user1111 wrote:
Quote:

Sommerman wrote:
Mightn't this put the kibosh on a casino?

The casino was proposed to be in GV which is no where near a PATH train, so most people would most likely drive there, if this should even happen.

Sommerman wrote:
Mightn't this put the kibosh on a casino?

greenville wrote:
The only time I used the damn Path is on the late hours of night on the weekends. Time to start calling the mayor and members of city council. If this really happens, the traffic at the Holland tunnel and downtown would be unbearable on the weekends. It would reduce property values, and it would affect our hotels. Downtowners better get their pitch forks ready, because if this happens we all get f*cked.

Sommerman wrote:
1. Can't the governors' vetos be overridden?

2. Could closing a mass transit link for six (?) hours in this part of the world violate any clean air acts at the state or federal level?

Monroe wrote:
Er, it was his dad who fostered the 'Cuomo or the homo' meme. Wrong Cuomo by a generation . . . I don't know what jr had to do with the campaign, especially because they denied any relation to the gay slur.

Monroe wrote:
For the chump change it would take to keep it open, I say keep it open. But my amusement is reading how people are shredding Republican Christie, while giving Democrat and liberal fun boy Cuomo an 'ole'.

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

Stringer wrote:
PATH could be targeted for privatization, service reduction under Port Authority plan embraced by governors

By Matt Friedman | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
December 29, 2014 at 8:12 AM

JERSEY CITY ? A report by the Port Authority that?s supported by the governors of New York and New Jersey floats the idea of eliminating overnight PATH service and turning over the system's operation to an outside organization ? public or private.

Those ideas, along with others in the 99-page report that was released Saturday night, were slammed today by Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, who said curtailing service on one of the region?s most vital transportation links would hurt not just his city's economy, but the state as a whole.

?I think that all too often politicians assume the public is stupid, and this is an example of that,? said Fulop, a Port Authority critic whose administration in May filed a $400 million lawsuit against it alleging owed back taxes. ?The fact that you?re releasing a report in between Christmas and New Year's, the fact that there are components of it that are nothing more than a mere power grab.?

But Port Authority Chairman John Degnan, who was on the panel that prepared the report, said the recommendations are not final and that curtailing service is one of several options to save money.

Read more:
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... service.html#incart_river

Privatization of a money losing venture... A different idiotic Republican of New Jersey went that route before and it was garbage.

Stringer wrote:
PATH could be targeted for privatization, service reduction under Port Authority plan embraced by governors

By Matt Friedman | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
December 29, 2014 at 8:12 AM

JERSEY CITY ? A report by the Port Authority that?s supported by the governors of New York and New Jersey floats the idea of eliminating overnight PATH service and turning over the system's operation to an outside organization ? public or private.

Those ideas, along with others in the 99-page report that was released Saturday night, were slammed today by Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop, who said curtailing service on one of the region?s most vital transportation links would hurt not just his city's economy, but the state as a whole.

?I think that all too often politicians assume the public is stupid, and this is an example of that,? said Fulop, a Port Authority critic whose administration in May filed a $400 million lawsuit against it alleging owed back taxes. ?The fact that you?re releasing a report in between Christmas and New Year's, the fact that there are components of it that are nothing more than a mere power grab.?

But Port Authority Chairman John Degnan, who was on the panel that prepared the report, said the recommendations are not final and that curtailing service is one of several options to save money.

Read more:
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/ ... service.html#incart_river

Wishful_Thinking wrote:


Interestingly, Hong Kong's subway system is wildly successful financially http://www.theatlantic.com/china/arch ... sportation-system/279528/ and like the Port Authority, they own much of the real-estate at their transit hubs. Which begs another question - why cannot the PA follow that model, and better subsidize the PATH?

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
The late Morris Pesin, the father of Liberty State Park, attended the Port Authority meetings. He kept the fares at thirty cents for a long time. Pesin said, "Once the Port Authority raises the fare there will be no stopping." He was right on that point. Pesin always pointed out to the Port Authority, the PATH, was supposed to be a financial loss because the money came from the bridges and tunnels. The PATH was never expected to "break even."

Wikipedia's article on 'Farebox Recovery Ratio' points to the complexity of this problem - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farebox_recovery_ratio The % of PATH's operating costs recovered by fares is, at 41%, higher than most American cities. And our cost/ride is a little higher, but not excessively so.

What is more interesting is comparing how mass transit systems fare in Europe/Asia vs. USA. In Europe and Asia, fares are more commonly zone or distance based, as opposed to the flat rate PATH and the NYC Subway charges. The article suggests fixed fare models are much more dependent on subsidies than variable fare models - a real problem in the US, where cars and roads get most of the money for transit.

Interestingly, Hong Kong's subway system is wildly successful financially http://www.theatlantic.com/china/arch ... sportation-system/279528/ and like the Port Authority, they own much of the real-estate at their transit hubs. Which begs another question - why cannot the PA follow that model, and better subsidize the PATH?

Yvonne wrote:
The late Morris Pesin, the father of Liberty State Park, attended the Port Authority meetings. He kept the fares at thirty cents for a long time. Pesin said, "Once the Port Authority raises the fare there will be no stopping." He was right on that point. Pesin always pointed out to the Port Authority, the PATH, was supposed to be a financial loss because the money came from the bridges and tunnels. The PATH was never expected to "break even."

Monroe wrote:
You must be very angry at Democrat Governor Cuomo. What is his interest in this?

PEC0905 wrote:
What we really need is for PATH to be classified as an Urban Transit System just like the NYC Subway so that it will be eligible for additional federal funding. This could be a ploy to get just that......

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

PEC0905 wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
This is all politics. Its not a real proposal.

1. Its a response to Fulop's lawsuit for $400 million in back taxes.
2. Its a response to the state legislatures voting to restructure the agency while diminishing the power of both governors.
3. Its a shake down for campaign contributions from real estate interests in NJ, many of whom also have a presence in NY.

If this was a real proposal, the real estate developers would be shutting down development on half finished towers rather than continuing to throw good money after bad.

Perfectly stated.

This is all bullsh*t and even the title of this thread is misleading. The Port Authority released a 99 page report proposing several changes across the board and the PATH overnight service change is just one idea of many that was FLOATED. Neither governor singled out PATh and no service change is approved or even pending, so everyone needs to relax.

This has no basis is reality and is politics at its best. All parties involved are scheming and are pushing back at each other to promote hidden agendas.

At the end of the day public transportation is vital and therefore is heavily subsidized. The MTA loses money as does the PATH and just about every other public transportation entity. This is nothing new so the the fact they mention potential savings of 10 million is a joke and a drop in the bucket when you look at the big picture.

Fulop and Zimmer are already pushing back and the banks and developers will do so behind the scenes. The 24/7 PATH service is critical and as Hudson County continues to grow, service needs to increase, not decrease. A new station is coming to Harrison and Christie's buddies have development contracts for the surrounding neighborhood that will depend on PATH so just keep that in mind. Nevermind the WTC Hub that cost 4 billion and is almost complete. 10 million, really??

What we really need is for PATH to be classified as an Urban Transit System just like the NYC Subway so that it will be eligible for additional federal funding. This could be a ploy to get just that......

There is literally nothing misleading about the thread's title. Your opinion may be that this is not a serious proposal, but it is a specific proposal supported by Christie and Cuomo nonetheless.

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ ... TH-Service-286991111.html

PEC0905 wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
This is all politics. Its not a real proposal.

1. Its a response to Fulop's lawsuit for $400 million in back taxes.
2. Its a response to the state legislatures voting to restructure the agency while diminishing the power of both governors.
3. Its a shake down for campaign contributions from real estate interests in NJ, many of whom also have a presence in NY.

If this was a real proposal, the real estate developers would be shutting down development on half finished towers rather than continuing to throw good money after bad.

Perfectly stated.

This is all bullsh*t and even the title of this thread is misleading. The Port Authority released a 99 page report proposing several changes across the board and the PATH overnight service change is just one idea of many that was FLOATED. Neither governor singled out PATh and no service change is approved or even pending, so everyone needs to relax.

This has no basis is reality and is politics at its best. All parties involved are scheming and are pushing back at each other to promote hidden agendas.

At the end of the day public transportation is vital and therefore is heavily subsidized. The MTA loses money as does the PATH and just about every other public transportation entity. This is nothing new so the the fact they mention potential savings of 10 million is a joke and a drop in the bucket when you look at the big picture.

Fulop and Zimmer are already pushing back and the banks and developers will do so behind the scenes. The 24/7 PATH service is critical and as Hudson County continues to grow, service needs to increase, not decrease. A new station is coming to Harrison and Christie's buddies have development contracts for the surrounding neighborhood that will depend on PATH so just keep that in mind. Nevermind the WTC Hub that cost 4 billion and is almost complete. 10 million, really??

What we really need is for PATH to be classified as an Urban Transit System just like the NYC Subway so that it will be eligible for additional federal funding. This could be a ploy to get just that......

Sommerman wrote:
1. Can't the governors' vetos be overridden?

2. Could closing a mass transit link for six (?) hours in this part of the world violate any clean air acts at the state or federal level?

Monroe wrote:
You must be very angry at Democrat Governor Cuomo. What is his interest in this?