Mr. Walder's conveniently located living room

You can definitely say one thing about unit 9BC at 65 West 95th Street—it's conveniently located. Near (five!) train lines and "just steps from Central Park," the buyer of former MTA CEO Jay Walder's condo is guaranteed a relatively painless trip wherever he or she is going.

As long as it's not to Hong Kong, that is.

Mr. Walder's three-bedroom co-op, listed for $1.68 million with Stribling brokers Jeffrey Stockwell and Shallini Mehra, is now in contract.

Mr. Walder purchased the condo for $1.6 million in July 2010, about a year before the chairman resigned to take over the MTR Corporation, a transportation company in Hong Kong. (Mr. Walder, who earned a $350,000 salary as the MTA chief likely bought a much, much nicer place with his $7.2 million salary, though that is in Hong Kong dollars).

The condo was listed in October 2011 for $1.79 million, but the price bump proved as unpopular as the one that Mr. Walder's MTA fare hike, and it dropped back down to $1.68 million. It is not clear yet whether he broke even, but factoring in brokers fees, the odds are not good.

Maybe the next residents will find the condo better suited to long-term occupancy than Mr. Walder? It boasts big bedrooms with great closet space, an extra-large living room, big windows and plenty of light. The building also has a landscaped roof deck and, for the public transportation-averse, bike storage!

kvelsey@observer.com

Don't mind me. (Business Insider)

Mayor Bloomberg was asked about Jay Walder's glum assessment of the M.T.A. yesterday. He agreed with the ousted transit chief and then proceeded to throw up his hands, passing the buck to the governor, according to Capital New York.

"Keep in mind, it’s all relative," said the mayor. "When I came to New York in 1966, the subway cars were covered in graffiti, they broke down all the time, they had no signalling."

"Having said that," he continued, "if you compare today’s M.T.A. system here to modern M.T.A. systems, and I have been on the Hong Kong system, it’s an order of magnitude more modern, and that’s what we have to do."

By "we," Bloomberg, whose third term expires at the end of next year, really meant "they."

"It’s a state problem," he said. "They’ve got to find the monies."

The mayor later added that the state of the M.T.A. is "hurting our economy."

"That’s where I think the governor really can do something here," he said. "But he’s got to get the legislature together and find funding for the M.T.A. And I’ll be happy to help him, but I certainly don’t want to get in the ways of, be an impediment to him doing this."

Will the mayor even bother to "take" the subway when he's out of office?

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Walder works the crowd. (MTR)

Tuesday was Jay Walder's first day on the million-dollar job in Honk Kong, and while the focus was on fair hikes there in his first press conference, the former M.T.A chief did not hesitate to take a swipe at New York, where frustrations with the politics and finances of the system drove him away.

“New York, when I arrived there, was in a financial crisis,” Mr. Walder said. “The system simply did not have enough money to continue to operate. The assets were not being renewed. And the infrastructure was in terrible condition.”

“What I did,” Mr. Walder continued, “was to be able to right that financial basis and to be able to put the system back on firm financial footing.”

Well, sort of. Transit advocates have been critical of his decision to balance the budget with roughly $7 billion in debt, using MetroCards as credit cards, as Transportation Alternatives put it. And then there was the whole dismantling of the pay roll tax at the end of last year, but Governor Cuomo promised yesterday not to cut into the current capital plan, so that was a hopeful note. At the same time, he never once mentioned the word "transit" during his State of the State address yesterday.

Still, Mr. Walder could not help but take a swipe at our mass transit system in comparing it to his new assignment, which underscores his decision to leave.

“I think we have a very different situation here,” Mr. Walder said. “We have a first-class railway. We have a sustainable financial model that is supporting that railway. And I think the people of Hong Kong are benefiting tremendously from what we have. I don’t think it’s the same situation as what you have in New York.”

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Slow down. (Getty)

When Jay Walder resigned from the M.T.A. earlier this year, the transportation community was mortified. Here was their messiah leaving for Hong Kong, his work barely begun. Transit wonks could hardly fathom who could take over for Mr. Walder, continuing his formidable task of transforming the agency in ways both subtle—cutting $4 billion in waste and efficiencies—and not—underground cellphones, Oyster cards, Bus Rapid Transit.

They were looking in the wrong place.

Today, Governor Andrew Cuomo made official the weeks-old rumors that Joe Lhota, Rudy Giuliani's deputy mayor for operations, would take over the unruly agency. The other front runner was Neil Peterson—a serial businessman who founded a Zipcar precursor, led three transit agencies on the West Coast and was an accomplished ballroom dancer. He might have actually outshone Mr. Walder, even.

Mr. Lhota does not dance, though he may know a thing or two about pop music, from his stint at Madison Square Garden, where he has worked for Jimmy Dolan since leaving City Hall.

He is, by all accounts, a great bandleader though, at least when it comes to making the books sing. "Joe is as good as it gets," Richard Schwartz, a senior adviser to Mayor Giuliani, told The Observer. "He knows everything about the operations and the communities and the politics of the city." City officials and activists who have worked with Mr. Lhota in the past describe him as whip smart and very accessible, perhaps more so than anyone in the at-times combative Giuliani administration. But above all, they speak of his budgetary expertise, his wizardry with numbers.

In other words, he is no transit wonk, though he did oversee the city's Department of Transportation as part of his portfolio. Regardless, that may be exactly what the M.T.A. needs right now. The Cuomo administration, which has been preaching austerity all year, seems to think so. "There was a debate whether it should be a transit guy or a numbers guy," one member of the committee that helped select the new director said. "The numbers guys won out."

That said, this person, who was in the transit camp, agreed that given the difficult fiscal climate, and continued animosity in Albany toward the M.T.A., Mr. Lhota could be exactly what the agency needs. "He certainly seems to have the management and finance skills to navigate the political channels and get M.T.A. the resources it needs," the committee member said. "Or at least make sure there aren't any more cuts."

The M.T.A. is already running on fumes. There have been fare hikes the past three years, and still the city had to face one of the gravest service cuts in a generation. The capital budget has a $10 billion hole in it, large enough to drive one of those massive tunnel boring machines through, and in one of his last acts as M.T.A. boss, his final "thanks for nothing," Jay Walder decided to try and close that hole with almost $7 billion in new borrowing. He knew he was not getting any help from Albany, either insider the Legislature or the executive mansion.

Joe Lhota might be able to help with that. He has the full backing of the governor, and he knows the byways of the state's ruling class. And much as we may want the city's subways to shine again—to compete with places like London and Hong Kong and Washington in terms of transit—it seems clear now is not the time for that. Steady as she goes is the motto.

"Look at all the projects we already have, do we really need more?" one Giuliani insider wondered. "Those are all things that have to be managed at this points. I think it's a far greater priority to make sure those projects are tightly controlled, on time and on budget, and that the rest of the system is made more efficient and cost-friendly."

After all, what good is a new subway line if the old ones are crumbling?

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Chris Ward chilling with another governor. (Newsday)

Just not much less than he already does.

At least that is the impression given by our former colleagues over at Capital and WNYC, who point out that in the governor's recently released schedules, no mentions are made of meetings with either agency's head, Jay Walder or Chris Ward. As The Observer has previously reported, the governor has had limited contact with either Mr. Walder or Mr. Ward, despite their being in charge of two of the state's most important and powerful agencies.

Andrea Bernstein opens with this spry appraisal:

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo met repeatedly in the first eight months of the year on marriage equality, the property tax cap, and even farmer’s markets. But his schedule from January 1- August 31, made available online Thursday, shows no meetings or phone calls with Port Authority chief Chris Ward or Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Jay Walder.

Meanwhile Reid and Dana bring us these amusing details:

On Thursday, Feb. 3 at 4:15 p.m., he had a meeting in Albany on "Public Authorities." No attendees are listed. But that same day, the board of the Port Authority voted in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's pick for Authority Chairman, David Samson.

On Friday, March 4, at 1:30 pm, the governor had a meeting about the vaguely defined topic, "Transporation and Infrastructure" at his New York City offices.

In April, May, June and July, there was no mention in his public schedules of "Ward," "Walder," "Port Authority," or "MTA."

On August 10, he made a "New York Remembers" announcement that included Robert Morris, a vice president at the Port Authority Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.

There was some attention paid to the M.T.A. in the lead up to the Hurricane Irene shutdown, but otherwise it appears the governor has taken almost no notice of these agencies. That said, perhaps this is a good thing, given the relative repute of their directors. Yet for a politician who is known to be incredibly hands-on, that would seem strange.

With the appointment of a new M.T.A. chief forthcoming—and the 9/11 anniversary behind us—it would seem these are positions Governor Cuomo might be paying more attention to in the near future.

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

This is fixable.

The first thing on my platform is that the next M.T.A. chief need not be a train buff. He or she—or me specifically, since I’m hereby throwing my name out there—has to appreciate the economic essentiality of the authority, which moves the equivalent of New Jersey’s population (8.5 million, give or take) every weekday. But this is not a Lionel set; this is dollars and nonsense.

The next chief should know more about transit financing, particularly the warren navigated in simply keeping the four-pronged monster afloat. As it stands now, it’s a ready-made punch line, with the nation’s largest transit system held hostage to a dysfunctional Albany.

The way it works at present, as this newspaper explained in a 2009 profile of then-new, now-outgoing chief Jay Walder, the organization basically runs on debt (sound familiar?). Instead of giving the M.T.A. enough long-term income sources to sustain itself over time—on fares, tolls and taxes—the state has settled upon a system in which funding for repairs and new construction, like the Second Avenue Subway and the No. 7 line extension, runs dry every five years or so (i.e., barring a prostitution scandal, every gubernatorial administration or so). What happens then is that whoever is in charge of the M.T.A. must go to Albany—to whomever is in charge there—and plead for a new tax; or go to the public to eventually borrow from the state’s general fund.

Barring these scenarios, it’s the familiar fare hikes and service cuts—including the epochal ones from the spring of 2010 that wiped out the W and V subway lines, along with 18 bus routes, and upped the commuting times for millions of New Yorkers who pay into the system through both taxes and fares.

Financing-wise, the M.T.A. is a crapshoot, much like relying on the G on the weekend: it’s there; there are signs for it—even schedules, if you look hard enough—but it doesn’t work well because what undergirds it is unreliable. Abandon hope, all ye who swipe here.

Thus the run of grim statistics, showing a system with a $900 million gap in its operating budget; a $9 billion shortfall in its construction plans; and a $2.1 billion-plus budget deficit for good measure (plus, fresh plans to borrow another $7 billion), and tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow …

When we all have to take the N or the 1 or the 4, 5, 6, a line that carries more people daily than the subways of Chicago, L.A. and Boston put together, such dollar signs mean little (one bad commute is a tragedy, a million is a statistic). They’re not tangible to the everyday commuter, as the misery of the trips to and fro seem to trump all.

So restructuring the financial funding situation would be the first criterion for any M.T.A. head. And that means taking some of the year-to-year decision making away from Albany and creating a five-year animal for the operating budget. Therefore, less borrowing and fewer drastic measures like fare hikes (three in three years now) and deep service cuts. Nothing really changes otherwise.

With such a financial funding restructuring that divorces the authority from Albany power plays, there should be a focus on fresh revenues that don’t come from commuters. Enough! Especially with the hikes in monthlies. Laudably, Mr. Walder and the Bloomberg administration in recent years pushed congestion pricing—charging drivers to use central business districts like we charge train and bus riders. It didn’t take, amid bizarre opposition where cars were lofted to First Amendment-level rights. But I would resurrect it. Look to London (not right now, but in general, when it comes to transit). We debate bike lanes for BroBos while Western Europe innovates (and China and Japan build the fastest trains on earth).

And if congestion pricing won’t take, I would propose a tourist tax of some sort, a surcharge levied through the Port Authority (master of airports, the bus terminals and most bridges) for stopping by but not paying in.

Finally, financially speaking, the new M.T.A. chief needs an understanding of the vast real estate holdings of the authority, which include train yards, rights of way and buildings (big ones, too—Grand Central Station, anyone?). Work the commercial real estate industry for prospective buyers—Canadian pension funds are pretty ravenous these days—and sell off all nonessential properties.

The next thing on my platform would be ways to humanize the average commute, turning it away from the sort of shaking, silent anger on the typical F or L train platform to something speedier and as close to serene as a New Yorker could hope. There are ways.

One such way was associated with Mr. Walder’s time in London: the oyster card. Virtually everlasting smartcards that riders wave in front of readers (and the readers read the microchip inside, see?), using oyster cards instead of Metro Cards could drastically reduce boarding times, not to mention cut down on those Metro Card hustles.

And as for boarding times, the M.T.A., under my watch, would enforce the proper boarding and exiting of trains and especially of buses. No more discreet announcements at a bus door’s opening about exiting through the rear. Drivers would be empowered to physically enforce such exiting on all able-bodied New Yorkers over the age of reason (7 or so, depending on P.S. district). Same for spreading out on the platform—the city is dense enough—and for not clustering in ingresses and egresses.

Also, it is time for New York to join the nation’s capital in enforcing cleaner subway platforms through fines and a whistleblower program that puts our ballyhooed Silicon Alley to work for good instead of evil (imagine Foursquare loosed: “I’m at Bedford L stop, watching some dude in a Decemberists tour shirt toss copy of Mother Jones into tracks”), much in the same way that the same lampooned, lamented M.T.A. of today helped clean up the actual subway cars in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It is possible, as doable as scrubbing graffiti from the old BMT line.

Once we have the lines up and running, I would move to incentivize use of the nicer areas of the subway and the nicer parts of the trains. Amtrak has its regional and then its Acela. Why not, for a little more, Subway Premium? A quiet car? Something!

And, in closing, why not air-conditioning (remember: we work out the funding structure and increase revenue, we have more money to play with for things that now seem insane); or above-ground Metro Card machines; or having all stations rigged with those clocks that tell you when the trains are coming (or not coming); or a direct rail-link to J.F.K. and La Guardia (the A and the M60 racket just doesn’t work and tosses more cash to the carbon-coughing cabbies)?

If some of this seems implausible, even fantastical, the ramblings of a rider with too many N trips from southern Brooklyn to central Manhattan under his belt of late, know this: Dear reader, he consulted Smart People who know transit in this town, including people on the committee just announced by the governor to advise him in filling the important patronage job of M.T.A. chief (indeed, Mr. Walder was the first transportation professional ever in the role—though, as we discussed at the outset, that’s not necessarily an asset). Every one of these ideas (except maybe Subway Premium) is being or has been discussed by those who might effect real change.

Or we could just abolish it. Trash the whole thing and revert to the Robert Moses days when individual entities like the subway lines and the L.I.R.R. were just that—individual entities, chugging along under different purviews, often at cross-purposes.

Sound radical? A bit meshuganah even? The M.T.A. today is bad, yes; and exhibits so little promise of improving in our grandchildren’s lifetimes. But, believe it or not, here was Governor Cuomo defending abolishment: “It is the simplest notion in the world. All you need is a few lines and a bill to get rid of the authority.”

Mario Cuomo would defend that position repeatedly in his 1982 re-election campaign run by son Andrew (the above came from a New York Times transcript of a Democratic primary debate Mr. Cuomo had against Ed Koch in September of that year). It never happened. The M.T.A. and the Cuomos are still with us. Maybe one can finally fix the other (Mario Cuomo did not respond to a request for comment. Perhaps he’s thought about the M.T.A. enough for one lifetime).

Anyway, I’m standing by, awaiting the call. I live in Brooklyn, five minutes from the N. I might even waive the $350,000 salary.

tacitelli@observer.com :: Follow on Twitter @tacitelli

Pay up! (mcorriss.com)

Transit wonks are hoping Governor Andrew Cuomo might still be their secret savior, and it's starting to look like he might be. Not only has the governor selected a crack team to replace outgoing M.T.A. chief Jay Walder, but he is even said to be considering the impossible—congestion pricing.

Governor Cuomo dodged the congestion pricing question on the campaign trail, and he has remained mum even as éminences gris have continued to call for bridge tolls. Now, while mulling whether or not to veto new Port Authority tolls, the Cuomo administration could actually use the PA tolls as cover to finally implement them on East River bridges. According to City Hall News' Adam Lisberg, Governor Cuomo could embrace certain toll increases if others are cut.

People close to the discussions believe Gov. Andrew Cuomo will accede to a $2 toll hike despite his public protests. And once Cuomo establishes that a toll increase does not fall under his “no new taxes” pledge, these people believe that would lay the groundwork for a coordinated toll plan that would raise the price to enter crowded Manhattan but reduce it elsewhere.

“The bridge tolls will become the way to solve the MTA problem,” said one person involved in the long-term effort. “In this situation, it’s ludicrous to leave some of the bridges free.”

The key difference between this latest proposal and the one that died two years ago is that it cleverly reduces tolls on outer-borough connections, such as the Triborough, Throgg's Neck and Whitestone bridges. This could please many of the local pols who quashed the plan before and underscore the goal of bridge tolling as a means to reduce congestion in the Central Business District and not simply a revenue raiser.

The idea, which would also charge vehicles traveling below 60th Street as before, was conceived by former transportation commissioner "Gridlock" Sam Schwartz, who believes it could raise $1.9 billion for transit funding.

Maybe Jay Walder should not have left so soon.

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

All aboard? (wikispaces.com)

Transportation wonks have a habit of talking about Jay Walder, the outgoing head of the M.T.A., in messianic terms, as though he were the only man capable of fixing the agency’s myriad problems—an aging system, run by intransigent unions, with almost no political support. While many of them have greeted his resignation with shock and concern, there is a growing sense that this could actually be the best thing to happen to the M.T.A. since Mr. Walder’s arrival two years ago.

“I guess I’m partly responsible for inflating the importance of Jay,” said Gene Russianoff, head of the Straphangers Campaign and dean of transit advocate.

Indeed, there have been others—Richard Ravitch, the team of Kiley-Gunn, even Mr. Walder’s predecessor, Lee Sander—who have done a lot to resurrect mass transit from the death throes of the 1970s. Mr. Walder, though, was different. He had moved from McKinsey to run London’s transit system, introducing successful innovations, including the vaunted oyster card, which speeds up bus and Tube boardings, as well as implementing that dread scourge, congestion pricing. He was supposed to bring the same innovation and ingenuity to New York.

“You have to hope it’s a wake-up call to the people in Albany,” blogger and M.T.A. kremlinologist Benjamin Kabak said.

That hope is directed at one man in particular: Andrew Cuomo.

The governor grew up riding the same subways from Queens as the Rockaways native he must now replace, though he is not the likeliest booster. On the campaign trail, Mr. Cuomo expressed indifference that bordered on antipathy when reporters questioned him about mass transit. This included an uncharacteristically testy press conference outside City Hall, when he unveiled his Urban Agenda. Of its 230 pages, 25 covered affordable housing, 32 on criminal justice, 20 on health care but only two on transportation. He has done nothing of note on the subject during his first seven months in office besides reappointing Mr. Walder. Despite that, they have a cool relationship with limited communication.

Still, transit advocates and straphanging pols are hitching their train to the governor, either out of desperation or legitimate belief that he could transform the M.T.A. in ways that have been talked about but rarely acted upon. “It puts the governor on the hook,” Mr. Russianoff said. “It will be his pick running the agency, and he will be accountable for what happens to the M.T.A.”

There are few greater political liabilities than the M.T.A., which is why the Cuomo administration has held it at arm’s length for so long. Even with Mr. Walder in place, he could keep this up for only so long, but now, unable to point to a Paterson appointee calling the shots, the responsibility will be his all the more. “When the big issues come, from fare policy to safety and the reliability of the system, in the end this is America, and the elected officials are held responsible,” said former Westchester Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, who used to oversee the agency in the Assembly.

Should the governor embrace the M.T.A, advocates believe he has a singular ability to fix its problems, many of which stem from a Legislature that shortchanges the M.T.A. on a regular basis, thwarting projects like congestion pricing and other forms of transportation funding and even raiding the agency’s budget on occasion, as happened twice last year. “A big part of this is getting the support of the Legislature,” Mr. Brodsky said.

With his string of victories this year—the rent regs/property tax cap deal, gay marriage and an on-time, balanced budget—Governor Cuomo has shown an ability to bend Albany to his will.

“I think a lot of people feel our public transportation system is being held together by chicken wire,” said Assemblyman Micah Kellner, who represents the Upper East Side. “There’s a lot of speculation Jay left because why oversee a crumbling system when you can oversee the best in Hong Kong. That’s a wake up call to New York that we need to do something transformative. So whether that’s the governor taking more control of the M.T.A. or possibly breaking up the three systems, they don’t work so well anymore.”

Mr. Kellner put forth Mr. Brodsky’s name as a possible change agent. "Nobody's smarter or worked with it more deeply than him," Mr. Kellner said. Many of the other names that have been batted about come from within the M.T.A., chief among them hard-charging Thomas Prendergast, head of New York City Transit, and Helena Williams, the L.I.R.R. president who has served as interim chair in the past. Mr. Kabak points out that a dark horse is always possible. "Jay was pretty firmly ensconced in London when they picked him, so you never know," he said.

Meanwhile, State Senator Lee Zeldin of Long Island laid out a 10-point to-do list in The Post on Monday, which included capping agency managers’ compensation, selling real estate and pursuing public-private partnerships. Other reform agendas have begun to emerge, as well. The governor’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Richard Ravitch, the former lieutenant governor once charged with rescuing the M.T.A. in the 1980s, told The Observer that the idea that the authority needs to be torn down and rebuilt was “dumb as shit.” Instead, it’s a matter of approach. “It all depends on what you define as broken,” Mr. Ravitch said. “The M.T.A. isn’t broken. It’s just facing a lot of challenges, and it will always face a lot of challenges. In a way, that’s how it was set up.”

So how can the governor tackle those challenges, many of which are fiscal? The M.T.A. faces a $9 billion hole in its five-year capital budget that must be addressed by the start of next year. Between now and then, the agency must negotiate a new contract with the union representing most of its workers. Both will be expensive propositions, and while the Cuomo administration has shown an ability to broker compromise in the Legislature, taxes or any other revenue increases have been antithetical to that platform—that balanced budget allowed the millionaire’s tax to expire at the same time it cut $100 million from the M.T.A. Gay marriage is free, mass transit is not.

"The message from Andrew has been that revenues are hard to come by," Mr. Brodsky said.

The first indication of the governor's position, barring an unexpected address on a mass transit revolution, will come from who he appoints to run the agency. "Some governors want to be hands on and in control and take credit and blame for whatever happens at the M.T.A," Mr. Ravitch said. "Other people are delighted to have someone who is a reputable, well-regarded professional and independent."

Still, the governor is on a political roll. “It has wetted his appetite for more victories,” said one Democratic operative, who said that in addition to Medicaid and the Port Authority, the administration is looking very closely at the M.T.A. for an overhaul. “It would be quite the feather in his cap.”

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Ask my replacement. (MTA/Flickr)

In a new security filing, MTR Corporation reveals it will pay its new CEO $7.2 million when he starts in November, according to Bloomberg News. And to think people complained about Jay Walder's compensation package when he was hired by the M.T.A.

O.K., so it's not as much as you might think. Those are Hong Kong dollars, which actually translates to $924,000 U.S., almost triple the $350,000 he was making here in New York. Not too shabby, though whether or not it's enough to afford a three-bedroom in Hong Kong, we're not sure. At the very least, he can still brag to his friends back home about being a multimillionaire.

He very well could be, too—The Journal reports that, after bonuses and stock options, Mr. Walder's predecessor, Chow Chung Kong made $1.7 million U.S.  last year. He also leaves Mr. Walder a big conductor's cap to fill. According to Bloomberg, the company's stock rose 170 percent during the tenure of Sir Chow (he's a knight of the British empire, too), when he oversaw the takeover of a rival Hong Kong railway and led the company's global expansion.

Compared to the job he's leaving behind, that should be easy.

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

It looks pretty at night, at least.

Last year, The Observer reported that relatively new (he was nine months in) M.T.A. chief Jay Walder and his wife had bought on the Upper West Side near five subway lines. The couple paid $1.599 million for a condo with three bedrooms, a lot of natural light, a big master suite with double sinks, and a walk-in closet. It was the sort of apartment a New Yorker could settle into for the long haul.

Now, though, with Mr. Walder decamping for Hong Kong, what of it? We don't know yet. But we do know that he might find $1.599 million a steal for a nice three-bedroom in his next city.

Hong Kong is one of the world's most expensive housing markets, with relative costs that dwarf those of Manhattan (not to mention a general cost of living that puts us to shame—is that the right word?—as well: On its latest survey of the costliest cities, consultancy Mercer ranked Hong Kong No. 9 and New York No. 32).

Not only is the housing pricey in Hong Kong (average apartments go for around $3,000), it's kind of ... bad. And not bad as in four post-college roommates sharing a two-bedroom walk-up on the edge of some New York neighborhood that The Times routinely labels "emerging."

From The Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago:

[A] blaze swept through an eight-story building in the city's Kowloon section that consisted mainly of apartments subdivided into rental units as small as 100 square feet, a typical arrangement in older city districts. Even smaller "cage" or "coffin" units have as many as three beds stacked in a 30-square-foot space.

Demand for subdivided flats has surged in the last few years as record-high home prices have squeezed low-income families into into smaller quarters. But the crowding is posing public-safety and other risks.

Housing costs in Hong Kong have jumped during the global recession by nearly 80 percent, creating a city of seven million that's rich on one end and poor on the other, with not much else in the middle. In other words, you either have the $3,000 for the rental or the $1 million-plus for the purchase; or you are in truly in dire straits.

Mr. Walder, understandably, should fall on the latter end of that spectrum, besting with the move, according to sources, his annual M.T.A. salary of $350,000.

tacitelli@observer.com  ::  Follow on Twitter @tacitelli