Letter: Transit historian can’t have it both ways in opinion pieces

Photo via Wikimedia Commons
To the Editor,
The author states MTA Chair Janno Lieber proclaiming riders coming back in record numbers to be “a glass half full.” How? Would the author be so kind as to share specific numbers so maybe an intelligent judgment could be made?
The author goes on to predict that fewer people will ride the rails due to telecommuting. So in addition to being an “expert” on transit, the author can now accurately predict the future?
The author then states how no expansion of the subway should be done until all systems are brought up to good repair. Fair enough.
But in a July 9, 2021, opinion piece in Mass Transit magazine, the author states “Why not extend the NYC Transit #6 subway line beyond the Pelham Bay Park Station terminal to directly into Co-Op City?” In a Nov. 18, 2020, opinion piece for “Mass Transit” magazine, he advocates spending $150 million to reopen the Hilton Passageway. So which is it? No system expansion until everything is brought up to a state of good repair, or spend money on projects the author feels are worthwhile?
Doesn’t the author care enough about his opinion pieces to provide details? Does the author bother to read his other pieces? Doesn’t he see how they conflict with each other? Why should the author be taken seriously? Because he proclaims himself to be a transit historian and advocate? And who exactly bestowed those titles upon him?

More from Around NYC