Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2016-2017 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Transportation" - Testimonies

13 Senator Catharine M. Young
Chair, Senate Finance Committee
14
Assemblyman Herman D. Farrell, Jr.
15 Chair, Assembly Ways & Means Committee

16 PRESENT:

17 Senator Liz Krueger
Senate Finance Committee (RM)
18
Assemblyman Robert Oaks
19 Assembly Ways & Means Committee (RM)

20 Assemblyman David Gantt
Chair, Assembly Committee on Transportation
21
Assemblyman James F. Brennan
22 Chair, Assembly Committee on Corporations,
Authorities & Commissions
23
Assemblyman Michael Cusick
24

1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Transportation
2 1-20-16

3 PRESENT: (Continued)

4 Senator Thomas F. O'Mara

5 Assemblyman Phil Steck

6 Senator Diane Savino

7 Assemblyman James Skoufis

8 Senator Timothy Kennedy

9 Assemblyman Steven Otis

10 Senator Michael H. Ranzenhofer

11 Senator Martin Malave Dilan

12 Senator Patricia A. Ritchie

13 Assemblyman David G. McDonough

14 Senator Marc Panepinto

15 Senator Phil M. Boyle

16 Assemblyman Raymond Walter

17 Assemblyman Michael DenDekker

18 Senator Joseph Griffo

19 Assemblywoman Pamela J. Hunter

20 Assemblywoman Alicia Hyndman

21 Assemblyman Edward Ra

22 Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis

23 Assemblyman Todd Kaminsky

24 Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer

1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Transportation
2 1-20-16

3 PRESENT: (Continued)

4 Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr.

5 Assemblywoman Patricia Fahy

6 Assemblywoman Jo Anne Simon

7

8 LIST OF SPEAKERS

9 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

10 Matthew J. Driscoll
Commissioner
11 New York State Department
of Transportation 7 13
12
Theresa Egan
13 Executive Deputy Commissioner
New York State Department
14 of Motor Vehicles 160 166

15 Maria Lehman
Interim Executive Director
16 & Chief Operating Officer
Matt Howard
17 CFO
Gordon Cuffy
18 Counsel
NYS State Thruway Authority
19 and NYS Canal Corporation 207 212

20 Bill Carpenter
CEO, Rochester Genesee Regional
21 Transportation Authority
Vice president, New York Public
22 Transit Association 251 258

23

1 2016-2017 Executive Budget
Transportation
2 1-20-16

3 LIST OF SPEAKERS, Continued

4 STATEMENT QUESTIONS

5 Mike Elmendorf
President & COE
6 Associated General
Contractors of NYS 267 280
7
Brian P. Noonan
8 Associated Builders and
Contractors, Inc.,
9 Empire State Chapter 280 --

10 Nadine Lemmon
Director, New York and
11 Federal Policy
Tri-State Transportation
12 Campaign 285 --

13 Scott Wigger
Executive Director
14 Railroads of New York 293 299

15 Jeffrey Griswold
President
16 Michael Boesel
First Vice President
17 NYS Association of Town
Superintendents of Highways 303 313
18
Jeremy Martelle
19 President
New York Aviation Management
20 Association 318 331

21

22

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good morning.

2 Today we begin the first in the series

3 of hearings conducted by the joint fiscal

4 committees of the Legislature regarding the

5 Governor's proposed budget for fiscal year

6 2016-2017. The hearings are conducted

7 pursuant to Article 7, Section 3 of the

8 Constitution and Article 2, Section 31 and

9 32A of the Legislative Law.

10 Today the Assembly Ways and Means

11 Committee and the Senate Finance Committee

12 will hear testimony concerning the budget

13 proposal for Transportation.

14 I will now introduce members from the

15 Assembly. And Senator Young, chair of the

16 Senate Finance Committee, will introduce

17 members from the Senate.

18 We're joined by Chairman David Gantt,

19 and Michael Cusick is with us.

20 And Assemblyman Oaks?

21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yes, we're also

22 joined by the ranker on Transportation, Dave

23 McDonough.

24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We've also been

1 joined by Assemblyman Phil Steck.

2 Senator?

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thank

4 you, and good morning. And I'm delighted to

5 be here today, especially with my esteemed

6 colleague, Chairman Denny Farrell, and look

7 forward to working with everyone.

8 I'm also very happy that Assemblyman

9 Bob Oaks is here and my colleague Senator Liz

10 Krueger, who is ranking member on the Senate

11 Finance Committee.

12 I'd like to introduce members from our

13 conference. And we have Senator Tom O'Mara

14 and Senator Michael Ranzenhofer with us

15 today. I'm sure that other colleagues will

16 be joining us very shortly.

17 And at this point I'd like to turn it

18 over to Senator Liz Krueger.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

20 And I welcome Senator Young to her

21 first budget hearing as the Finance chair.

22 Some of us have done this more times than we

23 can remember. And I know that Denny and I

24 are looking forward to working with

1 Senator Young.

2 And I'm joined today by Senator Martin

3 Dilan, the ranker on Transportation, and

4 Senator Tim Kennedy from Buffalo.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And we'll have to

6 go out for spaghetti once the hearings are

7 over, to celebrate.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: TouchÈ.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Before introducing

10 the first witness, I would like to remind all

11 of the witnesses testifying today to keep

12 your statement within your allotted time

13 limit so that everyone can be afforded the

14 opportunity to speak.

15 I will now call the first witness,

16 New York State Department of Transportation

17 Commissioner Matthew Driscoll.

18 Good morning, Matt.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

20 And good morning, everyone. Chairperson

21 Young, Chairperson Farrell, Chairperson Gantt

22 and members of the legislative fiscal and

23 Transportation Committees, thank you for this

24 opportunity to discuss Governor Cuomo's

1 Executive Budget as it pertains to the

2 Department of Transportation for the

3 2016-2017 state fiscal year.

4 I'd like to acknowledge Chairpersons

5 Robach and Marcellino, who are not here, but

6 I suspect will be as well, for their

7 leadership.

8 The most important function of the

9 department is to ensure the safety of the

10 traveling public. This is accomplished

11 through conducting bridge safety assurance

12 inspections; targeted and comprehensive bus,

13 truck and freight rail inspections; providing

14 traffic signal maintenance; and performing

15 winter snow and ice control. And as you

16 might expect, snow and ice control is one of

17 the more challenging responsibilities for the

18 department, given the unpredictability of

19 weather patterns.

20 Last year, on the heels of several

21 years of extreme winter weather, Governor

22 Cuomo directed state agencies to assess and

23 strategically augment their capacity to more

24 effectively respond to these types of

1 emergencies.

2 To enhance DOT's capabilities, the

3 Governor provided the department with

4 $50 million for new winter storm equipment

5 through the NY Responds initiative. This new

6 equipment, including new graders, loaders,

7 and plow equipment is being deployed in every

8 region of the state, with an emphasis on

9 areas that are typically hit the hardest by

10 harsh winter conditions.

11 Earlier this month, the Governor

12 unveiled a bold and comprehensive

13 $22.1 billion Transportation Plan to

14 modernize and enhance New York's

15 transportation infrastructure, including

16 historic investments in roads and bridges,

17 freight goods movement, and upstate airports.

18 Specific to the Department of Transportation,

19 the Governorís proposal provides the

20 framework for a new, unprecedented

21 $20.1 billion five-year transportation

22 capital plan. This new commitment builds

23 upon $18.3 billion in core DOT funding by

24 adding $1.8 billion in new resources.

1 The Executive Budget provides

2 significant new state investments during

3 state fiscal year 2016-17 to improve

4 New York's transportation system, enhance the

5 system's resiliency, create jobs, and deliver

6 record levels of operating aid for transit

7 systems. The proposal includes more than

8 $4.3 billion in new DOT capital program

9 funding, an increase of 17 percent. Of that

10 amount, more than $3 billion in new funding

11 is provided to support the department's

12 highway and bridge program.

13 DOT's budget also provides

14 $438 million in additional funding for local

15 highway and bridge projects under the

16 Consolidated Local Streets and Highway

17 Improvement Program, better known as CHIPS;

18 $39.7 million for the local matching share of

19 federally aided projects under the

20 Marchiselli program; and an unparalleled

21 $5.2 billion to support the operation of

22 local transit systems, including increases

23 for upstate transit.

24 The Governor has also highlighted

1 several high-priority initiatives that will

2 form the core of the state's Transportation

3 Plan, many of which will provide local

4 governments with unprecedented access to

5 transportation funds. These proposed

6 strategic investments include:

7 PAVE-NY, a new $1 billion initiative

8 that will provide $500 million to help

9 municipal governments replace, rehabilitate

10 and maintain vital local bridges and invest

11 $500 million in state-owned bridges;

12 BRIDGE-NY, a new $1 billion initiative

13 that will invest $500 million to pave local

14 roads and $500 million to pave state roads;

15 A new $500 million Extreme Weather

16 Infrastructure Hardening Program to make

17 safety and resiliency enhancements to

18 roadways across the state that have proven to

19 be susceptible to flooding and other

20 extreme-weather-related events; and

21 $200 million to an Upstate Airport

22 Economic Development and Revitalization

23 Competition to accelerate investments in

24 commercial passenger and cargo service

1 airports.

2 As a former mayor, I recognize that

3 local roads and bridges matter. Too often,

4 however, local governments are forced to make

5 difficult choices between repairing and

6 replacing infrastructure. Working with local

7 governments, the department has revised its

8 project planning and development policies so

9 that municipalities can implement

10 cost-effective project solutions. At the

11 same time, the department will work with

12 municipalities to develop strong asset

13 management practices through enhanced

14 training, technical assistance and deployment

15 of innovative technologies. By working

16 cooperatively, investments in transportation

17 infrastructure will facilitate economic

18 growth, leverage private investment, and

19 create new jobs across our state.

20 In closing, let's not forget the work

21 we do is critical and the challenges we face

22 are very real. Through open and continuous

23 dialogue, collectively we will deliver the

24 transportation system that our residents

1 deserve and is necessary to maintain

2 New York's position as the Empire State.

3 I want to thank you for your time, and

4 I am available to address any questions that

5 you may have.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

7 much, Commissioner. We've been joined by

8 Assemblyman Brennan.

9 First to question, Assemblyman Gantt,

10 chairman, Transportation.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Thank you very

12 much, Chairman Farrell.

13 Welcome, Commissioner, glad to see you

14 here, glad to see that this may be a

15 different year for both us here in New York

16 State and across the country. As you know,

17 for years now we have not received that which

18 was necessary for us to run the kind of

19 programs that we believe are necessary here

20 in New York State. I will ask the question

21 that I always ask, and that's exactly where

22 do we stand with the condition of roads and

23 bridges. Are we on the upside going up, or

24 are we coming down? And what do you plan on

1 doing for us in terms of something.

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I think

3 overall we've been somewhat in the same place

4 for some time. But I would suggest to you

5 that with the new program that the Governor

6 is announcing, BRIDGE-NY, it's really going

7 to make a significant difference both for

8 local and state-owned roads. Five hundred

9 million dollars will go a long way in helping

10 to make sure that not only are they

11 maintained but also rehabilitated across the

12 State of New York. So I feel good about

13 that.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Do you intend to

15 put out a schedule of projects that are to be

16 done? Because quite often in the past we say

17 these big things, and those projects just

18 never get done for the locals. And I think

19 that many others here who sit here with me

20 will have the same question that I have in

21 terms of that.

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. So no,

23 I want to stand behind what I say. I've made

24 kind of a practice of that throughout my

1 career. Again, I think this program is going

2 to make a significant difference that the

3 Governor has announced. We are doing an

4 assessment across the state on both the local

5 side and the state side for bridges. And we

6 will be developing a competitive program

7 based on the needs of those bridges across

8 New York State.

9 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Now, when we deal

10 with the local programs, I know that each

11 year I get questions from the locals dealing

12 with CHIPS and Marchiselli in particular,

13 because those are the programs that are

14 important to them.

15 Are we planning on doing any

16 increases, substantial increases in dealing

17 with those particular programs?

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

19 know, I've spent a significant portion of

20 time making sure that I listen to the locals.

21 And I understand firsthand, having been

22 there, the challenges that they face, the

23 people that you and I both represent.

24 As I mentioned, PAVE-NY is another

1 program that the Governor has put forward in

2 this budget, another billion-dollar program

3 that is going to provide additional resources

4 to local governments so that local

5 governments will have the flexibility, in

6 addition to the CHIPS funding and the

7 Marchiselli funding, to be able to augment

8 their budgets.

9 So they will see an increase, it's

10 formula-based, they will see an increase in

11 that aid in this budget.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Will we also see

13 improvements in the condition of the roads

14 and bridges? Because I think that's what's

15 most important to us.

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, of

17 course. Right. I don't want the Department

18 of Transportation -- and I know the Governor

19 doesn't -- to spend money that doesn't make a

20 difference. We will see well over 200

21 bridges improved, and we will see over 1300

22 miles of roadways paved.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: The problem I have

24 with just that blanket statement is that in

1 the past we have said that; however, we found

2 out that they always get boxed up someplace,

3 whether it be we, the state, do not abide by

4 that which we always said we will do, and

5 that is to have a fifty-fifty in terms of

6 your hiring people, engineers and your shop.

7 Because a consistent complaint I get

8 is that it gets bottled up at the state

9 level. And when I talk to those who

10 represent those individuals who are at the

11 state level, they tell me the problem is they

12 didn't hire the staff they were supposed to

13 hire. And over the years, I've consistently

14 asked the question, are we going to hire

15 those staff members that we need to hire to

16 make sure that we get the work out the door?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So I can't

18 speak to the past, and I won't. I can only

19 speak about what I'm suggesting to you, and

20 that is moving forward. I don't believe that

21 the staffing issues are the problem. I think

22 that -- and what I mentioned was the policy

23 change that we've made here. Previously, in

24 previous administrations, the policy dictated

1 to locals how some of their federal dollars

2 might have been utilized on local roads. We

3 are not doing that anymore. We are giving

4 that decision-making ability back to the

5 locals who know it most.

6 We will be working very closely with

7 the local governments -- as I mentioned,

8 workshop training, assistance, the kind of

9 things that the department can bring to help

10 create more efficiencies with the Department

11 of Transportation and local governments. I

12 believe that we are adequately staffed to

13 handle all of those.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: When can we expect

15 that you will have for us a schedule of those

16 kinds of projects that we're talking about?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So we're going

18 through that process now. Probably late

19 spring.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Late spring. Can

21 I count on you to get a list to my office so

22 I can see what's happening? Because

23 obviously there are those of us who live

24 upstate and there's those of us who live

1 downstate, and we know what those important

2 projects are in our particular area. So I'd

3 like to get a copy of those lists.

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: When we have

5 those assessments done, we will make those

6 available.

7 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Okay.

8 Mr. Farrell, rather than have you beat me up

9 today and make me stop, I will stop here so

10 that others can have --

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: No, you can go.

12 You've got three more minutes.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Three more

14 minutes?

15 Now, the feds, I see this is the first

16 time in a long time that the feds have --

17 it's called Transportation -- FAST, is that

18 it?

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right, the new

20 surface transportation bill.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: And a long time

22 that we've had dollars that we could

23 literally count on. Where are we at with

24 that?

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I'll

2 agree it's good news. It's the first

3 long-term plan they've passed in 10 years.

4 And really the benefit of that is largely

5 planning, that it allows not only the state

6 but local governments to plan accordingly.

7 There's been some increases. Candidly,

8 they're at about the rate of inflation at

9 best. But nonetheless, that program includes

10 some new things as well, highways of

11 significance for freight movements of goods

12 and services. There are additional kinds of

13 attributes that are in the FAST bill.

14 But the good news is we have a

15 five-year bill. The good news is we have

16 five years that local governments and the

17 state can plan accordingly, based upon that

18 bill.

19 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Well, we should

20 know for the next five years there's a

21 workable plan that we can hopefully all live

22 with, and your office would be willing to

23 work with us, because there's always some

24 kinks in the armor when it's all said and

1 done. So I hope that we can work together to

2 make sure that this state, New York, which

3 has always been at the forefront of safety,

4 makes sure the people in our state are safe.

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: You can count

6 on that.

7 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Okay. Thank you

8 very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your

9 time.

10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

11 much, Chairman.

12 We've been joined by Assemblywoman

13 Alicia Hyndman, Assemblyman Kaminsky, and

14 Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer.

15 Senator?

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And we also have

17 been joined by Senator Diane Savino.

18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: And we also have

19 Assemblyman Michael DenDekker.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So, Chairman, I'd

21 like to ask some questions now.

22 So welcome, Commissioner, it's great

23 to have you here, and look forward to your

24 answers to some questions. It's wonderful

1 that you have your background in municipal

2 government, because I think that gives you a

3 great perspective as to why infrastructure is

4 so critical to the people of New York State.

5 And as you know, with the

6 Transportation Plan, traditionally it's been

7 approval of a multiyear plan that included

8 the adoption of both the DOT and the MTA

9 five-year capital plans. And that has not

10 occurred since 2011. And so as you know, the

11 Senate Republican Conference has been very

12 concerned about having relative parity

13 between DOT funding and the MTA and actually

14 having a defined five-year plan put forward.

15 So one of my questions is, is the DOT

16 going to be providing the Legislature with a

17 five-year plan? Because I believe very

18 strongly that we need that information to

19 move forward.

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, we are

21 developing a five-year plan.

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And when do we

23 expect to see the five-year plan? Because I

24 don't believe that we have the details right

1 now on it.

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. Well,

3 I would suspect that it will be at the

4 conclusion of the budget season.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: At the conclusion

6 of it? Or during --

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, sure. I

8 mean, that's a conversation between the

9 Legislature and the Executive. But we are

10 building a five-year program.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And what do you

12 anticipate, Commissioner, would be included

13 in this plan? So projects, needs

14 assessments, funding details, et cetera?

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

16 know, as I mentioned, BRIDGE-NY and PAVE-NY.

17 There's increases for mass transit in upstate

18 New York as well, which is significant and

19 I'm sure welcome.

20 There's investments in rail. So a

21 comprehensive way the investments that DOT

22 will be making as part of the Transportation

23 Plan will also help support economic

24 development initiatives across the state.

1 It's important that we think of how we not

2 only maintain our system but build upon it,

3 that we do it so that it connects with

4 economic development opportunities that are

5 already either in place or yet to come.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. So it's a

7 work in progress, you're saying, right now.

8 okay.

9 Were the details of the $2 billion in

10 Thruway Authority funding being included in

11 the five-year plan that you're just

12 referencing, or is this funding just

13 including the overall $22.1 billion DOT

14 capital program number? I'm very concerned

15 about that because I think for the first

16 time, there's Thruway funding included being

17 counted as parity toward the five-year plan

18 for DOT. So could you give us some more

19 information on that?

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, what I

21 can tell you is that the Governor's budget is

22 unprecedented in terms of the support for the

23 Department of Transportation. In this budget

24 there's $20.1 billion for a five-year plan.

1 That's up from 18.3. As I've said and

2 outlined, there's some new initiatives here

3 that really I believe wholeheartedly are

4 really going to benefit local government,

5 that will make a significant difference,

6 particularly the BRIDGE-NY and the PAVE-NY

7 program.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: But traditionally

9 Thruway Authority funding has not been

10 included in the parity numbers, is that

11 correct?

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: To my

13 knowledge. But I can't speak to the Thruway.

14 That would be a question for them. But they

15 are receiving $2 billion.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: But I guess what

17 the issue is is that these funding sources

18 for the Thruway Authority haven't been

19 included as parity in the past. And it looks

20 like under the Governor's proposal that they

21 are included and added. And so does that

22 skew the parity issue?

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, to me,

24 as I mentioned, I'm charged with operating

1 the Department of Transportation, and the

2 unprecedented level of funding is going to go

3 a long way, more than it ever has before, to

4 not only maintain the system statewide but

5 enhance it. So I'm very pleased with the

6 $20.1 billion budget for the Department of

7 Transportation.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

9 I wanted to touch on the transit

10 operating assistance. There's an overall

11 increase of nearly $224 million. And the MTA

12 would receive a $201 million increase while

13 downstate non-MTA transit systems would

14 receive a $17.4 million increase. And both

15 of those are attributable to an increase in

16 downstate dedicated revenues.

17 Upstate transit systems would receive

18 a $5 million increase which would be provided

19 from the Dedicated Mass Transportation Trust

20 Fund. Unlike downstate, upstate transit

21 dedicated revenues continue to decline. And

22 so my question is do you believe that there's

23 a structural funding problem in regard to

24 upstate transit? And if so, what steps can

1 be taken to ensure that upstate transit

2 operators, including the systems in Syracuse,

3 Buffalo, Rochester and Albany, have more

4 reliable and predictable funding?

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

6 know, I would say for upstate transit there's

7 an increase this year. It's going to be

8 providing a record for upstate, $194 million.

9 So that's a significant increase over last

10 year. It also includes $5 million for

11 additional capital. So in terms of upstate

12 transit, I think that that is going to make

13 people feel pretty good to see those types of

14 increases, to help them continue the very

15 important service that we need in upstate

16 New York.

17 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Will there be a

18 multiyear capital program for upstate transit

19 included in the five-year DOT capital plan?

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: The transit

21 plan is included, incorporated into our

22 five-year budget.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: It will be. Okay,

24 thank you.

1 You touched on the BRIDGE-NY program

2 and the $1 billion PAVE-NY program for state

3 and local roads and bridges from new and

4 existing DOT funding. So how will these -- I

5 think Assemblyman Gantt touched on this, but

6 how will these projects be selected?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay, so the

8 BRIDGE-NY program is competitive. So there's

9 $500 million for local bridges and $500

10 million for state-owned bridges. The state

11 owns the majority of the bridges, by the way.

12 It will be based on not geographic, but it

13 will be based on conditions, frequency use,

14 how often a bridge may be used. That scoring

15 is being developed as we speak, it's not

16 complete, but that's how that will work.

17 On the PAVE-NY, there's a formula that

18 will disseminate those funds to local

19 governments and to state-owned roads.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So it's strictly

21 scoring by DOT. Will there be any local

22 input on these projects? Will local

23 governments be able to weigh in?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, on the

1 BRIDGE-NY they'll certainly want to compete

2 for those. And any requisite information

3 that we would need, we'd ask of them. But

4 the decision will rest with the DOT scoring

5 system.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 And finally -- and I've got 2 minutes

8 and 58 seconds left. But the Executive

9 proposes a $200 million upstate airport

10 competition which would provide $40 million

11 in funding to five eligible upstate airports.

12 And I believe there are a total of 74

13 airports.

14 And so I guess one of the questions

15 might be, and is, when would this program be

16 initiated? And actually over how many years,

17 also?

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, it's

19 going to be initiated right away. We're

20 developing the criteria now. You're correct,

21 there's 74 upstate airports who will develop

22 plans and submit them to the Department of

23 Transportation. There will be five winners

24 of $40 million each.

1 But I would say this, too, as someone

2 who had an airport under my watch. The plans

3 that folks develop, whether they win or not,

4 are useful plans going forward because

5 airports are constantly changing, the

6 economies of airports are changing. So I

7 think the competition is a good thing.

8 But there will be 74 airports who are

9 eligible to compete. There will be five

10 winners of that competition.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What happens to the

12 remainder of the airports? There will be

13 funding available for ongoing maintenance

14 issues, is that right?

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: There's still the

17 traditional, what is it, $6 million?

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: There's the

19 traditional -- yup, there's the traditional.

20 We have -- $5 million will still be available

21 for local match for the federal airport

22 programs, et cetera.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: What is the goal of

24 the competition? Are you looking to

1 regionalize and maybe eliminate some of the

2 airports that exist? That's a question that

3 I'm concerned about because, as you know,

4 upstate is very vast and there are miles and

5 miles sometimes in between airports. So

6 could you address that?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah, there's

8 no desire to eliminate the airports at all.

9 As you point out, upstate New York is very

10 vast and communities need their airports for

11 services to people and industry.

12 It's really designed to help continue

13 to spur economic development opportunities in

14 upstate New York. You know, we live in a

15 changing environment. You know, the global

16 economy is changing every day. You know,

17 next year or this year, rather, you'll see

18 the opening of the Panama Canal. That's

19 going to dramatically change how goods are

20 shipped and how they're received and how

21 they're distributed throughout not only

22 New York but other states as well.

23 So I think, you know, the genius of

24 the plan is to really help prepare people to

1 meet those challenges and to really help

2 people figure out how, on a regional basis,

3 they can utilize an important asset, which an

4 airport is, to help further their economic

5 mission.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

7 much.

8 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And we have

10 10 seconds to spare. So thank you.

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

12 SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you, Senator.

13 We've been joined by Assemblywoman Pam

14 Hunter and Assemblyman Skoufis.

15 Next to question, Assemblyman Cusick.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Thank you,

17 Mr. Chairman.

18 Commissioner Driscoll, good to see

19 you. I'm going to be brief, but I'm going to

20 ask about -- I know DOT has less jurisdiction

21 in New York City than it does upstate, so I'm

22 going to ask a little bit about New York City

23 issues, particularly the Staten Island

24 Expressway. Could you give us an update on

1 where we are with the completion of the

2 Staten Island Expressway?

3 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah, I

4 believe the project is largely completed.

5 We've done a significant amount of work on

6 the BQE as well as the Gowanus expressway as

7 well. The HOV on that particular lane, which

8 I happened to be on for the first time just a

9 few weeks ago, seems to be working quite

10 well.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Okay. Well, I

12 wanted to ask about the HOV also. There has

13 been -- as someone who lives on Staten

14 Island, and I know my colleagues from Staten

15 Island will probably be asking similar

16 questions, there has been major tie-ups and

17 backups on the Staten Island Expressway.

18 There have been folks who have speculated

19 what the problems may be. Folks do point at

20 the HOV and also the connection with the

21 Gowanus.

22 Is there any coordination going on as

23 to figuring out what is causing some of these

24 major tie-ups in the last, I would just -- I

1 would say in the last three weeks or a month?

2 Is there anything, any investigation going on

3 by State DOT on these?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

5 know, I would say, to me, there's a lot of

6 people certainly that live in those areas and

7 in fact all of the boroughs, but in

8 particular Staten Island as well. And if you

9 look at the traffic counts for the Gowanus

10 and the BQE and you -- you know, you look at

11 rush-hour traffic. So from, you know, 7 to

12 10 in the morning and 4 to 7 at night, the

13 Gowanus is about 163,000 users and the BQE is

14 about 150,000.

15 So what I'm getting at is there's a

16 lot of people on the road in a condensed

17 period of time, and then accidents occur.

18 And when accidents occur, that's where you're

19 seeing these choke points that are creating

20 huge time delays for people, because it does

21 take time to have, you know, the scene

22 addressed.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: When there's an

24 accident, say in the HOV lane, how is that

1 dealt with? Is that DOT, or does DOT

2 coordinate with NYPD? And how quick, what is

3 the reaction time of cleaning that up so that

4 the HOV lane is usable?

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. Well,

6 I don't know the exact reaction time. But

7 the City of New York is responsible for, you

8 know, having the police get on that highway

9 and having the appropriate trucks remove the

10 vehicles that have been involved in an

11 accident.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: And when the

13 Verrazano Bridge, which is run by the MTA,

14 when it's closed for construction or anything

15 like that, what is the lead time given to

16 State DOT as to notice? Because that's also

17 another issue too, is the coordination of --

18 I know there's a lot of construction going on

19 on the Verrazano, the Gowanus, the BQE.

20 What's the lead time that you're giving a

21 notice as to what is happening and you can

22 inform, then, elected officials and then the

23 public?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. Well,

1 I think during the project development phase

2 DOT is notified. But quite honestly, you

3 know, that's an exact area that I've been

4 reaching out on, to -- I'm fairly new in this

5 position in terms of understanding the

6 coordination between the agencies. And

7 that's an effort that will continue. I'm

8 still getting my arms around that.

9 But I do know that in project

10 development there's coordination between the

11 agencies. If there's road closures, we are

12 made aware of it. And, you know, I'm all

13 about protocol, so I like to make sure that

14 local officials like yourself certainly are

15 aware in advance, you know, that there may be

16 a closing or a detour.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: And we do

18 appreciate that.

19 With the HOV lane, I know that many

20 commuters, not only Staten Islanders but

21 people in the region, in Jersey and other

22 parts of New York City, they use the HOV lane

23 to go from the Staten Island side of the

24 Verrazano Bridge over into the Gowanus. And

1 I know that recently in the last couple of

2 holidays you've kept those HOV lanes open in

3 the Gowanus. Is that going to be a practice

4 that DOT will keep doing, keeping it open on

5 holidays?

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah, the same

7 schedule. And I believe that this was the

8 first holiday that that might have been open.

9 We want to make sure that that continues.

10 We're, by the way, working with the

11 City DOT, you know, on this very issue. So I

12 think the HOV lane has thus far proved very

13 successful.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: And the HOV lane

15 is vital for many commuters to get to work,

16 particularly the folks who take the express

17 buses into the City for work.

18 With the HOV lane, is everything

19 complete? Is construction complete on the

20 HOV lanes with the Staten Island Expressway?

21 Are there any plans of making any additions

22 in this phase or maybe you saw that there

23 might be some changes needed somewhere?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: To my

1 knowledge, the work is substantially

2 completed.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Okay. I know

4 that there are a few elected officials on

5 Staten Island that have made some suggestions

6 concerning HOV, and I just wanted to say that

7 we've been working with your regional offices

8 to talk about if there are some changes that

9 may be needed, some kinks in the armor

10 that -- after everything is going. And you

11 have been very open to us and to the other

12 elected officials in the region and out on

13 Staten Island.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I'm happy

15 to meet with you and anyone else on that as

16 well so, you know, I can also better

17 understand the challenges as well.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Yes. Because the

19 expressway, as I said, is vital not only to

20 the residents of Staten Island but to the

21 entire region for business and for getting to

22 work on a daily basis.

23 Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you,

24 Mr. Chairman.

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

2 Senator?

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes, next I'd like

4 to have Senator O'Mara ask questions.

5 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you,

6 Chairwoman.

7 Good morning, Commissioner, and thank

8 you for being here. As Senator Young touched

9 on briefly in her comments, obviously parity

10 is of primary importance to those of us

11 representing upstate areas. The parity, as

12 I've seen it reported as recently as over

13 this weekend, is -- and correct me if I'm

14 wrong -- that it's been a $22 billion

15 proposal for upstate and a $26 billion

16 proposal for MTA. Is that generally accurate

17 figures?

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm honestly

19 not sure what the MTA number is, but

20 $22 billion is the Transportation budget.

21 SENATOR O'MARA: Well, there was an

22 announcement earlier in the year between

23 Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio about I

24 believe it was a $8.38 billion figure for

1 MTA. Do you know whether that 8.3 billion is

2 per year, and for how many years that

3 commitment is for?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I don't. I

5 would suspect that that's a conversation

6 between the Legislature and the Executive.

7 SENATOR O'MARA: With regards to CHIPS

8 funding, as I read the Executive Budget so

9 far there is no increase for CHIPS funding?

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: That's

11 correct. It's the same amount as last year.

12 SENATOR O'MARA: And with the other

13 $22 billion for upstate roads and bridges,

14 how much of that will be going towards local

15 roads and bridges, as opposed to state?

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well,

17 $500 million for each program. Recall we

18 have the BRIDGE-NY program for a billion

19 dollars and the PAVE-NY program.

20 So I'd add that the PAVE-NY program

21 will really be in addition to CHIPS funding,

22 as an example, because it will provide

23 across-the-board additional resources for

24 local governments.

1 SENATOR O'MARA: Is it the intention

2 to distribute those monies in the same kind

3 of formula fashion as CHIPS is distributed?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: There is a

5 formula, but I can't say to you with

6 certainty that it's the same.

7 SENATOR O'MARA: Do we have that

8 available as far as where that spending is

9 going to be for upstate roads and bridges --

10 or local roads and bridges?

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Those have not

12 been identified yet, but we will have that

13 information. We're poring through building

14 the criteria now.

15 SENATOR O'MARA: Now, with regards to

16 the Dedicated Highway, Bridge and Trust Fund,

17 it's my understanding that that brings in

18 roughly 6-point-some billion dollars a year.

19 Could you explain -- if that number is

20 accurate; correct me if it's not -- how that

21 money is broken out, where that's spent?

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I can't, but

23 I'd be happy to get you those answers.

24 SENATOR O'MARA: I would. My

1 understanding is that the Dedicated Highway,

2 Bridge and Trust Fund, the intention when it

3 was set up was to be towards capital funding

4 for roads and bridges. And it seems that a

5 lot of that goes towards regular maintenance

6 as opposed to capital projects. And also a

7 great deal that seems to go to administration

8 as well rather than capital projects. So

9 that's certainly a concern of mine in those

10 resources not being used as they were

11 originally intended that are collected

12 through a variety of driver's fees and fees

13 at the gas pumps as well.

14 So it's important to all of us in this

15 state that money is spent the way it was

16 intended as it's collected. And I think it's

17 been a long time since that hasn't been

18 followed, and I would like your attention at

19 that, and maybe an explanation as to the

20 breakout of how those funds are currently

21 being expended, proposed for this year.

22 On public transit in upstate, we seem

23 to have a bit of a battle and dispute going

24 on between the Department of Transportation

1 and the Department of Health as it comes to

2 non-emergency Medicaid transportation and the

3 use of public transit for those rides. And

4 my rural counties that I represent are

5 struggling greatly with rides being assigned

6 to taxi companies rather than through the

7 public transit that is provided by the

8 counties or in some cases by the ARCs of the

9 county, to the point where one adjacent

10 county to mine, Tioga County, has completely

11 shut down their transit system because of

12 loss of ridership because of non-emergency

13 Medicaid transportation no longer being

14 directed to public transit.

15 I believe the Department of

16 Transportation has been supportive in my

17 efforts and my colleagues' efforts to rectify

18 that. We're still having quite a battle with

19 the Department of Health, who is assigning

20 those rides. Are you up to speed on that

21 issue, and can you address what DOT is doing

22 with regards to non-emergency Medicaid

23 transportation, trying to get those rides on

24 our public transit systems?

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So that's the

2 first I've heard of that. But I will be

3 reaching out to the Department of Health as

4 well to understand what their thinking is

5 related to that.

6 SENATOR O'MARA: At last year's budget

7 there was some $4 million that was allocated

8 towards rural public transit systems to make

9 up for this loss of ridership. So there's an

10 acknowledgment that it's having an impact.

11 That was last year's budget, $4 million was

12 appropriated. None of it has been

13 distributed to our rural transit systems,

14 which are dying on the vine right now with

15 the lack of ridership.

16 And I would encourage you to look into

17 that, Commissioner, because as more and more

18 of our rural counties shut down their transit

19 systems, that's not going to help anybody,

20 including those that are -- the Medicaid

21 recipients that are getting these rides and

22 the like in that regard.

23 One final question with regards to the

24 Tappan Zee Bridge. Can you explain to us how

1 the state is going to pay for the Tappan Zee

2 Bridge?

3 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I don't have

4 the knowledge of that final plan. Obviously

5 they received a TIFIA loan, that work

6 continues, great progress is being made. The

7 final plan is not yet available.

8 SENATOR O'MARA: Who is putting that

9 plan together?

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: That would be

11 a question for the Thruway Authority.

12 SENATOR O'MARA: Thank you very much,

13 Commissioner.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you. We've

16 been joined by Assemblywoman Simon.

17 Next, Assemblyman Brennan.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Good morning,

19 Commissioner. I just wanted to discuss a

20 little bit about the overall perspectives

21 associated with the DOT capital plan.

22 This is the second year of a five-year

23 plan. But as we had last year, there was not

24 a project list submitted as of the time of

1 the budget. Can you tell us when you will be

2 submitting a project list for the DOT capital

3 plan?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: My

5 understanding is we've lived up to that

6 commitment and we're working with the

7 Legislature on those projects.

8 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Well, isn't it

9 more useful for the general public and the

10 members of the Legislature to see in advance

11 what the project list is proposed, so that

12 there can be some kind of understanding and

13 some kind of input into that?

14 I mean, usually the past couple of

15 years we've had an MOU that has been

16 negotiated, you know, in the last 48 hours of

17 the budget and no list prior to that. So I

18 don't really think that's such a great

19 process. Can you possibly change the

20 process?

21 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, yeah, I

22 can't speak to the MOU, but I can tell you

23 that the projects that were part of that are

24 being honored. Now, we're working with the

1 Legislature, who has the projects --

2 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Well, they were

3 appropriated in the -- I mean, they were

4 pursuant to the MOU, so they're on a list

5 pursuant to an appropriation.

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right, and

7 we --

8 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: So you're

9 supposed to do that anyway, right?

10 THE SPEAKER: And we are honoring that

11 commitment.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Okay. But as

13 far as you know, there's not going to be a

14 public list anytime in the near future other

15 than what we see at the time of adoption?

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Well, I wouldn't

17 speculate on that.

18 I would say that with regard to the

19 last project list, as I said, we've provided

20 that to the Legislature, and we are living

21 that commitment.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Okay, I

23 understand that.

24 And as far as a letting level is

1 concerned, do you publish a letting level for

2 the next three years sometime in the near

3 future?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm sorry, did

5 you say letting --

6 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: A letting level.

7 How much actually goes out the door and

8 pursuant to a contract.

9 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, sure.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: You will be --

11 when will you be publishing that?

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: When we have

13 the project list fully developed from the

14 Legislature.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: At the same time

16 as the MOU as of the practice beforehand?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Again, I can't

18 speak to what the practice was previously.

19 As I mentioned, the MOU that ultimately was

20 not signed yet still included projects, we

21 are honoring those commitments and we are

22 working with the Legislature on those

23 projects.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Okay. So it's

1 good to see an increase in the five-year

2 capital budget. You mentioned or in the

3 Executive Budget it shows an increase of

4 $3.8 billion between state and federal funds.

5 How much -- how is that divided between state

6 and federal?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, so for

8 this year, it's 1.8 billion, so there will be

9 1.1 billion in state funds and 700 million in

10 federal.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: That is the

12 increase?

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: And what is the

15 source of the additional state funds? What

16 is the source of funds for that $1.1 billion.

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: State funding.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Is it cash from

19 the General Fund? Is it borrowing --

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: That would be

21 a question for the Department of Budget, but

22 I'd be happy to get you the answer as well.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: It's not

24 included in your budget how it will be

1 financed?

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: They're state

3 funds.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN BRENNAN: Okay. No more

5 questions. Thank you.

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

7 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

8 Senator?

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Krueger.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Senator Marty Dilan.

11 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you very much,

12 Madam Chairperson.

13 Good morning, Commissioner.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

15 SENATOR DILAN: I have the same

16 concerns regarding the project list and MOU.

17 Despite the fact that we may be in the second

18 year of a five-year plan, we constantly get

19 the same responses and no project list and no

20 MOU, and then we're expected to vote blindly

21 on these projects. So I just wanted to note

22 that for the record.

23 But I want to know how did DOT's

24 overtime and consulting costs change during

1 the 2010-2014 capital plan, relative to its

2 projections? How have overtime and

3 consulting expenses changed since the passage

4 of design/build?

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So as you're

6 aware, the typical breakdown has been about

7 50/50 in house versus consultants. That has

8 not changed.

9 In terms of the dollar amount on a

10 change, I don't believe that there's been a

11 change. We've been pretty consistent,

12 historically, on those costs.

13 SENATOR DILAN: Can you give us a

14 status report on the implementation of

15 design/build legislation since it passed in

16 2011 and what percentage of DOT's capital

17 programs use design/build or best value

18 procurement, and can you explain how

19 design/build generated the fiscal time and

20 savings projections that were cited and how

21 design/build procurements are audited by your

22 department?

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. I

24 don't think I can give you a percentage of

1 that. I can tell you that the design/build

2 process has awarded 23 contracts totaling

3 about $1.1 billion.

4 The reality is design/build is really

5 a faster process to get projects done. And,

6 you know, there's an old saying time is

7 money. So it's been very successful. The

8 K Bridge in the City is a great example of a

9 design/build project. It's moving along

10 wonderfully. But design/build has been very

11 successful, and I would suggest respectfully

12 to this body that making that a permanent

13 option for the Department of Transportation

14 would be welcome.

15 SENATOR DILAN: With respect to the

16 Kosciuszko Bridge, can you give us the status

17 of that? And that also is a design/build

18 project, so --

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: It is. It is.

20 And I had the good fortune of being there

21 about a month ago to take a look at that.

22 It's on time, it's on budget, is my

23 understanding. And as you can see, progress

24 is being made. So it is on time, the

1 progress is working well, the partnership

2 with the design/build firms is working

3 wonderfully. And I think it's a great

4 example, particularly in a very kind of

5 condensed area, of why design/build can make

6 good sense when time so important.

7 SENATOR DILAN: Okay. I want to move

8 to the $200 million for upstate airport

9 revitalization. And there is a lot of talk

10 about parity. Is there any expected funds

11 that will go to New York City airports? And

12 are you involved in the LaGuardia Airport

13 revitalization?

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So on the

15 LaGuardia Airport we are helping coordinate,

16 with the Port Authority, access on the Grand

17 Central Parkway for construction activity at

18 the airport. That's the extent of our

19 involvement.

20 You know, with respect to the upstate

21 airport initiative that the Governor put

22 forth, it is for the 74 airports that are

23 upstate. And I think, you know, the

24 Governor's efforts clearly, with LaGuardia as

1 an example, really demonstrate the need to

2 upgrade these facilities, not only in the

3 city area but certainly in upstate.

4 As I mentioned, it's a competitive

5 program. There will be five winners out of

6 74 who would compete. But again, I want to

7 say that I think it's a healthy exercise for

8 localities or airport operators to develop

9 their plans, because it helps them think

10 long-term. So I think it's a great program.

11 It is focused on upstate New York and not the

12 City, sir.

13 SENATOR DILAN: Okay. Years back

14 there was a lot of talk with respect to

15 high-speed rail. And during that time there

16 were federal funds that were given to

17 New York State initially, and I believe that

18 there was another state, I believe it was

19 Florida, who refused their funds, and that

20 eventually was awarded to New York State.

21 Can you tell us what progress has been

22 made with respect to high-speed rail in

23 New York?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure. Sure.

1 We're making progress. And, you know, this

2 is a really long-term effort that really must

3 rely on the federal government as well as a

4 partner.

5 But in the Rensselaer Station, the

6 fourth track is being added. In Schenectady,

7 the double track is being constructed.

8 Historically for those of us that live west

9 of Albany, Schenectady has been somewhat of a

10 choke point in terms of time. That is

11 getting addressed.

12 But going forward, there's lots of

13 work and signalization and other areas that

14 will need to continue, and we'll need to work

15 very closely with our partner in the federal

16 government to help support those efforts.

17 SENATOR DILAN: But how are those

18 federal funds being spent or utilized?

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: As I just

20 mentioned, there's two concrete examples, in

21 Rensselaer adding the fourth track, which

22 moves traffic flows over because there's this

23 tension between cargo and passenger. And the

24 same in Schenectady where, you know,

1 historically a train could sit, be parked to

2 the side for up to 45 minutes.

3 You know, my personal opinion is on

4 high-speed rail it's really not the speed

5 that the trains can travel at. Because right

6 now trains can travel up to a hundred miles

7 an hour in certain areas. But they make a

8 lot of stops. There's these two areas that I

9 mentioned that really slow the system down.

10 There's signalization challenges that need to

11 be upgraded as well. And we have a strong

12 commitment to work with our federal partner

13 to continue to fund those efforts going

14 forward.

15 We're also doing new stations. We

16 will be doing it in Schenectady. We are

17 under construction in Rochester modernizing

18 that facility. So work is progressing.

19 SENATOR DILAN: Okay. And my final

20 question is with respect to MWBEs. If you

21 can give us your dollar value in past capital

22 program years. And what do you expect for

23 the new five-year capital plan with that

24 respect?

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: You know, the

2 Governor clearly has set the bar very high

3 for MWBE. I think we lead the nation, you

4 know, in those goals. And I think that's an

5 admirable thing to do, by the way.

6 DOT has worked very hard to make sure

7 that we are utilizing the training that we

8 can in each of our regions. I don't view

9 this as a one size fits all, because I think

10 that there's different challenges in

11 different parts of the state. But since I've

12 been in, we have been communicating with our

13 folks in the regions about outreach, getting

14 out there helping to educate and train

15 MWBE/DBEs in terms of the opportunities that

16 exist with the Department of Transportation.

17 And I think our numbers are pretty

18 healthy.

19 SENATOR DILAN: So do you have an

20 actual dollar value, or you will get back to

21 us with that?

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I don't have a

23 dollar value, but we're about 17 percent on

24 WBE and when it's all in with DBE, we're

1 about 26 percent. So we're doing very well,

2 but that's not good enough. We need to

3 continue to do more outreach, training

4 programs for our industry partners across the

5 State of New York in every region.

6 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you very much,

7 Commissioner.

8 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I'm

9 committed to that.

10 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

12 Assemblyman Kaminsky.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Before that,

14 Chairman, I'd like to say that Senator Patty

15 Ritchie has joined us.

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: And also Senator

17 Marc Panepinto.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Good morning,

19 Commissioner. How are you? I just want to

20 ask you a few questions about some

21 transportation projects on southern

22 Long Island, if that's okay.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: So the first

1 involves State Route 878. And I'm sure you

2 have a lot -- it's a big state and a lot of

3 roads to deal with. 878 connects the Five

4 Towns area and a good part of the Long Beach

5 Barrier Island with Queens, JFK Airport and

6 the rest of New York City.

7 And the number-one complaint I guess

8 I've received in my term so far involves the

9 congestion and the flooding on Route 878. A

10 lot of people spend a lot of time either

11 repairing their cars after driving on it,

12 stuck in traffic or stuck in floods.

13 And the first question I had for you

14 before I get into the road itself is about

15 state priority roads. How do you go about

16 determining what road gets priority status

17 and what doesn't? And then I'll ask

18 specifically about this one.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

20 know, I think we do a historical overview and

21 look at where roads have been impacted by

22 extreme events such as the one that you're

23 mentioning, you know, with flooding. This

24 might be an opportunity with the program I

1 outlined early on, which was the Extreme

2 Weather Program that the Governor is

3 promoting in this budget as well.

4 So we try to do a thoughtful analysis

5 of where these particular roadways are that

6 may not just be impacted by extreme weather

7 events -- flooding, in the example that you

8 cited -- but also in road conditions, traffic

9 counts, et cetera.

10 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Sure. And

11 after Hurricane Sandy, the fact of 878 being

12 a key evacuation route was really highlighted

13 for people, and it's scary.

14 So I brought a photo I blew up just to

15 show you what happens on a day where there's

16 just regular rain. This wasn't a storm,

17 there was no -- you would have heard on the

18 news "Rain tomorrow." And this is what you

19 get on a regular rainy afternoon. And you

20 can obviously see that this is to the

21 consternation of a lot of taxpayers who don't

22 understand why this has been this way for so

23 long.

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. Is

1 that ponding on the left-hand side?

2 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Yes.

3 So what we have as a result,

4 unfortunately, is this is a symbol for a lot

5 of people beyond their driving trouble, it's

6 a symbol of government failure. And I think

7 a lot of that has to do with the fact that

8 you have two different regions of DOT

9 intersecting right there between Nassau or

10 Long Island and the City. You have the

11 county having a part of the roadway that kind

12 of is right around there too, and so it's

13 difficult.

14 What I was able to unearth was DOT did

15 a study on congestion in the area, and

16 flooding, a few years ago, just in I believe

17 2011 or 2012. And I've worked with some of

18 your regional directors on it. But it's kind

19 of gotten buried in the attic, so to speak,

20 and I would appreciate if you could look at

21 it and give it some attention.

22 For a relatively modest sum, expanding

23 a lane in one direction or the other, I think

24 some great improvements could be made. And I

1 think because it's an evacuation route and

2 because it's gotten inattention for so long,

3 making the flooding and the congestion a

4 priority would be much appreciated by a lot

5 of Long Islanders.

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay. And did

7 you say that was 2012 you thought that study

8 was?

9 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Yeah. I have

10 the study; I could pass it on to your staff

11 if you like.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay. Yeah,

13 we'll definitely take a look and I'll get

14 back to you.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Okay, thank

16 you. The second thing is I'm sure you

17 appreciate when politicians ask for funds for

18 a program and then, when you're doing the

19 program, complain about the chaos it causes

20 in the area. I'll try not to do that.

21 You are investing money to repair the

22 Loop Parkway drawbridge, which is the eastern

23 end of the Barrier Island up. And it's a

24 needed repair, and that's appreciated. But

1 my understanding is that it will be shut down

2 for entire weekends in the upcoming year.

3 And I'd just ask that you pay attention to

4 that, to try to minimize the impact it will

5 cause. There will be thousands of people in

6 my area who will have to take a tremendous

7 detour just to get off the island on certain

8 weekends, so making sure we minimize the

9 impact of that is appreciated. But I do

10 appreciate you modernizing our bridges, and I

11 thank you for that.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure. And I

13 appreciate that. And look, I mean, we're

14 going to have to shut that down for the

15 weekend to get the work done that's got to be

16 done; there's going to be some disruption.

17 But what we will make sure is that we are

18 giving as much advance notice, you know, to

19 folks so they know where the proper ways will

20 be to avoid that closure during the time of

21 construction.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Okay. And,

23 look, I'm not an engineer, but if you could

24 just make sure that those closures are

1 absolutely necessary, that would be

2 appreciated as well.

3 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay, sure.

4 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: And lastly, I

5 drove up to Albany this morning and heard

6 apocalyptic weather reports about coastal

7 flooding this weekend. And I actually, after

8 having lived through Irene and Sandy, take

9 that seriously. So I'd just ask that you

10 spend some time this week considering how

11 that will impact coastal areas in our region

12 and help us be prepared in case the flooding

13 is more serious than we'd like.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. And

15 just so everybody knows, we've been meeting,

16 they're meeting right now on it, we've been

17 in discussions since yesterday with New York

18 Responds, DHSES, and other emergency service

19 providers, coordinating efforts. We're

20 tracking the storm to see what happens. Just

21 know that we have -- all of our salt sheds

22 are fully up, they're full on Long Island.

23 We have plenty of equipment and manpower, and

24 we're prepared to respond.

1 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Thank you, and

2 I appreciate that.

3 The Governor's Office of Storm

4 Recovery has worked with our communities to

5 come up with coastal mitigation projects,

6 sometimes very involved projects that cost a

7 lot of money. And we are very excited for

8 that, but they're not there yet. And

9 obviously that's not your department. But

10 the point is we almost, in many cases, are no

11 better prepared for flooding than we were the

12 day before Sandy. So, you know, please keep

13 that in mind in making your preparations.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I will.

15 And I have some familiarity with that from my

16 previous career, and you're correct, there's

17 been a lot of -- with the erosion of the

18 coastal sea grasses in particular, that acted

19 as kind of a protective barrier. So I know

20 the requisite agencies, DEC, EFC and others,

21 are working with EPA to secure funding to

22 really make sure that those protection

23 barriers are in place.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN KAMINSKY: Okay, thank

1 you. I look forward to working with you on

2 these projects. Take care.

3 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

6 Next we'll hear from Senator Michael

7 Ranzenhofer.

8 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Good morning.

9 Thank you, Commissioner.

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

11 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: I just want to

12 ask you about one of the comments that you

13 had made earlier when Senator Young asked you

14 about parity and you were talking about your

15 budget and you said words to the effect that

16 you are given a budget to administer in the

17 Department of Transportation and parity, you

18 know, that's not your issue.

19 It is my issue. And it is an issue

20 for a number of people, my colleagues

21 especially upstate, who are very concerned

22 about parity because if the money is not

23 flowing to our region, then the roads and

24 bridges are not being adequately addressed.

1 I just want to tell you that that is a

2 concern of mine.

3 And one of the things that you've

4 mentioned is right now you're readdressing

5 the formula. And several years ago the

6 formula was recalculated to the advantage of

7 some areas and then to the disadvantage of

8 other areas. My area in particular, the

9 Western New York region, did not benefit by

10 the recalculation of the formula.

11 So if you're now revising the formula

12 again, this will be the third reiteration of

13 this formula for distributing funds. And I

14 wanted to ask you when is the formula going

15 to be ready and why is the formula being

16 changed again? Because it seemed like when

17 you made the second change, it was more

18 subjective as opposed to just number of lane

19 miles, as it had been previously for many,

20 many years.

21 So what's the rational behind the

22 readjustment of the formula? Because that

23 ties into the parity question, which I

24 believe my area in Western New York was

1 adversely affected. So if you can tell me

2 when it's going to be done and why it's going

3 to be done and what the new formula's going

4 to be and how it's different from the second

5 version.

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So we're not

7 changing previous formulas. I talked about

8 the development of a formula for the new

9 PAVE-NY program. And that really will help

10 support dollars that localities are

11 receiving, you know, otherwise through CHIPS.

12 So it will be in addition to.

13 So we are creating a formula for the

14 distribution of those funds. When it will be

15 done, you know, I can't tell you with

16 certainty. I would hope that it would be

17 done by late spring. But we are working on

18 that now.

19 You know, I'm hesitant to give you a

20 time frame because, candidly, I don't know

21 what it is and I don't want to be wrong. But

22 we are working on a new formula for the

23 distribution of those dollars for the PAVE-NY

24 program.

1 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Okay. Are you

2 planning on getting those dollars out the

3 door this year?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm sure that

5 the locals would love us to do that. And I

6 recognize, having been in that position as

7 well, how important that is. So when we're

8 ready to go, we'll want to make those

9 disbursements as soon as we can.

10 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Okay. Because

11 one of the things that we deal with just on a

12 day-to-day basis -- and this was brought up

13 earlier as well in terms of your letting

14 process and then your award process. I mean,

15 all too often my experience is, you know,

16 you'll be soliciting bids in February and

17 March and April and then you get backed up

18 because of the construction season and then

19 the project gets done the following year.

20 The concern I have for your PAVE-NY

21 and BRIDGE-NY program is that if you're not

22 going to have your formulas in place until

23 the late spring, how can you possibly then do

24 the letting process, award the contracts --

1 with all the time delays that are built in --

2 and actually get the work done this year? So

3 that's my concern, is that we can do the work

4 this year.

5 So how would we be able to actually

6 get the projects out the door, get the men

7 and women working, get the roads paved this

8 year with that timetable that you've alluded

9 to?

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. And

11 so, I mean, you know, you're correct to point

12 that out. That's a discussion that I had

13 soon upon my arrival at the department, was

14 the coordination and the timing of the

15 lettings and how the construction efforts

16 roll out, absent from the funding piece.

17 We have a short window for

18 construction in New York State, let's face

19 it. It's about five months, six months.

20 This year was a little better because we've

21 so far -- knock on wood -- had a pretty fair

22 and mild winter.

23 But having said that, you know, it's

24 really a timing issue and a coordination

1 issue. So as we develop this formula and as

2 we understand where projects lie, some

3 projects may not be just a one-year summer

4 project as well. They're all different.

5 But as best that we can coordinate

6 those, we want to do that for efficiencies on

7 the local level and, candidly, for

8 efficiencies from our end as well. Because

9 if we have dollars available to support local

10 efforts, we want to get those out the door.

11 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Okay. Because

12 one of the comments that you also made

13 earlier, and I quote, you said "Time is

14 money." And obviously if the projects are

15 delayed, they're going to be more costly. If

16 they're delayed into the next construction

17 season, the costs are going to go up more

18 than anybody wants to do.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure.

20 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: So what can you

21 say to assure us that, you know, there's

22 going to be some sort of change within the

23 department to get these projects done more

24 quickly?

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I mean,

2 look, I'm not going make a promise about

3 something that might happen in the weather to

4 delay a project or some unforeseen event.

5 You know, many times in construction

6 in particular, sometimes you find things you

7 never planned on. So there's a list of

8 variables that can happen during a

9 construction project that might delay it.

10 Not in all cases; it could happen. But to

11 the best of our ability, we are looking at

12 how we can better coordinate the release of

13 funds, getting projects let so that they're

14 coordinated so that without a hiccup they can

15 be done in a timely manner.

16 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Okay, let me

17 just switch gears a moment to public transit

18 and the disparity between the upstate and the

19 downstate area.

20 We have transit systems in our area

21 that, you know, have had capital projects on

22 the back burner for years. One in

23 particular, an escalator which transports

24 people up and down, which has been

1 inoperable. And it just took forever to get

2 it fixed. You have systems that want to

3 expand bus service systems, you have systems

4 that want to purchase new buses, and, you

5 know, at least what I view as a rather meager

6 increase in funding for upstate public

7 transit. I just don't know how you can ask

8 them, you know, to just continue to put these

9 projects on hold, especially after your

10 comment that time is money. You know, the

11 longer you wait, the more expensive the buses

12 cost. The longer you wait, the more

13 expensive the cost to fix the elevator.

14 You know, what assurances do we have

15 that this money is actually going to be there

16 that these transit systems can use?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, let me

18 say that about two months ago I took the time

19 to meet with all the transit operators to

20 hear firsthand from them. And while some may

21 have some capital needs, largely it was

22 operational.

23 But I've listened to them. And part

24 and parcel, that's why we want to ensure that

1 when, you know, funds -- and hopefully as the

2 budget is passed, these additional

3 resources are made available, that we can get

4 to those transit operators who need those

5 operating funds.

6 There is an additional $5 million put

7 in for capital funds. We'll go through that

8 assessment. I won't speak to it because I

9 haven't done it. But we will be going

10 through that assessment as well to identify

11 the capital needs and how those can be

12 distributed upon need.

13 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Let me just

14 touch on two other areas.

15 You mentioned this airport

16 competition, there are going to be five

17 awards and I think 79 or 84 --

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: 74.

19 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: -- 74 that are

20 going to compete.

21 One of the things I just want to ask

22 you is, you know, when you ask an airport to

23 come up with some sort of plan, I mean, they

24 have to spend a lot of money in terms of

1 architects, engineers. It costs tens,

2 hundreds of thousands of dollars for these

3 type of plans. So while they're going to be

4 helpful -- but if you only have, you know,

5 maybe five or 6 percent of the airports

6 receiving money, where is the incentive for

7 an airport, who has very limited funds right

8 now, to expend hundreds of thousands of

9 dollars for design projects if they have a

10 very low chance of receiving any funds?

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. Well,

12 that's assuming they all have to spend that

13 money. Because they might not all have to.

14 If they have an aggressive build-out

15 program, they may need to bring in

16 contractors to help fulfill that design

17 project, as an example. Other airports may

18 simply need a jet bridge, which is the piece

19 of equipment that you walk out the door to

20 that connects to the airplane itself.

21 Their needs are different. For people

22 who are looking to do a more aggressive

23 build-out of an airport, they would likely

24 utilize outside consultants. But for some of

1 the smaller airports that frankly are

2 throughout New York State, their needs may

3 not be the same.

4 So I can't speak intelligently to

5 whether or not they all spend a hundred

6 thousand dollars or not. My guess is, based

7 on past experience, that's not completely

8 true. But I would acknowledge that there are

9 airports that likely will have development

10 plans or have those already in their back

11 pocket.

12 You know, many airports -- federal

13 funding is the large driver for airports

14 across New York State and the country. We

15 get the money from the feds. And so most

16 airports have plans already developed. They

17 may have to upgrade them, they may have to

18 make some adjustments, but by and large most

19 airports do have plans on the table.

20 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Okay, let me

21 just close with one question. You talked

22 about the MWBE program. In some areas of the

23 state, that works great. In other areas,

24 there's a lot of time spent getting waivers

1 because it's just not being met. And back to

2 your "time is money," it just takes forever

3 to get this waiver.

4 So I'm wondering what your department

5 can do to speed up that process so projects

6 can be done more quickly if that goal,

7 although lofty, is not able to be met in a

8 community.

9 And I'll stop asking questions and

10 just listen to your answer.

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay. Well,

12 thank you. That's a good question.

13 So we have met with ESD, who is really

14 the program overseer, if you will, on the

15 waiver issue and others. And again, you

16 know, it's really about education and

17 outreach.

18 But from the state's perspective, it's

19 also making sure that localities or people

20 who are looking to do work are casting a wide

21 net. That is, they're not just perhaps

22 advertising in the town tribune, but they are

23 casting a wider net to seek out MWBE

24 opportunities beyond the county line, if you

1 will.

2 So again, I think a lot of it is

3 educational that we need to continue to do.

4 We are also working with ESD to better

5 understand their position on waivers and what

6 additional information may be necessary.

7 Because you're correct, sometimes the waiver

8 requests take long. And of course we don't

9 want that as well.

10 SENATOR RANZENHOFER: Thank you,

11 Commissioner.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you,

13 sir.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you, Senator.

15 Assemblyman McDonough.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: Thank you,

17 Chairman.

18 Welcome, Commissioner. Good morning.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: One of my

21 concerns is the transit capital funding, but

22 I know this is going to be a subject that we

23 have to discuss in our budget negotiations,

24 that downstate capital funding seems to be

1 zero in the Executive Budget proposal.

2 Upstate is doing $20 million.

3 Anyway, but I have another local

4 question, and I'll be very brief. In Nassau

5 County, the Southern State Parkway. I don't

6 know if you've been on it, but there's a

7 section there that over the past several

8 years has gotten the moniker as "Blood Alley"

9 because there's a lot of curves and it's high

10 speed, of course.

11 And I'm wondering -- I don't think we

12 can rebuild the Southern State Parkway,

13 obviously. But if you would seriously

14 address that, because I'm getting lots of --

15 over several years, lots of times that people

16 have called and complained about it. And

17 there are severe accidents on there, high

18 speed at turns. I don't know what we can do

19 about lowering the -- we can't lower the

20 speed limit, usually, on a parkway. But I

21 would appreciate if you would look into it,

22 the Southern State Parkway, mostly in western

23 Nassau County. And I'll get back to you with

24 the actual locations and all of that. But if

1 you'd look into it.

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay, I will.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: And as I say,

4 it's referred to as Blood Alley.

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: What, I'm

6 sorry?

7 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: Blood Alley,

8 because there's many deaths there.

9 So if you could look into that, I'd

10 appreciate it. And let me know what's -- if

11 anything can be done to remediate or develop

12 something with that.

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: Okay?

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN McDONOUGH: Thank you very

17 much.

18 And, Chairman, I won't use any more of

19 your time.

20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

22 much.

23 Next we have Senator Kennedy.

24 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you,

1 Chairwoman.

2 Thank you, Commissioner. It's great

3 to see you. And let me just start by

4 thanking you and your office for the level of

5 professionalism and outreach communication

6 that you've demonstrated over the course of

7 the last several months. It's been a

8 pleasure to work you, and it's great to see

9 an upstater that recognizes the needs of our

10 community. And I want to touch on some of

11 these needs that are contained and some

12 concerns that I have with the budget.

13 You know, again, as my colleagues have

14 already pointed out the issue of parity, I

15 have to bring it up, I'm compelled because

16 it's something that we're hearing with great

17 significance, not only the safety of our

18 roads and bridges and those that are

19 utilizing these roads and bridges every

20 single day in their commutes, but also the

21 workforce, the businesses, and the jobs that

22 are created and ensuring that there is that

23 parity, there is that level playing field.

24 There is a lot of talk of parity, and

1 we want to see it through into actuality,

2 into reality. So we're going to be watching

3 intently how this unfolds over the course of

4 the next couple of months. But certainly we

5 are on the same page when it comes to

6 ensuring that our region -- which, quite

7 frankly, in years past has been neglected.

8 And as an upstater yourself, a former mayor

9 of Syracuse, you get it. So certainly that's

10 something that is a major concern of ours.

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

12 SENATOR KENNEDY: Another point that

13 I'd like to make in regard to public transit,

14 the operating assistance. Again, my

15 colleagues have touched on this already.

16 But, you know, my district in particular is

17 impacted with great significance. I

18 represent the City of Buffalo, the City of

19 Lackawanna, the Town of Cheektowaga. Buffalo

20 Niagara International Airport is in my

21 district. There is the public transit system

22 wholly contained within my district, the

23 light rail. Our community is the only

24 community in upstate New York with a light

1 rail transit system.

2 And so, you know, it seems like year

3 after year -- and I know this is your first

4 budget hearing, but it's my sixth. And year

5 after year we come to the table and we talk

6 about ensuring that Western New York and in

7 particular the NFTA, because of the fact that

8 it's the only upstate system with a light

9 rail component, is funded to the level that

10 it needs to be. And quite frankly, I believe

11 that the formula needs to be adjusted. And

12 we've talked about redoing the formula in

13 various areas. This is one area that I think

14 needs to be addressed. And I'd like you to

15 touch on that, if you could, please.

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure. Well,

17 I'm pleased to report that the Governor has

18 increased upstate transit funding. So as I

19 mentioned earlier, everyone will see an

20 increase in that.

21 You know, as we go through the

22 long-term needs of a system, you know,

23 there's two sides of that. Right? There's

24 the capital side that that system may need,

1 and then there's the operational side as

2 well.

3 And I know, you know, that as I

4 mentioned meeting earlier with many of the

5 transit operators across the state, they're

6 very hardworking. They provide a critically

7 important service. And I say that as a

8 former mayor, it's so critically important to

9 my city, and still is, and is to many of your

10 districts as well. And so they also

11 understand, you know, the need for

12 modernization as well.

13 So I can say to you that there is an

14 increase in this budget, that I'm going to be

15 working very hard with them to better

16 understand and work cooperatively with them

17 going forward to see how we can help them

18 continue to maintain and expand their

19 service.

20 It appears that in Buffalo, the region

21 in Buffalo and in Albany, kind of the

22 bookends of the state, their ridership is up.

23 It's not that in the middle of the state.

24 And so there's differences throughout, of

1 course, the systems. They have different

2 needs. Some are in more suburban or urban

3 areas, and others are in more rural areas.

4 So there is no one easy, quick answer.

5 But the importance of mass transit in

6 particular to upstate is critically important

7 for those who need it most and, in

8 particular, how it supports economic

9 development opportunities. We know that it's

10 a part of the REDC transportation piece. The

11 REDC process, smartly, you know, has made

12 sure that they're working closely in terms of

13 site selection for specific reuse. When you

14 talk about how you want to develop a

15 particular opportunity, that is coordinated

16 with the local transit operators as well.

17 So clearly it's an important issue.

18 I'm very personally aware of that. And I'll

19 be working hard with them going forward.

20 SENATOR KENNEDY: Well, wouldn't it

21 make sense, Commissioner, to include the

22 light rail into this formula as we move

23 forward, to ensure that there is equity with

24 the NFTA and other areas of upstate?

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I would

2 say to that -- because I don't know the

3 answer -- I'd like to understand what their

4 revenues are versus their operating expenses

5 versus their capital costs, and look at those

6 on kind of a dashboard, if you will, in

7 comparison with the others so I could better

8 make an informed decision.

9 SENATOR KENNEDY: Okay. Thank you.

10 I want to talk a little bit about the

11 transit capital needs, the non-MTA, the

12 $20 million. Can you talk a little bit about

13 the formula and how it's going to help

14 systems like the NFTA make more accurate

15 long-term plans moving forward?

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I think,

17 without being redundant, as I just described,

18 there's additional dollars available for

19 upstate transit. I think -- I know that

20 that's going to go a long way in helping them

21 in particular with their operating expenses.

22 You know, they're very sophisticated,

23 as you know, because every turn in the wheel

24 costs money. And so when they look at their

1 route coverage, where they want to send their

2 vehicles, those are sometimes difficult

3 choices that they need to make as well.

4 So I can't make a promise, and I

5 won't. But what I will say is going forward

6 I intend, as I've told the group, to stay

7 close with them and have a good understanding

8 and be an advocate for them as we develop

9 long-term funding plans.

10 SENATOR KENNEDY: Thank you.

11 And again, from my perspective -- and

12 I know we're well into the game here. But,

13 you know, for fear of being redundant, to

14 touch on what some of my other colleagues

15 have mentioned, that we're hearing this from

16 the industry leaders, of the timing. And I

17 know, again, you've touched on this already.

18 Is there a way -- look, we can't predict the

19 weather. We know that. You've mentioned

20 that. But, you know, we can understand

21 weather patterns and the timeline which we

22 have to deal with.

23 What can we do, what if anything can

24 we do to move these projects along? The

1 industry leaders are saying, you know, that

2 money is being held up, that projects are

3 being held up, that jobs are being held up

4 because of the timing to which these

5 projects are let, in concert with the weather

6 pattern. What if anything can we do here?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

8 know, I think really it boils down to, for

9 me, a better coordination. I think that's

10 going to go a long way. And I think that

11 starts, you know, with the Department of

12 Transportation as well.

13 I mentioned, and you did, you know,

14 the unforeseen circumstances. Things happen

15 that are beyond anybody's control if a

16 project may have started. But having said

17 that, you know, getting it off the ground I

18 think starts with good coordination. And so

19 that's something that we are working on. I

20 don't have an answer for you today on that.

21 But it is something that I am interested in,

22 that I experienced myself. And part of the

23 policy adjustment I talked about earlier was

24 from a previous experience as well.

1 And so I'm pleased to report to you

2 that we're making progress. I don't have all

3 the answers for you today. But you should

4 know that I understand these challenges, I

5 know the concerns that you hear from your

6 constituency on, and frankly I consider them

7 all my constituency as well now. And so I'll

8 continue to work hard with my team. I have a

9 great team, great institutional knowledge at

10 DOT. And so we're looking for creative ways

11 to improve what we do as well.

12 SENATOR KENNEDY: Great, Commissioner.

13 And look, I'm touching on some concerns

14 because we have a very limited amount of time

15 and I'm done. But I just want to make a

16 point that, you know, there are a lot of

17 positive things contained within this budget

18 for local municipalities, including that

19 PAVE-NY. When it comes to getting these

20 potholes fixed in the various municipalities

21 that we're working with -- especially the

22 more industrialized areas of our state, like

23 the district that I represent, in the older

24 infrastructure -- it's important that those

1 funds flow as quickly as possible.

2 So I'm very pleased to see that sort

3 of funding moving forward. I look forward to

4 working with you to make sure that that gets

5 spent as quickly as possible. Thank you for

6 your time.

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Me as well.

8 Thank you.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

10 We've been joined by Assemblyman

11 Thiele and Assemblywoman Fahy.

12 Next to question, Assemblyman

13 DenDekker.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you very

15 much.

16 So the first thing I'd like to just

17 talk about real quick is obviously you've

18 heard concerns of many of my colleagues on

19 issues and problems and things are taking so

20 much longer than they used to. And I guess

21 where I want to go right away is looking at

22 the workforce of the agency.

23 I mean, we've had a 20 percent

24 decrease in personnel in the Department of

1 Transportation over the past nine years. How

2 can you -- when you hear us being so

3 concerned about projects not getting off the

4 ground, I mean, logically we have to assume

5 you don't have enough people. So I don't

6 understand why we're cutting again this year

7 another 46 positions from the budget. Why is

8 the Department of Transportation, if they're

9 having such a problem keeping up with the

10 demands of transportation, are you not hiring

11 more people? I mean, I know you must be

12 productive. And that may be the way you're

13 saying, oh, well, we've gotten more

14 productive so we need less people. Well,

15 think how much more productive you would be

16 if you had kept the staffing level where it

17 was.

18 And I'd like you to explain to me, you

19 know, how you can possibly keep up on snow

20 removal and the time required for the

21 planning of all these projects when you keep

22 on cutting your workforce.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: You know, our

24 snow and ice operations, which are in earnest

1 right now, and our summer maintenance efforts

2 really haven't been, in my opinion, impacted

3 by retirements, attritions or eliminations of

4 positions. We still have, you know, over

5 8200 people at the Department of

6 Transportation. That's a lot of folks.

7 We recognize the importance of our

8 engineering staff, who really are the

9 backbone -- by the way, engineers aren't just

10 sitting at an easel drawing out plans for a

11 project. They're doing construction

12 inspection, they're doing bridge inspection,

13 very specific and specialized elements of the

14 engineering field.

15 So, you know, we want to keep them

16 well staffed. I do believe, and I say this

17 to you confidently, that it's not always a

18 staffing issue. There are many other things

19 that come into play in terms of letting

20 procurements or coordination of projects.

21 Many times locals also aren't always

22 ready. Again, you know, if you're in a local

23 office, you're serving local government, you

24 know, smartly, you're trying to bundle as

1 much grant or other elements of funding that

2 you can before you launch a project.

3 So while a project may be on a

4 particular list for five years, it doesn't

5 always reflect that it didn't go because of

6 DOT effort or funding. Many times there's

7 matches involved, there's local elements that

8 need to take place.

9 So I would say to you that it's kind

10 of a combination of all of those. I just

11 described to you how we're looking at how we

12 might better improve our efficiency

13 internally. I had a conversation yesterday

14 with somebody just about that that I've

15 assigned to look at some creative ways that

16 we can do that.

17 So I think it's really a combination

18 of all of those things that perhaps are

19 frustrating to folks. But clearly I'm

20 comfortable with the number of staff we have.

21 We bring on part-time drivers who are

22 operators, if you will, particularly for our

23 snow and ice detail, who do a tremendous job

24 working long hours, out there as we speak.

1 So we augment, as needed, our forces as well.

2 And when you think about it from a long-term

3 kind of business perspective, you know,

4 sometimes you're better served by that.

5 So we do that in snow and ice with our

6 operators. They're part-time folks who come

7 to us during the season when we need them

8 most. We frankly don't need snow operators

9 in July.

10 So I think it's a combination of all

11 of those things.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: But having a

13 workforce that is trained to an aspect of not

14 doing a single position, that can do more.

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: That's right.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: So that in

17 those times when you don't need snow plow

18 drivers, you still need people to do work to

19 make our state continue to move forward in

20 transportation.

21 What I'm saying, what we see, I

22 believe, many of my colleagues and I see is

23 jobs and projects taking too long to get

24 going. And hearing all the various things

1 that you just described, they sound very

2 logical. But when I look at your staffing,

3 where you at one time had staffing well over

4 10,000 and now you're down to 8200, and you

5 say, Oh, but we're comfortable with that

6 because we're productive and we find new

7 creative ways of making it work -- we don't

8 want you to find new creative ways. We want

9 it to work.

10 We don't want you to try to be

11 streamlining and -- we want you to get the

12 manpower that you need to get the projects

13 done that need to be done. Because the

14 longer they take to get done, the more

15 deterioration goes on and then the more it

16 costs in the long run. And then it reaches a

17 point like we hear where we finally do have

18 to do the work, that we have to completely

19 shut down a portion of transportation in an

20 area to now do the critical infrastructure

21 job that has to be done because we didn't do

22 it along when we had the manpower at the

23 time.

24 I'm just saying it's something I'd

1 really like you to look at.

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Understood.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: The other

4 thing I just want to talk about quickly is

5 funding to the MTA.

6 As you know, I'm from the New York

7 City area. MTA funding is of the utmost

8 importance, MTA transportation for our trains

9 and our buses. Especially in Queens, where

10 I'm from, bus service is so vitally

11 important. And I see that in this budget the

12 MTA is going to get an increase of

13 $22 million which is a 0.49 percent increase.

14 Is that correct?

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: The MTA, in

16 our budget --

17 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Yes.

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, they'll

19 be receiving, of the mass transit statewide,

20 they'll be receiving about $4.7 billion.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Correct.

22 But that's the --

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So there's

24 $303 million available --

1 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: -- 0.49

2 percent increase over last year. Okay?

3 The funding for some other areas --

4 like some of the upstate transportation areas

5 got a 2.7 percent increase. Is there a

6 particular reason why the MTA funding in the

7 City of New York and the critical

8 infrastructure and equipment that we need

9 only got less than a half percent increase?

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I can't

11 speak to the MTA, and I won't.

12 I can tell you that as part of that

13 budget also in other downstate areas, other

14 transit operators have received about

15 $303 million. And as I pointed out earlier,

16 $194 million will be for the remainder of the

17 upstate transit operators.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Correct. The

19 $303 million that you're talking about,

20 though, is for non-MTA downstate transit.

21 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Which, by the

23 way, got no increase. So non-MTA downstate

24 transit got absolutely no increase at all,

1 they have flat funding. The MTA got a

2 0.49 percent increase, but upstate got

3 2.7 percent. Where I think there's so much

4 transportation needs in the City, and the MTA

5 is trying to do as much as it can, why New

6 York State and DOT is going to cut their

7 portion or give such a minuscule little

8 amount of an increase doesn't seem very

9 logical or fair to my constituents in my

10 area.

11 So obviously I would advocate for a

12 larger amount of funding for the MTA. And I

13 would also say that leaving the non-MTA flat

14 is not reflective of the needs either. With

15 increased costs in wages and insurance and

16 other aspects, to keep funding flat is going

17 to result in a service cut to my

18 constituents.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Understood.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: That's all I

21 have. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN DENDEKKER: Thank you,

24 Commissioner.

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

3 much.

4 Next I would call on Senator Diane

5 Savino.

6 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator

7 Young.

8 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

9 SENATOR SAVINO: Good morning,

10 Commissioner.

11 The beauty of going this far into the

12 testimony is a lot of the questions I had

13 have already been answered. But I want you

14 to clarify for me something. In your

15 testimony you mentioned that the Governor has

16 given your agency $50 million to enhance

17 DOT's capabilities with respect to purchase

18 of winter storm equipment so that your agency

19 can respond better to harsh winter

20 conditions. But yet in the CHIPS/Marchiselli

21 budget, which is remaining flat, there's also

22 no additional money this year for harsh

23 winter weather conditions.

24 So are you suggesting that the state

100

1 will be responsible for helping localities?

2 Or how are localities supposed to absorb the

3 increased costs?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, yeah,

5 the harsh winter funding that was done last

6 year, I believe, was really in response to

7 what was all, if we all recall, the vortexes,

8 you know, that took place, really extreme

9 harsh winter weather. And fortunately this

10 year we haven't seen that yet.

11 But there is going to be an increase

12 for folks, you're correct. CHIPS and

13 Marchiselli are staying the same. But I

14 mentioned the PAVE-NY program. That is an

15 increase. And so when you couple that

16 increase with the CHIPS that's held at the

17 same level, and the Marchiselli, which is

18 used to match for those federal programs,

19 they will see an increase.

20 SENATOR SAVINO: So now let me go back

21 to something more local. You know, we're all

22 very parochial here.

23 Assemblyman Cusick talked a bit about

24 the Staten Island Expressway. And while it

101

1 seems to be largely completed -- and, by the

2 way, it has made things much better for

3 Staten Island -- that's assuming there's no

4 problems on the other side of the bridge.

5 One of the things with the HOV lane is the

6 abuse of it. So obviously there has to be

7 coordination with the NYPD and the Highway

8 Division to have greater enforcement on the

9 HOV lane so that people don't abuse it.

10 But one of the ways you avoid that on

11 the Brooklyn side of it is there's a Jersey

12 barrier that prevents people from getting

13 into it once the HOV lane starts.

14 So has there been any consideration

15 about putting a Jersey barrier down the SIE

16 to make sure that people cannot abuse it?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I haven't had

18 that conversation, but I will. I'll have

19 that with City DOT. I'd mentioned earlier I

20 was having discussions with them on the

21 Gowanus now because, you know, at some point

22 certain we transfer it over to them and

23 they'll be responsible for that. But I will

24 have that conversation with them.

102

1 SENATOR SAVINO: Because it's

2 incredibly frustrating to Staten Islanders to

3 see people routinely abuse the HOV lane with

4 impunity.

5 Now, with respect to the Gowanus

6 Expressway, I'm going to ask you the same

7 question I asked your predecessor, Joan

8 McDonald. We've invested hundreds of

9 millions of dollars in improving the Staten

10 Island expressway. The MTA is spending, you

11 know, untold amounts of money on redecking

12 the Verrazano Bridge. They're also about to

13 embark on a new plan to revamp the entrance

14 and the exit ramps, particularly the

15 connections to the Belt Parkway, which is

16 going to create a significant amount of

17 traffic congestion on the Gowanus Expressway.

18 But we've invested tens of millions,

19 millions and millions of dollars on the

20 Gowanus Expressway and the BQE over the past,

21 I don't know, 30 years. We've never added

22 any capacity to it.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm sorry?

24 SENATOR SAVINO: We have not added any

103

1 capacity to it. It is the same, you know,

2 roadway that it always has been. And that is

3 what creates the backup.

4 So if you have one accident on the BQE

5 or one accident on the Gowanus, it's backed

6 up all the way either to Queens or it's

7 backed up all the way to New Jersey.

8 The same bottlenecks every day, the

9 split where the Battery Tunnel -- where you

10 go this way to the Battery Tunnel or this way

11 to the BQE -- same tie-ups every day, the

12 same tie-ups at the Kosciuszko Bridge. So

13 unless we're prepared to either eliminate the

14 Gowanus and build something else or to add

15 capacity to it, how are we supposed to

16 improve transit through this region?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, that's

18 a great question. And candidly, there's a

19 ton of traffic there, as you know. And that

20 complicates things, because you've got a

21 roadway that was built whenever it was built,

22 and there's more traffic than that roadway

23 was designed for, because there's more people

24 than it was designed for back then.

104

1 You know, to talk about how you

2 frankly add on or build new is a long-term

3 conversation, because it's going to take a

4 great deal of resources, involves right of

5 way, which is always kind of a sticky issues

6 in terms of, you know, securing properties to

7 either expand or create a new footprint.

8 But we're challenged, of course, with

9 the high number of users on that roadway. It

10 kind of is what it is. That doesn't minimize

11 it, but it's just the fact of the matter.

12 And so that's why the HOV lane was added. I

13 think it's worked very well. But I

14 understand that there's still challenges. I

15 know accidents create big choke points,

16 they're problematic, because then everything

17 bottlenecks. And it's a result of all the

18 traffic that I just described.

19 So, you know, candidly, I don't have

20 an answer for you to say how are we going to

21 fix that. It's a long-term discussion,

22 though. If people are interested in how you

23 add on or build new, that's a federal highway

24 long-term discussion that will need to take

105

1 place.

2 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, candidly, those

3 discussions have been taking place for years.

4 When I first got elected, there was a -- and

5 I'm sure Assemblywoman Simon will also speak

6 about this -- there were studies done then,

7 and in fact there was a recommendation to

8 either double-deck the Gowanus Expressway,

9 which of course is something that the people

10 in the community aren't interested in, or

11 build a tunnel. At the time -- I think this

12 was 2006 -- the proposed cost for a potential

13 tunnel was about $30 billion and a time frame

14 of like 20 years to build it.

15 But that study, those feasibility

16 studies on how to improve traffic flow

17 through that area all centered around

18 expanding capacity. So we can spend another

19 half a billion dollars redecking the Gowanus

20 Expressway and still not move anybody any

21 faster. But if you would like, I'm sure we

22 would be happy to send you those studies.

23 They're sitting on a shelf somewhere

24 collecting dust. But there are some

106

1 suggestions in there that I think we should

2 look at. Because if not, we are going to

3 have the same bottlenecks everywhere, which

4 is a disincentive to people to bring their

5 businesses to Staten Island or even to South

6 Brooklyn. South Brooklyn is growing very

7 fast. The Industry City is Industry City

8 again for the first time in probably 30

9 years. We need to be able to move people and

10 goods and services through that area much

11 quicker than we're doing now.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right,

13 understood. And I would like to see those,

14 and I know my staff is familiar -- I'm

15 assuming my staff is familiar with these.

16 We'll have that conversation.

17 And, you know, I'm not a big fan of

18 continually doing studies because I don't

19 like to see studies sit on a shelf after you

20 spend money. We're not in a position to be

21 able to do that. I can't speak to what took

22 place years before. I can only tell you

23 going forward that I'll take a look at it.

24 But I won't make a promise to say we're going

107

1 to add a new deck, we're going to expand it.

2 But I will take a look at that, I'll

3 have that conversation with staff. And I'm

4 happy to meet with the two of you, if you'd

5 like, and discuss it further.

6 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I'll come

8 to you.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

10 much.

11 Assemblyman Oaks.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you,

13 Chairman.

14 Commissioner, thank you for being

15 here.

16 I know we've talked a bit on the

17 funding for bridges, state and local. A

18 question related to that -- well, one, a

19 comment. I do think and I heard you say

20 there would be some local input on that,

21 although you have a metrics that you're going

22 to use of how you pick those.

23 Do culverts qualify? I know, you

24 know, in bridge money -- in a lot of our

108

1 rural areas we have culverts that may not

2 meet the distance, but they're also, you

3 know, taking traffic. Will those qualify

4 under this?

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Under the

6 bridge program?

7 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yeah.

8 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: No, because

9 they're not a bridge.

10 But I did mention it's a competitive

11 program. So a local community and your

12 district or anyone else's would make

13 application to the Department of

14 Transportation, you know, for potential

15 funding. And certainly we would be asking

16 them to provide us information relative to

17 that bridge. And we'd utilize the bridge

18 inspections that no doubt we have done as

19 part of that process as well.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Well, one of the

21 thoughts I might have, or whatever, is that

22 we try to have a piece of funding culverts

23 maybe that could go toward that, and whether

24 that be distributed on a CHIPS-type thing.

109

1 But maybe a piece of that as we go forward,

2 because certainly those are in bad shape.

3 On the pavement side, you mentioned

4 that you're working on the criteria for that.

5 And we'll look forward to seeing that.

6 Again, a suggestion on that side that's been

7 made to me. You know, if we use the local

8 CHIPS formula obviously on the pavement side,

9 that would be a way of meeting a lot of the

10 local needs. And at a minimum, certainly,

11 again, having a great deal of local input on

12 that would be appreciated.

13 We've heard the word "parity" often

14 today. We've looked at the numbers.

15 Obviously the reason I think it keeps coming

16 up is because if you look at it

17 historically -- I've happened to be around

18 the Legislature a number of years -- we saw

19 where the norm was having equal funding for

20 mass transit and our driving public, trying

21 to serve both those needs, which are both

22 critically important to our state.

23 Then we had a fiscal crisis, the state

24 having to make tough decisions, and we saw

110

1 where those started to see a disparity. This

2 year we see kind of the most it has been.

3 And so instead of coming back toward more

4 parity, we're seeing maybe even it inching

5 further the other way.

6 And I know you made the comment that

7 you feel good about the investments, it is

8 historic. I do know some of the industry

9 projections are saying, you know, we're

10 looking at $20 billion or $22 billion if we

11 include the Thruway stabilization. Some of

12 the industry standards are saying we ought to

13 be spending $28 billion to meet the needs.

14 And obviously unlimited dollars, if we had

15 those, I know your first instance would

16 probably be to say how do we get those

17 dollars there.

18 But I guess, you know, my question is:

19 How do we get to parity? Do you have a

20 sense -- I know you've made comments here of,

21 you know, that's -- you're going to continue

22 to be working and whatever. But is that the

23 goal, the hope? And how do we get there?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I think,

111

1 you know, how we get there is doing just what

2 the Governor has proposed. This is the

3 largest DOT budget ever. It's $20.1 billion.

4 And so it allows us to not only maintain but

5 enhance the system as well, and make

6 strategic investments that support rail and

7 transit and support local economies also.

8 So I think if we looked at it in the

9 context of setting aside a dollar amount of

10 what this budget can do, it can make a

11 difference. And I'll go back to the

12 BRIDGE-NY and the PAVE-NY. Now, I've been

13 here in my role as commissioner not quite six

14 months, and I've taken the time to travel the

15 state and meet with local communities,

16 elected officials, certainly members of the

17 Legislature. And nearly everyone, you know,

18 is concerned about the dollars that can get

19 to a local level to help them support their

20 needs, even basic needs such as paving or

21 bridge repair.

22 That's why those programs are in here,

23 because the Governor understands it's

24 important to get dollars to the localities

112

1 who need them most. And I will say they are

2 also being utilized as well to help support

3 the state system, because we have a

4 responsibility to maintain and improve that

5 as well.

6 So I'm very comfortable with the

7 budget. I think it's a very good budget. I

8 think it's moving in the right direction.

9 It's going to deliver things that we have

10 been unable to do in the past. And so I feel

11 good about the budget.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: I guess I would

13 just end in saying, you know, I -- the parity

14 sense that I hear and feel, being an

15 individual whose residents depend more on

16 those roads and bridges, whether they be

17 state or local ones, each day. So there's a

18 sense of fairness. There's also the real

19 concern for safety and getting to the point

20 where we can feel comfortable that the people

21 who are going to work every day, getting on a

22 school bus, doing whatever, can trust the

23 roads that we have.

24 And I know when I talk to my local

113

1 highway people, they express concerns of

2 saying we're falling behind, help is needed,

3 and anything the state can do is important.

4 And so I come from that. I hope that

5 maybe in the negotiations in this year's

6 budget maybe we see an opportunity to move

7 closer to that. I know this is the

8 Governor's proposal. I also hope that as

9 those negotiations take place, this year we

10 can maybe have a louder voice, include all

11 the leaders among those negotiations, and

12 maybe then we come up with the best decision.

13 So thank you, Commissioner.

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you,

15 sir.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

17 much.

18 Senator?

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Patty

20 Ritchie.

21 SENATOR RITCHIE: Commissioner, I

22 would just like to start off by thanking you

23 for your responsiveness. I have to say that

24 I've been really impressed with your ability

114

1 and your chief of staff's ability to fix a

2 number of problems that I've brought up at

3 our hearings over the last couple of years

4 that for some reason couldn't get fixed and

5 inside of a day or two, once you took over,

6 they were addressed and have been taken care

7 of.

8 One of those problems that I've

9 addressed over the last couple of years is

10 one that I'm sure you're aware of, and that

11 is the salt contamination in the wells in the

12 Town of Orleans. In your previous position

13 you were very instrumental in helping secure

14 that low-cost loan for the town to be able to

15 connect the water systems to those residents.

16 And, you know, the Governor this year has a

17 clean water fund that I'm hoping, because of

18 the economic challenges in the Town of

19 Orleans, that we'll finally be able to put

20 this issue to rest and get good water to the

21 people who live there.

22 So I'm just asking if you've had an

23 opportunity to look at it and have any

24 suggestions.

115

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, let me

2 start by thanking you for your leadership on

3 that two years ago.

4 And as you pointed out, you know, we

5 brought together a large number of people,

6 with your leadership as well, and were able

7 to construct a financial structure with some

8 grant that at that time we thought was going

9 to do it.

10 I've read recently that there was some

11 chatter about the issue. What I want to say

12 to you is -- and I did speak with some of my

13 colleagues just the other day -- is that I'm

14 going to reengage on that and to bring the

15 appropriate people back to the table so we

16 can take a fresh look at that. So I'm

17 willing to help to the extent that I can with

18 you on that.

19 SENATOR RITCHIE: And I just, in

20 return, would like to say that this is

21 exactly what I talked about at the beginning,

22 that -- your willingness to take a look at

23 the issue. You know, this has been going on

24 for a number of years, something that we have

116

1 to have resolution to. But I'm hopeful that

2 given the fact that you've been able to solve

3 the other problems very quickly, that we'll

4 be able to get to where we need to on this

5 also. So thank you.

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: We will reach

7 out to you and work to coordinate our

8 schedules.

9 SENATOR RITCHIE: Thank you.

10 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

11 Assemblywoman Shelley Mayer.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Thank you,

13 Mr. Chairman.

14 Good morning still, Commissioner.

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Good morning.

16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: My questions

17 deal with the non-MTA downstate system

18 fundings. I represent the City of Yonkers.

19 And I have some questions.

20 It appears that the operating budget

21 for the Westchester portion of the budget has

22 increased by 5.92 percent. Am I correct

23 about that?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, about

117

1 $157 million.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: I actually think

3 it's more than that. But my question is in

4 determining the percentage increase for the

5 non-MTA downstate regions, is the same

6 percentage increase applied to each of the

7 communities? In other words, Nassau got the

8 same percentage increase, Suffolk same

9 percentage increase?

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I don't know

11 the answer to that. But the answer is yes.

12 (Laughter.)

13 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: So your

14 understanding is it is yes.

15 So my question is, did the department

16 do any independent analysis of the ridership

17 trends in these counties? Not pitting myself

18 against the others, but did you do any

19 independent analysis to say, for example,

20 Westchester's percentage increase may be

21 greater than another county's?

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: We did.

23 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay. I'd be

24 interested in seeing what your data shows.

118

1 Would you be willing to share that?

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure. Sure.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Did you do any

4 analysis of whether the county's

5 contributions resulted in service loss? Just

6 for example, in Westchester over the past I

7 would say eight years, there's been a

8 substantial diminution in service of the B

9 Line because the county contributed less.

10 Which I understand is not the state's

11 problem, but it is my constituents' problem

12 because there is a reduction in bus service

13 and bus routes.

14 Did you look at the actual usage and

15 what the county's contributions have been?

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, I know

17 ridership counts and usage are part of that.

18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Okay. Again,

19 I'd be interested in seeing that.

20 With respect to the capital

21 contributions for the downstate suburban

22 operators, I understand that the distribution

23 is not confirmed or there's not an exact

24 understanding of where there will be capital

119

1 and where it will be allocated.

2 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

3 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: I just would

4 like to make clear that for systems like

5 ours, which is, as the other suburban

6 districts, historically underfunded in my

7 opinion, based on the needs of an urban

8 suburban community that is extremely

9 dependent on public transportation, that the

10 need for capital should be based on an

11 independent evaluation of the need of the

12 system.

13 And I don't know, have you had an

14 opportunity to meet with the B Line service

15 as you went around?

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I have not

17 yet. I know we are -- I am.

18 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: You are planning

19 to meet with them?

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Mm-hmm.

21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Again, I would

22 urge that there be an independent analysis of

23 the needs of that system.

24 And the other question I have is with

120

1 respect to capital, has DOT looked at the

2 safety needs of bus drivers and bus operators

3 in these public transit systems and whether

4 there should be dividers between the driver

5 and the passengers as I believe they have in

6 the City of New York?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah,

8 certainly training, safety training is a part

9 of what we also provide as part of the

10 funding package.

11 In terms of dividers between --

12 segmenting where the driver is versus the

13 riders, I don't know that that's an actual

14 part of it. I don't believe it is. But

15 that's a conversation that we could have with

16 our federal partners.

17 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: I just would

18 urge you to do that in light of some of the

19 issues that have occurred in the last year

20 within the non-MTA systems in Westchester.

21 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MAYER: Thank you very

23 much.

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

121

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

2 Senator?

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

4 I would like to take this time to talk

5 with you, Commissioner, about a very

6 important local project that's in Western

7 New York. And I know since you took office

8 as commissioner on July 2nd of 2015, you have

9 traveled the state and you are very familiar

10 with upstate, and I want to thank you for

11 that.

12 I know you also know that the Governor

13 has prioritized Western New York. And as a

14 result of the Governor's efforts, we have had

15 a real rebirth, we've had a renewal, new

16 hope, new vitality. Our economy is growing

17 in Erie County again. We've seen progress

18 along the Southern Tier.

19 And one of the projects that is very

20 important that community leaders, business

21 leaders, labor leaders have gotten behind is

22 finishing Route 219. This is a project --

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Say the name

24 again?

122

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Route 219. It's a

2 project that has been ongoing for many, many

3 years -- for decades, as a matter of fact.

4 And up until 2010, we were making great

5 progress. And it's been stalled,

6 unfortunately, ever since then.

7 I know you've been busy today getting

8 ready, but I wanted to point out in the

9 Buffalo News this morning there was an

10 excellent editorial about completing 219.

11 And the Buffalo News is calling on the state

12 and the Governor to seek funds through the

13 FAST Act that you pointed out earlier, the

14 federal Fixing America's Surface

15 Transportation Act, and that there will be

16 funds available.

17 And what the Buffalo News is hoping,

18 what leaders in Western New York are hoping,

19 what I'm hoping, what our Assemblymen are

20 hoping is that we can finally start to make

21 progress again on Route 219.

22 In 2010 there was -- it was a

23 technological marvel. Zoar Valley is

24 500 feet deep in some spots, and there was a

123

1 bridge, as part of the new construction of

2 219, that was completed, a double bridge.

3 And during that construction, unfortunately,

4 the state, the state administration at that

5 time tried to divert $86 million away from

6 that project. Because of outcry, we were

7 able to restore that, the bridge was

8 completed. So now the roadway goes down to

9 Ashford.

10 But we'd like to get it started again.

11 And what the Buffalo News points out -- and

12 by the way, this is a 1500-mile binational

13 interstate that would open up new

14 opportunities for Western New York as far as

15 trade, as far as commerce, as far as

16 logistics. And it would provide many, many,

17 many good-paying construction jobs. And it

18 would only add to and enhance what the

19 Governor's been able to achieve for Western

20 New York.

21 So what we're hoping is that we can

22 finally get this jump-started. The other

23 states have made great progress. Maryland,

24 for example, just approved funding for a

124

1 2 1/2 mile interchange in Maryland. There

2 are 200 miles left in Pennsylvania that need

3 to be completed, but the great news is that

4 Pennsylvania has committed dollars for the

5 study process on 219.

6 So if we can get this Toronto to Miami

7 route open, I think it would bode well. And

8 it would actually enhance -- because as you

9 know, we have the Thruway system that runs

10 from east to west, or west to east, if you're

11 from Western New York, and we have

12 Interstate 86 that also runs from west to

13 east. And so this would provide us with a

14 strategic placement on the map, really put

15 Western New York on the map. And as we

16 continue to grow our economy, continue to

17 focus on growing manufacturing jobs, this

18 would be enormous for Western New York.

19 So what we're hoping is that the

20 Governor, you, will work with the President,

21 with the federal government, to secure the

22 funds. And what we're looking at is Section

23 12. We've been coming from the north down to

24 the south, but what we'd like to do is

125

1 complete Section 12, which is a couple-mile

2 stretch. And it would go from Interstate 86

3 to just north of Salamanca.

4 There are a few reasons why that's

5 important. One is Dresser-Rand is one of the

6 largest employers in the region, in the

7 Southern Tier, certainly the largest employer

8 in the City of Olean. They manufacture huge

9 compressors. And transporting those huge

10 compressors is always a challenge. If we are

11 able to finish the 219 where they've run into

12 some snags now, they would be better able to

13 ship these compressors, going up to the port

14 up in Buffalo and ship them that way. And

15 that would actually help the company

16 enormously.

17 So what we're hoping for, we're

18 pushing for, and what I'd like to work with

19 you on is finding a way to work to get 219

20 going again. I think this is an enormous

21 opportunity that has presented itself for the

22 state, for Western New York, through this

23 FAST funding. And I know that there's

24 $16 billion available for New York State.

126

1 And I also know Senator Chuck Schumer has

2 prioritized having money available for our

3 state's highways and bridges through those

4 funds. So hopefully we can work together

5 with leaders from Western New York to come to

6 a conclusion. And I just wanted to put that

7 on your radar screen, and hopefully we can

8 get the funding put in place, the

9 environmental studies completed, work with

10 the Seneca Nation of Indians, because this

11 section would actually go through their

12 territory. But I also think this would be

13 something that would be quite beneficial for

14 the Nation also.

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I will

16 circle up with my folks and then I will call

17 you when I can figure out a process.

18 But do you -- is there an issue with

19 going through the Nation on that? Or are

20 they open to this type of --

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: I've met with the

22 Nation several times, and in fact met with

23 them this morning. And I can't speak on

24 behalf of the president of the Tribal

127

1 Council, Councilors, but I will say there are

2 discussions that could be had. Certainly

3 it's beneficial for the Nation and certainly

4 it's beneficial for the state. And they seem

5 to be open to having that discussion with the

6 state.

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay. I'll

8 take a look at it and I'll give your office a

9 call.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

11 Commissioner.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 Assemblyman Skoufis.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN SKOUFIS: Thank you,

15 Chairman.

16 Thank you, Commissioner.

17 And I want to first thank your

18 Region 8 team for their exemplary work.

19 They've been real true partners with my

20 office over the past three years.

21 You know, I'm all for parity. I do

22 have a major concern with the debate on

23 parity, though, that has evolved or I guess

24 actually devolved into this upstate/downstate

128

1 divide. And I say that because there are

2 some areas of the state that don't fit nicely

3 into upstate or downstate here in New York,

4 and in particular the Hudson Valley.

5 I represent Orange and Rockland

6 Counties. You know, if you ask someone from

7 the five boroughs, anything north of

8 Riverdale is upstate. If you ask someone

9 from the North Country, they'll laugh at you

10 if you try and say Orange and Rockland County

11 is in upstate.

12 So one of my concerns is that as part

13 of this DOT capital program and how the money

14 is divvied up into each of the DOT regions,

15 those in the Hudson Valley, particularly

16 Orange and Rockland Counties west of the

17 Hudson, we will somehow be penalized or be

18 given a disproportionately less amount of

19 money that comes through this five-year

20 capital program, as a result of really the

21 crumbs that we get from the MTA capital

22 program.

23 So I'm hoping that you can respond to

24 that and perhaps hopefully allay my fears.

129

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah. Well, I

2 know there's always been a lot of

3 conversation about, you know, who gets more,

4 who gets less. You know, DOT historically

5 does an assessment of the system across the

6 state regardless of where you are and really

7 looks at usage, traffic flows, counts,

8 conditions, et cetera.

9 So, you know, I say historically DOT

10 has always been fair in doing that, and I

11 want to assure you going forward that we will

12 be as well. Because again, I recognize when

13 you have a certain amount of pie and it's got

14 to do a lot of things, that people --

15 rightfully so -- are advocating always for

16 more.

17 But we try to take kind of a holistic

18 view as to how we can meet our

19 responsibility, which is to keep the system

20 safe, because that is the most important

21 element of what we do -- but also to support

22 the locals so they can keep the system on a

23 local level safe as well, because that's the

24 most important thing they can do also.

130

1 ASSEMBLYMAN SKOUFIS: I appreciate

2 that. You know, we don't have subways or

3 really any kind of massive bus transit in

4 Orange and Rockland Counties, so I just hope

5 that that is not held against us that we are

6 in the MTA region.

7 A more specific -- it's not a

8 question, because we've had conversations

9 about this. I do want to thank you and your

10 department for the renewed leadership on a

11 specific project, that's the Exit 131

12 interchange adjacent to the Woodbury Commons.

13 We've spoken about that. And I just want to

14 reiterate my strong support for it and desire

15 to see this funding appropriated as soon as

16 possible, particularly with the casino about

17 an hour north up in the Catskills beginning

18 construction and opening in the near future,

19 and all that traffic coming through that

20 interchange, it's even more urgent now than

21 ever.

22 So I just want to reiterate and thank

23 you for your support with that project.

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

131

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

2 Senator?

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

4 Senator Marc Panepinto.

5 SENATOR PANEPINTO: Yes.

6 Commissioner, how are you?

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Hi, Senator.

8 Good.

9 SENATOR PANEPINTO: First of all, I'm

10 just incredibly impressed by your ability to

11 field these questions. You're being

12 cross-examined by, you know, a number of

13 Assemblymen and Senators and doing a great

14 job.

15 I want to echo what Senator Young had

16 to say about the 219 connector. It really is

17 a regional, bipartisan issue that we'd love

18 the DOT to look at. And it really opens up

19 the corridor from Toronto, whether it be, you

20 know, Miami or Maryland or Pennsylvania, and

21 it's very important for us.

22 In talking about Region 5, which is

23 Western New York, you know, we've talked

24 about parity and you're probably sick of

132

1 hearing about it. But in Region 5 we have

2 12.5 percent of the roads and bridges. And

3 in my county, Erie County, we have the most

4 road miles of any county in the state by the

5 DOT. And our funding level is at less than

6 9 percent. Probably about 8.5 percent is

7 what we're getting in Region 5 right now.

8 How are we looking at the parity

9 formula? And I know you've been asked this

10 in a number of ways, but I'm asking from a

11 sheer percentage standpoint. You know, we've

12 got 12.5 percent of the roads and bridges,

13 we're getting 8.5 percent of the funding.

14 That's not parity as I see it. So how do you

15 address that?

16 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I think

17 you have to address it -- you know, you work

18 with a certain amount, but you have to

19 address it in terms of what the conditions

20 are in a given area, Region 5 or elsewhere;

21 the use, the number of users of a particular

22 roadway or bridge and what have you. And I

23 think that plays a lot into it.

24 And again, I mention safety because at

133

1 the end of the day, you know, if a particular

2 roadway is unsafe or a particular bridge, we

3 want to work, whether it's the state or with

4 locals, to ensure that it becomes safe.

5 So that's generally how we view it. I

6 think there is a tendency, perhaps, I've

7 heard in the past where people think, Well,

8 you know, one particular area gets more money

9 because they may have more people or not.

10 And that's really not the case. Of course,

11 you know, dollars in this day and age,

12 whatever venue you're in, are always very

13 competitive, as I think we could all agree.

14 We have a big system with a lot of

15 need. You know, the percentage of our

16 bridges that are in pretty good shape, both

17 local and state, probably somewhere about

18 72 percent in good shape. There are

19 challenges in other areas, obviously. And

20 our roadways are generally in good shape.

21 But as we continue to see the climate changes

22 that we've experienced over the last few

23 years, you know, that really impacts

24 conditions as well.

134

1 So we're not playing favorites, we're

2 really trying to take a methodical,

3 thoughtful analysis of the system in its

4 entirety. It may not always equate to a

5 particular percentage. But we try to look

6 ahead at what the needs are given that

7 criteria.

8 SENATOR PANEPINTO: And I want you to

9 understand, I'm not one of these upstate

10 Senators who is anti the MTA. I understand

11 the economic impact, and I support, you know,

12 funding of MTA spending and infrastructure

13 spending. But in upstate, you know, we have

14 drivers, we're undergoing a renaissance in

15 Western New York. And, you know, as I talk

16 to building contractors, you know, we're

17 building Solar City, we've got a medical

18 campus. You know, we need the roads and

19 bridges to improve capacity so that we can

20 utilize these wonderful facilities we're

21 building.

22 So I just want you, as you're looking

23 at, you know, hopefully a five-year DOT

24 plan -- I'm not sure if we're going to get a

135

1 five-year plan this year -- but I think it's

2 important to look at those percentages in

3 dollar values. And, you know, we want to get

4 our fair share. And it's not to slight the

5 MTA; we need to build up the MTA, and I

6 support the spending in the City on those

7 projects.

8 On a separate issue, I was looking at

9 the budget and there's a five-year Extreme

10 Weather Infrastructure Hardening Program

11 appropriation.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

13 SENATOR PANEPINTO: We couldn't find

14 it in your agency's appropriation. How are

15 those projects going to be selected and

16 funded?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Again, it will

18 be by analysis. You know, we'll look at

19 historic data, and there's plenty of that.

20 You know, I just mentioned there's

21 been a significant change in the last several

22 years of weather patterns. So whether it's

23 been these vortexes that we've had -- and

24 thankfully we haven't experienced that this

136

1 year. But if you look at Hurricane Irene and

2 Tropical Storm Lee or certainly Superstorm

3 Sandy, things are changing. And so with

4 those changes -- and in particular, you know,

5 location plays a role in that. If you're in

6 the Hudson Valley, as an example, where

7 you've got high hills and narrow roadways,

8 we've seen impacts that we hadn't seen

9 before.

10 The Governor smartly, in my opinion,

11 is placing money now for us to go out and

12 identify where those particular roadways may

13 be. Perhaps there's grading work or other

14 things that we might be able to do to prevent

15 flooding of a parkway or how we really look

16 at culverts.

17 You know, I come from, in my previous

18 work with the state, you know, working with

19 water and sewer infrastructure. And that's

20 something that I've been broaching and

21 discussing with our people as we think about

22 the long term. Stormwater management is

23 becoming a critically important issue. It's

24 really changed, you know, over the last five,

137

1 six years. And it's an area that I want DOT

2 to change with too, because we need to be

3 smart about how we also direct waters from

4 our systems because likely they could impact

5 locals.

6 So the short answer is that we are

7 going to take a careful look and analysis to

8 see historically where these roads have

9 largely been impacted because of severe

10 weather, and we hope to make a difference

11 with those funds. There's $500 million that

12 he's appropriated in this proposed budget to

13 do so, and I think it's money well spent

14 based on what we've seen over the course

15 certainly of the last six years.

16 SENATOR PANEPINTO: Since you mention

17 stormwater, I may be the only Senator that

18 knows what a stormwater protection plan is as

19 provided by the New York State Department of

20 Transportation. I mean, I've looked at specs

21 and plans and, you know, dealt with

22 contractors in this regard.

23 That follows up my next question, and

24 this goes to what the Assemblyman was asking

138

1 earlier about, you know, where we are in our

2 staffing. And I know I had asked the DOT

3 last year to give me some of the economic

4 justifications for the so-called cost savings

5 on the consultants that we're using and

6 really this contracting-out issue of

7 engineers and, oh, gosh, you know, people who

8 are on-site doing inspections. Inspections

9 and engineers has been a big part of what DOT

10 does, and I know in Western New York and

11 Region 5 I think all of our inspection is

12 contracted out.

13 So I'd like to know the economic

14 analysis that DOT has done to really quantify

15 whether or not there have been real cost

16 savings in doing that.

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you

18 know, the straight answer is I have not seen

19 that. I intend to look at it. It's one of

20 the historical things that's taken place at

21 DOT, you know, before my arrival.

22 But I would say that, again, from kind

23 of an operational or a business perspective,

24 you know, we have a strong engineering force

139

1 that as you know does a lot of things, a lot

2 of important things, and we augment that with

3 consultants, engineers, to support the

4 efforts of not only our local folks but to go

5 out on case-by-case or special project areas

6 and provide resources that perhaps we might

7 not have.

8 But I think there's a second piece

9 here that we should think about, which is

10 while DOT, in my opinion, has adequate

11 staffing to continue to deliver, while we

12 also utilize the private sector for

13 engineering work, we are also supporting

14 another economy as well. These are people

15 that live in all of our communities, who go

16 to our local grocery store, who pay our

17 property taxes, who send their kids to our

18 school and pay school taxes as well.

19 So I look at it in the sense that

20 while we do utilize contractors or vendors to

21 support our engineering services, we're also

22 helping support another sector of the economy

23 in New York State.

24 SENATOR PANEPINTO: And I completely

140

1 understand that. And as I said, Region 5

2 DOT, Darrell Kaminski, the director there has

3 been incredibly responsive.

4 But, you know, as I talk to

5 contractors and labor folks, you know, they

6 really ascribe the, you know, lack of

7 engineering infrastructure as the reason why,

8 you know, we're not getting contracts let in

9 an appropriate time frame.

10 And as we talked about, we have a

11 limited construction window to build in

12 New York State. It's more limited in Western

13 New York. And so when a project goes out to

14 bid in November and we're not breaking ground

15 until June, that's a problem. We're losing

16 two or three months of the construction

17 season and it's really, I think, incumbent

18 upon the DOT to be looking at that to make

19 those projects work in Region 5 and all of

20 the upstate regions in a timely fashion. We

21 want to get construction workers in the field

22 in April and not in June.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right. I

24 agree with you. I agree with you.

141

1 And, you know, that's part of the kind

2 of evaluation that I've been doing. I've

3 made some changes already operationally,

4 administratively, at the Department of

5 Transportation policywise. But that is an

6 area that I'm looking at and will be looking

7 at. I hear you. I mean, I've heard this

8 from other people, and I experienced it

9 myself years ago. It's a big ship.

10 But, you know, look, we can find ways

11 that we also can modernize ourselves and be

12 more efficient. You know, somebody mentioned

13 earlier about cross-training. It's another

14 area that I'm interested in. While many

15 people have specialized areas in DOT, I'm a

16 big believer in cross-training, you know, so

17 that people are able to do and function in

18 more than one capacity.

19 And I'm not suggesting that they

20 can't. What I'm suggesting is perhaps it's

21 not utilized to the degree it should be.

22 That will be part of my evaluation as I

23 continue forward as well.

24 SENATOR PANEPINTO: Well, I'm looking

142

1 forward to working with you on that. And as

2 you address that economic analysis, I'd

3 really like to be able to share that with the

4 Senate and Assembly to see whether or not we

5 really have saved money by downsizing from

6 our public employees.

7 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay, good

8 enough. Fair enough.

9 SENATOR PANEPINTO: Thank you.

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

11 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

12 I would like to announce that Senator Phil

13 Boyle has joined us.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman

15 Simon.

16 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: Thank you.

17 Thank you very much, Commissioner. I

18 would like to follow up a little bit on

19 Senator Savino's questions with regard to the

20 Gowanus Expressway.

21 We have, the last decade or so,

22 200,000 cars and trucks a day on the Gowanus

23 Expressway, which is bleeding over into local

24 streets. And the communities and the State

143

1 DOT worked for a long time together on a

2 major environmental impact statement, a major

3 investment statement with regard to that, and

4 found actually tunnel alternatives that would

5 work very well, would add capacity. It would

6 allow you to clean the air as well.

7 But the primary reason why we've been

8 told for years you couldn't increase capacity

9 was the federal Clean Air Act.

10 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: Meanwhile, it's

12 the particulate matter that is -- schools are

13 along the Gowanus Expressway, and the

14 children are breathing in all this stuff and

15 it's costing us more socially. And now, of

16 course, the western area of Brooklyn is

17 undergoing renewed interest, and the idea of

18 being able to take down this corroding

19 expressway and open up the waterfront is

20 tremendously attractive and we think very

21 economically and environmentally fiscally

22 responsible.

23 However, there was a proposal to add

24 some sort of elevated HOV, which really

144

1 hasn't happened. So (a) I would like to know

2 the status of that and whether that is going

3 to happen. And if not, to encourage a very

4 serious second look at the Gowanus Tunnel.

5 And I know that the Senator and I would be

6 happy to host you in our districts to tour

7 this area so you can see firsthand what's

8 going on.

9 So if you could just tell me a little

10 bit about what you know about the status of

11 that other HOV proposal.

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, very

13 little. I don't believe that it is slated to

14 go. Candidly, I'm sure it's a funding

15 challenge.

16 I do want to say, though, that I am a

17 firm believer in recognizing the importance

18 of these air-quality issues. You know, where

19 I lived many years ago, we had a particular

20 area in our downtown that was put on a list,

21 if you will, from the federal government as

22 being a very dangerous area, and so there was

23 some mitigation done of that.

24 And I guess the point I'm saying is

145

1 that going forward, these are the types of

2 things that I think are important that we

3 recognize and think about as well, so we just

4 don't build something but we do it correctly

5 so that we do that in balance with our

6 surroundings. I'm a big believer in kind of

7 land use planning. You know, traffic

8 systems, roadways, arterials, they're all

9 important to move people and goods. But to

10 me, they're also important for quality of

11 life issues, and so how do we build around

12 those as well. And air quality is very

13 important to that, particularly in these

14 days, and it will continue to be so going

15 forward. So I'm happy to take a look at

16 that.

17 But to answer your question, I do not

18 believe that the debt program is slated to

19 go.

20 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: Okay. And you

21 mean by slated to go, to go forward or just

22 not --

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: -- to be

24 built, correct. Not to my knowledge. And

146

1 I'm looking to my left; it's not.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: And then another

3 question I had is you mentioned earlier about

4 the BQE being transferred over to the City

5 DOT. And I know that that is the case with

6 regard to the triple cantilever, which goes

7 the sort of northern part above the

8 connection to the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel and

9 around Brooklyn Heights and on up to the

10 Kosciuszko.

11 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: My question is,

13 since we were talking about the Gowanus,

14 which is part of the BQE, it's the same

15 interstate, is there a line at which you

16 would be transferring to the City DOT? Or am

17 I to understand that the whole Gowanus

18 Expressway will then go to the City DOT as

19 opposed to state?

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, the HOV

21 lane, that's what I was speaking to, would be

22 transferred for operating and maintenance

23 purposes to the City.

24 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: I see.

147

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So we're

2 having those conversations. I had a chance

3 to meet Polly Trottenberg, you know, a month

4 or so ago, and our staffs are interacting as

5 we speak. I'll continue to meet with the

6 commissioner as well, because obviously

7 there's lots of challenges there. And again,

8 you know, to the degree that I can, I want to

9 make sure that we're on the same page and

10 coordinate our activities.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN SIMON: Thank you very

12 much.

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

15 Senator?

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

17 Senator Krueger has some questions.

18 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.

19 So you didn't think there could be any

20 left. So I'm going to try to make mine a

21 lightning round for you.

22 So several members already raised the

23 question of the 2015-2016 MOU. You explained

24 it hadn't been signed. You explained that

148

1 you were in negotiations with the Legislature

2 still. Who in the Legislature? I'd like to

3 talk to them.

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: No, what I

5 said, Senator, was that it's my understanding

6 that the MOU had not been signed, but DOT is

7 committed to the projects that were a part of

8 that list nonetheless.

9 It's my understanding that that list

10 is with staff of the legislative bodies.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: And have any of

12 those projects actually begun in 2015-2016?

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Yes. So then we

15 should be able to get a list of the projects

16 that have actually already started?

17 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I believe the

18 staff has the list. I believe.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: Staff to whom?

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: The

21 Legislature.

22 SENATOR KRUEGER: So would Cathy

23 Young's staff have it, as the Finance chair?

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Ways and Means

149

1 and Senate Finance.

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. So I could

3 perhaps ask you for it, then.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes.

5 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. I will

6 ask Cathy Young for that, thank you.

7 Jumping back, 2010-2014 capital plan,

8 can we get a master list of what was

9 completed during that five-year plan? And

10 are there projects that are still in the

11 pipeline from that time period?

12 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah, I don't

13 know if there are, but we can get you the

14 projects that have been completed, yes.

15 SENATOR KRUEGER: One of the issues

16 that was raised to me was that for the

17 '10-'14 plan, we got federal stimulus monies,

18 the old ARRA funding, and that there was

19 supposed to be a three-year deadline for

20 completing projects that the reappropriations

21 in the department's budget still show there's

22 500 million in reapprops outstanding.

23 I'm just concerned that, one, if we're

24 not spending them, we might face actually

150

1 having to give them back. So I'm wondering

2 whether perhaps I am wrong that there are

3 still 500 million outstanding yet to be spent

4 from the old ARRA money.

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yeah, my

6 understanding is the ARRA funding is

7 complete.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you think that

9 that reapprop money actually has been spent.

10 So if staff could just double-check, and

11 we'll try to coordinate why we thought there

12 was still 500 million left. Thank you.

13 Lots of people asked about the PAVE

14 and BRIDGE funding, but there used to also be

15 a funding stream, I think on a five-year

16 level, for something called the

17 Infrastructure Hardening Fund. And we

18 couldn't find the Extreme Weather

19 Infrastructure Hardening Program

20 appropriation in this year's budget proposal.

21 Can you just clarify, does that program still

22 exist, and is there money for it?

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, this is

24 in the proposed budget. I can't speak to the

151

1 previous, but we can find that for you.

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you think there

3 is money for the Infrastructure Hardening

4 Program in the proposed budget?

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: And I believe

6 that may be rolled into this. But I'll need

7 to clarify that and get back to you.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Thank you.

9 The Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust

10 Fund. So the Comptroller's most recent

11 report found that only 25 percent of that

12 Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust Fund was

13 actually disbursed for capital construction.

14 Can you project for me, in the '15-'19

15 capital plan, how much of that money is

16 intended to be used for capital construction

17 and how much of that money needs to go into

18 operating expenses and debt service?

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: As I mentioned

20 earlier when I was asked, I can't, because I

21 don't know that answer. I know we are

22 reprogramming, so that again is more

23 information that I would need to get to you.

24 SENATOR KRUEGER: And is it your

152

1 understanding that it will need to actually

2 show up in a budget bill at some point but

3 the details haven't been worked out yet?

4 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm saying

5 that we are reformatting our budget with the

6 proposed budget before you, and so as we go

7 through now creating some new criteria for

8 programs like PAVE-NY and BRIDGE-NY, we are

9 also reprogramming the portfolio.

10 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

11 There's been lots of discussion about

12 the issue of parity between MTA versus

13 everything else. Some people talk about it

14 as upstate/downstate; I'd prefer to talk

15 about it as sort of mass transit versus

16 highways and bridges.

17 When the state is talking about

18 calculating the numbers and trying to answer

19 the questions about parity, parity can mean

20 lots of different things. So are we talking

21 about looking at population or system users,

22 or what kind of standards are actually used?

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, as I had

24 mentioned I think previously, systems,

153

1 conditions, use all play into the criteria

2 that we look at. You know, we don't want to

3 make decisions just based upon geographic

4 location. That may not be an indicator that

5 there may be a particular need.

6 SENATOR KRUEGER: The price of oil is

7 going down dramatically or has come down

8 dramatically. That has, I think, potentially

9 two big impacts for state government. One,

10 if in fact the cost of gas and oil have been

11 used as a basis for seeing skyrocketing costs

12 in your budgets, are we seeing money savings

13 because now gas and oil costs so much less?

14 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: In terms of

15 the use for us in our operations?

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: For you, for your

17 contracts, for your operations.

18 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, I have

19 to assume that we are seeing a savings based

20 upon the cost of fuel.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Then of course we

22 also draw revenue from the gas taxes in

23 New York State.

24 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Right.

154

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: So could you give me

2 a sense of what projected loss in revenue we

3 think the state might face based on the

4 lowered cost of gas, meaning less tax revenue

5 into a number of the programs you depend on?

6 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: No, I

7 couldn't. I couldn't. Much like it varies

8 across counties who count on that tax revenue

9 from the sale of petroleum, I don't know what

10 the number would be and the impact it would

11 be for New York State.

12 SENATOR KRUEGER: So you didn't use

13 any new calculator for determining lost

14 revenue into your budget for the coming year?

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Not to my

16 knowledge, no.

17 SENATOR KRUEGER: No. So it may be a

18 good question for Tax & Finance when they

19 testify.

20 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Sure.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much.

22 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

155

1 Assemblyman Gantt, second go-round.

2 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: I'll keep it

3 short, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.

4 Mr. Commissioner, as you know, I'm

5 Dave Gantt. I was -- or at least I offered,

6 at the groundbreaking ceremonies at the

7 railroad station there in Rochester, I

8 offered free consultant services. And so I'm

9 going to offer you the same thing. I'm going

10 to offer you my free services. He's watching

11 very carefully as to what I say. But it's

12 free, because I'm the only one who knows

13 where the pillar is that goes in front of

14 that station from back in 1950. So those

15 services are still there. Hopefully you will

16 give me the opportunity to continue to serve

17 you free.

18 However, at that particular meeting

19 the mayor, who's a young woman in our town,

20 was not even born yet. She just got

21 information from her consultant that it would

22 cost her probably three times as much for --

23 or cost the state probably three times as

24 much later for a bus station as it would if

156

1 we did that station now.

2 So she took me up on my free services

3 contract with the state, with the

4 commissioner, and she asked if I would go and

5 consult for her free on the issue of whether

6 or not the state should try and purchase the

7 bus station, it's a multimodal station. So

8 she wants you to come in and purchase that at

9 $3 million rather than $9 million.

10 And so that's what I'm asking today,

11 that you simply take a look at whether or not

12 we ought to do the bus station now rather

13 than later. My offer still stands that I

14 will consult on that pillar. Nobody knows

15 where that pillar goes but me. So that's

16 free. And this service that I'm providing

17 for the mayor is free. So I don't want

18 anybody to leave out of here saying it's

19 anything else but free.

20 So we'd like to have you do that in

21 Rochester, it's about the multimodal. And we

22 think we could save money.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Okay, thank

24 you, sir. And I did meet with the mayor just

157

1 last week on that subject and others, and I'm

2 in the process of gathering information.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: So you can tell

4 her I did my job, free.

5 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: You did your

6 job. You're a good consultant.

7 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Well, there are

8 some people in here, consultants in here

9 looking now, so I wanted to make sure I got

10 that on the record.

11 Thank you very much. And thank you

12 for your time.

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you,

14 Assemblyman.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN GANTT: Thanks, Mr. Chair.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

17 We were just joined by Senator Joseph

18 Griffo.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you. I guess

20 I've got you, to close.

21 Of the $22.1 billion five-year capital

22 plan, is there a priority or any emphasis

23 given to bicycle and pedestrian

24 infrastructures?

158

1 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Yes, sir,

2 there is. It's actually part of our Complete

3 Streets Program. And in fact we look to

4 build those elements into all the projects

5 that we look at as to how we can better serve

6 the pedestrian and bicycling communities

7 throughout New York State.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: I hope you're

9 putting them in separate divisions. The

10 pedestrians aren't walking in between the

11 bicycles, are they?

12 (Laughter.)

13 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Well, you hope

14 they're looking.

15 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: That will get me

16 into the paper again.

17 The other question is -- I don't know

18 if anyone raised this before -- and that's

19 the fact that the last several enacted

20 budgets included a $10 million capital

21 appropriation for rail service preservation,

22 which included 4 million to upgrade diesel

23 train engines owned by LIRR to meet higher

24 federal emissions standards. Have these

159

1 procurements been completed? How many more

2 LIRR trains could be upgraded in the same

3 manner? Why was the appropriate language

4 allowing for this funding removed in the

5 Executive Budget proposal? Why did they

6 remove it? And do you plan to continue this

7 program?

8 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: So I don't

9 know why the language was removed. Those

10 appraisals or reviews are being done as we

11 speak. And I'm going to follow up on your

12 question with the appropriate staff at DOT.

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Fine. Very good.

14 Thank you very much.

15 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thank you,

16 sir.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: See you next year.

18 That's it.

19 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: I'm done?

20 thank you.

21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: You're free at

22 last.

23 COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL: Thanks for

24 your time.

160

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

2 much, Commissioner, very helpful.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

4 Next to testify, the New York State

5 Department of Motor Vehicles, Theresa Egan,

6 executive deputy commissioner.

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Good

8 afternoon.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Good afternoon.

10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Thank

11 you, Chairperson Young, Chairperson Farrell,

12 and other members of the Legislature for

13 inviting me here today. I'm Terri Egan, the

14 executive deputy commissioner for the

15 Department of Motor Vehicles.

16 Governor Cuomo's Executive Budget plan

17 allows DMV to continue to build upon the

18 innovations and efficiencies achieved over

19 the past few years. It provides $325 million

20 for DMV, which will enable us to continue our

21 efforts to improve overall customer service,

22 promote traffic safety, and protect

23 consumers.

24 At the Governorís direction, our

161

1 efforts to improve customer service started

2 with an agencywide Customer Service

3 Initiative, which consisted of 11 separate

4 projects that added new technologies,

5 upgraded equipment, and instituted best

6 practices in customer service in all of our

7 call centers and 27 state-operated DMV

8 offices.

9 One of the principal goals of the

10 Customer Service Initiative was to decrease

11 average office wait times from 72 minutes,

12 which we saw in 2013, to 30 minutes. I am

13 pleased to report that we were successful in

14 doing so and that in 2015, the average office

15 wait time in state-operated DMV offices was

16 maintained below 30 minutes.

17 The expansion and improvement of our

18 website was another important success of the

19 Customer Service Initiative. To improve our

20 service, DMV introduced a new, modern,

21 dynamic, and easy-to-use website that is also

22 optimized for access from mobile devices.

23 Our website now receives more than 30 million

24 site visits per year and offers more than 50

162

1 online transactions and services. In 2015,

2 customers performed more than 6 million

3 internet transactions, many completed through

4 MyDMV, DMV's personalized web portal.

5 To connect with our customers that

6 utilize social media, DMV has also

7 established a strong social media presence on

8 the site, including Facebook, Twitter,

9 Flickr, Instagram and YouTube. DMV recently

10 won the 2015 Pinnacle Award from the National

11 Association of Government Web Professionals,

12 the second national accolade that we have

13 received this year for the design, ease of

14 use, and scope of services of our website.

15 Along with the expanded use of the

16 website, we are fully embracing new

17 technologies such as electronic notifications

18 that allow us to reduce our environmental

19 footprint. Currently more than 1 million

20 New Yorkers are enrolled in our electronic

21 registration renewal and inspection reminders

22 program, which will eliminate hundreds of

23 thousands of mailings in 2016.

24 In total, these improvements have

163

1 helped us to move closer to achieving the

2 long-term goal of 50 percent of customers

3 using alternative service channels, including

4 the web, mail and kiosks. Currently,

5 approximately 45 percent of our customers

6 transact their business through an

7 alternative service channel, rather than

8 having to be served at the counter by a

9 customer service representative in an office.

10 DMV is not only focused on improving

11 service to our customers, we also continue to

12 increase partnerships with other agencies and

13 to improve services, create efficiencies and

14 promote enforcement. In 2015, DMV partnered

15 with the State Liquor Authority on "Operation

16 Prevent," to target underage drinking, which

17 resulted in nearly 760 arrests and the

18 seizure of more than 750 fraudulent

19 identification documents.

20 In addition, we continue to offer

21 in-office and online options for customers to

22 register to vote or sign up for organ

23 donation, furthering the missions of the

24 Board of Elections and the Department of

164

1 Health. DMV also recently partnered with DOH

2 to produce medical marijuana cards for

3 patients and caregivers. And further, should

4 the legislation pass, we are also ready to

5 partner with the Board of Elections to

6 implement the Governorís Executive Budget

7 proposal to increase voter enrollment.

8 Partnering with 14 state agencies

9 through the Governorís Traffic Safety

10 Committee, DMV will continue its outstanding

11 work that has made New Yorkís roadways among

12 the safest in the nation. GTSC distributes

13 approximately $32 million in federal funding

14 annually to support traffic safety

15 initiatives, including enforcement efforts by

16 state and local law enforcement agencies to

17 combat impaired driving and distracted

18 driving as well as other dangerous driving

19 behaviors. GTSC was also instrumental in

20 securing an $805,000 National Highway Traffic

21 Safety Administration grant to improve

22 pedestrian safety, one of only three grants

23 awarded nationally.

24 In 2015, seat belt use reached an

165

1 all-time high of 92 percent, and New York

2 State has become a national leader in an

3 innovative program aimed at detecting drugged

4 driving by training and certifying Drug

5 Recognition Experts across the state. As a

6 result of these efforts and more, over the

7 past 10 years crash fatalities have decreased

8 by 27 percent.

9 To support our ongoing traffic safety

10 efforts, last year, our administrative law

11 judges adjudicated close to 10,500 cases,

12 including those involving chemical test

13 refusals, fatal crashes, excess speeds, and

14 persistent violators. These administrative

15 law judges also provide support for DMV's

16 mission to protect consumers. Last year they

17 also adjudicated more than 1,000 repair shop

18 dealer complaints and inspection station

19 violations, resulting in nearly $1.2 million

20 being returned to consumers as a result of

21 cases involving fraudulent repair, inspection

22 and dealer transactions.

23 Looking forward, DMV will continue our

24 commitment to improve traffic safety, protect

166

1 consumers, innovate and improve our

2 procedures, maintain a high level of customer

3 service, and provide convenient options for

4 our customers to complete transactions. We

5 remain strongly committed to our core mission

6 to serve the citizens of New York.

7 Once again, thank you for this

8 opportunity to speak with you today. I

9 welcome any questions you might have about

10 DMV and our plans for serving the people of

11 New York. Thank you.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 Assemblyman Cusick.

14 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Thank you,

15 Mr. Chairman.

16 Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you

17 for testifying. I just have a couple of

18 quick questions.

19 I know that there -- and correct me if

20 I'm wrong. Is there a decrease in the

21 workforce at all at DMV?

22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: There is

23 a decrease this year, sir.

24 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: My concern, not

167

1 only as someone who goes to renew his

2 license, but representing many constituents

3 who do, will that have any effect on the

4 customer service on the local level in the

5 different areas of New York State?

6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It will

7 not. This budget contemplates a 10 FTE

8 reduction this year. We will be able to

9 absorb that.

10 We've made some great strides in

11 regard to some technological advances in the

12 way we're approaching our in-office

13 experience and, most importantly, really

14 trying to move as many transactions as

15 possible to the website so that -- as I'm

16 sure most of you have heard, people would

17 like to do it from the comfort of their home

18 or, you know, from the subway using their

19 mobile devices.

20 So there will be no impact, sir.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: So we don't need

22 to expect having constituents call our

23 offices saying that they're having unusual

24 waits at DMV due to this budget?

168

1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I would

2 certainly not anticipate that, sir. We

3 again, for this year, have been able to

4 maintain the statewide average below

5 30 minutes in our state-run offices.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Great. I want to

7 put on my hat as chair of the Election Law.

8 You had mentioned and the Governor had

9 mentioned the voter registration.

10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes.

11 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: And currently DMV

12 is the only agency that has that online, is

13 that correct?

14 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: That is

15 correct.

16 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: And that's due to

17 mainly because DMV has access to a web

18 signature that other agencies do not have,

19 correct?

20 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: That is

21 correct.

22 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Could you just

23 tell me, the plan that was put forth by the

24 Governor in the budget announcement last

169

1 week, what is the plan to join with other

2 agencies? Because I know our committee has

3 been looking into this and we had hearings on

4 this this past winter, and we're very

5 interested in the Assembly in moving forward

6 on voter registration online.

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Sure.

8 Again, we haven't seen any of the proposed

9 legislation. And I think what -- as we are

10 aware at this point, the process as far as

11 DMV is concerned will remain in essence the

12 same as it has been since the mid-90s when we

13 implemented Motor Voter. The only difference

14 is where currently right now it is an

15 affirmative opt-in, it's just going to change

16 to an opt-out. The rest of the process will

17 remain exactly the same.

18 In regard to expanding that with other

19 agencies, I'm not sure what those plans are.

20 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Okay. But there

21 are -- there will be discussions on possibly

22 expanding it, correct?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I would

24 believe so.

170

1 ASSEMBLYMAN CUSICK: Okay, thank you.

2 Thank you, Commissioner.

3 Thank you, Mr. Chair.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

5 much.

6 I'd like to welcome and thank you

7 today, Deputy Commissioner. And I did have a

8 couple of questions for you.

9 You know, the background is in the

10 Executive Budget proposal it provides

11 $302.3 million for DMV, as you know. And

12 that's $2.8 million less, it has been pointed

13 out, than -- based on continuing

14 administrative and operational efficiencies,

15 including more than 4 million online

16 transactions per year.

17 And that leads into a question that I

18 have. I've heard from local governments

19 across the state, especially county clerks,

20 about the online transactions and the impact

21 that it has on their locations across the

22 state. So could you address that, please?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

24 Certainly. Again, county clerks serve, in

171

1 essence, the same constituency as our

2 state-operated offices. And I think one of

3 the things that we believe one of our primary

4 missions is to provide exemplary customer

5 service, and that is a result of listening to

6 our customers.

7 We hear over and over again, Can't I

8 do more transactions from home? Why do I

9 have to come into an office? Can't we do it

10 on mobile, because we're doing everything

11 else on mobile? So we at DMV have attempted

12 to implement many of those things that we

13 think are meeting our customers' demands.

14 This year the county clerks shared

15 about $43.8 million in retention, with about

16 $750,000 coming from web. As many of you may

17 recall, back in 2012 legislation was passed

18 to provide county clerks a sharing of those

19 revenues derived from online transactions.

20 There was about $750,000 shared by the clerks

21 coming from that this year, and our

22 projections indicate that those revenues will

23 increase to over a million dollars next year.

24 In addition, as a result of our

172

1 natural cycle of increase of license renewal

2 volumes over the next four years, where the

3 county clerks shared about 43.8 million in

4 normal retentions this year, our projections

5 indicate in the years '18-'19, at the height

6 of the cycle, their revenues will be

7 exceeding $51 million.

8 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. And I

9 appreciate that answer.

10 I do want to stress, however, that I

11 know that you're focused on customer service,

12 and that's something that I and the

13 Legislature also support. But it is crucial

14 to make sure that our DMV locations are

15 continued and are operating.

16 And the reason I say that is that

17 going online is a great thing for people who

18 choose to use that method to deal with the

19 DMV. However, I'm sure you know that in

20 upstate New York there are wide, vast

21 geographic regions that do not have access to

22 broadband, no access to Internet. People may

23 not even be able to afford computers. And as

24 a result of that, they need to have that

173

1 local customer service at the DMV office

2 through the clerks' offices.

3 So I just want to point that out, and

4 I'm sure you're aware of that.

5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

6 Absolutely.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Also I wanted to

8 ask a question about the federal Real ID Act

9 of 2005 that establishes minimum standards

10 for the production and issuance of

11 state-issued driver's licenses and

12 identification cards. And as you know, it

13 was found that the DMV licenses that were put

14 forward do not meet the standards of that

15 act.

16 So could you please provide the

17 Legislature with any details on the measure

18 that DMV has taken in order to be in

19 compliance? Because as you know, there's a

20 one-year extension period, the clock is

21 ticking. And could you please give us an

22 update on where that is at?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I'll be

24 happy to, Senator. Thank you for asking.

174

1 Again, there's a couple of things that

2 I know that in the press actually has been

3 misrepresented. So if we could start,

4 New York has since 2008 offered a Real

5 ID-compliant document. It's the enhanced

6 driver's license. So we have provided a

7 license that is Real ID-compliant for several

8 years.

9 Most recently, I think what you're

10 referring to is in October, New York received

11 a one-year extension till October of 2016.

12 And much of what we have done over the last

13 decade is to work with DHS and wait to see

14 how it is that they were going to implement

15 the act, particularly as it references air

16 travel, which I think is the thing that most

17 New Yorkers are concerned about.

18 It was only less than two weeks ago

19 that DHS actually announced what its

20 implementation plan was, and that plan in

21 essence says -- and there's lot of

22 technicalities -- but as it pertains to

23 New York is that New York documents will

24 continue to be good, effective, will let you

175

1 get on a plane through 2020, as long as we

2 stay either on extension or become compliant.

3 And we have every intention to be on

4 extension or compliant through that time

5 frame. So all of New York State documents

6 will be good through October of 2020.

7 Inasmuch as they just made this

8 announcement less than two weeks ago, we will

9 continue to work with DHS at this point as

10 well as with DOB and our ITS people here in

11 the state to come up with the most

12 cost-effective and efficient plan to ensure

13 that all New Yorkers will not suffer any

14 negative impact from this federal rule.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.

16 Thank you very much for that answer.

17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: You're

18 welcome.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

20 Assemblyman Ra.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN RA: Thank you, Chairman.

22 I just had a quick question. You

23 touched on the organ donor sign-up program.

24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes.

176

1 ASSEMBLYMAN RA: And I know that there

2 was that piece of legislation last year that

3 made some slight changes to the wording of

4 that on the form and the effect of not

5 filling out that question on the online form.

6 Has that been implemented yet?

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It has,

8 sir. And as recently as November we moved it

9 to another one of our electronic formats, and

10 we are seeing an uptick.

11 Last year we had over 385,000

12 applications to join the registry transmitted

13 through the Department of Motor Vehicles.

14 And historically it still looks like

15 88 percent of the organ donor registry

16 participants are coming through DMV.

17 ASSEMBLYMAN RA: Great. So that's

18 been smooth, in your view, so far?

19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It has.

20 We continue to look for other ways that we

21 can improve participation. We're working

22 closely with DOH.

23 ASSEMBLYMAN RA: Great. Thank you

24 very much.

177

1 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: You're

2 welcome.

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

4 Senator?

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

6 much.

7 Senator Marty Dilan.

8 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you very much.

9 I just have one quick question. In

10 your testimony you mentioned that seat belt

11 use is up to 92 percent. In previous years

12 when I chaired the Transportation Committee,

13 the Department of Motor Vehicles did provide

14 to me a study, and as a result there's

15 legislation for the use of seat belts in the

16 back seat.

17 I just wanted to know if the

18 department still supports that legislation.

19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: We would

20 support back seat belts, yes, sir.

21 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you.

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Very efficient.

23 Thank you very much.

24 Assemblyman?

178

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: The state fiscal

2 year 2013-2014 budget included $4.5 million

3 to fund a DMV Customer Service Initiative

4 which was continued in the 2014-2015 budget

5 with an additional $1.4 million in funding.

6 Had these initiatives been fully implemented?

7 Were they successful? Is the DMV currently

8 offering Saturday hours?

9 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes.

10 Yes. And yes.

11 (Laughter.)

12 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes, they

13 have been -- the money has been expended. We

14 have continued to expand on what we started

15 back in 2012-2013. We have maximized or are

16 maximizing the use of our kiosks by

17 continuing to add transactions that can be

18 done in an office. We continue to optimize

19 our website so it is not only easy to use

20 from home, but it's easier to use with all of

21 our mobile devices. So we have continued to

22 do that.

23 We continue, again, to work on our

24 reservation systems within the state-run

179

1 offices so that you can make a reservation

2 now and come in and be served. We've had

3 over 900,000 reservations actually made

4 within the state-run offices.

5 So yes, I think it's been very

6 successful. And as we've been able to keep

7 our wait times down as well as I think

8 provide exemplary customer service, I think

9 it was money well spent and well used.

10 So thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: The Executive

12 proposal reduces the DMV workforce by 10

13 full-time-equivalent employees. Will this

14 have any impact on customer service at the

15 DMV? The DMV workforce has been reduced by

16 24 percent over the past 10 years. What

17 impact has this had on DMV operations and

18 customer services?

19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Thank

20 you.

21 Yes, we have incurred a 10 FTE for

22 this year, but we still have 2,149 staff. I

23 do not believe there will be an impact on

24 customer service. We have made some

180

1 tremendous strides in the use of technology,

2 as we've spoken about.

3 In addition, we are actively engaged

4 in lean management, which is one of the

5 recommendations that came out of the Sage

6 Commission, in that we're trying -- you know,

7 with each lean project we're finding

8 efficiencies so that we then can deploy

9 resources to those areas that may need

10 attention.

11 And we continue to be very creative

12 with how we are using the workforce that we

13 currently have. So no, I do not believe

14 there will be any negative impact by this

15 reduction.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: The compliance

17 deadline for the federal Real ID Act was

18 recently extended to January 2018. Is

19 New York in compliance? What has the DMV

20 done so far toward achieving compliance?

21 What additional action is required to achieve

22 compliance? Is DMV planning to meet the new

23 compliance deadline, January 2018?

24 That's four different ways to ask the

181

1 same question.

2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

3 Certainly. And actually, as long as the

4 state remains on extension or is Real

5 ID-compliant, that deadline goes really to

6 2020.

7 So we believe we have plenty of time

8 to implement and do what we need to do, after

9 speaking with DHS, talking to DOB, talking to

10 ITS, to provide a document and a process that

11 will allow New Yorkers to continue to fly

12 during that time.

13 And again, the footnote to that always

14 is we've had a Real ID-compliant document

15 since 2008, and we'll continue that also.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

17 much.

18 Any further questions?

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes, we have

20 several Senators.

21 We'll start with Senator Joseph

22 Griffo.

23 SENATOR GRIFFO: Thank you, Madam

24 Chairwoman.

182

1 Thank you, Commissioner. Appreciate

2 that. I just want to echo what the

3 chairwoman said earlier about it's important

4 to have that ongoing dialogue with county

5 clerks too, because your constituents are

6 their constituents, and they're all of our

7 constituents. So customer service I think is

8 in the best interests of everybody.

9 So I hope you would continue to at

10 least listen and involve them in that

11 conversation and discussion.

12 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

13 Absolutely. And in fact we're meeting with

14 them next week, Senator.

15 SENATOR GRIFFO: I'm going to follow

16 up on the Real ID Act because I do have some

17 questions on that.

18 You say that we have been compliant.

19 What do you consider compliant? The enhanced

20 driver's license that we offer?

21 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: We have

22 provided -- and DHS has certainly recognized

23 that our EDL is a Real ID-compliant document.

24 So that has been in existence since 2008.

183

1 ***START HERE***

2 There are a series of technical

3 requirements to become fully Real ID-

4 compliant, but at this time we have provided

5 and received an extension from DHS. And, you

6 know, inasmuch as DHS has taken 10 years,

7 really, to announce its implementation, now

8 that they finally have, we will be working

9 closely with them moving forward to make sure

10 that anything we do will not have a negative

11 impact on New York's ability to fly.

12 SENATOR GRIFFO: So the document that

13 you indicate was compliant actually comes at

14 an additional cost to all of the customers

15 and constituents that we represent, correct?

16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: As a

17 result of legislation that was passed, yes,

18 there's an additional fee charged for the

19 EDL.

20 SENATOR GRIFFO: So we are one of the

21 last if not the last states that was

22 noncompliant, correct?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: In regard

24 to a listing on the DHS website, it would

184

1 look so. As we have had conversations with

2 DHS, we think that was an unfair listing, if

3 you will, because there were many states that

4 were even on the extension category that had

5 legislation in place at the time that said

6 they could not become Real ID-compliant. But

7 in any event, having worked through that in

8 the fall, DHS has granted us an extension

9 through October of 2016.

10 SENATOR GRIFFO: And we have sought

11 other extensions. So this could potentially

12 be the last extension, even though you've

13 talked about how they've given more --

14 they've delineated some of their requirements

15 now.

16 So the question then would be if we

17 know the enhanced driver's license -- my

18 concern, and it should be all of our

19 concerns, is we want to ensure that any

20 New Yorker that is trying to engage in travel

21 or access to a federal building will have the

22 appropriate identification necessary to do so

23 to conduct business or to travel. And if the

24 enhanced license can do that, and it will be

185

1 recognized accordingly, what are we going to

2 do to allow that opportunity without that

3 additional cost to all New Yorkers? Because

4 to impose an additional cost on something

5 that the federal government is requiring

6 seems to be very onerous.

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I

8 absolutely understand your concern, Senator.

9 In regard to the $30 fee, because it was

10 legislatively mandated, there's not something

11 that DMV can do in regard to that.

12 SENATOR GRIFFO: So you would

13 support -- if there were legislation, we

14 could expect that the DMV would support any

15 legislation that would eliminate that fee,

16 then?

17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Again, we

18 would certainly review any proposal that was

19 given to us. In addition, we will continue

20 to work with DHS as well as our own DOB and

21 ITS to see if there are other alternatives

22 that might be available.

23 SENATOR GRIFFO: What are we doing to

24 inform the public, too, about the

186

1 responsibilities and obligations? Because I

2 think it's been deficient to date because

3 many people are very confused and unaware of

4 the requirements. Granted, again, it's a

5 federal law, but handed to DMV.

6 So what have you or more importantly

7 what will you do to ensure that people

8 understand what will be required?

9 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

10 Absolutely. And as I think you appropriately

11 point out, the message from DHS and TSA has

12 been complicated at best. Part of the

13 announcement that was made less than two

14 weeks ago was an educational marketing

15 program that the feds intend to pursue, so we

16 will strongly -- we will be working with them

17 to come up with a marketing and education

18 plan that will mirror what it is so that we

19 are all saying the same thing to all of our

20 constituents.

21 So now that we do have some time

22 frames and it is more concrete, we will have

23 that ability to put that plan together.

24 SENATOR GRIFFO: And you'll have that

187

1 plan which we can be able to access and know

2 how you're going to communicate with the

3 general public?

4 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

5 Absolutely. As soon as we have that plan

6 available, we'd be happy to share it.

7 SENATOR GRIFFO: Thank you.

8 Thank you, Chairwoman.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

10 much, Senator.

11 Next I'd like to call on Senator Diane

12 Savino.

13 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Senator

14 Young.

15 Thank you for your testimony. I

16 wanted to ask you a question about the

17 issuance of the medical marijuana cards for

18 patients and caregivers. I'm happy to hear

19 that DMV is issuing them. I have a question,

20 though, about how many have been issued, if

21 you know, and what the turnaround is from the

22 request for the card.

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I do

24 know, as of this morning, it was 117 cards

188

1 have been issued. We issued the first one on

2 January 4th. The turnaround time I think is

3 very short. I don't know exactly what that

4 is, but I can get that to you, Senator.

5 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, I would be

6 interested in hearing that.

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

8 Absolutely.

9 SENATOR SAVINO: And the other

10 question is, just briefly, I know that

11 everyone is concerned about distracted

12 driving and obviously reducing the incidence

13 of driving under the influence. In the

14 Legislature, I believe two years ago we

15 increased the penalties for texting while

16 driving and in fact made actually having the

17 phone in your hand a primary offense so the

18 police could pull you over.

19 Do you have any idea how many

20 summonses have been issued statewide with

21 respect to texting while driving?

22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I don't

23 have that offhand, but I certainly can get

24 that. That is a metric that we keep and we

189

1 report on it regularly. We do -- we're happy

2 to report, actually, in 2014, which is the

3 last year of full reporting on this, that in

4 regard to impaired driving our fatalities

5 were at the lowest ever that had alcohol as a

6 factor, which we were very pleased with.

7 And as a result of many of the

8 initiatives the Governor has directed not

9 only us to take but also legislation that has

10 been passed, we were really happy to see

11 those numbers start to come down.

12 SENATOR SAVINO: Are we tracking the

13 number of accidents due to distracted

14 driving, particularly from texting?

15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes, we

16 have an ability -- the Governor's Traffic

17 Safety Committee website actually has these

18 reports that are done, they're available on

19 their website. It's a little difficult to

20 track because, again, we don't say anything

21 is a particular cause. The way that police

22 and law enforcement report, it's a factor.

23 But certainly if you go to the charts

24 that are there, you can look at factors from

190

1 cellphones to texting to distracted driving,

2 and I think there's even one for eating while

3 driving. So those numbers are all set out.

4 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you.

5 And another issue that has been of

6 concern to myself, Assemblyman Cusick and I

7 have been carrying a bill for several years

8 now with respect to creating a crime of

9 intruding into the work zone. The number of

10 work zone fatalities across the state

11 continues to go up, despite us increasing

12 fines. Everyone -- you drive down the

13 Thruway, you see a sign that says, you know,

14 the penalties are doubled for speeding

15 through the work zone. But it has had very

16 little impact on changing people's behavior.

17 So we have been pushing the idea of

18 creating a felony, creating the crime of

19 vehicular law homicide for intentionally

20 intruding into the work zone. The Senate has

21 passed this bill many times. But we're kind

22 of running into problems convincing others

23 that this is necessary, because they don't

24 see the number of summonses.

191

1 So I'm not sure if you know the answer

2 to that question or if you can point me in a

3 direction where I can obtain the information

4 to justify our position that we need to

5 increase these penalties, because intrusions

6 into the work zone are creating not just a

7 hazard for the workers in the work zone, but

8 it actually creates a big problem for

9 drivers.

10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Sure. I

11 mean, we certainly can work with DOT as well

12 as our Governor's Traffic Safety Committee

13 and some of our other data people to provide

14 whatever data you think you need.

15 SENATOR SAVINO: Those tickets are

16 adjudicated by your ALJs, aren't they?

17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It

18 depends on where -- it depends on where the

19 infraction happens. Some could be our ALJs,

20 some could be local town judges and

21 magistrates.

22 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, thank you.

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: You're

24 welcome.

192

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

2 much, Senator.

3 Next I would call on Senator Kathy

4 Marchione.

5 SENATOR MARCHIONE: Thank you. Thank

6 you. Hi, how are you?

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Good to

8 see you, Senator.

9 SENATOR MARCHIONE: That's good. Nice

10 to see you too.

11 Recently it has come to my attention

12 that State DMV has put out for bid the

13 ability of a private company to process

14 commercial or dealer work, as known by county

15 clerks. Can you tell me whether that is true

16 or not?

17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I do not

18 believe that's true.

19 SENATOR MARCHIONE: Okay, I had a

20 gentleman in my office who -- actually, the

21 company is in my district -- told me that he

22 put a bid in for work with the Department of

23 Motor Vehicles.

24 So you're confirming that at this time

193

1 you have not put work out?

2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I am not

3 aware of what that would be. We certainly

4 could, if you would like, after this, get us

5 the information and we can track it down and

6 more specifically discuss it. But I am not

7 aware of any bid that's going out for dealer

8 work.

9 SENATOR MARCHIONE: Okay, that was my

10 second question.

11 I know that you've done a great deal

12 of work for online, and it's very easy to

13 use. County clerks hate it, of course, as

14 you know. But certainly it's terrific for

15 people to be able to get their DMV work done

16 quickly.

17 Have you secured an online program for

18 dealers as of this time so that dealers -- I

19 know that they have been able to for years

20 but have not. Have you streamlined and

21 looked at programs where dealers are now

22 going to start going online?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Again,

24 the partnering program has been available at

194

1 DMV for several years. As far as any new

2 initiative in regard to that, the answer

3 would be no.

4 The only thing -- and again, trying to

5 figure out exactly what your constituent may

6 be referring to -- we are getting ready to

7 put out an RFP for an online EMV system.

8 It's basically called -- it's to allow the

9 transfer and the inventory of new cars, used

10 cars, for dealers to be done electronically

11 as opposed to on paper. But that has to do

12 with really more, again, just the inventory

13 and the transfer. That RFP we would expect

14 to go out hopefully next month.

15 SENATOR MARCHIONE: Okay. And that

16 might be what he was talking about. He

17 wasn't explaining it well.

18 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It could

19 be, but we'd be happy to follow up with you

20 if you would like.

21 SENATOR MARCHIONE: Thank you.

22 One other question. You have a

23 program, it's COMPASS?

24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes.

195

1 SENATOR MARCHIONE: But within COMPASS

2 there's a function called Tickets in COMPASS.

3 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes.

4 SENATOR MARCHIONE: My local district

5 attorney has been in contact with me because

6 in her office they're able to access that.

7 The problem that they're experiencing is they

8 would love to see that program expanded to

9 local justice courts.

10 In any given day in just one of my

11 counties, in Saratoga, they process about 200

12 cases a day. They can't possibly look at

13 everything when it's in a local justice

14 court; they don't have time. But the local

15 justice court, even with limited access, a

16 certain individual, someone within there to

17 be able to look at Tickets in COMPASS -- let

18 me tell you the situation that occurred, that

19 we actually went to DMV and asked if we could

20 hook onto Tickets in COMPASS. We had an

21 accident in my district with four young high

22 school students, and the young man who was

23 responsible for the accident had 22

24 violations stockpiled that no one knew about

196

1 because they weren't able to access what he

2 hadn't taken care of.

3 And so at that point we went to DMV

4 and we asked if we could hook in. And you

5 were running a pilot, and thank you, you put

6 Saratoga on that pilot.

7 Well, now they know it works so well

8 and local courts have access, of course, to

9 all criminal records through DCJS. They

10 really need to have access to COMPASS in

11 order for them not only in a plea agreement,

12 but in any decision that the judge is

13 rendering, to know what is out there and what

14 may still be outstanding in order to be able

15 to know what they really need to do with that

16 person in front of them.

17 So I'm here today hoping that access

18 can be given to our mobile justice courts.

19 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Yes,

20 Senator, we're aware of that.

21 And again, for those who may not be

22 familiar with this, here in New York, local

23 courts as well as DAs can receive an

24 abstract, which is what we talk about as a

197

1 driver's driving record. And it lists out

2 convictions.

3 There is a program that we started a

4 couple of years ago called Tickets in

5 COMPASS, which allows certain people to have

6 access not only to the driver conviction but

7 to what the original charges were.

8 There was a decision at the time that

9 the program was instituted that that access

10 would be given to district attorneys so that

11 they can make a determination whether or not

12 they could even want to make an offer for a

13 plea bargain for a particular matter. There

14 was a decision also at that time that town

15 judges and courts would not have that same

16 access, mostly because, again, judges as an

17 objective neutral arbiter, the idea being

18 seeing the original charge prior to the time

19 that they may be called upon to actually have

20 a trial to make a determination of guilt or

21 innocence, we would not want anybody to be

22 unfairly biased, and we would certainly want

23 the motorist to feel that there was fairness

24 going on at all levels with the DA as well as

198

1 their defense attorney as well as the town

2 judge.

3 So that is really the theory behind

4 doing it this way. And town judges can

5 absolutely get access to this at the

6 appropriate time through their district

7 attorney.

8 So I'm familiar with the case on the

9 Northway. And I would just say that while

10 the town judge may not have had access to

11 this document and this information, the

12 district attorney certainly did. And if it

13 was any time within the last three years or

14 so, they would have had any sort of

15 information in regard to the priors on this.

16 So I understand the concern and we

17 understand the request, but at this time,

18 again, balancing what we believe to be the

19 fairness to the motorist as well as the

20 objectivity and the unbiased nature of the

21 judicial system, that's our policy as we sit

22 here.

23 SENATOR MARCHIONE: My request is just

24 to hope that you'll revisit that policy. But

199

1 thank you for your explanation.

2 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Thank

3 you, Senator.

4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblywoman

5 Malliotakis.

6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Thank you

7 very much.

8 Thank you, Commissioner, for being

9 here.

10 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Good

11 afternoon.

12 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: I just

13 wanted to follow up on some of the drunk

14 driving stuff.

15 One of the first bills that I had

16 introduced when I came to the Legislature was

17 to strip licenses from individuals after a

18 third conviction. It was sort of like a

19 "three strikes, you're out." A similar law,

20 Vince's Law, went into effect I think in

21 2014. I just wanted to ask you if you could

22 provide a little bit of an update on how

23 that's been working.

24 At the time that this law went into

200

1 effect, there were about 47,000 individuals,

2 I think, in the database that had three

3 convictions of drunk driving, and I wanted to

4 know what your perspective is on how this law

5 is working and if it goes really far enough.

6 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN:

7 Certainly. It may be a little premature to

8 make a determination on how well it's

9 working. I do believe, I think we just read

10 about a month and a half ago that we had our

11 first either arrest and/or conviction under

12 the new law. And it takes a little bit of

13 time to really compile all of that

14 information. And even though somebody may be

15 getting charged with that new law, as a

16 judicial system works, it may take several

17 months if not in excess of a year before it

18 works its way through the judicial system.

19 So it's something that we will continue to

20 work on.

21 And as you know, too, we try to the --

22 you know, the best of our authority is take a

23 very strong look at not only these impaired

24 drivers -- and again, we're looking not only

201

1 at alcohol now, but we're also looking at

2 drug-impaired and seeing what we can do

3 within our own authority. And certainly as

4 proposals come in from the Legislature, we

5 review those also.

6 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: The first

7 case, the conviction that you mentioned, was

8 that a license that was suspended or was it

9 just someone who, you know, was sentenced to

10 seven years, which was the maximum?

11 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I

12 thinking it had to do with the arrest and not

13 the sentence.

14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Okay. All

15 right, so hopefully we'll see some progress

16 with this and getting people off the streets.

17 I have another question regarding the

18 state identification cards. Can you just

19 talk a little bit about the process for an

20 individual who is either -- it's only --

21 state identification cards are only given to

22 citizens or legal residents, correct?

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Well,

24 citizenship is not an element of our license

202

1 issuance process. So I'm not sure if you're

2 talking about just a regular license or if

3 you're talking about what potentially would

4 be a Real ID document.

5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: State ID

6 document.

7 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Okay.

8 Citizenship is not an element of our

9 licensing process. And again, online we have

10 a very I think robust website in regard to

11 what would be needed for someone to come into

12 an office to receive either a non-driver ID

13 and/or their license.

14 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: But to

15 receive an ID, you do need to be a legal

16 resident of the city and the nation, no?

17 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Again, in

18 regard to a non-driver ID, not being a

19 Real ID document, citizenship is not an

20 element of our license process.

21 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS:

22 Citizenship is not. But about a legal

23 resident?

24 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: It is not

203

1 either.

2 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: So you can

3 be an illegal immigrant and obtain a New York

4 State identification card?

5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Residency

6 versus citizenship, those are two different

7 things, Assemblywoman. So I'm not --

8 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: But you're

9 either a legal resident or you're not. You

10 are either a citizen -- so if you are not a

11 citizen of the United States and you're not a

12 legal resident of the United States, so you

13 are here illegally, you can still obtain a

14 state identification card?

15 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Well,

16 again, we would have to look at the

17 documentation that was provided. We are

18 provided with all sorts of different types of

19 passports, citizenship documents, temporary

20 residents. And on each one of those things

21 there's a different process.

22 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Again, but

23 if you are here without any of those

24 documents, making you not a legal resident,

204

1 can you obtain an identification card? I

2 think that's a, you know, pretty

3 black-and-white question. If you are not

4 legally here, whether it be with a visa or --

5 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: If you

6 cannot provide us with the documentation to

7 show that you are legally here and meet the

8 checklist that we have in regard to the

9 documents that we need, we could not provide

10 an identification card.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Okay. So

12 unlike the City of New York, if you are -- if

13 you are here illegally, you do not have legal

14 status to be in the United States, you cannot

15 obtain a card? I just want a yes or no.

16 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I can't

17 comment on what New York City does. We're

18 not sure what it is that they do.

19 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Okay. But

20 in the State of New York, the state does not

21 give an identification card if you're not a

22 legal resident? Just a yes or a no.

23 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: I believe

24 the answer is no, we don't. Although

205

1 citizenship is not an element, again, of our

2 licensing process. It depends on the

3 paperwork that's provided to us as well as

4 the passport information that --

5 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: But you

6 need to show some documentation that you're

7 here legally.

8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: There is

9 a series of things that we would look at,

10 yes.

11 ASSEMBLYWOMAN MALLIOTAKIS: Thank you

12 very much.

13 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

14 Senator?

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

16 Senator Dilan would like to ask one

17 more question.

18 SENATOR DILAN: Yes.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Or maybe more than

20 one.

21 SENATOR DILAN: No, just one.

22 And very quickly, again, I wanted to

23 understand what enforcement is going on with

24 unlicensed used car dealers in terms of

206

1 curbstoning where they're just parking their

2 vehicles -- uninsured, not registered. And I

3 wonder what enforcement your agency is taking

4 upon these unlicensed used car dealers. And

5 I know that New York City Police Department

6 is at a loss as to what they do with these

7 vehicles that are in residential areas.

8 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Sure.

9 Senator, as we receive those complaints, we

10 will send out our automobile facility

11 investigators, our AFIs, to look to see if we

12 can find evidence of an unlawful dealership.

13 Oftentimes I will say that it is not

14 something where we can find evidence of a

15 dealership, and then it does become a law

16 enforcement issue and we work with NYPD as

17 best we can on that.

18 SENATOR DILAN: Okay. Thank you.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Further questions?

20 Thank you very much.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

22 EX. DEP. COMMISSIONER EGAN: Thank you

23 very much.

24 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: New York State

207

1 Thruway Authority and Canal Corporation,

2 Maria Lehman, interim executive director,

3 Matt Howard, CFO, Gordon Cuffy, counsel.

4 Come on up, come on up, Matt.

5 (Laughter.)

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: There are chairs.

7 Thought we would get you.

8 Good afternoon.

9 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Good

10 afternoon.

11 Chairperson Young, Chairperson

12 Farrell, and members of the Senate and

13 Assembly fiscal and Transportation

14 Committees, thank you for having me here

15 today. I am Maria Lehman, the interim

16 executive director and chief operating

17 officer for the New York State Thruway

18 Authority and Canal Corporation.

19 This is a very important year for the

20 Thruway Authority. The Executive Budget

21 proposes a capital appropriation of

22 $700 million in the Thruway Stabilization

23 Program. This is in addition to the nearly

24 $1.3 billion approved in 2015. We are

208

1 grateful to the Governor for this infusion of

2 capital from the settlements with banks and

3 financial institutions. These funds will

4 allow us to continue the progress we've made

5 on the New NY Bridge as well as meet our

6 systemwide capital needs, while enabling

7 tolls to remain frozen at current levels

8 until 2020.

9 The Executive Budget also includes a

10 tax credit that will cut tolls for frequent

11 users of the Thruway and eliminate tolls for

12 agricultural users, benefiting nearly one

13 million passenger, business and farm

14 vehicles. Drivers of passenger vehicles who

15 spend at least $50 annually, and businesses

16 and commercial account holders who spend

17 between $100 and $9,999 annually in Thruway

18 tolls, would receive a tax credit worth

19 50 percent of the tolls paid. Further,

20 farming vehicles bringing farm goods to

21 market would have tolls eliminated completely

22 through a 100 percent tax credit.

23 Finally, the Executive Budget proposes

24 the transfer of the Canal Corporation to the

209

1 New York Power Authority in recognition of

2 the natural nexus of missions between Canals

3 and the Power Authority. The 27

4 hydroelectric generating facilities along the

5 Canal System represent 9 percent of the

6 stateís total hydroelectric facilities and

7 approximately 2.3 percent of its annual

8 hydroelectric power production. The Power

9 Authority currently manages the corporationís

10 largest reservoir, the Hinckley Reservoir,

11 and the Corporation routinely performs

12 maintenance work for the Power Authority at

13 the Crescent and Vischer Ferry Dams, where

14 the Power Authority operates hydroelectric

15 power-generation facilities.

16 This transfer allows the Thruway

17 Authority to reassume roughly $85 million in

18 operating costs that have been supported by

19 the state since 2013. These costs include

20 approximately $26 million in state support

21 and approximately $59 million for the

22 New York State Police Troop T costs that were

23 assumed by the state, which will now be

24 returning to the Thruway Authority.

210

1 The Thruway Authority adopted a 2016

2 budget that is balanced and provides the

3 necessary resources to maintain the current

4 levels of maintenance, safety, and service on

5 our system. The Thruway Authorityís capital

6 and operating costs are being effectively and

7 efficiently managed, and our 2015 revenue has

8 exceeded expectations.

9 Another noteworthy point is that the

10 Thruway Authority has held annual operating

11 growth to less than 1 percent since 2011, and

12 we project that we can continue that trend

13 into the near future.

14 There is significant progress on the

15 construction of the New NY Bridge, thanks to

16 the dedicated professionals working on the

17 project. The single largest bridge and

18 highway infrastructure project in

19 North America, this new crossing is literally

20 rising from the water and stretching further

21 across the Hudson every day. In the past

22 months the first steel girders have reached

23 the Rockland landing, and additional progress

24 includes 55 percent of the concrete piers are

211

1 complete, 46 percent of the steel girders are

2 fabricated, and 34 percent of the deck panels

3 are fabricated.

4 The Governorís 2016-1017 proposed

5 budget recognizes the Thruway's vital role as

6 the backbone for commerce, tourism and

7 commuters in New York. It is important to

8 reiterate that the funds included in the

9 Executive proposal are for capital

10 improvements, not operating costs. The

11 $700 million in assistance will ensure that

12 all of the necessary capital maintenance and

13 improvements we have planned can occur

14 without requiring a toll adjustment.

15 One final note: We could not do any of

16 what we do without our dedicated employees

17 across the state, and I want to take this

18 opportunity to acknowledge their hard work,

19 dedication, and ongoing commitment to the

20 highest standards of safety and reliability

21 in every area of our operations.

22 Thank you for your time. I would be

23 happy to respond to any questions you may

24 have.

212

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

2 Mr. Walter, Assemblyman Walter.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: Thank you,

4 Chairman.

5 Ms. Lehman, congratulations. I hope

6 we can make it a permanent position, not just

7 temporary here.

8 But it's nice to have someone with

9 some Western New York experience at the

10 Thruway Authority. I'd like to talk

11 specifically in my district, which is the

12 Williamsville toll barrier. In previous

13 years we've approached the Thruway Authority

14 about eliminating the tolls between Exits 49

15 and 50 for our commuters who use that passage

16 frequently. With this proposal by the

17 Governor, is that something that is more

18 achievable today than it was previously? Or

19 is that something that's not on the table at

20 all, or can we talk about it further?

21 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Our current

22 five-year capital plan does include some

23 improvements at Williamsville. As far as

24 changing out the barriers, that is not in our

213

1 current capital plan. But what we have done

2 as part of the Cleveland Hill road and bridge

3 project, we have made improvements there to

4 be able to allow better throughput. We had

5 added 20 mile per hour E-ZPass lanes, for

6 example, by reconfiguring in the plaza, and

7 we'll be adding some lanes this construction

8 season. So it's a little more effective and

9 efficient as far as the toll plaza.

10 We will be looking towards the future

11 of a plan to be able to do more, but in our

12 current five-year plan it's not included.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: So specifically,

14 you know, one of the issues we're looking at

15 is having high-speed lanes there. That is

16 not -- is that in any sort of plans within

17 the next five years?

18 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: What we are

19 doing right now is doing the high-speed

20 all-electronic tolling at the Tappan Zee, at

21 the New NY Bridge. And we're hoping that we

22 can use the lessons learned there.

23 There's obviously a lot of changes

24 that have to happen at Williamsville because

214

1 of the vertical and horizontal curves, and so

2 there's a lot of -- it's capital-intensive to

3 change that barrier. So we want to be able

4 to make sure we kind of understand

5 all-electronic tolls and then start working

6 on a plan for the Thruway.

7 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: Even with the

8 improvements there, there still continues to

9 be, you know, failures at the toll at

10 high-volume, peak times, you know, with

11 traffic backing up all the way to Cayuga Road

12 and beyond in many instances. You know,

13 obviously high-speed tolls will, you know,

14 alleviate some of that.

15 But back to my original question, you

16 know, the Governor has proposed this tax

17 credit to reduce the cost of anybody who

18 spends more than $50 a year on the Thruway.

19 I think it's a 50 percent tax credit that

20 he's proposed. Is there any way that we can

21 use that as a way to eliminate that 15-cent

22 toll between Exit 49 and 50?

23 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I mean, I

24 think it's something we're going to have to

215

1 look at with the financial plan and how

2 things shake out. We're hopeful that we're

3 going to see -- right now we see about

4 70 percent E-ZPass usage across the system.

5 In Williamsville it's about 70 percent, where

6 it's 80 percent at the New NY Bridge site.

7 So if we get more E-ZPass, then we're more

8 efficient and so we can, you know, use the

9 information we glean from when we have a tax

10 credit to make decisions for strategies for

11 the future.

12 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: Access to the

13 E-ZPass lane there, though, is very

14 difficult. I mean, you're all the way on the

15 left, you go from -- you don't get to three

16 lanes or four lanes or whatever, however many

17 it is, nine or 10 lanes, until after the

18 bottleneck occurs. So there needs to be some

19 sort of a long-term plan, I think. You know,

20 obviously removing the Williamsville toll

21 barrier has been an issue for going on 20

22 years now and was certainly part of the plan

23 long ago, you know, that shouldn't be

24 abandoned. I mean, we need to get back to,

216

1 you know -- start putting plans together to

2 finally eliminate that toll barrier. I mean,

3 it's not conducive for the economic comeback

4 that's happening in Western New York right

5 now. It's hurting us.

6 So anything we can do to keep that on

7 the priority list would be good, and I would

8 encourage you to advocate for that in your

9 new role here.

10 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Yeah, I'm

11 happy to say that, you know, there was a lot

12 of talk for a long time and we are making

13 incremental improvements in the interim so

14 that we're not just waiting till we have the

15 whole answer. So hopefully some of the

16 interim improvements will help. And we

17 certainly will look at a long-term strategy.

18 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: Obviously you

19 know the issue is a lot of that traffic gets

20 diverted right down in the middle of the

21 village of Williamsville, 40,000 cars a day

22 down Route 5 right in the middle of the

23 village. Anything we can do to help

24 alleviate some of that congestion would be

217

1 good.

2 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Yup.

3 ASSEMBLYMAN WALTER: Thank you.

4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

5 Senator?

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 So great to see you again, Executive

8 Director Lehman, and I thank you for being

9 here. And I do have a few questions

10 regarding the Executive Budget proposal.

11 So as you pointed out, there's

12 $700 million in financial settlement monies

13 to help fund the Tappan Zee Bridge and the

14 Authority's capital program, building on the

15 $1.3 billion, approximately, included in the

16 2016 enacted budget. So according to the

17 Governor, this additional support would bring

18 the Authority's two-year total of settlement

19 funds to $2 billion and enable the Thruway

20 Authority to avoid a toll increase until at

21 least 2020.

22 The Executive Budget for this year

23 also includes legislation for a three-year

24 Thruway toll reduction and protection plan of

218

1 $340 million that would issue tax credits to

2 residents and small businesses, reducing

3 their tolls by 50 percent, as well as a full

4 toll reduction for farmers, which is welcome

5 news for rural areas across New York.

6 I was wondering, can the Thruway

7 confirm that the cost of the new Tappan Zee

8 Bridge will not lead to a systemwide toll

9 increase? Because you have this plan for the

10 next four years to have basically a freeze,

11 but what happens after then? And there are a

12 lot of questions about how we're going to

13 continue to pay for the construction of the

14 Tappan Zee Bridge, and people across the

15 state are concerned about where that funding

16 is coming from and whether it would be put as

17 a burden on the entire system.

18 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Well, the

19 first part of the question is that we have a

20 strategy on the funding of the New NY Bridge.

21 It has been evolving. When we started down

22 that road several years ago, we didn't

23 anticipate that we would have a TIFIA loan

24 from U.S. DOT for $1.6 billion towards that

219

1 project. We saw the $1.285 billion last

2 year; about $750 million of that is going

3 towards the Tappan Zee. And we are yet

4 determining what part of the $700 million

5 that's proposed here that would come towards

6 the TZ. So we do have this framework that

7 we're looking at.

8 I think the other thing that's

9 important is that the Governor has named a

10 Toll Task Force, and that task force is

11 focusing only on the tolls at the New NY

12 Bridge. It was named back in November, and

13 they will be working on what we will be

14 looking at moving forward. So it's about

15 what the tolls will look like once we get

16 through this period, and what other things --

17 for example, do we have commuter discounts,

18 do we have resident discounts. You know, do

19 we continue -- we have a Green Card discount.

20 So those kinds of things and issues is really

21 what that task force is going to be charged

22 with.

23 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: So you cannot

24 confirm that there would not be a systemwide

220

1 increase, that that's a possibility in the

2 future?

3 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: We will have

4 to see where we are at the end of this

5 period. We are looking at a very aggressive

6 capital program upstate, it's $1.5 billion

7 over the next five years. And so, you know,

8 there's no plan to increase tolls at the

9 Thruway in 2016, and hopefully with this

10 Executive Budget we'll go through 2020 and

11 we'll be working with our constituencies on

12 what our next steps are.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

14 When does the Thruway Authority

15 anticipate you'll be able to release a

16 financial plan for the new Tappan Zee Bridge

17 project? So we have some details on it, but

18 we don't have a financial plan. You just

19 referenced it a little bit. But, you know,

20 when do you think we'll have more details

21 moving forward?

22 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I think

23 moving through the budget process, again, we

24 will look at what portion of the $700 million

221

1 we will be allocating. And then we need to

2 look at other new, potential, innovative

3 financial mechanisms. You know, as I stated,

4 there's a lot of things that we've

5 incorporated that at the beginning of this

6 journey were not even possibilities. It was

7 all going to be tolls at the New NY Bridge.

8 So I think there's been fluidity to be

9 able to be responsive to the financial

10 markets and whatever new tools we have in the

11 toolbox to be able to keep those toll rates

12 as low as possible.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And I think you

14 especially, hailing from western New York,

15 know that increased tolls is a major drag on

16 the Thruway, a major drag on our economy and

17 the traveling public. And oftentimes, as you

18 also know, that big trucks and so on may try

19 to bypass the Thruway and go on our local

20 roads and tear those up. So it's a major

21 issue for people, and it's an affordability

22 issue also.

23 I was hoping that you could comment on

24 the operational savings and financial

222

1 improvements that the Thruway has undertaken

2 in the last couple of years. If you could

3 give us some more information on those,

4 please.

5 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Sure.

6 First I'd really like to thank our

7 executive director up till last Friday.

8 Bob Megna has been a real godsend to the

9 Thruway as far as looking at it from a

10 financial standpoint, in all the places that

11 we really could look, to come up with some

12 changes.

13 But I think, you know, one of the

14 things, you know, being in operations and

15 maintenance for the last year, I actually

16 started December 28th in operations and

17 maintenance of '14, three days before we had

18 our first big snow event --

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Lucky you.

20 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: -- and I was

21 there. I'm a Buffalonian, I can handle it.

22 Anyway, I think we looked at a lot of

23 things from a more global perspective, but

24 we're now drilling down. One of the things

223

1 that I like to tell folks is this isn't your

2 grandfather's Thruway, it's your daughter's

3 Thruway. There's a lot of new means and

4 methods for how we organize, how we regroup,

5 how we use our resources more wisely across

6 the system.

7 And so we're looking at that, looking

8 from the ground up at the core issues, from

9 the bottom up. So we did this kind of

10 top-down review of all the things we can

11 change, and now we're trying to realign our

12 resources into core businesses and how we

13 deliver those businesses.

14 So moving forward, you know, we'll be

15 working with our board on various different

16 initiatives to be able to streamline

17 back-office operations, for example, and put

18 the money where we need it as far as

19 maintaining and operating the roadway system

20 and the bridge system.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

22 So your assessment is that the

23 Authority's financial condition is stronger

24 today than it has been? That's number one.

224

1 And what is your opinion of the bond

2 rating agencies -- or what is the opinion of

3 the bond rating agencies regarding the

4 Thruway Authority?

5 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Well, I can

6 speak to the first question. I think we're

7 in much more stable financial footing than we

8 were. I mean, we have a budget that is

9 maintaining less than 1 percent growth. Our

10 revenue last year, we did much better than we

11 anticipated, even after adjusting it.

12 As far as the bond ratings, I can

13 either get back to you with that or I can ask

14 Matt, who's our chief financial officer, to

15 answer that question.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.

17 There's discussion of parity, and I'm

18 sure you heard it earlier as you sat through

19 the testimony of Commissioner Driscoll, in

20 the highway and bridge funding program. And

21 so now there's $2 billion, right, with the

22 Thruway that is being counted toward that

23 parity. In your recollection, has that ever

24 happened before? Because it's our

225

1 understanding that it hasn't been counted

2 toward parity in the past.

3 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I can't

4 speak to the parity issue. It's not

5 something that I've looked at, nor do I know

6 the history of the Thruway. But I do know

7 that that $700 million is really integral to

8 us being able to deliver that capital program

9 and keep our tolls flat, which is really what

10 we want to be able to do to help continue the

11 momentum that upstate is seeing on the

12 upswing.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Will the new Tappan

14 Zee Bridge, as has been promised, include a

15 bus service being put in place?

16 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: The New NY

17 Bridge has allowances for both the potential

18 for rail, for commuter rail, and bus rapid

19 transit.

20 Our understanding -- our

21 recommendation is that bus rapid transit be

22 available on the bridge when the bridge opens

23 in 2018. I believe BRT is fully funded for

24 that phase, to be able to do that, which is

226

1 $91 million. And that is in this budget, I

2 believe, in DOT.

3 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

4 As you also pointed out in your

5 testimony, there is language in the Executive

6 proposal that would move funding for the

7 Canal Corporation from DOT over to the

8 New York Power Authority. So I was wondering

9 about that. That's been in place since 1992.

10 What are the benefits of making that move?

11 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: First of

12 all, it's revenue-neutral. And it's, again,

13 realigning under our core businesses.

14 I think the Canal Corporation really

15 does have a natural nexus with the Power

16 Authority. They do operate hydroelectric

17 facilities along the Canal Corporation. Both

18 organizations, their core business is water

19 resources, it is hydroelectric power, and

20 it's tourism, because the Power Authority has

21 its visitor center. So that's part of their

22 focus. Once upon a time the canal was about

23 commercial vehicles; now it's more about

24 recreational vehicles and tourism.

227

1 And again, I think there's great

2 opportunity, with the Governor's goals of

3 going to 50 percent from green power, there's

4 great opportunity that the Canal Authority,

5 as a function of what they do, can take

6 advantage of to increase the amount of

7 hydroelectric power along the canal system,

8 as well as increasing tourism.

9 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. I have

10 a couple of follow-up questions.

11 Now, under the Governor's proposal

12 he's recommending that the Thruway reassume

13 the cost of State Police Troop T.

14 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And also he

16 recommends the elimination of current cost

17 waivers by the state. And that would

18 increase the Thruway's operating budget by

19 about $85 million, I believe -- is that

20 correct?

21 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

22 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: And so you believe

23 that the Power Authority would be able to

24 absorb or pay for those increased costs?

228

1 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: So I think

2 it's revenue-neutral. I think they will --

3 and you can talk to the Power Authority

4 specifically, but that will come from the

5 budget to the Power Authority, and then we

6 will take back Troop T, which again is very

7 core to our business. And, you know, having

8 had events just last week and this week and

9 working with them across the state, we are

10 working closely with Troop T on a very

11 regular basis. So again, I think that

12 realigns our core businesses very well.

13 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

14 And I do have one final question, and

15 it's related to the Canal Corporation. As

16 you know very well -- again, Western New

17 Yorker -- there are several historical canal

18 bridges that are in need of repair, and most

19 of them would be in Senator Ortt's district.

20 So DOT has been maintaining those

21 bridges in the past. And how would that be

22 paid for in the future, and would the Power

23 Authority be the source of funding to make

24 sure that those historic bridges are

229

1 maintained, and also they're important from

2 an economic and tourism sense also?

3 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Mm-hmm.

4 Last year we actually did sign an

5 agreement with DOT relative to the DOT being

6 responsible for the capital investments on

7 those bridges, and that the Thruway was

8 responsible for the operation and the

9 maintenance. And so it's envisioned, with

10 the transition with Canal Corporation, that

11 that contract would just be novated. And so

12 our responsibilities would go to Power

13 Authority, and the DOT would remain with the

14 responsibilities they have in the memorandum

15 and the agreement we have now.

16 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay, thank you.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you, Senator.

18 Commissioner, the mass transit force

19 made recommendations for the bus rapid

20 transit across the Tappan Zee Bridge

21 replacement. Is there a funding in the

22 budget proposal for this purpose?

23 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: My

24 understanding, there is. It is not in the

230

1 Thruway's budget proposal. We have a small

2 amount allocated towards that project, but it

3 is in the budget proposal.

4 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: And so you don't

5 know if it's -- is Phase 1 fully funded?

6 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Phase 1 is

7 fully funded. It's my understanding that

8 it's fully funded.

9 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: And when will the

10 service, then, the new BRT system begin?

11 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: We are

12 recommending that they begin when we open the

13 bridge in 2018.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Give me that date

15 again?

16 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: 2018.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: 2018, okay.

18 The 2015-2016 enacted budget included

19 Article 7 legislation that authorized shared

20 service agreements between the Thruway

21 Authority and DOT in emergency situations.

22 Has that shared service authorization been

23 utilized?

24 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Yes, it has.

231

1 And it's probably being utilized as I speak

2 right now, with the potential Nor'easter

3 coming to New York.

4 We are regularly sharing resources.

5 With the two lake-effect storms we've had in

6 the past two weeks, we've actually been able

7 to utilize some of the new equipment that DOT

8 had in big snowblowers, to be able to

9 preposition them in areas where we had very

10 heavy lake-effect snow bands in the 4 to

11 5 inches an hour, and were able to keep the

12 road open.

13 So we've been using them. We've been

14 working together on our plans and how we

15 coordinate better. They've been kicking the

16 tires on some of our plans; we've been

17 helping them with some of theirs. And so

18 there's regular meetings, there's regular

19 sharing of information and actually people

20 and equipment.

21 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: The Executive also

22 has additional Article 7 legislation that

23 would create two new tax credits which would

24 reimburse half the cost of tolls paid by the

232

1 frequent travelers of the Thruway and all of

2 the cost of tolls paid by the farm vehicles.

3 Does the Thruway anticipate traffic growth

4 related to these tax credits?

5 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: We are

6 actually having one of our traffic

7 consultants that do our revenue work for us

8 look at that very issue. We believe that it

9 probably will drive more traffic to the

10 Thruway. And we also believe it will drive

11 more traffic to E-ZPass, which makes it more

12 cost-effective for us to be able to handle

13 that. So I do believe that it is going to

14 drive traffic some; we still do not have the

15 results from the traffic modeling based on

16 this type of activity in other parts of the

17 country.

18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: And the program

19 would only work -- you have to have E-ZPass

20 to take it?

21 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Yes, that will

23 raise it.

24 Questions? Any other questions?

233

1 Senator.

2 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes. Senator

3 Joseph Griffo.

4 SENATOR GRIFFO: Thank you,

5 Chairwoman.

6 Director Lehman, thank you for being

7 here today.

8 Canal Corporation when it was under

9 the Thruway, what was the subsidy, the

10 complete subsidy, to have that housed under

11 the Thruway?

12 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Going back

13 again to what we were talking about, we were

14 talking about $85 million was the cost, both

15 from an operations and maintenance standpoint

16 of the canal as well as the capital that was

17 spent on an annual basis. So that's about

18 what we were spending.

19 SENATOR GRIFFO: So it was costing you

20 $85 million to have the responsibility of the

21 Canal Corp., correct?

22 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

23 SENATOR GRIFFO: And then the state

24 was assuming $85 million in cost to State

234

1 Police and other support services?

2 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: State Police

3 and the operating subsidy to the Thruway,

4 correct.

5 SENATOR GRIFFO: So that's where

6 you're seeing that offset right now?

7 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

8 SENATOR GRIFFO: So then the new cost

9 of that $85 million will basically be borne

10 by the Power Authority?

11 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: It's our

12 understanding that what this will do is it

13 will basically just be a budgetary

14 transfer of --

15 SENATOR GRIFFO: But how? If those

16 costs were being actually incurred, how could

17 they not incur significant costs themselves,

18 having now the responsibility and authority

19 over the Canal Corporation and everything,

20 maintenance and other responsibilities that

21 go along with that?

22 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Well, I

23 believe they will be getting -- it's a

24 revenue-neutral transaction three ways. So I

235

1 believe the budget will support the Power

2 Authority for that amount.

3 SENATOR GRIFFO: So based on the idea

4 of long-term stability, using the one-time

5 surplus, now the bank settlement, you're

6 projecting that by 2020 the rates can stay

7 the same. Was there ever any consideration

8 given -- and you're doing this in tier

9 approaches, apparently. Was there any

10 thought given to just a across-the-board

11 reduction or freeze, rather than having all

12 these tiers with tax credits and things of

13 that nature?

14 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I think

15 we're always looking at the financial -- the

16 whole financial planning of what we do at the

17 Thruway. And we have -- the Thruway was

18 built in the 1950s. It's more than 60 years

19 old. It sees 250 million vehicles a year and

20 8 billion miles traveled on it. It is

21 getting old, it is being much more

22 capital-intensive as far as being able to

23 maintain it at a state of good repair. And

24 it is the backbone, so we need to be able to

236

1 maintain it.

2 So I think we're always looking at

3 ways of cost cutting, but we do have a

4 570-mile-long asset that needs a lot of

5 tender, loving care.

6 SENATOR GRIFFO: And when you compare

7 that to other states across the country, have

8 you done those type of analyses, other states

9 that operate similar highways, and what their

10 tolls are compared to ours?

11 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Yes, we have

12 done that. And even in the peer states in

13 the region, our tolls average, I believe,

14 4.7 cents a mile, and that's much lower than

15 all our peers. I mean, significantly

16 lower -- in a lot of cases, a half or a third

17 of what our peer states are.

18 So we're doing everything we can to

19 keep the toll rates low and to maintain the

20 infrastructure.

21 SENATOR GRIFFO: And could you just --

22 and just two quick questions. Who

23 recommended this removal of the Canal Corp.

24 from the Thruway to the -- was that something

237

1 you recommended, the Thruway suggested that?

2 Or did that come from -- can you share the

3 thinking behind how this change was made?

4 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I think

5 there's been a lot of discussion over the

6 years on that. And I wasn't privy to a lot

7 of those conversations. I'm pretty new to

8 this seat, it's a few days old. But I think

9 there's been a lot of discussion over the

10 years about where it would make the most

11 sense from a core-business standpoint.

12 And I do know that our director, Brian

13 Stratton, is very supportive of this, because

14 he sees the synergy of the move.

15 SENATOR GRIFFO: Now, beyond the

16 upkeep, the capital costs, beyond upkeep, you

17 may be looking at new initiatives. Is there

18 any consideration being given to adding

19 additional exits using E-ZPass only as a

20 possibility?

21 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I think that

22 is in our longer-term plan. I believe the

23 lessons we learned from the all-electronic

24 tolling at the New NY Bridge, at the Tappan

238

1 Zee, really is going to help us formulate

2 better plans. There's a lot of improvements,

3 I know in the past there's been studies done

4 and, you know, it was multi-billions to be

5 able to do that, simply because the way the

6 geometry of the road works, to be able -- you

7 have to go slow where the toll plazas are,

8 because they're narrow and you have curves,

9 both horizontal and vertical.

10 So I think it's an expensive

11 undertaking, and we need to make sure that it

12 is the best, we get our best return on

13 investment before we do that. So we have

14 this next five-year capital plan to really

15 understand the issues and how much cost

16 savings we have and how effective and

17 efficient the system is, and then work on the

18 plan and how we do this in a more broad-based

19 system.

20 All-electronic tolling is the tolling

21 of the future. There's a lot of states that

22 have really embraced it. We have one of the

23 oldest, you know, backbones and interstate

24 systems in the country, and so that

239

1 modernization, we want to take it slow and

2 careful so we do get a good return on

3 investment.

4 SENATOR GRIFFO: Hundreds of millions

5 of dollars are being given to you this year

6 just to hold the line, basically, for four

7 years. When you know and recognize how

8 important this is economically as well as a

9 transportation network, I would hope that

10 we're looking now, under your direction with

11 your staff, at a much longer-term approach

12 for stability than just to say that hundreds

13 of millions of dollars which could be

14 invested in capital and free up other money

15 for you -- I can hear Daniel Patrick

16 Moynihan, his words ringing in our ears.

17 But we really need to provide much

18 more long-term stability costwise than just

19 four years, after spending hundreds of

20 millions of dollars. And I hope under your

21 leadership that will happen.

22 Thank you.

23 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I totally

24 concur. Thank you.

240

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

2 Next, any Assembly members?

3 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Then we also have

5 Senator Marty Dilan.

6 SENATOR DILAN: Yes, thank you again,

7 Madam Chairperson.

8 My question is with regard to the tax

9 credit for E-ZPass riders you mentioned in

10 your testimony. I would like you to

11 elaborate a little more as to how this tax

12 credit will work, where is the money coming

13 from to pay for it, and what effect will this

14 have on your system? And then also presuming

15 that this tax credit modifies drivers'

16 behavior, and there is more use of the

17 system, what effect will that have on

18 maintenance of your system?

19 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Mm-hmm.

20 Okay. I think -- as far as details on the

21 tax proposal, I think that the budget is

22 looking to the Department of Taxation, that

23 they will have money in the budget to be able

24 to handle that.

241

1 As we're looking at it, if you look at

2 the breakdown, passenger vehicles paying $50

3 or more in annual tolls, when we look at

4 that, that will impact about 900,000 drivers.

5 And there will be an annual savings to those

6 drivers of about $97.

7 I think if you look at businesses and

8 commercial vehicles, there's more than 26,000

9 businesses that will benefit under that, and

10 they'll see about just under $700 of average

11 savings.

12 And then the commercial trucks, based

13 on looking at all our records, there's just

14 under a thousand commercial trucking

15 companies that we feel will see a benefit,

16 and that benefit will average out at about

17 $1800 per.

18 So it's providing to refocus on

19 getting people back on the main arterial, the

20 main backbone. It's also going to drive

21 E-ZPass usage. And from our perspective, we

22 have much higher percentages of E-ZPass usage

23 in the City and close to New York City. It's

24 much lower as we get more into upstate

242

1 New York. It's more effective for us and

2 more cost-effective to be able to run the

3 system with the E-ZPass, and so we're hoping

4 that that will help on the operational side.

5 From a maintenance side, as I told

6 you, we have a lot, a lot of miles traveled

7 on the system. I don't think you're going to

8 see a great bump in traffic. I do see that

9 we are going to have some bump in traffic.

10 And hopefully here in the next few months

11 we'll have more data of what that looks like.

12 And where we have our capital program,

13 our full five-year program detailed down to

14 the individual projects is on our webpage

15 right now.

16 We do look at that quarterly to see

17 what changes we have to make and, you

18 know, on an annual basis what changes we have

19 to make based on issues that we're seeing.

20 So over the past two winters where we've had

21 a tough spring, spring comes after a deep

22 thaw and we have issues with the roadway,

23 we've reprogrammed some things, basically

24 because we had to.

243

1 So I think we will be looking at all

2 that very carefully as we are looking at our

3 2017 element of our capital program to make

4 sure that in places that we're seeing more

5 wear and tear, that we can address it.

6 SENATOR DILAN: And this is a tax

7 credit that's being proposed for three years.

8 What happens after that?

9 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I don't know

10 what we're going to do beyond that, and I

11 think we're going to be looking at our models

12 to see what makes the most sense as the next

13 proposal.

14 SENATOR DILAN: Okay. You know, I

15 just see that in New York City we're talking

16 about congestion pricing and Move NY, and it

17 just seems strange that you're using taxpayer

18 dollars to invite more congestion on your

19 system. So I'm just concerned about that.

20 How do you react to that?

21 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: I think

22 there's some concerns, but I think

23 realistically we still offer a really good

24 roadway network for a lot of that. And while

244

1 we do have some areas where we have capacity

2 issues, by and large they're a lot -- they're

3 not as challenging as some of the other

4 roadways. And so we really do want to drive

5 traffic -- I think, moving forward, we should

6 be looking at things like congestion pricing,

7 which we do at the Tappan Zee Bridge, and do

8 that more extensively across the system so

9 that we can kind of flatten out the peaks and

10 valleys on the roadway.

11 So I think as we're looking towards

12 the future, we'll be looking towards those

13 kinds of items.

14 SENATOR DILAN: Thank you very much.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you, Senator.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: That's it? Thank

17 you very much.

18 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Senator Krueger.

19 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: I'm sorry.

20 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Do not forget about

21 Senator Krueger.

22 SENATOR KRUEGER: I always like to try

23 to be the last.

24 So I appreciated very much the answers

245

1 to the question earlier, which was actually

2 news to me, that our toll costs per mile are

3 less than any other state's, because I think

4 sometimes in the rhetorical discussions that

5 take place, there's some perception that it's

6 just the opposite. So that was actually very

7 helpful.

8 Following through on the concerns

9 about the state now investing from the

10 General Fund in the Thruway Authority --

11 although we are arguably using the settlement

12 money -- the Governor is proposing a

13 four-year freeze on toll increases. But is

14 there anywhere in the budget that he's making

15 a multi-year commitment of state revenue

16 continuing to go into the Thruway Authority

17 beyond just this one year?

18 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: No. I think

19 the intent is that based on what we need from

20 a cash flow and a capital to be able to

21 deliver that five-year program, that that

22 infusion from settlement funds this year will

23 work through those years so that it does

24 cover us till 2020.

246

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: So it's your

2 projection that based on the money coming in

3 this year, as the Governor proposed it, for

4 the following three years after that the

5 Thruway Authority will not need an infusion

6 of non-Thruway money to continue on your

7 commitment not to need a toll increase --

8 even though we're continuing the new tax

9 credit, which will actually lower your

10 revenue?

11 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: The tax

12 credit will not lower the revenue. The

13 revenue will still be coming to the Thruway.

14 And so, again, we feel that based on

15 all the projections, that that is the intent.

16 It's our intent that that will hold us

17 through till 2020. And now it gives us the

18 opportunity to look to the future to see what

19 we do beyond 2020.

20 SENATOR KRUEGER: And you were right,

21 the tax credit doesn't come from your budget,

22 it comes from General Fund.

23 So what's the estimated cost to the

24 state of these two new tax credits?

247

1 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Three

2 hundred and forty million.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Per year?

4 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Over three

5 years.

6 SENATOR KRUEGER: Over three years.

7 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Correct.

8 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

9 Jumping to the Canal Authority being

10 moved to the Power Authority, and your

11 discussion of the fact that the Canal

12 Authority actually does generate electricity

13 through -- just double-checking the number --

14 quite a few small plants on the authority.

15 Do you believe that if the canal is moved to

16 the Power Authority it opens up new

17 opportunities for the State of New York to

18 increase the amount of hydroelectric power

19 produced on the Canal Authority?

20 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Absolutely.

21 I'm a real proponent of green energy.

22 My husband and I built a passive solar house

23 35 years ago, so I live this, and I'm a very

24 big proponent of green energy.

248

1 The technology in the last decade has

2 really improved to be able to do low-head

3 hydropower. Once upon a time you needed to

4 have big dams, like you have in Niagara or

5 like you have on the St. Lawrence, to be able

6 to really be effectively producing

7 electricity. Technology has come forward to

8 the point that you can use smaller, shorter

9 dams.

10 And so I believe they have great

11 opportunity to be able to take advantage of

12 that and provide a lot more. Right now they

13 generate about $7 million worth of power from

14 what they do on the canal, and I think

15 there's great opportunity to be able to do a

16 lot more than that.

17 SENATOR KRUEGER: I agree with you

18 that it would be a very good thing. Every

19 opportunity we have for new green energy in

20 this state is a win for us.

21 We asked the Department of

22 Transportation commissioner what the actual

23 costs for the new bridge in Westchester -- I

24 don't know that there's an official name --

249

1 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: The New NY

2 Bridge.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: The New NY Bridge,

4 thank you. I keep forgetting that

5 terminology.

6 So he said that that's not his budget,

7 so he didn't know. Do you have an estimated

8 full cost for the build of the New NY Bridge?

9 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Yes, I do.

10 It is $3.98 billion. It is what it is since

11 we've accepted the bid for the project. And

12 we are on target for opening it in 2018 and

13 staying within that budget.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: And is there an

15 estimate of the debt costs and what that will

16 be for the state over time, from this

17 project?

18 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: At this

19 point we have the TIFIA loan, which is a

20 federal loan, a low-interest, long-term loan.

21 We have what we received in the budget

22 allocation last year, which was about 750.

23 We will have some amount from this

24 year's 700 that is yet to be determined on

250

1 how much we'll go off for the system.

2 And then the remainder, we are still

3 looking for innovative financing. We always

4 have the ability to go back to how the

5 Thruway does and do our revenue bonds. But

6 we want to be able to keep -- and those are

7 paid with future tolls, so we want to keep

8 those down. So every innovative opportunity

9 we have, those -- if we do have the debt, it

10 will come on to the Thruway Authority, in our

11 bonding program.

12 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Thank

13 you for your testimony.

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you. Thanks,

15 Executive Director.

16 INTERIM EX. DIR. LEHMAN: Thanks.

17 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

18 much.

19 Good afternoon. New York Public

20 Transit Association, Capital District

21 Transportation Authority, Carm -- here in

22 front, you're not Mr. Basile.

23 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: I'm not that

24 good-looking, no, Mr. Chairman.

251

1 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: All righty. Bill

2 Carpenter. How are you?

3 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: Very good.

4 Thank you, Chairman Farrell,

5 Chairwoman Young, for giving NYPTA, the

6 New York Public Transit Association, the

7 opportunity to testify today about the

8 Governor's proposed 2016-2017 Executive

9 Budget.

10 My name is Bill Carpenter. I am the

11 chief executive officer for the Rochester

12 Genesee Regional Transportation Authority and

13 vice president for NYPTA. NYPTA members

14 include transit systems, private-sector

15 manufacturers and suppliers, state agencies

16 and community advocates.

17 Communities throughout New York

18 benefit from the services provided from more

19 than 100 public transit systems. Our members

20 serve urban and rural areas, enabling

21 mobility and connections that keep our state

22 moving. We know that the metropolitan

23 New York City area cannot function without

24 the high-quality transit services provided by

252

1 the MTA, and the same is true for cities and

2 towns in upstate New York and throughout the

3 state. Today more than ever, we need

4 high-quality transit to allow our citizens to

5 fully participate in economic opportunities.

6 Mobility choices provided by transit

7 systems support many of the stateís important

8 programs -- economic development, job growth,

9 anti-poverty, housing, energy conservation,

10 and environmental protection. Well-planned

11 and thoughtful transit services are essential

12 to moving people to jobs in cities and

13 expanding suburban and rural areas, while

14 also providing access to healthcare, to

15 schools, to colleges and universities.

16 Transit provides our growing senior

17 population and people with disabilities the

18 freedom and choices they need to live their

19 lives and participate in society.

20 Transit ridership is growing in many

21 communities, and systems are responding by

22 making services easier to use and understand.

23 Innovative technologies are making fare

24 payment easier. Real-time information

253

1 applications are in many of our systems,

2 along with customer features that make using

3 the bus and trains inviting and appealing.

4 Our growing popularity is why we're asking

5 for an appropriate investment in transit so

6 we can provide more and better services to

7 our communities.

8 The Governorís Executive Budget

9 includes increases to transit operating aid.

10 This level of funding will allow transit

11 systems to maintain current services, but it

12 will not allow us to expand and meet customer

13 expectations that support the stateís

14 economic development initiatives.

15 To allow transit systems to fully

16 support the economic opportunities that

17 citizens deserve, NYPTA recommends an

18 additional $15 million in operating aid for

19 upstate transit systems and $5 million for

20 downstate suburban county transit systems.

21 And a structural fix to upstate funding is

22 still needed so that future growth is not

23 constrained.

24 There's also a need for a multi-year

254

1 statewide transit capital program. For far

2 too long, the capital needs of upstate and

3 downstate suburban transit systems have been

4 an afterthought. All of us have diverted

5 federal capital funding to subsidize

6 operations. In essence, we're borrowing from

7 tomorrow to pay for services today. It's not

8 sustainable, and we're at a critical

9 crossroad. The time to fix this and to

10 invest in transit is now.

11 New York transit systems across the

12 state lack the consistent capital investment

13 needed that's led to worsening infrastructure

14 conditions and unnecessary maintenance

15 expenses. Let me give a couple of examples.

16 In Buffalo, where buses are supposed

17 to last 12 years, 46 percent of the buses are

18 beyond their useful life. Here in Albany,

19 20 percent of the buses are beyond their

20 useful life. They're twice as expensive to

21 maintain as newer buses.

22 In Rochester, our campus facility

23 where buses are maintained and washed,

24 fueled, the campus is 40 years old and we

255

1 lack the capital to renovate and expand the

2 campus.

3 In Syracuse and Nassau County, they

4 have 20-year-old CNG facilities for fueling

5 their buses that need to be replaced.

6 The Governor has committed $8.3

7 billion to fund the MTA five-year capital

8 plan. His goal is to "transform the

9 Metropolitan Transportation Authority and to

10 dramatically improve the travel experience

11 for millions of New Yorkers and visitors to

12 the metropolitan region." We support this

13 initiative and the money to accomplish it.

14 But transit customers in upstate and

15 downstate communities deserve the same

16 transformation, and we're asking for the same

17 fully funded, multiyear capital program. In

18 total, our systems operate 3,000 buses and

19 serve over 170 million customers every year.

20 Three thousand buses, 170 million customers

21 outside the MTA. Collectively, we would be

22 the seventh-largest transit system in the

23 United States.

24 The Executive Budget proposed a $295

256

1 million capital program for non-MTA transit

2 systems as part of the $22 billion DOT

3 five-year program. We thank the Governor for

4 recognizing our work, but the proposed

5 funding is not enough to address the backlog

6 of infrastructure needs of our systems.

7 NYPTA recommends a state capital

8 investment of at least $100 million per year

9 in upstate and suburban downstate systems, to

10 allow them to modernize their aging

11 infrastructure. To achieve this level and

12 provide funding to these systems in

13 proportion to state capital being provided to

14 the MTA, we're looking for the $295 million

15 to be increased to $545 million.

16 In rural transit service, transit

17 systems in the rural parts of the upstate

18 region are suffering from severe ridership

19 loss as a result of the stateís change in the

20 way Medicaid transportation is arranged. The

21 decline in riders and revenue on rural

22 upstate systems has resulted in service

23 reductions to the general public and is

24 threatening the viability of services to

257

1 those who need them most. NYPTA recommends

2 the state provide additional funding to rural

3 transit systems so essential services can be

4 retained.

5 In conclusion, transit service

6 provides mobility for a growing customer

7 base. It allows everyone to participate in

8 the economic rebirth of our communities.

9 NYPTA members appreciate the funding and

10 support we receive. We ask for consideration

11 of the capital and operating needs of our

12 systems so we can do more. Increased

13 investments in transit will result in better

14 service and more cost-effective delivery of

15 that service. This investment will also

16 ensure thousands of jobs for state transit

17 manufacturers and suppliers. A fully funded

18 transit capital and operating plan helps all

19 New Yorkers have the mobility choices they

20 want and need.

21 On behalf of NYPTA and RGRTA, I urge

22 Governor Cuomo and the Legislature to support

23 a better network of transit systems in

24 New York State that can contribute to

258

1 economic growth. NYPTA is committed to

2 working with the Governor and all of you so

3 transit can continue to be a strong partner.

4 Thank you very much.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Questions?

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very much

7 for being here today.

8 And you may have heard me question

9 Commissioner Driscoll earlier about upstate

10 transit and the fact that there does seem to

11 be a structural problem that needs to be

12 addressed and, in addition, the capital needs

13 that you have spoken of. He countered with

14 the Governor's proposal of $5 million in an

15 increase. Could you give us your thoughts

16 in a more in-depth way about what that

17 $5 million would do? Is that enough, what

18 other needs are there, and how can the

19 Legislature be helpful in this regard?

20 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: Thank you for

21 the question, Chairwoman Young.

22 We were, as an industry -- since 2009,

23 funding was essentially held flat for a good

24 number of years. First a reduction in 2009,

259

1 and then slow increases to where we had flat

2 funding a number of years ago.

3 As the state economy has improved and

4 the poverty levels have also increased, the

5 urban transit systems are experiencing a

6 tremendous interest in services. Jobs are

7 being located in the outer suburban areas.

8 So where everyone would like to do more with

9 less, the fact of the matter is public

10 transit is being asked to do more to serve

11 our communities, to be the mobility

12 infrastructure.

13 The $5 million increase proposed in

14 the Executive Budget does provide kind of a

15 baseline funding where we could continue to

16 maintain the services we have. But I've

17 received calls -- I'll just speak for RGRTA.

18 I receive calls on a regular basis from

19 places like Xerox in Webster that are adding

20 hundreds of jobs at a call center that we

21 don't serve right now. We didn't serve it

22 when they opened it. They're repurposing

23 manufacturing facilities to add jobs. These

24 are good-paying jobs for people who live in

260

1 the center of our community; how do we get

2 them there?

3 Those are the kinds of opportunities

4 we're looking for. Jobs are being expanded

5 where the factories are, where the land is.

6 We need to connect individuals.

7 The anti-poverty initiatives as well,

8 we're being asked to redesign how we do

9 systems. Rochester was the first community

10 to start an anti-poverty initiative, this

11 time last year. We're being challenged to --

12 you need to do things not just differently,

13 but you need to do different things. You

14 need to keep connecting people where they're

15 going to, so don't stop doing that, but we

16 have a need for additional services.

17 So that's where the increased ask

18 comes from, is for us to be able to be

19 partners in the success of economic

20 development.

21 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very

22 much.

23 Senator Krueger has a question, or

24 more.

261

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Thank you

2 very much.

3 I didn't really leave during your

4 testimony, I just hid behind you to drink my

5 soup.

6 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: It's a better

7 side.

8 (Laughter.)

9 SENATOR KRUEGER: I agree with you on

10 the importance of mass transit as an economic

11 development tool in every region. I'm from

12 New York City. We wouldn't be the city we

13 are without our mass transit, even though

14 we're constantly struggling to get it to

15 function better and more. Your demands every

16 year don't seem unreasonable to me at all.

17 I'm curious, because this state has

18 been putting so much money into its Regional

19 Economic Development Councils -- and now

20 these competitive regional economic I guess

21 contests, so recently the Governor awarded

22 $500 million each to three regions.

23 Is money coming into mass transit in

24 your territory through either of these two

262

1 big-bucket economic development programs?

2 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: Thank you,

3 Senator, for the question.

4 The short answer is no. And when we

5 talk about that, what we're told is the

6 pockets of money that these come from, from

7 different economic development pots or energy

8 conservation pots, they're not mass transit

9 pots, they're not Department of

10 Transportation pots. So what the Governor

11 has done is collect different economic

12 development and other program pots.

13 I serve as the cochair for one of the

14 subcommittees for the Finger Lakes Regional

15 Economic Development Council. So I work well

16 in prioritizing the projects, I do include

17 projects that would benefit RGRTA if the

18 projects have scored well. But I've been

19 told the pots of money that go into the

20 Regional Economic Development Councils are

21 not pots that would help build bus facilities

22 or provide operating aid.

23 SENATOR KRUEGER: I appreciate the

24 answer. I guess this is more a rhetorical

263

1 statement than a question for you.

2 I have been fairly outspoken with my

3 concerns about how the New York State

4 government divvies up its budget money for

5 things we call economic development and have

6 been a bit cynical about ignoring certain

7 priority areas but having, seemingly every

8 year, new money for new competitions.

9 I think it's a shame that the State of

10 New York doesn't recognize the importance of

11 public transit, mass transit statewide as a

12 fundamental economic development tool. You

13 know, if you don't have the infrastructure,

14 they don't stay and they don't come. And

15 transportation infrastructure, for me, is a

16 no-brainer.

17 So I hope that whoever is listening,

18 that the State of New York as it defines what

19 we call economic development and when we

20 continue to do these Regional Economic

21 Council contests every year -- and perhaps

22 we'll see more, I guess, contests in general

23 for regions -- that please, please, please

24 recognize that mass transit/public

264

1 transportation has to be an allowable

2 activity within those funds. Because, you

3 know, you are here representing a very broad

4 universe of public and mass transit efforts,

5 and they all do need the money and deserve

6 the money.

7 And before, I asked the Thruway

8 Authority or I complimented the Thruway

9 Authority for knowing how little we actually

10 spend per mile or demand from people per

11 mile. Do you ever do any analysis of

12 New York State's investment in public

13 transportation compared to other states?

14 Because I feel that we probably are lagging

15 behind. Do you know?

16 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: First of all, it

17 was a very good rhetorical question on

18 whether money from the economic pots should

19 come to mass transit. I'll just leave it at

20 that.

21 As far as how New York State compares

22 with public transportation, I serve not just

23 as vice president for NYPTA but also serve on

24 the board of directors for the American

265

1 Public Transportation Association. The

2 funding mechanisms across the 50 states are

3 very different, with some county non-property

4 tax, some on sales tax, some on income tax

5 and some on state funding.

6 So I don't know that as an association

7 we've ever been able to identify -- Ohio, as

8 an example, which passes sales tax

9 referendums to pay for their public transit,

10 would have much less public funding than

11 New York State. But other states that do a

12 heavy state funding, because of the MTA, New

13 York State does pretty well. Many other

14 systems have some local control of funding.

15 But it's really very different state to

16 state.

17 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. Thank

18 you for your testimony.

19 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

20 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Assemblyman Oaks.

21 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yes, thank you.

22 Just your last point in your

23 presentation talked about the rural

24 transportation and the issues of the changes

266

1 in Medicaid. And I think Senator O'Mara, in

2 an earlier part of today's discussion,

3 actually brought up this issue.

4 Could you just quickly explain what's

5 changed and what needs to happen to -- you

6 know, my interest is getting people to where

7 they need to be and also doing it in the most

8 efficient, cost-effective way, but ...

9 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: I don't think

10 there's a simple answer to that, Assemblyman.

11 The Department of Health has some specific

12 guidelines they're trying to follow. The

13 consequences of those guidelines are public

14 transit is not getting the same opportunities

15 to provide transportation to Medicaid

16 recipients.

17 The loss of those rides -- because the

18 formula funding in many of these counties is

19 based on the miles and customers you carry,

20 you lose not just the Medicaid ride, but you

21 lose that other funding. So that in some

22 counties we're reaching the point where a

23 person can get a cab ride from home to the

24 doctor and back again, but when they want to

267

1 buy some food or get their prescription

2 filled, there's no longer public transit

3 access to get them where else they need to

4 go.

5 So that it needs to be looked at with

6 the full consequences that -- the change the

7 Department of Health made is one broker is

8 deciding who gets the -- who's the provider

9 for the transportation. And public

10 transportation is not getting as favorable a

11 treatment as it had prior to that change a

12 few years ago.

13 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

15 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

16 RGRTA CEO CARPENTER: Thank you very

17 much.

18 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Associated General

19 Contractors of New York State, Mike

20 Elmendorf, president. 12:15.

21 MR. ELMENDORF: Good afternoon,

22 Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell, members

23 of the Legislature. Thank you for the

24 opportunity to be here today.

268

1 Thank you for your patience. It's

2 been a long day already, and out of

3 consideration for that I will dispense with

4 my formal testimony, which you have, and I

5 will summarize it and try to hit on some of

6 the key points for our industry.

7 I'm Mike Elmendorf, president and CEO

8 of the Associated General Contractors of

9 New York State. We're New York State's

10 leading statewide construction industry

11 association. We represent the vertical

12 building construction industry and the heavy

13 highway and civil contractors that build the

14 majority of the state's public and private

15 building infrastructure, our transportation-

16 heavy civil and environmental infrastructure

17 in every region of New York.

18 And as we look at Governor Cuomo's

19 proposed Executive Budget, there are

20 certainly a lot of good things there for our

21 industry. For the economy, there are some

22 things that I think we can improve upon and

23 there are some things that I think we have

24 some real concerns about.

269

1 Very broadly, I'll hit three areas, so

2 hopefully there's time for some questions and

3 time for me to get on my way and you all in

4 your collective ways, because again, we've

5 been sitting here for a while.

6 Starting with the MTA, we strongly

7 support the Governor's historic commitment to

8 help meet the really significant, real

9 documented capital needs of the MTA. He's

10 committed an additional $8.3 billion to meet

11 the MTA's capital needs over the next five

12 years, and it just makes good sense to do

13 that. The MTA is critical to the New York

14 City and the broader New York City metro

15 region's economy, but more than that, it's

16 critical to the whole state's economy. And

17 I'll get to a broader discussion of this when

18 we talk about DOT and parity.

19 But New York City's economy drives the

20 state's economy to a significant degree, and

21 investing in the MTA creates economic

22 activity well beyond the MTA metro region, if

23 train cars are being built up in the far end

24 of the North Country and there's other impact

270

1 around the state. So you can't think about

2 these issues as upstate/downstate, and that's

3 why we strongly support the MTA investment.

4 And our contractors in that region who will

5 do that work, support it, and our contractors

6 elsewhere in the state support it as well.

7 Moving on to the Thruway Authority,

8 we're glad to see the Governor's commitment

9 to the Thruway. The Thruway is a vital

10 network for the state and for our economy. I

11 think it's fair to say, as we did last year,

12 that we have some concerns about what appears

13 to be a growing pattern of state subsidy of

14 what should really be and always was a

15 toll-supported system, and I think that that

16 is something that we're going to need to look

17 at. Because it's not really new money, when

18 you look at what the Thruway is getting, it's

19 dollars -- whether they're settlement dollars

20 or state dollars -- that are supplanting what

21 would be toll revenues within the Thruway

22 that have always supported their system.

23 And their system has real, substantial

24 needs. The Thruway is somewhat unique in

271

1 terms of their infrastructure because it was

2 all built at about the same time, and as a

3 result it's all coming of age at about the

4 same time and it has significant needs

5 developing at about the same time. And the

6 fact is if you go to Western New York,

7 there's now a stretch of the Thruway where

8 you actually have a reduced speed limit

9 because the conditions have gotten so bad,

10 because, due to a variety of reasons which

11 really are beyond the Thruway Authority's

12 control, there's been a delay of a

13 reconstruction project.

14 But I think that shows you what the

15 future of the Thruway is if they don't have

16 the resources to make the investments that

17 they need to in their system. And, although

18 nobody likes tolls, I think you have to

19 wonder what happens in 2020 when the cap

20 comes off the tolls. And realistically, we

21 may well be looking at a significant toll

22 increase, which is probably worse in the long

23 term for the economy and for motorists than

24 if you have reasonable incremental increases

272

1 that can meet the Thruway's needs.

2 One last point on the Thruway. We've

3 for a long time have been advocating for the

4 transfer of the Canal Corporation out of the

5 Thruway to somewhere else, and to the

6 Power Authority. We think it makes sense.

7 As Executive Director Lehman testified, it is

8 closer to the core function of the

9 Power Authority than it is to the

10 Thruway Authority, and it really should free

11 up resources for the Thruway Authority.

12 We're a little concerned that with

13 that transfer, the transfer of the costs for

14 Troop T that were effected last year are

15 being undone, which makes that

16 revenue-neutral. We'd like to see both of

17 those changes remain so that the Thruway has

18 additional toll revenue to invest into their

19 system.

20 And finally, I want to talk about DOT

21 and then have a conversation about parity.

22 Commissioner Driscoll testified this morning

23 that the Governor's proposed a $20.1 billion,

24 five-year DOT capital plan. And he's

273

1 correct, it's the biggest DOT capital plan

2 that's been proposed yet, and that's a very

3 good thing. It's also a very good thing that

4 it's a five-year plan, because we haven't

5 actually seen one of those proposed since I

6 think the end of the last bond act in 2009 or

7 so.

8 So that's positive, and certainly the

9 action in Washington that has resulted in,

10 finally, the 10-year-overdue passage of a

11 surface transportation bill has helped make

12 that long-term planning possible. So we

13 thank our congressional delegation for that

14 as well.

15 But there's two things to look at. It

16 being the biggest program ever doesn't mean

17 that it meets the needs of DOT, and in fact

18 it's been since 2009 that we've had a public

19 needs assessment from DOT. And in 2009 they

20 said their five-year needs were $25 billion,

21 and as you know, they got nowhere near those

22 resources. So those needs have only

23 increased because there's been deterioration

24 in the system since they didn't have the

274

1 resources necessary to meet those needs. So

2 that's number one.

3 Number two is the issue of parity.

4 And we were very glad to hear so many

5 questions and comments and so much discussion

6 earlier about parity. And I think it's

7 important to clarify a couple of things --

8 chiefly, what is parity and what isn't

9 parity.

10 Parity is a defined word. It's not a

11 term of art that was created to describe

12 something here, it's the state of being

13 equal. And in fact, that's what the DOT and

14 MTA capital plans were until 2009-2010, when

15 parity was broken. And you can see that, if

16 you look at the written testimony; there's a

17 chart in there.

18 And why is that important? Well, it's

19 important because both systems have needs.

20 The MTA's been out talking about their needs,

21 but DOT has significant needs too. Think

22 about the Tappan Zee Bridge. The Tappan Zee

23 Bridge gets a lot of attention. The Governor

24 deserves a lot of credit for advancing that

275

1 project. The bridge is in horrible shape, it

2 needs to be replaced, needed to be replaced a

3 long time ago.

4 The Governor tells a pretty amusing

5 story about driving over the Tappan Zee

6 Bridge and wondering if you should crack your

7 window or undo your seat belt or get ready to

8 swim because the condition was so bad. And

9 certainly it's half in jest, but the reality

10 is that bridge was in very poor condition and

11 something needed to be done.

12 What you may not realize is that

13 there's about six hundred bridges across

14 New York in the State DOT system, local

15 systems, and other authorities, that are in

16 as-bad or worse condition than the Tappan Zee

17 Bridge. So the needs for DOT are very clear

18 as well. They're as important as the MTA's

19 needs.

20 Now there's the issue of what number

21 is parity. Well, the DOT plan is

22 $20.1 billion. The $2 billion in Thruway

23 stabilization -- the $1.3 billion from last

24 year and the $700 million from this year --

276

1 has never been part of that calculation. It

2 is not part of the DOT capital plan, and it

3 should not be part of the parity discussion.

4 That's a separate issue.

5 So when you're talking about straight

6 parity, if the MTA capital plan is

7 $26.1 billion over the next five years,

8 that's what the DOT capital plan should be.

9 And there is great documentation in both

10 systems to indicate that that need is there,

11 it should be funded. Both systems are

12 critical to our economy.

13 The other thing that parity isn't is

14 an upstate/downstate issue. It drives me

15 crazy when I hear people talk about it that

16 way, and I appreciate, Senator Krueger, your

17 comments and others' earlier about that. The

18 whole state relies on our statewide system of

19 roads and bridges. I go to New York City

20 regularly, I see roads and bridges. There

21 are needs. And in fact, if you look at the

22 DOT system, the biggest DOT project right now

23 in New York State is the K Bridge in New York

24 City.

277

1 I talked about the statewide impact of

2 the MTA system -- this is not an

3 upstate/downstate issue, it's not

4 upstate/downstate parity, it's not an upstate

5 road and bridge program, it is DOT/MTA

6 parity. It's what we always had. We have an

7 historic opportunity to restore it this year

8 and do the right thing for all the people of

9 the state and meet our infrastructure needs.

10 Our economies rely on it. Our economies

11 don't work if our infrastructure is failing.

12 We can't be open for business if our roads

13 and bridges are closed. We can't be open for

14 business if our transit systems are failing.

15 And so this is an opportunity for the

16 Legislature and the Executive to right the

17 wrong that occurred several years ago, due to

18 a variety of fiscal and other circumstances,

19 when parity was broken. Restore it, invest

20 in our infrastructure, and put people back to

21 work.

22 And so we were glad to hear the

23 Governor commit to achieving parity. It's

24 clear we've got some more work to do there,

278

1 we're not there in the Executive Budget, but

2 we're hopeful that with your support, and

3 ongoing conversations, that we can get there.

4 And if you look at the end of the

5 testimony, we have an incredibly broad

6 coalition of organizations that are

7 supporting parity. It's really pretty

8 extraordinary, because it's a lot of groups

9 and individuals that generally get paid to

10 argue with each other. Right? It's the

11 whole of the business community, the whole of

12 the construction industry, local governments,

13 the mayors, counties, farmers, organized

14 labor across the state, and the environmental

15 community, who all agree we need to fund the

16 MTA system and fund the DOT system equitably.

17 And so too do the people of New York.

18 Because there was a Siena College poll

19 recently that showed that 71 percent of

20 people, which is a big number on any issue,

21 agreed that both systems should be funded

22 equitably.

23 So that's a priority for us. We think

24 the budget is a good starting point in many

279

1 ways, but we think there's some room for

2 improvement.

3 And one last point. One thing I would

4 encourage you to look at, the budget proposes

5 the creation of a New York State Design and

6 Construction Office under the Dormitory

7 Authority, and we look forward to learning

8 more about exactly what the scope of that

9 would be. But if what it's going to do is

10 take control and management of construction

11 projects away from agencies like DOT, OGS,

12 State University Construction Fund and

13 others, I think we'd have some real concern

14 about that, because there's a long history of

15 our industry and our public partners in those

16 agencies delivering quality successful

17 projects, and we should be able to continue

18 to do that.

19 We can improve the process, certainly,

20 and we'd like to have those conversations

21 too, but we'd be concerned about the

22 authority for those projects shifting to this

23 new entity.

24 And with that, I will welcome any

280

1 questions.

2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

3 Senator?

4 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you very much

5 for making excellent points regarding parity

6 and other issues, but especially parity and

7 the fact that we need to invest as a state in

8 our roads and bridges. We need to make sure

9 that we restore a five-year plan and that

10 there's parity in the process and the plan

11 and transparency also as far as what those

12 projects will entail.

13 So thank you for your input.

14 MR. ELMENDORF: Thank you, Senator.

15 Thank you.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Associated Builders

17 and Contractors, Joshua Reap, Director of

18 Government Affairs.

19 Josh?

20 MR. NOONAN: It's not Josh. Brian.

21 Josh couldn't make it this afternoon.

22 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Somebody on my

23 staff's going to have a broken finger.

24 MR. NOONAN: Thank you, Chairwoman

281

1 Young. Thank you, Chairman Farrell. I know

2 you guys have been here a long time today, so

3 I'll try to keep our comments brief.

4 My name is Brian Noonan. I'm with

5 Associated Builders and Contractors. Our

6 organization represents nearly 400 merit shop

7 contractors throughout New York State.

8 I am here to express our support for

9 the Governor's ambitious plan to fix our

10 crumbling infrastructure. These improvements

11 include critical upgrades to everything from

12 roads, bridges and sewers to utilities and

13 waste water systems. Simply put, they add to

14 the quality of life to New Yorkers on a daily

15 basis.

16 Few here would disagree in saying that

17 these upgrades are badly needed, and have

18 been for a number of years.

19 The Governor's proposal is pegged at

20 roughly $100 billion over five years. Given

21 that New York is close to its debt cap --

22 some estimates are we are within $800

23 million -- it's clear that agencies and

24 authorities will be issuing bonds to cover

282

1 the cost of construction. While this is not

2 ideal, infrastructure improvements are a good

3 use of bonds.

4 So if we are going to bond this work,

5 then you have an obligation to ensure that

6 the taxpayers of this great state get the

7 maximum value for their investment. That

8 means putting these projects out to bid

9 without costly gimmicks like Project Labor

10 Agreements, otherwise known in the industry

11 as PLAs.

12 I will assume that most of you here

13 are familiar with PLAs. For those who are

14 not, these costly provisions are agreements

15 made between the owner of a project and the

16 building trades unions. They mandate that

17 the vast majority of workers on a job site

18 are from the union halls. Typically, this

19 means three out of every four workers. This

20 excludes workers who choose not to join a

21 union from working on the project.

22 They have also been proven to drive up

23 costs on a project upwards of 30 percent.

24 This comes from the diminished competition

283

1 that they create, along with antiquated

2 jurisdictional work rules that accompany

3 PLAs. You don't need to look far to see the

4 failure of a PLA on a publicly-funded

5 infrastructure project.

6 The Exit 122 rehabilitation project

7 along Route 17 had issued its bid when the

8 New York State DOT rescinded it and issued a

9 new one with a mandated PLA attached. The

10 project was delayed more than a year. While

11 New York received an initial low bid of

12 approximately $65 million, this bid was put

13 aside in favor of one with the inclusion of a

14 PLA. When all was said and done, the total

15 project cost approached $100 million -- over

16 $30 million higher than the bid without the

17 attachment of a PLA. This is just one

18 example. There are, in fact, dozens more

19 just like it.

20 With the numbers being discussed here

21 today, the amount being wasted would

22 skyrocket from tens of millions to hundreds

23 of millions. The taxpayers of New York State

24 deserve the best value at the best price.

284

1 While we desperately need these investments,

2 we also need them done the right way. To

3 attach PLAs simply to appease certain groups

4 while excluding others is not good for

5 anyone.

6 By allowing for a free, open,

7 transparent bidding process, everyone has a

8 chance at work. This does not hurt anyone

9 the way that PLAs do, and everyone has the

10 same fair chance. Most importantly,

11 taxpayers will see their money go further and

12 more of these crucial upgrades can take

13 place.

14 While I am here, I would be remiss if

15 I did not also speak briefly on the Wicks Law

16 and the Scaffold Law. These regulations

17 drive up the costs of construction to the

18 detriment of taxpayers and customers across

19 the state, and have made New York one of the

20 most costly states in which to build.

21 Serious reform needs to be looked at in both

22 cases, and our organization would always be

23 willing to sit down with you and discuss

24 real, practical, common-sense solutions to

285

1 resolving some of the issues most prevalent

2 and problematic to the contractors of

3 New York State.

4 Thank you once again for your time.

5 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Okay. Thank you

6 very much.

7 Anybody have any questions?

8 Okay. Very articulate. Thank you

9 very much.

10 MR. NOONAN: Thank you very much.

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thanks.

12 Tri-State Transportation Campaign,

13 Nadine Lemmon, director, New York/federal

14 policy.

15 MS. LEMMON: Good afternoon. Thank

16 you for the opportunity to allow us to

17 testify today.

18 My name is Nadine Lemmon, and I am the

19 New York and federal policy director for

20 Tri-State Transportation Campaign. We're a

21 policy and advocacy organization working on a

22 sustainable transportation future.

23 As transportation advocates, we of

24 course were thrilled to hear about the bold

286

1 plans the Governor has laid on the table for

2 infrastructure in this state. Many of the

3 proposals, like Third Track on Long Island,

4 revamping Penn Station, and the Hudson Links

5 transit system on the New NY Bridge, have

6 been on our wish list for years.

7 Unfortunately, as they say, the devil

8 is in the details, or in this case, the lack

9 of details in this Executive Budget. The

10 Executive Budget reveals that Governor

11 Cuomo's plan for funding the MTA's capital

12 needs is nothing but smoke and mirrors. This

13 budget contains no appropriation for the MTA,

14 not only this year but in any of the outlying

15 years. There is only a reappropriation of

16 the $1 billion from last year's budget.

17 While we were supportive of the agreement

18 made this summer between Governor Cuomo and

19 Mayor de Blasio, we see now that the Governor

20 has had an entirely different idea of a

21 "fully funded" MTA capital plan.

22 The Executive Budget redefines the

23 concept of parity. Drivers will be getting

24 real dollars in their roads and bridges,

287

1 fixed as part of NYSDOT's capital plan, and

2 the New NY Bridge will be receiving $2

3 billion total from the bank settlement funds.

4 Instead of comparable cash, the MTA will be

5 getting an IOU. This budget leaves the door

6 wide open to be funded with an unsustainable

7 level of debt financing for the MTA.

8 Drivers will be getting a toll

9 reduction worth $340 million, according to

10 the Thruway Authority, while downstate

11 transit riders will be saddled with a transit

12 system facing an uncertain future. And

13 upstate transit riders will be getting an

14 underfunded capital plan as well.

15 We understand that every capital plan

16 has some debt, but the Executive Budget

17 introduces substantial risk to transit

18 riders. As history has shown, unsustainable

19 debt puts pressure on the MTA's operating

20 budget, increasing the likelihood of future

21 fare increases and service cuts, negatively

22 impacting low-income transit riders.

23 There is also the risk that projects

24 will be slowed down, or fall off the table in

288

1 later years, and the state's promised

2 commitment will be pushed off. The ambiguous

3 language in the Article 7 legislation leaves

4 the potential for no money to be put into the

5 MTA by the state until 2019. By 2019, as the

6 debt bomb explodes, the Governor's term and

7 potentially his commitment to this plan will

8 be ended.

9 There should be parity between the MTA

10 and roads and bridges, a different kind of

11 parity than you've heard today. The Capital

12 Plan Review Board needs to approve the MTA's

13 capital program immediately. It's a year

14 late. And real dollars need to be put into

15 the 2016-2017 budget, along with a clear

16 timeline and certainty of funding sources for

17 the plan.

18 We support NYPTA's testimony

19 concerning the non-MTA transit. Multiyear

20 capital funding is the key for establishing

21 stable transit systems, both upstate and

22 down. We applaud the Executive Budget for

23 including a five-year capital plan for

24 upstate transit, but that capital plan is not

289

1 fully funded. That's a $1 billion capital

2 plan, it has a $500 million gap, and the

3 Executive Budget only puts $295 million into

4 that.

5 We are particularly concerned that

6 there is no capital funding for downstate

7 transit, suburban transit systems such as

8 Westchester's Beeline service and Nassau

9 County's NICE systems. Just this past

10 Sunday, 11 bus routes were cut, eliminated in

11 Nassau County, in part because there's a

12 $7.5 million deficit in NICEís budget.

13 So in order to prevent similar cuts to

14 transit across the state, we urge you to

15 fully fund the $500 million gap in NYPTA's

16 proposed five-year capital plan.

17 I really want to thank all of the

18 legislators today for hammering on the fact

19 that there is no list of projects coming out

20 of New York State DOT. If you'll allow me a

21 moment of being candid, it's ridiculous that

22 you have not gotten a list of projects, and

23 you haven't gotten it for the last several

24 years since I've been here. You've had a

290

1 list out of the MTA for their capital plan

2 since October of 2014. And Commissioner

3 Driscoll said today that you're not going to

4 see anything until the budget deal is done.

5 You shouldn't let that stand.

6 In March of 2015, the Legislature also

7 approved a two-year capital plan for New York

8 State DOT in your budget, the last budget

9 cycle, and we still haven't see the list of

10 projects for that. And the MOU that was

11 negotiated with the Governor's office has not

12 been signed, has not been released to the

13 public.

14 Details are sorely lacking in this

15 Executive Budget. There was mention that the

16 Hudson Links Transit across the New NY Bridge

17 is fully funded. There's a $31 million gap

18 and we could not find the appropriation in

19 the budget. So this is problematic. It's a

20 new bus system that is expected to be

21 launched in 23 months. There should be an

22 appropriation. There should be a list of

23 projects.

24 A press release that came out of the

291

1 Governor's office on January 5th mentions

2 that New York State DOT's "Complete Streets"

3 funding will be used to partially fund the

4 $100 million Downtown Revitalization

5 Initiative. To our knowledge, there is no

6 so-called "Complete Streets" funding unless

7 the Governor is referring to the dedicated

8 federal dollars that are coming out of D.C.

9 And if that's the case, if it's the

10 Governor's plan to siphon off these

11 much-needed dollars for downtown Hunger

12 Games, we would definitely encourage you

13 instead to have a dedicated fund of state

14 dollars for bicycle and pedestrian

15 infrastructure that is on top of what is

16 already being spent to the tune of $20

17 million a year.

18 And thank you, Chairman Farrell, for

19 your question earlier to the commissioner as

20 to whether there was bicycle and pedestrian

21 funding in this budget.

22 And for the past several years the

23 Bronx community has been calling for the

24 inclusion of $3 million in New York State

292

1 DOT's capital plan to fund the environmental

2 review of the reconfiguration of the Sheridan

3 Expressway. Again, without a detailed list

4 of capital projects, there is no way to tell

5 if this funding has been included in this

6 Executive Budget.

7 In conclusion, the opaque and

8 unregulated process for developing the

9 New York State DOT capital plan must change.

10 The State Legislature must statutorily

11 require the Department of Transportation to

12 submit a five-year capital plan, with defined

13 projects, that is subject to public review

14 prior to passage of the state budget and

15 require DOT to report on the progress of that

16 plan. The MTA does it; DOT can do it as

17 well.

18 New York needs its capital planning to

19 be done transparently, comprehensively, and

20 in a coordinated, long-term manner. The MTA

21 and DOT capital plans need to be submitted

22 for consideration at the same time, every

23 five years, based on a 20-year needs

24 assessment. Given that the MOU process has

293

1 clearly broken down, this needs to be a

2 statutory requirement. It is the only way

3 that we're going to be able to assure parity

4 in this system.

5 Thank you for your time.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Railroads of

9 New York, Incorporated, Scott Wigger,

10 executive director.

11 MR. WIGGER: Good afternoon. Thanks

12 for the opportunity to testify here today.

13 My name is Scott Wigger, and I am the

14 executive director for Railroads of New York.

15 We're an organization that represents the

16 freight rail industry here in New York State.

17 It's comprised of four Class I railroads --

18 cSX, Canadian National, Canadian Pacific, and

19 Norfolk Southern -- and 34 short-line and

20 regional railroads here in the state. Our

21 members directly employ over 3,700

22 individuals, and we allow our customers

23 access to the nationwide 140,000-mile rail

24 network, which gives access to both coasts

294

1 and all U.S. ports and shipment of goods.

2 Besides a substantial competitive

3 advantage that businesses enjoy that have

4 rail access and thus access to this network,

5 there's many environmental benefits that we

6 provide, such as reduced pollution, better

7 fuel efficiency, reduced highway congestion,

8 and less wear and tear on the roads.

9 In regards to the Governor's Executive

10 Budget proposal, in it is contained a

11 $10 million allocation for freight rail

12 projects and another $10 million allocation

13 for a mix of freight, passenger, and port

14 projects -- freight rail, passenger rail, and

15 port projects. We appreciate the work that

16 was done to reestablish this program three

17 years ago by the Legislature and the

18 Governor's office, but this has been at the

19 same funding level for those last three

20 years, the same $20 million level since it

21 was reestablished.

22 RONY believes this budget year

23 provides a unique opportunity for us to fully

24 fund this program at a $50 million level,

295

1 which is the level it was at during the

2 2005-2010 Bond Act years. We see increased

3 attention these days on transportation

4 infrastructure, and we appreciate that that's

5 a focus these days that we feel is very

6 important. However, when we look at the rest

7 of DOT's budget funding, we see all the other

8 modes -- roads, bridges, transit, airports --

9 all getting proposed increased funding

10 allocations, while the freight rail

11 allocations proposed remain flat.

12 So it's a little disconcerting for us,

13 but we still look forward to working with the

14 Legislature and the Governor's office to work

15 to build this up to the aforementioned

16 $50 million level.

17 Just as with all modes of

18 transportation infrastructure, freight rail

19 infrastructure gradually deteriorates due to

20 time, wear and tear, and whatnot, and at the

21 same time it's project that freight rail

22 volumes are going to increase. Last year,

23 U.S. DOT put out a report saying they expect

24 freight rail volume to increase by 49 percent

296

1 by the year 2040, which just means putting

2 more strain on the system.

3 Our railroads invest heavily in

4 capital repair, maintenance, expansion

5 projects. There's direct economic benefits

6 when we do expansion projects, whether

7 providing enhanced services to existing

8 customers, providing rail access to

9 businesses currently without rail service, or

10 just locating a rail infrastructure in areas

11 of the state that currently lack access to

12 the rail network, so that when prospective

13 businesses are looking at the state to locate

14 their operations, like a manufacturing

15 facility requesting rail access, it's

16 certainly an incentive to locate here in New

17 York.

18 We certainly need help with state

19 funding to help with projects we can't

20 finance ourselves. You know, with the repair

21 projects, obviously, we have to do those

22 first, because the safety of our system is of

23 foremost importance. So as more and more

24 funding has to go for repair and maintenance

297

1 projects, that's less and less we have for

2 economic development projects.

3 So as such, we support the development

4 of this DOT five-year capital plan. We

5 support funding it at the same $50 million

6 per year level, totaling $250 million over

7 the five-year period. This long-term

8 investment planning would allow our railroads

9 to undertake more innovative capital projects

10 to expand economic development efforts and

11 also allow us time for better collaboration

12 with local businesses and economic

13 development organizations for better planning

14 and cost-effectiveness.

15 As far as the scoring, since we

16 reestablished this program, it's been scored

17 through the DOT scoring process and not the

18 Regional Council scoring process, which we

19 appreciate and certainly support. We

20 appreciate the efforts by the Legislature and

21 the Governor to keep it that way.

22 Just as with transportation

23 infrastructure investments in general, it's

24 hard to localize on a regional basis the

298

1 benefits any one project would have on the

2 entire statewide network. And the jobs is

3 often, you know, are you creative with our

4 customers, not necessarily with railroads

5 themselves, so that's hard to quantify as

6 well. Except for DOT, they are properly

7 positioned to keep scoring in this way.

8 As far as the needs of the system,

9 I've said this in past years before, the 2009

10 DOT rail plan puts the needs of the freight

11 rail network at about $390 million per year

12 over a five-year period, totaling nearly

13 $2 billion. About half of those identified

14 needs are just to keep the existing system in

15 safe condition and to bring it up to a state

16 of good repair.

17 What you'll see is what we did

18 recently, attached to my testimony, is we did

19 a survey of our own members just asking for

20 projects you can't do without state

21 assistance. And as you'll see, there's over

22 $350 million worth of projects listed there.

23 They show short- and long-term needs, and

24 there's a variety of projects -- repair,

299

1 maintenance, economic development, and

2 expansion -- in all corners of the state. So

3 we hope this helps to illustrate the needs of

4 the system.

5 I appreciate the time today to come up

6 here and testify, and I am happy to answer

7 any questions you may have.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

9 Any questions? Senator.

10 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Yes. I know

11 Assemblyman Farrell reacted at first to the

12 thickness of your packet. He was worried you

13 were going to read every page. But I want to

14 thank you for the detail on the $350 million

15 of shovel-ready projects that could be

16 undertaken across the state. It's very

17 helpful to the legislators to see what the

18 potential could be. So I just want to give

19 my thanks to you for that.

20 I'm glad to see there are projects for

21 Allegheny, Cattaragus, Chataqua, and

22 Livingston Counties in the mix, and I look

23 forward to working with you in the future.

24 MR. WIGGER: Great. Thanks.

300

1 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

2 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Hi. I don't know if

4 you heard me when I asked the earlier

5 testifier whether public transit, mass

6 transit was defined as economic development

7 for the various economic development funds we

8 distribute throughout the state.

9 So I have the same question for you.

10 Is freight rail eligible to participate in

11 the regional economic councils or in the

12 regional $500 million competitions that

13 have -- has rail freight gotten any money?

14 MR. WIGGER: Sure. Technically, yes,

15 we're eligible. But on a practical basis, it

16 just doesn't work.

17 Like I said, when you go through the

18 Regional Council process, they're looking at

19 their regions alone. Whereas when we do a

20 project, say the Portersville Bridge, for

21 example -- it's out in the western Southern

22 Tier area of the state -- that's really to

23 allow us to go from Buffalo to Albany more

24 consistently, instead of having to dip

301

1 through Pennsylvania. So if you're just

2 looking at it on that localized basis, you

3 won't see the benefits all around.

4 And also the fact that we're not

5 creating direct jobs with a maintenance

6 project or a repair project, that's not going

7 to score well at all. So unless we're

8 talking about like a manufacturer who wants

9 to come to this state and they want direct

10 rail access -- that's a project that would

11 score well, because those are some direct

12 jobs that would score. But otherwise, we're

13 just not competitive there.

14 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

15 So I come from New York City, and I

16 spend a lot of time talking to people

17 throughout the state about how we do a better

18 job of bringing New York State agriculture

19 down into New York City. I always describe

20 how I have a city of 9 million people who

21 want to eat what New York State produces, but

22 there's the constant struggles of the

23 trucking patterns of trying to truck so much

24 food into New York City and the lack of

302

1 competition with the costs because of that.

2 Are there specific efforts in rail

3 freight that would expand the ability, if you

4 were funded, to Ensure better access for

5 upstate agricultural producers to move their

6 food downstate?

7 MR. WIGGER: Well, the projects would

8 rest with the direct -- the rail companies

9 themselves, you know, the ones that serve

10 that area and that go from upstate to

11 downstate, because some are just

12 regionalized, some just go east-west. So it

13 rests with those companies.

14 But of course any good business is

15 going to look to expand their business, so

16 that's definitely an opportunity we see

17 there. You know, if we shifted from trucks

18 to rail, we're certainly available for that.

19 SENATOR KRUEGER: But none of these

20 projects specifically in this giant package

21 are specific to agricultural freight, or you

22 don't know what ratio of your rail freight is

23 agricultural?

24 MR. WIGGER: Off the top of my head --

303

1 yeah, I'm not sure, I'd have to look through

2 it again.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you.

4 MR. WIGGER: Sure.

5 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

6 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

7 MR. WIGGER: Thanks.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: New York State

9 Association of Town Superintendents of

10 Highways, Jeff Griswold, president; New York

11 State County Highway Superintendents

12 Association, Kevin O'Brien, president.

13 And the next person is Jeremy

14 Martelle. If you would come down now, it

15 would make it go quicker.

16 Good afternoon.

17 MR. GRISWOLD: Good afternoon,

18 Senator Young, Assemblyman Farrell, and other

19 members of the Legislature. I am Jeffrey

20 Griswold, president of the New York State

21 Association of Town Superintendents of

22 Highways, and I'm the Town of Preble highway

23 superintendent. With me, representing the

24 Town of Palmyra, also my first vice

304

1 president, is Michael Boesel.

2 We apologize, but at the same time

3 this is happening, County Highway

4 Superintendents President Kevin O'Brien is at

5 a swearing-in ceremony for their association.

6 We appreciate this opportunity to

7 submit testimony for your consideration as

8 you review the Governor's 2016-2017 budget.

9 We'd like to begin by thanking you, the

10 members of the Legislature, for your

11 steadfast support of local roads and bridges.

12 As you know, our collective membership is

13 responsible for ensuring the safe operation

14 of 87 percent of the state's public roads,

15 half of its bridges, and plowing not only our

16 huge system but over a quarter of the New

17 York State DOT's roads. Every time there is

18 a winter weather event, the hardworking men

19 and women of our local crews ensure New

20 York's drivers get to and from schools,

21 hospitals, work, and other destinations

22 safely.

23 We are pleased to see Governor Cuomo

24 propose increased funding levels in the

305

1 Executive Budget for the New York State DOT

2 capital plan and the new additional programs

3 for local and state bridges and roads. As

4 part of this proposed capital plan is a

5 $1 billion PAVE-NY program to be split evenly

6 between the state and locals. Another new

7 program is the $1 billion BRIDGE-NY to

8 replace and rehabilitate bridges. Like

9 PAVE-NY, we have been told the monies for

10 BRIDGE-NY will also be split 50/50 between

11 the state and the localities.

12 However, it is imperative to note that

13 this $20.1 billion proposed five-year New

14 York State DOT capital plan funding level is

15 not enough to prevent the further

16 deterioration of New York's highways and

17 bridge system. The Governor's proposal

18 maintains the CHIPS funding level at $438

19 million and $39.7 million for Marchiselli,

20 but does not include the $50 million extreme

21 winter recovery money we received last year.

22 There is also $500 million for an Extreme

23 Weather Infrastructure Hardening Program for

24 investments in roadways statewide that are

306

1 susceptible to flooding, but it is not clear

2 how this funding would be distributed or if

3 local roads are eligible for a fair share.

4 Our associations support a five-year

5 allocation of $3.7 billion, $742 million

6 annually, in CHIPS/Marchiselli funding and

7 $750 million, or $150 million annually, for a

8 local bridge and culvert program.

9 The Executive Budget includes a

10 five-year, $1 billion BRIDGE-NY program split

11 between the state and localities. This

12 proposal appears to be an improvement over

13 the current state and local initiative that

14 is part of the current budget. When the

15 first two years of the five-year $750 million

16 program was allocated, New York State DOT,

17 who chose the projects without local input,

18 split the number of state and local projects

19 equally: 23 are locals, 23 state-owned.

20 However, the state bridge projects

21 total 55 percent of the funds, and just two

22 locally owned bridges in New York City

23 accounted for 66 percent of the local bridge

24 funding allocation. We're hoping that the

307

1 new BRIDGE-NY program is more effective in

2 achieving regional balance and maximizing

3 local decision making and flexibility, which

4 is why we are requesting the local BRIDGE-NY

5 funding be distributed through CHIPS.

6 We cannot emphasize enough the

7 importance that both local portions of the

8 PAVE-NY and BRIDGE-NY programs be distributed

9 through the CHIPS formula and be funded with

10 state dollars, not federal funds. By using

11 CHIPS as the funding mechanism for the local

12 side of the program, every municipality

13 across New York State will benefit. The

14 CHIPS formula is based on local highway

15 mileage for all municipalities and motor

16 vehicle registrations for counties and New

17 York City. This formula allows the local

18 highway superintendents and commissioners of

19 public works, the experts in their

20 localities, to make decisions on what road,

21 bridge and culvert rehabilitation and

22 reconstruction is most important.

23 We are also pleased that the Executive

24 Budget includes a five-year DOT capital plan

308

1 which will allow long-term predictable

2 funding levels and more effective planning.

3 This fall, for the first time, the

4 administration did not release a DOT

5 five-year capital needs analysis, which we

6 believe to be in excess of $28 billion.

7 Traditionally, the funding levels for both

8 the DOT and MTA systems were based on

9 multiyear needs analysis and were released in

10 advance of the adoption of the five-year

11 capital programs.

12 Mike?

13 MR. BOESEL: I'm going to take over

14 from here.

15 In the fall, Governor Cuomo and Mayor

16 de Blasio announced an agreement to jointly

17 subsidize the MTA's nearly $11 billion

18 funding gap for its proposed $26.1 billion

19 2015-2019 five-year capital program. While

20 we are not clear on where the funding for

21 this state commitment of $8.3 billion will

22 come from, we certainly appreciate this vital

23 investment in downstate transit.

24 We are hopeful that you and your

309

1 fellow legislators can work with us to ensure

2 that funding parity is restored between the

3 DOT's highway and bridge five-year capital

4 program and the MTA's capital program, with

5 each program receiving an equal funding level

6 of $26.1 billion.

7 As you can see from the chart included

8 in our testimony, three of the last four

9 DOT/MTA five-year capital programs were

10 virtually identical in size. In the early

11 1990s, the Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust

12 Fund was created to pay for New York State

13 DOT's capital program and the Dedicated Mass

14 Transit Trust Fund was created to assist the

15 MTA and other transit system capital

16 programs.

17 At that time, drivers statewide were

18 asked to have a portion of their gas taxes

19 and auto fees directed toward the Dedicated

20 Mass Transit Fund. Today, New York's drivers

21 pay hundreds of millions of dollars annually

22 to mass transit, about 90 percent of which

23 goes to the MTA. In return for drivers'

24 financial assistance to transit, it was

310

1 originally agreed that the DOT and MTA's

2 five-year capital programs would be similar

3 in size and would be negotiated

4 simultaneously.

5 Having a five-year highway and bridge

6 capital program that truly meets the needs of

7 our state's residents is our top priority.

8 We believe it is essential the MTA and the

9 DOT capital programs are equal and that a

10 significant portion of the resulting

11 additional funding be allocated directly to

12 local highway departments throughout the

13 state. To meet a greater portion of the

14 critical needs of the local transportation

15 system, we request a five-year allocation of

16 $3.7 billion, or $742 million annually, for

17 CHIPS/Marchiselli funding and $750 million,

18 or $150 million annually, for a local bridge

19 and culvert program.

20 The local systems' needs are great and

21 well documented. The New York State

22 Comptroller's studies indicate that a large

23 number of road mileage is deteriorating and

24 many bridges in the state are rated

311

1 structurally deficient and functionally

2 obsolete. According to the 2014

3 Comptroller's report, 34 percent of bridges

4 are deficient and 48 percent of road

5 pavements are rated fair or poor or getting

6 worse. The Comptroller estimates that there

7 will be $89 billion in unmet local

8 infrastructure needs over the next 20 years,

9 with much of this shortfall on the already

10 deteriorating local transportation system.

11 In November of 2013, our New York

12 State Association of Town Highway

13 Superintendents conducted our own needs study

14 of the local transportation system. Our

15 analysis determined that, on average, local

16 governments outside New York City should be

17 spending $2.32 billion annually on their

18 highways and bridges. Currently these

19 municipalities spend only about $1 billion

20 annually, leaving an annual shortfall of

21 $1.32 billion.

22 So what is needed now? In previous

23 years, even in tough economic times, the

24 Legislature has responded to the dire

312

1 conditions of the state's transportation

2 systems and augmented CHIPS and other local

3 transportation funding but more is required.

4 MTA/DOT parity will help provide the funding

5 needed to reverse the deteriorating

6 conditions of our local transportation

7 systems and make significant progress in its

8 rehabilitation.

9 We are urging support for a

10 significant increase for the CHIPS program to

11 help all municipalities in the state extend

12 the life of our assets and maintain our vast

13 system and an adequately funded local bridge

14 and culvert program that will provide direct

15 funding to local governments and add

16 flexibility needed to address local

17 conditions.

18 Our associations and the mutual

19 constituencies and communities we serve

20 appreciate the support of our state elected

21 officials who partner with us to insure we

22 all get the job done when it comes to

23 providing the public with a safe and

24 functional statewide transportation system,

313

1 one that supports jobs and economic growth

2 for our communities. We request that you and

3 your legislative colleagues make the same

4 state funding commitment of $26.1 billion to

5 our roads, bridges and culverts as the

6 Governor has pledged to mass transit.

7 We look forward to continuing working

8 with you to make more state funding and

9 resources available to meet the critical

10 needs of our local transportation systems.

11 Thank you very much.

12 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you,

13 gentlemen.

14 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

15 much.

16 Question?

17 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Yes, just a couple

18 of quick things.

19 Both, thank you very much for the

20 presentation and giving the perspective -- I

21 know you mentioned -- I think CHIPS in this

22 budget is at $438 million, which would be the

23 same as what we had last year but without the

24 winter recovery monies. So in essence,

314

1 that's a reduction from what local

2 governments are going to receive.

3 But you lay out some of what we need

4 really need. Are we getting -- is your

5 message -- are we geting further behind in

6 maintaining our local roads because of

7 funding levels of where we are?

8 MR. GRISWOLD: In my small town just

9 south of Syracuse, we're holding our own if

10 we don't have another winter like we did last

11 year.

12 Due to the wisdom of the Legislature

13 last year, we did have the Winter Recovery

14 Fund two years in a row. This winter we've

15 been blessed with a lighter winter. I'm just

16 hoping in the spring I don't have something

17 that goes awry. It's going year to year;

18 there's no long term.

19 My big hope, with the energy prices

20 coming down -- for years they were

21 skyrocketing, double digits -- and I'm really

22 hoping that with some increased funding,

23 along with lower oil prices, aggregate prices

24 may hold off, we can get more work done to

315

1 make up for these years of not being able to

2 keep up. I mean, we have a golden

3 opportunity right now to be able to really

4 get some real work done that your

5 constituents and mine can really appreciate.

6 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: You talked about

7 the recommendation that the PAVE-NY program

8 as well as the BRIDGE-NY program be

9 distributed, those resources, by a CHIPS kind

10 of formula. We heard from the commissioner

11 today, one, that the bridges she didn't

12 allude to, that that would be considered, and

13 said that the other formula was being

14 determined for the PAVE -- your

15 recommendation would be to do the PAVE along

16 the -- using the CHIPS formula.

17 MR. GRISWOLD: Well, instead of using

18 specific projects, which, depending on how

19 this is laid out -- there are no details at

20 this time -- CHIPS statewide, whether you're

21 talking transportation or any other --

22 education or anything else -- CHIPS by and

23 large is very fair money. It's not an

24 upstate/downstate issue.

316

1 A lot of CHIPS money goes to New York

2 City -- we have no problem with that -- and

3 Long Island. It's equitable. And here we

4 keep talking parity, we talked equality -- I

5 think it's important that you understand that

6 this CHIPS formula is complicated as it can

7 be. I mean, we just hit the points -- is

8 what we generally believe, the county

9 associations would agree, I believe -- it's

10 fair.

11 And I think that's what we're asking.

12 We're not -- it's not a competition,

13 upstate/downstate. It's a fair, equitable

14 way of putting a program forward.

15 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: I think in your

16 presentation you also said that this last

17 year there was some of the choosing of

18 projects and whatever without input from

19 localities. The commissioner did mention

20 today that they would be looking for input

21 from local governments. Is there a best way

22 to do that, to give that input?

23 Recommendations, to be part of negotiations

24 or a part of recommendations to the Executive

317

1 of how that should happen?

2 MR. GRISWOLD: I can tell you that in

3 our testimony we said that it's very

4 frustrating and anybody sitting in our shoes

5 or outside of the metropolitan area would be

6 frustrated that while most of that local

7 funding that was deemed and said to be local,

8 62 percent of it went to New York City

9 bridges. And that's frustrating -- I

10 honestly don't know an actual formula or a

11 way of doing it.

12 I mean, you're basically going to

13 spread this money fairly as CHIPS, which is

14 our first choice. If you make it

15 competitive, you have your bigger departments

16 and bigger towns and like that that have

17 grant-writer-type people that can do it. And

18 myself, I am my own secretary of my small

19 highway department, so I do everything, soup

20 to nuts. So I would be relying on myself

21 to -- if it was a competitive basis, I

22 probably would have a tough time with it, to

23 be honest with you.

24 I hope that answered your question.

318

1 ASSEMBLYMAN OAKS: Thank you, and

2 thank you also for the work you do in your

3 local communities, but those you represent

4 across our state, in keeping our local roads

5 passable and in the best condition they can

6 within the restraints that you have. And

7 hopefully as part of this budget we can move

8 to giving you the resources to get us in a

9 better position.

10 Thank you.

11 MR. GRISWOLD: Thank you, Assemblyman.

12 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you.

13 Senator?

14 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: No questions.

15 Thank you.

16 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: To close, New York

17 Aviation Management Association, Jeremy

18 Martelle, president.

19 MR. MARTELLE: Good afternoon. Thank

20 you, Chairwoman Young, Chairman Farrell, and

21 members of the committees.

22 I am Jeremy Martelle, president of the

23 New York Aviation Management Association and

24 regional manager for CHA Companies, our

319

1 aviation division. NYAMA appreciates this

2 opportunity to testify on the 2016-2017

3 Executive Budget proposal as it relates to

4 the support of airports within the state.

5 NYAMA represents over 13,000 members

6 and affiliate members, 120 commercial service

7 and general aviation airports, fixed based

8 operators, consultants, engineers and other

9 aviation industries and professionals who

10 believe that serious economic development

11 efforts at the state and regional level

12 necessitates strong public investment in our

13 aviation assets and our facilities.

14 I would like to take this moment to

15 thank you and the members of the Legislature

16 for enacting significant aviation tax reform

17 last year as part of the final budget. This

18 action to restore our competitiveness with

19 our neighboring states is already yielding

20 tangible results, as a number of airports

21 have reported increased business developments

22 and business jet locations at their

23 facilities.

24 Airports are economic engines fueling

320

1 growth in the communities they serve.

2 According to the New York State Department of

3 Transportation's Aviation Bureau, the

4 aviation industry contributes over

5 $50 billion in annual economic activity in

6 New York State and almost 400,000 state

7 residents work in aviation or

8 aviation-related industries. The economic

9 benefits of New York State airports are

10 impressive. As a whole, aviation generates

11 $18 billion in payroll and $4.5 billion in

12 state and local tax revenue annually.

13 This powerful economic engine and its

14 benefits to New York's citizens are

15 restrained by a critical lack of state

16 infrastructure investment, competition from

17 other states, and a sluggish state and

18 national economy.

19 The state's Airport Capital Program

20 for fiscal years 2010 through 2013 included

21 no capital improvement funding. This period

22 with no funding followed five years where the

23 airport capital program was funded at a level

24 of $15 to $17 million per year. It was only

321

1 starting with the 2013-2014 budget that the

2 State Aviation Capital Grant Program,

3 formally the AIR99 program, began being

4 funded at a level of less than $10 million

5 annually.

6 While this reduced funding level has

7 provided some valuable financial assistance

8 for infrastructure projects at airports

9 across the state -- for example, funding

10 airport security improvements, repair of

11 existing facilities, and safety

12 enhancements -- it represents only half of

13 the traditional budget allocation which has

14 been set aside during previous years.

15 Additionally, over 130 public-use airports

16 across the state compete for a portion of

17 this lower level of funding, creating large

18 gaps in much needed infrastructure funding.

19 The Executive Budget continues

20 underfunding the capital grant program at

21 this level for the fourth consecutive year.

22 The Airport Improvement Program

23 Funding Transfer. The funding level in the

24 State Aviation Capital Grant Program is

322

1 further eroded due to the underfunding of the

2 state matching program for federal airport

3 capital improvement dollars. The Federal

4 Aviation Administration's Airport Capital

5 Improvement Program typically funded

6 95 percent of all eligible projects.

7 Recently, a change in the program now

8 provides only 90 percent federal funding

9 under the Airport Improvement Program to most

10 airports, instead of the 95 percent as in

11 previous years. What this has done is

12 doubled the required state portion of that

13 total grant. The federal funding that is

14 received by New York airports varies but is

15 typically between $80 million to $100 million

16 annually. Based on experience and recent

17 program data, it is anticipated that the

18 $4 million budget allocation by the state to

19 cover its share of the federally funded

20 airport projects will likely be insufficient

21 and will be far short of what is needed.

22 This creates an uncertainty that all

23 available federal funding will be utilized by

24 New York going forward. New York can ill

323

1 afford to jeopardize receiving any of these

2 federal funds and seeing them diverted to

3 neighboring states that compete directly with

4 New York State's airports.

5 In the last three fiscal years, an

6 additional $1 million to $3 million has been

7 necessary to meet the state share match.

8 Regrettably, this AIP funding shortfall has

9 been made up by reducing the scarce capital

10 funds through the State Aviation Capital

11 Grant Program. Unless AIP is fully funded,

12 this funding gap in AIP is expected to

13 continue next year and beyond, siphoning

14 millions of scarce dollars from an already

15 financially marginalized state airport

16 capital funding program.

17 NYAMA urges the Legislature to fully

18 fund the airport improvement program match at

19 a minimum of $6 million in the next fiscal

20 year budget. This will ensure that the full

21 amount of airport capital improvement funding

22 appropriated to the State Aviation Capital

23 Grant Program can be used for the important

24 purposes of that program and not to make up

324

1 the shortfall in the AIP match.

2 Perhaps the most significant aviation

3 initiative in the Executive Budget is the

4 Upstate Airport Initiative. Last year,

5 Governor Cuomo unveiled a comprehensive plan

6 to modernize and revitalize LaGuardia,

7 JFK International, Republic, and Stewart

8 International Airports, bringing them up to

9 21st-century standards for service, access

10 and amenities. The plan includes a massive

11 investment in these downstate airports.

12 NYAMA believes that there are other

13 airports in the state that should be

14 considered for targeted investments as has

15 been proposed for the downstate airports.

16 New York has a significant interest in the

17 continued vitality of general aviation and

18 community airports. Business aviation is a

19 critical tool for companies in New York to

20 conduct business, improve operational

21 efficiency, save money, and open

22 opportunities for areas not served by

23 commercial aviation. The success of business

24 aviation will encourage new business

325

1 opportunities and continued investment by

2 companies as well as bringing much-needed

3 jobs to all areas of the state.

4 This is why NYAMA is pleased that the

5 Executive Budget attempts to address this

6 need. The Governor is proposing $200 million

7 for an Upstate Airport Economic Development

8 and Revitalization competition to accelerate

9 investments in commercial, passenger, and

10 cargo service airports resulting in the

11 creation of jobs and stimulating economic

12 development. The state will award five

13 airports approximately $40 million each.

14 Grants will fund projects to enhance safety,

15 improve operations and access, reduce

16 environmental impacts, and create a better

17 passenger experience and leverage private

18 investments.

19 Although welcomed, NYAMA is concerned

20 that many of the over 120 airports we

21 represent will not have a legitimate

22 opportunity to fairly compete for this

23 funding, and we await the additional details

24 on the rules of this competition. NYAMA is

326

1 anxious to work with you and the Governor to

2 assure this significant infrastructure

3 funding reaches airports that establish the

4 need for support, enhances aviation business

5 development, creates new and permanent jobs,

6 and improves the state's economy as a whole.

7 As you are aware, many upstate

8 airports are constantly seeking to preserve

9 access to commercial service and connections

10 to major cities across the state and nation.

11 Over the last 10 years, these smaller

12 airports have seen their passenger boardings

13 decrease at a slow but relatively constant

14 rate. General aviation airports with no

15 scheduled airline service play a key role in

16 regional business and rely more heavily on

17 state funding for revenue-producing projects

18 like hangars and fuel farms. Many of these

19 aviation facilities face a daily struggle

20 just to continue.

21 For example, in 2014 New York State

22 DOT received a total of nearly $30 million in

23 funding requests by 73 airports for critical

24 infrastructure projects. Out of the

327

1 73 airports, only 26 were awarded a total of

2 $9 million under the State Aviation Capital

3 Grant Program. This demonstrates the huge

4 gap between what is required for airport

5 development projects and what is ultimately

6 available through the state budget.

7 As a result of the small number of

8 projects funded under the program, we know

9 the number of funding applications submitted

10 is artificially small. Many airports cannot

11 devote scarce resources to design and

12 engineer projects and go through the expense

13 of the application process if there is little

14 chance they will be awarded due to a lack of

15 significant program funding.

16 Based on the analysis of the

17 FAA-approved documents such as Airport

18 Capital Improvement Plans, Airport Master

19 Plans, and Airport Layout Plans, the New York

20 State Department of Transportation has

21 estimated that the state will need

22 $4.3 billion to support its aviation goals

23 for the next 20-year period between 2010 and

24 2030, an average of $215 million per year.

328

1 This investment is necessary to properly

2 maintain the system and allow airports to

3 attract passenger, cargo, and general

4 aviation services, therefore supporting the

5 Governor's economic development goals.

6 Although the federal Airport

7 Improvement Program grants provide some level

8 of funding, they average a total of less than

9 $100 million per year and are limited to

10 certain types of projects with a large

11 allocation traditionally going to the

12 Port Authority airports. Ultimately, this

13 leaves us with an enormous funding shortfall

14 for airport development needs statewide.

15 Consequently, in order to meet ongoing

16 critical needs of airport infrastructure

17 improvements and developments and to address

18 growing needs going forward, NYAMA is seeking

19 State Aviation Capital Grant Program funding

20 of $200 million, or $40 million per year,

21 over the course of the next five years. We

22 are also calling for a fully funded state AIP

23 program at a level to match historical

24 federal funding under the FAA Airport

329

1 Improvement Program without the need to

2 divert funds from the State Aviation Capital

3 Grant Program. We believe a projected state

4 budget surplus heading into the next fiscal

5 year and a call by many for parity between

6 the New York State DOT and the MTA capital

7 plans will help make this level of funding

8 possible.

9 The cost of addressing the growing

10 needs of the overall transportation system is

11 great, but will only increase if we delay

12 action. New York State must invest now in

13 effective aviation infrastructure programs or

14 face much higher, perhaps prohibitive, prices

15 later when the decay has made the challenges

16 far worse.

17 The long-standing policy on federal

18 requirements for the use of proceeds from

19 taxes on aviation fuel was recently clarified

20 by the FAA. The FAA rule mandates that all

21 aviation fuel tax revenue collected by states

22 or local units of government, either an

23 airport sponsor or a non-sponsor, must be

24 spent on airports for aviation-related

330

1 programs.

2 The Governor's Executive Budget -- in

3 Part Z of the revenue bill -- proposes to

4 address the FAA fuel tax clarification that

5 such fuel tax revenues generated at airports

6 go for aviation purposes. The budget

7 proposal also appears to exclude sales of

8 fuel for use in commercial and general

9 aviation aircraft from local sales taxes and

10 from the prepayment of sales tax on motor

11 fuels. Because of the complex nature of this

12 issue and the questions it raises about the

13 financial impacts on airports, NYAMA is

14 seeking more details in order to formulate an

15 informed recommendation on this provision.

16 So I conclude that NYAMA and its

17 members across New York State support your

18 efforts to ensure that the state pursues

19 policies that are pro-growth and pro-job

20 creation. Strong state investment in our

21 airports is one of these winning strategies.

22 We look forward to continuing to work

23 with you and all our elected officials to

24 enhance our airports and aviation assets in

331

1 ways that create new jobs, increase economic

2 development, and improve airport services so

3 that all regions of New York can compete

4 effectively with other states for business

5 aviation, scheduled commercial service, and

6 to benefit all New York State's residents.

7 Thank you for your time.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you very

9 much.

10 Any questions? Yes, Senator.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you very much

12 for your testimony, and I know you're the

13 last one. Just two very different questions.

14 Your testimony talks about 120

15 airports, but earlier in discussions about

16 the competition where five could get money,

17 the number was more like 73, 74. How come

18 you have so many more airports than previous

19 testifiers?

20 MR. MARTELLE: We have 120 members,

21 and 73 -- if I understand your question

22 correctly, the 73 airports were the number of

23 airports that actually submitted for projects

24 under the Airport Capital Improvement

332

1 Program.

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: So that 73 number

3 was just entities that have applied in the

4 past for the state money?

5 MR. MARTELLE: That is correct. Not

6 everybody will apply, so that was part of our

7 concern. Not everybody is encouraged to

8 apply, because of the process and the amount

9 of money that is available for awarding these

10 projects under the capital program.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: But it's your

12 understanding that for the proposed five

13 $40 million projects, all 120 could apply?

14 Or only that subset of the 70-something?

15 MR. MARTELLE: All 120 airports could

16 apply. Whether or not they would be able to

17 rise to the level of being able to be

18 funded -- there are a lot of small GA

19 facilities that would find it probably

20 difficult to spend $40 million. They would

21 be much more beneficial to be awarded a

22 $100,000 or $200,000 grant and be able to

23 meet their needs and invest that under that

24 type of program.

333

1 SENATOR KRUEGER: Thank you. And then

2 the final section of your testimony related

3 to Part Z of the revenue bill that -- I

4 hadn't gotten to Part Z yet, so thank you.

5 So apparently the feds changed the rules of

6 how fuel tax revenues can be used and that it

7 will have to be applied to aviation and the

8 airports.

9 I assume you think that's a good

10 thing, it will keep this revenue money at the

11 airports. Is that correct?

12 MR. MARTELLE: We would think that

13 that would be a good thing, but also we're

14 interested in how it can be -- all of our

15 member airports would be able to effectively

16 keep track of that and ensure that it's

17 tracked efficiently. I'm sure there's going

18 to be additional details that would have to

19 be ironed out as far as how it would be kept

20 track of.

21 SENATOR KRUEGER: And so we don't know

22 yet an estimate of how much money that would

23 be newly available to the airports, do we?

24 MR. MARTELLE: No. Not at this time.

334

1 I am not aware of that number.

2 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. And I gather

3 that you're concerned about the details; we

4 don't know how that would be divvied up.

5 Would it be based on the estimated volume per

6 airport, of planes coming in and out, or some

7 other formula?

8 MR. MARTELLE: That money -- the money

9 that's collected at the airport needs to be

10 reinvested in that airport.

11 SENATOR KRUEGER: So if you fuel up at

12 that airport, that share of the tax money has

13 to stay there?

14 MR. MARTELLE: For the local share,

15 yes.

16 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. And when we

17 talk about local, we're meaning local and

18 county versus the state share? Because in

19 some places you have state sales tax, county

20 sales tax, and even local.

21 MR. MARTELLE: Yes. I'm speaking of

22 the local, county -- and local tax. Not

23 necessarily the state tax.

24 SENATOR KRUEGER: Right, but

335

1 potentially the county and the local.

2 MR. MARTELLE: Correct.

3 SENATOR KRUEGER: Okay. Thank you

4 very much.

5 MR. MARTELLE: Thank you.

6 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Senator?

7 CHAIRWOMAN YOUNG: Thank you.

8 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: Thank you. Thank

9 you very much.

10 MR. MARTELLE: Thank you.

11 CHAIRMAN FARRELL: We'll adjourn until

12 Monday at 9:30 a.m., when the hearing on

13 Health issues will be held. Thank you.

14 (Whereupon, the budget hearing

15 concluded at 3:13 p.m.)

Print as PDF

Joint Legislative Public Hearing on 2016-2017 Executive Budget Proposal: Topic "Transportation" - Testimonies

Newsroom

Statement from NYS Senator Catharine M. Young (R,C,I-57th District)

Town of Mansfield Slated to Receive $300,000 State Grant

Senator Young Secures $125,000 for Town of Ripley

Senator Young Secures $350,000 for Town of Hinsdale to Replace Equipment Lost to Fire

Share this Article or Press Release

Newsroom

Statement from NYS Senator Catharine M. Young (R,C,I-57th District)

Town of Mansfield Slated to Receive $300,000 State Grant

Senator Young Secures $125,000 for Town of Ripley

Senator Young Secures $350,000 for Town of Hinsdale to Replace Equipment Lost to Fire