Today’s Headlines

  • NYPD Sergeant Perfectly Acts Out the Ethos of Placard Culture (Post)
  • Our Placard-Issuing, Big Oil-Suing Mayor Won’t Stop His Daily SUV Expedition to Park Slope (News)
  • If DOT’s 14th St Busway Plan Beats Weaker Plans, Why Didn’t DOT Study a Stronger Busway? (Voice)
  • Port Authority Looking Ahead to the Next Trans-Hudson Transit Tunnel After Gateway (NYT, AMNY)
  • MTA Sending Office Workers Out to Assist Subway Passengers During System Failures (News)
  • The Times Managed to Mangle an Op-Ed in Favor of Congestion Pricing
  • Five Electeds Call on City Hall to Make Walking Safer at Gas Station By Sunset Park School (Bklyn Paper)
  • Turning Semi-Truck Driver Hits Woman, Kills Her Dog in West Side Crosswalk (Post)
  • The Real Joke Is That Joe Lhota Only Works Part-Time at the MTA IRL (AMNY)
  • Make It Stop (Bklyn Paper)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Vooch

    It’s always illuminating to read about 2 armed gangs battling over car storage on our streets.

    It’s worth reading the Post article linked as the first piece today. Very telling in so many ways.

  • Maggie

    The Post says the semi truck driver hit a woman and killed her dog in the crosswalk at West 57th Street and Ninth Ave?

    I could nitpick all day whether that’s UWS, Hell’s Kitchen or Midtown but not UES, surely.

    Hope the bloodshed by an innocent pet compels NYPD and DOT to do an even better job than they do when it’s everyday pedestrians and cyclists… I notice NYPD didn’t even mention whether the dog was wearing a helmet.

  • Larry Littlefield

    The Port Authority is going to hire a consultant? Good God. How about finding out what it’s own engineers, those of Amtrak and NYCT and NJT, can produce for free?

    https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/the-gateway-tunnel-and-new-bus-terminal-more-money-that-new-jersey-and-the-port-authority-can-afford-and-more-time-than-they-have/

    New York City Transit has multiple mylar copied of everything it has done. When the Twin Towers came down it rebuilt a mile of tunnel in less than one year — based on 90 year old plans it still had.

    It has a copy of the plans for the two-level 63rd Street tunnel, with commuter rail and subway. That tunnel’s commuter rail level wasn’t tall enough for bi-level cars, and the tunnel leaked. They’ll have the plans for the leak. Get the plans, make the commuter rail level taller, and make it more water tight. Find out who the companies are who build underwater oil platforms, send them the plans with an RFP.

    The know ridership from the Hub Bound surveys. NJT knows origins and destinations in New Jersey. They know how many people walk from the PABT, and how many transfer to subway/PATH anyway, and might do so at Secaucus if NJT was priced cheap enough to there so it cost the same to transfer there vs. go all the way in to Manhattan and walk. Which would make it cheaper to travel in NJ.

    What is the point of a(nother) consultant contract? The contract itself?

  • sbauman

    New York City Transit has multiple mylar copied of everything it has done. When the Twin Towers came down it rebuilt a mile of tunnel in less than one year — based on 90 year old plans it still had.

    That was one of the problems. A twice in a lifetime opportunity was missed.

    The 7th Ave local suffers from not having a layup track south of Chambers. Cortlandt St could have been rebuilt as a 3 track station. The TA missed this opportunity when the WTC was originally built and when it was rebuilt 35 years later.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Because interlockings are by far the most expensive part of signal systems, the tendency has been to remove them, not add them. And they still have the South Ferry Loop as a lay-up area.

    Worse was the absence of pocket tracks on the Second Avenue. But then, like the E-train in Jamaica, that is only a “temporary” terminal while the rest is built, right?

  • Flakker

    having county sheriffs terrorize city employee lawbreakers and make it their explicit mandate to do so would be a: funny and b: pay for itself in reality TV ratings

  • Simon Phearson

    The NYPD is the #1 reason I won’t be shedding any tears when the Supreme Court invalidates compulsory union dues for public employees. And I’m usually pro-union.

  • bolwerk

    Unions exist to push policies that benefit their members, and the police are supposed to be impartial enforcers of the law. That should seem to make the very existence of police unions raise numerous due process and equal protection questions.

    Of course, SCOTUS probably thinks the police are the only people sacrosanct to have a union.

  • Simon Phearson

    The argument is that being forced to pay for services you receive the benefit of is a violation of the First Amendment. It’s an awful argument but a likely winner before this Court, and may well point to the end of all organized labor in the U.S. It might make some of the Trump-supporting populists on this blog think twice about where their never-Hillaryism left them.

  • Larry Littlefield

    “It might make some of the Trump-supporting populists on this blog…”

    Are there any?

  • bolwerk

    AIUI the argument goes you shouldn’t have to pay an organization whose views you don’t agree with, even if they provide you services. I’d just love to see that logic extended to me as a customer of a number of privately owned utilities (with a monopoly franchse, no less) with lobbying arms. But of course private companies are people, unlike unions.

    Maybe I haven’t been paying much attention, but I haven’t noticed many Trump supporters here other than the occasional “Libertarian” who sneaks in to try to whine about Big Gubbermint.

  • Simon Phearson

    A few; they obviously don’t out themselves often. Vooch is one.

  • Larry Littlefield

    I get the feeling he’s a “Libertarian” who sneaks in to try to whine about Big Gubbermint,” in Bowlerk’s terms. If there is anywhere in the U.S. where that kind of whining is appropriate, this is it.

  • Simon Phearson

    Pick below the surface. He’s absolutely a Trump-over-Hillary supporter. He might cast it in “pox on both houses” terms, but there are plenty of people here who thought Trump would be better for the country than Hillary, and some of them still do.

  • Simon Phearson

    AIUI the argument goes you shouldn’t have to pay an organization whose views you don’t agree with, even if they provide you services.

    Not precisely. It’s been a longstanding First Amendment principle, in the union context, that you can’t be compelled to pay dues to fund a union’s political activities, but you can be compelled to pay dues relating to the union’s operations and collective bargaining efforts. So for a long time, the fees have been split: you pay dues for the benefits you receive and you can opt, if you wish, to pay additional dues to support the union’s political activities.

    The case now before the Court will dissolve that distinction. The argument being, apparently, that even negotiating for better pay and benefits is tantamount to engaging in “political speech,” so that the longstanding distinction between political fees and agency fees is not tenable.

    The problem with the whole analysis is that “bargaining units” are just units of government. They’re like municipalities, counties, etc. – ways of organizing people. If you don’t like how they’re run, you vote in elections and engage in advocacy. If you don’t want better benefits and pay, then you push for worse benefits and pay.

    But people have gotten into the habit of thinking of union membership like it’s a political statement. Like it’s not just, “I work on the factory floor of a Ford factory and am part of a collective unit negotiating with management,” and instead, “I am a union supporter and I essentially support Democratic politics.” That’s not what they are, that’s not what they need to be, but that’s how conservatives think of them, and guess who has a majority of seats on the Supreme Court?

  • Larry Littlefield

    I don’t think many people voted “for” either one, and the question wasn’t who would do better, it was who would do worse.

    Do you want the economic, social and political decline of our country to be competently managed and deferred? Or do you want to get the whole thing over with in a big hurray?

  • Simon Phearson

    I don’t think many people voted “for” either one, and the question wasn’t who would do better, it was who would do worse.

    Yes, and look at what they stuck us with.

    Do you want the economic, social and political decline of our country to be competently managed and deferred? Or do you want to get the whole thing over with in a big hurray?

    I don’t know how anyone can be sitting here now, at this point in the Trump presidency, and ask this question seriously. Do you want to ask a Dreamer this question? A gay or transgender person? Christ, a woman? Do you want to ask one of those blue collar workers we heard so much about after the election, whose jobs are still disappearing, and whose union organization rights aren’t going to be too far behind?

    No, it’s not rational to “want to get the whole thing over with in a big [hurrah/hurry].” That is the sort of thing you muse about if you’re a white straight male without much to lose and no idea of how bad it could get. That is the sort of thing you might believe is preferable if you’re totally ignorant of the rise of authoritarians in other countries across the world and what happens when these kinds of collapses actually happen. What you’re eagerly anticipating is the deaths of thousands, if not millions of people. Through active neglect, environmental destruction, economic disaster, denial of access to adequate healthcare, increased violence, etc., and then on to prison camps, concentration camps, paramilitary groups, and all the rest.

  • neroden

    I didn’t actually know that the five counties of NYC still had county sherriffs!

    The county sherriffs are clearly the ones we will need on our side to arrest the crime gang known as the NYPD. They seem honest. Get rid of NYPD and report crimes directly to the county sherriffs.