Trenton, NJ – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says New Jersey’s governor has agreed to take the next two weeks to rethink his decision to cancel a massive NJ-NY rail tunnel project.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
LaHood met with Christie for nearly an hour at the New Jersey Statehouse on Friday. LaHood issued a statement shortly afterward saying that the Republican governor has agreed to review options for the tunnel into Manhattan.
LaHood says a small group of U.S. and New Jersey transportation officials will review the options and report back to Christie within two weeks.
Christie canceled the project Thursday over escalating costs, which he said New Jerseyans could not afford.
He had earlier halted work on the already under-construction project to review it.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — As a candidate last year, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie was willing to support the planned New Jersey-to-Manhattan rail tunnel. As governor, he now says the nation’s largest public transportation project is a luxury the state can no longer afford.
Christie justified his decision to scrap the project on Thursday as a move to protect the long-range financial interests of New Jersey taxpayers. But supporters of the nearly $9 billion project said the decision will have the exact opposite result.
U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., who helped secure federal funding for the project, called the cancellation “one of the biggest policy blunders in New Jersey’s history.”
“Without increased transportation options into Manhattan, New Jersey’s economy will eventually be crippled,” he said.
Christie was set to meet with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on Friday, whom he spoke with Thursday before announcing that he was killing the tunnel. It’s unclear what was said during that conversation and whether Christie told LaHood of his decision.
LaHood spokeswoman Olivia Alair said in an e-mailed statement Thursday that LaHood and Christie plan to meet Friday afternoon to “discuss a path forward on the ARC tunnel project.”
More than a half-billion dollars has been spent on the tunnel — dubbed Access to the Region’s Core, or ARC — and construction began last year. The largest federal transportation project in the country, it was expected to double train traffic in and out of New York City during peak commute times once completed in 2018.
But over the years, cost projections for the tunnel also have nearly doubled.
It started at $5 billion in 2005 and grew to $8.7 billion by 2008. In recent months, Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff has made public statements that put the price tag between $9 billion and $10 billion. On Thursday, Christie said his advisers put the costs at $11 billion to $14 billion.
“The bottom line is this, New Jersey has gone for too long and for too many decades ordering things that they can’t pay for,” he said at a news conference. “This project has some flaws to it, but in the end this is a financial decision. When weighing all the interests, I simply cannot put the taxpayers of the State of New Jersey on what would be a never-ending hook.”
A month ago, the Republican governor ordered a 30-day halt to all work on the tunnel over concerns that it would go over budget. On Thursday, he directed state transportation officials to explore other approaches to modernize and expand rail capacity into New York.
Lautenberg acknowledged that cost overruns on a project of the tunnel’s size were inevitable but said Christie’s numbers are inflated.
The federal government and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey had each pledged $3 billion to the tunnel. New Jersey had committed $2.7 billion. The project is being run by NJ Transit.
New Jersey Assemblyman John Wisniewski, who leads the Assembly transportation panel, filed a public records request Friday for documents pertaining to the tunnel. He has accused Christie’s advisers of inflating the cost of building the tunnel to justify what some believe will be the governor’s decision to divert the money to smaller road and rail projects. Christie has not said how he plans to use the money.
The independent Regional Plan Association said Christie was using fuzzy math.
“Gov. Christie’s claim that he supports ARC but could not move forward because of budget overruns is most likely not true,” the group said in a statement. “The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) officially never released its estimates for potential budget overruns — only Gov. Christie estimates them to be in the $3 billion to $5 billion range. What’s more, Trenton has repeatedly rebuffed federal officials’ efforts to work out a cost overrun deal.”
The project had been in the works for about 20 years. Currently, NJ Transit and Amtrak share a century-old two-track tunnel beneath the Hudson River. The new tunnel would add two more tracks, more than doubling the number of NJ Transit trains that could pass under the river.
Mark Nardolillo, CEO of tunnel contractor BEM Systems in Chatum, said 10 to 15 employees he has working on it will lose their jobs.
“We don’t have alternate work to put these people on,” said Nardolillo, whose company handled environmental permits and data management for property acquisition. “This is the one job you counted on. It’ll have a devastating impact on the region.”
Commuters at New York’s Penn Station weren’t pleased to hear the project had been canceled.
“This is not good. I hope they reconsider,” said Michael Murphy, an IT and infrastructure expert waiting for a train home to Morristown. But, he added, “if they have a problem with the budget, there’s not much choice.”
Roy Gainsburg, a retired book publisher from South Orange, who still rides into the city occasionally, said commuter trains frequently get stuck in the tunnel.
“It certainly would be nice if there was another tunnel, because this one has only two tracks, so trains get stuck at peak hours,” he said.
Christie’s predecessor, Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine, broke ground on the tunnel in June 2009, a few months before the gubernatorial election that he lost to Christie.
During his campaign last year, Christie supported the project.
But as soon as he announced the work stoppage, lawmakers and transportation officials suggested Christie had planned to scrap the project and to use the state’s share of the money to pay for the nearly broke Transportation Trust Fund, which pays for local road projects and rail repairs.
Christie has refused to raise the state’s gas tax, which is among the lowest in the country, to replenish the fund.
So far, about $600 million has been spent on the tunnel project — $130 million of that in federal stimulus money. New Jersey could be on the hook to repay half of what’s been spent to the federal government for breaking its commitment.
Lautenberg has said canceling the tunnel would violate an agreement with the federal government in which New Jersey committed itself to the project in exchange for $3 billion in federal funding.
Officials have said the tunnel would create 6,000 construction jobs and add at least 40,000 new jobs after it is completed. If Christie were to divert money to the state transportation fund, that could also create jobs, depending on the projects.
Christie said staff will immediately begin a shutdown of the tunnel project.
There are no “other options” to increase rail capacity into Manhattan besides a tunnel or a bridge. Christie is smart enough to know this and he is also smart enough to know that NJ needs to increase its gas tax. Will he have the courage to admit this?
Perhaps NY state and city would kick into this tunnel idea. I ams sure that there must be a new yawker or two that want to go to new jersey (land of cheaper gasoline and no sales tax on clothes).
He’s playing for an infusion of more Federal cash; this tunnel is too politically hot to let pass, especially with four Democratic senators involved (including the all powerful Chuck Schumer). Christie knows what he’s doing.
Provided there are guarnteed “no-overruns”.
Tzi,
The four Democratic Senators would be very happy to send more Federal cash. However, it will require Republican votes, as they are now filibustering absolutely every Democratic proposal.
9 Billion dollars! How about calling it 9000 Million! You could pay 10,000 workers – $60,000 a year, for 10 years, plus 3 Billion for Material, with that money! It’s obviously another goverment waste of citizen’s money, and it’s about time it stops.
As for the ones yelling we need higher gasoline taxes, well, gasoline tax was already doubled in the past few years, when the price of gasoline doubled, hence double taxes. It’s the high oil & gasoline costs that had a big part in tanking the economy. So go ahead, and bring prices higher…
#1
you ( like usual) do not know what you’re talking about. “There are no “other options” to increase rail capacity into Manhattan besides a tunnel or a bridge.”There were many proposals for a tunnel, and the best and far less expensive was called “Alternative G”. This would have had a tunnel go to PennStation and then continue to Grand Central Terminal. This would allow both Amtrak and Metro North to use the new tunnel and allow easy access for travelers from NJ to midtown and vice versa. This could be coupled with the long delayed PennStation expansion into the Farley building.
Unfortunately, Corzine in a rush to start anything before an election chose a plan to have the tunnel go to a brand new TERMINAL one block north of PennsStation and 150 feet below the Macys basement. This cavern would not only be a terrorists dream but could not be used for Amtrak, MetroNorth or future High Speed Rail, and the Water Tunnel would prohibit any expansion to Grand Central( and changing it from a terminus to a station.
Kudos for Christie to put an end to the wrong project.
#7 ,
The proposed terminal for the project that Christie is trying to stop is WEST, not north of the current Penn Station, in the Post Office.
More importantly, Alternative G, while having the lowest capital and operating costs, would have required a relocation of part of the #6 subway, possibly causing huge disruptions. Note that the #6 is the most overcrowded subway in the entire New York City transit system and it is likely to get worse with the completion of the #7 extension and the LIRR connection to GCT. Even more importantly, Alternative G would have required large real estate acquisitions or easements and a few years ago the cost of Manhattan real estate had been going up so quickly that it was doubtful whether it would have been possible to get the property in a timely manner for a reasonable cost. The decision to drop Alternative G was a reasonable one under the circumstances.
#8
Once again you prove my point. The ARC terminus would be north of Penn Station at 34 th street and in a newly excavated deep cavern that would be an terrorists dream.
The actual path of the train is south of the cuurent tunnels than swings north and below the current PennStation. What you obviously think is west would be the expansion of the monstrosity we now call PennStation into the beautiful Farley building. That was part of alternative G.
Unfortunately opting for a terminus deep and North is not west. If you don 217; t want me to confuse you with the facts just go to the ARC website:http://www.arctunnel.com/pdf/property/NYAlignment.pdf
I have no problem with Gov Christie canceling the project. Its simple math. They are ALREADY projecting cost overruns of 2.5 – 3 BILLION dollars. If any construction company put in a low bid only to come back a few years later saying they messed up by 3 billion dollars, they should be forced to eat it! There is no reason WE the tax payers of NJ should have to pay for it. Better to pay the 600M we owe now and take our losses. 600M is only 1/5th of 3B!
As for the comment by #1 CharlieHall (how ironic!) that we should have our gas taxes raised, that is absolutely stupid. Why should we have to pay for their overruns? Taxes in NJ are among the highest in the country! Being that I drive a lot, it seems we pay just slightly below average for a gallon of gas. If the actual taxes are low (probably around 38 cents per gallon), our base rate must be higher.