Andrea Bernstein

The fight over the controversial Prospect Park West bike lane came to an end when a judge dismissed claims that the city failed to go through proper channels when it installed the two-way protected path.

Brooklyn's Prospect Park West bike lane (photo by Kate Hinds)

Justice Bert Bunyan of Brooklyn has dismissed a lawsuit against a Brooklyn bike lane that has become a flash point in Mayor Michael Bloomberg's efforts to re-organize street space to promote biking, walking and more sustainable modes of transportation. (Full ruling here.)

This is the first time a court has ruled on whether the city has legal authority to install bike lanes at a rapid clip.

The suit, which had prominent backers include former city transportation commissioner Iris Weinshall, and her husband, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, who live along Prospect Park West, alleged the city manipulated data and hadn't properly consulted the community in building the lane.

The lawsuit, filed at the end of March after a particularly brutal and unhappy winter for New Yorkers -- including piles of snow, endless blizzards, and seemingly interminable transit delays -- seemed to crystallize emotions of some New Yorkers, that bike lanes were being imposed on communities.

Though bike lanes, including the Prospect Park West one, were built at the behest of the local community board, the rap on them -- , feeds into a vulnerability of the Mayor's -- that he does things by fiat.

His seemingly-unrelated and ultimately disastrous appointment of former Schools Chancellor Cathie Black in the fall poured gasoline on that perception, as did his initial dismissiveness about the impact of the blizzard of 2010, when he recommended stranded  New Yorkers go see a Broadway show while they were waiting for their roads to be plowed.

All of this created a political atmosphere where going after Mayor Bloomberg on bike lanes seemed an easy target.   When the lawsuit was filed, it was noticed.

But the snows of winter eventually did melt, and the bike lane has proven popular in the community, with polls showing around two thirds of Brooklynites wanting to keep it, or keep it with modifications.

In an emailed statement, the city transportation commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan, said she considered the matter settled.

"This decision results in a hands-down victory for communities across the city. The plaintiffs have been dead wrong in their unsupported claims about the bike path and DOT’s practices,” said DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan in a statement emailed by the city.

But at the end of the day, the judge did not rule on the merits of the bike lane.  Plaintiffs didn't get to make the argument that the lane had adverse affects.  Instead, lawyers for the plaintiffs found themselves arguing mostly on a technical point --whether the bike lane was a "trial." The point was crucial, because plaintiffs would have to have filed their lawsuit much earlier if the bike was intended to be permanent.

At the end of the day, and the judge ruled resoundingly the project wasn't experimental. (Plaintiffs had gone so far as to make the abbreviation EBL -- "experimental bike lane" -- in legal filings.)  The opponents “presented no evidence that D.O.T. viewed the bikeway as a pilot or temporary project," the Judge said in his ruling.   That meant they'd missed their deadline.

The judge did say the city had failed to properly answer a freedom of information request filed by the lawsuit's opponents; it ordered the city to do so.   He did not rule on whether the city manipulated data, because the complaint was dismissed on timeliness issues.

The attorney for the plaintiffs, Jim Walden said in a statement, "Although we respectfully disagree with the Court's determination on the statute of limitations, we will need time to review his comprehensive analysis before deciding on our options."

The U.S. Rail System, 1918 (Photo: Railway Maps of the World)

To the list of things not to like about Penn Station -- the ceilings are too low, there’s no natural light, the food is unmemorable, add this:  You can’t find a display map of Amtrak train routes.

From Penn Station, you can take the train from Penn Station to Montreal, or Miami, or Montana, but if you stand under the departure board, author Mark Ovenden says, “you can’t see a map for love nor money.”

Ovenden, wrote the book, Railway Maps of the World.  (See a slideshow of samples here). We’ve come down here to New York’s Penn station to evaluate the maps, because it’s a confluence of railway systems -- Amtrak, New Jersey Transit, and the MTA subway and Long Island Railroad. But we get stuck at the Amtrak, because we can’t find a map.

“In Europe,” Ovenden says, “in a lot of the big old stations, there were these great big tiled maps made from ceramic or painted on the wall. There’s one at Bordeaux for example, a massive map of the whole of the south of France.”

But in Penn station we find advertisements where we think a train map should be. For food, drink, even train travel. An Amtrak spokesman concedes there’s no wall map, but says you can find the information in other ways. Ovenden says that’s missing the point -- and an opportunity. A map, he says, is an advertisement for travel. It pries open your mind.

“These wonderful display maps, really give you the sense of getting on board, the joy of the journey and the experience of traveling by train.”

At the Amtrak information desk, the agents hand do hand out booklets, with a map you can fold out. The map looks nice, a network of red lines stretching over a green background. It shows mountains, waterways, and cities. But then Ovenden lays the current map next to a train map from a hundred years ago.

I do a double-take. The lines on the old map are so thick that they’re barely discernable, one from the other. “We had almost a railway in almost every town and hamlet in the U.S.,” Ovenden says. “The old 1918 map looks like the blood vessels and the arteries and the veins of a country. It was the lifeblood of this country and when you look at it now, it’s just a skeleton.”

Through World War II, the railways were booming in the U.S  But after the war, the country made a choice. There was a huge infusion of federal funds into the interstate highway system. Air travel took off. Passenger rail was passé.  During parts of the day, Penn Station was almost empty. (For a related guest post by Mark Ovenden, click here.)

And, then, the station was torn down, replaced by a thicket of anonymous office towers, Madison Square Garden, and this crabbed space, which is so crabbed even the idea of an Amtrak map is foreign.

There is one part of the station that’s still alive -- the public transport part. NJ Transit has a nice map -- pretty, but smallish. But the MTA just nails it, with huge subway, bus, and Long Island rail maps. Ovenden’s energy ratchets up about ten notches when he sees these maps.” That’s what you need on the wall of the station, that’s fantastic! Look at it!”

We see tourists from France, China, and parts of the United States. These maps are about more than wayfinding.   They’re entertainment. They’re art. “Maps are part of the journey, and we shouldn’t forget that,” Ovenden tells me, as we wrap.

Maps are a vision of who we are, who we can be, and where we can go.

To the list of things not to like about Penn Station — the too-low ceilings, the lack of natural light, the unmemorable food — add this: no display map of Amtrak train routes.

(robotbrainz/Flickr)

After two days of tangled commutes following a derailment, New Jersey Transit is now apologizing for not providing better information to commuters about the incident, which also caused delays for Amtrak and Long Island Rail Road riders. WNYC reporter Bob Hennelly, commuting from New Jersey, ran into NJ Transit brass at Penn Station today.

Bob writes: "It was an unusual site in Penn Station Thursday morning: a phalanx of NJ Transit's top managers lined up ready to be criticized by a ridership put through two days of delays and service disruptions after a derailment."

You can read the rest of his account of the encounter here.

More on the derailment coming soon.

(photo by d-w via Flickr)

A little tidbit from yesterday's Marist poll on biking in New York City that I neglected to pull out.  The poll asked whether group X is "mostly respectful or not respectful when sharing the roads?"

Not surprisingly, the most "not respectful" are taxi drivers, at 78 percent.  Then, really motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are kind of clustered: Motorists are the next, at 53 percent.  Then come cyclists, with a 46 percent not respectful, and pedestrians, at 44 percent.

The most respectful?  Bus drivers.  Only 28 percent are seen as "not respectful," compared to 67 percent "respectful."

Andrea Bernstein, WNYC reporter and director of the Transportation Nation blog, discusses the proposed steep fare and toll increases by The Port Authority of NY and NJ and metro-area politician’s responses. 

Drivers, how would a hike to $15 affect your driving habits? Let us know!

Cars Headed To Holland Tunnel (photo: Kate Hinds)

To be in a vehicle on a Friday afternoon in New York City is a particular kind of hell.  No matter where you go, there are thousands of motorists in front of you, edging their way off the island...by the Holland Tunnel, the George Washington Bridge, the Lincoln Tunnel. We New Yorkers pride ourselves on being able to game the system -- on finding the one traffic-free road out of town, or choosing the bridge or tunnel that will get us to our weekend destination most quickly, or taking the train, or staying put, or figuring out, down to the minute, when is the best possible time to leave to beat it all.  But still, somehow almost every New Yorker has found him- or  herself slowly but inevitably inching towards one of the Port Authority crossings on a Friday afternoon, stuck in a nasty and impenetrable row of barely-moving vehicles.

Funny that, because around 4 pm on Friday is when the Port Authority announced a proposal to raise toll rates to as much as $15 during peak times (from $8) for drivers paying cash – somewhat less for EZ Pass users – and to raise the PATH commuter train fare from $1.75 to $2.75.    It was a decision the bi-state authority has found itself inching inevitably towards.

Now, a digression on the timing of the release. Friday afternoons –- particularly in August-- are when governments dump bad news.  The Port Authority press release not only came late on a Friday, reporters’ email inboxes soon filled with statements of support from business, labor and transit groups.  Then, to further the proposal:  a carefully-worded – and unusual – joint statement from Governors Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie, who together control the Port.  The Governors were careful not to rule out the hikes.   (Keep reading for an explanation of why.)

The release – which cited 9/11-related World Trade Center costs as a major impetus behind the hikes – also came out about a month before 9/11’s tenth anniversary.  If you’re going to ask for tolls to pay for WTC-related costs, August 2011 is a pretty good time to do it. When asked about whether he had any explanation for the timing of the release, a Port Authority spokesman said he’d “take the hit on that. “

Oh yes, there’s another thing. In these fare-hike battles, typically an Authority will put out a true doomsday hike plan. Toll and transit users will howl, as will politicians. Then, at the end, governors will “find” some money, and everyone will feel relieved that the hike is not as bad as initially proposed.

But back to the snarl, and how we got here.

Since the 9/11 attacks, the Port Authority, which owns the 16 acre-site where the Twin Towers once stood, has been responsible for rebuilding the World Trade Center, and for the increasingly apparent security needs of the new One World Trade (aka the “Freedom Tower.”)

In a press release announcing the toll hikes, the Authority put those costs at $11 billion and $6 billion respectively, though that doesn’t account for what the Authority has received in insurance money and some rent payments.

But still.  It hasn’t been hard to trace the growing costs.  Take just one example: the World Trade Center transit hub, which architect Santiago Calatrava once described as evoking “a dove in flight,” was initially projected to cost $2.2 billion.  Its price tag is now $3.44 billion. Some 50,000 commuters from New Jersey use that station, a number that’s expected to rise to 70,000 when the new station is built. About 750,000 riders pass through Grand Central Station each day.

Three point four billion dollars is a lot of money for a train station, but at the same time, it will be at one of the most emotionally resonant locations in the world. Who wants to say 'No, it’s not worth it?'

There’s been a lot of that at the WTC, but that only partly accounts for the Port Authority’s budget problems. The struggling economy has meant both a smaller number of drivers paying tolls, as well as fewer airport fees.

But that still doesn’t paint the whole picture. Unlike, say the NY MTA, which gets (dwindling) subsidies from the government and from taxes, the Port Authority raises all its own revenue from tolls and fees. The bi-state authority is controlled by two governors, in this case, NJ Governor Chris Christie and NY Governor Andrew Cuomo. Both men have cut taxes, and have made it clear they don’t intend to raise any more. Which means the Port Authority revenues look increasingly attractive to both men -- who, after all, do have to pay for infrastructure one way or another.

Governor Christie has asked the Port Authority to use the $1.8 billion it would have contributed to the ARC tunnel to improve roads, which solves part of the budget hole created by Christie’s decision not to raise the gas tax to fund the state highway trust fund, which is broke. And the NY MTA -- controlled by Cuomo --  has asked for $380 million from the Port Authority for the NY MTA’s capital plan.  "These raids are pressuring the fares,” says Kate Slevin, executive director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign. “Christie is using the $1.8 billion to plug holes in the state’s transportation program.”

But Tom Wright, executive director of the Regional Plan Association, backs the plan to raise tolls. “Tolls should not be off-limits. There has to be some way to pay for surface transportation.”

It appears that Governors Christie and Cuomo might be coming to the conclusion that of the various unpalatable options -– raising taxes, turning over more money from their respective state budgets to transportation, or raising tolls -- that raising tolls through the Port Authority, which offers them some political insulation, might be the best of the unsavory choices.  In a carefully worded statement Friday, which underplayed their own control of the Port Authority, the two governors said:

“The Port Authority has informed us of its proposal to dramatically increase tolls on its tunnels and bridges and fares on the PATH.

While we understand the Port Authority leadership's concerns about a potential downgrade to its bond rating if toll increases are not instituted, our primary concern with this proposal is its impact on our respective states’ residents and commercial users of the crossings.”

On Monday Christie gave a further hint that he might support toll hikes in some form. Cutting the Port Authority’s budget “would mean that hundreds of projects would have to be stopped, that thousands of people would be laid off, and that progress on the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site would slow, if not stop. So, governing is about choosing. You’ve got to make choices.”

Cuomo also did not rule out toll hikes, though he called this proposal “a non-starter” at a Tuesday Q&A with reporters. Still, he said, he understood the Port needed money, and said that he’d huddle with his two appointees on the board (the others were appointed by his predecessors or by New Jersey) to review the proposal.  He gave no timetable for the review, but did say: “The knee-jerk response of 'the government needs more money, go to the taxpayer, put your hand in the taxpayers' pocket, take out more money and fund it' --  that doesn’t work for me.  It doesn’t work for the taxpayer and it doesn’t work for the state of New York."

The Port Authority estimates raising tolls would produce $720 million a year, and an additional $290 million a year after 2014, when tolls would rise again.

But it estimates two incentives in the plan –- a steep discount for EZ Pass users and more off-peak hours for trucks -- would ease congestion at tolls by encouraging some 85 percent of drivers to use the tags, and nudging trucks to drive in later where possible. (Truck drivers have argued it's impossible to deliver some goods in the middle of the night, but the Port Authority says previous off-peak incentives have pushed drivers to enter the city at non-peak times.)

There are certainly people for whom a toll rise creates unbearable hardship, particularly people who moved out to the exurbs for larger, cheaper housing and now find themselves paying huge amounts for gas to get to their New York City-based jobs.

But Robert “Buz” Paaswell,  a City College of New York professor, says he did a study for the Tri-Borough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, a division of the NY MTA, on the feasibility of raising tolls. After all, if you raise tolls so much that people just don’t pay them, you’ve done an exercise that may get drivers off the street, but won’t increase revenue. “We did a study for the TBTA, looking at classes of riders, and asked what is the elasticity of different prices. In the end the demand to cross the bridges is so very high, the alternatives are so very low that people are going to gripe and then they are gonig to pay it.”

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (photo courtesy of Gov. Cuomo's flickr page)

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is calling a Port Authority of New York and New Jersey plan to hike Hudson River tolls to as much as $15 for cash-paying drivers during peak hours (from $8) "a non-starter." The proposal would also hike PATH commuter rail fares from $1.75 to $2.75.

But the governor isn't ruling out toll hikes altogether. The governors of New York and New Jersey appoint members to the Port Authority board.

The Port Authority announced late Friday it would be hiking the tolls (which would be be smaller for EZ Pass users) with a joint statement from Governors Cuomo and Christie saying they would need to review the proposal.

The board will hold hearings August 16 and will make a final vote August 19.

At a press conference today in Albany, Cuomo acknowledged the Port Authority needs money.

"To the extent the thrust is: there appear to be long term problems at the Port, and the situation was developing for some time, I think that’s probably right. I’ve heard over the past several months that there are financial issues at the Port and to the extent -- what and how and why  --that’s what we want to find out."

Cuomo added: "I think the proposal is a non-starter for obvious reasons and we’ll now look at what the need for the revenue is."  In a follow-up email, Cuomo spokesman Joshua Vlasto said Cuomo was ruling out this proposal, not any toll hikes whatsoever.

Neither, by the way, did New Jersey Governor Chris Christie at a news conference yesterday, in Burlington City, NJ, where he was asked if he would veto a Port Authority board vote to authorize a toll hike.

"Obviously we both have veto authority over the minutes and we can veto it if we want to, but remember this: the Port made very clear in their announcement on Friday that that would mean that hundreds of projects would have to be stopped, that thousands of people would be laid off, and that progress on the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site would slow, if not stop. So, governing is about choosing. You’ve got to make choices. So, we have a full range of options available to us including the veto.

"Neither one of us are sitting here threatening anything right now because we want to get all the information before we take any public position on it, except to say as you saw in the joint statement that both of us were surprised at the magnitude of the increase that was being asked for and at the condition of the finances of the Port. Now remember just this spring, I finally got my Chairman of the Port Authority in place and so up to this time really Chris Ward’s been running the Port Authority and so these decisions on budgeting and what’s been spent and what’s been wasted have been under Mr. Ward’s purview, not an appointee of the Christie Administration, so now we have General Samson there. He is looking into it for me. He has been controlling things, I think, at a much better rate than has been done before, and I’m pleased with the kind of experience and professionalism that Chairman Samson has brought to his new role but it is a brand-new role. So, we’re digging in. We’re going to find out the information; we’ll see where we go from here."

Cuomo said he'd be huddling with his two appointees, Jeffrey Lynford and Scott Rechler (the other New York board members were appointed by his predecessors) to review the proposal, but his office didn't say whether would have the review completed by August 19.

Some interesting cross-tabs in today's NY1-Marist poll, which shows a pro-bike lane margin even larger than Quinnipiac's:  by a nearly 40 points, 66 to 28, New Yorkers support bike lanes.

Who do you think likes bikes lanes the most? Turns out the answer is Manhattanites (73%), Latinos (72%), and people who earn less than $50,000 a year (70%).  Younger people (under 45) prefer them to older people 68 to 62 percent.

Some other interesting findings in the poll, which delves a bit deeper than Quinnipiac's into people's attitudes:  40 percent say traffic is worse because of bike lanes, 25 percent say it's better, and 30 percent say it makes no difference.

Forty-four percent say the number of bike lanes is about right, 27 percent say there should be more, and less than a quarter want the number of bike lanes decreased.

The poll of 808 NYC adults was taken July 20 through July 27 and has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.

That the group Building America's Future thinks the U.S. should be investing more money in infrastructure is about as shocking as 90 degree temps in August, but in a conference call announcing the release of its new report: "Falling Apart and Falling Behind," former PA Governor Ed Rendell, one of BAF's chairs, gave a particularly urgent call to arms on an infrastructure bank, which would leverage federal funds to funnel private investment into roads, bridges, transit, and rail.

"Congress has to take a deep breath and listen," Rendell said, when asked how to clear the increasingly daunting hurdle of asking the federal government to do anything about infrastructure spending .

"Let’s take the infrastructure bank.  If we create the infrastructure bank and hold it for major transportation projects of regional significance, if  we fund it at $5 billion a year, $5 billion in credit subsidy from federal treasury,  that would produce over  $600 billion in private sector investment, and in the end because these would be loans that would be repaid, in the end cost to the federal treasury? Zero.  Zero.   And we get $600 billion that we could invest in infrastructure repair in the next decade."

Stephen Goldsmith, New York City's Deputy Mayor for Operations, is leaving after just over a year on the job. Goldsmith will be pursuing unnamed  “private-sector opportunities in infrastructure finance.”

UPDATED with analysis:  Stephen Goldsmith, the Deputy Mayor who oversees the NYC DOT, is leaving after just over a year on the job.   Goldsmith will be pursuing unnamed  "private-sector opportunities in infrastructure finance."

Goldsmith, the former Republican Mayor of Indianapolis, was always seen as an ideas man, someone who could help the city think its way through problems like how to deliver services more cheaply.  Goldsmith tended to chew on -- and address -- problems like back-office duplication, how much the city spends on gasoline, and whether the threat of increased fees could prompt people to recycle, save water, or leave their cars at home.

But the Deputy Mayor for Operations is also responsible for things like garbage pick-up and Goldsmith never seemed to easily slip into that role, unlike his predecessor,  Ed Skylar, whoalways seemed to have his fingers on the trigger of his blackberry when it came to operating the city.

Under Goldsmith's watch there was a scaling-back of some Bloomberg transportation initiatives, like protected bike lanes that were to run all the way up First and Second Avenue to Harlem (which Goldsmith addressed in a interview with us here) and a true, physically-segregated Bus Rapid Transit on 34th street.  The bikes now stop in midtown, and the BRT won't be built.

To be sure, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has received strong push-back on his transportation initiatives during the period when Goldsmith was Deputy Mayor, and its possible those projects would have been curtailed no matter which Deputy Mayor was overseeing them.

Any criticism the Mayor received about bike lanes (which remain extremely popular) paled compared to what the Mayor heard after mishandling of a December blizzard left buses stranded and streets unplowed for days,  responsibilities that had been part of Goldsmith's portfolio.  Both men were out of town as the blizzard began.

Goldsmith is being succeeded by Caswell Holloway, the Commissioner of the City Department of Environmental Protection

Here's the press release from NYC City Hall.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg today appointed Caswell F. Holloway, who has served as the City’s Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection since 2010, Deputy Mayor for Operations. Holloway replaces Stephen Goldsmith, who is leaving to pursue private-sector opportunities in infrastructure finance.

“As New Yorkers, we were extraordinarily lucky to have Steve Goldsmith make our City government more innovative and efficient,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “Just as he did at DEP, Cas Holloway is going to jump right in, and build on everything that Steve has been able to accomplish and continue the progress he has made in reforming our government and making it work better.”

“This week, I informed the Mayor of my decision to resign my job as Deputy Mayor of Operations,” said Deputy Mayor Goldsmith. “This job has been a special opportunity to contribute to the City of New York and further the substantial accomplishments of Mayor Bloomberg. I am proud of the work we have done over the last year to pass an aggressive budget, and put in place the foundation and plans for dozens of initiatives and best practices that will dramatically further customer service and cost savings in the City. Over the last month, I received important overtures in an area with which I have long been associated – infrastructure finance.

“After thirty years of long hours in public service, the change will provide me, at age 64, with more flexibility for me and my family and a secure foundation for our future. In addition, I intend to continue my academic work and the school year is about to start. Now that we have the ball rolling on our initiatives, I am comfortable that the person taking over for me will do an exceptional job moving things forward. Cas is not just a colleague, but a friend and a person who I trust to take over for me, and whose talents are among the most exceptional I have seen in my public career. He has developed a career in New York, and will accelerate the agenda and build on the progress we have made. It has been a unique honor to be part of the high performing Bloomberg team. City Hall and the agencies are truly alive with the spirit of service and innovation.”

“I am proud of everything we have done at DEP to advance Mayor Bloomberg’s efforts to strengthen our infrastructure, protect our world-renowned drinking water, and make New York City a model for new sustainability approaches, like green infrastructure,” said Deputy Mayor Holloway. “I’m thrilled and honored at the opportunity to come back to City Hall and work even more closely with Mayor Bloomberg on the issues that are so important to the daily lives of New Yorkers. Building on the foundation Steve Goldsmith has built, we will continue to transform City services to ensure that government is doing all it can to work efficiently and effectively for the millions of people who live and work in New York City.”

As Deputy Mayor for Operations, Stephen Goldsmith spearheaded the creation of Mayor Bloomberg’s “NYC Simplicity” agenda, which seeks to transform New York City government to make it more customer-focused, innovative and efficient. As part of NYC Simplicity, Goldsmith launched the City’s shared services initiative, which will save the City $500 million by 2013 through the consolidation of back-office operations such as fleet, real estate and information technology. He developed new programs to improve customer service, such as “Get It Done. Together,” in which the Department of Buildings consolidated approvals and extended hours of operation to speed the approval process, as well as the NYC Business Acceleration team, which will create true one-stop shopping and coordinated inspections for small business owners.

Under Deputy Mayor Goldsmith, the City created new methods to interact with the public and its employees, including “Change By Us” – the City’s new online platform that will enable New Yorkers to team up to transform their own communities. Goldsmith oversaw the development of the update to PlaNYC, including the creation of the City’s Clean Heat program, which will eliminate the use of the most polluting grade of heating oil – No. 6 fuel oil – in the city and accelerate the deployment of new natural gas infrastructure. Goldsmith also was tasked with piloting some of the City’s most complex technology projects.

He also took the reins of CityTime, the City’s automated payroll system, which has now been successfully deployed to nearly the entire targeted workforce. Similarly, Goldsmith created the City’s Office of Emergency Communications, which has made significant strides in implementing the City’s Emergency Communications Transformation Project and reduced the cost of the construction of the City’s Public Safety Answering Center in Bronx by more than $100 million.

As Commissioner, Cas Holloway has significantly cut costs at DEP while improving customer service, reduced planned water rate increases to their lowest levels in years, developed a ground-breaking green infrastructure plan to capture rain water, reduce sewer overflows and save the City $2 billion over 20 years and he ended 15 year-old labor disputes that were hampering the city’s ability to conduct operations effectively.

Prior to serving as DEP Commissioner, Holloway served as Chief of Staff to Deputy Mayor for Operations Edward Skyler and as Special Advisor to Mayor Bloomberg. Holloway took a leading role in the writing and implementation of the Administration’s report on the health impacts of September 11^th and led negotiations on 9/11 health legislation that was signed by President Obama. Following the tragic fire at 130 Liberty Street, he led a comprehensive review of abatement and demolition operations that resulted in an overhaul of the asbestos abatement process. He also played a lead role in developing the City’s comprehensive cleanup plan for the Gowanus Canal, and in the passage and implementation of the City’s Solid Waste Management Plan.

Deputy Mayor Holloway graduated cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts from Harvard College and graduated with honors from University of Chicago Law School.  Prior to joining the Mayor’s Office, Deputy Mayor Holloway was an associate at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP and Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP and served as law clerk to Judge Dennis G. Jacobs, now Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Prior to Law School, Deputy Mayor Holloway also served as Chief of Staff at the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation. He lives in Brooklyn Heights with his wife, Jessica.

(Photo (cc) by Flickr user Liber)

Here at TN we've been covering the FAA shutdown extensively. You can catch up on our detailed reporting by clicking on the the links throughout this post. Or, scroll down for our recap of all the basic issues summarized in eight straightforward questions.

Wait, air traffic controllers aren’t working?

Air traffic controllers are still on the job, and no safety functions have been halted.  But that doesn’t mean air traffic controllers aren’t feeling the effects of the partial shutdown. Example:  the break room at New York LaGuardia’s airport is being rehabbed, and that work has ground to a halt. So the workers are “resting” in an office.

So, what else does the FAA do? Do we even need the FAA?

The FAA oversees construction projects at airports, collects taxes on airline tickets, and inspects airports.  It also develops new technology and ensures airports can accommodate new airplane models. None of the workers who do these things are collecting paychecks.

Rewind that tape.  Airports aren’t being inspected?

Airports are being inspected, because that work is considered critical to “life and property.”  But the 40 inspectors aren’t getting paid, and are responsible for their own government credit card bills, which, yes, include airplane tickets to airports around the country.

How many other workers are affected?

The US DOT says 4,000 workers have been furloughed, and that some 70,000 construction workers have been idled.

Will those workers eventually be paid?

For the federal workers, it would take an act of Congress. For the construction workers, that depends on their union.

So I’m saving money, now right?  Because I don’t have to pay taxes?

Nope.  Almost all the airlines have raised their ticket prices to make up the difference.    Meanwhile, the federal government is losing $30 million a day – an estimated $1 billion before this is settled.

Okay, now I’m interested.  Why did Congress shut down the FAA?

The FAA hasn’t actually been granted long-term funding since 2007.  Instead, Congress has voted 20 times to extend funding for the agency on a short-term basis, while a larger funding bill is hammered out.

Usually, that has meant just keeping everything as is.  But this time, the Republican-controlled House inserted a provision to eliminate subsidies for some rural airports in their extension. But the Democrats in the Senate wouldn’t agree to that, because they felt they would lose their leverage in another dispute, over how easy it should be for airline workers to unionize.   The House left for vacation without negotiating, and the Senate said: No dice.

By the way.  The total savings from the House-backed cut in rural air subsidies would have been $16 million, or about what the Treasury loses every 12 hours the FAA is shutdown.

When will all this be resolved?

President Obama says he wants it resolved by week’s end.  But it could stay unsettled until Congress returns to Washington.  Sometime after Labor Day.

White House File Photo

UPDATED WITH AUDIO President Barack Obama is calling the FAA shutdown a "lose-lose-lose situation."  And he added:  "My expectation and I think the American people’s expectation is this gets resolved before the end of this week."

The President said Congress wouldn't have to return to Washington to act, but could do it through the procedural agreement, unanimous consent.

The FAA has been shutdown for nearly two weeks after the GOP-led Congress added new cuts to a routine extension vote, and the Democratic Senate accused the House of trying to gain leverage in a dispute over labor laws.

The President  made his remarks before a White House meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Here's a full transcript. You can listen to his remarks here.

"A good example of how undone work here in Washington can have an adverse impact on that economy is what’s going on with the Federal Aviation Administration. And I’m going to be hearing from Ray LaHood about the situation that is looming as a consequence of Congress not acting.

Some of you may be aware of the fact that the FAA routinely gets its authorities extended through Congress.  It has happened 20 times since 2007.

This time Congress has decided to play some politics with it. And as a consequence they left town without getting this extension done.

Here is what this means:  Thousands of FAA workers being furloughed, including safety inspectors.  It also means projects all across the country involving tens of thousands of construction workers being suspended because congress didn’t get its work done.  And that means folks who are on construction sites doing work bringing home a paycheck now potentially find themselves going home without one. And important projects all across the country are left undone.

Here’s what also happens it turns out: This extension gives the authority to collect fees from airlines.  The airlines are still collecting these fees because it’s priced into their tickets but they are not turning them over to the federal government  and the federal government stands to lose $200 million a week.  That would be a billion dollars at a time when we are worrying about how we pay for things from education to head start. nd we don’t anticipate it would be easy to get that money back even though the airlines are collecting it.  Thy are keeping it .

This is a lose-lose-lose situation that can be easily solved if congress comes back into town and does its job. They don’t even have to come back into town.  The House and the Senate could through a procedural agreement basically do this through unanimous consent

They can have the fights they want to have when they get back don’t put people the livelihoods of thousand at people at a risk, don’t put projects at risk, and don’t let a billion dollars, at a time when we are scrambling for every dollar we can get, left on the table because Congress did not act .

I am urging the House and the Senate to care of this.

This is an example of a self inflicted wound that is unnecessary.

My expectation and I think the America people’s expectation is this gets resolved before the end of this week."

Did you wake up this morning and realize your Federal Aviation Administration was closed?  Even though the FAA has been partially shut down nearly two weeks over a funding dispute,  in the fog of debt talks, almost no one paid attention.  But now that it looks like some 74,000 workers will be off the job until at least September, focus is getting, um , a little sharper.

Transportation Nation's Todd Zwillich breaks it all down for you on the NewsHour:

Watch the full episode. See more PBS NewsHour.

The NY MTA says it receives about 700 text messages a day seeking arrival or departure information for B63 buses in Brooklyn. The transit authority last winter began piloting a GPS-based program on the Bay Ridge-Brooklyn Heights bus route, where users can send a text message asking when a bus will be arriving at a given stop.

The procedure involves texting a six-digit code number to "41411," then waiting for a text back that tells users how many miles or how many stops the bus is away.

Unlike some privately generated apps, the MTA app doesn't "find" users, nor does it tell how many minutes a bus is away.

But the authority it still has 18,000 "mobile interactions" and 13,000 "desktop interactions" a month.

And it has chosen a vendor, VeriFone, to fully hook up all buses in Staten Island by the end of the year, at a cost of $6.9 million. Transportation Nation reported on the Staten Island roll-out earlier this year.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino today launched Boston's 600-bike,  61-station bike share, called the "New Balance Hubway."   Boston's system will cost $85 a year to join, or $5 a day.  Members can check out bikes from one station and drop them off at another at no charge if they use them for 30 minutes or less, with charges rising the longer bikes are used.  Nicole Freedman, who set up Boston's bike share, says the system already has 500 members, which she says is ahead of projections.

Hubway's 3-year cost is projected to be $5.7 million, with $3 million of that coming from the FTA.

From Menino's press office:

New Balance Hubway bike share system that will feature 61 stations and over 600 bikes around the city. The system is operated by Alta Bicycle Share of Portland, OR and includes locations in Kenmore Square, Roxbury, the South End, the Longwood Medical area, Allston, Brighton, the Back Bay and more. New Balance Hubway is a program under Mayor Menino’s nationally recognized Boston Bikes program that he launched to make Boston one of the world’s premiere cycling cities.

“This is a great day for Boston,” Mayor Menino said. “New Balance Hubway promotes a new, environmentally friendly way of getting around and I hope that all residents use the system. Over the past four years, we have taken great strides toward making Boston a city that welcomes and encourages bicycling but this innovative system is the most significant step yet. We have had the goal of going from worst to first, and with Hubway we’re nearly there. I want to thank Senators John Kerry and Scott Brown and Congressmen Michael Capuano and Stephen Lynch for their dedicated hard work in helping to secure crucial grant funding to make such an important project possible.”

“If anyone can transform Boston into a premier bike friendly city it’s Mayor Menino,” Senator John Kerry said. “Bike sharing is an environmentally friendly way to reduce traffic congestion.”

With over 40 stations currently operational and the rest to be installed shortly, the system is fully operated by Alta Bicycle Share, although the equipment is a state-of-the-art, third generation, solar powered automated system developed by Public Bike System Company. New Balance Hubway features “swipe card” payments and costs $5 per day with free trips that are 30 minutes or less, and $85 annual memberships. Since the New Balance Hubway website went live on July 13, over 700 annual memberships have been activated. Similar systems are located in Washington D.C., Montreal, London and Melbourne. The technology allows users to rent bikes from one station and return them at another across the city. Typically, there will be about 10 bikes available at each station."

Full release here.

Send us your reviews of the system, or how it affects you!

Biking in New York City has increased by 14 percent from last spring — and the city's Department of Transportation said it recorded 18,809 cyclists per day, up from 16, 463 last year.

White House Briefing Room (Photo: Andrea Bernstein)

How urgent does US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood think the FAA shutdown is?  Urgent enough that he joined White House Press Secretary Jay Carney for the daily press briefing of White House reporters.

Among the newsiest parts of the briefing: (Full transcript at end of post)  LaHood urged  congress to pass a "clean extension," of the FAA reauthorization bill.  While LaHood, an able politician himself and a former GOP congressman, didn't single out any political parties in his remarks, anyone who's been following this story knows that the Republican-led congress specifically did not pass a clean extension, but instead added a provision that would eliminate subsidies for certain lightly used airports.

LaHood also said he'd spoken to airlines (though he did not name them) to rebuke them for raising fares to make up for the tax that is not being collected while the FAA is shutdown, that the Treasury is looking into ways to recoup the $200 million a week in taxes that the federal government isn't collecting while the shutdown continues, and that 70,000 construction workers and 4,000 federal employees are now sitting idle, with no paychecks.

PRESS BRIEFING

BY PRESS SECRETARY JAY CARNEY

AND SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION RAY LaHOOD

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

11:03 A.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY:  Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.  Thanks for being here for this early briefing today.

I will be here, obviously, to take your questions on all issues.  I have with me today at the top of the briefing the Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, because while we’ve been paying attention, for obvious reasons, on one congressional stalemate, there is another one that also affects the economy and jobs, and that’s why Secretary LaHood is here to speak with you.  He’ll take some questions afterwards, and then like I said, I will follow him.

And with that, I turn the podium over.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Good morning.  Since Congress failed to pass an FAA bill, nearly 4,000 FAA employees have been furloughed, and as many as 70,000 construction workers across America are out of work.

Important airport modernization projects have been shut down in every state in the country.  And let me just say parenthetically, one of the highest unemployment segments in the country is in the construction area, in the building trades.  And for all of my friends on Capitol Hill who give speeches every day about jobs, the importance of jobs, putting people to work, this is not the time to be laying off 70,000 construction workers.  These are friends and neighbors to people who live in communities.  These are people who work hard -- and we’re right smack dab in the middle of the construction season.  This is not the time to be laying off 70,000 people.

I have been meeting with and talking to members of Congress from both sides of the aisle, asking them to pass another clean extension of the FAA bill, which they have done on 20 occasions.  So they need to come back to the negotiating table; Congress needs to pass a clean bill so our 4,000 FAA employees -- who are without a paycheck since last Saturday -- can come back to work, these construction projects can start again, our friends and neighbors can go back to work.

I think -- if some of you have been paying attention, you know that I’ve said we have the safest and the best aviation system in the world.  This is not the way to run it, to have 4,000 of our people that run the system not at their desks, not doing their work, and to have these construction projects suspended.

Transportation has always been bipartisan.  I served on the House Transportation Committee for three terms.  It was always bipartisan.  It’s always been bipartisan.  And I ask Congress in a bipartisan way to come back, pass a clean bill, finish the negotiations, and then get to a bigger FAA bill.

MR. CARNEY:  With that, we’ll take questions.

Erica, start with you.

Q    Mr. Secretary, do you have any advice to your former House GOP colleagues on dealing with the debt ceiling?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, as some of you know, I’ve been in public service and politics 35 years -- 17 years as a staffer, 14 years as a member, and now two and a half years in this job.

During the time that I was a staffer, I was chief of staff for Bob Michel, who served during the time that Ronald Reagan was President and Tip O’Neill was the Speaker of the House.  During the time that Tom Foley was Speaker, Bob Michel was also the Republican leader.  And during the time that President Clinton was President, Bob Michel was Republican leader.  That whole period of time was a very rich history and legacy of compromise.

That’s how Congress has always solved problems -- through compromise, through people working things out, through people putting aside their own agendas and their own egos, deciding what’s important for the American people.

This is a time that I think most of us that have watched politics have never seen before, because there are people in Congress who don’t like the word compromise, who don’t believe in it.  That’s what we need today.  We need for people to come together, set aside their own egos, a certain part of their own agenda for the American people -- to make sure we maintain the strongest economy in the world; to send a signal to the world that we can get big things done, Washington can still get big things done.

This is about continuing to have a strong economy and continuing to compromise -- and take maybe a couple chapters out of Tip O’Neill, Bob Michel, Ronald Reagan, President Clinton, people that have served in this town with distinction and gotten big things done through compromise.

MR. CARNEY:  Jake.

Q    Some House Republicans say that they’ve already compromised, and that’s what the Boehner bill is; it is a compromise.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, I’m going to let Jay --

Q    Come on.  (Laughter.)

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  I’m going to let Jay do his job here.  I’m not here to take his job.  I’m here to try and put forth a message that in one of the highest unemployment sectors in the country, where we have friends and neighbors all over the country that are out of work during the construction season -- they ought to go back to work.  They shouldn’t be held hostage.  These projects shouldn’t be held hostage.  And we have 4,000 FAA employees -- hardworking people who come to work every day and do their jobs.

Q    Can you explain what the bottleneck is on the FAA bill, from your perspective?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Yes, certainly I can.  It’s the idea that there’s a couple of provisions that could probably be worked out if they would pass a clean extension again, as they’ve done on 20 other occasions, as Congresses always have done, that could probably be worked out I think within the next 30 days.

In my discussions with people in leadership in both the Senate and House, they believe the labor issue and the Essential Air Service issue, those are probably the two big issues -- there are a few little ones -- probably could be worked out over the next 30 days.  And that’s really what I’ve been saying to members of Congress:  Don’t hold hostage common, ordinary citizens who want to work, who want to do construction jobs, who make their living doing that, and are FAA employees.  It’s just -- it’s not the way -- it’s not really the way to run the best aviation system in the world.

Bill.

Q    Mr. Secretary, without the FAA there, there’s nobody to collect the federal tax on airline tickets.  So what’s happening to that money?  Is it going back to customers and consumers?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, I have talked to the largest aviation association here in Washington that represents all the airlines, and I have told them that I am not happy about the fact they continue to add to citizens’ ticket price -- now, these are people who are planning vacations, who are planning to fly, people who live on a budget.  They’re collecting this money and it’s going to their bottom line, and I think that is not right.  And I simply think it’s not fair for them to do that, and I’ve made that known to them.

I think the airlines should not be collecting this amount of money under the umbrella that it’s a tax.  It’s not.  They shouldn’t be collecting it, and they shouldn’t be adding it on to passengers’ price of a ticket.

Q    It’s not their money.  I mean, it’s theft, isn’t it?  If they’re taking money that’s due the federal government and putting in their pocket?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, look, Treasury is working on this and we’re working with Treasury on it.  And the important point is here, passengers shouldn’t have to be paying this particular amount of money.  They shouldn’t.

Dave.

Q    Mr. Secretary, can you talk about the deal that’s going to be announced tomorrow between the auto companies and the administration to hike fuel-efficiency standards?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, if I want to keep my job the last thing I’m going to do is talk about what the President is going to talk about tomorrow.  (Laughter.)

Q    Come on.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  You know, I know that maybe I don’t look very smart, but I have survived 35 years around here.  Stay tuned, Dave.

Yes, sir.

Q    Mr. Secretary, thank you.  You are smart.  You’re doing a good job.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Oh, thank you.

Q    My question is, Mr. Secretary:  As far as the international partners are concerned, what are you hearing from them as far as security is concerned?  And also, U.S. and India had some agreement on aviation and on obviously -- where we do stand?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  I’ll be happy to talk to you offline on this.  I don’t know that there are very many other people in this room that care about India-U.S. relationships when it comes to aviation, which, by the way, is pretty good.

Anybody else on this subject?

Q    Yes, on the aviation subject, sir.  To what extent do you think it has been caught up in the tone and the rough and tumble of the overall debt ceiling hassle?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  You know, that’s a good question.  I don’t happen to believe it has, because when I’ve talked to members of Congress, particularly those that are in leadership, this really is I think some people’s way of saying that these two issues that I mentioned, the EAS, the Essential Air Service, and the union provision, they want to get to those.  They want to get them solved.

I think it can be done with a clean bill, another extension.  I think it could be done very quickly with the discussions I’ve had with people in leadership in the House and Senate.  And I hope that -- I really hope that will happen.

Q    Given the current situation, is there any hope that your issue is going to be handled before they deal with the debt ceiling issue?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Debt and deficit are center stage.

Q    Mr. Secretary, one more on the aviation windfall.  Which airlines have you talked to?  And second, does -- do you or does the government have the power to order a refund?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Under deregulation we can’t set ticket prices, okay?  So we can’t do that.  We’re talking with our friends and colleagues in Treasury about the way forward and how we figure out what happens with this money.

Q    So there’s not a chance of a refund?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  I don’t know the answer to that.  We’re trying to figure that out.

Q    Okay.  Which airlines did you talk to?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, I’ve talked to a number of airlines, but more importantly, I’ve talked to the air transportation -- or the Aviation Transportation Association, which represents most of the airlines.  But I’ve talked to some of the airlines personally about this.

Q    And they have names?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  You know what their names are.  (Laughter.)

Q    If I could ask, as a former congressman, a Republican congressman, and before that in the Reagan era the chief of staff to the House Republican leader, could you comment on this debt limit impasse and whether you think your colleagues -- or successors in the House Republican caucus should have accepted the deal that was on the table with the President and Mr. Boehner?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Look, I’m not going to get into that aspect of it.  I’ve probably said pretty much what I want to say about this.  I’m going to leave the details to Jay and others that work in government affairs to do that.  I’m going to --

Q    Mr. Secretary?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Yes.

Q    At what point does the FAA impasse become a public safety issue, or could it possibly?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  There is no public safety issue here.  Flying is safe.  Air-traffic controllers all over America went to work today.  They’re guiding planes in and out of airports.  Thousands of people will board planes all day today, fly all over America and all over the world.  Safety is not compromised.

And, frankly, the flying public’s travel plans will not be compromised.  The people that have been furloughed, the 4,000 people, are people who are working on next-generation technology research and things like that.  So safety is not compromised.

Yes, ma’am.

Q    Do you have an estimate on the revenue loss from this?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  In terms of the tax?  Yes, it’s about -- it’s about $200 billion a month.

Q    Two hundred billion dollars a month?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Two hundred million dollars a month.  All right.  I’m going to restart.  (Laughter.)  Two hundred million dollars a week -- is that right?  All right, blame Jill if I’m wrong.  (Laughter.)

Let me go back to this gentleman.

Q    Will that money have to be made up?  Is that going to put a crimp in financing for future aviation projects?  I mean, that’s a fair amount of money you’ll be losing.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  It’s -- you know what it is?  It’s real money to the treasury.  For all the talk around here and debt and deficit, that money is being lost to the treasury.  And we’re trying to figure out if it can be made up or not.  So for people who really care about debt and deficit, pass a clean bill, let’s get back on track, let’s get our workers back to work, let’s get construction projects going again, and let’s start collecting the tax that goes into the federal treasury.

That it, Jay?  Look, I know you want me to stay up here a lot longer than -- (laughter.)

MR. CARNEY:  I am so happy you’re here.

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Yes, I know.  (Laughter.)  There’s two reasons for me to be here -- so he can relax a little bit -- okay, you get the last question.

Q    Thank you.  I know you said you’re talking to Treasury.  Is there any way to get -- retroactively get the money back?

SECRETARY LaHOOD:  Well, that’s what we’re talking to Treasury about.  We’re trying to figure this out.

This is complicated and we want to -- first of all, we want to do right by passengers.  That’s number one.  That’s why I’ve been talking to the airlines and to the ATA.  And secondly, we want to make sure, legally, where this takes us, because a lot of money is being lost to the treasury.

Thank you all very much.