[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. A few big local mass transit stories in the last few days. Congestion pricing to enter Manhattan below 60th Street did not end this weekend, as President Trump and his transportation secretary had demanded that it must. A lawsuit and negotiations over the issue are underway instead. Also new, a court filing in that lawsuit showed Mayor Adams to apparently be taking a stronger pro-congestion pricing position than he has before.

Trump's Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, announced that the federal government is taking control away from the MTA for the redevelopment of Penn Station. Now, Governor Hochul hailed this as good news. She thanked the President for taking on the responsibility. Her hope is that it'll save New York a lot of money and maybe make the renovation go quicker.

Officially, Amtrak, which is federal, controls Penn Station, though the MTA is its biggest tenant and has its biggest population of riders, but the article on Gothamist about this by our transportation reporters Stephen Nessen and Ramsey Khalifeh is headed Trump Station? Feds Take Control of Penn Station Rebuild, Kick MTA off the Project.

I have the same question that the headline implies. Is the federal government taking responsibility for this at a time when it's looking to spend less money on things because Trump is out to buy naming rights? Maybe I'm just making this up in my head, but planting his name brand forever on millions of people's commutes, the former Penn Station, and planting a thumb in the eye of the city that has largely rejected him in the bargain. With us now is WNYC and Gothamist transportation reporter Stephen Nessen, who also co-authors our weekly transportation newsletter called On the Way. Hey, Stephen.

Stephen Nessen: Hello, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Tell us about this letter that MTA Chair Janno Lieber received on Thursday.

Stephen Nessen: Well, it came from Kyle Fields, who's actually the chief counsel for the Federal Railroad Administration, and the letter itself was relatively benign. It simply said we are going to revoke a grant that would have allowed the MTA to essentially keep moving forward with its Penn Station redesigns. It doesn't sound that inflammatory the way that the letter is written, but Department of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy put out his own sort of press release, which turned up the heat a little bit, so to speak.

Basically, he said by taking this project away from the MTA, it will save taxpayers $120 million, which in the grand scheme of development projects isn't that much, but the real flamethrower part of it is where he accuses the MTA of a history of this, I'm quoting, "History of inefficiency, waste and mismanagement." Then he goes on to say, "Meant that a new approach is needed." They say they're going to put taxpayers first, ensuring every dollar is spent wisely to create a transit hub all Americans can take pride in. I'm quoting from his press release about basically removing the MTA from this Penn Station redevelopment project.

Brian Lehrer: Governor Hochul is saying this is good news. Do I have that right?

Stephen Nessen: Well, if you literally read the words that she wrote in a statement, I have not heard her do any public comments on this just yet. As you noted, this happened last Thursday. I don't think she's publicly spoken about it, but yes, Brian, if you read the letter, it literally says, "This is a major victory for New Yorkers, and the use of federal funds will save New York taxpayers $1.3 billion that otherwise would have been necessary for the project."

I can't help but hear that as being laced with sarcasm. She says she thanks the president and the secretary for taking sole responsibility to deliver this beautiful new $7 billion station. She didn't need to add that $7 billion price tag, but I think the implication, like you said, is, "Oh, you want to save money? Enjoy spending $7 billion now on this Penn Station project all on your own."

Brian Lehrer: Yes, I have the Hochul statement here. I'll read a little bit of it for the listeners. "In multiple meetings with President Trump, I requested that the federal government fund the long overdue overhaul of Penn Station. Clearly, that effort has been successful, and I want to thank the President and Secretary Duffy for taking on the sole responsibility to deliver the beautiful new $7 billion station that new Yorkers deserve. This is a major victory for New Yorkers, and the use of federal funds will save New York taxpayers 1.3 billion that would have otherwise been necessary for this project." Stephen, I read it as earnest until you said that she might have been being sarcastic there, and now I kind of see it, but how much so?

Stephen Nessen: Well, I think, this project, to be fair to the federal government's credit, has dragged on for a long time. You and I have been talking about this since Cuomo was the governor and he had his grand midtown redevelopment scheme that basically shattered to pieces when he stepped down. Hochul kind of took it up and then tried to make a deal with Vornado to help them. They would help fund the Penn Station redevelopment. She would give them development rights in the neighborhood. That kind of crumbled when real estate demand, and basically, their bottom line was like, "Nah, that doesn't seem like a wise investment at the moment."

I think, for them, unfortunately, they were sort of in this, "All right, now we need to go back to the drawing board again and work on another plan for somehow redeveloping this project, which is really complicated." Like you said, Amtrak owns it, MTA leases it. NJ Transit also has a big role in this. How to sort of meet every party, meet their demands, meet their needs and redevelop it.

As you know, as we've spoken about also many times, the Gateway Project is currently under completion and that's going to be done soon. They need to consider how to add more track space maybe. It's a really big, complicated project and a lot of parties were at the table, obviously, Amtrak too, but I think the governor, Governor Hochul, had really wanted her stamp on this. She wanted the ribbon cutting. She wanted to be the leader that got a big project done. Cuomo, of course, got Moynihan Train Hall done, which was also pretty nice, but didn't address all of Penn Station's problems.

Brian Lehrer: I think Janno Lieber, the head of the MTA, has been a little more explicitly skeptical of this federal takeover of the project. Janno Lieber, by the way, is scheduled, listeners, to be on the show as our lead guest on Thursday morning this week. We'll certainly talk about this more with him. Where does Trump's interest in Penn Station stem from? Am I just fantasizing in my head when I wonder from the headline of your article if he plans to rename Penn Station, Trump Station after he directs federal dollars to be spent on the renovation, or where does his interest come from?

Stephen Nessen: Well, it's very hard to get in touch with the President, even his secretary. They're not very responsive to questions certainly from the local press here, so it's hard. He doesn't talk a lot about Penn Station, but like Hochul said, they did have several meetings. It did come up. I think we're speculating a little bit, but we're sort of like, "Well, what does Trump get out of this other than perhaps naming rights?"

My colleague, Ramsey Khalifeh, did some reporting recently and recalled via talking to some planners who do have their own plan for Penn Station, this sort of Washington-based design firm, architects who would design-- they have a Penn Station plan that would create it in a sort of neoclassical design harkening back to what they call classical architectural heritage.

That is something Trump is interested in. He signed an executive order when, during his first term as president, to make all government buildings have more classical look, no more brutalist, no more modernist style federal buildings. As we all know, he obviously started as a builder of some sort in New York City. I think maybe he still has that impulse to want to build stuff in this style. I think that's perhaps part of it. Like you were saying, put his thumb back in New York or whatever the metaphor was to get back in--

Brian Lehrer: You said thumb in New York's eye.

Stephen Nessen: Right. A thumb in New York's eye to sort of put his stamp on something in New York, which I guess hasn't been done for some time at this point.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, any questions or comments about the renovation of Penn Station from a design standpoint? Maybe you don't like brutalist architecture either, or from a political standpoint or a funding standpoint, 212-433-WNYC, for our transportation reporter Stephen Nessen. We'll also get into the state of congestion pricing, which exists still today despite a deadline of this weekend to abolish it that the Trump administration had issued, although they seem to be in negotiations now. 212-433-WNYC, call or text 212-433-3692. Here's a basic question from a listener in a text, Stephen, listener writes, "Why is it presently named Penn Station?"

Stephen Nessen: I believe that's because the Pennsylvania Railroad used to own it. I'm pretty sure that's-- I recall that's why it still called Penn Station.

Brian Lehrer: Simple enough. We know that the Pennsylvania Railroad may not run there anymore, but Amtrak does, MJ Transit does, the Long Island Railroad does, multiple subway lines shuttling commuters to and from Midtown Manhattan there as well. Of course, all the subway lines that stop at Penn Station. I gather Metro North is going to go into Penn Station in addition to Grand Central-

Stephen Nessen: That's right.

Brian Lehrer: -in a couple of years if that project gets completed. Will the Trump takeover of Penn, or let's say the federal government's takeover of the renovation of Penn affect the commuter lines in any way, short term or longer term?

Stephen Nessen: Yes, that reminds me, I wanted to mention something in the letter. There is one sentence that a lot of transit advocates are pointing to as being potentially good news. Basically, it's a little vague if you don't follow this, but he said in the letter, Kyle, the legal counsel, Kyle Fields, writes, "The Amtrak will evaluate regional service options to identify improvements with the goal of optimizing service and recognizing fiscal constraints.

Let me translate that as a transit reporter. Like you mentioned, all those lines do go through Penn Station. There's this sort of quixotic goal of a lot of advocates, including someone like Andy Byford, who used to be head of New York City Transit. He actually works at Amtrak now, and he's a proponent of this idea of through running. We may have spoken about it before, but basically, it would entail Penn Station not being terminal, but sort of being a pass-through station. Instead of New Jersey Transit ending at Penn Station, then turning around and going back to New Jersey, it would go out to Long island and vice versa. Long Island Railroad trains would go to New Jersey. You wouldn't need to have everyone sort of stopping and turning around there. They could just pass through.

A lot of advocates say it's a great way to save money. It's a more efficient way to run a train hub as opposed to a terminal, but MTA, Amtrak, NJ Transit, first of all, these are three agencies that cooperate to a certain extent. They're not about to let each other share each other's tracks and trains. There is some territorial issues, so they are pretty reluctant to do that. They've outright rejected that over and over again. Absolutely no through running. You can ask Janno Lieber about it this week. He will reject it. The letter indicates that they are looking at that as a possible, evaluate the regional service options. I think that's what they're getting at. It's on the table anyways, again, which is interesting.

Brian Lehrer: What's the case for pass through? Are there a lot of people who really want to go from Mineola into New Jersey.

Stephen Nessen: Perhaps. I think it's more like the sort of complicated dance that trains have to do when they pull in, stop, drop everyone off, turn around. There's a few yards where they have to go up, turn around, come back again. It's just a waste of time and energy when that train could just keep going. Imagine a subway train just drops people off and keeps going. It would save time, it would save money. It would probably be more efficient to run trains that way if, the big if, if everyone can cooperate, which it's not clear that currently they have that capability.

Brian Lehrer: Craig in Morganville in Jersey, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Craig: Hello, guys. How are you doing? I think if the feds want to take this over, we all know it's going to be a disaster. The feds really can't handle saying anything well at all. The governor thinks it's only going to be 7 billion. None of these projects has ever come under budget or on the budget. We all know this territorial fighting. Like your guest just said, nobody knows how to work in plain ice. This will be a huge, huge debacle in terms of a pass through station. I don't think that even has any inklings of working whatsoever. You're going to need a hub to have people transfer, get off and do all the stops. This is going to be a disaster unless everyone gets down to reality, rolls up their sleeves, and really want to talk about it, and I don't think that's going to happen. Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you very much. Well, there's one skeptic, another skeptic of another kind weighing in, in a text on the potential design. "Now that Trump would be in control, does this mean Penn Station will be covered in gold paint?" Writes Jeremy in Greenwich Village. Maybe this is where we move on to the congestion pricing news, because a few months ago, Trump began taking steps.

We'll just remind the listeners to end the tolling of vehicles south of 60th Street. The MTA was ordered by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to shut off the tolling by yesterday, Sunday or Saturday, and it didn't happen. Are they defying the Trump administration? Our whole first segment was about Trump possibly defying court orders. Is the MTA defying an order from the Trump administration and the transportation secretary, or are they mutually negotiating?

Stephen Nessen: Well, I guess on the one hand, the federal government did order them to stop tolling by Sunday, but there's not a mechanism for the federal government to turn it off. I guess if they had a court order to do it, the MTA might have complied, but it's worth noting that, as you said, the MTA is suing the federal government over this directive to stop charging to turn off the congestion pricing tools.

In court, in the filings, in the paperwork that goes into a lawsuit, they have all this back and forth, but basically, the judge said, "Okay, how about this date? How about this day? How about by October? We'll be ready for whatever, oral arguments." The federal government agreed to that timeline, which essentially means-- and they didn't file an injunction, emergency injunction to halt the tolling plan. They basically agreed that by October, we will submit all of our documents. The MTA will submit their documents. We'll let the judge decide if we need to do oral arguments or if the judge will just decide. They agreed to that timeline.

Essentially, they agreed that it can continue until October. Publicly, Secretary Duffy is saying April 20th, it needs to shut down, but to what end? To what happens? It's unclear. I guess perhaps the Penn Station takeover is maybe a response to that, although they did that before April 20th, so it's hard to connect the two necessarily.

Brian Lehrer: Also, on the federal takeover of the Penn Station renovation, listener writes, "I wonder if this is the start of dismantling Amtrak." Frankly, Stephen, I had the exact opposite question in my head, which is that I thought some fiscal conservatives want to dismantle Amtrak as a federal rail system, but this seems maybe more inclined to support it, or how do you read it?

Stephen Nessen: Yes, it's complicated, right? It sounds like they're emboldening Amtrak and giving them a new project to take on. It doesn't sound like they're cutting Amtrak or taking anything away from them. The Amtrak officials I've spoken to have basically said, "Doge hasn't come for us yet." They haven't heard anything from the feds about wasteful spending or cutting down on anything. It's unclear, but the Amtrak does have a lot on its plate already.

Remember, NJ Transit had all those meltdowns last summer, total service failures. A lot of that was due to Amtrak's antiquated electrical system. They need something like $2.9 billion to upgrade that, and that's really a high priority for them because I don't think any of their electrical system in the Northeast Corridor is up to snuff at the moment.

Brian Lehrer: If we're talking about a big renovation project in the middle of Manhattan, I think we owe it to hear from one of the neighbors. We owe that to the neighbors. John in Hell's Kitchen is calling in. John, you're on WNYC. Hello.

John: Hi. Thanks for having my call. I'm just local who's wondering if there is any mechanism in which the local neighborhood is inputting into the environmental impact of the developments. I know New Jersey Transit wants to expand and there's going to be more rail traffic. We're already getting hit by the congestion pricing. We just want to know-- well, I just want to know what is the impact and if there is a mechanism from which we can kind of weigh in to the proposed plan.

Brian Lehrer: John, fair enough. I'll throw in here, as we're starting to run out of time, Stephen, that I wonder if the Dolans want to weigh in because a number of people are texting. Is this going to involve moving Madison Square Garden, which I think Trump has talked about?

Stephen Nessen: Yes, it's a great question from John and from the listener. To John's question, it's not clear to me, because if the state is doing it, they would follow sort of state rules and guidelines, such as eminent domain. They'd have to follow some sort of procedure. There'd be public hearings. There'd be a lot of community input to a certain extent. If the feds are just doing this, it's not clear to me exactly if they have to follow New York State or city laws. For a development project, I assume they would. Again, this is something I need to delve into a little bit more.

To the second part, the big MSG question, what happens with Madison Square Garden is that's hanging out there. I have not heard back from MSG. I've emailed them a couple times to get a comment. I haven't heard, but I believe their lease is up in maybe four years. It just got a short renewal from City Council for five years last year. That's one of the big things. If you can move MSG, then that opens up a whole world of redevelopment options. If you don't move MSG, it really restricts and restrains what kind of renovations can be done.

Brian Lehrer: We should probably do a whole separate segment on architecture and building design and what it represents, politically and otherwise. I'll just say we're getting a number of texts and calls on this. I'll read one text, "Neoclassical style, what Trump wants for Penn Station is historically often a fascist's favorite architectural style, and this feels symbolic of that." However, the listener writes, "I also mourn the loss of the old Penn Station that looked more like Grand Central and so also could see myself enjoying a neoclassical Penn Station," so that from that listener.

Just last thing before you go on this other story that we didn't even touch on yet that you reported, Mayor Adams has changed his stance, apparently, on protecting congestion pricing as of a court filing that you reported on a few days ago. We may be entering into the Eric Adams is irrelevant to almost anything era. I'm not sure, but what does it mean?

Stephen Nessen: Well, basically, publicly, he sort of washed his hands of it and said, "It's not my project, it's a state project," but he hasn't come out vocally in support of it by any means whatsoever. In court, because the DOT is a part of the project, they help the MTA, they work closely together, they are very much defending congestion pricing.

Brian Lehrer: Our transportation reporter, always on it, Stephen Nessen. Hear him on the radio, read him on Gothamist. Stephen, thanks a lot.

Stephen Nessen: Thank you for having me.

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.