General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

H2Osquare said:
It looks like the MPO is using “congestion pricing” to mean “variable tolling on highways” like they do on interstates in Virginia and Texas , rather than a “charge to enter the central business district” like in London or Stockholm. Their map only included interstates and certain state highways, and notable excludes Storrow and Memorial Drives, so most trips from inner ring suburbs like Belmont and Watertown and Newton to Downtown or Kendall Square would not be affected by their version of congestion pricing. The central business district charge would probably yield more revenue that just the highways, but probably not to the level of NYC
Click to expand...
Similar to what London is doing now with the expanded ULEZ cordon that encompasses much more of the city, eventually for Metro Boston (strong emphasis on eventually - acknowledging this would likely happen in phases if at all), I think the best thing would be to have a multi-tiered cordon - like a baseline charge for entering within the boundary outlined by 128 and then a CBD cordon that had a higher charge and encompassed the high demand, relatively transit-rich districts like Downtown, Back Bay, LMA, Airport, Kendall, etc.
 
mass.streetsblog.org

Gov. Healey Budget Proposal Fixes MBTA Deficit With Fair Share Funding - Streetsblog Massachusetts

"This is a game-changer for the agency," said MBTA General Manager Phil Eng.
mass.streetsblog.org mass.streetsblog.org

Well, whatever the plan (that does sound like it will be disappointing) that going to be revealed later today, at least this means the odds of the worse case scenario greatly decreases now. That scenario lies in nothing discussed or "revealed", with the odds increasing the later it is procrastinated. It probably be another kick-the-can plan, but at least it's not running right off the cliff by total inaction
 
... And the press release:

Notably no new revenues,but the highlights are:

  • Immediately direct $857 million in surplus Fair Share revenue from FY24 to public transportation.
  • Dedicate $765 million in Fair Share resources from FY26 to the Commonwealth Transportation Fund, building on an innovative strategy developed by the Healey-Driscoll administration to maximize Fair Share through borrowing to yield $5 billion over the next 10 years for capital investment bonds in rail, roads, bridges, Regional Transit Authorities and culverts.
  • More than double support for the MBTA’s operating budget to $687 million in FY26 and immediately address the agency’s budget shortfall, putting the MBTA on a path of long-term stability.
After covering $100 million in debt service on new borrowing, the FY26 budget will propose to invest:
  • $687 million to stabilize MBTA operations, including $500 million from Fair Share to to fund programs such as the MBTA Workforce Academy, low-income fares and water transportation programs
  • $110 million for Regional Transit Authorities, including $66 million for formula-based transit improvements, $30 million for Fare Free service and $10 million to facilitate interconnectivity between RTAs
  • $55 million for MassDOT operations, including workforce investments and enhanced capital project delivery
The surplus Fair Share supplemental budget to be filed by Governor Healey will propose to invest $857 million of the $1.3 billion surplus available for spending in transportation, including:

  • $400 million to address workforce and safety initiatives identified as necessary by the Federal Transit Authority
  • $300 million to replenish MBTA reserves
  • $25 million for a Winter Resilience Assistance Program for municipalities
  • $25 million for RTA workforce recruitment and retention
  • $10 million for microtransit

The 5B In borrowed against Fair Share funding will allow for:
  • $1.4 billion in investments at the MBTA for new commuter rail coaches, Red and Orange Line cars, station accessibility and resilience, track improvements and power system resiliency.
  • $2.5 billion for road and bridge repairs across the state through MassDOT, with money set aside for culverts, small bridge repairs and safety and congestion hot spots.
  • Close the funding gap for the Allston I-90 Multimodal Project


The administration plans to use $1.2 billion in Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs) to borrow against future federal highway grants to finance priority Highway Division projects statewide.

The financing plan also calls for using $170 million available from the administration’s pool of federal matching funds to retire the MBTA’s legacy debt ($89 million), freeing up operating capacity at the agency.

As part of this capital expansion, Governor Healey intends to file a multi-year Chapter 90 bill later this month that will grow the size of the funding pool directed to cities and towns to $300 million per year for five years, the highest amount in the history of funding for local roads and sidewalks. This additional $100 million annual investment represents a 50 percent increase to support the repair of municipal roads, bridges and infrastructure.
 
eber said:
If y'all want to read the report, here's the PDF:

https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6765d7c41b9c09fbe21baa40/67867789858aa064f7dc65ce_TFTF Final Report 1.14.2025.pdf
Click to expand...

Pretty disappointing that the report clearly shows we're outliers in how little we tax gas and vehicles registrations, yet those are off the table. If the gas tax pegging to inflation hadn't been shot down by ballot initiative (narrowly, and I believe that today would win) it would be 32.5 cents right now
 
Stlin said:
... And the press release:

Notably no new revenues,but the highlights are:

  • Immediately direct $857 million in surplus Fair Share revenue from FY24 to public transportation.
  • Dedicate $765 million in Fair Share resources from FY26 to the Commonwealth Transportation Fund, building on an innovative strategy developed by the Healey-Driscoll administration to maximize Fair Share through borrowing to yield $5 billion over the next 10 years for capital investment bonds in rail, roads, bridges, Regional Transit Authorities and culverts.
  • More than double support for the MBTA’s operating budget to $687 million in FY26 and immediately address the agency’s budget shortfall, putting the MBTA on a path of long-term stability.
After covering $100 million in debt service on new borrowing, the FY26 budget will propose to invest:
  • $687 million to stabilize MBTA operations, including $500 million from Fair Share to to fund programs such as the MBTA Workforce Academy, low-income fares and water transportation programs
  • $110 million for Regional Transit Authorities, including $66 million for formula-based transit improvements, $30 million for Fare Free service and $10 million to facilitate interconnectivity between RTAs
  • $55 million for MassDOT operations, including workforce investments and enhanced capital project delivery
The surplus Fair Share supplemental budget to be filed by Governor Healey will propose to invest $857 million of the $1.3 billion surplus available for spending in transportation, including:

  • $400 million to address workforce and safety initiatives identified as necessary by the Federal Transit Authority
  • $300 million to replenish MBTA reserves
  • $25 million for a Winter Resilience Assistance Program for municipalities
  • $25 million for RTA workforce recruitment and retention
  • $10 million for microtransit

The 5B In borrowed against Fair Share funding will allow for:
  • $1.4 billion in investments at the MBTA for new commuter rail coaches, Red and Orange Line cars, station accessibility and resilience, track improvements and power system resiliency.
  • $2.5 billion for road and bridge repairs across the state through MassDOT, with money set aside for culverts, small bridge repairs and safety and congestion hot spots.
  • Close the funding gap for the Allston I-90 Multimodal Project


The administration plans to use $1.2 billion in Grant Anticipation Notes (GANs) to borrow against future federal highway grants to finance priority Highway Division projects statewide.

The financing plan also calls for using $170 million available from the administration’s pool of federal matching funds to retire the MBTA’s legacy debt ($89 million), freeing up operating capacity at the agency.

As part of this capital expansion, Governor Healey intends to file a multi-year Chapter 90 bill later this month that will grow the size of the funding pool directed to cities and towns to $300 million per year for five years, the highest amount in the history of funding for local roads and sidewalks. This additional $100 million annual investment represents a 50 percent increase to support the repair of municipal roads, bridges and infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Were the Red and Orange Line cars not already funded?
 
KCasiglio said:
Pretty disappointing that the report clearly shows we're outliers in how little we tax gas and vehicles registrations, yet those are off the table. If the gas tax pegging to inflation hadn't been shot down by ballot initiative (narrowly, and I believe that today would win) it would be 32.5 cents right now
Click to expand...
With electrification moving forward, we really need to shift to a vehicle mile tax as well as a gas tax (keep the gas tax to incentivize electrification). Vehicle mile tax should perhaps be based on the weight of the vehicle (as is done with trucks) -- heavier vehicles do cause more wear and tear.
 
KCasiglio said:
Pretty disappointing that the report clearly shows we're outliers in how little we tax gas and vehicles registrations, yet those are off the table. If the gas tax pegging to inflation hadn't been shot down by ballot initiative (narrowly, and I believe that today would win) it would be 32.5 cents right now
Click to expand...
Ignoring that MA has a significant yearly vehicle excise tax that the others generally don't have makes that vehicle registration chart extremely misleading in practice, though.

At minimum, even on a 5+ year old vehicle with a cheap original MSRP, you are typically looking at $50+ a year in something that isn't a "registration fee" but functions just like one in practice.
 
JeffDowntown said:
With electrification moving forward, we really need to shift to a vehicle mile tax as well as a gas tax (keep the gas tax to incentivize electrification). Vehicle mile tax should perhaps be based on the weight of the vehicle (as is done with trucks) -- heavier vehicles do cause more wear and tear.
Click to expand...
Isn't this already accounted with the gas tax since heavier vehicles use more fuel?
 
  • Like
Reactions: W-4
millerm277 said:
Ignoring that MA has a significant yearly vehicle excise tax that the others generally don't have makes that vehicle registration chart extremely misleading in practice, though.

At minimum, even on a 5+ year old vehicle with a cheap original MSRP, you are typically looking at $50+ a year in something that isn't a "registration fee" but functions just like one in practice.
Click to expand...

Fair. Having only lived in CT (which also does this) and MA I forget that this isn't standard practice.

JeffDowntown said:
With electrification moving forward, we really need to shift to a vehicle mile tax as well as a gas tax (keep the gas tax to incentivize electrification). Vehicle mile tax should perhaps be based on the weight of the vehicle (as is done with trucks) -- heavier vehicles do cause more wear and tear.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Funding transportation needs to shift to a VMT model, while the gas tax should begin to be treated like a sin tax. Dedicate the funds raised specifically towards efforts that would reduce receipts and celebrate the day it doesn't raise you any more money.
 
The EGE said:
It's not - road wear increases as the fourth power (square of the square) of axle load - so a vehicle that's just 19% heavier will cause twice the road wear, despite having a much smaller gap in fuel efficiency.
Click to expand...
I want to demonstrate the math on this, for those who are interested.

This is simply a fun thought experiment (not necessarily advocating for this as a system of taxation) of what the tax ramification of a system in which excise tax estimation was done based on the the fourth power of axle load (the stress on the road caused by a motor vehicle) for all vehicles that cause stress on the road:

Weight (Pounds)Number of AxlesAxle Load (Pounds)Excise Tax (Proportional to Fourth Power of Axle Load)Sample Vehicle
50,000510,000$10,000.00Fully loaded semi-truck with trailer (e.g., Freightliner Cascadia with a full cargo load)
40,000410,000$10,000.00Cement mixer truck (e.g., Mack Granite Mixer with full concrete load)
30,000310,000$10,000.00Fire engine (e.g., Pierce Saber Pumper)
20,000210,000$10,000.00Box truck (e.g., Freightliner M2 106 with a full cargo load)
15,00027,500$3,164.06Large passenger van (e.g., Ford E-450 Super Duty)
10,00025,000$625.00Class 3 pickup truck (e.g., Ford F-350 Super Duty)
8,00024,000$256.00Full-size SUV (e.g., Chevrolet Suburban)
6,00023,000$81.00Midsize SUV (e.g., Toyota 4Runner)
5,00022,500$39.06Compact SUV (e.g., Honda CR-V)
4,00022,000$16.00Compact sedan (e.g., Toyota Corolla)
3,00021,500$5.06Compact car (e.g., Honda Civic)
2,00021,000$1.00Lightweight car or larger ATV (e.g., Smart Fortwo or Polaris RZR)
1,5002750$0.32Heavy motorcycle with a sidecar or electric tricycle (e.g., Harley-Davidson Touring with sidecar)
1,0002500$0.06Large electric scooter or light utility cart (e.g., GEM e2 Neighborhood Electric Vehicle)
8002400$0.03Standard motorcycle or high-powered electric bike (e.g., Honda Gold Wing)

EDITED: To reflext per-axle load (thanks @The EGE)
 
Last edited:
OldColony said:
How would a VMT work for residents who frequently drive out of state?
Click to expand...
I mean, it's not that different to a gas tax that varies across state lines - if for example I lived in RI, I might choose to buy gas in MA which has a 8¢ cheaper gas tax, and therefore RI would miss out on that revenue. It's one of reasons a regional gas tax was proposed by Baker - small state means crossing the border for a discount is all too easy.

That said... There is a regulatory framework that exists that we simply need to expand to EVs and mileage based user fees. The International Fuel Tax Agreement exists for trucking and bus operators, as they report per-state mileage and fuel taxes paid quarterly - the states then redistribute amongst themselves. The problem is the reporting for private automobiles, but there are regional structures that may act as clearinghouses - the Eastern Transportation Coalition seems to be leading so far, and I hope that it comes to pass because VA's formula is... Questionable.
 
The EGE said:
Do your calculations rely on per-axle load (i.e, accounting for different numbers of axles on vehicles)?
Click to expand...

They absolutely do not! I'm editing to reflect this correction. Thanks

EDITED: They do now! Thanks
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top