Menu
Don’t Take the Train Away
I was encouraged by the large crowd that gathered last evening in the City Council chamber to speak against proposed decreases in train service to Lowell and increases in the cost of riding the train. As I said at the public hearing, it is mind boggling to think that in 2012 we would find ourselves at a meeting where the topic is a recommendation to reduce access to mass transit. At a time when every reasonable institution, business, organization, individual, and family is trying to save energy and protect our environment through more “sustainable” behavior, why are we talking about making it more difficult to use a train to travel between Lowell and Boston?
Would a 10 percent increase in the fare be justifiable? Maybe. But not the huge increase being proposed by the MBTA. Would a slight adjustment in the weekend schedule on the Lowell-Boston line be defensible? Maybe. But not the plan to wipe out weekend service.
The MBTA certainly got the public’s attention. There is passion around this issue. You could feel it in City Hall last night. The opposition was spontaneous. It was personal. It was professional. It was immediate. This is the kind of change that would hit people where they live. It would be bad for everyone who lives and works in this area, as well as for those who count on the public being able to easily visit and do business in the city and region. We need the train. We need late service. We need weekend service. And the cost should be fair and affordable.
I concur with Paul’s account of last night’s hearing. More than 50 people registered to speak, led by State Senator Eileen Donoghue, State Representatives Kevin Murphy and Colleen Garry, Mayor Patrick Murphy, City Councilors Marty Lorrey and Vesna Nuon and City Manager Bernie Lynch.
The dominant message was to NOT curtail Boston to Lowell train service which brings Lowell residents to Boston for work, medical care, education and leisure and Boston residents to Lowell for our cultural economy. Most that I heard speak (including me) emphasized this, but the fare increase is huge (40+%) which, for the occasional user may be tolerable, but for the everyday commuter is disastrous.
While the many MBTA personnel in attendance were clearly there to listen, they did have a brief presentation, respond to a few speaker comments, and provide printed information on the proposal. I do have considerable sympathy for the T people. While they may have spent (and continue to spend) unwisely, I suspect they’ve implemented huge efficiencies where they are able to. But many of their costs such as fuel and health care have skyrocketed and they are saddled with paying the debt on $5 billion in mass transit improvements required to have obtained the Big Dig funding. That’s a bill that should more appropriately be on the state’s books than on the T’s.
Then there’s the T’s funding mechanism – a cut of the sales tax. That might have seemed like a great idea when the economy was booming, but since the 2007 collapse, sales tax receipts have plummeted and so has the T’s funding. If a government service is worth providing, it should be funded adequately. But in good times, those who operate the service get seduced by the “percentage of revenue stream” approach, figuring it will increase budgets. Like homeowners who never imaged their home values would go down, government officials never imagined tax receipts would drop so much and leave them with insufficient operating funds.
Anyway, the T website contains much information on this and the ability to post comments online. Please check it out.
“As I said at the public hearing, it is mind boggling to think that in 2012 we would find ourselves at a meeting where the topic is a recommendation to reduce access to mass transit. At a time when every reasonable institution, business, organization, individual, and family is trying to save energy and protect our environment through more “sustainable” behavior, why are we talking about making it more difficult to use a train to travel between Lowell and Boston?”
Agreed!
My hope is that our dissenting voice will give them cause to reconsider. I think the recommendation by some other speakers to hold another public hearing at the commuter rail station is an excellent idea and wondering if that can be carried through.
Only in the US, as stories dominate about rising gasoline prices, would we be having this conversation. And, any thoughts to curtail service from Lowell to Boston and back should be viewed as a serious threat to all sorts of economic developments efforts going on as well as moves on the part of UML and MCC to attract more and more students who can take the train and eventually the trolley to their respective campuses.
Anyone know how many students ride the commuter rail daily?
It is a failure of our government if either of the two MBTA proposals become reality.
There has been an attempt to spur economic growth based on intermodal transit, with a special focus on the Gateway cities. Much of the investment in this policy could be ruined by suboptimal planning by the MBTA.
They have yet to achieve any significant efficiency improvements, although they claim some progress in the areas of new hires and as new contracts are negotiated. They need a much more aggressive efficiency program, not cost reduction by dropping service.
They historically receive 1% of the 5% sales tax revenue, plus $160M from the sales tax increase when it was raised to 6.25% a couple of years ago. Together with local assessments that provides over 2/3rds of their total revenue. Any thoughts of an increase in gasoline tax should be accompanied by a corresponding reduction in sales tax, so no more total revenue, but maybe a movement in incentive away from automobiles and toward public transportation. A modest increase in fares, and an increase in visitor usage by offering day or multi-day tickets should be the focus of their new revenue action.