Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

New Haven App Designer Keeps Youngsters Safe and Appropriate on Mobile Devices
Dec 22, 2014 11:00 am
As smartphones, tablets, and other mobile devices become more prevalent in children’s lives, New Haven-based Copilot...more »
NASA’s Orion Spacecraft Completes Successful Unmanned First Mission
Dec 5, 2014 11:30 am
An unmanned test flight of NASA’s new Orion spacecraft was successful this morning, flying higher than any human-rated...more »

Our Partners

˜

OP-ED | Connecticut Must Learn from Metro-North’s Woes

by Susan Bigelow | Feb 21, 2014 9:12am
(5) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Opinion

Metro North’s passengers are not happy, and with good reason. The commuter rail system, which is one of the largest and busiest in the country, has had a very bad year, and riders on the New Haven Line have been bearing some of the worst of the burdens.

New Haven Line Commuters blasted Metro-North officials at a recent “commuter speakout,” complaining of delays, unheated trains, slow response and general frustration. This all follows a year that saw a tragic derailment, massive service disruptions, and all kinds of other problems. Meanwhile, fares continue to rise; a 5 percent fare hike went into effect this January. Commuters are fed up; they feel like nobody in Hartford or New York is actually listening.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has threatened to look elsewhere for someone to run the New Haven-to-Springfield Line if the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), the massive, quasi-public company Connecticut contracts with to run and maintain the New Haven-to-New York line, can’t get back on the ball. He cited the case of Keolis, a French company, taking over management of the MBTA’s commuter lines in Massachusetts, and suggested that something similar could happen here. After all, Connecticut owns the rails the trains ride on all the way down to the New York border.

Is this the solution — to switch operators to someone who might be more responsive? After all, there’s no telling when the MTA will get their act together, and the only real hold Connecticut has on them is the ability to renew their contract every five years. We are in no way represented on their board, which is appointed by various New York officials.

Don’t hold your breath, though. As attractive as ditching the MTA for some other railroad operator may seem, it’s probably not going to happen. The MTA has been running this line for a long time, and any change of operators would likely cause even more massive disruptions without guaranteeing any future success. It’s also complicated; what would happen to trains after they crossed into New York? Would we still have to shell out huge amounts of money to the MTA for access to their system?

Therefore, things haven’t gotten to the point where it would make sense to switch out the MTA for another quasi-public corporation. Unfortunately, that means entrusting your ride to work to a company you have next to no control over and no real alternative to — unless you think driving on I-95 during rush hour is fun.

But at some point, we need to really think about how we run public transportation in this state, and whether the patchwork transit system we have now actually makes sense. For now, the MTA runs the New Haven Line. But in a few years the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail line will start running. Who’s going to operate that? The other commuter rail line in Connecticut, Shore Line East, is run by Amtrak. The state DOT’s CTTransit operates buses in most cities, but not all. New London County has its own system, as does Middletown, Bridgeport, and a bunch of other places. Heck, the town of Enfield runs its own two-line bus system.

The reason why this piecemeal system exists is partly because we like local control, but also because the state doesn’t have the money to run and maintain everything. The legislature raids the special transportation fund with regularity. This is supposed to stop in 2015, but I’ll be surprised if legislators don’t find some way around that.

New Jersey found itself in a similar position in the 1970s, and decided to create one single agency that runs pretty much everything — NJ Transit. Its board is appointed by the governor of New Jersey, and includes members of the general public.

The benefits of having a single public corporation that’s accountable to the people of the state like this include better transit planning and direction, easier access to different parts of the state, and hopefully better customer response times. New Jersey’s transportation fund, unlike Connecticut’s, is protected in the state constitution.

If we learn nothing else from Metro North’s catastrophic year, it’s that we have to plan better for the long term, and develop transportation plans that focus on the people who travel by rail and bus. It’s time to come to terms with the fact that public transportation is a big part of this state’s future, and that it can’t just be an afterthought anymore.

Susan Bigelow is an award-winning columnist and the founder of CTLocalPolitics. She lives in Enfield with her wife and their cats.

Tags: , , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

(5) Comments

posted by: art vandelay | February 21, 2014  1:46pm

art vandelay

I totally agree. A major problem is that the infrastructure is over 100 years old.  The only thing the MTA does is try to maintain it which is a loosing battle.  The disasters last year proved it.  Maybe a French company with fresh ideas will make a difference.  Who knows within 20 or 30 years, they could design a system like they have in France where we could get to NYC is less than an hour from New Haven.  Most of the ticket costs are going into paying high union wages, & corporate executive benefits.

posted by: LongJohn47 | February 21, 2014  5:09pm

The only way we’re going to have modern, high speed rail is to start over. 

It would be impossible to reconstruct the New Haven line, running as it does through very expensive real estate and protected wetlands, and I can’t even begin to imagine the nightmare that I-95 would become during the years that construction would take.

The Regional Plan Association recently produced a report (www.america2050.org) calling for an additional $3.6 billion in infrastructure investment to modernize the New Haven line. 

The largest portion is to replace five 100-year-old swing bridges that no longer work properly.  Other large sums are for communications systems and “positive train control” that has been mandated by the Feds, and enlarging the maintenance yard in New Haven.

posted by: art vandelay | February 22, 2014  4:36pm

art vandelay

A country that could construct the Brooklyn Bridge, large metro subway systems, the “Big Dig” can certainly construct a high speed rail system.

posted by: LongJohn47 | February 22, 2014  7:24pm

Art, I agree 100%.  The only problem is how to pay for it—taxes and/or debt—and I don’t remember you as being a big fan of either.

Just for the record, we’ve hardly had a time in our lives (at least since the 1950’s) when debt was so cheap, so I’m a proponent of borrowing as much as the market will bear and plowing the money into massive infrastructure projects.

High speed rail?  For sure.  Connect all our major metropolitan areas, on the coast and in the interior.

Rewire our cities with state-of-the-art fiber optics?  You betcha.  Sweden and South Korea both have massive advantages over us in speed of transmission, scope of delivery, and price to consumer.  We’re now the third world for data access.

It’s strange to look back on Eisenhower as the golden age, but can you imagine the Tea Party going along with an Interstate highway system?

Neither can I.

posted by: ASTANVET | February 23, 2014  8:11am

is it a private enterprise or not?  if customers are not happy, they would stop using it, if a business wants to attract new customers they improve their infrastructure.  The problem is with price fixing, and intervention - the GOVT has NEVER - EVER run a successful commercial enterprise.  From the post office, to amtrac (formerly PA Railroad) look up the history of govt run railroads and you will see metro north replaying itself time after time.  Riders of Metro North need to either accept a huge increase to cover the cost of upgrades, or the general public (WHO DO NOT USE THE TRAIN) accept huge tax increases to pay for upgrades.  Hmmm… which way do you think it’s going to go?