4 ms·
Minor correction but neither project in the story is managed by New York City. Although the city owns the subway, it's controlled by the MTA state agency (which
by epc 9y ago
Minor correction but neither project in the story is managed by New York City. Although the city owns the subway, it's controlled by the MTA state agency (which is also responsible for East Side Access to Grand Central).
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago> it's controlled by the MTA state agency Which the state controls because New York City ran itself into bankruptcy in the 70s and needed a bailout.
- epc 9y agoNo. The MTA was formed in the 1960s to take over operations of the then–bankrupt privately owned Long Island Railroad, assuming operations of New York City transit in late 1960s. NYCT had itself been formed in the 1940s after the then-private companies running various subway, elevated and bus routes went under. Specific to today and the article in question: The government of NYC has little to no control over the MTA, including the subways, other than bickering with the governor over funding.
- chimeracoder 9y ago> Specific to today and the article in question: The government of NYC has little to no control over the MTA, including the subways, other than bickering with the governor over funding. The MTA is an independent entity, but the state government has plenty of control over it through the contracts that control both its funding and its expansion projects. However, as the article explains, the government chooses not to exercise that authority of oversight, delegating it instead to the MTA itself (!).
- epc 9y agoRight. My point is that the MTA is controlled by New York State, not New York City. HN comments tend to conflate the two and then gloss into a general "ultra liberal bankrupt NYC" critique. Many things to criticize NYC over, but management of the subways…is a state problem.