General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

[Delvin4519]

Coalition drops report on dire state of mass transit in Massachusetts - Cambridge Day

It’s not just an MBTA problem. A statewide report reported and backed by 40-plus organizations warns: “The current state of transportation is unsustainable.”

www.cambridgeday.com

Healey task force on transportation funding will miss its December 31 deadline

The task force Gov. Maura Healey created to propose a new funding model for transportation in Massachusetts is going to miss its end-of-2024 deadline.

commonwealthbeacon.org

THE TASK FORCE Gov. Maura Healey created to propose a new funding model for transportation in Massachusetts is going to miss its end-of-2024 deadline, and sources say the concepts currently being bandied about fall well short of what some had been hoping for.

Task force members were notified by email at 5:37 p.m. on Monday that the report was not being issued on Tuesday. The delay comes as Healey is preparing her fiscal 2026 budget, which is due to be unveiled in late January.

In July, Hayes Morrison, the state’s undersecretary of transportation, briefed the MBTA board on the task force’s progress and lowered expectations about its eventual report. She promised a “tool kit” listing potential revenue sources and revenue uses with no actual recommendations. Asked if the final report would rank revenue-raising priorities, she said: “We don’t think so.”

We're literally sleepwalking into disaster. Someone posted this below on zombie reddit. 100% agree with the post.

Are Governor Healey or the upcoming federal administration even going to actually save the T in full?

At the very least, Bus Network Redesign, is that thing still gonna finish out its phased rollout?

EDIT: deleted one of the screenshotted comments in response to one of the replies below.

 

[FK4]

Some misogyny in the post but it would be nice to feel like the Gov actually wants to do something here. But, need to see the task force report first.

 

[HenryAlan]

Just adding a data point. Had to get a 10:30pm bus at Alewife and hopped on the Red Line at 10:03 with a little concern. I shouldn't have worried. Arrived at Alewife in exactly 20 minutes. I can't remember the last time I got from Harvard to Alewife in that time.

Yes, I would rate all three HRT colors as running very well at the moment. I haven't ridden any Green Line routes in a while, so can't comment on them, but on the other lines, it's all smooth, fast, and frequent.

 

[ritchiew]

Just adding a data point. Had to get a 10:30pm bus at Alewife and hopped on the Red Line at 10:03 with a little concern. I shouldn't have worried. Arrived at Alewife in exactly 20 minutes. I can't remember the last time I got from Harvard to Alewife in that time.

Whoa. If Harvard to Alewife took you 20 minutes, you had some bad luck and got on slow train. That's supposed to take about 9 minutes, and since all the shutdowns, that's roughly what has actually been happening. Here's stats from a recent weekday: Average travel time between those two stops was 9m 18s; fastest was 6m; and 90% were under 14m.

https://dashboard.transitmatters.org/red/trips/single/?to=70061&from=70068&date=2025-01-03

That does go to show how terrible the service has been that 20 minutes now feels like a victory. I'm just beginning to recalibrate for how long these trips should take, now that the track work is done.

 

[HenryAlan]

Whoa. If Harvard to Alewife took you 20 minutes, you had some bad luck and got on slow train.

I missed that part and thought he meant 20 minutes from Park to Alewife. So yeah, that is not good if it was from Harvard. Typically, though, the trains are running quite well.

 

[ant8904]

We're literally sleepwalking into disaster. Someone posted this below on zombie reddit. 100% agree with the post.

Are Governor Healey or the upcoming federal administration even going to actually save the T in full?

At the very least, Bus Network Redesign, is that thing still gonna finish out its phased rollout?

I know I said that line, but I do want respond that my concerns are not exactly the same.

Like in terms of full disaster, my concern is the worse case scenario have a concerningly high non-zero chance. That they are going to procrastinate, but until past procrastination, they put it off so late that we do inadvertently fall of the fiscal cliff. The danger of brinkmanship is allow stakes to get high enough, one of the times something will actually slip.

But I do think the realistic scenario is just last minute action and a kick-the-can scenario. That is not a worse-case-scenario, that is sadly the norm for decades. It will leave a deficit that will cause drastic cuts and fare hikes, but not one the MBTA had to close before.

Okay, a cut that leaves Eng being scapegoated, half-hour headways, and re-staffed in-house personnel in favor for on-paper-cheaper-but-in-practice-disastrous consultants-as-needed is possible - but realistically any kick-the-can will be enough that it avoids something that looks too obviously bad (like half-hour headways). Meanwhile if they something like reverse the personnel hiring, it wont affect ridership experience in a way we can immediately tell. I'm not a fan of the slow boiled, but it does avoid the most dramatic loss. It also buys time.

I do hope dialog do start ramping up. The sooner we actually hear discussion, the more hope we get a better timeline than what is speculated above

 

[Balerion]

I don't think it would be easy to scapegoat Eng at this point. The shutdowns have been high-profile and the successes of them have been trumpeted. If there are serious service cuts because of a budget shortfall, there will be enough people screaming about it that Eng will not take the blame for the sins of the legislature.

 

[themissinglink]

Governor's Task Force Has A Plan to Dodge the T's Fiscal Crisis, But Only for the Short Term - Streetsblog Massachusetts

"There will be no service cuts, no layoffs, and no fare increases" for the MBTA in the coming year, task force member Brian Kane told StreetsblogMASS.

mass.streetsblog.org

 

[Jeremi]

Congestion pricing. There, there’s your task force. You could roll it out in two months and the hole is plugged forever.

 

[BeansTheCat]

Governor's Task Force Has A Plan to Dodge the T's Fiscal Crisis, But Only for the Short Term - Streetsblog Massachusetts

"There will be no service cuts, no layoffs, and no fare increases" for the MBTA in the coming year, task force member Brian Kane told StreetsblogMASS.

mass.streetsblog.org

While this is pretty clearly not what the Millionaire's Tax was intended for, and it's not a long term a long-term fix, I don't hate it. If it weren't for the states abysmal track record of funding the T, I'd say it's a very reasonable stop gap. It's fairly reasonable to expect both sides of the T's operating budget (income and expenses) to improve in the following years. Shorter headways due to new RL/OL cars, increased service on BNRD routes, major GL improvements (Type 10s, stop consolidation/enhancement, GLTPS), continued RTO, and worsening traffic should all lead to consistent ridership increases. At the same time, signal replacements, new bus lanes (or just improved enforcement), and management that actually knows what they're doing should reduce operating costs. While there are some headwinds (like running SCR), the idea that the T's fiscal situation will be significantly different if it can continue current progress over the next 3 or 4 years is understandable.

That all said, it sure seems like the can is just being kicked down the road again.

Congestion pricing. There, there’s your task force. You could roll it out in two months and the hole is plugged forever.

Not sure if you read the article, but there's this tidbit:

Kane told StreetsblogMASS that congestion pricing – which recently launched in New York City – came up as a topic of discussion at Tuesday's meeting as a potential long-term solution that merits further conversation.

If New York's congestion pricing works as expected and it doesn't cost politicians their jobs in 2026, I have a feeling we'll be seeing it soon after.

 

[FK4]

While this is pretty clearly not what the Millionaire's Tax was intended for, and it's not a long term a long-term fix, I don't hate it. If it weren't for the states abysmal track record of funding the T, I'd say it's a very reasonable stop gap. It's fairly reasonable to expect both sides of the T's operating budget (income and expenses) to improve in the following years. Shorter headways due to new RL/OL cars, increased service on BNRD routes, major GL improvements (Type 10s, stop consolidation/enhancement, GLTPS), continued RTO, and worsening traffic should all lead to consistent ridership increases. At the same time, signal replacements, new bus lanes (or just improved enforcement), and management that actually knows what they're doing should reduce operating costs. While there are some headwinds (like running SCR), the idea that the T's fiscal situation will be significantly different if it can continue current progress over the next 3 or 4 years is understandable.

That all said, it sure seems like the can is just being kicked down the road again.


Not sure if you read the article, but there's this tidbit:

If New York's congestion pricing works as expected and it doesn't cost politicians their jobs in 2026, I have a feeling we'll be seeing it soon after.

I really hope congestion pricing works out in NYC and that this is something that we will live to see here. I wish we could at least just do a pilot of it.

 

[KCasiglio]

I really hope congestion pricing works out in NYC and that this is something that we will live to see here. I wish we could at least just do a pilot of it.

If New York's congestion pricing works as expected and it doesn't cost politicians their jobs in 2026, I have a feeling we'll be seeing it soon after.

I would be very surprised if we're not by 2030. The MPO, building off of a 2023 study surveying different roadway pricing schemes, is doing a study this year on alternative scenarios for Boston and their impacts (pg. 114).

 

[Jeremi]

I would be very surprised if we're not by 2030. The MPO, building off of a 2023 study surveying different roadway pricing schemes, is doing a study this year on alternative scenarios for Boston and their impacts (pg. 114).

2030 is 15 years too late. No more studies about studies and task forces which don’t complete tasks.

 

[KCasiglio]

2030 is 15 years too late. No more studies about studies and task forces which don’t complete tasks.

Sure. But it's not 2010 and we can't do anything about that. It's also never going to get implemented without the political cover of a study. If the best time to be doing it was 15 years ago, the next best time is now.

 

[ritchiew]

Governor's Task Force Has A Plan to Dodge the T's Fiscal Crisis, But Only for the Short Term - Streetsblog Massachusetts

"There will be no service cuts, no layoffs, and no fare increases" for the MBTA in the coming year, task force member Brian Kane told StreetsblogMASS.

mass.streetsblog.org

So reading through, it looks like they'll just recommend using funds from the millionaires tax. Is that right?

I'm going to be at my most cynical for a sec. A quick summary of this task force, as I've seen it:

1. Healey set up the task force to figure out a long term solution to financing public transit. They'd be looking at the full range of options. Everything was on the table. This administration would not be kicking the can down the road. (Setting up a task force like this always reeks of kicking the can. When politicians actually want to do something like, say, tax cuts, they don't spend a year analyzing every possible option or consequence. They just pick a policy, close enough, and use their political clout to get it done. So a task force should set low expectations, but maybe something good would come out of it.)
2. Actually not everything was on the table. Healey quickly stepped in to say there would be no new taxes, tolls, or fees from anyone. Seeing as how the T actually needs more money, that really put a crimp in available options. Actually, there are so few options available at that point, I feel like they could have wrapped this up over the summer. Or just said there are no long term solutions under those conditions.
3. Disputes within the task force kept leaking to the press. I never know what to make of those, but it didn't sound like it was going well. Members complained they didn't think they were solving anything. They weren't clear if they were coming up with specific recommendations or a vague list of options. The task force missed deadlines, and they still haven't issued their report.
4. After a year, it looks like the task force came up with nothing. Absolutely nothing.
5. In the mean time, it turned out that the millionaires tax was raising a lot more money than expected. Praise be! The task force says go use that money. That will still require an annual fight with public schools, which also get a piece of that money, but good enough for the next couple of years (hopefully). (Note just how little the government is actually doing to save the MBTA in this case. "Tax rich people to fund transportation" was broadly popular, but politically impossible. It took a ballot initiative and a popular vote to enact the millionaires tax. The voters are saving the MBTA. No help from the task force, the governor, or really any of our political institutions.)
6. Can successfully kicked.

 

[KCasiglio]

So reading through, it looks like they'll just recommend using funds from the millionaires tax. Is that right?

I'm going to be at my most cynical for a sec. A quick summary of this task force, as I've seen it:

1. Healey set up the task force to figure out a long term solution to financing public transit. They'd be looking at the full range of options. Everything was on the table. This administration would not be kicking the can down the road. (Setting up a task force like this always reeks of kicking the can. When politicians actually want to do something like, say, tax cuts, they don't spend a year analyzing every possible option or consequence. They just pick a policy, close enough, and use their political clout to get it done. So a task force should set low expectations, but maybe something good would come out of it.)
2. Actually not everything was on the table. Healey quickly stepped in to say there would be no new taxes, tolls, or fees from anyone. Seeing as how the T actually needs more money, that really put a crimp in available options. Actually, there are so few options available at that point, I feel like they could have wrapped this up over the summer. Or just said there are no long term solutions under those conditions.
3. Disputes within the task force kept leaking to the press. I never know what to make of those, but it didn't sound like it was going well. Members complained they didn't think they were solving anything. They weren't clear if they were coming up with specific recommendations or a vague list of options. The task force missed deadlines, and they still haven't issued their report.
4. After a year, it looks like the task force came up with nothing. Absolutely nothing.
5. In the mean time, it turned out that the millionaires tax was raising a lot more money than expected. Praise be! The task force says go use that money. That will still require an annual fight with public schools, which also get a piece of that money, but good enough for the next couple of years (hopefully). (Note just how little the government is actually doing to save the MBTA in this case. "Tax rich people to fund transportation" was broadly popular, but politically impossible. It took a ballot initiative and a popular vote to enact the millionaires tax. The voters are saving the MBTA. No help from the task force, the governor, or really any of our political institutions.)
6. Can successfully kicked.

Also worth remembering that this was money that was supposed to be helping to fund capital improvements. The opportunity cost here is massive.

 

[RandomWalk]

It may help to look at how the political landscape changed since the task force was set up. The easiest exit strategy for the Governor was eliminated on 11/5. Now she has to pivot to Plan B.

 

[ritchiew]

Also worth remembering that this was money that was supposed to be helping to fund capital improvements. The opportunity cost here is massive.

^^^
Yes, this, so much this. Jeez, what a failure.

It's also never going to get implemented without the political cover of a study.

So, I agree with you here, kinda. I understand that these studies can work even if they're just political cover for a politician to do something. But the planned congestion pricing study you point to looks pretty ineffective. It's one of dozens of little studies proposed in that document, in a "throw it at the wall and see what sticks" kind of way. It's a small budget. Possible outcome could be an "interactive visual document" like StoryMap, which, fine, but that's nothing near the rigor required for a congestion pricing study to be effective. Just playing the odds, it seems like most of these studies go nowhere.

Is there some reason you're more optimistic than I am about a study like that?

 

[KCasiglio]

^^^
Yes, this, so much this. Jeez, what a failure.


So, I agree with you here, kinda. I understand that these studies can work even if they're just political cover for a politician to do something. But the planned congestion pricing study you point to looks pretty ineffective. It's one of dozens of little studies proposed in that document, in a "throw it at the wall and see what sticks" kind of way. It's a small budget. Possible outcome could be an "interactive visual document" like StoryMap, which, fine, but that's nothing near the rigor required for a congestion pricing study to be effective. Just playing the odds, it seems like most of these studies go nowhere.

Is there some reason you're more optimistic than I am about a study like that?

It's one of three such small studies, not dozens, to be fair. The MPO doesn't exactly get to choose its own studies, it presents a list of dozens of proposals and a few get selected by the MPO Board's UPWP committee. The budget is small, though I will provide the caveat that MPO study budgets typically look smaller because a lot of the work is charged to generalized budgets. Outreach & engagement, graphics, editorial, finance...basically any support work. It's still not a big study, but tens of thousands more than it's on-paper budget, which is basically supporting the salary of the project manager and data analysts.

My optimism isn't really stemming from "this study is going to be amazing and bring us to congestion pricing" rather than that out of the dozens of proposed studies, roadway pricing is one that the board supported strongly enough to fund not just once, but now twice. I shared the MPO meeting recording from when the first study was presented, and it's clear that some form of roadway pricing has institutional support. I believe that they are laying the groundwork now so that once 2-3 years of impacts from NYC can be looked at they can move quickly.

Just playing the odds, it seems like most of these studies go nowhere.

Historically, you're not wrong! There has been a large and rapid generational shift at the MPO, and we're particularly sensitive to this and want to make sure plans don't sit on shelves.

 

[stefal]

This isn't surprising... not doing much but looking like they did something...

They won't have to fight with public schools, but will have to fight with other transportation agencies. I think it is set up to be 50% for education, 50% for transportation, and this seems to imply the T would be receiving a good amount of the transportation funding.

The transportation funding portion of the Fair Share Amendment was really geared toward putting capital projects into construction. It was a glimmer of consistent funding for transportation agencies, which would help them greatly in properly developing capital investment plans. It doesn't help these agencies if they don't know how much money they're going to or not going to have in 3-5 years. Now that it's going to MBTA operating funds, capital funding is probably back to being as clear as mud, though it sounds like the actual details of this "suggested" plan aren't even clear either, so what did they really do for a year?