General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Actually surprised no one has challenged this; the text of the amendment is more explicit than I had thought. I had read the law as general allocation to education and transit, but here's the final text from the state constitution:

Article CXXI.​

Article XLIV of the Massachusetts Constitution is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph at the end thereof:-

To provide the resources for quality public education and affordable public colleges and universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation, all revenues received in accordance with this paragraph shall be expended, subject to appropriation, only for these purposes. In addition to the taxes on income otherwise authorized under this Article, there shall be an additional tax of 4 percent on that portion of annual taxable income in excess of $1,000,000 (one million dollars) reported on any return related to those taxes. To ensure that this additional tax continues to apply only to the commonwealth’s highest income taxpayers, this $1,000,000 (one million dollars) income level shall be adjusted annually to reflect any increases in the cost of living by the same method used for federal income tax brackets. This paragraph shall apply to all tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023.


Quincy is building (or trying to build) a parking garage and a significant use of these funds was to support operating budgets of non-MBTA transit agencies elsewhere in the Commonwealth to make them fare-free. Plain letter reading those seem to be outside the scope but I hadn't read any pushback on the interpretation of operating budgets for public transit in particular. Is it "maintenance" in the broadest sense?
 
Justbuildit said:
Actually surprised no one has challenged this; the text of the amendment is more explicit than I had thought. I had read the law as general allocation to education and transit, but here's the final text from the state constitution:

Article CXXI.​

Article XLIV of the Massachusetts Constitution is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph at the end thereof:-

To provide the resources for quality public education and affordable public colleges and universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation, all revenues received in accordance with this paragraph shall be expended, subject to appropriation, only for these purposes. In addition to the taxes on income otherwise authorized under this Article, there shall be an additional tax of 4 percent on that portion of annual taxable income in excess of $1,000,000 (one million dollars) reported on any return related to those taxes. To ensure that this additional tax continues to apply only to the commonwealth’s highest income taxpayers, this $1,000,000 (one million dollars) income level shall be adjusted annually to reflect any increases in the cost of living by the same method used for federal income tax brackets. This paragraph shall apply to all tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2023.


Quincy is building (or trying to build) a parking garage and a significant use of these funds was to support operating budgets of non-MBTA transit agencies elsewhere in the Commonwealth to make them fare-free. Plain letter reading those seem to be outside the scope but I hadn't read any pushback on the interpretation of operating budgets for public transit in particular. Is it "maintenance" in the broadest sense?
Click to expand...
I am certain all of the operating budgets for transit agencies have line items that can be pointed to as repair and maintenance.

If the parking garage is replacing former capacity that has been lost due to maintenance neglect, it could, broadly, be construed as repair and maintenance. If it is totally new capacity, that is a pretty hard stretch.
 
Might be a dumb question, but are there significant capital projects that would reduce operating costs? NSRL/ electrification comes to mind long term, but blanking on things they could do now
 
Bus lanes, bus bulbs, and transit signal priority. If you can save 10% of cycle time* on a route that uses 10 buses, you can run the same service with 9 buses. Or run 10 buses on shorter headways and attract more riders.

*Cycle time is the scheduled time for round trip travel time, plus operator breaks, plus recovery time for delays. It's typically scheduled as the 90th or 95th percentile travel time. Anything that reduces travel time variability can reduce cycle time by reducing the need for recovery time, even if it doesn't reduce the scheduled travel time by as much.
 
Budd Enjoyer said:
Might be a dumb question, but are there significant capital projects that would reduce operating costs? NSRL/ electrification comes to mind long term, but blanking on things they could do now
Click to expand...
Prudent vehicle renewal is an underrated one. If you don't have so many old, falling-apart trains day-to-day taxing the shops with constant nuisance repairs and needing to press Everett Shops into fabbing no-longer-made parts, you reduce annual maintenance quite a bit while increasing topline ridership from way better reliability. The Orange Line is starting to show results from that right now. Unfortunately, the last decade has been a real wipeout on that front as they've been way, way too tardy with all manner of rail procurements. But they've probably got that savings data with the buses where fleet renewal and rebuild programs have been sustained and a lot more proactive for most of the last decade. They're at least well on their way to embarking on that with the Red and Green fleet replacements and the Commuter Rail bi-level procurement/single-level retirement despite a painful short-term crunch with the failing old fleets. But it's something you have to keep foot on the gas at all times for it to really pay off. Once they nurse the CRRC procurement to its eventual completion and thrash through the CAF Type 10 teething process, they'll need to make sure the next Blue Line order and Commuter Rail replacement loco order proceed on-time or else they're going to have more problems with past-rebuild age fleets slowly sucking resources in the shops.

Same goes for general preventative lineside maintenance. Orange, Red, and Green Line Transformation will save money in the long-term on things like signal repair as old relay components that have no parts sources get replaced by modern fiber optic backplanes. All the recent signal renewal across Commuter Rail stemming from the federal Positive Train Control mandate will end up saving them lots of money over the next 20 years by having the system up to a real and full state-of-repair for honestly the first time in the T ownership era (too many lines had really dodgy-condition signal plant before the mandate forced their hand to modernize across-the-board). And it'll save the Blue Line quite a bit to move from its very archaic and maintenance-intensive mechanical trip signal system to something solid-state like Red/Orange's ATO or more modern CBTC.
 
JumboBuc said:
So we're using half a billion per year of the "Fair Share" / "Millionaires' Tax" money -- which was meant to fund improvements to transportation -- to plug the gap in the T's operating budget. This was never the intent of that money.
Click to expand...
It's infuriating that in parallel we've cut off our ability to deal with the operational side of the house. Healey and Baker both engaged in a legislative campaign to relieve millionares of wealth/estate taxes. So few of us will ever hit a million dollar inheritance, and with a simple fix of the "cliff" at $1m, we would've give some space to make do with tax revenues to operational budgetary space to work with.
 
This happened before, not too long after the new trains were introduced.
 
as02143 said:
It's infuriating that in parallel we've cut off our ability to deal with the operational side of the house. Healey and Baker both engaged in a legislative campaign to relieve millionares of wealth/estate taxes. So few of us will ever hit a million dollar inheritance, and with a simple fix of the "cliff" at $1m, we would've give some space to make do with tax revenues to operational budgetary space to work with.
Click to expand...
Hard disagree. The Massachusetts estate tax was inherently flawed in a way no other state's is or was (taxing the entire estate and not just the amount above the threshold), and the $1 million threshold was the lowest in the nation. It's actually pretty easy to die with a million dollar net worth in MA given that the median home price in Greater Boston is in the high-$900s. It's also significantly easier to die with a million dollar estate than it is to "hit a million dollar inheritance" because most peoples' wills divide their estate among multiple heirs. If someone dies with an average million dollar house and $200k in other assets and leaves it to their three kids, that's a $1.2 million estate but inheritances of only $400k.

The reason that estate tax reform was supported by both Baker and Healey was that it was a total no-brainer improvement to a flawed policy.
 
JumboBuc said:
The reason that estate tax reform was supported by both Baker and Healey was that it was a total no-brainer improvement to a flawed policy.
Click to expand...
There was a quite simple reform that would not have left us with such a hole in the budget to fill -- just remove the cliff. But, alas, too many greedy folks in the state house thinking more about their own wallet than about the common wealt.
 
MBTA rolls out a heritage locomotive honoring the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad:
https://www.trains.com/pro/mechanical/locomotives/mbta-introduces-new-haven-heritage-unit/

1770612567055.jpeg
 
Last edited:
www.bostonglobe.com

Why the T can’t escape its recurring budget crises. And why it doesn’t have to be this way. - The Boston Globe

Experts point to changes in taxes, tolls, RMV fees as possibilities to fund the MBTA's budget.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

In 2024, Governor Maura Healey convened a Transportation Funding Task Force of business and government leaders to evaluate available funding options for the state’s entire transportation system, including the T. The group’s lengthy report identified several funding sources with untapped potential, such as increasing the state gas tax and vehicle registration fees, which are lower than national and peer state averages respectively, according to the group’s analysis.

But no concrete longterm solutions have been put into action, and it once again looks like business as usual.

The T in January said it expected to be $560 million in the red this coming fiscal year, which begins in July. Its operating deficit would balloon to $732 million the next year, according to agency forecasts.

[...]

For a time, the T would spend what it needed and send the bill to the legislature, which covered the expenses. That changed in 2000. Aiming, in part, to make the T live within its means, the state legislature created a dedicated funding source for the agency: a sliver of the state sales tax.

But actual sales tax revenues over the years have fallen well short of expectations. The MBTA Advisory Board, the T’s public oversight body, estimates the agency brought in $9 billion to $16 billion less than predicted between 2000 and 2021.

[...]

In 2019, business groups met regularly to discuss how to shore up the T’s finances and deepen the state’s transportation coffers. Following those talks, the House of Representatives passed a transportation tax bill in March 2020 that would have raised more than a half-billion dollars a year, from increases in the gas tax, the minimum corporate tax, and Uber and Lyft fees.

But then the pandemic hit and the issue got sidelined, yet again postponing the hard decisions.
Click to expand...
 
The Pioneer Institute needs to fuck off.
commonwealthbeacon.org

Reviving the MBTA’s Fiscal and Management Control Board would set the agency back

Much of today’s investment is a direct response to years of deferred maintenance and staffing shortages—conditions that worsened under the austerity-driven approach of the T's control board.
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org
On a recent episode of The Codcast, Pioneer Institute executive director Jim Stergios argued that “the T’s spending is off the rails” and called for reinstating a Fiscal and Management Control Board at the MBTA. That proposal gets history exactly backward.
The best way to deliver safe, reliable, and efficient public transportation in Greater Boston is through sustained investment, stable leadership, and strong—but appropriately scaled—oversight. Today, all three are in place, and they are producing real, measurable results. Reinstating a control board would undermine that progress, not strengthen it.
To be clear, the original FMCB did important work, and its members deserve credit for stepping in during a period of crisis. But calls to bring it back ignore the lessons learned from its tenure—lessons that are especially relevant now, as the MBTA finally emerges from years of underinvestment.
One of the most significant problems with the FMCB was structural. By statute, the board met 36 times a year—or about once every 10 days. This pace pulled senior leadership and staff away from the core work of operating, maintaining, and improving the system, and toward preparing constant presentations for board consumption.
The FMCB’s own Safety Review Panel report acknowledged this flaw in 2019. “Also obvious is that the mandate requiring the FMCB to have such frequent meetings has had a detrimental effect on the organization,” it said. “It’s unquestionable that this mandate is causing staff to ‘take their eye off the ball’ and contributes to safety not getting the time and attention it requires.” That warning should not be forgotten.
Claims that the MBTA’s current spending levels are reckless are also deeply misleading. Much of today’s investment is a direct response to years of deferred maintenance and staffing shortages—conditions that worsened under an austerity-driven approach.
Click to expand...
 
themissinglink said:
The Pioneer Institute needs to fuck off.
commonwealthbeacon.org

Reviving the MBTA’s Fiscal and Management Control Board would set the agency back

Much of today’s investment is a direct response to years of deferred maintenance and staffing shortages—conditions that worsened under the austerity-driven approach of the T's control board.
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org
Click to expand...
They pretty much have fucked off from public relevance, and only exist right now as a de facto campaign arm of their recent ex-Board member Brian Shortsleeve for his doomed Gov. campaign. It's why they're hammering the FCMB bullshit right now in complete sync with Shortsleeve's talking points. If the only pub they can get right now for that effort is a Commonwealth Beacon op-ed savaging them for their duplicity, that's about all you need to know about how far they've fallen since Baker left office and ended the revolving door of their hangers-on getting access to the levers of power.
 
www.bostonglobe.com

Boston to keep three MBTA bus routes free to ride through June, but long-term plan is unclear - The Boston Globe

The pilot program on the 23, 28, and 29 bus routes was previously set to end by March 1.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com

The city of Boston will pay to keep three MBTA bus routes fare-free through the end of June, temporarily extending a pilot program that was expected to run out of money by month’s end.

But its long-term future past that is unclear, four years after Mayor Michelle Wu championed the program as a way to remove financial hurdles for riders and help improve service.

[...]

The mayor had previously hoped that the results of the pilot program would spur the MBTA to fund and expand fare-free service. But the cash-strapped agency is staring down a massive budget deficit.

In a statement released by Wu’s office, MBTA general manager Phil Eng said said the T has been “pleased to be able to support the City of Boston’s program,” but he did not indicate whether it would, or could, help extend the program past June.
Click to expand...

Dead in the water, I'd expect.
 
commonwealthbeacon.org

‘Administrative fat’ or ‘amnesia’: How much should we spend on the MBTA?

This week on The Codcast, we dive into a long-running debate: is the significant growth in state funding for the T an acknowledgment that good public transit requires big public investment, or is it a reflection of out-of-control spending? CommonWealth Beacon senior reporter Chris Lisinski...
commonwealthbeacon.org commonwealthbeacon.org

Pioneer Institute takes yet another whack at (campaigning for their alum Brian Shortsleeve) bringing back the FCMB in their second podcast appearance in 4 weeks. This time Charlie "The Lesser" Chieppo getting destroyed by Aloisi in a point-counterpoint standoff. "But the pensions!..." and "PRIVATIZE MOAR!" and blah blah blah.


In other news, Commonwealth Beacon apparently has no rolodex whatsoever to book better guests. 🤷‍♂️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top