METRO NORTH NEW HAVEN RAIL COMMUTER COUNCIL

(Established in 1985 under Connecticut Public Act 85-239, now Sections 13b-212b and

13b -212c of the Connecticut General Statutes)

 

MINUTES OF MAY 16, 2007

THE OFFICES OF SWRPA

STAMFORD GOVERNMENT CENTER

STAMFORD, CT

 

 

Present were:  Jim Cameron, Chairman; Vice Chairmen Terri Cronin and Jeff Steele; Joe McGee, Rodney Chabot, Jeff Maron, Sue Prosi and Bob Jelley, Members of the Council; Ed Lydecker and Scott Ornstein, Metro North Railroad; Ken Partridge, Greenwich Post; Mark Ginocchio, The Advocate; Christine Trani, Krista Tulp and Walter Turpin, members of the public.

 

The meeting began at 7:00 p.m. The Minutes of the April meeting were approved.

 

WIRES DOWN INCIDENT ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 25, 2007

 

Jim Cameron explained that none of the Metro North people who had planned to come to the meeting were available because of the storm damage that afternoon on the Harlem and Hudson lines.  In addition, Gene Colonese was unable to come.  It was decided to discuss the problems, even though no Metro North and CDOT personnel were available to comment definitively. 

 

Jeff Maron said that although the first catenary wire came down at about 5:20 a.m. and the rest of the wires came down about a half-hour later, there was no email notice until 7:00 am.  Mr. Maron was at the Stamford station where he was told that there would be trains at Rye to go to GCT, but he said that after he had taken a taxi to Rye, there were no trains at Rye.  He commented that there was more and better information coming from cell phone conversations with wives at home than from MNRR and CDOT.  He noted that the emails from MNRR and CDOT gave different information.  He said that people were unhappier about the lack of accurate information than they were about the wires having come down in the first place.  The platforms were very crowded at Rye, and at one point, they were told to go to the wrong platform and then told to go back to the other platform. 

 

Terri Cronin said that the best information was from TV stations and not from the Railroad.  She said that she got information from TV at 6:30 and that Channel 12 had a helicopter up and reporting on where the trains were and what they were doing.

 

Mr. Cameron read in chronological order the dozen or so emails from MNRR and CDOT.  They were contradictory, and some from CDOT promised bus service, which never materialized.  He wondered how the people at CDOT got their information.  Scott Ornstein from MNRR said that TransCom gets its information from all of the transport agencies from Hartford to Philadelphia and gives this information to the media. 

 

Jeff Steele said that the public address announcer at Stamford cannot be understood. 

 

Mr. Cameron wondered where conductors got the information that they gave to people on trains.  Mr. Ornstein said that they got it from the train radio.  Mr. Cameron raised the question of Mr. Cannito having said at a previous Council meeting that through GPS he knows where trains are at all times.  He wondered why that information could not be made available to commuters.  Mr. Ornstein said that there could be security issues in giving out that information and that New York is a particular target for terrorists.  There was general skepticism from the Council.

 

There was general discussion of the promise of buses and the failure to provide buses.  There were questions about whether bus companies with contracts with Metro North are required to provide buses when asked or merely have the option to provide buses.  Mr. Ornstein said that the bus contracts are designed for two situations:  (1) planned bus substitutions when there is planned track work, and (2) unplanned incidents when trains are unable to run.  With the unplanned incidents, last minute availability of busses and drivers is always an issue.    

 

It was moved by Jeff Maron that the Council write a letter to MNRR and CDOT requesting:  (1) the information requested in the Council’s earlier letter seeking information about the April 25 incident; (2) standard operating procedures for communicating with customers about incidents; (3) the names of the persons at MNRR and CDOT responsible for communications with customers; and (4) MNRR’s and CDOT’s post-mortem reviews of the handling of the April 25 incident.  The motion was unanimously adopted. 

 

FARE SURCHARGE

 

Mr. Cameron noted that the commuter models of the effect of a fare surcharge would be brought to the June meeting.  Rodney Chabot asked why there needed to be a fare surcharge at all, since there is a State surplus and a proposal to reduce or eliminate the gasoline tax during the summer.  Sue Prosi said that she thought that the whole concept that the new M-8 cars should be paid for by commuters was wrong.  Mr. Chabot moved the Council to take the position that a portion of the State’s surplus should be used in place of the money proposed to be raised by the fare surcharge.  The motion was adopted. 

 

NEW HAVEN LINE TRAINS ON THE LOWER LEVEL AT GCT

 

Ed Lydecker said that he had checked and that more than the usual number of New Haven line trains were arriving and departing at lower level platforms in GCT.  He went over the April Monthly Operating Report, and noted that consist compliance had been going down.  Ms. Prosi asked why the bar cars were being rehabilitated at the present time, rather than M-2 cars.  Someone suggested that it was perhaps because of the strong bar car lobby. 

 

MAIN LINE MATTERS

 

Ms. Cronin asked what was going on at the East Norwalk station.  It was reported that there is construction going on there.  Mr. Maron asked about the status of replacing the old Stamford garage.  It was reported that there is money for design of a new garage.  Mr. Maron said that people want to know when the floor of the old garage is going to be patched, because they are concerned about possible tire damage from the reinforcing bars that are now exposed. 

 

WATERBURY BRANCH

 

Representatives of the Waterbury branch said that they were getting VRE cars only for off-peak service and would like them for on-peak as well.  They also said that people wanted an earlier train than the 6:45 to GCT.  When pressed, they suggested a half-hour to one hour earlier.  They said that people wanted to get to GCT by 8:30 and wanted to be able to leave GCT at 5:30 in the evening.  They also spoke of the need for a third car on peak trains and on Friday evenings.  Mr. Ornstein said that the ridership count showed a maximum of 178 passengers on a Waterbury line train, and there were enough seats in two cars.  Bob Jelley said that the Council had been told by Metro North that the standard for opening closed cars was that if there were an average of more than 50 people per car, additional cars should be opened, and went on to say that it was obvious from that standard that there should be three cars for 178 passengers. 

 

The question was also raised by Waterbury passengers about having two tracks, rather than the present one track on the Waterbury Branch.  Mr. Chabot said there were two tracks some years ago.  Sue Prosi said that a study will be performed soon to study two tracks vs. one track.

 

NEW CANAAN BRANCH

 

Mr. Chabot said that there is still no telephone at the Talmadge Hill station.

 

The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.  The next meeting is Wednesday, June 20, 2007 at the Offices of SWRPA, Stamford Government Center, Stamford, CT.

 

Bob Jelley

Secretary

Phone:  (203) 498-4306

email:  rjelley@wiggin.com

 

(Revised June 18, 2007)

 

\88888888\1005\655717.1