The $3.8 billion bond act was cobbled together in Albany this year after Governor Pataki proposed a 5-year capital program that increased transit spending more than highway spending. The State Senate would only go along with a transportation funding deal that maintained highway-transit "parity." The bond act was hatched as the way to lift all transportation spending without raising taxes.

On Thursday, Staten Island Borough President Guy Molinari urged voters to reject the bond measure, citing "no clear understanding as to how the bond act will benefit Staten Island, and no certain commitments for residents to rely on." In a statement, Molinari said, "I can't recall [a bond referendum] that has created the confusion and exhibited the vagueness of [this year's] transportation bond act." He cited concerns over full funding for Staten Island's third bus depot and new express buses. "My belief is that voters are better off rejecting the bond act and have framers of the act go back to the drawing boards," Molinari concluded.

Earlier in the week, Mayor Giuliani, through a spokesperson at a City Council meeting, announced his support for the bond act. However, the Mayor's backing was leavened with skeptical comments on whether the city would see all the funds promised in the act. The spokesperson criticized what he called shortfalls in city receipts from the 1996 environmental bond act, and raised the possibility that transportation bond act funds would simply substitute for other funding NY State has already committed to city projects.

On Tuesday, Brooklyn Borough President Howard Golden issued a statement supporting the bond act, citing improvements for city buses and subways. The statement also referred to the Borough President's "serious reservations" about the act. Indeed, popular Brooklyn City Council member and likely 2001 Borough President candidate Ken Fisher stated opposition to the bond in a Sept. Daily News op-ed, citing the absence of Brooklyn-specific projects.

Manhattan Borough President C. Virginia Fields has been a vocal supporter of the bond act all fall, citing the importance of a fully-funded MTA capital program to the momentum of the 2^nd Avenue Subway project and other city transit repair and upgrade priorities.

Last week, Governor Pataki's office called the bond act a "linchpin" of the MTA capital program. Other state officials seem to be keeping quiet for now. State Comptroller Carl McCall backed the measure several weeks ago, while grumbling about poor fiscal policy and lack of clear project lists. Michael Bragman, upstate Democratic rival to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, has announced opposition to the act. Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Rick Lazio continues to criticize the measure.

Editorial comment on the bond act has so far been skeptical, and to some degree, locally-focused. A Sept. Staten Island Advance editorial raised issues of state debt and legislative cowardice. Also in Sept., the Daily News begged for more information about programs the bond act would support, while the Hudson Valley Journal-News raised a variety of questions about freight rail funding slated for CSX' West Shore Line ("the total transportation package offers too few details").

NYPIRG's Straphangers Campaign supports the bond act, for reasons much like those cited by Borough Presidents Golden and Fields (see MTR #288). The Tri-State Transportation Campaign has taken the opportunity of bond act news stories to criticize the NY State DOT's highway widening plans on Long Island. Other advocacy groups have so far been quiet.

The NY Times noted on Wednesday the absence of any concerted promotional campaign to whip up voter support for the act. However, a group of construction industry groups are reportedly raising money for an advertising campaign on its behalf. The effort would target upstate voters, who are historically more begrudging of state bond referendums than their downstate counterparts.