General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Jahvon09 said:
I saw those when I went through that station. But as far as the homeless sleeping on them goes, looks like someone is sleeping just past the trash barrell. I see a foot sticking out & a sandel on the floor. Similar benches are set up at Gov't Center Station upstairs. :)
Click to expand...

Good catch!
 
Last edited:
bigeman312 said:
Can you explain what "working capital" means in this context? Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen the T use the term that much, and I was rather confused as well, but turns out it's the same as any other business: cash set aside for short-term expenses (salaries, invoices, etc.).
 
stefal said:
I haven't seen the T use the term that much, and I was rather confused as well, but turns out it's the same as any other business: cash set aside for short-term expenses (salaries, invoices, etc.).
Click to expand...

Thank you! That leads me to another question. @friendchristoph says "money for working capital instead of funding that in one of the hundred other ways available to the T." What is meant by that? What other funding sources were available for this "working capital?" Is the tweeter implying that a different funding source should be covering these expenses? What source?
 
bigeman312 said:
Can you explain what "working capital" means in this context? Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
If they're using the generally accepted accounting definition, that's current assets- current liabilities. In short, it's the difference between what they have on hand and what they owe over the next year.

Colloquially however, it often means operating liquidity- having the cash on hand to pay wages, bills, etc as they come up due. In this context I'm assuming it's the latter, given the description of "ensure adequate cash flow to make payments." Think of it as buffer cash.

Thank you! That leads me to another question. @friendchristoph says "money for working capital instead of funding that in one of the hundred other ways available to the T." What is meant by that? What other funding sources were available for this "working capital?" Is the tweeter implying that a different funding source should be covering these expenses? What source?
Click to expand...

I think a fundamental misunderstanding of what working capital meant. I think he assumed it was the same thing as capital improvements.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. Thanks to both of you. Based on the responses, it seems to me like the MBTA is doing the right thing by allocating this money primarily to unfounded short-term expenses (“working capital”), and that this tweeter is incorrect in his finding of issue with the T’s allocation.

Is that fair?
 
bigeman312 said:
Hmm. Thanks to both of you. Based on the responses, it seems to me like the MBTA is doing the right thing by allocating this money primarily to unfounded short-term expenses (“working capital”), and that this tweeter is incorrect in his finding of issue with the T’s allocation.

Is that fair?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say Chris is incorrect, his primary point is that the MBTA has been consistently under budgeting for revenue and acting surprised when it exceeds their targets, rather than budgeting for that revenue and having a plan to spend it. I think his point is we really didn't need all the "Forging Ahead" service cuts because now the T has a pretty sizable cushion of extra money allocated to nothing in particular.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
I wouldn't say Chris is incorrect, his primary point is that the MBTA has been consistently under budgeting for revenue and acting surprised when it exceeds their targets, rather than budgeting for that revenue and having a plan to spend it. I think his point is we really didn't need all the "Forging Ahead" service cuts because now the T has a pretty sizable cushion of extra money allocated to nothing in particular.
Click to expand...
Given the uncertainty coming into FY2022 when that budget was finalized I don't begrudge the MBTA being very cautious and conservative with it's financial planning. In general that's good practice - it's far better to be left with money in the bank than be in the red. In fact, the state recommends that local municipalities be left with 3-5% in "free cash" (difference between budgeted and actual revenues / expenses) at the end of each fiscal year. Either way, the T maybe could have not cut as deeply as they did, but that's only apparent with the benefit of hindsight and actual economic performance - besides, the fy2022 budget was developed for prepandemic service levels. Hopefully the T uses that piggy bank to make some significant investments.
 
Last edited:
HelloBostonHi said:
I wouldn't say Chris is incorrect, his primary point is that the MBTA has been consistently under budgeting for revenue and acting surprised when it exceeds their targets, rather than budgeting for that revenue and having a plan to spend it. I think his point is we really didn't need all the "Forging Ahead" service cuts because now the T has a pretty sizable cushion of extra money allocated to nothing in particular.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that seems reasonable in general, but the pandemic was tough to predict. I also am not sure I buy into his if you just use the money to increase service levels ridership will come back - hasn't service already been generally restored to pre-pandemic levels? I don't think it is what is currently depressing ridership. Not am I sure if you could really just pump more money into the CR to have more trains running given all the other constraints on ridership - there is no way to increase service on the Red or Orange for instance given current rolling stock and other limitations....
 
Stlin said:
I think a fundamental misunderstanding of what working capital meant. I think he assumed it was the same thing as capital improvements.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was my take on it, too, which is unfortunate. Chris Friend has a lot of insightful things to say about T operations and planning, but I cringe when he delves in to the finances, because he (and likely most of his readers) need a better grounding in terminology and concepts.
 
HelloBostonHi said:
Solid list of projects in the latest accessibility report, including a few platform projects I hadn't heard about before and some more work at Ruggles: https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/2021-12/2021-12-03-swa-initiatives.pdf
Click to expand...
This one caught my eye:
" 8. Hynes Station Scope: MassDOT has designated a private developer to construct an air rights development over Hynes Station and the MassPike I-90 at the northeast corner of Boylston St. and Massachusetts Ave. The design will provide a renovated and fully accessible station with a reopened Boylston St. entrance incorporated into the new air rights development. Update: The MBTA is meeting with the developer on a biweekly basis to define the station’s external dimensions, structural constraints, and utility upgrades. A design consultant began working in March 2020. Full design is expected to be complete in June 2022 (contingent on the developer also completing its design). Pending funding availability, construction would begin shortly thereafter and is projected to take approximately 3 years. "
 
^ You beat me to it, Charlie. I believe the language about starting when the developer has funding is new. This was likely obvious, but it's the first time they're mentioning that. I believe they have stated they meet with the developer bi-weekly before.

Someone asked about North Wilmington on here recently:

Pending the release of Federal funds, design work is expected to be substantially
completed in early 2022 with construction to follow.
Click to expand...
 
My notes:
  • Ruggles: "Ruggles Phase II project will advance additional accessibility upgrades – including constructing an accessible entrance from Columbus Avenue, creating additional accessible entrances to the Orange Line and Commuter Rail platforms, upgrading paths of travel around the station and other repairs to bring the station into full code compliance for a permanent certificate of occupancy. Update: The design for this project is expected to reach 75% in January 2022. Construction funding has not yet been identified therefore the finalization of design and start of construction will be determined, in part, by the availability of funds in the next capital funding cycle." I would assume those new entrances will be directly from Ruggles Street.
  • Newton Highlands continues to be pushed back - construction not scheduled to start til Fall 2022.
  • Many previously discussed projects are delayed slightly - not surprising given the prevalence of delays during planning and construction, and given COVID. Most of the delays aren't huge.
  • Worcester (NTP given November 29) and Winchester (construction starting this month) are under way.
  • Some more details about the planned Lynn reconstruction: "The consultant has presented the 15% design to the MBTA and has received design direction. The new station will have two new enlarged elevators, a new high level platform, and a new canopy. The 100% design submission is expected August 2022."
  • 100% design for South Attleboro expected in early 2022.
  • The next big slate of redundant elevators (Sullivan, Davis, Chinatown, North Station, State, Mass Ave, Broadway, Jackson Square, Arlington, Wellington) are at 30% design and headed for 75%. "Over the next year, select projects will be moved forward into final design and construction if funding becomes available."
  • New screens for displaying elevator statuses are being added, beginning with Forest Hills.
  • Type 10 contract expected in mid-2022.
 
The EGE said:
My notes:
  • Ruggles: "Ruggles Phase II project will advance additional accessibility upgrades – including constructing an accessible entrance from Columbus Avenue, creating additional accessible entrances to the Orange Line and Commuter Rail platforms, upgrading paths of travel around the station and other repairs to bring the station into full code compliance for a permanent certificate of occupancy. Update: The design for this project is expected to reach 75% in January 2022. Construction funding has not yet been identified therefore the finalization of design and start of construction will be determined, in part, by the availability of funds in the next capital funding cycle." I would assume those new entrances will be directly from Ruggles Street.
Click to expand...
Reasonable pitch: sell the air rights over the SW corner of Ruggles and require a building there to incorporate new OL and CR entrances on Ruggles St.
1638975081387.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top