The standoff over Penn Station’s future intensified this week when MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber publicly refused to sign a federal partnership agreement for the Trump administration’s multibillion-dollar overhaul of the transit hub, calling the redevelopment process run by Amtrak and the U.S. Department of Transportation “simply bizarre” and raising pointed questions about transparency, funding, and potential conflicts of interest.
The Memorandum That Sparked the Clash
The confrontation crystallized around a Memorandum of Agreement that Andy Byford — the former New York City Transit president now serving as Amtrak’s special adviser overseeing the Penn Station redevelopment — sent to Lieber on Monday, June 23. The letter renewed an invitation for the MTA to become a “fully involved” partner in the project, one of several overtures Byford has extended since the Trump administration took control of the Penn Station overhaul from the MTA in April 2025.
Lieber responded with a letter of his own that same evening, obtained by Gothamist, and then escalated the dispute publicly at the MTA’s monthly board meeting on June 24. In the letter, Lieber accused Byford of engaging in “gamesmanship” by leaking the invitation to media outlets before the MTA chair had even received it.
At the board meeting, Lieber did not hold back. He told board members that he was “declining to be the first person in New York real estate history to say I want to enter into a real estate deal with Donald Trump and with no lease and no protections and just take a bet,” as NY1 reported.
What the MTA Wants — and Why It Will Not Sign
Lieber’s objections extend well beyond the MOA itself. At the core of the dispute is the MTA’s lease on Penn Station, which runs through 2186 and stipulates that Amtrak cannot make changes to the Long Island Rail Road portion of the station without the MTA’s consent. Lieber characterized the MOA as offering the MTA not the rights of a partnership, but rather the status of a tenant — one that could be overridden or displaced at any point during construction.
The MTA chief also cited the federal government’s interference with congestion pricing revenue and its withholding of funds for the Second Avenue Subway extension to 125th Street as reasons to distrust a partnership agreement with Washington. In his letter, he questioned whether Halmar — one of the two firms selected as the master developer — was chosen on the merits of its bid or because of executive Peter Cipriano’s prior employment at Trump’s Department of Transportation during the president’s first term.
Lieber further pressed on the project’s financial structure: Who will pay the estimated $7 to $8 billion? What role does Madison Square Garden owner James Dolan stand to play, given that Amtrak’s design calls for demolishing the Dolan-owned Infosys Theater on Eighth Avenue to construct a new grand entrance? And what happens if the administration’s attention shifts elsewhere and the project stalls?
The Federal Vision — and the Funding Question
The Trump administration’s plan for Penn Station is ambitious in scope. Renderings unveiled on June 8 by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, Byford, and Penn Transformation Partners — a joint venture of Halmar, Skanska, and Vornado Realty, with design by architect Vishaan Chakrabarti’s Practice for Architecture and Urbanism — envision a single-level, ADA-compliant concourse with art deco detailing and a grand Eighth Avenue entrance. The design promises to consolidate public activity above the platforms, expand track capacity, and introduce at least limited through-running on the regional rail network, all while keeping Madison Square Garden in place and rail service operational throughout construction. Groundbreaking is targeted for the end of 2027, with the project expected to be entirely union-built, according to Amtrak’s press release.
The federal government has already committed roughly $243 million in early-stage funding — a $43 million grant to Amtrak in August 2025, followed by an additional $200 million for design and permitting when Penn Transformation Partners was selected as master developer in May 2026. Duffy told Congress last month that the administration would commit $8 billion to the project, but the DOT later clarified that figure referred to the total estimated cost, not a federal funding pledge.
Governor Kathy Hochul’s office has drawn a clean line. A senior MTA advisor, Mitch Schwartz, told amNewYork that if the president wants the project, he should pay for it — pointing to Duffy’s congressional testimony as the administration’s own benchmark.
Where Both Sides Go From Here
Amtrak maintains that the MOA does not weaken the MTA’s existing lease, does not require the MTA to contribute financially, and does not authorize changes to the recently renovated 33rd Street Concourse. An Amtrak spokesperson stated that the organization remains committed to improving Penn Station for New Yorkers and called it “unfortunate” that the MTA does not appear to share that approach.
Lieber, for his part, has left the door open to collaboration — but without preconditions. He told the MTA board that the transit authority is “very interested” in working with Amtrak and other stakeholders on a plan to improve Penn Station, but that the MTA should not have to sign a binding agreement to participate. All Amtrak needs to do, Lieber argued, is share its full plan so the MTA can assess the scope and impact on LIRR riders.
For the more than 600,000 daily commuters who pass through Penn Station — a facility that has been the subject of redevelopment debates for over three decades — the intergovernmental dispute adds another layer of uncertainty to a project that, despite dramatic renderings and ambitious timelines, still lacks a confirmed funding structure. The question for New York is whether the two sides can find a framework for cooperation before the political window for a project of this scale closes, or whether Penn Station’s next chapter will be defined by the same institutional friction that has stalled its transformation for a generation.
