars in new service this year. Our customers will benefit from increased service on 11 subway lines, extended and new bus routes, additional commuter rail trains and cars on LIRR and Metro-North, and improved customer communications. |
|
|
| (638922) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 10:11:02 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. This is only the beginning.....Wait until the 2009 budget is unveiled. |
|
|
| (638940) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 11:26:01 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 10:09:21 2008. Do you have any solid evidence that Lee Sander knew about the revised revenue numbers while he was endorsing the service improvements? |
|
|
| (638944) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jun 24 11:40:31 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Why should anything be cut back?Everything should be built now regardless of cost, for it will only cost more later. Besides, as we have seen for the last 50 years, later never has any money of its own anyway. LION does not object to borrowing for infrastructure, it is right and proper that such expenses be amortized over 30 to 50 years. But NO BORROWING for operating costs. Those must be paid as you go, but they too must be paid: Both from the fare box and from the tax jar. ROAR |
|
|
| (638952) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 12:18:51 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 11:26:01 2008. Elliott Sander made his statement on March 3rd. He enthusiastically conveyed to the public his unqualified expectation that based on 2008 revenues, the service increases would receive his endorsement as ED and CEO.Sander is the public official whose statement was contradicted within a matter of days. Perhaps instead of giving him a raise, MTA should have called him to account for his flip flop. But then again, since MTA operates outside of the realm of political accountability to voters, they don't have to worry about being voted out of office for their flip flops. Sander doesn't have to run for re-election, he's not accountable, so he doesn't have to explain why mere days after his March 3rd statement, MTA did the opposite of what he said he would endorse. He can show us the hard evidence that he was mistaken without fault. To date, he has not done so, even though his flip flop as one of MTA's highest ranking officers was explicitly noted in our area's leading newspaper, among other places. |
|
|
| (638956) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by rtype3995 on Tue Jun 24 12:39:16 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 12:18:51 2008. Typical b.s being put out there....instead of wasting money on opto and buying new cars, they should have used the money elsewhere....I'd halt the upgrading of stations and new projects as well....and don't buy anymore subway cars at this time either..... |
|
|
| (638973) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jun 24 13:17:37 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Selkirk, this isn't anything new. The government seems to want people to die. SHAME. Do you think they honestly give a damn? If someone dies due to smoke inhallation, this will be swept under the rug.Most people won't give a damn anyways, theywill be concentrating on mcdonalds, ipods, and texting machines. What a shame.BAD and negative energy for this LOW LIFE Mr. Sander. Shame on this executive. We cannot just count on karma by itself to do the work, humans have to assist it. we have to get rid of these greedy executives and politicians. Positive energy is what we have. God wouldn't want anyone to just sit and watch those who make the "laws of a nation" break the laws of humanity. Pacifism doesn't work with these people. What a pitty, what have we gotten ourselves into? |
|
|
| (638974) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 13:19:01 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by rtype3995 on Tue Jun 24 12:39:16 2008. Typical b.s being put out there....instead of wasting money on opto and buying new cars, they should have used the money elsewhere....Not sure about that; the current cars being retired either have or very soon will end their useful lives. Doesn't pay to overhaul 40+ year old railcars, and if they don't overhaul them, it's likely that their reliability will begin to take huge hits, or else that maintenance costs on the older units will sharply increase. That said, the huge capital investments in CBTC have not paid dividends yet over traditional NYCT signaling; they have actually been over budget and over time so far on the Canarsie Line. Until the technology can be actually shown to improve service, it may be time to delay future implementation of CBTC signaling. MTA and NYCT especially are heavy with analysts working out of expensive real estate. Might be time to cool that line of work off, and focus on essential personnel. |
|
|
| (638979) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Tue Jun 24 13:27:24 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. They should have kept that money tree by the American Express pavilion at the '64-65 World's Fair.:) |
|
|
| (638980) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jun 24 13:27:32 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 12:18:51 2008. But then again, since MTA operates outside of the realm of political accountability to voters,Not entirely true, the governor can be held accountable, politically. |
|
|
| (638983) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 13:32:21 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue Jun 24 13:27:32 2008. That's true, but remember that politicians benefit a great deal by having MTA as a heat shield. It's a great thing to be a political leader when you can pretend that someone else is accountable for all sorts of things.Then again, who was the last NY Governor who did budgeting straight? I've heard decent things about Carey, but it's been a long time since then. |
|
|
| (638990) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jun 24 13:49:39 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Mr. Sander portrayed the raise as being in the best interest of the authority, saying that other transit systems paid their executives more.Other transit systems also pay their hourlies more. Will you remember that when it's contract time for us, Mr. Sander? We'll see. |
|
|
| (638996) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Tue Jun 24 14:04:31 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jun 24 13:49:39 2008. You'll do better with the present MTA/TA leadership than the previous one. |
|
|
| (639006) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 14:46:44 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 12:18:51 2008. "Elliott Sander made his statement on March 3rd. He enthusiastically conveyed to the public his unqualified expectation that based on 2008 revenues, the service increases would receive his endorsement as ED and CEO.Sander is the public official whose statement was contradicted within a matter of days. Perhaps instead of giving him a raise, MTA should have called him to account for his flip flop. But then again, since MTA operates outside of the realm of political accountability to voters, they don't have to worry about being voted out of office for their flip flops. Sander doesn't have to run for re-election, he's not accountable, so he doesn't have to explain why mere days after his March 3rd statement, MTA did the opposite of what he said he would endorse. He can show us the hard evidence that he was mistaken without fault. To date, he has not done so, even though his flip flop as one of MTA's highest ranking officers was explicitly noted in our area's leading newspaper, among other places." You still have not provided a single bit of evidence that Lee Sander knew about the revised revenue projections while he was promoting the MTA's plan. All that you are able to cite is that they happened in the same month. That's really not good enough if you want to make a reasonable case that he was acting unethically. Until some solid evidence is presented, all that I'm reading about is a conspiracy theory. |
|
|
| (639010) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Tue Jun 24 14:57:32 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. The MTA doesn't care about the passengers. I thought you knew that. |
|
|
| (639011) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 15:12:11 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 14:46:44 2008. You can believe that Elliott Sander is God's gift those of us blessed to have manage MTA. I prefer not to. I prefer to take his statements at face value, that he had reviewed MTA's revenues through early March 2008, that he publicly and very enthusiastically endorsed service increases, and that a few days later, MTA declared exactly the opposite of what Sander very publicly stated.Mr. Sander can inform us why he was - as you would have it - so severely mistaken in early March as to MTA revenues compared to what was declared in mid-March. Until he does that, all that I'm reading is a rather unpersuasive defense of a man who failed quite badly at his job. Either Sander made a huge error in how much revenue MTA had available, or else he participated in a crassly political ploy to make his now pathetic superior - Eliot Spitzer - look better in the run-up to the fare increases. Since I doubt that Sander will explain his conduct, you can feel free to do so in his place. |
|
|
| (639036) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 16:44:07 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 15:12:11 2008. You can believe that Elliott Sander is God's gift those of us blessed to have manage MTA. I prefer not to. I prefer to take his statements at face value, that he had reviewed MTA's revenues through early March 2008, that he publicly and very enthusiastically endorsed service increases, and that a few days later, MTA declared exactly the opposite of what Sander very publicly stated.Mr. Sander can inform us why he was - as you would have it - so severely mistaken in early March as to MTA revenues compared to what was declared in mid-March. Until he does that, all that I'm reading is a rather unpersuasive defense of a man who failed quite badly at his job. Either Sander made a huge error in how much revenue MTA had available, or else he participated in a crassly political ploy to make his now pathetic superior - Eliot Spitzer - look better in the run-up to the fare increases. Since I doubt that Sander will explain his conduct, you can feel free to do so in his place. There was already an explanation. The revenue projections changed. Now, for the third time, do you have any evidence that Lee Sander knew about the changes in revenue projections while he was promoting the MTA's plan? Also, stating that "either Sander made a huge error in how much revenue MTA had available..." is one of the most absurd statements that I've read. That insinuates that Mr. Sander is responsible for econometric modeling, or that the MTA should be able to execute such a function with precision. Ascribing such a responsibility to any executive, agency, or private business for that matter, where this is not part of their core competency is severely divorced from reality. The expectation that Lee Sander and the MTA should possess economic analysis that is superior to that of professional financial analysts and economists is so ridiculous that neither Mr. Sander, nor the MTA should be expected to answer for that. Such an absurd view, however, does help to concoct the conspiracy theories that I've been reading. |
|
|
| (639049) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by MJF on Tue Jun 24 17:31:43 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 12:18:51 2008. I think Sander made his March 3 presentation based on the congestion pricing plan being passed. When it was rejected the funding for the service enhancements went into limbo. |
|
|
| (639051) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 17:34:35 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 15:12:11 2008. Point of order on that for reference ... Division of the budget issues quarterly progress reports on an agency's finances though the agency itself is supposed to try to figure it out. Since the state's FY ends on April 1, whatever he had for a March "report" couldn't have been current since the first quarter's figures don't even come out until almost a month after the quarter ends from the comptroller's office. So if he had figures for March, then they would have HAD to be the last quarter of 2007 posted in January of 2008 ... just how it works. |
|
|
| (639066) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by rtype3995 on Tue Jun 24 18:05:09 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jun 24 13:49:39 2008. Transit doesn't care about its workers either,so at least we share something in common with the riders....as for contract time, we have a better chance of seeing snow in july than to get anything decent....the best chance to gain something was last year, when they had money....now no money, forget it |
|
|
| (639073) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:16:23 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 17:34:35 2008. Point of order on that for reference ... Division of the budget issues quarterly progress reports on an agency's finances though the agency itself is supposed to try to figure it out. Since the state's FY ends on April 1, whatever he had for a March "report" couldn't have been current since the first quarter's figures don't even come out until almost a month after the quarter ends from the comptroller's office. So if he had figures for March, then they would have HAD to be the last quarter of 2007 posted in January of 2008 ... just how it works.Had Sander's speech been otherwise, I might agree with you. But Sander was quite specific on March 3rd as to what he meant, so that there can be no mistaking it. He says, in the March 3rd address at Cooper Union, I have reviewed our 2008 revenues to date, which are in line with our budget projections. There's no other way to read that except that he indeed reviewed MTA's 2008 revenues to date, the date being March 3rd 2008. To reinforce that, Sander goes on, in the very next sentence, to talk about how those revenues up until March 3rd - or maybe March 2nd, depending on how you want to read it, OK - were in line with projections. Even if you're right, that only necessarily implies that Sander's statement was materially false: he had not, in that case, reviewed 2008 MTA revenues to date, and so he could not have compared them to projections for 2008. In the leading press account his March 3rd comments were read this way: The announcement that the authority could not afford the improvements now was an abrupt reversal from just three weeks ago, when Elliot G. Sander, the authority’s chief executive, said its finances appeared good enough to go ahead with the improvements. Mr. Sander made that announcement on March 3, a day after subway and bus fares increased and two days after commuter rail fares went up. Bridge tolls increased March 16. Speaking at Cooper Union in what was billed as the first “state of the M.T.A.” address, Mr. Sander said he had “a lot of good news to share” about service. “Our customers will benefit from increased service on 11 subway lines, extended and new bus routes, additional commuter rail trains and cars on L.I.R.R. and Metro-North, and improved customer communications,” he said, according to the text of his remarks on the authority’s Web Site. We never heard back from Sander as to any explanation for the flip flop. Nor did we hear him apologize for misleading millions of New Yorkers. Nor did we hear him offer his resignation over the episode. |
|
|
| (639076) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:30:53 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 16:44:07 2008. First of all, it's nice to have you here, Mr. Sander.There was already an explanation. The revenue projections changed. They changed over the course of a few days? Now, for the third time, do you have any evidence that Lee Sander knew about the changes in revenue projections while he was promoting the MTA's plan? Let's go to the videotape, Mr. Sander. On March 3rd, you said, Here on the occasion of the MTA's 40th anniversary I have a lot of good news to share with you on that front. I have reviewed our 2008 revenues to date, which are in line with our budget projections. As a result, I will recommend to the Board that we move ahead with the service enhancements included in the financial plan. But this is what your colleague, Gary Dellaverson says to NYT on March 24th, excerpted, Gary J. Dellaverson, the authority’s chief financial officer, used words like “gloomy” and “frightening” to describe the decline in what has been a key source of the authority’s prosperity in recent years. Real estate tax revenues in February and March were below budget forecasts, which had already been trimmed back substantially from previous years. “We took these tax projections down quite dramatically from last year, and they are quite dramatically underperforming,” Mr. Dellaverson said. The real estate boom had helped fuel large budget surpluses at the authority, but Mr. Dellaverson said the two-month decline was a “cautionary flag.” We know that you, Mr. Sander, said on March 3rd that you had reviewed revenues "to date", whih even if we say that it didn't include any of March, must have included February, otherwise you plainly were incorrect in saying "to date"; this from a man who was just given a $10k raise. So how is it, Mr. Sander, that you got up at Cooper Union and said that 2008 revenues were in line with projections, when Mr. Dellaverson flatly contradicts you? Ascribing such a responsibility to any executive, agency, or private business for that matter, where this is not part of their core competency is severely divorced from reality. The expectation that Lee Sander and the MTA should possess economic analysis that is superior to that of professional financial analysts and economists is so ridiculous that neither Mr. Sander, nor the MTA should be expected to answer for that. Such an absurd view, however, does help to concoct the conspiracy theories that I've been reading. Mr. Sander, I believe that a man who is the chief executive of a multibillion dollar enterprise should know the difference between up and down. If that's not within your core competency, then you're in the wrong line of work. Secondly, a man should stand behind what he says in great public speeches. You might not think that you're responsible for what you say, but all the rest of us certainly do. If you can't stand the heat, find a new line of work. I eagerly await your reply |
|
|
| (639085) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:43:36 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by MJF on Tue Jun 24 17:31:43 2008. I would like to think that, but Sander was very specific on March 3rd that February 2008 revenues were in line with projections. But some 20 days later, February 2008 revenues were pronounced by Gary Dellaverson to be "gloomy" and "worrying". Maybe Sander's error was unintentional, but even so, that's not a mistake that someone in his line of work ought to be making. |
|
|
| (639088) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 18:51:28 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:16:23 2008. If that's what he said (have no reason to doubt it) then it's the agency's accounting rather than Division of the Budget or Comptroller's office. Just so you know, not trying to defend Sander ... merely explaining how the state accounting works (which is the *official* number). |
|
|
| (639092) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:59:19 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 18:51:28 2008. If Sander were some lower level figure, I wouldn't want him to be held accountable. But he's MTA's CEO and ED, and you know how it goes....'The buck stops here'. Public statements like that have to be vetted, and even then, it's the man who delivers the speech who is ultimately responsible. (Ted Sorenson - legendary speechwriter and advisor to JFK - takes that line, and I think he's right; basically that if Sorenson screwed up a statement, sure it's his responsibility, but it would also ultimately be JFK's). |
|
|
| (639094) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Tue Jun 24 18:59:22 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by rtype3995 on Tue Jun 24 18:05:09 2008. Transit doesn't care about its workers either,so at least we share something in common with the riders....as for contract time, we have a better chance of seeing snow in july than to get anything decent....the best chance to gain something was last year, when they had money....now no money, forget it.We agree on that one brother!!!! Im not holding my breath looking for something "Great" that's for sure.. Something decent sure why not. In my book benifits are the priority than kiznash, but thats just me.. |
|
|
| (639097) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 19:01:45 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Railman718 on Tue Jun 24 18:59:22 2008. My feeling is that their priority will exactly the other way around. They will be willing (maybe) to give ground on wages, but they will fight to the death on benefits. I just hope that no one says anything stupid this time - note to Mike Bloomberg.... - that poisons negotiations, so maybe they can actually go somewhere. |
|
|
| (639100) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Tue Jun 24 19:05:43 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 19:01:45 2008. Yeah give us a raise then take it away when we have to "pay" for more of the benifits...I can see that as well.. Well we shall see whatever happens, happens. |
|
|
| (639188) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 20:41:33 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:30:53 2008. First of all, it's nice to have you here, Mr. Sander.ad hominem abusive by proxy? That's an impressive display of a weak argument! There was already an explanation. The revenue projections changed. They changed over the course of a few days? It wasn't a few days. It was 21 days. Distorting facts to emphasize your point only emphasizes how weak your argument is. There has to be a time interval between the events, and if it was 21 days, then it was 21 days. Now, for the third time, do you have any evidence that Lee Sander knew about the changes in revenue projections while he was promoting the MTA's plan? Let's go to the videotape, Mr. Sander. On March 3rd, you said, Oh, there's that ad hominem abusive by proxy attack again. How clever of you. Here on the occasion of the MTA's 40th anniversary I have a lot of good news to share with you on that front. I have reviewed our 2008 revenues to date, which are in line with our budget projections. As a result, I will recommend to the Board that we move ahead with the service enhancements included in the financial plan. 21 days passes. 21 days. Not 21 minutes. 21 days. Gary Dellaverson says to NYT on March 24th, excerpted, Gary J. Dellaverson, the authority’s chief financial officer, used words like "gloomy" and "frightening" to describe the decline in what has been a key source of the authority’s prosperity in recent years. Real estate tax revenues in February and March were below budget forecasts, which had already been trimmed back substantially from previous years. "We took these tax projections down quite dramatically from last year, and they are quite dramatically underperforming," Mr. Dellaverson said. The real estate boom had helped fuel large budget surpluses at the authority, but Mr. Dellaverson said the two-month decline was a "cautionary flag." Now let's look at the conspiracy theory: on March 3rd that you had reviewed revenues "to date", whih even if we say that it didn't include any of March, must have included February, otherwise you plainly were incorrect in saying "to date" No, that is not necessarily true. It might be true, but unless you can establish that February tax revenues were known on 10:30am, March 3rd - which was a Monday, this point is invalid. Again, it my be true, but considering that the speech took place at 10:30am on the first Monday of the month, it is highly unlikely that the data was compiled and available to him. ...2008 revenues were in line with projections, when Mr. Dellaverson flatly contradicts... You might have a point here if you can establish a few things, which you have not done. First, when are the numbers for revenues from real estate transactions normally released to the MTA? If you can establish that it is during the month on a week by week basis, then I'll concede this to you, and call for Lee Sander to answer for what he said, and perhaps even for him to step down. There is another possibility, that is very plausible, and that would easily explain the seeming contradiction between Mr. Sander's speech on March 3rd, and Mr Dellaverson's statement 21 days later; When they saw the numbers for February, they got very, very worried. March numbers would not be available on March 21st, which makes Mr Dellaverson's statement inaccurate. He could not have known what all of March's numbers would be with more than a week in the month left. So why would he make that statement? Probably because when they saw the February numbers, they chased after the March numbers on a week by week basis. By the time that March 21st hit, the trend was very clear. Ascribing such a responsibility to any executive, agency, or private business for that matter, where this is not part of their core competency is severely divorced from reality. The expectation that Lee Sander and the MTA should possess economic analysis that is superior to that of professional financial analysts and economists is so ridiculous that neither Mr. Sander, nor the MTA should be expected to answer for that. Such an absurd view, however, does help to concoct the conspiracy theories that I've been reading. I believe that a man who is the chief executive of a multibillion dollar enterprise should know the difference between up and down. If that's not within your core competency, then you're in the wrong line of work. That's an absurdly simplistic and reductionist reply. You have to establish that Lee Sander, or the MTA should posess economic forcasting that is superior to what is found in the best financial institutions in the world. You won't establish that because you can't So, at this stage, we still have no solid evidence that Lee Sander knew about the revised revenue projections when he was promoting the 40 year plan. Just a conspiracy theory. |
|
|
| (639190) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by MJF on Tue Jun 24 20:43:15 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:43:36 2008. I really do believe that Sander simply jumped the gun in that speech. Foolish to make a speech like that before the funding for services are guaranteed. |
|
|
| (639192) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jun 24 20:47:26 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Russ on Tue Jun 24 20:41:33 2008. It's easier to defer projects that haven't begun yet than projects that are underway. MTA's plate is pretty full right now.Let's see what happens as current projects get wrapped up. South Ferry will open for business early in 2009 and the underground portion of Fulton will open later in 2009, correct? As those dates come up, work crews will be freed up, contracts fully paid and the agency will be able to reevaluate demands vs. resources... |
|
|
| (639257) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 22:09:23 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 13:19:01 2008. Until the technology can be actually shown to improve service, it may be time to delay future implementation of CBTC signaling. MTA and NYCT especially are heavy with analysts working out of expensive real estate. Might be time to cool that line of work off, and focus on essential personnel.Without those analysts, much of the work that is necessary for the system to function doesn't happen. |
|
|
| (639259) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jun 24 22:10:46 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 22:09:23 2008. You are 100% wrong. yo don't need bean counters, have you ever read how the old BMT was run? |
|
|
| (639266) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 22:18:01 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 18:59:19 2008. No problem there ... but somehow I think he got really bad information, only question is from where. I've been rooting for Sander because he's so different from what was prior, so let's just say I'm more curious about this than I would otherwise be. :) |
|
|
| (639267) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 22:18:52 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jun 24 11:40:31 2008. ION does not object to borrowing for infrastructure, it is right and proper that such expenses be amortized over 30 to 50 years. But NO BORROWING for operating costs. Those must be paid as you go, but they too must be paid: Both from the fare box and from the tax jar.The LION would be well advised that the MTA cannot operate in the red, by law. (READ: they cannot borrow for operating costs). The LION would also be advised that the more you borrow TODAY, the more you have to pay under the heading "operating costs". (part of MTA's problem these days: much of the work done to climb out of the problem created by deferred maintenance was paid for through debt). I'm sure even LIONs know that you can't borrow money limitlessly. |
|
|
| (639275) | |
Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010) |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 22:25:33 2008, in response to M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 05:10:17 2008. Dramatized 2010-2014 capital budget problemsThe bigger issue is that they are deferring these projects to a capital program that is already underfunded. I doubt it is as serious as that AMNY article suggests, but still.... On another note, Selkirk, I'm surprised that your overreacting to ventilation plants being delayed. Yes, ventilation is important, but the system will continue to exist, and, for the record, an amount of fans will prevent the casualties caused by a biological or chemical attack in the subway. |
|
|
| (639308) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 22:54:24 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 22:18:01 2008. To be honest, I do like his attitude, and he is undeniably a breath of fresh air with regard to labor relations. But I do think that he crossed the line at the Cooper Union speech.Hopefully he can indeed keep things cooler on the labor relations side; he can hardly do worse than the last Chairman...... |
|
|
| (639312) | |
Re: Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 22:55:22 2008, in response to Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010), posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 22:25:33 2008. The "terror thing" was merely a reaction to some of the hysteria of others. However, with all the plastic components in subway cars these days, there is an enhanced risk should a car go up in flames. And thus ventilation is one thing you do NOT cut back on when money is tight. Back in the 70's and 80's, there were some pretty serious "smoke conditions" which is why they did a lot of work on the ventilation systems in the years after when they did get their hands on some cash.Yes, the "terror" thing was a bit over the top, unfortunately that seems to be the only pushbutton that works ... "in these times." :( |
|
|
| (639324) | |
Re: Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010) |
|
|
Posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 23:04:40 2008, in response to Re: Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010), posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 22:55:22 2008. The type of toxic smoke given off in plastic fires would kill people with or without ventilation.I don't know about the NTTs, but there ARE plastics that will not give off toxic smoke when in fire, and they are used in facades. |
|
|
| (639374) | |
Re: Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010) |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jun 24 23:57:18 2008, in response to Re: Delayed until when? (was: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010), posted by j trainloco on Tue Jun 24 23:04:40 2008. I'm not so sure of what the body and seat components are built with, but most of the electronics can be problematic, as well as track fires. The policy now is to shut down the railroad entirely until the smoke condition clears. With good ventilation, this shutdown time isn't as severe as it would be if the ventilation wasn't as good, and therefore maintaining the systems and improving them are, at least to me, a higher priority than hosing down platforms or several other "priorities." |
|
|
| (639401) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jun 25 02:37:08 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jun 24 22:10:46 2008. You are 100% wrong. yo don't need bean counters, have you ever read how the old BMT was run?Yes...it was run into the ground. It went bankrupt. |
|
|
| (639404) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed Jun 25 02:55:29 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by JournalSquare-K-Car on Tue Jun 24 13:17:37 2008. God wouldn't want anyone to just sit and watch those who make the "laws of a nation" break the laws of humanity.I doubt that running short of money for a few projects for a few years counts as breaking the laws of humanity but that's just me. Sander may be guilty of being over-optimistic. He's not guilty of regularly engaging in bestiality. |
|
|
| (639411) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jun 25 04:49:16 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by SMAZ on Wed Jun 25 02:37:08 2008. Ayup... |
|
|
| (639420) | |
Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010 |
|
|
Posted by MJF on Wed Jun 25 05:20:50 2008, in response to Re: M.T.A. Cuts Delay Some Big Projects Until 2010, posted by trainsarefun on Tue Jun 24 22:54:24 2008. Everyone says he's a breath of fresh air for labor relations but I haven't seen anything substantially different yet.What do you base this on? |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
