That MBTA report is finally out and basically concludes Charlie Baker and legislative leaders need to take over control of the authority through a new "Fiscal and Management Control Board" to replace the new MassDOT board Deval Patrick and legislative leaders set up to take over control of the authority.
The report calls for an end to restrictions on fare increases - in fact, it criticizes the T for offering pass holders higher discounts than other transit agencies in the US and England and says that's "unsustainable."
The state should look at creating a special property-tax levy in the communities served by the T to fund capital improvements and pay off the T's debt - with a state commitment to pay off Big Dig related debts but no new ones.
Oh, and New Bedford? You might want to rethink those plans that assume you're getting commuter rail anytime soon.
The recommendations also include making the T figure out how to spend the capital money it already has - and just on capital projects, not salaries - and crack the whip on workers, too many of whom the panel concluded are system-abusing layabouts.
The report also calls for a halt to any spending on system expansion that doesn't already have federal funding until that program is actually in place. That means the Green Line Extension, which recently received a commitment of nearly $1 billion in federal funds is OK, but plans for an electrified commuter-rail line to New Bedford should be shelved.
The report estimates a 20-year period for "the complete restoration" of the T's physical assets.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Okay, that's it, Baker and
By DTP
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:30am
Okay, that's it, Baker and his panel of "experts" must be living in another planet.
I hate to say it
By moxie
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:31am
But I think that it's so hopelessly broken that some form of receivership is the only solution. The people who run it, fund it, and work for it are completely incapable of doing their jobs.
The MBTA had very limited control of its destiny...
By b from Ros
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:49pm
Receivership was inevitable. Current state restrictions and laws hamstring the organization. Hopefully, they give it the proper tools to function (which could include human, fiscal, or legislative capital).
If Chuckie
By roadman
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:50pm
and his panel were truly interested in fixing the T, then it stands to reason they would recommend changing (or just flat out eliminating) those restrictions and laws. Instead, they're just looking for an excuse to underfund the system even more.
I do not know his plans in that regard...
By b from Ros
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:06pm
But this report is certainly a clear shot across the bow for fare hikes. This will open doors to increased "user fees" associated with public transportation.
Is it right or wrong? I guess we will find out...
The report specifically
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:14pm
The report specifically recommends exempting the T from some of those laws hamstringing it. Page 20 talks about exempting them from the anti-privatization law ("Pacheco law") and some others; page 12 mentions legislation necessary to allow them to raise fares. And the entirety of page 38 is an exhaustive list of legislation needed to free the T from laws restricting it.
Did you actually read the report, or are you just dismissing it because you don't like the source?
Worst expert panel....
By Michael Kerpan
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:36am
... ever.
And I predict Baker the (allegedly) Business-Savvy will prove to be one of the Commonwealth's worst governors ever.
At least
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:46am
He can address problems, unlike Deval. Everything including DCF was anecdotal.
Raise revenues, and monitor how it allocates available capital. OOOOooo The horror!
Address problems?
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:42pm
No. That isn't ALECs goal here.
Their goal is to destroy public transit and bust the public sector unions. Their fanboy doesn't give a shit about actually addressing the problems - more like exploiting problems.
SHOCKING
By erik g
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:05pm
I for one am shocked--SHOCKED--that running a state government is in no way similar to running a business, and that Charlie is out of his depth.
Deval
By RichM
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:34pm
Will be pretty tough to beat in that category.
Adorable!
By Elmer
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:41am
Confirmed
By moxie
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:48am
Buddy of mine works thru a Laborers local, and did a few months third shift track work on the T, funded thru Federal recovery money. He says they averaged three hours of actual work per shift.
While Far From Perfect ...
By Elmer
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:01pm
... the report raises lots of questions that the Ⓣ ought to answer.
There's actually a number of recommendations I agree with, such as:
I question this also
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:21pm
While I agree many bus routes should be modernized, as many still follow the old trolley routes.
But I'd love to see the cost analysis of how much would be saved along with how much $ it would cost to do such a thing.
Ideas are great, but most cost money so we're kinda back to square one.. the T has no money!
They'll hire some consultants to get on that
By Markk02474
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:38pm
after much money is budgeted, its put out to bid, one is selected, they do the work, hold public hearings, return a report, hold more public hearings, people object to changes, and years later, not much changes when money can't be found to implement the route movements.
Nice friend you have there.
By anon (not verified)
Thu, 04/09/2015 - 3:01pm
Nice friend you have there. Not everyone who works for a union is like that you know.
"As the service day
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:50pm
"As the service day lengthened, the night maintenance shift was reduced to only four hours each night – and fewer hours on weekends. "
I don't think the weekday service hours were ever shorter than they are now. They've been about 5 am to 12:45 am for several decades, probably all the way back until the trains ran all night in the early 60s. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.)
"working on the trains" -- no, the issue is working on the tracks. Even if trains are running 24 hours, only a small proportion of the rush hour fleet will be running at night, so any trains that need work can be in the repair shop.
What a load of crap
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:50am
I'm reading some of the stuff coming thru, and it's clear baker and this committee have no clue about public transit or even ride it. And it's also clear that some of these plans are suggested by people who have no idea how public transit really works.. they seem more "business" moves than actual transit policy.
The other thing I am gathering from this report is this.
It's 100% a load of crap that lacks many details in it (and many half truths). It's to make Charlie Baker look good. Why? because not only is he the reason for the Big Dig debt issue, but he ran on a platform of "conservative spending" and "no new taxes". And he certainly doesn't want to "that guy" who had to reneg on their campaign promises (as many do once they realize they pretty much have to).
So do you think a panel that he appointed would come out and say "yeah its xyz reasons and you're the cause, and yes you're going to have to re-neg on your campaign promises"? No, of course they wouldn't say that, so the data is skewed. It's all to make him look good and look like he's doing something AND to keep his campaign promises. Typical Mass politics, never for the people, always for the politicians to keep face.
So look forward to service cuts, 10 dollar fares, and a system that just will be "more of the same"
PS - Love the board appointment thing.. so we can have more of Charlie's non-riding T friends on boards to make decisions they have know virtually nothing about.
On a different note, suggestions on getting a decent used car? I'm going to need one.. fuck this noise.
Ya anything
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:57am
but a Smart Car!
don't you mean
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:54pm
a Smaht Cah?
(and no I wouldn't.. death trap on wheels IMHO)
The British car show
By roadman
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:03pm
Fifth Gear recently did crash testing on Smart Cars. For their small size, they held up suprisingly well in moderate speed impacts.
Still wouldn't dare drive one out on Interstate 95 or 93 though.
ya i know
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:05pm
I saw that too.
Still seems like a death trap to me and not very good in the snow. But people drive them so my rental impression may be wrong.
And yes, that's the other thing, they aren't made for high speeds. The steering wheel starts to vibrate.. (I speak from personal experience.. I rented one once a while ago)
Re: Vibrating steering wheel
By Belmont
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 3:22pm
I've never driven a SmartCar but I have driven cars that needed wheel alignments (which can cause very noticable vibrations). Your rental car may
have hit a pothole or two previous to you using it.
That must be why they were so popular in Canada
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 3:30pm
They aren't good in the snow.
There are some videos out there from their launch in the US - they use one in a head-on with a small Mercedes. The smart car is a hampster ball - it demolishes the Mercedes, actually.
Why settle for just a decent
By Kinopio
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:04pm
Why settle for just a decent used car? Might as well splurge since its not like this state ever adjusts the gas tax or charges for parking permits in Boston or charges the market rate for metered parking. You can even get your own free personal parking space as long as you put a piece of garbage in the street. And if the snow removal budget goes over its fine, car drivers musn't be hassled by snow, they'll get the millions from elsewhere.
I take pride
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:07pm
I take pride in that I've never had a car payment, EVER, and I'd like to keep it that way.
I wouldn't buy a new car anyways, loses its value the minute you drive it off the lot.
You run the T
By ccd (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:48pm
Cybah, you seem to be a public transit expert. Perhaps you should be running the MBTA(insert sarcasm)! Last time I checked, when goods and service are exchanges for a fee(money) its a business and runs like a business. Yah know balance sheets, income statements capital expenses, revenue. "Transit policy" is irrelevant if the business side of things fail to operate...
bzzt
By cybah
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 2:51pm
whatever dude.. not even gonna waste my time explaining because you obvious don't get it. (did you even read the report in full?)
did you know
By Malcolm Tucker
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 3:30pm
Public transportation is meant to be a public service. Privatizing it (i.e., making it a business) would likely make it less accessible to the public, thus eliminating its usefulness as a public service. There are still facts and figures and budgets and such in public services, but it's not a business just because money is involved.
~*~the more you know~*~~
False dichotomy. Ever heard
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 6:38pm
False dichotomy. Ever heard of non-profits? Hospitals, food banks, all sorts of other public assistance programs, but not provided by government. They're private, but they're not for-profit businesses, and they're run for the benefit of the public.
Hospitals Are Non-Profit?????
By BlackKat
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 11:40pm
Gee, I did not realize Partners was so altruistic. I guess it was wrong to apply the Tunney Act and we should have just let them keep gobbling up hospitals like the Borg.
I'm reading some of the stuff
By Scratchie
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:58pm
The deuce you say.
It's Beacon Hill that's broken
By necturus (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:01pm
The system has been starved of necessary investment for too long.
The T's woeful state is symptomatic of a larger problem: the Commonwealth's 18th century constititution, written for a society of gentleman farmers, dosen't work in the modern world. A document that gives Robert DeLeo, responsible only to a relative handful of voters in Winthrop, so much power over legislative priorities that affect the whole Commonwealth is clearly dysfunctional.
As Patriot's day approaches, it occurs to me that Massachusetts would probably be better off today if the British had won. Our Canadian neighbors have a much more sensible constitution.
Did you miss the part about unspent capital budget?
By moxie
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:35pm
You know, that little $2.2B allocated for repair/improvement over the last five years, that wasn't spent on repair/improvement?
The management of this agency is quite simply befucked. The problem starts there.
What I need to know more about
By whyaduck
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:44pm
is whether the capital budget can be tapped for repair/improvement? Are there any restrictions on the same?
I do agree, however, that there has to be management changes.
The vast majority of time
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 2:55pm
The vast majority of time capital funds are tied to specific projects and cannot be redirected into other funds. There's also a lot of capital funds laying around that have been approved to be devoted to in-progress projects that are still unspent (ie paying for landscaping on the GLX, which they won't pay out until it happens, but is budgeted, so looks unspent)
Did you miss the part
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 3:04pm
About how federal funding works? Contracts?
Or do you simply have no clue about holdbacks and phased pay outs and all that? These funds are not fungible.
lolmbta
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 6:44pm
They figured out a way to use $66.5M of capital funds to pay for 444 employees' salaries (see p17). But they can't figure out how to use capital funds on other capital expenditures. Lol.
Indeed, this part of the
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 6:41pm
Indeed, this part of the report was truly mind-boggling. You'd think they'd at least find a way to squander that $2B on more six-figure do-nothing no-show executive positions. The T management is so incompetent and inept they can't even figure out how to waste available money efficiently.
Why oh why
By Criss (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:10pm
Why can't some (most it seems) commenters here accept anything Baker or this panel says? It's like suddenly everyone here is an expert on public transit.
And at least he's trying to do something with the T. What exactly did Deval or Mitt do to improve things?
Short memory?
By adamg
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:31pm
Patrick worked to expand dedicated funding for the T. Remember the increase in the gas tax? Also got funding for the new Red and Orange Lime trains.
Orange Lime Trains
By Steeve
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:50pm
Those sound delicious.
I've heard...
By dmcboston
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:21pm
...that some of them are lemons...
Hiyo
By Steeve
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 3:18pm
Hiyo
Also got funding for the new
By anon (not verified)
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:55pm
Which, due to the structural problems in the T as pointed out in this report, won't actually be fully delivered for nearly another decade.
That's how long it takes
By Ari O
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 9:50pm
They were funded in 2013, spec'ed in 2014, bid in 2014, and the contract is now out and being signed (oh and came in well under budget).
Now why is it taking so long? Because the parochial powers that be made a perhaps political calculation that they had to be build in Massachusetts, rather than in another state that has a functioning transit factory. So they have to build a factory! That takes time. You don't just buy these things off a lot.
How long do you think it takes Ford to R&D, spec, design and assemble a car prototype before it rolls off the line? More than a year, that's for damn sure.
Exactly...
By octr202
Thu, 04/09/2015 - 8:07am
...had "we" decided these cars were of critical and urgent need, there are several car builders in the US with existing factories, some even with rapid transit cars rolling off the assembly lines right now. I'm sure Kawasaki could have taken the guts of their cars for NYC MTA or WMATA and put then in carbodies shaped to fit our tunnels quite easily. But that would have entailed letting them be built in New York or Nebraska. Can't have that, so we're going with untried and untested.
The T's procurement process is a mess. But somehow I don't see how putting the politicians in more control of it is going to improve the process.
And gave us Beverly Scott, and James Aloisi
By moxie
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 1:39pm
I wouldn't go around talking up Deval's management accomplishments if you want to win an argument.
It's like suddenly everyone
By DTP
Wed, 04/08/2015 - 12:34pm
I guarantee you 90% of commenters on UHub are more knowledgeable about public transit than Charlie Baker and his cronies.
Pages
Add comment