Here's the Latest!

Wednesday October 1, 2:13 PM - Newsday, "Ride Over for Fare Drop"

Ride Over for Fare Drop
by Ray Sanchez
NEWSDAY

September 25, 2003

It was a heady spring and summer when transit riders clung to the faint hope of wresting their hard-earned dollars from the mighty Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
It was nice while it lasted.
Now that the State Court of Appeals has decided not to hear the case seeking to roll back the steepest fare increase in history, it remains to be seen which MTA will emerge from the fracas.
Will it be the agency accused of cooking its books and exaggerating the size of its deficit to justify a fare hike?
Or will it be the embattled public authority so shaken by scandal that it's forced to deliver on promises to clean house?
"The MTA had a worse season than the Mets," said Gene Russianoff, staff lawyer for the Straphangers Campaign, the riders' advocacy group behind the effort to roll back the fare. "It was a big wake-up call."
You saw it coming with July's ruling by the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court: The MTA was within its rights when it raised the base fare by 33 percent in May but could have explained its financial straits more clearly.
That was essentially the end of the legal battle.
In May and June, two State Supreme Court justices ordered rollbacks of increases for rail and bus fares and bridge and tunnel tolls on grounds that the authority had deceived the public.
Justice Louis York, a regular subway rider from the Upper West Side, wrote that the deceptive practices "undermined the public's confidence in the MTA" and that public hearings were "based on the false and misleading premise that the MTA was in worse financial condition than it knew itself to be."
Evidence in the case included reports by the city and state comptrollers showing that the MTA shifted surplus funds in order to convince riders a hike was needed. State Comptroller Alan Hevesi said the agency's financial practices "made the public hearing process a sham."
But the Appellate Division ruled that no laws had been broken and that it was essentially up to the State Legislature to determine whether laws should be strengthened to require greater financial transparency by the MTA.
Now, the question is which face the MTA will put forth.
In recent months, the agency has been pushed to make substantial changes in the way it reports its finances. It has sought the advice of a prominent panel of financial experts. It released its preliminary budget earlier than usual. It has vowed to issue four-year financial plans with regular updates throughout the year.
Still, the agency, while pushing its financial reforms, has continued to fight more stringent transparency efforts.
"They're resisting on an independent budget office," Russianoff said. "They're resisting changing the way the inspector general is appointed. They've said no to a computerized registry of its contracts."
In fact, when the MTA board meets at its Madison Avenue headquarters this morning, Russianoff said he expects to be there to remind board chairman Peter Kalikow of the words he uttered when the 50-cent fare increase was approved on March 6.
"Today's financial plan addresses the overriding concerns our customers expressed in our public outreach effort," Kalikow said that day. "They were clear in terms of not wanting to see any service cuts. There are none."
Kalikow needs to be reminded of these words because when the MTA released its preliminary budget in late July - to the astonishment of many observers, months earlier than in years past - the proposal included a range of service cuts. They included reductions in cleaning subway cars, stations and buses, maintaining infrastructure and signals, inspecting subway cars and overhauling buses, station elevator operators and graffiti-removal crews.
Still, it was a heady spring and summer for those who rely on the subway.
"It was like being in a Frank Capra movie," Russianoff said. "The other day I was at a soccer game with my girls, and we took the bus back from Prospect Park. The driver got out and said, 'You're Gene Russianoff. Thanks so much for exposing what the agency has been doing.' He did it in front of my daughters. I don't know what they thought, but it made me very proud. It made me re-realize that there are hundreds of thousands of people who depend on a decent transit system and who care about how the subways are run."

Copyright © 2003, Newsday, Inc.

Wednesday October 1, 2:12 PM - Court of Appeal Denies Fare Hike Case

NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
More Info: Gene Russianoff (917) 575-9434
September 23, 2003
Eric Schneiderman (212) 928-5578
Thomas Shanahan (212) 867-1100

“It’s the End of the Line in the Fight Against the $2 Fare,”
Riders Group Says After Court of Appeals Refuses to Hear MTA Suit

Vows to Continue to Press for Reforms
to Make MTA More Open And Accountable

The NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign today said it would take no further legal action to contest the current $2 city subway and bus fare, following today’s refusal of the Court of Appeals to grant permission for the group to appeal a decision that reversed a lower court ruling that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority roll back the $2 fare and hold new public hearings.
“It’s the end of the line in the fight against the $2 fare,” said Gene Russianoff, NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign attorney. “We fought the hardest we could and salute the many public officials and transit riders and workers who were with us.”
The campaign vowed to continue to press for reforms to make the MTA more open and accountable, such as laws to create a more independent MTA Inspector General; a new MTA Independent Budget Office; a computerized registry of MTA contracts; and registration of its lobbyists.
On August 7th, the group had filed a petition asking for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeals the July 15th decision of a five-judge panel of the Appellate Division-First Department. That decision reversed a lower court ruling ordering a fare rollback. The Court of Appeals is the highest court in New York State.
“I am extremely disappointed at the ruling,” said State Senator Eric Schneiderman, lead counsel for the Straphangers Campaign and State Senator for the 31st District in Manhattan and the Bronx. “But I will aggressively pursue administrative and legislative means to ensure that the kind of deception by the MTA that was documented by two trial courts never happens again.”
“Our case will have a lasting legacy, serving as a warning to government agencies that they will be called to account when they don’t level with the public,” said Tom Shanahan of the law firm Shanahan & Associates, P.C., who is also representing the campaign.
—more, more, more—
Page Two—Fare Lawsuit Appeal /Release


“The intense public interest in the case has already forced some changes in the way the MTA communicates with the public,” said Brian O’Dwyer of the law firm of O’Dwyer and Bernstein. He noted, for example, that New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi has proposed new financial reporting regulations for the MTA.
The lawsuit was brought by the NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign, New York State Senate Democratic Leader David A. Paterson and several transit riders. Transport Workers Union Local 100 President Roger Toussaint has also intervened on the side of the plaintiffs.
On May 14th, State Supreme Court Justice Louis York ordered the MTA to roll back fares by May 28th on city subways and buses, the Long Island Rail Road, MetroNorth and Long Island Bus, as well as halt the closing of 62 subway station booths. Justice York found that the MTA had provided “misleading financial information” while holding public hearings on fare increases.
Justice York’s decision was automatically stayed when the MTA appealed the decision.
The base fare for New York City subways and buses rose by 33.3% on Sunday May 4th, the commuter railroad fares went up an average of 25% on Thursday, May 1st.
The lawsuit noted that in December 2002, the MTA approved a financial plan that projected a surplus of only $24.6 million at the end of 2002, with gaps of $235.9 million in 2003 and $715.6 million in 2004.
However, according to New York State Comptroller Alan Hevesi’s affidavit in the suit, the MTA “moved resources off budget and from one year to another, that had the effect of grossly reducing the projected size of the 2002 surplus from $537.1 million to $24.6 million.” Without these actions, the MTA’s surplus in 2003 would have been $83 million, according to Hevesi.
In addition to the Straphangers Campaign and Senator Paterson, the plaintiffs include seven transit riders: Gene Russianoff, Edith Prentiss, Katharine Roberts, Keith Causin, Kevin McRae, Farrah Steide, and Alexander Wood.
The plaintiffs were also represented by Gary Silverman, Laura Gentile, and Steven Aripotch of O’Dwyer and Bernstein; Anthony LoPresti of the law firm Shanahan and Associates, P.C.; Arthur Schwartz and Daniel Bright of the law firm of Kennedy, Schwartz and Cure; and attorney Lisa De Lindsay.

-30-

Thursday July 17, 1:23 PM - Daily News Editorial, July 16, 2003

New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
One more round for fare fight

Wednesday, July 16th, 2003

Even though a five-judge panel yesterday blocked a rollback of mass transit fares, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority didn't exactly emerge triumphant. If the agency cannot truly and permanently change the way it handles the public's money, there should be legislation to force it to reform.
Two lower courts had barred the new fare and toll increases on the subways, buses, commuter rail lines and MTA bridges and tunnels. The reasoning: The MTA board had approved the hikes while disseminating misleading info and, therefore, its vote was invalid.
The appellate judges, however, decided there is no legal obligation for the MTA to tell the public the extent of its budget problems when seeking a fare increase. Thus, the agency followed the law, even though it posted factually inaccurate budget stats in the subways before the hearings.
Public hearings, yes. A properly informed public for those hearings, no. Ridiculous. How can a misinformed public - force-fed the misinformation, no less - capably argue its points?
Even if the appellate court is right on the law, it's wrong on common sense. The case should go to the Court of Appeals for review. Realistically, it is unlikely the $1.50 fare will return. But that's not the entire reason to pursue the matter. The overriding issue is the agency's obligation to the public. Its finances must be transparent, not veiled in mystery, as they currently are.
MTA chairman Peter Kalikow says he's improving things. But if the agency falters, the Legislature must step in and rewrite the law to mandate openness. The appellate court invited as much, opining that "while it would be desirable from the public's perspective to have the MTA's budget processes completely transparent and open for detailed inspection," it's up to lawmakers, not judges, to set such a requirement.
First, though, let the state's top court weigh in. The millions of people who rely on the MTA deserve at least that much consideration.

Tuesday July 15, 4:32 PM - Straphangers Campaign Response to Appellate Court Decision

To read the Straphangers Campaign news release, go to http://www.straphangers.org/tolldecision/appeal.htm

Tuesday July 15, 1:11 PM - Fare Hike Stands as Appellate Court Rules

A State Appellate Court panel ruled 5-0 today that the MTA did not violate the law in its public notices, overturning Justice York's May 14th decision.

For the moment, the fare hike and token booth closings stand. The Straphangers Campaign will appeal the decision.

To read today's decision, go to: http://www.straphangers.org/farehike/july15decision.pdf

We will keep you up to date as we learn more. Thank you.

Thursday June 26, 10:41 AM - June 10, 2003: Appellate Court Hearing News Conference / Rally

Cut and paste into your browser: http://www.straphangers.org/tolldecision/appellate_hearing.htm

Thursday June 26, 10:38 AM - June 5, 2003: Toll Rollback Decision News Release

Cut and paste into your browser: http://www.straphangers.org/tolldecision/toll_reaction.htm

Thursday June 26, 10:35 AM - June 5, 2003: Toll Rollback Decision

Cut and paste into your browser: http://www.straphangers.org/tolldecision/toll.decision.pdf

_____________________________________________________________
www.straphangers.org | www.nypirg.org