Late Friday morning, in an online column entitled Time for ‘Adult Conversation’ on Somerville Green Line Extension, U.S. Congressman Mike Capuano called on local transportation advocates to come up with a “fall-back proposal” that would accommodate yet another round of delays on the Green Line Extension project (“GLX”).
To support his opinion, Rep. Capuano evaluated the project in simple, transactional terms — ultimately, we need to secure $557M in federal grants to complete the job — but the Federal Transportation Administration will not provide those funds unless the Commonwealth does two things: first, we must settle on a plan to properly support the overall MBTA system, and second, we must also commit to raising the $777M necessary to pay for the rest of the project.
In sum, the feds are willing to chip in for 42% of the cost for the entire GLX — but first they want our state legislature to demonstrate a renewed commitment to public transportation.
Unfortunately, our state legislature has largely avoided tackling this issue for many years — but now that the MBTA is in a state of perpetual crisis, and now that the GLX is at least five years behind schedule — the politicians are finally planning to take up the issue — next year, after the election.
Of course, making a big commitment to public transportation will require bold, progressive leadership. Some people do not think the GLX is a priority. And others worry that funding for the GLX might limit the potential for other projects around the Commonwealth — or unfairly burden those who live outside the MBTA’s service area.
But instead of approaching this debate with a determination to get the GLX done once and for all, Rep. Capuano thinks it would be wiser for us to immediately consider a less-ambitious “phasing plan” for the 4.3-mile project. He is afraid that we might not fare well in next year’s negotiation — and he worries that an “all-or-nothing” approach will leave us with nothing.
I respectfully disagree with his opinion and his suggested approach.
First of all, the GLX is not an option. The project has been mandated under the Clean Air Act as environmental remediation for all of the automobile pollution that was enabled by the Central Artery/Tunnel (“Big Dig”) highway construction project. In fact, the Commonwealth committed to this environmental remediation all the way back in year 1990.
Nevertheless, our state legislature has yet to truly fund the project. So in 2006, the Conservation Law Foundation sued the state — and the result was a settlement that called for the Commonwealth to complete the job by the end of 2014.
That deadline has already been postponed multiple times – so right now, we are simply hoping to get the job done by the end of this decade. The people of Somerville and the surrounding communities should not be asked to wait any longer.
Frankly, I am baffled by Rep. Capuano’s statement — it offers significant concessions before the negotiation has even commenced. Now, armed with this op-ed from an iconic Somerville progressive, opponents of increased funding for the MBTA are sure to stand firm in their view that the GLX isn’t a necessity. Beyond these strategic concerns, what is most troubling to me is all that Rep. Capuano’s statement fails to acknowledge…
The Green Line Extension is not merely a financial transaction. It’s an environmental issue and a public health issue. And it’s a matter of transformational importance to the people of Somerville and the surrounding communities. This is an area that has always been asked to bear the burden of supporting our regional transportation infrastructure — it’s now time that we see more of the benefits.
Instead of making plans to slow down on the GLX, we should call on our state legislature to fund the MBTA, finish the GLX, and settle on a deal that will improve public transportation and air quality throughout our entire Commonwealth.
Mike Connolly
From Mr. Capuano’s piece linked above (emphasis mine):
How on Earth do you conclude that Mr. Capuano is “making plans to slow down on the GLX”? His piece says just the opposite.
I want to be very clear about this, Mike. I live in your district. I vote. I have very little patience with candidates who knowingly misrepresent the positions of others.
Please clarify your apparent mis-characterization of Mr. Capuano’s piece.
There’s no intent to misrepresent Rep. Capuano’s position.
The original project deadline was 2014. The current project deadline is now 2019. The state legislature has yet to resolve the funding issues, but they plan to take up that question next year.
The main idea of Rep. Capuano’s article is that we should not approach next year’s negotiation with an “all or nothing” attitude — instead, we should develop on a “fall-back” plan. I view that as an invitation to further delays. The Somerville Transportation Equity Partnership agrees with my interpretation — they say we should not give an inch.
Compromise is good — but only when it happens at the end of a negotiation.
As you point out, the battle about funding GLX has been going on for nearly two decades. I’m not sure how much farther you would have us go before acknowledging that we are already nearing the end of negotiations.
I suggest, instead, that GLX is stalled and in danger of being abandoned altogether. I see no evidence that the legislature has any willingness whatsoever to raise the taxes needed to fund GLX, and the existing funding strategy (a new “vehicle mileage tax”) seems a long-shot. As Mr. Capuano has observed, any federal funding is dependent on a commitment by the state. I suggest that the practical effect of your proposal will be to kill GLX, while providing an excuse for doing so (“we tried and failed”) to all those legislators who have resisted in from the beginning.
In my view, Rep. Capuano speaks from his years of experience as both Mayor and Representative. Until STEP and you put forward a believable scenario for how the current plan will be funded, your proposal strikes me as brinkmanship verging on irresponsible.
Somerville desperately needs GLX. In this case, half a loaf is FAR PREFERABLE to nothing at all.
Instead of asking Somervillians to look inward and develop a phasing plan for the GLX, I think our leaders should be looking outward — and working on a comprehensive transportation package that has something to offer for everyone in the Commonwealth.
We should insist that full completion of the GLX (by the end of this decade) be part of broader transportation package that includes full funding for the MBTA, development of the South Coast Rail project, along with other transportation enticements for the folks in Central and Western Mass.
If we reach “the brink”, then we can talk compromise. But at this stage, I am in favor thinking big — and asking the state to live up to what has already been promised — a fully completed GLX by the end of the decade.
In my view, actually building the first leg strengthens, rather than weakens, the case for “thinking big”.
The huge success of the “DownEaster” has now spurred extensions to Brunswick and Freeport that will be in service this fall. I suggest that the “Phase 1” suggested by Rep. Capuano (or something similar) will be similarly successful, and that success itself will spur additional support.
I fear you create a false dichotomy. The choice is not between a phased plan for GLX and “thinking big” — a phased plan is, in fact, a part of thinking big.
We should begin constructing the GLX right now. We should provide full funding for the MBTA, we should continue the South Coast Rail project, we should provide rail service to Cape Cod, and we should significantly increase passenger rail alternatives in central and western MA.
In my view, THAT is how we “think big”.
The REALITY is that there is more than enough corporate welfare buried in the so-called Tax Expenditure Budget to pay the State’s share and fund the MBTA AND Regional transportation so that transportation is not a barrier to filling jobs, transportation is not the reason that houses are being about given away in some areas of the state, and economic stability and improvement stops being held up by failure to pay for viable infrastructure. There are still 90,000 unfillable jobs both because we don’t train for them and folks who cannot afford cars cannot get to them because the wealthy and upper middle class don’t need public transportation. It is students and the working class – and the aspiring almost middle classes who do. Just do the green line expention and like in Field of Dreams – the jobs, workers, and businesses will come. And take the money to do this out of the Tax Expenditure Budget – remember that whole discussion? More money is deferred due to the lobbying of corporate and philanpthrocapitalist interests than is collected. The tax expenditure budget is larger than the revenue used for the budget. That’s just wrong.
Ugh! Shouldn’t the public be responsible for paying for a public good?
are an excellent idea. Instead of “Arlington Street Station,” it’s “Fidelity/Arlington Street Station.” So what? People can still get where they need to go, and desperately-needed money comes into the system. Win-win.
First, it is the public’s responsibility, not a corporation’s to fund public infrastructure. Second, I hate being constantly reminded of how much influence business has on our society, though if the trade off is name the whole station and get rid of the visual clutter known as advertisements which are everywhere in the stations and on the trains and busses themselves, that would be tempting.
The desperately-needed money should come directly from taxes, as opposed to indirectly (and more expensively) from businesses who already eat far too much of my wallet.
It’s long past time for Massachusetts to collect the money in taxes needed to create and maintain the transportation system we so desperately need. A better way for Fidelity to contribute is to fund an ad campaign (perhaps through one of those Citizens United PACs) calling for such an increase. I’d rather see Fidelity following the New Balance model (emphasis mine):
I think it’s long past time we stopped groveling to the greedy among us and instead spoke to the majority who want Massachusetts to remain a beacon upon a hill.
Well put. There has to be a better way to fund the T than corporate-branded stations.