The news is that the MTA may not be able to sell the West Side rail yards to help pay for the capital plan after all. The deal between the MTA and developer Tishman Speyer fell through.
Some time ago, the New York City Partnership (equivalent to the Chamber of Commerce) put out a report saying the Second Avenue Subway (SAS) should be cancelled, since the Upper East Side is already built out and that investment wouldn't generate growth, but the Flushing Line extension was critical because it would open up a new area to development. I wrote to them in opposition. My response at the time was that the promise of the SAS already induced lots of building on the East Side, and the failure to deliver left Upper East Side residents paying massive taxes while cramming onto the Lex like sardines. If the Partnership was against the SAS from a cost-benefit perspective, I said, what it should be in favor of on the West Side was promising the Flushing Extension, borrowing money for the Flushing Extension, planning the Flushing Extension, having lots of people invest in new buildings expecting to be served by the Flushing Extension, collecting massive taxes on those new buildings, but then NEVER ACTUALLY BUILD IT. Future residents and workers of Hudson Yards could walk over to 8th Avenue and cram on the 8th Avenue line instead.
Per the New York Times: "The developer was also negotiating with city officials over other promised West Side projects, including the subway line. If the cost of the subway exceeded $2.1 billion, Tishman Speyer wanted assurances that either the state or the city would provide additional financing. It never got them." LOOKS LIKE MY SUGGESTION DIDN'T WORK!
So what does that say about all those parents who elected to stay in New York City because they were promised decent schools, but got teachers who retire at 62 instead of 55 instead? Or, for that matter, anyone else is promised anything while those who matter take money off the top? Perhaps they aren’t as smart or powerful as Tishman Speyer.