Environmental remediation is called for because the Big Dig, by increasing traffic, has many adverse environmental effects. So CLF went to court and got legally binding commitments for the Silver Line, the Green Line extension, and the Greenbush Line.
These are perhaps not perfect, and are still mostly unrealized, but they are overall positive steps to building a really good mass-transit infrastructure. I can’t imagine that there would have been any progress at all on that front without CLF’s willingness to sue.
The point I want to emphasize, though, is that these projects are not just givaways to the strap-hanging classes. They and their costs are part of the Big Dig package, as much so as the rebar and concrete that the cars and trucks drive over and under every day.
Alas, there is a fatal flaw. The Commonwealth and CLF agreed not only to build these projects, but to pay for them largely with MBTA debt. Which the T cannot afford. It’s sinking under its own debt right now; add the Green Line extension and kiss the whole mess goodbye.
Need I explain how unfair this is? Saddling MBTA commuters with Big Dig environmental costs is like billing victims for rape kits. But mostly it’s flat out unsustainable.
I understand why this has happened. There is some merit to the plan that says, Just build it, by hook or crook, and we’ll sort out who pays for it later.
But, sooner or later, it’s later. And if there is going to be some big reordering of priorities, some gathering of the squeaky wheels from Western Mass. to Metro West, then the strap hangers, and everyone who cares about the environment, ought to be in that number too.
While the MBTA is indeed currently paying for these out of debt that was not the case when the agreement was made. At the time the MBTA was funded through the legislature. It wasn’t until 2001 that the legislature created the current forward funding scheme forcing the MBTA to live on a much smaller budget and go into debt spending for just about everything.
Trickle Up, this is an outstanding post.
<
p>Jeremy, you’ve nailed it. When the CLF “won”, the MBTA wasn’t going to have to pay for it directly. That came later.
<
p>It’s also why the lege ought to use part of a gas tax increase to directly pay for mass transit infrastructure projects, including ones which have been/are currently being built. Get the MBTA out of paying so much for debt services and they just might survive.
I just wanted to step in with a quick note on this post from CLF’s perspective. The Central Artery transit commitments are and always have been state obligations. As Jeremy mentioned, in our original settlement with the state, the Conservation Law Foundation never agreed that these projects should be paid for with MBTA debt. The MBTA has been unfairly and inappropriately burdened with the cost of these projects.
<
p>Demand for public transportation continues to increase even as the MBTA struggles under a mounting debt burden. It’s far past time for the state to relieve the MBTA of its debt burden. If we want to provide safe, affordable and reliable public transportation and address air pollution and climate change, we need to adequately fund the MBTA and Regional Transit Authorities across the state. However you slice it, given the fact we’re facing an enormous transportation funding deficit, that will take new revenue sources.
<
p>For more about CLF’s point of view on the funding gap check out our op-ed from last year in the Globe: http://www.boston.com/news/glo…
<
p>Or visit http://www.ourtransportationfu… a coalition of businesses and organizations we’re working with to confront the state’s transportation funding woes.
<
p>Cheers,
Colin Durrant
CLF Director of Communications
to Colin and Jeremy for filling in the gaps on the history of the current arrangement.
<
p>Just in case it isn’t clear, I have long valued CLF’s work, and I called it New England’s leading environmental organization with appreciation and not irony.
It was clear to us and very appreciated! Thanks Trickle up!