Assuming the T actually wants to inform the public, Bryan Person explains why it should set up a blog. Among his reasons - finding anything on the current mbta.com is a pain and:
... It could explain in a human voice how the T is arriving at its decisions on issues such as fare increases, service changes, station upgrades, etc., and demonstrate how customers' needs and opinions are impacting the thought processes behind those decisions ...
Jeff reports that his state representative, Frank Smizik, has come out against the T's proposed fare hikes. He's yet to hear from his state senator, Cynthia Creem.
T Boycott is a site to promote the idea of staying off the T on June 6 as a protest against the proposed fare hikes.
Via Mike Mennonno.
When the MBTA announced its proposed fare structure for next year, it went to great lengths to say increases were needed just to keep service levels the same. Mass. Marrier went to one of the T fare-increase hearings yesterday. And what he heard was:
... T Deputy General Manager Dennis DiZoglio predicts a 6% drop in riders if the fare goes up. He also is looking at reducing bus and subway frequency to cut costs. ...
Mass Marrier details everything wrong now happening with the T's half-and-half fare system, in which some stations are equipped for CharlieWhatevers and the other half still use tokens - and he expresses doubts about the future (given that while there are four possible ways to put a card in the reader, only one works).
And that's before he even gets started on why the T should eliminate all fares.
Check out this Phoenix article, which notes that the T's contract with the carmen's union expires June 30, along with other fun facts (has it struck anybody else as odd the way Dan Grabauskas has emphasized the fact that the increases will go into effect UNLESS lots of people protest)? Then again, given how T employees are among the highest paid in the country (with high absenteeism to boot) is this a bad thing?
Jason writes that when he talked to an aide to his state representative, Jeffrey Sanchez, he learned he was the first person to contact Sanchez's office about the issue. Since the legislature helped create the mess the T is in, he suggests more people contact their legislators. He also explains why people who want to protest the increases should have a plan in place to make up the money the T makes (such as getting the legislature to do something about forward funding).
Mike Mennonno issues a call for action - serious action - over the fare increases and general service suckage, like, say, a mass protest at one of those T public hearings on the fare increases (list of the hearing dates and times):
Mike Mennonno looks at MBTA costs: Some of the highest salaries in the country, rampant absenteeism, expensive, oil-fired power plants and, of course, antiquated equipment:
... This is why it's hard for me to justify paying more for fare, because it's not going to fix what's broken: the unions, bad contracts for grossly overpriced generally faulty equipment as the rule, and the legislature's "forward-funding" plan, which just ain't cutting it, either. ...
Jason calls the office of his state senator, Dianne Wilkerson, to register his thoughts on the proposed T fare increases, in particular, his belief that the state should assume more responsibility for T costs, because the state legislature is at least partially responsible for the T's current financial condition. He does not expect the answer he gets from an aide:
Add Krissy in Boston to the list of people really mad about the planned T fare hikes; she posts a list of the things she'd want to see out of a new hike, including better service on the Green Line, commuter rail and express buses.
Mike Mennonno, meanwhile, reaches into colonial history to come up with a way to make people feel better about the fare increases.
Jason plans to call his legislators to request they look at ways to increase T ridership rather than simply letting the T hike fares because it has no choice:
... It seems appropriate policy would be to keep prices high to cut gasoline consumption while at the same time putting policy into place to increase MBTA ridership. Healey's idea to suspend the state's gasoline tax is bad policy and obvious pandering. It's also frustrating that the MBTA would cave on increased fares without leading the ridership to the legislature for a fix. ...
Mike Mennonno wonders why people generally seem resigned to the impending fare hikes - especially given all the fuss a couple years back when the T tried to ban buskers:
... I mean, we're talking a nearly forty percent increase here - think of that over the space of a year - there's nothing but stunned silence. People feel powerless, apparently, and that fare hikes like this are inevitable and unstoppable.
Take a page from the immigrants' playbook. There's strength in numbers. ...
Mass Marrier explains why the T should be cutting its fares to next to nothing.
The Outraged Liberal gets outraged (well, what do you expect?) about the T's plan to require outbound trolley riders to pay when they get offa that train:
... The system being proposed by T general manager Dan Grabauskas (who doesn't ride commuter rail because it's not convenient) reflects what happens when people who don't use whatever system for which they are designing "solutions." It is, in a word, unworkable.
Fred Hewitt, of the Watertown Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, discusses the proposed free-transfer system, which could mean savings for people who now take both a bus and the subway (such as many Watertown residents who take the bus into Harvard Square to catch the Red Line).
$1.70 for a subway ride; 22% higher for commuter rail.
Soxfan summarizes the latest T fare-hike announcement:
... we're in debt, it's not our fault, and you're going to pay up. ...
On Pelican In Her Piety, Jason digs deep into the announcement, which includes not just fare hikes but a restructuring of the entire T fare system.
On The Third Decade, Derek notes that on Friday, the T cited flat ridership for a planned 2007 fare increase, but that on Sunday, the Globe reported T ridership was actually up for the first time in a few years. So he wonders why nobody of the reportorial ilk has asked the T whether this means they won't need as much of a fare increase as they'd thought.
Earlier:
25-percent T fare increase on the way.
Rising fuel costs, expanding debt, steady ridership to blame.
Hmm, why do you think T ridership hasn't increased despite the recent run-up in gasoline prices? Regular T commuter Gary McGath has a possible answer:
... The MBTA offers riders inadequate parking, overcrowded trains, cars that are often freezing or broiling hot, unpredictably irregular buses and subways, Green Line trains that routinely lie about their final stop, and other frustrations. ...
If commuters do have to pay more, perhaps the T could soften the blow by giving them more amusing subway maps.
But if our favorite dysfunctional transit system has to raise fares, Jen Stewart has suggestions for what to do with the new money:
... a) hire people who aren't outright jerks to run your token booths (don't get me started on that harridan at Oak Grove...just don't), and b) fix your turnstiles and escalators? It would be lovely not to bruise myself every third morning on a turnstile that doesn't cooperate.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
