The MBTA has released proposals and data for fare increases that could range between 35% and 43%, as well as cuts on all services except the Red, Blue and Orange Lines.
The T estimates the extra money would make up a $161-million deficit and offset revenue lost by people abandoning the T because of the higher fares.
One proposal would sock CharlieTicket riders with even higher increases in an effort to get them to move to CharlieCards. Another would require a $10 minimum for adding value to CharlieCards on buses or on trolleys, not to raise revenue but to speed boarding times on buses.
The T plans a series of 20 hearings over the coming weeks over its proposals.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
![]() | 0 bytes |
![]() | 0 bytes |
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Better Yet
By anon
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 2:28pm
Visit one of the cities that has greatly expanded public transit and also expanded population and economic activity as a result.
They do exist.
Boston could be one of them if the statehouse clown car could find its clue sometime soon!
are you joking?
By anon
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:09pm
Funniest thing I've heard all day! You must not have had to rely on Chicago public transportation to get to work for several years. Glad you enjoyed your occasional trip up and down Michigan Ave., tourist.
Chicago has haters too
By Mark-
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:15pm
I'm sure if you rode the Chicago transit system, you'd find a lot to despise about that also. Also, their fares are already much higher than Boston's.
Pass the pain
By Kaz
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 2:12pm
Is it inherently necessary that the person running the MBTA advocate for passing the pain onto the public as opposed to openly advocating that the state fix its funding situation?
Is it because their ability to move up the ranks of state politics requires that they not tip the tea kettle of reality? The State House decided to put the MBTA on this crash course with its debt load by agreeing to completely asinine extrapolated budgetary numbers over 10 years ago now. They have not ONCE been forced to recognize the abject failure of their predecessors (unless you count last year's bailout from the sales tax increase that they paid the MBTA to close that "one time" budget hole). It's time for reality to be the key point here. It's time for the State House to revisit the stupidity that led the MBTA to want to jack up its fares while decreasing service.
I guess I can still maintain a little solace in the fact that we're grown up enough not to be blaming the Carmen's Union for the budget situation like other parts of this great nation of ours has done when public budgets don't line up with revenue. However, it won't matter how much they raise fares or cut service until they recognize WHY revenue isn't matching expenditure here. It's the most messed up funding situation of ANY public transit system in the US (as I recall from one analysis done about 2 years ago).
The legislature had better get the MBTA funding back on the right track and soon.
There Is Revenue Out There
By anon
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 2:33pm
There is plenty of revenue out there if the good people of MA would pay their fair share and the MA DOR would enforce the current laws on the books.
We have just finished a holiday season that saw a substantial increase in on-line shopping. You see the results of this with all the package deliveries in the weeks leading up to and the week after the holidays. Many of these purchases are not assessed a sales tax because the retailer does not have a presence in MA (Amazon is a great example of this). However, the MA purchaser is required to pay a Use Tax on their annual MA Form 1 when they file their income taxes. Conveniently enough, the Use Tax is 6.25% of the amount of the purchase not charged a sales tax, but would have been charged a sales tax if purchased in MA.
The amount of revenue lost is staggering, over $200 million a year is unpaid.
How about everyone agree to pay their fair share when filing their income tax return this year and we will have more than enough to cover the MBTA shortfall.
Public response period
By Kaz
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 2:43pm
The MBTA is accepting public comments electronically at fareproposal(.at.)mbta.com.
Here's what I sent to them:
To whom it may concern:
It doesn't matter if you boost fares through the roof or cut all of your service. Both are small bandages on the wound of "Forward Funding" that the state legislature has hobbled the Authority with since 2000. Until this becomes the talking point, all increased fares and reduced service do are pass the pain onto the portion of the public that cannot afford to bear that burden these days. The MBTA will continue to fail gradually...and then suddenly.
The public MUST be rallied to understand that it needs to pressure the State House to fix the Authority's funding situation and return the debt load back into the state's more capable hands and off of the MBTA's books. The extrapolated rate of state sales tax presented in 2000 was a pipe dream (and not even a very realistic one at the time even). The fact that this has essentially remained unvisited by the legislature is one of the greatest failures of our state's government over the past 10 years.
The public, especially those outside of the MBTA service area, are never going to be made aware of the reality of how badly "Forward Funding" and the Big Dig debt transfer from the 2000 legislation without the Authority being the ones to bring these facts to light themselves. It's time for the MBTA to stop acting as if it's going to fund-raise its way out of its financial situation. No amount of abusing patrons with advertising, robbing the average person's wallet for fare money, or deleting much-needed services is going to do anything other than make the system solvent for a meaningless amount of time further until the next time these same bells are rung for the following year. You are patching one hole and should be fully capable of realizing there are more holes coming sooner rather than later.
Please become the advocate that is needed to pressure the legislature into fixing the problem at its source. Get the Big Dig debt put back on the state's budget where it belonged all along. Get the MBTA budget paid by the state as one of those essential services the state should be providing no matter the cost and not some constrained amount artificially reliant on sales tax revenue as if that's relevant to public transportation in any way.
Please work to fix the most glaring problem that anyone who has taken a modicum of effort to understand the situation can see. You are probably the only one who can make this happen.
Among the cuts
By Peter
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 3:40pm
Folks from Brighton and Newton will miss the 501 which is on the axe under scenario two.
Thanks Kaz
By Matthew
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:27pm
I'm working on a letter along similar lines I'm going to send to them later.
Right on, time for us to organize
By Nik
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 7:06pm
Clearly, a lot of people here are regular T riders, and angered by the drastic cuts at hand. I take the T daily, and these cuts go beyond just trimming service, and into the realm of the T not serving basic mobility needs.
Kaz hits the nail on the head here. Instead of arguing on UHub, isn't it time we stand up for funding the T? Clearly, Rich Davey and now Jon Davis have done as much as humanly possible to cut waste and maximize efficiencies. The real elephant of the problem is the awful funding situation, including the Big Dig debt.
It's time for us to organize, as T-riding voters. The number of riders in the region, in the state, is far from small. We need to advocate for this state actually funding the way we get around. It isn't the sole job of a state official or the T to push for funding it; it's the duty of people who ride it and will be riding it.
Please tell me you're not
By anon
Wed, 01/04/2012 - 7:15am
Please tell me you're not considering an Occupy MBTA movement... ugh. Remember how Occupy Boston did nothing but cost taxpayers a million bucks? Please don't.
God Forbid!
By Udonymous
Wed, 01/04/2012 - 5:04pm
People getting together to demand redress?
That's communist!
And how much productivity will it cost when they cut all the service that gets people TO THEIR FUCKING JOBS?
PS
By Kaz
Wed, 01/04/2012 - 9:44am
I swear I didn't read this quote from Alvaro, a lawyer and board member of the MBTA, who commented in yesterday's Globe article before I wrote my public comment to the MBTA:
But kudos to Alvaro for speaking publicly on the truth of the matter and getting it into the media. It's time to put some pressure on the legislature and get a proposal on how they plan to clean up the mess their contemporaries and predecessors left them.
The $10 minimum load on a
By anon
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 3:42pm
The $10 minimum load on a CharlieCard would only apply at bus and trolley fareboxes, not at ticket machines in stations.
Adam, can you correct this?
Clarified
By adamg
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:11pm
Thanks!
Wow!
By Lecil
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:39pm
There is actually a good idea in the middle of that mess of a proposal! (Seriously; how many of us have lost tooth enamel standing behind someone putting a one-way fare on a Charlie ticket, one-nickle-at-a-time while boarding a train?) :)
I'm all for providing a
By anon
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 3:46pm
I'm all for providing a living wage, but there has to be a limit. Has the T compared their salaries and benefit packages to those provided by other transit agencies?
Also, from what I hear, there are a whole lot of supervisors who don't do very much. When the Blue Line went to single-employee operation a few years ago, they increased the number of supervisors more than the number of conductor positions they cut. Has anyone looked into reducing the number of employees who aren't actually getting things done?
Would the unions really rather see drastic cuts in front-line headcount, instead of reasonable salary and benefit concessions?
Classic negotiating strategy
By Mark-
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:22pm
This is exactly the way the last round of fare increases happened:
Start out with outrageous increases and service cuts.
Hold a lot of hearings.
End up with something that looks a lot better.
End up with something that looks a lot better, but ....
By Michael Kerpan
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:31pm
... still sucks.
;~{
"List of cuts at other large
By J
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 4:38pm
"List of cuts at other large transit systems (.rtf format)"
Ah yes, the race to the bottom strategy.
"if that shithole over there managed to cut their service, then why shouldnt we?"
Why not? I mean, Sacramento cut all transit service from 1am to 10pm. If they can do it, why not us? Miami runs trains every 30 minutes. Look at what a paradise they are! Let's be Miami!
And look at London, why their ticket fare is something like $8, why not us?
Hell, Arlington Texas has ZERO public transit, not even a bus. If they can do it, so can we!
Isn't it wonderful when we race to the bottom? What ever happened to, you know, trying to be better than others, and outdo other cities to try and attract investment and such.
Can you imagine ever hearing the following:
"Mexico City charges 21 CENTS a ride, and their subways run every 90 seconds, maybe we should try that"
Of course not.
And also, wasn't the sales tax hike supposed to pay for the MBTA for awhile?
The "fares havent been raised for 5 years" is a massive lie. Fares were raised, we just pay for it every time we buy something or go out to eat.
Default is preferable to service cutbacks
By Ron Newman
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 5:10pm
Instead of cutting service this drastically, the MBTA should spread the pain upward to the 1% by defaulting at least partially on its unsustainable debt. Let the hedge fund owners take a hit for a change.
That would be nice...
By Mark-
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 7:27pm
...if only evil hedge fund owners were the investors in MBTA bonds. But just about anybody who is trying to save for retirement ends up getting tax-free municipal bond mutual funds, and lots of little guys would end up getting screwed.
Not only that but the cost of borrowing would soar for anything with "Massachusetts" in its name and we would all pay that price in taxes.
What are the hearings for?
By Lecil
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 6:39pm
I'm curious what the MBTA expects to get out of the hearings. Are they looking for alternative ideas? Modifications to the two current proposals? Buy-in on one or the other of the two proposals?
What happens if the overwhelming public reaction is "Neither is acceptable"?
Are there really any options here?
I imagine the hearings . . .
By Chris Dowd
Tue, 01/03/2012 - 7:38pm
. . . are there for people to vent and scream - which will then be shown on the TeeVee for the usual suspects to mock and demean and dismiss and belittle for they won't be polished or have the right ideological talking points or match up with each of our little world views etc etc ad naseum. Basically our political system in toto- the appearance of participation blended artfully with artificial distinctions we ourselves now draw against each other like trained seals.
And no- barring the challenging and questioning of some very basic systemic stuff- which no one who matters is even remotely doing or would even consider doing- there are no options. Fees increased. End of story.
Who needs T management to cut
By Saul
Wed, 01/04/2012 - 8:29am
Who needs T management to cut service when today's weather seems to be doing the same.
Disabled trains on the Red, Blue and Green lines, and lots of commuter rails delays because of "inclement weather". Inclement weather? It's winter, single digits happen.
Pages