Report: MBTA management broken, so Beacon Hill needs to take back control

Okay, that's it, Baker and his panel of "experts" must be living in another planet.

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.

... ever.

And I predict Baker the (allegedly) Business-Savvy will prove to be one of the Commonwealth's worst governors ever.

One example of inefficient work practices can be observed in how the MBTA responded to Late Night Service with respect to its train maintenance program. As the service day lengthened, the night maintenance shift was reduced to only four hours each night – and fewer hours on weekends. Given set up and tear down time, the mechanics now only spend 1-3 hours per day actually working on the trains, yet the MBTA pays them for a full 8 hour shift.

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.

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.

Yes, let's drive housing costs up even more! Big Dig debt should be moved back to the roads, plain and simple (this from someone who drives every day).

According to the report, the MBTA pays $108 million annually in big dig debt. I just looked at MassDot data for the tunnels and Tobin in Boston, and in 2013 (the most recent I can find) combined toll revenue was just south of $411 million. If there were a 5% toll increase, that's another $20.5 million per year right there that could all go towards the Big Dig, and these numbers may be higher based on updated data.

Not perfect, but it's a start and the increase would be negligible to drivers.

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."

This will probably cause more harm than it's worth. Wheres the tipping point between paying a exorbitant amount for unreliable transit service (after all, this plan is supposed to take 20 years), and driving? I'd also be willing to bet fare evasion would increase due to people just on the cusp of being able to afford the T no longer being able to after a larger hike, and also because:

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

I've already pointed out in another thread that fare evaders get away with it, because you never actually see any T employees in stations, with the exception of some of the "Major" ones.

and crack the whip on workers, too many of whom the panel concluded are system-abusing gadabouts.

You're not going to win disengaged personnel back, and turnover comes at a very high cost in the form of training, recruiting, etc. It's a catch-22.

The halt on expansion is actually a good idea.

The public-private partnership idea NEEDS to be explored further and be brought front and center. I dedicated a year of graduate school to researching and redesigning a communications and social media strategy for the MBTA (which for the record is MUCH better than what they're doing now), and in the process also got into the business aspect a bit, particularly exploring PPP's. Setting these up with anyone who has a stop named after them would go a long, long way. BU, Northeastern, BC, MFA, Prudential, and other organizations with money have a lot to offer, and gain.

Get these organizations to fund cleaning and maintaining their respective stations in exchange for branding rights (as opposed to just selling them to random corporations as explored a few years ago) and either exclusive advertising rights in these stations, or a cut of outside advertising revenue for placements sold at these stations. You can also add free digital advertising for these organizations via social media at virtually no cost (posting/sharing/tweeting events, info, etc.)

There's way too much "old school" though in this report, and that's a big problem in such an "innovative" city.