NETransit also says single-source contract that is in addition to the RFP for 200 coaches, which is still open. So this was indeed a quickie job where a new contract was ripped out approximating the canceled +75 options on the first Rotem contract, gerrymandered to exclude Buy America since Rotem no longer has a U.S. plant.Looks like they will all be built in South Korea with a certain amount of American material.
Not news: astroturfing thinktank turfs astronomically.https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2019/09/25/viewpoint-new-transportation-taxes-would-just-fund.html?ana=RSS&s=article_search&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bizj_boston+%28Boston+Business+Journal%29
Viewpoint: New transportation taxes would just fund 'Cadillac-style’ bureaucracy
I read MassFiscal's piece. It seemed ad hominem too: that we should picture a Cadillac Bureaucracy and other tax-and-spend villains and think no further.Thats not an actual rebuttal, and is really just an ad hominem.
This is all rebutted by one obvious fact that they are very intentionally ignoring: their mile denominator in Mass is very skewed by the fact that we have an unusually low percentage of State roads. Most other states (NH and ME certainly included) have a higher percentage of overall roads under state management. As a result, MassDOT spends a lot of money on local aid, fixing local roads that in other states would be state operated. So when you include the money spent on those roads in the numerator but don't include their length in the denominator, of course you end up with silly ratios.I read MassFiscal's piece. It seemed ad hominem too: that we should picture a Cadillac Bureaucracy and other tax-and-spend villains and think no further.
1) Are there other correlates to high cost-per-mile administration (ike % urban/rural, level of unionization?) that could explain why MA spends so much more than NH or ME on admin?
2) Even if MA's costs are 3x to 5x those of NH & ME, are we talking 1% instead of .3% of total infrastructure cost, or 4% vs 1% or 40% vs 10% MassFiscal doesn't say. We're just supposed to recoil at the idea of bureaucrats and stop thinking right there.
3) If you read the underlying study, go to PDF page 16 (page 4 of Part 1) and note that while MA spends a lot, (rating us far down the list (higher numbers) in fiscal matters), we rank #1 on overall fatality rate on our highways. Maybe we decided we spend near the most on admin because we're working hard on killing the least people? That'd be a discussion worth having.
4) We spend near the most per mile on our network. Is that because we're doing accelerated bridge repair? Maybe?
CRRC's bi-level fleet being manufactured for SEPTA is a radically different design from the K-cars & Brokem-clones, so they wouldn't have met the base requirements for this contract anyway. I'm not even sure they'd be able to trainline non-wonkily with the mixed sets on the T depending on how the cab car computers are configured; SEPTA didn't ask for backwards ASA/auto-door/misc. systems compatibility with older makes, so there probably isn't any and the default configuration assumes alike-cars. Fantastic relationship and all with the state, CRRC damn well knew that beforehand that this was a K-car clone order and didn't bother inquiring at all about this 80-coach contract. And Mr. Mayor better not get his hopes up for the next 200-car bi order being assembled in his city, because if there's any allowances being left for fed funds to pick up some slack CRRC is already disqualified because of Chinese sanctions...and their bi-level product isn't dual compatible with push-pull or EMU sets like Bombardier's considerably higher-leverage MLV's are.Oh boy here we go, Springfield Mayor is mad that the T is sole sourcing the 80 bonus coaches and not using CRRC. Someone might want to tell him that A. Hyundai has made the previous coaches meaning a design is ready to go, B it's not the full coach order it's a small one, C the MBTA already has a massive order with CRRC that is worth far more than this little order, D CRRC has no proven experience building MBTA bi-levels, E CRRC has enough orders on their plate right now without adding a rather short lead time 80 brand new design coaches.