Submitted by weallgettheemails2 t3_11dcn31 in boston
Comments
Maxpowr9 t1_ja7uc60 wrote
Agree. If the State Legislature didn't suck, there would be an inquiry into why it's delayed yet again.
No wonder the MBTA sucks, zero accountability.
random12356622 t1_ja8wikn wrote
All we need to do is pour another billion or two into the system, and it will be fixed.
[deleted] t1_jaaigcv wrote
It’s delayed because it costs a billion $$$ and would be a net negative. How many years of fare evasion would that be?
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ja7vh5n wrote
They money is already spent, the cost has been sunk, it’s not like cancelling the project would get the money back and may be even more expensive with termination fees
Also automated fare collection is a good thing in the long run, it allows for faster boarding and all door operation for street level surface routes
The new system would also allow differentiation of fares by income, bringing us in line with most other modern metros
The plan is now to implement it gradually to minimize issues, according to the herald, I think that’s a relatively good thing
The MBTA expects to collect 450M in fares this year, making up about 25% of the budget, this project will last about 20 years given the last fare implementation, so with straight line depreciation that’s still only 10% of expected post pandemic revenue
caspa10152 t1_ja8fa9r wrote
They might collect $450 million in revenue but that number is far below the MBTA's operating budget. Last year they had a budget gap of about $400 million. Don't think spending an extra billion on this is really going to improve their budget
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ja8l7e4 wrote
well i mean not collecting fares would mean 450 million bigger hole? Also implementing this will improve service by reducing dwell times and overall make transit more attractive
​
the alternative of course is to do this, then throw it out right away by passing a 1% sales tax increase for the MBTA, because the contracted money is spent already, it's not like we'll get it back
AeuiGame t1_ja8ptyd wrote
Bigger hole, but bigger improvement on the city. Getting cars off the road helps actively the cities budget. Infrastructure shouldn't generate revenue.
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ja8q8qy wrote
yeah sure, but it wouldnt be a bigger improvement if you have to cut 30% to match the new revenue. We could do it if we increased the MBTA sales tax from 1% to 2%, but i highly doubt that would ever happen, and a reduction in service (like to 20-25 minutes between trains) would be a disaster given that trains now are already 15 minutes apart and packed to the gills (or at least the orange line is at sullivan)
caspa10152 t1_ja8tjxx wrote
I'm curious to see what the total dwell times are. Whenever I am Downtown I almost never see a line of people waiting to pass thru the turnstyle, whereas, when I used to work in Rockefeller center, especially during the holidays, it could take 10 to 15 mins just to get in, so there it made sense. I guess you can say I am struggling to understand the efficiency gain, in regards to dwell times, because I almost never see any. I'm also curious to know how many "free riding" passengers the MBTA believes currently exists.
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ja92jkb wrote
Bus dwell times mostly, green and buses are most likely to see improvements by allowing all door boarding
thebruns t1_jaaokxv wrote
> Also automated fare collection is a good thing in the long run, it allows for faster boarding and all door operation for street level surface routes
You know what actually allows faster boarding and all door operation for street level surface routes? Collecting fares via taxes instead of at the doors.
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_jaaoum6 wrote
Good luck getting taxes raised we barely passed the millionaire tax
Middle-Example6618 t1_ja7yeim wrote
>They money is already spent, the cost has been sunk, it’s not like cancelling the project would get the money back and may be even more expensive with termination fees
I didn't ask you to change the subject, yet there you go!
FYI, the "sunk cost fallacy" .... is a fallacy. Its not the arugument you think it is.
Might want to work on those logic/semantic skills.
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ja805sa wrote
That’s now how contracting works. The money is spent; we are contractually obligated to spend it, if we don’t we get assessed a penalty for the lost business so they can still be made relatively whole
The sunk cost is a real sunk cost, not in a logical sense, but an economic one
Coomb t1_ja8c5q8 wrote
The "fallacy"of the *sunk cost fallacy" is people getting emotionally attached to money that has already been spent / time that's already been wasted / other resources that have already been used, and despite knowing or having good reason to believe that future resource use is not a good investment given the current state of affairs, continue using resources.
It is not, however, fallacious to observe that money has already been spent to make some kind of progress, that spending only a little bit more money will actually get you a useful product at the end, and that abandoning the project entirely will get you nothing of value. You are making a rational assessment to continue investing money because, with the state of affairs as it is, additional investment appears to be profitable.
Let's say, for example, that you signed a contract to buy a new Ford F-150 for a million dollars, paid in $1,000 installments, with the vehicle to only be delivered if and when the final payment is made. Otherwise you get nothing.
That would have been a stupid contract to sign. It would be stupid to keep paying on that contract if you had only already paid in $1,000, or $10,000, or $100,000, or $900,000. The value of the vehicle is not a million dollars. It's $100,000 or less. Every single payment you make up to roughly the $900,000 level is objectively a bad decision, even if you've already paid in a substantial amount of money. However, along the way, your decision to keep paying might have been driven by the sunk cost fallacy. After all, you already threw $100,000 down a hole. If you stopped paying now, that money would just disappear to no benefit.
On the other hand, if somehow you inherited the right to be sold the F-150 knowing that only a single $1,000 payment needed to be made to actually get the car, it would not be fallacious reasoning to make that payment. It wouldn't make it fallacious if you observed that the $999,000 already spent are a sunk cost. You would be making a rational decision to spend $1,000 in return for an F-150. Somebody else might have made a bad decision to pay up to that point, but it's not a bad decision to pay just a little bit more money to get a useful product at the end.
[deleted] t1_ja802vm wrote
[deleted]
techiemikey t1_ja913ko wrote
>The MBTA expects to collect 450M in fares this year, making up about 25% of the budget, this project will last about 20 years given the last fare implementation, so with straight line depreciation that’s still only 10% of expected post pandemic revenue
From their post.
But even if they didn't include that, they didn't say "let's throw good money after bad money". They said "cancelling the money wouldn't get the money back" with an unspoken "so your comparrison only makes sense in hindsight"
SkiingAway t1_ja891za wrote
This is also a support and maintenance contract, not just implementation.
Turnstiles, fareboxes, software/back end payment systems, etc.
The existing fare system already has those costs and they would be expected to be higher (as it gets more obsolete and harder to support) over that time period than the new system. So those aren't exactly new/additional costs vs what the MBTA was already spending at status quo to continue to have a fare system.
You're looking at more like a $650m number for the actual "new fare system" and $300m for a decade of support/maintenance. To be clear, I'm not at all happy with that price or the project management/timeline.
MBTA fare revenue in 2019 was around $672m, 2023 fare revenue is expected to be around $475m.
We're talking about 1 year's fare revenue to implement the project itself, and combined costs (project + ongoing costs) should still be only around 10-15% of the decade's fare revenue. With the at least 20 year project life, you'd be looking at fare collection costs coming in probably below 10% over the 20 years.
Ignoring inflation, over 10 years at pre-pandemic levels, the MBTA would bring in ~6.7 billion in fares. (At current levels, $4.75 billion), and $13.4 billion for 20 years. The fare system can be expected to cost around $1bn for the decade, around $1.3bn for 20 years.
So, the question is:
Where are you coming up with another $4-5 billion for the T in the next decade from?
And if you do have that $4-5 billion, is free fares the best use of that money or is any of the huge list of projects people want to improve the system a better use of it?
LennyKravitzScarf t1_ja8i0c9 wrote
Using January 2019 monthly ridership data, we had 672k monthly bus rides and 1.7 million subway rides. At the current fare, that’s $2.37 million of fares/month. A billion dollars would be 35 years of free bus and subway service.
AboyNamedBort t1_ja8ncjg wrote
Buses should be free. It makes boarding so much quicker.
ahecht t1_ja8vs40 wrote
The new system will allow any-door boarding on busses and fare validation once on board, so it should be just as fast.
thebruns t1_jaaopm8 wrote
You mean like Charlie did in 2006 before they cancelled it since some people were upset that not everyone was paying?
ahecht t1_jaarrna wrote
Not quite. That system was the people would enter through any door and then fight there way up to the front to pay at the the kiosk by the driver. With the new system there won't be a kiosk at the front. There will be touchpoints throughout the car, and when you get on you tap at any touchpoint. There will be inspectors boarding the trains at random and checking people's cards/phones, and if anyone didn't tap in they get a fine. This is the same system that many European cities use.
thebruns t1_jaas0uc wrote
There were payment terminals at surface stations that dispenses a paper proof of payment ticket. There WERE inspectors boarding the trains at random and checking people's cards/receipts, and if anyone didn't have one they got a fine. This is the same system that many European cities use.
After about a year of this, those machines sat unused for 8 years before they were installed on the Fairmount line where they are in use today.
RhaenyrasUncle t1_jabp5mk wrote
Every form of transit should be free.
Simply assess an extra property tax to everyone who lives within X distance of an MBTA subway station.
swni t1_jaaq9q0 wrote
That doesn't seem right, as of 2014 it is close to a million subway rides per weekday. 2019 fares were 671.4m. Last year fares were only $200m though obviously that was mostly a temporary decline. https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/financials/budgets/fy19-itemized-budget.pdf
LennyKravitzScarf t1_jaatk5h wrote
I’m sure I messed up some math somewhere, but I pulled out just subway and bus rides form the January 2019 data from the mbta website. The 671m figure includes commuter rail and ferry.
swni t1_jaav6rz wrote
For Jan 2019 I see 658k subway rides per weekday, way higher than 1.7m per month. Bus was 370k / weekday. https://mbtabackontrack.com/performance/#/detail/ridership/2019-01-01/Subway///all
Shoobert t1_jaahljz wrote
Wish they would have just put that billion in an endowment fund and use that money to fund it in perpetuity with free rides for all. Shit, levy a sales tax and ad that to the fund annually to increase the principle while we're at it.
Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_jacgs0h wrote
That billion would have already been used up of fares were replaced instead
snoogins355 t1_ja9mnl3 wrote
Could raise the sales tax a little within 1 mile of T stations to help pay for it too
Jackamalio626 t1_ja9mwh7 wrote
Why the hell does the T even operate as a for profit venture in the first place
Ksevio t1_jab7p6m wrote
It doesn't really. It receives most of it's funding from the government
Pinwurm t1_ja7zbmm wrote
NYC did their rollout pretty quickly and efficiently… years ago. How are we 3 years over projections and a quarter billion over?
MA government has got to be the one of the least efficiently run cesspools in the country. It cannot complete any project on time, within specs, or within budget. The new bullshit CCRC trains, the bullshit Sumner Tunnel closures, this bullshit. Three years over and a quarter billion down the drain.
I mean - the ONLY time any work was done was the Orange Line closure and that’s cause Washington was threatening to Federalize the agency. Which they should have.
By the time this tech is finally rolled out, it’ll be 6 years overdue, treated as a ‘victory’, and some new technology would’ve already already been invented.
ahecht t1_ja83pgd wrote
> NYC did their rollout pretty quickly and efficiently… years ago. How are we 3 years over projections and a quarter billion over?
Part of the problem is that we're using the same company NYC did and they had to wait for the NYC rollout to finish in 2021 before they even started working on Massachusetts.
reaper527 t1_ja80l1w wrote
> How are we 3 years over projections and a quarter billion over?
are we actually over by more than that?
the article makes it sound like we're over the current budget by $200m, which was already raised by 200m when the original budget of $723m was increased to $935m.
disco_t0ast t1_ja8515f wrote
>How are we 3 years over projections and a quarter billion over?
Because anything involving massdot is incapable of being completed on time or on budget. The levels of nepotism, corruption, and incompetence are astounding.
Pinwurm t1_ja87n5y wrote
It's wild. Between MassDOT and MBTA, the city grinds to a halt.
There are a few decent Mass Government agencies. I'm usually pretty impressed with Massport. Logan Express buses operate well, the parks they service (like Bremen Street Park) are very beautifully maintained. Plus Logan's renovations went really well - and the Logan renovations went off without a problem. It's a much smaller agency and have a lot of Federal oversight (cause, ya know, planes). But it's still proof that a State agency can be good with with the right management structure and fuckin' accountability.
drtywater t1_ja9q3nl wrote
Massport has very in demand assets and very good revenue stream. FWIW Massport has its own scandal such as the State Police barracks OT scandal also touched on the Massport Troop.
User-NetOfInter t1_jab3nv5 wrote
Staties own the airport. It’s their slush fund.
disco_t0ast t1_ja8ws5b wrote
If you consider the FTA's recent involvement, the T has had federal oversight for some time as well. I can't find the source now but i read a few times that Poftak and Baker went back a ways - so no matter how bad Stevie fucked up the T, he was never getting fired. That's why it's continued to decline. It's no coincidence he gtfo as soon as Maura was taking over.
thebruns t1_jaap00w wrote
> NYC did their rollout pretty quickly and efficiently… years ago.
No they didnt. The OMNY program is massively delayed.
>The MTA announced that the MTA's new "tap and go" ticket system, One Metro New York (OMNY) will not come to the Metro-North Railroad until 2025, delayed from the original projected 2021 completion.
https://patch.com/new-york/yorktown-somers/metro-north-not-expected-get-omny-pay-until-2025-mta
>Originally slated for 2021, the AirTrain's OMNY rollout will now happen "sometime in 2024," according to a recent tweet from the airport.
https://patch.com/new-york/queens/omnys-delayed-rollout-jfk-airtrain-must-be-sped-lawmakers-say
>An MTA spokesperson merely said there was “no update” on the agency’s plans for the back-door boarding pilot, which was unceremoniously axed in 2022. At the time, Lieber said he was trying to find “the right time” to start the pilot, which was announced in 2021 and then sat on the shelf for months.
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2023/02/21/mtas-all-door-boarding-pilot-still-nixed-for-some-reason/
Please dont spread misinformation.
Ksevio t1_jab7zvs wrote
But you could board trains and busses in NYC and pay with your phone last year
thebruns t1_jab8cej wrote
Subway trains, yes. Not commuter rail, ferries, Airtrain, PATH or Rosevelt Island tram. The whole system was supposed to be done by now.
And rear-door boarding on buses is now 2+ years late
CommonNotCommons t1_jabrjaw wrote
>MA government has got to be the one of the least efficiently run cesspools in the country.
Massachusetts has just about the best-run, most effective government in the country. Certain parts of our government really suck, like the MBTA. But that’s also a consequence of how we structured our institutions, and how we fund them.
MBOSY t1_ja7u2fv wrote
Time for heads to roll. $212 million over budget. The only explanation is pocket lining supported by our politicians.
reaper527 t1_ja7w5wf wrote
> Time for heads to roll. $212 million over budget. The only explanation is pocket lining supported by our politicians.
i'm sure it will get blamed on the pandemic, but that's a total copout. the project started in 2017, and was supposed to be completed in 2021.
even if literally nothing got done in 2020/21, it should still be done now.
rip_wallace t1_ja7wver wrote
RhaenyrasUncle t1_jabpfyl wrote
Won't somebody please think of the poor millionaire politicians who had to give up...
...a whole 45 minutes of their life to attend a meeting that they got paid $250k to attend, to discuss these issues?!
Texasian t1_ja81gj8 wrote
For what it’s worth, it seems like ALL the features won’t be out by 2024.
The only thing I care about is multi-door boarding on Green Line and buses.
reaper527 t1_ja84d5w wrote
> For what it’s worth, it seems like ALL the features won’t be out by 2024. > > > > The only thing I care about is multi-door boarding on Green Line and buses.
i just want to be able to use my phone as my pass so i don't have to worry about my charlie card expiring for no reason. (plus being able to add value to my card without having to physically be at the station)
Texasian t1_ja8utq8 wrote
You can technically do that, but the current interface is shit.
hannahbay t1_ja9rt6o wrote
How?
Texasian t1_ja9tkxq wrote
Sorry, to be clear, I meant loading a Charlie card without having to be at a station. You can do it here
Since it’s stored value, you’d still need to tap at a fare machine or subway gate… so your kinda fucked if you want the bus.
killerdio t1_jaa2yw9 wrote
I thought you HAD to use a fare machine? Which kind of defeats the purpose of not needing to go to a fare machine...
The only use I found for it was being able to pay with my old shitty cards that have lost their magnetic strip. It also takes until the next business day to take effect, so overall a very unpleasant system.
Ksevio t1_jab771t wrote
You just have to tap it on a networked reader like the subway gates (but not the readers on the trains or busses)
boston_acc t1_jaahm8a wrote
Ever year—especially post-covid—this becomes more embarrassing. How many realms of life do you actually need a physical card for nowadays? Credit cards, gym cards, library cards—all of these have been outsourced to digital functionality. It really shouldn’t be that hard for transit to do the same (and it doesn’t even need to be tied to your credit card like NYC—you can just have a virtual card that can be reloaded with funds whenever you want).
thebruns t1_jaaoftm wrote
> The only thing I care about is multi-door boarding on Green Line and buses.
There was multi-door boarding on the Green Line when Charlie was introduced.
Some people started fare evasion hysteria and it ended.
There is zero guarantee the new system wont face the same result. NYC installed readers at every bus door to allow all-door boarding and then simply never launched it because of fare evasion hysteria
alexbaguette1 t1_jaco2nz wrote
Toronto did the same thing in 2015. The agency now estimates that they lose $80 million a year (~13% of their revenue) due to fare evasion. This is purely anecdotal, but there definitely appears to be higher crime rates on the subway system since they made this change. However, the chair of the system said that making sure everyone has paid is the first step to addressing the “lawlessness” there.
missdingdong t1_jacwrzg wrote
Exactly where on back doors the fare mechanism will be, and how large? Space is usually a problem on MBTA vehicles with standing room only.
Texasian t1_jaczvtu wrote
IDK. Google it.
hausofpurple t1_jadypb6 wrote
There’s some devices that look to be for a pilot on the silver line. If you step onto the bus at the back door, there’s a device attached to the right hand yellow pole. It’s about the size of an iPad mini I’d say? If you’d be able to fit onto the bus while boarding at the rear door, you’d be able to reach the very small tap device no problem. If you can’t reach it, there’s probably not room for you to be getting on, moot point.
missdingdong t1_jae731a wrote
Thank you.
Vivecs954 t1_ja84xw5 wrote
Lmao there is definitely already multi door boarding now for the green line
mpjjpm t1_ja8cac1 wrote
Not at street-level stops when the operator is determined to collect every fare from every rider.
TwoforFlinching613 t1_ja8lv14 wrote
Obviously, this is anecdotal based on my experience. When I take the C/D lines (especially C), I would ballpark that all doors open about 97% of the time. It is rare that I see an operator only open the front doors.
charons-voyage t1_ja9h9zj wrote
When I first moved here and was taking D line from Brookline, everyone would hold up their hand in the air and the driver would open all the doors and we would shuffle in. About a week later I realized they were holding their passes up and I had been riding for free lol.
willzyx01 t1_ja7xs6x wrote
$212M over budget? lol. Time to stop, audit the entire project and audit taxes and bank accounts of everyone involved. There is absolutely no fucking way nobody stole money from this.
aaronswar43 t1_ja7yz1w wrote
This is crazy since this same company did nyc automated fare system for way less price tag.
thebruns t1_jaap2i0 wrote
The OMNY program is facing serious 4+ year delays
reaper527 t1_ja7ti7b wrote
this rollout is really moving at government speed.
NEU_Throwaway1 t1_ja7zljy wrote
Matches the speed of the rest of the MBTA's system.
senatorium t1_ja82q4x wrote
It’s unfortunate that we even need this system, as opposed to free rides, but free rides would require a financial commitment from the state to make up the lost fare revenue and it’s exceedingly unlikely the state government will do that (Healey, in fact, is today introducing a tax cut bill).
That being said a billion dollars for fare collection absolutely boggles the mind. I can’t even imagine how it could cost that much. I’m not sure we’re even spending a billion to replace the Orange and Red cars and we definitely aren’t to replace the RL and OL signal systems, two projects that will improve the T significantly more than this will. My guess is that the contractor is fleecing the T with billable hours here.
alohadave t1_ja83zjc wrote
Fares never fully paid for the cost of running the system. I don't remember the exact percent, but it's only as high as 60%, and that feels high. It's public transit and uses public money to operate with.
Studies have shown the costs of collecting and enforcing fares is pretty close to what the fares bring in in many systems.
TheDoktorIsIn t1_ja87pfu wrote
My favorite was a couple years ago they had that whole Fare is Fair thing.
You know what else is fair? Trains that run on time. Tracks that don't light on fire. Faster train service than walking from A to B. Fair goes both ways, I'm paying for a service.
Also the vast majority of the time when tickets weren't checked on the commuter rail, it was because they were understaffed and couldn't check tickets. But I'm sure they thought of that... Right?
Vivecs954 t1_ja861yb wrote
The “fares” is mostly the commuter rail too, like free busses would cost almost nothing because there aren’t that many bus fare dollars to give away in the first place.
and_dont_blink t1_jab20n4 wrote
With how the system is run, and how messed up the current state is, it'd feel kind of wrong for the rest of the state to have to bear the burden of pumping more money into it for no real benefit to them. If a working train system is something Boston wants, then Boston is going to have to figure it out. Right now the city is being strangled and tripped up from within.
CommonNotCommons t1_jabrs3d wrote
The city of Boston gives away most of their taxes to the rest of the state via state income tax. If it weren’t for Boston, the rest of the state would be in much worse shape. Maybe some people should gain a little perspective about the dynamics around our centers of commerce. Oh, and how much more efficiently government dollars get spent in a city versus anywhere else. The rest of the state isn’t pulling their fair share of output.
That’s fine, that’s how we’ve chosen to structure things as a state and as a country, but it also means comments like this are based in ignorance. Boston isn’t suckling at the teat, improving it pays dividends to the rest of the commonwealth.
and_dont_blink t1_jabsfu8 wrote
>The city of Boston gives away most of their taxes to the rest of the state via state income tax. If it weren’t for Boston, the rest of the state would be in much worse shape.
I see, if everything is exactly as you say then why would they need the state's help to provide funding for their subway system CommonNotCommons?
While MA is at $2.4B the rest of the state is at $10.4B. So they're generating about 23% of the state income, but that's just income tax. There's nothing stopping Boston from creating another tax just to fund the trains, or issuing bonds, considering it primarily effects Boston and is a Boston issue. Someone in Springfield or a small town shouldn't have an extra tax levied to pay for some form of grift happening here, that should be on us.
[deleted] t1_jadvnox wrote
[removed]
and_dont_blink t1_jae53d1 wrote
>You’re wrong and you’re trying to save face, and it’s embarrassing to watch you squirm.
Generally CommonNotCommons, the person calling names and making insinuations isn't in the right but rather trying to bluster. It's not a good look mate.
You are correct that Boston is an outsized economic presence in the state, but you act as though it's responsible for everything and it simply isn't. You've given no reason for why the rest of the state should be kicking in money to pay for Boston's train system running amok, and by your own logic they shouldn't need it.
They could simply issue bonds or add an additional tax. Problem solved. If we can agree that Boston shouldn't take money from the state for it's train system, there's no issue. You don't really have any other arguments, just vitriol.
>Jesus christ I’ve had it with you morons.
Take care, but I'd point out when people resort to name calling and ad hominems they're basically telegraphing they aren't confident in their arguments, are unhappy about it, and lack the maturity to handle it.
LukeWarmCheesecake t1_ja7vm1v wrote
Sunk cost fallacy. Baker's government did so much damage to this state.
teslas_love_pigeon t1_ja87p96 wrote
lol you people will continue blaming Baker in 2030.
You are absolutely delusional to not see that your politicians absolutely don't care about you. Why should they? You'll lap up all the garbage values they spit out while doing fuckall.
Did you happen to know that the Democratic Party in Mass had a complete veto proof supermajority in the legislature branch during all of Baker's reign? Do you know what this actually means? It means Baker didn't do shit unless the DNC approved it first.
But yeah continue to vote for the same politicians that figuratively spit in your face while telling you they care about housing equality or public transportation.
I mean FFS we voted out a politician that brought billions in federal transportation grants into Mass and replaced him with a woke twitter moron that has done fuck all but loves to ride the coattails of AOC (who is a better politician than Pressley will ever be).
AWalker17 t1_ja97o7g wrote
I think it’s worth noting that Pressley actually voted AGAINST the infrastructure bill. So not only did we replace the guy getting the transportation grants, we replaced him with someone who actually voted with Republicans against the infrastructure bill. And even worse, we’re likely stuck with her because no one in their right mind would vote for a Republican and there hasn’t been a whisper of a potential primary candidate since she was elected.
teslas_love_pigeon t1_ja9ou53 wrote
Yes, it's truly insane how stupid the voters are but it's okay they're voting for people that want to "help" us without ever questioning what that help actually is (spoiler alert it's mostly suppressing new development, public transit, and job opportunities).
I'm sure if you're wealthy you love it because you get to talk about how much you love helping the poor and minorities while voting for politicians that will do everything in their power to make sure poor people can't live or work in Boston.
0bsessions324 t1_jad0ans wrote
It's a known and quantifiable fact that Baker's been meddling with the T since long before he took office.
Baker was the guy who gutted funding for the MBTA to fund the Big Dig. It takes a pretty big sense of self delusion to not notice that a lot of the T's current issues are at Charlie's feet.
rocketwidget t1_ja83pg7 wrote
The original ETA of this new fare system was 2020-21. Yeesh.
MoeGreenVegas t1_ja8qj43 wrote
"Covid"
jack-o-licious t1_jacjo7f wrote
The fare system will be completed momentarily.
Vivecs954 t1_ja85ivm wrote
Biggest waste of money. Why are we spending a billion dollars on fare collection when the trains are not even maintained properly?
I know the MBTA is not a household but the analogy holds that of that if you have a fixed budget you should pay your rent/mortgage before you pay your cable bill.
The T needs to get its deferred maintenance backlog caught up before it even thinks about a luxury like this. And you can’t “chew bubble gum and walk at the same time” if you have a finite ammount of money to spend like the T does.
[deleted] t1_ja9fxyv wrote
[deleted]
newcomputer1990 t1_jab1916 wrote
It gets worse when half green and silver line stops don’t actually need machines and nearly every bus stop had no machine.
fatnoah t1_ja8pwfv wrote
Spending close to $1B makes no sense. The MBTA collected $200M in fares in 2022. Let's say the new system boosts that by 25%. It'll take 20 years to break even.
0bsessions324 t1_jacztql wrote
Why does it need to?
massahoochie t1_ja8e73p wrote
Why don’t they prioritize a convenient, reliably working rail system before spending $1B on this nonsense? What a bunch of dunces.
MKGirl t1_ja9ag4o wrote
1B on a fare collecting system..!?
Its_me_mikey t1_ja87pcu wrote
All just to count money. Wtf
caspa10152 t1_ja8ec8h wrote
I can think of a billion ways the MBTA could spend the money better
personman t1_ja9y787 wrote
the MBTA makes $200M/yr in fares. The CharlieCard system was put in place in 2006. So in another 17 years, when it's time for another overhaul, this system will have barely paid for itself. And that's not counting maintenance and ongoing service fees.
Literally make public transportation free. It works.
drtywater t1_ja9qdob wrote
For people comparing to NYC roll out that is a fair but nuanced issue. One major difference is the T also including commuter rail in this job whereas NYC only had Subway and bus. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but in the NYC system it only has NYC MTA and does not include LIRR, PATH, Metro North, or NJ Transit right?
Nexis4Jersey t1_jaa3a3g wrote
MTA controls the LIRR and Metro North , it's all one agency and the new fare system will cover the commuter rails along with every NY transit system south of Albany. PATH will also use the new OMNY system and will roll out next yr. NJT decided to go with the same flawed company as SEPTA/PATCO, but there have been growing calls to dump it at least in North / Central Jersey for the cubic system. And the NY system has faced numerous delays I think they're 2yrs behind.
drtywater t1_jaak556 wrote
Interesting im honestly surprised at level of integration. Yes Metro North and LIRR are MTA as well but I know those agencies can be very territorial and not always play nice
thebruns t1_jaap9tf wrote
> PATH will also use the new OMNY system and will roll out next yr.
PATH went with their own system as well
Nexis4Jersey t1_jabesg2 wrote
I misread the articles your right they said OMNY like system.
thebruns t1_jaap8ba wrote
It is supposed to but is massively delayed
https://patch.com/new-york/yorktown-somers/metro-north-not-expected-get-omny-pay-until-2025-mta
iDidThatOnPorpoise t1_ja9y6sd wrote
Can someone link to the project's website? It genuinely does not make sense for something like this to be 3 years behind and $212m over budget.
Commercial_Board6680 t1_ja9nqrz wrote
What level of incompetence is required to get employment within the top echelon of the MBTA? It's just one thing after another with these clowns.
b0xturtl3 t1_jacwm9l wrote
In the meantime, everyone is already riding the GLX for free -- why bother paying? That section of the T could be the first "fare free" zone as an experiment. And for those of us who are paying, stop giving us paper receipts--what a waste and the machines keep breaking down due to running out of ... paper.
AutoModerator t1_ja7ruib wrote
The linked source has opted to use a soft paywall to restrict free viewership of their content. As alternate sources become available, please post them as a reply to this comment. Users with a library card can often view unrestricted articles here Boston Herald articles are still permissible. Please refrain from filing report as Rule 5 violation.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
ahecht t1_ja85idd wrote
>The MBTA does not expect to fully implement its nearly $1 billion automated fare collection system in 2024, as previously planned, effectively pushing back a project that was already three years behind schedule.
>
>This project, when completed, will replace the 2006 CharlieCard system with a modernized contactless payment approach, allowing riders to tap or board at any door with a fare card, smartphone or credit card, with an additional aim of cutting down on fare evasion.
>
>To that end, electronic fare gates were introduced at North Station in October, and will eventually be installed at South and Back Bay stations.
>
>“The Healey-Driscoll administration has undergone a preliminary review of this complex project to assess its current status and timeline for completion,” MBTA spokesperson Joe Pesaturo told the Herald on Saturday.
>
>“Based on the review so far, it’s clear based on the contractor’s most recent schedule, it is unlikely to meet the current 2024 timeline for full implementation. As the review process advances, more information will become available.”
>
>It’s the latest setback for the T’s fare collection overhaul project, which is being implemented by Boston AFC 2.0 OpCo LLC, a subsidiary of Cubic Transportation Systems, per a 2018 contractual agreement.
>
>The original contract called for full implementation by 2021, at a $723.3 million cost to the MBTA, but the T’s Fiscal and Management Control Board amended the deal in April 2020, pushing that timeline to 2024 and driving up the final price tag to $935.4 million.
>
>Pesaturo did not address a Herald inquiry about whether the extended timeline would increase the cost of the project, but a source with experience in the fare payment industry said a price increase is likely.
>
>“It came out that it was $200 million over budget, for a total cost of just under a billion,” the source said. “And that’s the last update we’ve had. I think we can all expect that there’s going to be future cost overruns that are going to get this project over a billion dollars.”
>
>Brian Kane, executive director of the MBTA Advisory Board, said the board has been asking for a project update as part of its capital budget oversight process for the past couple of years, but has not been getting much of a response from the T.
>
>“It looks like they’re trying to do this incrementally and not make a big deal about it, and have this be a whole big, giant program or project that’s subject to systemic failure issues,” Kane said. “I think they’re going to incrementally phase in stuff over the next three, four or five years.
>
>“And by 2026, ‘27, ‘28, you will see a wholly transformed fare collection system out there. But you won’t have a giant ribbon cutting.”
>
>Stacy Thompson, executive director of LivableStreets, said the contract is overly bloated and complex, making the project’s “endgame” more difficult to accomplish. The MBTA should have focused on its fare policies first, she said, before implementing new fare payment technology.
>
>“The MBTA must start putting policy before technology because at the end of the day, we have a fare collection system that is off-track, is costing us a billion dollars, and we don’t have low-income fares,” Thompson said.
>
>“We haven’t figured out our fare policies in a post-COVID world. None of that work has happened. Technology will not save us.”
>
>Pesaturo said the MBTA continues to review fare policy, “through the lens of equity, to deliver a project which modernizes the fare system to reflect customer payment choices, such as mobile devices and contactless credit cards.”
>
>Charlie Chieppo, a transportation watcher at Pioneer Institute, said a big part of the problem is with the vendor, which has control of a large share of the market, in terms of transit agencies seeking to implement this technology.
>
>In May 2022, Pioneer Institute published a report on the project, which cited a 2017 Governing Magazine article that described problems and delays that had occurred in other transit agencies that had contracted with Cubic for similar technology, including Chicago, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C.
>
>“If you want this kind of fare system, you don’t have a lot of other places to go,” Chieppo said. “So I think they’ve done a lot of overpromising and under-delivering.”
>
>However, an observer of the T’s project pointed out that in New York City, the much-larger Metropolitan Transportation Authority was able to get its contactless payment system up and running faster and at a lower cost than the MBTA.
>
>“They’re up and running and going and the T’s system is nowhere to be found,” the source said. “So it’s not exactly a situation where the T can blame the vendor … because the vendor successfully rolled out a similar procurement at a much bigger agency in the same time frame.”
[deleted] t1_jab10jj wrote
[deleted]
darthpaul t1_jacgxlx wrote
I’ve seen 2 articles on this. No explanation why it’s going over.
inelasticplastick t1_ja90xb8 wrote
what happened to the tokens. such a simple and low-cost method
Middle-Example6618 t1_ja7u3n2 wrote
A billion dollars is a LOT of free rides and a LOT of not-so-slow zones.
Seriously need this explained, how this was cheaper than just throwing the turnstiles open...?