They’re CRAZY.
Seriously, this is absolutely ridiculous. If you live in the South Shore, you get to use these services for free. North Shore? At least $35 a week, about $1820 a year. That’s 1820 a year that could be going to the local economy. That’s $1820 that could be someone’s food or phone or rent. That’s $1820 that may cost people their jobs, no longer able to afford to commute into the city, especially those without good access to public transportation or who work during hours that the T is not open. (And for those who can take the T, the fairs have jumped quickly there too – and parking at the T has increased $2 a day as well, making that no more affordable than the Tobin).
The death of the Turnpike Authority couldn’t happen soon enough. Don’t these people get it – middle class and working class people cross these bridges and tunnels every day? I certainly can’t afford these increases to the Tobin, which I frequently use. I’m going to have to go all the way to Route 95, to catch Route 93, and go without the toll. The result? The MBTA loses my $3 a trip, I have to spend more on gas and I lose about 20 minutes of my day. It’s a freaking lose, lose, lose. I bet a lot of drivers will alter their routes, making the already-bad traffic on 95 much worse.
It’s well past time for this state to dump all the tolls, or at least those that aren’t on the border, and just raise the gas tax by a small sum. 5-10 cents a gallon would make up the difference and then some, so we could focus on more roads beyond Greater Boston.
And these gas taxes should fund public transit maintenance, operation, and expansion.
<
p>I don’t have a philosophical problem with charging people for driving. I do have a problem doing it with a process that is both inequitable and inefficient.
<
p>And the MBTA parking increase is ridiculous and another argument for debt relief and increased funding.
One or the other. Probably the bonds.
you can thank Mike Dukakis for this. This is a reminder of the the long term effects of bad government.
The main source of the MBTA’s current financial woes is the use of forward funding, instituted in the year 2000. A decade since Dukakis was governor.
The Big Dig was essentially launched by Dukakis and his man, Salvuci, ran it. It was the most expensive highway project in the history of the US and it sucks. It has burdened the Mass Turnpike Authority with billions in debt that is being paid by the metrowest motorists.
It’s all Dukakis’ fault. Never mind that ground wasn’t broken until after he’d left office. Never mind the bad governance of four consecutive Republican governors who could have done something to control costs. Let’s just blame the guy who started it. Just like Vietnam is widely regarded as being all Eisenhower’s fault, so too should the Big Dig be laid entirely on Dukakis’ shoulders.
like a jerk on this issue- sort of like DiMasi looked with his kneejerk responses to Patrick’s municipal partnership act.
In this case, a toll is nothing more than a more unjust form of taxation. A tax on “some”- lucky for Patrick he lives in Milton (south of the city), so he won’t be paying the toll to get to work.
administratively (apparently), whereas the gas tax would require legislation.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
–which Charlie nodded at in his promotion of Ryan’s post–is that hiking the existing tolls would be a very narrow burden, less likely to excite broad political opposition.
Didn’t we fight a war about this?
Once again, Metrowest commuters — who barely use the Big Dig system — are going to be forced to pay for the waste. You get hit at 128, and then you get hit again at Allston — then repeat going outbound. At the same time, the cost of parking at the T lots is about to go up. For those folks heading to downtown from points west, you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
<
p>Since the Big Dig was supposed to benefit commerce throughout the state by allowing more efficient delivery of goods, etc., through downtown Boston and out to the airport, the only fair thing to do is to spread the pain though an increase in gas tax and/or registration fees.
for either the North Shore or Metro West – and we both got hit with the parking increases. I almost could have made this entire diary about the parking increases, because that’s as ridiculous as these tolls. There’s now really no affordable way for me to get in the city, short of going way-the-heck out of my way (which I will)… and even then, I couldn’t use that option if I needed to park anywhere in the city proper.
And the galling thing is that the entire gajillion dollar project benefitted (i) the City of Boston and (ii) South Shore commuters.
<
p>Why such fear of the political power of the Irish Riviera?
The Metro west people are really getting screwed. North shore people have many ways of commutng without paying a toll. Route 93 is free. So are routes 28 and 38. People who use the Tobin get soaked but thousands avoid that toll by cutting across the Lynn Fells Parkway or Route 16 from Route One. That will be the biggest symptom, secondary roads will become packed with the drivers who are avoiding the tolls.
I really don’t think it makes sense to try to talk about who gets “soaked” more than others. This is going to “soak” everyone on the North Shore, including those who never took the Tobin or Sumner or Pike into Boston, due to even worse traffic problems on 95 and 93 during rush hours. However, I guess those will be the lucky ones, because there’s going to be at least 100,000-150,000 who could not find it feasible to take alternate routes and won’t find public transportation any cheaper (people in Winthrop, Revere, huge swaths of Lynn, Swampscott, etc.)
<
p>We’ve got to build the coalition to stop this, because it will have a negative impact on everyone in both the North Shore and Metro West who commute on a daily basis.
Since the Big Dig was supposed to benefit commerce throughout the state by allowing more efficient delivery of goods, etc., through downtown Boston and out to the airport, the only fair thing to do is to spread the pain though an increase in gas tax and/or registration fees.
<
p>The benefits for the Big Dig, as well as the Turnpike, accrue to everyone, not just those who travel on them, or even drive at all. The costs should be spread across the entire state. Gouging those who are trapped into driving on the inside 128 portion of these roads with this increase is not equitable, and taxes a smaller portion of the citizens. Spreading the cost throughout the state will result on a smaller per capita hit.
<
p>People are going to use local roads and alternative highways to avoid the tolls increasing traffic on them and further reducing revenues from the toll system. Also, think of the aggravation to be experienced by those who live along these alternative routes. I already travel from the North Shore via 128 to 93 when visiting MGH, instead of Rte 1 and paying Tobin tolls. The two routes are within 1 mile of each other in total distance so there is no downside to using 93.
this is actually going to have a significant impact on my life, because I really can’t afford to pay those tolls. And I don’t mean it would be an added burden, or a bigger stress, or that I’d have to find some more hours or cut back on spending; I really mean that I simply cannot afford them.
<
p>That means, in turn, to get into the city – where literally all of my close friends live – I will have to drive very far out of my way, which means I’ll need to spend more on gas, which means I’ll have to use more gas (which hurts the environment), which means I’ll have to add to the traffic of already-stressed out highways (Route 95/93) and which means I’ll have less time for friends and waste being unproductive, driving.
<
p>So, this is a policy that hurts the environment, hurts the pocketbooks of everyone, most especially the middle and working class, and diminishes the quality of life. This is a very bad, clearly stupid, no good policy that the legislature has to fix – and fix now. To cap it all off, there’s no other, less expensive transportation option – including public transit.
<
p>No one wants to raise taxes, but the only way to fix this is to raise the gas tax. We have to pay for roads and it should be done in a fair and equitable way. This is simply unfair and I hope it’s going to be the rallying cry this issue truly needed, because the tolls were already too high for people who don’t make bags of cash every week.
You logic is that the only “FAIR” solution is to stick some chump in Athol or North Adams with the bill for maintaining your tunnels, which you admit that you yourself will drive miles to avoid paying for.
never drive on state-maintained roads or bridges and sure as hell never, ever go to Boston.
I find that one thing people from Boston have a hard time understanding, is that the world doesnt revolve around Boston.
My guess is that it is a safe bet that the average annual number of trips to Boston by someone from Athol or North Adams can be safetly rounded down to zero and with the improvements to airports like Providence and Manchester that can be refined to zero and zero one hundreths.
Also, it shouldnt be much of a stretch to imagine how much of the states highway budget gets burnt up in Boston, in comparison to how much of the payment for it comes from Boston. the same can be said for inside 128. All the money moves one way.
a) North Adams and Athol have roads they didn’t pay for in complete, either.
<
p>and b) even if someone from Athol has never even seen the city of Boston, they’ve benefited from it. What percent of the state’s budget comes from the Greater Boston area? I assure you more than the rest of the state combined. We help pay for your roads, bridges and education, too. Furthermore, raising the gas tax would not only benefit me, it would benefit you, by generating more revenue to fix our deteriorating infrastructure across the state. We simply aren’t doing anything near enough about it and this is a fair mechanism of revenue generation that could start us down that path. And, yes, I’ll fully support whatever new roads, bridges and public transportation is needed in North Adams, Athol, Springfield, Pittsfield, Westfield or any other community out in Western Mass. I would love nothing more than to see Western Mass and a city like Springfield prosper, because we need to make sure that the success of Massachusetts – and the opportunity – is universal.
Metro areas are a great big rock around the neck of the rest of their states. Always have been and always will be. If forced to pay for their own budgets metro areas would fold neatly like a stack of those rags called Boston Globes. If you dont understand this look for example at NYC and how it bleeds the rest of NY.
Same as Boston and its support network of tennant farmers in the rest of the state who get back less than 30 cents for every dollar shelled out. Boston could give a flip about anyone outside of Boston and its more than high time the rest of the state banded together and returned the favor.
That it takes 3 people to get KILLED at a state highway intersection before the beloved commonwealth will consider footing the EXPENSE of putting up a traffic light. Thats the world we live in; bridge decays … closed, no zillion dollar tunnels to shorten our commutes.
NYC, particularly Wall Street, were a big chunk of NYS’s tax base. So I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about that, regardless of how upstaters feel.
The tax base chunk is never as big as the spending chunk although you are correct in assuming that the imbalance will get even worse as the speculation driven “economy” pops.
so they can pay all those farmers…
<
p>so even if it’s not in taxes (and I would vehemently disagree with that premise, anyway), you get your’s, too.
The population of Boston is 600,000, but another 600,000 people commute into Boston to earn a living and then take that money back into their own communities.
<
p>Who pays for these extra 600,000 people who come to Boston every day and use the city’s roads, emit pollution from their cars, fling litter and trash onto the cities streets, uses the cities emergency services when necessary, walk through the city’s sidewalks and parks, all while extracting money for use elsewhere? The city means making a living and and affording opportunities to build personal financial worth for 600,000 non residents, who intern take that money and spend on property taxes and businesses in Braintree, Lowell, Auburn, Georgetown, Burlington, West Bridgewater, Shirley, Dracut, Taunton, Milford, Billerica, and 100s of other towns in MA.
<
p>So, you don’t want to pay for Boston? Fine. Let Boston put up tolls and taxes for every non resident who enters to recoup the costs lost. See how fast people stop making money, stop bringing money back into the smaller communities, move to a more lucrative area and send the MA economy into the crapper. Lets see how quickly the 128 businesses jet out of MA because access to the nearest major city is now cost prohibitive, essentially leaving them in the boondocks.
<
p>By the way, NYC, if it were an independent country, would be the 16th largest economy in the world. The NYC Metro area has a GDP roughly the same as Russia’s and Canada’s. So, I doubt it’s really a big rock around the neck of NYC.
<
p>Without any kind of numbers or analysis from economists, what you say really makes no sense at all. I’m open to being wrong, but you gotta show some work.
<
p>
Except that you do have a relatively cheap way of geting to work if you live near the blue line, a bus line, or any commuter rail stop (which is something we should be trying to encourage).
<
p>But yeah, gas taxes need to go up and they need to fund expansion of public transit.
<
p>Also–I don’t know if carpooling is an option for you. Something to look into, maybe. You know your own situation better than I do.
the gas tax should pay for the repair of roads and bridges that are deteriorating and for the huge debt caused by the big dig. raise the public transit rates if you want to raise money for public transit. It is the syphoning off of gas tax monies that has caused our highways and bridges to rot. Pay for your charlie card and i will pay for my gas, okay? Or buy a gosh darned car. Just stop looking for a handout, times are tough enough. Lets pay our debts first.
That’s the spirit- increase demand for gas and clog the roads even more! Good for the environment, and fun for everyone.
the less traffic on the road.
<
p>You need to think that out better.
<
p>No one’s looking for a handout, just a way to get to work or an evening out that makes fiscal sense and helps the economy. Using part of the gas tax for public transit absolutely makes good sense and even better policy, helping make public transit a better option for more people who would otherwise take their cars. We have to make policy that makes commuting more affordable and helps the planet, telling people to “buy a gosh darned car” doesn’t accomplish any of that.
syphoning gas tax money for other purposes starves the state. As a result, roads and bridges all over the state crumble. Mass transit is nice and should be paid for by its users just as all motor vehicle users pay for the gas tax.
Not if done correctly. The roads and bridges all over the state are already crumbling. Part of the reason for that is the heavy use of roads that often weren’t meant to hold the capacity they currently do. Getting cars off the road – and helping give them more public transit choices – will not only improve your commute time, but lessen the wear and tear on roads.
<
p>We all benefit from public transit, just like we all benefit from the state’s highway system. That’s why all of our tax dollars contribute toward them.
the commuter rail is very, very expensive. 4/day for parking, $263 for a monthly pass. The blue line costs about $200/month, including parking. Taking the bus from where I live would add an hour to an already hour-long commute. Add on top of that half the time I’d need public transportation, it’s closed. Not everyone uses them in the 9-5 schedule…
<
p>Carpooling is not an option for that very same reason.
<
p>The only thing that makes sense for me is to start heading 95 > 93 > Storrow Drive. It’ll add 20 minutes and take more gas and add to the traffic on the road… but it is the best solution short of increasing the gas tax.
BMG readers might not be aware that a penny of the five-cent sales tax – everywhere in the state – is dedicated for the MBTA budget. (Or it was last time I checked.) Not Pioneer Valley Transportation Authority, not Berkshire Regional Transit Authority. A little gift from the legislature to the Hub under the Finneran reign.
<
p>If Boston and the MBTA will forego that revenue stream that comes from taxpayers and consumer throughout the state, and let the funds instead be spent on the state’s general fund, I bet we could work out a deal on raising the gas tax. Your transit system would suffer a net loss I expect, but it would might allow the pro-gas tax, “share the pain” comments in this thread to begin to sound logical. Don’t let the fact that we are already subsidizing your transit system get in the way of your wishful thinking, gentlemen.
I forgot about that.
allow some of that penny to go toward other public transportation authorities – divide it up proportionally to need for service.
<
p>Furthermore, to offset the loss of revenue (and increase it as necessary), make that last penny or two of the increase to the gas tax go toward public transit.
One issue is the general funding for roads and bridges, and that is best provided by the gas tax, which is much more cost-effective to implement.
<
p>But the exceptional cost of center city infrastructure to accomodate vehicles is probably best assigned to those vehicles that use those avenues to the city. However, as pointed out by others, the toll collection is not only inefficient, but it is unfair in that it does not equally burden those that enter the city.
<
p>So what other method could be used that would raise revenue fairly, efficiently, and “hit” all those the enter the city by private vehicles equally. Other world cities (London, for example) have set up an automatic system to bill vehicles for entering the city by any avenue. But it may be a lot less expensive to merely tax parking within the confines of the city, excepting residents.
<
p>I would advocate a combination of state-wide increased gas tax (and for other reasons, increased federal gas tax), a center city parking tax paid to the State, and an automatic collection system for the high cost avenues (tunnels for sure, maybe the turnpike, and possibly the expressway) into the City. With the sources spread, the specific cost of the tunnels, etc. could be no more (and possibly less) than the current rates.
without having tolls? I’d suspect taking pictures of everyone’s license plates and forwarding them the bill later on isn’t exactly an option. To make every car that would ever go into Boston have a transponder would take years and could never be anything close to fully enforced.
<
p>I would think it entirely fair to have a nominal toll tax to enter the city, but $3 was too high and $7 is absolutely insane. I think a dollar would be fair and would raise a considerable sum that could be combined with the other bevy of options you added, all of which I think could at least be made to be fair. However, something like 2/3rds of the tolls collected in this state go right back into Turnpike toll-taker salaries, making it not only incredibly inefficient, but suspiciously more like an excuse to create jobs, not so much to generate revenue. If the tolls were only a dollar, they’d even be more inefficient and wasteful. Thus, I think the only efficient ways of creating the revenue would be the gas tax – and maybe taxing parking by a small amount.
<
p>In government, I really think the best option is usually the simplest one. Sharing the burden through the gas tax would be the closest thing to fair that would be an efficient way of collecting the revenue.
In London, every car that passes into the congestion zone is charged. Some have transponders; others have their license plates read. Yes, there is some administrative overhead, but you get both revenue benefits and the congestion reduction.
Can be done by transponders or ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) systems. By using this method to supplement other sources of traffic revenue (gas tax and parking tax) we could limit its application to high cost infrastructure that offers the driver a logistic advantage compared to other avenues. As I said, the tunnels and probably the turnpike and expressway would be good candidates. By limiting its application locations we would save on the investment cost to institute the system. By making it automatic we would eliminate much of the operational cost of toll-taking, as well as the traffic delays incurred as a result.
<
p>I would recommend the following steps:
1) Increase the gas tax by 5-10 cents per gallon.
2) Eliminate the MBTA parking lot cost increases.
3) Institute a parking tax (excepting residents) in Boston at 10% of parking fee.
4) Institute automatic toll taking for high cost expressways into city, from N, S, E and W at about $2 per pass.
5) Eliminate all other tolls
…it would make sense to toll the Tip O’Neill Tunnel/Zakim Bridge stretch of I-93. After all, if the purpose is to pay for the Big Dig then shouldn’t we toll the road that actually was the result of the project? It may have the added benefit of reducing traffic in downtown Boston because through traffic could avoid tolls by taking 95/128. At the moment we’re seeing nice gas prices, but they’ll probably rise again and I have no interest in artificially raising the price.
isn’t exactly unreasonable
<
p>it would still be less than most northeastern states pay, significantly so compared to a few of them.
this notion that we should just put tolls on the south shore is wrong for 2 reasons.
<
p>first, two wrongs don’t make a right. An unfair burden is an unfair burden. It smacks of this whole reactionary motion across America in the 1990s-2000s of trying to tear people down to the most common denominator, instead of trying to improve the lives of everyone.
<
p>second, it’s a little utopian to just say “we should put tolls south of boston on 93.” Where are they going to go? You can’t just put tolls on some place magically, the rodes have to be widened, expanded, with multiple lanes added… etc. etc. etc. Considering the traffic is already bad there during traffic hours, the added commute time in and of itself would be an unfair burden – even if you could widen the roads in an affordable, practical manner. I honestly doubt the roads could be widened though, because we’re talking bridges here – expensive ones at that. What’s there is there and it would probably be far more expensive to change it than to not, hence why they’ve likely never been added.
<
p>the gas tax is still the most reasonable, affordable, efficient and best solution available to solve these problems and make the system both equitable and fair.
I’m not an engineer so I don’t have the answer to your practical concerns. I do want to clarify that I’m not looking to put tolls on the North or South Shores. My suggestion is very specifically to have a bridge/tunnel toll for the Zakim/O’Neill stretch as that basically is the Big Dig. In addition to drivers having the 128 option to avoid tolls, more drivers might also be encouraged to drive, say, only as far as Sullivan Square, which is what I do, and take the T the rest of the way in.
<
p>It seems, however, that if the point is to recoup Big Dig costs we should go after the contractors that went way overbudget. After all, it’s not the fault of the taxpayers/commuters of the state that it cost so much.
I don’t have to use these toll roads so this change isn’t going to affect me.
<
p>How much of the tolls goes toward the cost of collecting the tolls?
<
p>Personally I would rather pay an increased gas tax than make other people pay the increased tolls.
<
p>If the money I pay for gas is going to the state instead of the oil companies….that would be fine with me.
I’ve read around 2/3-3/4.
If the legislature lacked the courage to solve this problem by implementing a tax gas increase in the past, then this should be more than enough impetus for them to pass one now. Hey, maybe that was the plan all along…
in the sense you mean. There are agendas, such as eliminating the Turnpike Authority. But also, we are watching conflicting priorities bump into each other, as the reality of debt percolates through the system.
<
p>So the Governor lifts not a finger to help out the Pike–and why should he? He’s got a plan of his own–and the Pike, faced with a river of red ink, raises tolls. This is no “pantomime:” The Turnpike Authority can hardly raise the gas tax, after all. Is it supposed to hold a bake sale?
<
p>The structure of the toll increase is controversial, sparing (for once) the western part of the state at the expense of the rest. Rhetorical Q: Is there a toll increase of this magnitide that wouldn’t be controversial?
<
p>Bottom line, things are in flux, and there’s an opportunity for change. If Metrowest and North Shore votes squeak loudly enough, and other planets are in alignment, maybe there is a shot at a gas-tax increase in lieu of this toll hike. Otherwise things will follow the path of least resistance.
<
p>One thing I’d like to see in this mix: if highways are going to get some relief from their crushing debts, so should the MBTA.
Our neighbors to the north use our roads-maybe they should share in the burden of infrastructure upkeep?
<
p>I live in the city and frequently use the Pike to get out to clients in Metrowest. It will cost me $8 round trip to get out there now. I will be taking the much slower Route 9 and other roads to avoid the tolls now.
I don’t think the “Turnpike Board” is acting in good faith with this decision. I think they’re putting on some kind of PR show, or throwing some kind of tantrum, as they are perpetually faced with elimination as an entity.
Perhaps the whole pantomime is being coordinated with the Governor’s office. I don’t know.
However, seven dollar tolls seem so completely riduculous that it’s hard to believe that “The Turnpike Board” ever expected them to be implemented.
This has always been the problem with the conservative tax avoidance schemes. Rather than broad based taxes paying for public goods, services, and spaces we shift the costs to some subset of citizens we deem “users” and make them pay the bill. The conservatives get to brag about cutting taxes, the rest of us fight over who gets screwed.
<
p>Whether I actually use the Pike or the Tobin Bridge (and I rarely do) I derive a benefit from their existence. Same with many other public goods and services. I benefit from the fact that they exist. Not as much as the people who use them frequently, maybe, but I still benefit.
<
p>Toll collections should have disappeared years ago. These roads and bridges were built before the interstate highway system, when there wasn’t a pool of federal dollars to finance road construction. Not to mention the fact that tolls on only one road is stupid (I can drive around the toll road) and unfair (only some pay tolls).
<
p>We should have paid off the bonds, ripped out the toll booths, and been done with it all. Instead the politicians got to avoid raising taxes and perpetuate a patronage army of toll collectors. Win-win for them.
<
p>We need to rationalize our transportation system and come up with comprehensive plan for our transportation needs. And create a broader based financing system to pay for it all. We can’t do that with three debt ridden independent agencies (T, Pike, and Massport), plus all the little regional “T’s” we’ve created around the state.
<
p>With the Big Dig payments were probably stuck with some kind of tolls (????). But that doesn’t mean we can’t come up with a better mix of revenue streams to spread the burden: regional gas tax, increased excise taxes, etc. I don’t know. I am not a finance or tax person.
<
p>The bigger issue here, though, is making a subset of people pay for something we all benefit from, and can avoid paying for.
<
p>
A gas tax serves a general purpose: provide revenue that is sorely needed to build and maintain roads and bridges.
<
p>The current gas tax is not just too low, because it’s a fixed rate, it’s value has diminished over time. It’s time to restore the gas tax.
<
p>Tolls provide general revenue, but they can also serve to shape behavior. Smart tolls, tolls that rise and fall as demand rises and falls, could be used to alleviate congestion at peak periods. Mixed into an afternoon’s rush hour traffic are those who would travel at a little earlier/later time if the toll were lower at that earlier/later time and those who would pay a premium to have less traffic at that exact moment. Peak-priced tolls could spread the demand, reduce congestion, and extract a premium from those willing and able to pay it.
The Globe mentions some other bridge/tunnel tolls, but misses an obvious one.
<
p>
<
p>But the most obvious comparison is the tolls between New Jersey and NY City — the George Washington Bridge and the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels. For passenger cars, those each cost $8 at all times if you pay cash; at off-peak hours you get a $2 discount for using EZ-Pass. Note, interestingly, that 12 noon-8pm is considered “peak” on Saturday and Sunday.
I guess one thing that I find particularly troubling about these toll hikes is that not only is the North Shore hit hard (along with Metro West), but also the fact that the economic problems faced by Lynn and Salem have been all but ignored for the last twenty years.
<
p>The truth is that back in the 80’s, deindustrialization hit the cities of Lynn and Salem incredibly hard. Lynn especially, which lost thousands of good paying jobs – mostly at GE, but at other companies as well. Consequently, thousands of additional jobs were also lost as well in other sectors.
<
p>This period of job loss continued well into the 90’s, even as the national economy grew at astounding proportions. While the rest of the state and the country experienced the largest expansion of economic growth in human history – the cities of Lynn and Salem continued to decline economically by pretty much every measurable standard.
<
p>Manufacturing jobs (and jobs in other sectors as well) declined, while poverty and other negative indicators (such as crime) increased.
<
p>How do I know all of this? Well, about twelve years ago I wrote a report about this phenomenom using data from the state bureau of labor stats and I presented the results from this study at a forum sponsored by the Salem State Business School.
<
p>And as anyone who lives in either of these cities (like me) can tell you – one of the primary reasons that it is so hard to attract good jobs and new industry here is traffic. On any given weekday while school is in session, it can take nearly 40 minutes to drive 3.5 miles from one side of Salem to the other side of Lynn.
<
p>Both communities are simply too isolated from the larger state economy to enjoy the ‘spill off’ of economic growth that might occur outside the region.
<
p>One solution to this problem (though not a ‘magic bullet’ by any stretch) would be to extend the Blue Line. An idea that is routinely laughed down by state bureaucrats and even some elected officials. Providing aid and assistance to struggling communities like Lynn and Salem is not only NOT a priority – but the mere suggestion of adopting this solution is usually met with either hostility or presumptions of preposterness.
<
p>Additionally, or initially, the Patrick adminstration officials saw no need to include Lynn as part of their Gateway Cities initiative – with some reports that a number of officials simply (and wrongly) assumed that Lynn would prosper if Boston’s economy prospered. This may have changed, but I am not sure. I will have to look into it.
<
p>So now, with these toll increases coming ‘down the Pike’, so to speak, the state is only further isolating cities like Lynn and Salem. God only knows what the impact will be if they also decide to raise tolls on the Tobin.