Big Dig Wasn’t Worth The Cost (published Nov 16, 2004)
The Globe is correct in pointing out two key problems with the central artery and tunnel project – but it may have missed the forest for the trees. Adrian Walker is right that after years of cost overruns, the expensive leaks in the big dig are proof that Turnpike chief Matt Amorello has been an incompetent steward of the public trust (“Shameless Tunnel Vision,” City & Region, Nov. 15). The editorial page is also right that the state is woefully behind schedule in keeping its Central Artery legal commitments to improve public transportation.
Perhaps it is time to draw larger conclusions. First, in regard to the $14 billion dig, 16 years of Republican governors have proved poor watchdogs of taxpayers’ money. This is noteworthy since they campaign as fiscal hawks who will fight corruption and work for reform.
Second, perhaps it is time to admit that the Big Dig itself was a mistake. With $14 billion spent, what have we accomplished? While I-93 is now wider, and I-90 now has a tunnel that goes straight to the airport, citizens know that roads, bridges, and public transportation have been neglected for a decade.
For $14 billion, we could have renewed the Artery above ground, built an urban ring as a heavy rail line similar to the Red Line, extended other transit lines like the Green Line to 128, improved roads, and had billions left to use on education or other projects.
In short, we have invested $14 billion in a project to transform roughly a mile of downtown Boston, along the edges of the North End, the financial district, and Chinatown. For the same money, we could have transformed the entire region.
That’s what I wrote then. What’s the way forward now?
accomplish now? Although it could be said that nothing on earth could be worth the amount spent on the Big Dig, it’s too late to go back. I haven’t been in Boston since the Central Artery was finished…did they take down the old roadway yet? It seems to me that the land uncovered by removing the elevated artery–assuming that’s been done–must be worth a great deal. Of course they can’t build skyscrapers on it, but just having all those acres exposed to air and light must be worth something.
Anyone who regularly commuted through Boston during the last 20 years knows full well this was not a mistake. It has significantly reduced traffic.
Except when they shut down a lane on Storrow Drive so a-holes can park their cars.
The Legislature DELIBERATELY created an authority what is beyond the purview of the Governor when they invented the Turnpike authoirty. They CHOSE to place the Big Dig under turnpike Authority – why is that? So it’s budget would never be subject to embarassing vetos?
<
p>
Swift tried to fire them, and was told be the SJC she couldn’t, and was sued as an individual for her trouble. Romney reuested a judgement outlining his authority in 2005, and the SJC told him there was ‘no compelling legal need’ for such a judgement.
<
p>
In fact, you can make an excellent case that the Governor was the only one who legally DIDN’T have say over their operations! I mean, seriously – did the GOVERNOR place a special outside section in the budget to prevent him from appointing his own people, so there would finally be a majority to fire Amorello? Did ROMNEY seek a SUPER majority to fire him?
<
p>
Romney was able to get rid of the MDC, but the Legislature rebuffed his attempts to place the Dig under the authority of MassHighway where it belongs. Now, the Legislature is looking to give this mess away – and are finding no takers.
<
p>
The Hackarma rules!
Peter, no denying hackrama ruled here. Lots of blame to hand out. But to somehow absolve the behavior of 16 years of Republican Governors is laughable. THEY made the appointments to the damn board. (True, none of them probably never controlled a board–it takes 5 years of appointing and NONE of them stayed that long–OK Weld was physically there, but his mind wasn’t. So the best defence they have is they didn’t care enough to stay around)
<
p>
When did Mckinnon leave the turnpike? ’92 maybe? After that–Republican heads of the turnpike. Sure lots of Dem lege’s feed at the troph (sp), but the buck stops with the Governor and to deny that proves your just a party hack and have no right to adopt Peter Porcupine as a pen name.
If there is a five member board, serving rotating 5 year terms, i.e. one slot is up each year, then any Governor in his 3rd year should be taking control of the board.
<
p>
So after 15 years (16 next year) of Republican rule, that means the last 12 years have been a Republican rule at the Turnpike.
<
p>
And this is my pet peeve with the press: They still let the Republicans “run against government”, as if they haven’t had it for the last 15 years!!!
<
p>
So Romney wants to go to Washington and run the country. You have the whole political spectrum there. Complicated policy, a lot of moving peices. And Romney can’t even figure out how to get along with Republicans form his own party. If he can’t do that, how does he expect to rule in DC?
<
p>
On the Swift thing, she tried to fire them over one vote (on toll hikes). Trying to fire someone that votes in good conscience is a joke and she was overruled.