NJTE Posted July 9 Share #26 Posted July 9 (edited) IGNORE THIS, SAME POST AS THE ONE BELOW. PHONE IS ACTING UP Edited July 9 by NJTE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 9 Share #27 Posted July 9 8 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co said: How much of Orange County does NJT cover? Just over the border. How much of Rockland County does NJT subsidize by giving buses to Rockland Coaches? Huge swaths. -Also, the 196 and 197 serve Orange as much as the 9, 20, and 47 serve Rockland. -11A is weird cuz its a local slog in NJ till Stony Point -The only routes your complaint is valid is for are the 45 and 49 ONLY 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 9 Share #28 Posted July 9 1 minute ago, NJTE said: -Also, the 196 and 197 serve Orange as much as the 9, 20, and 47 serve Rockland. -11A is weird cuz its a local slog in NJ till Stony Point -The only routes your complaint is valid is for are the 45 and 49 ONLY Oh how can I forget that Rockland already pays NJT for rail service. Getting funding for bus service from them would be hilariously easy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co Posted July 9 Share #29 Posted July 9 1 hour ago, NJTE said: This is like saying NJT shouldn’t run service to Port Jervis on behalf of MNR because it isn’t in NJ. That's different because NJT is a contract carrier being paid by MNR. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 9 Share #30 Posted July 9 17 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co said: That's different because NJT is a contract carrier being paid by MNR. Fair point. I guess what I should’ve said is the Spring Valley Line which is directly run by NJT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAzumah Posted July 9 Author Share #31 Posted July 9 2 hours ago, NJTE said: -The only routes your complaint is valid is for are the 45 and 49 ONLY My theory is that both of these routes are going to ShortLine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #32 Posted July 10 1 hour ago, JAzumah said: My theory is that both of these routes are going to ShortLine. Or go to NJT, either or really 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Spire Posted July 10 Share #33 Posted July 10 14 hours ago, NJTE said: And? NJT once had routes to Spring Valley and Nyack. NJT even had routes to Allentown. People didn’t complain then, what’s different now. I wouldn’t want people to have no public transportation to the biggest city in the country all because it isn’t in the state the transportation provider is named for. This is like saying NJT shouldn’t run service to Port Jervis on behalf of MNR because it isn’t in NJ. Maybe they come under MTA Bus Company and New York subsidizes its portion 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAzumah Posted July 10 Author Share #34 Posted July 10 30 minutes ago, Robert Spire said: Maybe they come under MTA Bus Company and New York subsidizes its portion It is cheaper to pay NJT to do it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotham Bus Co Posted July 10 Share #35 Posted July 10 15 hours ago, NJTE said: Fair point. I guess what I should’ve said is the Spring Valley Line which is directly run by NJT. Isn't the NY portion of the Pascack Valley Line also paid for by Metro North? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #36 Posted July 10 33 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co said: Isn't the NY portion of the Pascack Valley Line also paid for by Metro North? No, it’s Rockland pays NJT to keep the service running. The line is fully owned and ran by NJT. Rockland paying NJT is my point here, if Rockland can pay NJT for rail service they most definitely can pay NJT for bus service 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 10 Share #37 Posted July 10 19 hours ago, NJTE said: Oh how can I forget that Rockland already pays NJT for rail service. Getting funding for bus service from them would be hilariously easy Because that’s not NJT’s service, it’s MNRR’s contracted to NJT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 10 Share #38 Posted July 10 1 hour ago, NJTE said: No, it’s Rockland pays NJT to keep the service running. The line is fully owned and ran by NJT. Rockland paying NJT is my point here, if Rockland can pay NJT for rail service they most definitely can pay NJT for bus service That’s incorrect. Those three stations (except suffern) on PV and between them, as well as Port Jervis are contracted to MNR who in turn sub-contracts it to NJT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #39 Posted July 10 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Lawrence St said: Because that’s not NJT’s service, it’s MNRR’s contracted to NJT. It is not actually. NJT fully owns and runs the PVL, the only contract is the PJL, proven by that fact the the agreement only ever mentions the PVL as the “Pascack Valley Line shall mean the NJT-owned rail line which extends from Spring Valley, New York, to Hoboken Terminal in New Jersey.” Edited July 10 by NJTE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #40 Posted July 10 4 minutes ago, NJTE said: It is not actually. NJT fully owns and runs the PVL, the only contract is the PJL, proven by that fact the the agreement only ever mentions the PVL as the “Pascack Valley Line shall mean the NJT-owned rail line which extends from Spring Valley, New York, to Hoboken Terminal in New Jersey.” The agreement just states that MNR now operates the stations in NY, MNR however only pays for the PJL, not the PVL. That is still subsidized by Rockland County 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #41 Posted July 10 5 minutes ago, NJTE said: The agreement just states that MNR now operates the stations in NY, MNR however only pays for the PJL, not the PVL. That is still subsidized by Rockland County I forgot to mention that Rockland pays NJT through MN, but it isn’t a contract like the PJL where they pay MN to contract NJT to run the service. Rockland has in fact threatened before that they would abandon MN and just handle it directly with NJT 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #42 Posted July 10 1 minute ago, NJTE said: I forgot to mention that Rockland pays NJT through MN, but it isn’t a contract like the PJL where they pay MN to contract NJT to run the service. Rockland has in fact threatened before that they would abandon MN and just handle it directly with NJT And I honestly see this becoming feasible when NJT takes over Rockland Coaches as they'd probably want to extend NJT's rail-bus pass reciprocity rule (rail passes are valid for the same number of bus zones that can be travelled for the same pass price) to the area, because MN WOH station passes only allow for one bus zone, while a NJT monthly to suffern (for example) currently includes 7 zones 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTE Posted July 10 Share #43 Posted July 10 It’s weird I know but that’s how it is 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 10 Share #44 Posted July 10 2 hours ago, NJTE said: And I honestly see this becoming feasible when NJT takes over Rockland Coaches as they'd probably want to extend NJT's rail-bus pass reciprocity rule (rail passes are valid for the same number of bus zones that can be travelled for the same pass price) to the area, because MN WOH station passes only allow for one bus zone, while a NJT monthly to suffern (for example) currently includes 7 zones It's 7 zones Suffern - Hoboken, but it's 11 zones Suffern - NY Penn (here's the updated fare-zone reciprocity table: https://www.njtransit.com/tickets/rail-tickets ) But yes, I generally agree rail tickets should always be valid for a similar bus trip 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mtatransit Posted July 10 Share #45 Posted July 10 (edited) 6 hours ago, NJTE said: No, it’s Rockland pays NJT to keep the service running. The line is fully owned and ran by NJT. Rockland paying NJT is my point here, if Rockland can pay NJT for rail service they most definitely can pay NJT for bus service No, the portion from the state line to Spring Valley is contracted and paid for by MNR. Rockland contributes by becoming one of the MTA tax areas. That is exactly why they been complaining over 20 years about the "value gap" between taxes paid and services received. I guess they for one reason or other did not leave yet. Like here https://www.lohud.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/06/08/rockland-rail-costs-cuts/28682507/ and here https://patch.com/new-york/newcity/rockland-county-exec-seeks-exceptions-nyc-congestion-pricing and here https://www.recordonline.com/story/business/2012/12/06/counties-note-mta-value-gap/49236413007/ Edited July 10 by Mtatransit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 10 Share #46 Posted July 10 33 minutes ago, Mtatransit said: No, the portion from the state line to Spring Valley is contracted and paid for by MNR. Rockland contributes by becoming one of the MTA tax areas. That is exactly why they been complaining over 20 years about the "value gap" between taxes paid and services received. I guess they for one reason or other did not leave yet. Like here https://www.lohud.com/story/opinion/contributors/2015/06/08/rockland-rail-costs-cuts/28682507/ and here https://patch.com/new-york/newcity/rockland-county-exec-seeks-exceptions-nyc-congestion-pricing and here https://www.recordonline.com/story/business/2012/12/06/counties-note-mta-value-gap/49236413007/ It’s also the exact reason why Rhinecliff wants nothing to do with extending the Hudson line up there, as it now subjects Rhinecliff residents to the MTA Tax. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 10 Share #47 Posted July 10 39 minutes ago, Lawrence St said: It’s also the exact reason why Rhinecliff wants nothing to do with extending the Hudson line up there, as it now subjects Rhinecliff residents to the MTA Tax. The taxes are at the county level, and Rhinecliff is still Dutchess County and subject to the MTA tax. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawrence St Posted July 11 Share #48 Posted July 11 12 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said: The taxes are at the county level, and Rhinecliff is still Dutchess County and subject to the MTA tax. Not according to what I read, that part of Dutchess across the River isn’t subject to it. Most of the complaints have been about the raised tax in case MNR ever goes up there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 12 Share #49 Posted July 12 On 7/9/2024 at 10:05 AM, checkmatechamp13 said: My thinking with routes like the #165/166 is that it would provide more ridership to justify more service on the super-express variants, which allow people from to avoid that slow drag through Hudson and southern Bergen Counties. The other thing is the lack of integration between the fare systems gets annoying...it's bad enough that there's very limited integration between the NJT bus and rail system fares, but on top of that, Rockland Coaches has its own fare structure (and they charge you a "fuel surcharge" on top of that). If someone has an NJT monthly pass for say, Englewood - NYC, they can also use that for Englewood - Bergenfield, but if somebody has a Rockland Coaches monthly pass, they can pretty much only use that within the specific corridor that they bought the pass for (and of course, the limited service available doesn't help either). Sounds like you'd extend the Parkway expresses... Not for the sake of running service to Rockland, but I always thought that point-to-point service b/w [PABT] & [the P&R] should've been a separate route... Much like the #193 (done been watered down to what it currently is now, but that's a discussion we've already had, that's neither here nor there for this discussion... LOL) is for the Willowbrook Mall P&R, but not nearly to the extent of the total service it gets.... If you extract the 2-3 stops for the exit 165 P&R from the #165P, you may have a case.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAzumah Posted July 15 Author Share #50 Posted July 15 I am hearing that the closure date for certain Coach USA business units have been moved up to August 16. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.