had top transit officials sounding the alarm centered on a $600 million operating deficit for the coming year – a mere fraction of the agency’s overall debt.. But the MTA’s financial documents show officials are “uncertain” whether the agency will have enough money to stay afloat beyond 2026.
“We have papered over our failure to deal with a lot of difficult, long-term issues with more borrowing,” said Nicole Gelinas, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute. "To make a long story short, we've gone from zero debt in the early 1980s to close to $48 [billion], $50 billion in long-term debt by 2023."This year, the amount the MTA will pay on its debt represents about 40% of the agency’s expected fare and toll revenues. Two decades ago, that ratio was about 20%.
The money the MTA will pay the banks this year is enough to run the entire mass transit systems in Chicago or Washington, D.C. The agency’s $48 billion pile of debt is nearly the same amount as Gov.
In 1981, he pushed through legislation that allowed the MTA to take on $2.5 billion in debt to pay for mass transit repairs. That debt was to be paid off by fares, bridge and tunnel tolls, and new taxes. The numbers from this period mark a dramatic escalation in the use of debt – one that continues to this day.
Gothamist reached out to Pataki multiple times through his assistant for comment on this story, but the ex-governor did not respond.Banks and bondholders have always been happy to lend the MTA money, and the MTA keeps coming back for more. Although there have been few expansions to New York City’s mass transit system over the last 40 years, they’ve cost far more than anywhere else in the world. The most egregious example is the MTA’s East Side Access project, whichwith Long Island Rail Road service into the new Grand Central Madison station beneath Grand Central Terminal.
“Why are we borrowing so much money? Because the MTA makes poor decisions with what it's going to spend that money on,” said Gelinas. “We're not getting as much as we should for our money.”