[HK-Online] Ross Sandler's Second Report on NYAT - 8/11/00
kitchen
kitchen@hellskitchen.net
Fri, 11 Aug 2000 07:01:32 -0400
Hell's Kitchen Online 8/11/00
http://hellskitchen.net "All the News the Times Won't Print"
------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, see the bottom of this newsletter
------------------------------------------------------------
IN THIS ISSUE ...
New York Apple Tour's court-appointed monitor Ross Sandler has released his
second report on the operations of the bus company. Like his first report,
Mr. Sandler concentrates on an extremely limited standard of review set by
Justice Phyllis Gangel-Jacobs.
The report ignores many of the operations that occur once the busses are on
the streets and, unfortunately, attempts to minimize, explain away or
rationalize many of the summonses received by bus drivers. Whether a
particular summons may or may not stand up to factual inquiry and judicial
review should be the job of the courts, not Mr. Sandler. He should be a
scrutinizer, not a cheerleader.
The administrative trials of NYAT by the State Department of Motor Vehicles
and the City Department of Consumer Affairs are still continuing with no
decisions reached yet.
And as reported in late July, a Federal Judge found NYAT guilty of making
false statements as to the age of the vehicles in an attempt to exempt them
from emission standards. NYAT was fined $800,000 and is required to upgrade
its engines.
------------------------------------------------------------
REPORT TO JUSTICE GANGEL-JACOBS BY
COURT-APPOINTED MONITOR ROSS SANDLER
August 9, 2000
Hon. Phyllis B. Gangel-Jacobs
Supreme Court Justice
60 Centre Street
New York, NY 10007
Re: New York Apple Tours, Inc. v. Hoffman, et al.; Index No. 112044/00
New York Apple Tours, Inc. v. Jackson, et al.; Index No. 112299/00
Dear Judge Gangle-Jacobs:
Enclosed please find my second report as court-appointed monitor for New
York Apple Tours line. If you have any questions concerning this report I
would be delighted to respond.
Sincerely Yours,
Ross Sandler
cc: Hayim A. Grant
Mel Bankan
Howard L. Simon
Gabe Tausig
Brice Paulson
Mark Gimpel
Report No. 2 of Ross Sandler
Court-Appointed Monitor for
New York Apple Tours, inc.
July 14 to August 3, 2000
I. Introduction
This second report summarizes the work of the Monitor for the three-week
period beginning on July 14, 2000, the beginning of the third week of
operations, to August 3, 2000, the end of the fifth week of operation. The
company during the period has continued to operate within the guidelines
set down by the court and the Monitor. Major events included the arrival of
a full time director of operations who began work on July 24, 2000, and the
resolution of the legal dispute with the Department of Justice concerning
Apple Tours’ plea agreement.
II. Activities of Monitor
A. Compliance. The company with my approval modified three of the forms to
better match daily work requirements, and added a new daily summary form.
The new forms are attached hereto.
On July 27, 2000 Robert Firmbach, the Article 19A consultant retained by
the company, reviewed the company’s 19A files and its bus inspection
reports. He orally advised me that the company is maintaining its 19A files
and bus inspections as required, and that he will submit a written report
on his review at a later date.
I have followed the practice of meeting each Friday with Hayim Grant,
President of Apple Tours, to receive a report for the prior week ending on
Thursday. In addition to these meetings at the company’s Manhattan office,
I regularly visit the company’s parking facility in Greenpoint to observe
the early morning dispatch of drivers and buses. I also visit the Manhattan
terminal to observe operations, and on occasion ride a tour bus.
B. Repair Facility. On July 19, 2000 I visited the company’s repair
facility in Queens. The facility is located on Borden Avenue with frontage
on Newtown Creek. The site is a former vehicle maintenance facility which
Apple Tours has leased. It is crowded with buses in varying states of
repair from the newly rebuilt to the utterly cannibalized along with a
large inventory of parts ranging from small boxes containing nuts and bolts
to fully rebuilt engines and transmissions. The company purchases parts and
supplies from English suppliers and, while I was there, was preparing to
ship a number of bus transmissions back to England for rebuilding. The
space is cramped for the number of buses and equipment stored there which
makes some work and storage appear difficult and disorganized. Overall, the
repair facility appears busy and professionally managed.
One covered bay of the repair facility has a pit over which vehicles can be
driven. The pit allows a person to stand at full height and is used not
only for repairs, but also for official State DOT inspections of Apple
Tours’ buses as well as buses belonging to several other small bus
companies. Inspections usually take place every Thursday. To facilitate bus
inspections Apple Tours had made a number of changes in the facility,
including lengthening the pit to accommodate buses.
On the day I visited the repair facility, Verne Cavaleri, Intermodal
Transportation Specialist 1, who is in charge of State DOT’s New York
region inspections, was present along with an inspector from the State who
was inspecting a bus from another company. Cavaleri told me that Apple
Tours’ bus inspection record had recently improved as compared to its own
past record as well as compared to other companies. For the period April 3,
1998 through May 26, 1999, Apple Tours experienced an initial failure rate
of 41 percent for 133 inspections. More recently, from May 26, 1999 through
May 26, 2000, Apple Tours reduced its initial failure rate to 23.6 per cent
for 123 inspections. Gateway Bus Tours, a smaller double decker competitor,
by contrast, had an initial failure rate of 47 per cent from May 5, 1999
through May 5, 2000 for 17 inspections. Reinspection by the State
subsequently passed all of the buses of both companies.
C. New Operations Manager. On July 17, 2000 Howard M. Erlanger joined the
company as director of bus operations. He will supervise mechanics,
drivers, tour guides and dispatchers. Erlanger has been in the bus business
since 1978, including a period from 1995 to 1999 when he owned his own bus
company. He previously worked for Shortline Sightseeing, Community Coach,
White Coach & Tours, and most recently Travelways where he was Vice
President for Fleet Utilization and Operations.
III. Results for the three weeks JuJy 14 through August 3, 2000
A. Drivers. As of August 3, 2000 Apple Tours had 63 approved and licensed
drivers. The number of divers actually assigned out on a daily basis during
the period varied from a low of 25 to a high of 39 The list of drivers is
updated regularly as divers return, medical issues are: clarified and new
drivers are hired.
During the period two divers were dropped for failing the random drug test,
one for not taking a drug test when required, and another for unauthorized
selling of tour tickets.
The required drug test is administered by a private DOT compliance
specialist, Comply, which maintains its main office in Deer Park, Long
Island. I met with its President, David Jacovsky, when he visited the
Greenpoint dispatching location on July 5. 2000 to schedule and administer
the drug tests.
B. Buses. As of August 4, 2000 Apple Tours had 59 buses with all necessary
licenses and inspections from State DOT, State DMV and the City DCA. The
number of buses actually in use on any given day varied from a low of 21 to
a high of 33.
C. Breakdowns. During the twenty-one days of this period there were 35
breakdowns.
This continues to be a problem which the company acknowledges. One sign of
progress is that in the last seven days of the period only four breakdowns
were experienced. I have asked for additional information on breakdowns in
future reports. Permanent improvement depends on additions to the
maintenance program and introduction of newer buses,
D. Accidents, During the twenty-one days there were three minor accidents
involving other vehicles, none of which resulted in a personal injury.
• On Friday, July 14, 2000, a bus pulling to the curb brushed against a
parked truck which resulted in breaking the glass in the bus’s side
passenger door.
• On Thursday, July 20, 2000, a training bus without passengers being
driven by a trainee with a 19A instructor on board passed too close to a
sanitation truck and knocked the truck’s side mirror off.
On Wednesday, August 2, 2000, a van cut in front of a bus standing in
traffic. It swiped the bus, leaving a mark, but did not stop.
E. Summonses. The company reports that it or its drivers for the twenty-one
days received twenty-four summonses, an average of 8 per week. This
compares with an average of 12 per week during the first two weeks of
operation. It is possible that a diver may have received a summons and not
reported it. If this happened the company will eventually receive a notice
from the administrative tribunal handling the summonses.
None of the summonses have been adjudicated. As many as sixteen of the
summonses may have a questionable legal basis and the company may be
entitled to a dismissal. Three others concern equipment defects that were
repaired within the time allowed to received a dismissal. With respect to
the remaining five summonses the company will take the matters to the
appropriate administrative tribunal. The summonses were as follows:
• Five summonses were for unauthorized layover or no standing, of which
four appear to have occurred at authorized stops.
• Seven summonses cited missing windows in closed-top double decker
buses. The windows had been removed by the company for tour purposes, and
each bus had passed state DOT inspection in that configuration. The
company, to avoid such summons, has started to weld a single restraining
bar across the open windows in addition to stating its intent to challenge
the summons.
• One summons cited a bus in passenger service for traveling on a
no-through truck route, a requirement that does not apply to a tour bus in
passenger service.
• Six summonses cited illegal discharge of passengers. Four of the
summons, however, specify locations which appear to be approved tour bus stops.
• Four summonses are for equipment defects (all for burned out brake
lights) which were repaired within the time allotted.
• One summons was for stopping in an intersection. The bus had been
taken out of service because of low air pressure and was being driven back
to the repair facility in Queens when it lost air pressure and stalled in
the middle of an intersection.
III. Community Outreach
I have had additional correspondence with Senator Tom Duane and Council
Member Christine Quinn, and with some members of the community and the
Times Square BID. I anticipate meeting with community representatives again
after they have received this report.
IV. The Federal Sentence
On Friday, July 28, 2000 the federal district court in New Jersey resolved
the controversy between the company and the Department of Justice over the
interpretation of the written plea agreement signed by the company when it
pled guilty to two violations of the federal false statement statute, Title
l8, United States Code, Section 1001. The dispute concerned federal
emissions and safety standards to be applied to the 42 buses which remain
subject of the plea agreement. It is now incumbent on the company to reach
agreements with federal EPA and federal DOT consistent with the district
court’s decision, and then to meet those obligations. Gabe Tausig of the
City Law Department informed me that the City anticipates taking a position
concerning the legal implications of these events for Apple Tours.
V. Conclusion
During this period the company has continued to operate within the rules.
Dated: August 8, 2000
Ross Sandler
Court Appointed Monitor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hell's Kitchen Online(tm) -- NYC's West Side Wonderland
web: http://hellskitchen.net
email: kitchen@hellskitchen.net
TenantNet(tm), for Residential Tenants: http://tenant.net