I. The Connecticut Transportation Authority

The Connecticut Transportation Authority (CTA) was created by Public Act 639 of 1963 by the Connecticut General Assembly to act in the name of the State to preserve and protect vital rail service in the event of the collapse of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad. The five Authority members were appointed by the Governor and had the power to contract in the name of the State for the purpose of providing rail transportation service in the State.

The General Assembly gave the Authority the power to acquire or obtain the use of facilities and equipment employed in providing rail transportation by gift, purchase, lease or other arrangement. The CTA was empowered to, in the name of the State, apply for and to receive and accept grants of property, money and services etc. which would be used to meet capital or operating expenses and for any other purpose in the furtherance of its powers and duties.

On February 1, 1968 the New York Central and Pennsylvania Railroad directors merged to create the Penn Central Transportation Company. Just under one year later on January 1, 1969 the Interstate Commerce Commission grafted the ailing New Haven Railroad onto the Penn Central.

In Public Act 768 of 1969, the General Assembly created the Department Of Transportation (ConnDOT) and granted it all powers formerly reserved to the CTA. The Authority's membership was increased to 13. The Act made the CTA advisory to ConnDOT and conferred upon the CTA exemption from regulation by all other State agencies.

On June 21, 1970 the Penn Central Transportation Company went bankrupt and filed for reorganization. Connecticut was again faced with the possible loss of service if the railroad collapsed. The DOT Commissioner delegated his power to contract for continuation of rail passenger service to the CTA.

On October 27, 1970 the CTA entered into agreement with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and the Penn Central Transportation Company for the preservation of commuter rail service in Southwestern Connecticut. ConnDOT assumed responsibility for carrying out provisions of the Agreement as agent for the staffless CTA.

Commuters soon became dissatisfied with the new service arrangement. The Agreement set service standards which the railroad failed to meet, and the Authority acquiesced in the demise of a historic New Haven Railroad fare structure to conform with wholly MTA supported Harlem and Hudson Line fare structures. The Public Utilities Commission could not use its regulatory and review powers to determine if CTA actions or those of the ConnDOT as agents for the Authority were in the public interest since the CTA was exempt from regulation.

In 1972, at the instigation of a citizens group of angry commuters, a drive was initiated by State Senators George C. Guidera and William E. Strada, Jr. to make State agencies more responsive to the plight of rail passengers. Over the next several years several attempts were made to pass legislation to allow regulation of the Authority and increase voice of the public in decision-making on transportation policy in Connecticut.

In the year 1975, Public Act 572 was enacted by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor. The Act abolished the Connecticut Transportation Authority and created the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority (CPTA). The CPTA was to have members representing all segments of the population affected by its deliberations. CPTA actions were not immune from regulation by other State agencies. The CPTA was to
remain advisory to ConnDOT and it was to have no powers of its own.

II. The Connecticut Public Transportation Authority

The Connecticut Public Transportation Authority was born amid controversy as the legislation creating it, and abolishing the Connecticut Transportation Authority was signed in the midst of an attempt by the Penn Central Railroad to raise passenger fares on its Harlem, Hudson and New Haven Division commuter lines.

The Connecticut Transportation Authority, nominal signatory to the Suburban Passenger Train Service Agreements, would have been required to approve implementation of New Haven Division fare changes. But the CTA ceased to exist on July 8, 1979 with the Governor's approval of Public Act 572. The powers delegated to it, therefore, automatically reverted back to the Commissioner of Transportation and his approval of the requested increase was both proper and legal, but not without controversy.

By the insertion of one word the legislation passed in 1975 did not change the composition of a continuing Connecticut Transportation Authority, it abolished it, and created a new agency to be known as the Connecticut PUBLIC Transportation Authority. The Act-did not include language designating the CPTA as successor to the CTA or grant to the new agency the powers enjoyed by the old.

III. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CPTA

Public Act 75-572 (now Section 13b-lla of the General Statutes) gave the CPTA no power but did give it certain responsibilities. The following outlines the six basic charges given to the CPTA under Public Act 75-572:

1. REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES

The Authority was charged with recommending restructured boundaries for regional transit districts within the State. The legislation included three criteria to be used in reaching a decision:

1) Present planning region boundaries;

2) Commutation patterns; and

3) Boundaries corresponding with those related to UMTA funding (urbanized area boundaries).

In its 1977 Annual Report the Authority pointed out the incompatibility of criteria mandated for use by the Legislature. Some municipalities are in one planning region but are part of a designated urbanized area which is centered in another planning region. Commuter patterns often overlap from one planning region to another and from one urbanized area to another.

The Authority further pointed out that in certain areas of the State, particularly the. Southwestern section, the input received at its public hearings demonstrated great opposition to the mandating of Regional boundaries at the expense of smaller, more locally oriented transit districts which were operable and performing satisfactorily.

The Authority advised the Legislature that, in its opinion, the well functioning operation of transit districts might cease to exist if regional boundaries were mandated against the will of local communities.

While indicating that it would, if the legislature insisted, establish a priority of the three criteria listed and produce a map of recommended regional boundaries, the CPTA suggested, instead, that the requirement to do so be eliminated from Section 13b-lla of the General Statutes. In so doing, the Authority recognized the wishes of the public and brought them to the attention of the State Legislature. It also recognized that circumstances differ in each part of the State and suggested to the Legislature that the parameters it established were too restrictive; that each area of activity should be reviewed on its own merits.

The Legislature has since repealed the requirement that the Authority submit to it a list of recommended Regional Transit District boundaries.

2. BASIC LEVEL OF SERVICE

The Authority was charged with submitting to the Commissioner of Transportation a definition of what constitutes a "basic level of service" in each urbanized area of the State. The legislation gave the Authority no guidelines to follow and did not indicate if the definition was to address the public desire, the public need, or the current financial ability of the government to fund services. The term, being open to varying interpretations, made this charge a major consideration of the Authority during its first two years of existence.

To establish an inflexible definition of what constitutes a Basic Level Of Service requires an omniscience far beyond that of the Authority or any other constituted public body. Infinite knowledge of current and future public need and public desire, as well as the cost of funding, would be required to establish a pure definition.

The Authority, in addressing this requirement of the Legislature, expressed its opinion where common sense and public opinion directed it to, and left open the door for further evaluation of basic levels of service by recommending investigations and studies of need and reliance upon regional and local authorities' knowledge of the transportation problems affecting their respective areas.

The Authority, in its 1976 Annual Report, made two declarative statements on the subject. It advised the Commissioner and the Legislature that, in its opinion, the present West End commuter rail service represented a basic level of service in that area of the State. It further advised that, in its opinion, present rail freight service is below what it considered to be the basic level and that every effort should be made to restore service over the Poughkeepsie Bridge, to reinstitute through freight service, and to improve and expand service across the state. It recommended an aggressive marketing program to encourage maximum use of rail freight with the objective of restoring a level of usage and service that existed in 1969.

3. PUBLIC HEARINGS

The Authority was directed by the Legislature to hold public hearings at least once annually in each of the State's urban areas for the purpose of receiving comments and recommendations from the citizens. It did so in the winters of 1975 and 1976 but, in January, 1977, it approached the Legislature and asked that the Statute's wording be amended.

The Authority pointed out that the mandate providing for public hearings in each urbanized area left a void in the northeastern and northwestern areas of the State where no urbanized areas exist. It felt that comments should be received from all areas and asked the Legislature to change the description from "urban" to "metropolitan" areas, and to give the CPTA discretion to define the composition of such metropolitan areas for the purpose of holding its annual public hearings. The Legislature concurred and the Authority received comments and recommendations from people in the State's rural areas for the first time in 1977.

The Authority's public hearings are more than just a sounding board for the frustrated citizen who finds the State's transportation systems lacking. Comments received by the CPTA are carefully considered and many public recommendations have been incorporated in the Authority's Annual Reports. In some instances the Authority's hearings have produced immediate results which benefited certain segments of the public.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

As set forth in Public Act 75-572, the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority was to submit annually to the Commissioner of Transportation a list of public transportation projects which, if undertaken by the State, would further the policy set forth in section 13b-32 of the general statutes. The list was to include at least one project in each of the State's recognized urban areas.

The Statute concerns improvement in the transportation of people and goods within, to or from the State by rail, motor carrier and other modes of mass transportation by land. The Authority was agreeable to offering suggestions with the goals of the statute in mind. What it found objectionable was the mandate that each year's list contain at least one recommended project for each urbanized area.

The Authority did not question that there was room for improvement in all areas of the State. It recognized, however, that many worthy improvements had already been suggested by others and were included in regional Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and the Connecticut Master Transportation Plan.

Excluding the use of the Connecticut Master Transportation Plan and previously formulated TIPs, the Authority found it difficult to meet the requirement that it recommend at least one transportation project each year in every urbanized area without proposing projects that were not feasible, just to comply with the Statute. It did, therefore, draw upon these documents in compiling recommendations contained in its 1976 and 1977 Annual Reports.

In its 1977 Annual Report the Authority recommended that the requirement, as written, be deleted from the Statute. It felt that recommendations made on its own, without regard to urbanized boundaries, would be more meaningful than the forced inclusion in its report of recommended continuation and completion of projects previously 1?resented by others. The Legislature concurred and, in subsequent reports, the CPTA offered recommendations for improvement in public transportation services and facilities without regard to geographic considerations.

The fifth and sixth charges delegated to the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority were:

- To assist the Commissioner of Transportation in developing regulations to formalize arrangements between the Department and local transit districts, between local transit districts and transit system operators and between local transit districts.

-and-

- To consult with and advise the Commissioner of Transportation on matters pertaining to the adequacy of rail and motor carrier facilities and services preparatory to drafting the annual revision of the State's comprehensive long-range Master Transportation Plan.

IV. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

During their tenure the members of the CPTA aggressively recommended improvements to the State's public transportation infrastructure. Some highlights of these recommendations are described below.

1. RAIL ROLLING STOCK:

At the CPTA's October, 1977 meeting a Conrail spokesman advised the Authority that a study made by the railroad estimated a need for 78 new coaches by 1990, including those needed for a re-electrified Danbury Branch. In its 1978 annual report, the CPTA recommended purchase additional coaches.

Several times during Authority deliberations in 1977 the suggestion was made that some excess cafe cars be converted into full rail passenger coaches to meet the imminent need for more equipment. The suggestion was formalized in the CPTA's Annual Report of 1978.

For three years the CPTA suggested rehabilitation of the rail equipment used on the Danbury branch line. In its 1978 Annual Report the Authority recommended a complete overhaul of the FL-9 engines and the standard coaches to meet the immediate need on the Danbury line and to provide the State with serviceable equipment for experimentation in other, non electrified, areas of the State. In September, 1979 the Authority learned that the Department was going to rehabilitate four FL-9 engines and all of the 2500 series standard coaches which are used on the Danbury line.

The rehabilitation and reintroduction to the commuter fleet of the 4400 series rail cars was discussed at CPTA meetings as early as 1976. Faced with increasing ridership statistics and an impending car shortage, with no new rail cars on order, the Authority formally recommended rehabilitation and use of the old 4400 series cars in its January, 1979 Annual Report.

On several occasions during 1977 the CPTA expressed its belief that rail commuter equipment was not being utilized to receive the maximum benefit. Authority members questioned the continuing number of standees on certain trains and the number of deadhead, or non-revenue service, cars being moved back and forth to New York on others. On each occasion the CPTA was assured by the operator, Conrail, that the railroad continually monitored rail car utilization and was convinced that the current fleet was being operated with optimum usage received. It took an energy crisis to prove the Authority right. With the dramatic increase in ridership caused by the gasoline shortage of 1979, Conrail developed a revised system of train scheduling and car utilization to accommodate more passengers effectively.

2. STAMFORD RAIL STATION:

The history of the Stamford railroad station property, from the date of its purchase by private parties, was recounted in preparation of the CPTA's. first Annual Report in January, 1976. The conditions confronting rail passengers were told and it was not a pretty story. The Authority recommended purchase of the property by the State and the development of the Stamford railroad station site as a transportation center for lower Fairfield County. The station remained a subject of CPTA discussion for the next three years and the Authority issued a resolution supporting legislation proposed in 1978 and entitled: "An Act Concerning Condemnation of the Stamford Railroad Station -Study Feasibility of Moving Railroad Station."

In 1979 the Legislature passed a bill mandating purchase of the Stamford railroad station property by the Department of Transportation.

3. MANCHESTER-WILLIMANTIC RAIL LINE:

Five years before the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority came into being, the Penn Central Railroad abandoned rail service on the line running between Manchester and Willimantic, Connecticut. At that time then Deputy Commissioner of Transportation Samuel Kanell embarked upon negotiations with the railroad to purchase the right-of-way, with rails in place, in the name of the State.

In its February, 1978 Annual Report, the CPTA recommended that the Department of Transportation study the relaying of trackage along this right-of-way and, more importantly, begin a program to maintain the right-of-way free from vegetation, using highway maintenance crews if necessary, until such time as track work could begin. The recommendation also appeared in the 1979 annual report.

4. EXPANDED HALF FARE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS:

At its 1977 public hearings the Authority was told that the half fare program for senior citizens was unworkable on branch line trains. The half fare program was in effect only during off-peak hours and, during those hours, there was very little train service on the Danbury and Waterbury lines. In its 1978 Annual Report the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority recommended that half fare rates be extended to the elderly at all hours.

One year later, the Department of Transportation and New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced that the half fare program would be extended to the elderly and the handicapped at all hours. For the first two months of 1979, after the all day half fare program went into effect, the increase in elderly and handicapped ridership jumped 65% when compared to the same two months of 1978.

5. RAIL SCHEDULES:

On January 1, 1971 the State of Connecticut became a partner in the operation of rail service between Greenwich and New Haven and on May 1, 1971 AMTRAK became the operator of rail service between New Haven and points east and north. Service in the State which had formerly been provided by one operating agency was now split into two, and neither saw fit to provide information to its patrons of the other's schedules.

The problem encountered by passengers seeking to take trains from the Southwestern part of the State to Hartford was constantly brought up at meetings during the CPTA's first year of existence. On April 4, 1977 Authority member Stuart Low presented to Deputy Commissioner Thompson a one page timetable he had prepared. -It showed, in straightforward fashion, all the Conrail/AMTRAK connecting trains between New Haven and Hartford.

Three months later, in June, 1977, Conrail posted, in all of its stations on the West End, a schedule showing these connections in a timetable fashioned after Mr. Low's example.

6. BUS TRANSIT:

The purchasing by the State of private bus companies in order to preserve vital services was a policy of the DOT supported wholeheartedly by the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority. The purchasing of new equipment was likewise an area of mutual agreement.

The CPTA does feel, however, that certain amenities could and should be provided to the bus riding public and it is here where, although the Department may have agreed on the need, it disagreed on the priority. The Authority submitted a list of recommendations to the Department in 1978 concerning bus stop shelters and seating and the need for route maps and schedules to be posted at bus stops.

7. THOUGHTS FROM THE CABOOSE:

After four years of existence the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority is at a crossroads. It cannot point to any spectacular achievements yet it need not be ashamed of its efforts. It has demonstrated foresight on more than one occasion, yet it lacked the power to directly effect change when change was needed. Not all its recommendations were acted on.

Yet one wonders what might have been had the CPTA not deliberated and brought problems to the attention of the Department of Transportation and the State Legislature. Would there have been mandated regional transit districts against the will of the communities? Would there have been any Legislative interest in transforming the Stamford railroad station from a public eyesore into a center of civic pride?

The Connecticut Public Transportation Authority will continue to exist for as long as the Governor and the State Legislature feel its existence is worthwhile. CPTA members will remain willing and eager to work with, not against, the Department in promoting forward looking public transportation policies for the State. If the executive and legislative bodies of government are content with the Authority's fulfillment of its obligations, and with the policies and actions of the powerful Department of Transportation, the CPTA will continue to be an advisory body and an "Authority" in name only. It will continue its role as a voice of the public and a conscience of the DOT.

The Connecticut Public Transportation Commission, created under section 13b-11a of the Connecticut General Statutes, is the successor to the Connecticut Public Transportation Authority. The Authority, which was created in 1975, served a very similar function to today's Commission. As a result of a Sunset Review of the Commission, conducted by the General Assembly's Program Review and Investigations Committee in 1983, the Authority and another advisory group, the Governor's Railroad Advisory Task Force, were merged to form the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission. The first meeting of the Commission was held in January 1984, and its initial Annual Report was issued at the end of that year.

The Commission is composed of 11 gubernatorial appointees, each representing specific areas of interest in public transportation as specified in subsection (a) of C.G.S. 13b-11a, and 8 legislative appointees, two each by the Senate President Pro Tempore, the Speaker of the House and the minority leaders of each house of the General Assembly. In addition, the Departments of Transportation and Environmental Protection and the Office of Policy and Management are represented by non-voting ex-officio members on the Commission.