Today’s Headlines

  • Washington Will Investigate Why NYC Transit Projects Cost So Much (NYT)
  • Cynthia Nixon Is Doing a Public Service by Talking About Cuomo’s MTA Neglect (AMNY)
  • Meanwhile, Governor Sideshow Is At It Again (Politico 1, 2NYTPost)
  • Brad Lander Is Scraping @NYCTSubway for Data on Signal Failures (NYT)
  • Scott Rechler Talks Pricing, Value Capture, and Gateway With City & State
  • Electeds and Manhattan CB 3 Protest M22 Service Cuts (Lo-Down)
  • Responding to Suicides, Diaz Sr. Wants Uber Regs (News, Post); Related: Joshi on WNYC
  • State Bill Would Empower TEAs to Ticket Moving Violations (WNYC)
  • Richard Brown: No Charges for Hit-and-Run Driver Who Killed Lorenzo Anderson (WABC, News)
  • Think This Driver Was Following Truck Route Laws? (Bx Times)
  • Your Daily Reminder That NYPD Does Not Care About Traffic Violence (Bklyner)
  • These Teenagers Are the Stewards of Subway Wikipedia (NYT)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Fool

    ref: Washington Will Investigate Why NYC Transit Projects Cost So Much (NYT)


    Following is complete conspiracy theory though when combined with Cynthia Nixon.

    As Cynthia Nixon is a credible primary challenger and the primary is roughly 9 months from now. The GAO report is also due roughly 9 months from now. Cuomo will carrot and stick key Democratic voting blocks such as the Unions so he can win the primary.

    The unions may or may not see the end of the gravy train coming with the GAO report so they may require much larger and longer term bribes from Cuomo. So no cost reform, likely expansion (as all the “action plans” so far have been.

    Cuomo cannot raise the following taxes and still be viable candidate for president, especially considering how terrible services are in NYS:
    -Real Estate Taxes
    -Income Taxes
    -Sales Taxes
    -Definitely not congestion pricing

    So the game theory outcome is:
    -No cost control before primary.
    -Long Term cost increases before primary.
    -Special Improvement Districts (more marketable)
    -Use the IDC to appropriate NYC income tax

  • Larry Littlefield

    Cynthia Nixon wants more money spent on schools and less on other things, at higher tax rates. Just remember that.

    And by the way, the DeBlasio Administration has once again removed the tables that would allow this chart to be repeated from city budget documents. Those budget documents from February 2018 start in FY 2018 — no comparison with past years.

    Then again, the state budget documents are intentionally incomprehensible. They are cheating the people of this city, and they know it.

    Thanks to retroactive pension increases, school spending has soared at the expense of higher taxes and lower spending on other things. Nixon wants more of it.

    And Cuomo has been draining the city to a ridiculously unjust extreme to favor the rest of the state. His Republican opponent will presumably be in favor of more of that.

    No one calls out the school system and retroactive pension increases, or the rest of the state. So they keep demanding more.

  • The primary is in less than 6 months.

  • Fool

    You’re right. September felt further away.

  • 1ifbyrain2ifbytrain

    So, Beware of Darkness?

    “Herzberg was killed March 18 as she walked her bike across a dark street in Tempe, a Phoenix”

    “Herzberg was seen in a dashcam video released last week from the self-driving SUV that hit her. It shows her walking a bicycle across a darkened road moments before the fatal impact.”

  • bolwerk

    I seriously doubt CP has a decisive impact on anyone running for statewide or citywide office. It might have an impact at the district level in some districts, and that could go either way.

  • Joe R.

    Increasing school spending is the progressive’s version of trickle down economics. Neither one does what the supposed goal is, and both enrich a tiny fraction of the population at the expense of everyone else. Inflation-adjusted school spending per capita is about twice what it was when you and I attended school. Despite that, in general the quality of education is worse. Throwing more money at failing schools doesn’t fix the problem because the problem isn’t lack of funding. It’s mostly lack of good parenting but that subject seems to be taboo. Back when we went to school parents generally supported whatever the schools needed to do in order to educate their children. That including backing up any punishments meted out to disruptive students. It also included actually attending parent-teacher conferences. I’m not saying some subset of parents still don’t do those things now. However, in general schools succeed or fail based more on the quality of the parenting their students receive than the amount of their funding.

    We’ve heard for years about how smaller class sizes, pre-K, and so forth were supposed to improve the outcome of education. Of course, all of these things increase the number of UFT members, and are therefore somewhat self-serving. We hear very little about any remediations which might improve things if they don’t involve spending more money.

    And all this is in addition to those retroactive (and probably illegal) pension increases which did absolutely nothing to improve quality of education as they were simply throwing more money at past labor.

    The only bright spot is it seems the public is finally getting wise to the fact trickle-down economics don’t work. How much longer until they catch on to the fact spending more money on schools doesn’t result in better outcomes? Hopefully it’ll be very soon.

  • Joe R.

    Good analysis but I wonder if pandering to unions is a winning strategy any more even in New York State. Doing so would certainly hurt Cuomo nationally. Only a matter of time before all 50 states are “right-to-work” states. And the Supreme Court may well vote in favor of the workers in the Janus case, essentially allowing workers to not pay union dues if they don’t want to. The gravy train is indeed coming to an end for traditional labor unions.

    The end is also near for trickle-down economics. In the final analysis this could help workers more than labor unions ever did. If the wealthy face a choice of seeing most of their “profits” go towards taxes if they don’t reinvest them in equipment/workers, they’ll undoubtedly choose the latter. And workers will be the beneficiaries. It’s no secret things were much better for the average worker when the wealthy had very high marginal tax rates.

  • This is some straight-up caveman crap. Bad parenting? Unbelievable.

    I had assumed that you’d never serve up anything more wrong than the stuff about elevated bike lanes. But you sure proved me wrong.

  • Joe R.

    Well then explain to me why educational outcomes are worse now, despite throwing twice as much money at schools? It’s certainly not from lack of funding (and to be fair lack of funding is a problem in some states, but not NYS). What has changed between 40-50 years ago and now? Two trends that I see. One is the failure of parents to, well, act like parents. They want to be their child’s “friend” instead. And as such they’re afraid to criticize literally anything their children might do, no matter how wrong it is. The second problem is absentee parents. Unfortunately, the continued decline in worker compensation has made both parents working (assuming there are even two parents) a reality. I can’t blame the parents for this but it’s nevertheless a factor in educational outcomes. My mother was home when we came back from school. She often helped us with homework problems or read to us. A parent obviously can’t do that if they’re not home. Again, I’m not blaming the parents for this but we see the results in poorer educational outcomes.

    The bottom line though is the schools don’t need more money. Anyone asking for that should be called out.

  • Joe R.
  • Driver

    Think This Driver Was Following Truck Route Laws?
    While that truck might be over length, Westchester Ave is a truck route. The clearance under the El varies along the entire route, and gets very low around the area of Third ave.