It was less than a week into the Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s administration. Snow was coming down at a quick pace around Newark Penn Station. Sidewalks were becoming difficult to navigate — as were the roads bringing passengers to the station.
Everyone knew the day was going to be a problem for commuters. Everyone wondered whose problem it was to fix.
In the old New Jersey, NJ Transit and the Turnpike would have talked past each other while passengers fumed. In the new New Jersey, Kris Kolluri — who now runs both agencies — made one call. Turnpike snowplows rolled off the highway and into the rail hub, clearing the way so trains could keep moving and riders could keep transferring.
Kolluri said the question wasn’t whether this was a rail problem or a road problem. It was more basic: How does the state keep its transportation system running efficiently?
That, he says, is exactly why Sherrill did something no New Jersey governor has done before — put NJ Transit and the New Jersey Turnpike Authority under one leader and tell that person to treat them as pieces of a single mobility system, not rival fiefdoms.
“The governor’s view is that the job isn’t to manage two separate bureaucracies — it’s to move people,” Kolluri said. “Riders don’t care who owns which mile of track or which stretch of asphalt. They care if they can get from Point A to Point B quickly, reliably and at a price they can afford.
“She wanted someone thinking like Waze, not two siloed agencies. Waze looks at everything that’s available in real time and says, ‘Here’s the best way through the network right now.’ That’s essentially what she’s asked me to do with roads and rails.”
Kolluri recently spoke with BINJE about what that means in practice — for riders, for the World Cup and for the future of transportation in New Jersey.
Here is a look at that conversation, slightly edited for space and clarity.
BINJE: Let’s start with the big structural change, putting NJ Transit and the Turnpike under one person. Beyond a good analogy in a crisis, how does that translate into day-to-day decisions will real impact?
KOLLURI: The snowstorm at Newark Penn was a good example. In the old model, you’d have a debate about whether it was Transit’s problem or the Turnpike’s problem. Now, I don’t even need a meeting. I can just say, ‘Get the Turnpike plows over there, clear the station, keep people moving.’
That’s the practical difference. You cut out the negotiation between agencies. You make a decision and execute. The governor is very clear on outcomes — she’s pretty hands-off on tactics — but the expectation is that the system works and that people see the difference.
BINJE: You’ve called the governor’s approach “practical” and “pragmatic,” not orthodox. What do you mean by that?
KOLLURI: There’s a tendency in government to default to orthodoxy — “this is how we’ve always done it” — especially when you’re dealing with two big, legacy agencies. The governor is asking us to do the opposite: start from the problem we’re trying to solve and be willing to cross lines that existed mostly on organizational charts.
So, if Turnpike buses can solve a Transit problem during the World Cup, then we use Turnpike buses. If Transit’s real estate strategy can help the Turnpike think differently about its footprint, we do that, too. The test is whether it works in the real world, not whether it fits an old box.
BINJE: Let’s talk funding. The Turnpike is pledging $500 million to NJ Transit. How should riders understand that?
KOLLURI: It’s not a random transfer. It’s tied to a very specific goal: by 2031, we want to have replaced roughly 800 rail cars and 250 buses. You rebuild confidence in NJ Transit when people see and feel the difference — new equipment, cleaner, more reliable service. That’s what this funding is meant to underwrite.
And it reflects a bigger shift: recognizing that the Turnpike has a stake in a strong transit system. If trains are unreliable, people who can drive will get back in their cars. That’s bad for congestion, for emissions — and, frankly, for the long-term health of the whole mobility network.
BINJE: You’ve hinted that real estate will be part of that financial equation — a Land Plan for the Turnpike?
KOLLURI: NJ Transit already has what we call a Land Plan — a rigorous way of looking at every piece of property, every station area, every right-of-way and asking: Are we getting the most value out of this?
Now we’re taking that mindset to the Turnpike. I’m working with Transit’s head of real estate to look at interchanges, park-and-rides, and other assets the same way. The idea is to stop treating them as pure expenses and start treating them as long-term assets that can help support the investments we need to make in buses, trains and service.
BINJE: Inside NJ Transit, what’s the immediate priority under this new structure?
KOLLURI: Basic credibility. We can’t ask people to care about governance reforms or funding structures if the day-to-day experience doesn’t change. So, we’re focused on fundamentals: twice-daily compartment cleaning on trains, a clear plan to refresh the fleet and performance that’s as predictable as we can make it.
The unified structure helps, because we can coordinate construction, bus detours, rail schedules and highway work in a way that wasn’t really possible before. But ultimately, if a commuter feels like the train is cleaner and more on time, that’s how they’ll judge whether this is working.
BINJE: The World Cup seems like the ultimate test of all this. And we know all about the $150 ticket to get to MetLife Stadium (see that recap here). What other challenges and opportunities come out of hosting a global event?
KOLLURI: The World Cup compresses every problem we’re trying to solve into a few weeks. You’ve got people flying in from all over the world, many of them seeing New Jersey’s system for the first time. And they’re paying a lot of money for that experience.
We saw one FIFA package that was roughly $39,000 for two tickets, with merchandise and a large gift card. When you’re paying that kind of money, you’re expecting friction-free movement. Any failure — a confusing fare, a broken transfer, a long delay — becomes an international story.
So, we’ve had to look at everything: Secaucus fares, where there’s been a lot of misunderstanding about who pays what; a joint volunteer program pulling in Turnpike and Transit employees, including bilingual staff at key points; and even ordering 85 buses on the Turnpike side to support FIFA-related movements that rail alone can’t handle.
BINJE: You’ve talked about South Jersey as another key proving ground. Why?
KOLLURI: If this is truly a statewide model, people in Camden and Gloucester have to feel it, not just people changing trains in Secaucus.
That means moving long-talked-about projects: rehabilitating the River Line, advancing the Gloucester County rail line, and rebuilding the Walter Rand Transportation Center into a modern hub. It also means new tools like micro-transit, where we work with private operators to connect lower-density communities to the core network in ways a fixed bus route can’t.
If we can deliver on those, it’s a clear signal that the unified approach isn’t just about North Jersey commuters; it’s about the whole state. (See our South Jersey companion piece.)
BINJE: Longer term, you’ve floated the idea of a single app — a kind of ‘Waze for New Jersey.’ What does that look like?
KOLLURI: The vision is pretty simple to describe, hard to execute: one interface where you can see everything at once — rail, bus, micro-transit, maybe even autonomous vehicles on parts of the Turnpike down the line — and have the system route you dynamically based on what’s happening right now.
To get there, you need standardized data, reliable service and a willingness to let algorithms, not agency turf, drive a lot of decisions. We’re putting pieces in place — cleaner service, micro-transit pilots, early tech conversations — but I’m realistic. Funding fights, technical problems or old-fashioned turf battles can all derail that vision.
BINJE: Handling a one-day snowstorm was nice. What is the challenge now?
KOLLURI: Right now, I’m running two big agencies and helping plan the World Cup at the same time. We’re either going to show that integrated governance can actually deliver, or we’ll be the case study for why it doesn’t.
That’s the opportunity — and the risk.
