What would you do to get the T out of its financial mess?

What would I do to get the T out of its financial mess?

Well I certainly wouldn't make trips on the SL from the airport to Boston free. This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. A prime opportunity for the T to collect revenue and they abolish it? $2 is dirt cheap to get from an airport to a CBD. It's probably the cheapest in the world. Nor do I think that the SL is having ridership problems because the buses are always packed with people who are more-than-willing to pay the dirt-cheap fare. Is this supposed to increase ridership? The buses can only hold a certain number of people. They're not going to magically grow. This could increase ridership if they improved headways, but that will never happen.
 
probably more marketing for the service than anything else. Get people to take it now cuz its free, then they may take it in the future. Or if they are tourists, they may take it on the way back instead of a cab now that they know how to use it. Plus that's another $20- $50 to spend in the city at a restaurant or store rather than in a cab on a trip.

Also, Massport will pay the MBTA for the lost revenue so MBTA makes out. Massport may also benefit by getting people out of the airport quicker. Their taxi dispatch system seems to get backed up easily.

I feel like everytime I get in and need a cab the first 7 go, then there is 40 people waiting as the guy radios for more and they come around. The know when plans are going to land and when the crunches come, I feel like this is easily solvable.

(Blue line is still my preferred option however.)
 
The question then becomes why does MassPort have all this money to throw away when the T is strapped for pennies?
 
underground said:
Outside of his listed powers/duties, the mayor has informal authority as (and a duty to be) the city's number one lobbyist, and he's completely abdicated on this issue. He's absolutely no where and it's pretty disgusting considering how big of an issue the health of the MBTA is to Bostonians. 90% of the power in democracy is just showing up. It doesn't matter who's in charge of what, just show up and be a squeaky wheel. NIMBYs all over the world know that, but for some reason Menino doesn't.
Click to expand...

Menino is probably busy looking for those missing Hubway stations.
 
datadyne007 said:
The question then becomes why does MassPort have all this money to throw away when the T is strapped for pennies?
Click to expand...

Data -- Massport makes money -- it receives no direct funds from the Commonwealth.

From the FY 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR):
www.massport.com/massport/Documents/.../FY2011_CAFR.pdf

Executive Summary [my edits of format for emphasis and clarity]:
The Authority’s business consists of two distinct operating departments:
Aviation:
1) Logan
2) Hanscom
3) Wocester

and the Port:
1) Conley Container Terminal
2) General Cargo
3) Cruiseport Boston (Black Falcon)
4) Autoport Boston

During fiscal year 2011, the Authority generated approximately $537.6 million in operating revenues from these departments, which represented an increase of $9.7 million or 1.8% compared to fiscal year 2010.

Operating expenses were approximately $524.3 million, an increase of $16.8 million, or 3.3% from fiscal year 2010. Please see further discussion in the MD&A section.

.....

The Authority has no taxing power and is not taxpayer funded. It uses revenues from landing fees, parking fees, fees from terminal and other rentals, revenues from concessions, tolls, ground rents, and other charges to fund operating expenses.

The Authority’s revenues also fund its capital expenditures and include other sources such as federal grants, passenger facility charges (“PFCs”), and customer facility charges (“CFCs”).

The Authority issues revenue bonds which are secured solely by the Authority’s
Revenues, as defined by the 1978 Trust Agreement, the PFC Trust Agreement and the CFC Trust Agreement, respectively.

The Authority’s bonds do not constitute a debt or a pledge of the full faith and credit of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or of any political subdivision thereof.

Operating Revenues

Operating revenues of the Authority consist primarily of fees, rentals, concessions and operating grants.

Fees and other services (“Fee Revenue”) are comprised essentially of parking fees, landing fees, and container handling fees.

Rental revenues are earned through lease agreements for building and ground
rents across the Authority’s asset base, including Logan Airport, Hanscom Field, Worcester Airport and Port properties.

Concession revenues consist primarily of fees earned from ground services for airport
passengers, including car rentals, taxis, bus services, limousine services, and retail operations. The following table is a discussion of the Authority’s major operating revenues as shown on the Authority’s Condensed Statements of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Assets.

The Authority’s Condensed Operating Revenues for 2011 (in millions)
Operating revenues:
Fees, tolls and other services 276.4
Rentals 174.4
Concessions 65.9
Other, including operating grants 20.9
Total operating revenues 537.6
Click to expand...

Note that there is some question about who pays for all of the expenses associated with Troop F of the State Police who are based at Logan

Some other fascinating details taken from the FY 2011 CAFR

Logan:
1) serves the 8th largest domestic origin-destination air travel market in the U.S
during calendar year 2010
2) It is the primary source of the Authority’s revenues.
3) serves the 8th largest O&D market in the United States
4) nine out of ten passengers using Massport’s facilities call the Boston area home or come to the region to visit, vacation or to conduct business
5) the second largest U.S. international gateway airport among non-hub airports based on the number of international passengers
6) no single carrier dominates service and Logan Airport does not serve as any airline’s
hub
a) During fiscal year 2011, the largest airline accounted for approximately 14.5% of total landing fee and terminal rent revenues.
b) In addition, the top three airlines at Logan Airport accounted for 35.5% of its total landing fee and terminal rental revenues.
7) Logan Airport serves the Boston-Cambridge-Quincy Metropolitan Area consisting of Essex, Middlesex, Norfolk, Plymouth and Suffolk counties in Massachusetts and Rockingham and Strafford counties in New Hampshire. According to the Census Bureau for 2009 this metropolitan area (the “Boston MSA”):
a) is the nation’s 10th largest measured by population
b) 9th largest regional economy measured by gross metropolitan product.
8) The strength of a regional economy correlates with the demand for resident airline traffic, as well as business travel by both residents and visitors -- According to
the U.S. Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis, in 2009 the Boston MSA a) had personal income that was 11% higher than that of New England
b) and 35% higher than that of the nation as a whole.
c) The Boston MSA’s substantial concentration of universities, colleges, hospitals and medical research facilities results in a greater share of 2010 employment in this sector (20.4%) than the national average (15.0%).
d) Similarly, in the Boston MSA the professional/business services sector accounts for 16.4% of employment compared to a national average of 12.8%.
9) Boston is one of the top-ranking destinations for overseas visitors to the United States ranking 9th in the nation in 2009, just ahead of Chicago. Also, Boston is home to two major
convention centers - the John B. Hynes Veterans Memorial Convention Center (the “Hynes Center”) and the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center (“BCEC”). Boston has been named one of North America’s top 10 convention destinations by Tradeshow Week magazine every year since 2006.
10) Logan Airport ranked 10th among U.S. airports in terms of domestic O&D passengers in the 12 months ended June 30, 2010, ahead of major connecting hub airports, such as Dallas/Fort Worth, John F. Kennedy and Newark Liberty International.
11) In terms of international O&D passengers, Logan Airport ranked 7th, ahead of airports such as Orlando International, Bush Intercontinental and Washington-Dulles International:
a) Nearly 400,000 passengers flew between Asia and Boston in 2010
12) Capital Program -- On February 16, 2011, the Members of the Authority approved its capital program for fiscal years 2011 through 2015 (the “FY11-FY15 Capital Program”). The FY11-FY15 Capital Program represents a comprehensive and coordinated capital improvement and financial master plan for all Authority facilities. The program was developed in order to continue to fund security initiatives and airfield operation enhancements through maximizing:
a) Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) and
b) Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) grant receipts and
c) utilizing a $4.50 Passenger Facility Charge (“PFC”).
d) Also, the program includes the construction of a new consolidated car rental facility specifically financed by a $6.00 Customer Facility Charge (“CFC”).
13) The FY11-FY15 Capital Program includes $1.023 billion of capital projects. Funding for these projects will be provided from Massport- generated funds, FAA, TSA and other grant funding, bond proceeds, PFCs, CFCs and third party or other non-recourse funding sources.
a) FAA’s Airport Improvement Program (“AIP”), which provides Airport and Airway Trust Fund money for airport development, airport planning and noise abatement programs.
b) AIP grant revenue in fiscal years 2011 and 2010 totaled $19.6 million and $31.3 million, respectively. AIP grant revenue represented approximately 87.0% and 91.0% of total capital grant revenue earned during fiscal year 2011 and 2010, respectively.
c) Federal funding totaling of $2.9 million and $3.1 million during fiscal year 2011 and 2010, respectively, for environmental and security enhancements.
d) During fiscal year 2004, the Authority and the FAA executed a Letter of Intent (“LOI”) pursuant to which the FAA agreed to provide approximately $90.8 million in grants over an eight-year period to assist the Authority with its airside improvement program. In fiscal year 2011, the Authority secured $8.6 million in grants under the LOI, which was included in the $19.6 million AIP grant revenue discussed above.
e) During fiscal year 2011, the Authority completed three airport development projects funded by the FAA through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”). The Authority received a total of $15.1 million in ARRA funding from the FAA to (i) re-pave Logan Airport’s 7,000 foot runway (Runway 9/27) with environmentally-friendly “warm mix” asphalt which uses 20% less energy to manufacture, (ii) install in-pavement centerline lights at Logan Airport’s Taxiway A to enhance pilot visibility in this area
and (iii) make taxiway improvements at Hanscom Field.
f) Passenger Facility Charge Program -- During fiscal year 2011, the Authority received approval from the FAA to increase the $4.50 PFC collection authorization to $1.4 billion. The projected expiration date for the collection is December 1, 2023.
g) Customer Facility Charge Program -- In fiscal year 2010, the Members of the Authority approved a CFC of $6.00 per day for car rentals that originate from Logan Airport. CFCs and the proceeds from the CFC Bonds are being used to design and construct a Consolidated Rental Car Facility (the “ConRAC”).

So Massport collects from:
people -- PFC, parking
airlines -- rental of terminals, landing fees
concessions -- businesses selling stuff at Logan
buses, limos and cabs -- fee for picking up passengers
advertisers -- all over the walls and on the web for wifi


Financial Highlights
• Logan Airport serviced 28.4 million passengers in fiscal year 2011, a 2.1 million, or 8.0% increase in passengers when compared to fiscal year 2010. Factors contributing to Logan’s passenger growth include the expansion of low cost carrier service to preferred destinations, increased market share from other regional airports, growth in legacy carrier service, and the recovering regional economy.
• The Authority issued $214.1 million of Special Facilities Revenue Bonds which will be used to construct a consolidated rental car facility (“ConRAC”) on Airport property. The bonds are secured by a pledge of $6.00 CFC for each day a customer rents a car originating from Logan Airport.
• The Authority’s net assets grew to $1.69 billion, a $64.5 million or 4.0% increase over last year. Operating revenues exceeded operating expenses by $13.4 million, net non operating revenues were $28.6 million, and capital grant revenue was $22.5 million.
• The Authority also issued five series of revenue bonds in August 2010. The $97.9 million of Series A bonds were issued to fund certain projects within the Authority’s capital program and the Series B, C, D, and E Bonds were refunding bonds issued in the aggregate amount of $326.5 million, generating over $13.5 million in present value savings.
• At the Authority’s request, the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) approved the Authority’s PFC collection authority by an additional $392.1 million dollars to finance in whole or in part eleven additional capital projects.

Leading domestic destinations
Washington D.C.
New York, New York / Newark, New Jersey
San Francisco, California
Chicago, Illinois
Los Angeles, California
South Florida *
Orlando, Florida
Atlanta, Georgia
Denver, Colorado
Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas

Leading International destinations:
 
Most everyone here is familiar with the "ACKNOWLEDGE! ACKNOWLEDGE! ACKNOWLEDGE!" klaxson on the T (or at least the Orange Line)

I'd pay some money to have that as my ring tone/text notification.

It just has a cool old-timey sci-fi sound.
 
I've actually never heard that one, statler. Sounds like someone may have reprogrammed a Dalek.
 
I love how the Orange Line door chimes are so worn out they slow down briefly in mid-ring like turning a 45" record down to 33 rpm.

I'm also pretty sure you can literally buy the Green Line 3700 series door chimes at a Radio Shack near you. I swear I've heard that exact sound before in one of those early-80's era kids' model electronic experiment kits where you plug in wires into a bare circuit board and make lights blink and shit until you get bored after a half-hour.
 
Beton Brut said:
I've actually never heard that one, statler. Sounds like someone may have reprogrammed a Dalek.
Click to expand...

It doesn't happen too often and you have to pretty close to the cab to hear it when it goes off, but it's pretty cool. (Well, except for the fact that it almost always means a delay in service until whatever problem is fixed.)
 
I will never understand why the MBTA doesn't use common components on all their vehicles. The same lighting, hand grips, poles, seats, signage, flooring, audio equipment, roll signs, etc. should be used across all the vehicles fleets. From trolleys, to buses, to trains. It would save a lot of money on the commonality of parts and offer some uniformity to the system.
 
Lurker said:
I will never understand why the MBTA doesn't use common components on all their vehicles. The same lighting, hand grips, poles, seats, signage, flooring, audio equipment, roll signs, etc. should be used across all the vehicles fleets. From trolleys, to buses, to trains. It would save a lot of money on the commonality of parts and offer some uniformity to the system.
Click to expand...

After the Type 8 disaster they're moving towards that. It's interesting that they were pretty good on standardization long ago with the Red Line 01500's/01600's and 01700's being direct copies 20 years apart, the Green Line 3600's and 3700's direct copies 12 years apart, and the Orange and Blue 01200's and 0600's being the same exact car order fitted into different carbody dimensions (and in turn almost identical to the NYC PATH cars of same era). The 0600's and 01200's can even trainline with each other; until they proved too rusted-out to rehab the plan was to send 24 of the BL 0600's to Orange as a supplemental fleet. Commuter rail locomotive fleet has 3 different generations of F40's spread over 15 years, and all of their single-level coaches are pretty much copies of the 1979 Pullman order that's still the most reliable in the fleet.

Then we had the whole 1995-2010 era of total Frankenstein builds. The Bredas. The glitchy GP40 locomotives. The Silver Line dual-modes that bankrupted the manufacturer they went so over-budget and required so many redesigns. The Red Line 01800's (to be perfectly fair those are good cars...they just had failure-prone air conditioning units that took 10 years to iron out and the FAIL-prone LCD's/ASA that were brand-new tech at the time). The CNG buses that never really took off and saw the agency quickly pivot back to "clean" diesel. These new Rotem bi-level coaches and HSP locomotives that are 100% untested and very expensive new designs that we have to hope and pray work out well.


It'll be interesting (if ever funded) to see how the Orange and Red replacement orders play out. The contract spec is that one builder must cover both orders, meaning they will be 100% identical cars only differing by the standard Red and Orange carbody dimensions (i.e. just the stainless steel can on top). And they've added protection--thank you, incompetent Breda--from unqualified low bidders getting it by default by giving option for accepting (within reason) slightly higher bids for better-proven tech.

All of that would heavily favor Siemens, maker of the Blue Line cars, for this order. Which makes perfect sense with those lines shared Hawker-Siddeley old cars. The 0700's have been pretty much bulletproof in revenue service since the testing settled up last of their teething pains, and Siemens would be able to rip these Orange and Red ones out fast by templating its most recent heavy-rail order. Less testing, faster run-up at the factory, better scale, lower unit cost. And the recently-rehabbed Red Line 01700's, which will be oddballs once the 01500/01600's are gone, are only good until about 2022 before they need retirement. So it's quite likely their replacement will be carbon copies of these next new ones. If it's Siemens, that means every single heavy rail car on the system save for the 1994-era Bombardier 01800's will be the same exact thing. Just like half the commuter rail locomotives will be HSP's and the coach fleet half Rotem bi-levels.

Now, if we could just get something standard for the Type 9 trolleys that would be golden. Kinki-Sharyo better get that contract, because then they'd be reliable old Type 7 derivatives in a low-floor body. Or better yet, if they only spent some one-time money to shave the floor on 100 feet of the C/D portal tunnel where the ceiling dips low and a few feet of the corner wall at Boylston curve to add 5 stinking degrees to the curve...we'd be able to buy those sexy new mass-produced, off-shelf Kinki AmeriTram cars totally unmodified save for the T's standard L/R door configuration. It would be cheaper to do the tunnel work as a one-time cost than overcustomizing car order after car order every 20 years and driving up the per-unit cost into the sky. They should've known better after 50 years of every-other-make lemons with the Bredas, Boeings, and some late-era secondhand PCC purchases incompatible with the others. Perpetually penny-wise, pound-foolish when it comes to trolleys.
 
F-Line to Dudley said:
Or better yet, if they only spent some one-time money to shave the floor on 100 feet of the C/D portal tunnel where the ceiling dips low and a few feet of the corner wall at Boylston curve to add 5 stinking degrees to the curve...we'd be able to buy those sexy new mass-produced, off-shelf Kinki AmeriTram cars totally unmodified save for the T's standard L/R door configuration. It would be cheaper to do the tunnel work as a one-time cost than overcustomizing car order after car order every 20 years and driving up the per-unit cost into the sky.
Click to expand...

Has the T ever looked into this?

F-Line you often say that all new construction is to Red Line standards. Does this include the Silver Line in the Seaport?
 
BostonObserver said:
Has the T ever looked into this?

F-Line you often say that all new construction is to Red Line standards. Does this include the Silver Line in the Seaport?
Click to expand...

Yes. Transitway's even bigger because it has to fit bus turning radii. If the Phase III boondoggle were only designed to Red Line dimensions instead that mini-Big Dig under Chinatown might've actually been built (albeit still too expensive with street digging vs. the alternative they should've considered of Tremont tunnel to the NEC and then digging in open soil under the RR tracks to South Station).

Only post-1912 construction constrained from those dimensions is Copley Jct. and the E tunnel curve between Copley and Prudential. And that was because they penny-pinched in 1940 with the at-grade junction instead of the original, grander plans for a grade-separated flying junction. Even the old Broadway trolley tunnel abandoned in 1919 is max-dimension.


I'm not sure why that Beacon St. tunnel has a dip in the roof, because that's 1932 construction. The train yards above (now Pike) wouldn't explain that. Has to be some sort of obstruction...maybe related to the underground trunk feed from that electrical substation on Beacon right before the bridge. They probably let that one slide because the future-proofing plan for converting the Green Line to heavy rail had the B tracks getting converted and the C tracks simply looping without intermixing (reason why Kenmore Loop exists only feeding the C/D side). The D wasn't in the planning picture until the big 1945 expansion study so they didn't anticipate needing the clearance. It's not hard to fix it by shaving the floor. That hill between Kenmore and Audubon Circle is original terra firma, not Back Bay/Charles Basin landfill. Wouldn't cost more than a few mil and a few weekend bustitutions.

As for Boylston curve, that's also very easy. The curve currently is *just* wide enough with barely a turning radius degree to spare for handling an off-shelf tram. But that's not enough margin for error so they really could use a few degrees of wiggle room. All they'd need to do is chop back that corner wall on the outbound side into more a flattened half-hexagon and install new steel rebar. Then add a couple feet of decking on the overpass over the abandoned tracks. Construction wouldn't interfere at all with service. They can set up the scaffolding and do all their staging from the abandoned incline. Once that's done, spend a Saturday night realigning the tracks a literal several inches to foot to add couple degrees to the curve. That's it. Maybe $10-20M.


Considering they pay this in per-unit premium for almost EVERY car order to get their special-as-snowflake customizations, this is such a no-brainer. It's only the baked-in "well we've always done it this way" groupthink preventing them from doing it. But boy would it be sweet to get some of those AmeriTrams in this town (http://www.ameritram.com/kinki_gallery.php). Those things are made to be sold in bulk at attractive price scale, be modular so you can put together short and long cars at the factory like tinker toys with standardized prefab sections, and the seating arrangement is about a billion times better than the Bredas. And the guts are based on the tried-and-true Type 7's..."Just Works™"
 
"That would never work here! This is Boston!"

"This is Boston, not ____ !"

The state, city and MBTA are anything but solution-oriented.
 
Need to put a halt on Pensions & revamp the healthcare plan.

Also control the overtime pay.

MBTA workers make alot of money compared to the everyday private sector and retail workers. In reality its the private sector workers who are paying these salaries.
 
Last edited:
underground said:
Yeah, and the best solution is for everyone to make less. Makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

It makes no sense for a situation to exist where:

1) T workers have a strong union which has delivered to the members:
a) good pay
b) easy work process - e.g 5 to fill one hole
c) featherbedding staffing with restrictive cross-skill rules and absolute prohibition of private sector competition
d) easily claimable sick days including payment for unused days
e) exceptional pension plan, early retirement, easy disability early retirement criteria, etc.
f) exceptional working and retirement health care

2) union negotiates with "our representatives"

3) "our representatives" are elected with their campaigns heavily funded by the union members and with additional "services" e.g. thuggishness, etc. supplied by the union

Who loses -- the taxpayers and the T riders


ALL Public Sector Unions need to be disbanded
 
whighlander said:
ALL Public Sector Unions need to be disbanded
Click to expand...

No, no, and no. That's an ideological blanket statement. Let's please not confuse fully sensible and neccessary abuse and waste cleanup the likes of which you noted with going scorched-earth on people's ability to organize. There's plenty of counterpoints where union-busting ruins livelihoods. Nothing is ever that simple to get boiled down to a meme like "[allcaps]ALL[/allcaps] public unions need to be disbanded."

And you know this, whigh, so stop pushing this as a meme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top