NJ Transit riders say Murphy needs to provide more state aid
NJ Transit riders and advocates called on the agency board Tuesday night to stand up for riders and push the governor and Legislature for additional state aid and — to, at the very least — revise the proposal to increase fares.
The fare increase proposal — which would raise fares 15% in July and 3% annually for an indefinite amount of time after that — comes as the agency faces a $120 million fiscal cliff in the coming budget cycle and a $917 million gap a year later.
While the agency’s budget plans for the 2024-25 fiscal year would not require service cuts, it’s not guaranteed after that. The governor and Legislature have so far offered no proposal to increase state aid to the agency.
Nearly all of the 20 people who spoke at Tuesday’s board meeting — including several from neighboring states who use the system — called the fare increase proposal unacceptable. They said the plan would significantly strain those who need the system the most because they have no other means of transportation. Some called for the agency to rethink the fare increase while others said it should be rejected outright.
“Riders are being asked to pay more for less with low- and middle-income riders feeling the most pain,” said John Reichman, a member of Empower NJ, a coalition to fight climate change. “The fare increase will not even fix NJT’s underlying financial problems. In the following fiscal year, NJT is facing a far greater shortfall. The Murphy administration and this board are marching NJ Transit toward a death spiral.”
A number of straphangers said the fare hikes are unreasonable because there is no service expansion or guarantees about improving their commutes, which many said is poor or has declined. A few people did thank the agency staff for taking over bus service abandoned by private companies last year and canceling the Transitgrid project that frees up grant money for other projects that will lead to improvements.
“I found it amusing that comparing NJ Transit to world class public transport because I feel like I must be living in the twilight zone if that’s what you think,” said one caller, who said the system is antiquated, infrequent and unreliable. “My whole family uses the service in disgust almost every day.”
NJ Transit President and CEO Kevin Corbett said the recent announcement that the World Cup finals will be held at MetLife Stadium is a “huge vote of confidence,” and said transit access was clearly a factor.
He said the company is working with international transit experts to prepare “global best practices” for the tournament that will take place in 2026 and figure out “how short-term enhancements can provide long-term improvements.”
Zoe Baldwin, the New Jersey director for the nonprofit research and advocacy group the Regional Plan Association, complimented the agency for maintaining the system on a shoestring budget, saying the “state support isn’t only anemic, it’s below its own benchmark,” noting that 2020 state aid levels were higher than they are now.
She recommended the board urge the governor and Legislature to provide ample dedicated funding for the agency and make several revisions to the fare increase plan.
She added that regular, modest fare increases are reasonable, but that 3% annual hikes are “pretty off base,” especially when the median income for bus riders is considerably lower than those who ride trains.
Better ways to support NJ Transit
Speakers pointed to several ways to better support NJ Transit. They included bringing back a corporate business tax surcharge that recently expired; redirecting more money from the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, especially as it moves ahead with a $10.7 billion plan to expand the highway; and cutting exorbitant spending on a controversial decision to move NJ Transit’s headquarters to the most expensive space they received bids for in Newark.
Board member Shanti Narra, a regular NJ Transit commuter, sought to assure the riding public that it is being heard.
“I hear everyone’s concerns and please be aware that each and every one of us who sits on this board we live here, we pay taxes,” Narra said. “How this agency goes forward is of paramount concern.”
None of the board members addressed repeated calls made at the meeting and in at least two online petitions circulating, including one from Senate Republicans, to provide the public with an option to virtually participate in the public hearings planned for March. There are 10 public hearings that will take place throughout the state for people to weigh in on the fare hike proposal, but people who don’t attend in person can’t participate except by writing in comments via email or mail.
This will downgrade public participation that is already offered at NJ Transit’s monthly board and committee meetings, in which people can phone in to share comments remotely.
Adam Reich, a regular commuter who launched one of the petitions, noted that there were five board members attending Tuesday’s meeting virtually and said the “lack of a virtual option is completely unacceptable.” He said the March 8 meeting would make sense for a virtual option because it is scheduled to take place in NJ Transit’s boardroom, which has equipment to livestream and take calls.
Ironically, however, the livestreams of Tuesday’s meeting were poor with one option that went down completely early in the meeting, and the other was so choppy that most speakers’ comments could not be heard in full.
Reich added that all attendees benefit from hearing comments made by others, which will be enriched if more people can participate.
These are among the issues that could have fallen to the desk of the customer advocate, a position created by law that has not been filled for nearly three-and-a-half years. Narra, who had taken the lead on filling the role at least a year ago, said the field of candidates has been narrowed to three, with the hope to move forward in that process shortly.
Narra also said she was not in favor of a recent bill that advanced through the Senate transportation committee that would reimagine the customer advocate position. If made into law, it would create an office of the customer advocate so the person in that position has a staff — which Narra has said in the past this person needs but isn’t currently afforded by law — but answers to a three-person legislative panel.
“I don’t think having a three-person commission is going to be workable and I don’t think it’s going to address the concerns that riders will have,” Narra said.