 |
Post Office Box 1147 ●
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945 ●
(781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
45 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Sunday, November 10, 2019
The
Massive Tax Hikes Surge Is On
|
Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR)
Commissioner Christopher C. Harding today announced that
preliminary revenue collections for October totaled $2.028
billion, which is $115 million or 6.0% more than the actual
collections in October 2018, and $39 million or 2.0% more
than benchmark. [The FY2020 revenue benchmark "expectation"
is $30.099 billion.]
Massachusetts Department of Revenue
November 5, 2019 - Press Release
October Revenue Collections Total $2.028 Billion
Monthly collections up $115 million vs. October 2018
The state's economy may have contracted
slightly in the third quarter, but tax revenues in October
grew by $115 million over last year and beat expectations
for the month by $39 million, according to the Department of
Revenue....
The $75 million in corporate and business
taxes collected by the state exceeded estimates by $26
million and were up $29 million, or 62.9 percent, from last
October. Gas, cigarette and estate taxes, which are lumped
into a single category, were also up significantly, beating
last year by 9.4 percent with $241 million coming into state
coffers.
State House News Service
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Tax Revenues Stable in October, DOR Reports
A new battle is brewing on Beacon Hill over
the state’s gas tax, with advocates pushing to raise the
levy to pay for upgrades to public transit and fix crumbling
roads and bridges.
This week, a coalition of business groups
called for hiking the 24-cents-per-gallon tax as part of a
raft of revenue-generating proposals it argues are needed to
plug an estimated $50 billion gap in transportation funding
over the next two decades....
Rep. Linda Campbell, D-Methuen, said she
opposes increasing the tax because of the burden it would
put on her working-class district along the New Hampshire
border.
“It affects the people most, who can least
afford it — the folks that are earning minimum wage who have
to commute long distances to get to their job,” she said.
Rep. Lenny Mirra, R-West Newbury, also
opposes an increase. He said the Legislature needs to cut
state spending, not raise taxes, to meet its transportation
needs.
“We do very little to rein in spending,
especially on transportation,” he said. “We already collect
a lot of taxes that are earmarked for transportation, but
we’re not spending it wisely.” ...
Gov. Charlie Baker argues that the state has
sufficient tax and borrowing capacity to make the needed
investments in transportation, and doesn’t see a need to
raise the gas tax.
The Baker administration has filed a bond
bill calling for more than $18 billion in investment in
transportation over the next five years, with $8 billion
devoted to the MBTA....
The state’s gas tax generated nearly $800
million in 2019, according to the Department of Revenue. The
money goes toward fixing roads and bridges, and other
projects.
Massachusetts also charges a 2.54 cent per
gallon fee for removing underground gasoline tanks, which
brings the state’s overall rate to 26.54 cents per gallon.
Overall, Bay State drivers pay a total of
44.9 cents per gallon in gasoline taxes, including state and
federal taxes and other fees, according to the American
Petroleum Institute. That puts it below the U.S. average of
just under 49.3 cents per gallon in total taxes, the group
says.
In New Hampshire, which has a 22.2 cent
state tax, drivers pay 42.23 cents per gallon in total taxes
and fees, according to API....
Christopher Carlozzi, Massachusetts state
director of the National Federation of Independent
Businesses, said low-income families aren’t the only ones
who would take it on the chin from a gas tax increase.
Small-business owners would suffer too.
“Higher fuel taxes, new tolls and congestion
fees are all direct taxes on small businesses simply trying
to provide affordable products and services to residents,”
he said.
The group wants state officials to consider
transportation-related reforms, such as reducing
Massachusetts’ third-highest-in-the-nation road repair
costs.
“Policymakers are talking out of both sides
of their mouths,” Carlozzi said. “First, they say how
unaffordable Massachusetts is becoming, then in the next
breath they want to impose new taxes that will increase
costs for every business, consumer, commuter and working
family in the state.”
The Salem News
Saturday, November 9, 2019
Gas tax battle returns to Beacon Hill
Plan would raise tax for transportation funding
[House Speaker Robert] DeLeo identified
transportation revenues as one of two major topics he'd like
to see the House tackle before the Legislature recesses for
the year on Nov. 20....
While it would not be until at least after
the new year, Senate President Karen Spilka was
non-committal about the Senate taking up a transportation
revenue bill should one pass the House this session.
Spilka initially referenced the ongoing work
of Sen. Joseph Boncore and Sen. Adam Hinds, who are leading
working groups studying ways to improve the transportation
system and modernize the state's tax code.
At a meeting of his revenue group last week,
Hinds said he felt the group was on track to produce a set
of recommendations by next summer before the end of the
legislative session, and Sen. William Brownsberger urged the
group to focus on revenue-neutral ways to make the tax code
fairer.
"The senators, both Hinds and Boncore, are
looking at potential short-term recommendations as well as
long term recommendations," Spilka said Monday.
State House News Service
Monday, November 4, 2019
Baker Opposes "Big Increase" in Gas Tax
As Massachusetts House leaders prepare to
debate solutions to the state’s transportation woes, they
face an inconvenient truth: Increasing the gas tax remains
an unpopular option among voters.
A poll conducted for a labor-backed
organization found that only 11 percent of voters supported
adding 15 cents to the state’s gas tax, while 74 percent
were opposed. The online poll of 600 likely voters was taken
on behalf of advocacy group Raise Up Massachusetts, which
backs a separate effort to increase taxes on the wealthy.
The group’s poll, conducted in August,
didn’t show much support for congestion pricing, either.
When asked if they support raising tolls by 20 percent at
rush hour, only 20 percent of respondents supported such a
move, while 61 percent opposed it. (No mention was made
about the possibility of reducing tolls at off-peak times.)
A separate survey of voters conducted for
the MassINC public-policy think tank in August showed
slightly more support for an unspecified gas tax increase,
but still only 26 percent were in favor, with 68 percent
opposed.
So what will voters support? Little surprise
here: the so-called millionaires tax. More than two-thirds —
69 percent — told Raise Up pollsters they back a 4 percent
additional tax on annual income over $1 million.
Representatives for Raise Up shared the
results with a group of liberal House members on Wednesday,
in advance of an upcoming floor debate on transportation
funding. The debate is supposed to happen before
Thanksgiving. But this is such a politically thorny topic,
there’s some talk that it could get pushed off until
2020....
Raise Up wants something else, as well. The
coalition of unions and activist groups continues to push
that 4-percent surcharge on incomes over $1 million. They
call it the “Fair Share Amendment.” The idea would be to
spend the windfall on transportation and education.
Several business associations thwarted an
effort to put the Fair Share tax on the statewide ballot
once before, in the courts. But the proposal is back, and
its proponents say they have filed it in a way that would
withstand another legal challenge. Still, it requires a
constitutional amendment, a drawn-out process that means
voters wouldn’t get to decide on it until fall 2022, at the
earliest. The Legislature has cast one supportive vote and
will need to do so again, but no sooner than 2021.
It can be easy to tax the very rich, at
least when compared to taxing everyday drivers. But no one
said fixing this transportation crisis would be easy.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Poll shows strong opposition to 15-cent gas tax increase
An influential Boston business group is
calling for $50 billion in transportation projects aimed at
getting people onto public transit and cutting down on
traffic congestion — paid for by hiking tolls and the gas
tax.
“The Commonwealth needs to substantively
engage in shaping a 21st Century transportation system to
ensure the state’s global competitiveness and
sustainability,” the report by business group A Better City
states. “We are all in this together.”
The organization highlights projects that
would cost a combined $50 billion over the next 20 years.
This all would be paid for by pumping the gas tax up by 11.5
cents a gallon — a 46% increase — fees on ride-share
services and hammering drivers with way more tolls,
including on people entering the state, and everyone driving
on the Southeast Expressway and through the I-93/I-95
interchanges, plus just raising existing tolls.
The organization also advocated for raising
Registry of Motor Vehicle fees and making people pay more
taxes when trading in cars.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Boston business group calls for $50B in transportation
spending
Lawmakers are preparing to debate new forms
of transportation revenue and Gov. Charlie Baker often touts
his administration's record investment in the MBTA, but the
status quo is nowhere near enough to meet the state's
growing transit needs, according to one business coalition.
Instead, the group A Better City suggests in
a new 16-page report, Massachusetts leaders should commit to
raising and spending $50 billion on transportation over the
next two decades, all with new revenue from a range of
transportation-specific sources like fees, tolls and taxes.
The eyebrow-raising figure includes $10
billion to help roads, bridges and public transit achieve a
state of good repair, $10 billion to increase capacity as
the population grows, and $30 billion to modernize,
decarbonize and prepare infrastructure to cope with the
effects of climate change.
Rick Dimino, the group's CEO, said the state
needs to "go big" and "think about how we move the needle"
on a topic that directly affects housing, economic
development, the environment and the ways people get
around....
Researchers proposed seven new or boosted
revenue streams to generate the $50 billion they say is
needed.
The majority of that money, about 54
percent, could come from a broad expansion to roadway
pricing, adding $2-per-trip tolls to Interstate 93, $1 tolls
on Interstate 93 and 95 interchanges, $1 fees to cross state
lines by car at several border locations, and more.
Researchers also suggested an 11.5 cent
increase in the gas tax could raise about $7 billion by
2040, and they named higher fees on ride-hailing apps and
Registry of Motor Vehicles transactions, closing an auto
trade-in sales tax loophole, adding a commercial parking
surcharge and using revenue from the multi-state initiative
to reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector as
other strategies.
The group's $50 billion would come entirely
on top of existing spending plans....
A Better City is a downtown Boston-based
group of business leaders that advocates for economic growth
and sustainability....
The House plans to debate options this
month, but leaders there still haven't outlined a proposal.
A coalition of business groups — which includes A Better
City — this month said a majority of its members support new
options to raise transportation revenue such as a hike in
the state's gas tax.
State House News Service
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Biz Group Calls for $50 Billion in New Transpo Revenues
Gov. Charlie Baker this week said he
wouldn't support a "big increase" in the gas tax but that
doesn't mean the governor supports any increase in that
levy.
"We've said all along that we don't think
the gas tax is the right way to go, primarily because it is
just Massachusetts, it can only be used for roads and
bridges, and people would be able to just go to other states
to purchase gasoline, which puts a burden on retailers here
in Massachusetts and really won't raise the money that
people talk about," Baker said during an event on Oct. 30,
according to a transcript provided by his office.
Many lawmakers and interest groups are
pushing for the inclusion of a sizeable increase in the 24
cent-per-gallon gas tax as part of a package of revenue
generation options that House leaders are assembling and
plan to present to the full House for debate this month.
Baker says the state has sufficient tax and borrowing
capacity to make needed investments in transportation, but
many others believe the investments necessary aren't
possible without more money....
If Baker is not on board with
revenue-generating proposals in the Legislature, the hurdle
to pass those measures would be higher as Democrats would
need to ensure they have a two thirds majority in both
branches to override any vetoes that might be returned from
the Corner Office.
State House News Service
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Baker: Gas Tax Hike Not "The Right Way to Go"
There's a scenario in which gas-guzzling
cars, taxed aggressively, could be a necessary evil to
achieve a fully electrified train system that services
passengers every 15 minutes.
But Gov. Charlie Baker doesn't seem too
eager to live in that world.
On the same day that the MBTA's governing
board voted to endorse a plan that would cost billions to
totally reimagine the commuter rail, the governor dismissed
the notion of jacking up the state's 24-cent gas tax to help
pay for modern transportation infrastructure.
"I don't see us supporting a big increase in
the gas tax, no," Baker said, standing next to House Speaker
Robert DeLeo and Senate President Karen Spilka. "But these
guys have a debate to have and a lot of work to do and we'll
see where it goes."
Where Baker would like to see it go is
toward a vote on his $18 billion borrowing bill for
transportation that would invest record levels of capital
into roads, bridges and transit. He sees more frequent and
electrified trains as a worthy goal, but one with a 20-year
runway and more pressing needs in front of it.
But DeLeo still seems keen on asking the
House to vote in the next two weeks on a transportation
revenue package that is likely to include at least a modest
increase in the gas tax....
With just seven work days left until the
Legislature recesses until 2020, the House and Senate remain
stalemated over a more than $700 million surplus spending
bill that was, at least on paper, due by Halloween....
State House News Service
Friday, November 8, 2019
Weekly Roundup - One Way To Run A Railroad
House and Senate Democrats are less than two
weeks away from taking a multi-week break and are searching
for common ground on a series of questions that divide
them....
The other pressing questions are wrapped up
in backchannel debates over a $1.5 billion, seven-year
education funding bill, legislation allocating the more than
$1 billion budget surplus left over from fiscal 2019, a bill
to require more frequent campaign finance reporting by
legislative candidates, and a driving safety bill that has
languished in conference committee since June. Deliberations
over vaping and flavored tobacco and transportation funding
are still in the early stages, but House Democrats have
expressed an intent to act on both topics before the coming
six-week recess.
State House News Service
Friday, November 8, 2019
Advances - Week of Nov. 10, 2019
The MBTA board voted Monday to back
substantial investment in the commuter rail, calling for
electrification of the system and more frequent service
through the most dense corridors in a step that
transportation advocates praised as historic.
The Fiscal and Management Control Board
adopted unanimously resolutions calling for the T to develop
a "commuter rail transformation office" within three months
that will then oversee long-term work to electrify most of
the network and run trains with 15-minute headways between
key stations in a regional or urban rail model.
State House News Service
Monday, November 4, 2019
MBTA Board Commits To Reimagined Commuter Rail System
The MBTA is moving forward on a plan to
spend $10 billion to $28 billion on Commuter Rail updates —
a “New Big Dig” in the making, critics caution, and top
officials aren’t saying how they will pay for it.
The T Fiscal & Management Control Board on
Monday approved a raft of resolutions directing the T to get
rolling on a massive overhaul of the Commuter Rail, calling
for electrification of main Commuter Rail lines and trains
running every 15 to 20 minutes all day, rather than the
current status quo of a handful of trains headed into Boston
in the morning and then back out in the evening. The most
expensive option, at nearly $30 billion, includes a tunnel
linking North and South stations. The plan is intended to
get cars off the road by giving commuters an alternative —
by 2040....
Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance said he suspects the answer could lie in high gas
taxes — and added that the state doesn’t have the
appropriate controls in place to make sure this scale of
spending is done properly.
“This is the new Big Dig for the next
generation to pay,” said Craney, referring to the
notoriously out-of-control, over-budget and problem-plagued
highway megaproject that burned through money in the 1990s
and 2000s.
Transportation watcher Charlie Chieppo of
the Pioneer Institute said that while electrification on the
main lines and higher frequency at rush hour would be
welcome investments, planning for all-day frequent service
doesn’t make sense.
“That is just madness to me,” Chieppo said.
“I find it really hard to look taxpayers in the eye and tell
them they need to pay for that.”
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Critics: MBTA’s $10B-$28B Commuter Rail overhaul could be a
‘New Big Dig’
There’s one thing to be said for the MBTA’s
Fiscal and Management Control Board, it has a puckish sense
of humor....
But here’s the tricky bit — the Commuter
Rail improvements come with a $10 billion to $28 billion
price tag, and that North/South Station tunnel rings up at
nearly $30 billion on its own.
“The time is now to say let’s do it,” said
MBTA Fiscal and Management Control Board Chairman Joe
Aiello.
And how will the T pay for all this?
Ah. Aiello smiled and slipped into a back
room when the sordid topic of coin was raised by reporters.
You have to give him points for comic timing.
Gov. Charlie Baker, when asked whether the
money will come from taxes, tolls, fares or all three,
answered, “There’s a lot of work that has to be done to
figure out exactly which pieces and when would be pursued
under this.”
Translation: Prepare to be soaked.
Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The
problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of
other people’s money.” Fortunately for the T, we live in a
democracy in which we keep electing people who raise our
taxes, so the funding well is virtually bottomless....
Part of the impetus for the plan is getting
cars off the road by 2040, by giving commuters an
alternative. High gas taxes and congestion pricing will help
with that, long before 2040. The drivers won’t necessarily
opt for public transport — we’re talking about the “0 days
without a problem” T — but they could set their GPS for New
Hampshire or other states where the tax and commuting
picture is brighter.
A Boston Herald editorial
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
The T rolls out ‘Big Dig’ style commuter rail overhaul
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
The massive
tax hikes surge is on.
We're still
following the
stealth assault on Proposition 2½
— will it be included in the Education Finances Reform
bill when the conference committee reports it out — or
not? It's hard to tell, because any meetings of
the conference committee are held in secret and nobody's
talking.
But the so-called transportation
"crisis" is front and center, as House Speaker
Robert DeLeo vowed, and the debate now seems to be how
much to spend (the high-end advocated by some is $50
billion over two decades).
One thing all the power-players
seem to agree on is the need to hike the gas tax.
How much to extract from motorists and how to do it is
all that's up for debate. There are a few vocal
opponents already, but they are among a small minority.
The Salem News reported:
Christopher Carlozzi, Massachusetts
state director of the National Federation of Independent
Businesses, said low-income families aren’t the only
ones who would take it on the chin from a gas tax
increase. Small-business owners would suffer too.
“Higher fuel taxes, new tolls and
congestion fees are all direct taxes on small businesses
simply trying to provide affordable products and
services to residents,” he said.
The group wants state officials to
consider transportation-related reforms, such as
reducing Massachusetts’ third-highest-in-the-nation road
repair costs. . . .
Rep. Lenny Mirra, R-West Newbury, also
opposes an increase. He said the Legislature needs to
cut state spending, not raise taxes, to meet its
transportation needs.
“We do very little to rein in spending,
especially on transportation,” he said. “We already
collect a lot of taxes that are earmarked for
transportation, but we’re not spending it wisely.” . . .
Massachusetts also charges a 2.54 cent
per gallon fee for removing underground gasoline tanks,
which brings the state’s overall rate to 26.54 cents per
gallon.
Overall, Bay State drivers pay a total
of 44.9 cents per gallon in gasoline taxes, including
state and federal taxes and other fees, according to the
American Petroleum Institute. That puts it below the
U.S. average of just under 49.3 cents per gallon in
total taxes, the group says.
In New Hampshire, which has a 22.2 cent
state tax, drivers pay 42.23 cents per gallon in total
taxes and fees, according to API.
The state
chapter of the National Federation of Independent
Businesses makes the very point that CLT has been making
for years. "We already collect a lot of taxes that
are earmarked for transportation, but we're not spending
it wisely."
We
most recently made it — and
backed it up with another shocking annual report from
Reason Foundation. Its 24th Annual Highway Report of State
Highway Systems found:
"On spending, Massachusetts ranks 48th in total spending
per mile and 45th in capital and bridge costs per mile.
. . . Massachusetts’ worst rankings are in total
disbursements per mile (48th) and its urban arterial
pavement condition (48th)."
Massachusetts has gone from 44th-worst state in the
nation to 48th-worst in highway spending. The state's
total spending per lane-mile was 304% greater than
national average.
The usual
excuse for the Bay State's exorbitant cost of its
highway maintenance is the harsh winter climate.
That might work when compared to Alabama, Louisiana,
Mississippi, or Georgia, but how does it explain its
neighboring state even further north
— New Hampshire
— you know, the "Live Free
or Die" state with no income tax nor a sales tax burden
on its citizens, or shoppers from wherever? When
you drive over the border into New Hampshire it's
astonishing how much better the highway conditions
immediately become.
|
Total
Disbursements per State-Controlled Lane Mile |
|
Massachusetts: |
$216,066 |
|
New Hampshire: |
$64,176 |
|
National Average: |
$71,117 |
This
demonstrates that in the real world outside the
Taxachusetts culture much more can be accomplished
with much less — if a
revolution in thought ever reaches a conscientious
decision to spend taxpayers' money honestly, if
frugal stewardship is ever somehow discovered by the
Massachusetts political (and business) establishment
elites.
And the MBTA
sure wants a piece of this feeding frenzy climate.
The Boston Herald reported:
The MBTA is moving forward on a plan to spend
$10 billion to $28 billion on Commuter Rail
updates — a “New Big Dig” in the making, critics
caution, and top officials aren’t saying how
they will pay for it. . . .
Translation: Prepare to be soaked.
. . .
The drivers won’t necessarily
opt for public transport — we’re talking about the
“0 days without a problem” T — but they could set
their GPS for New Hampshire or other states where
the tax and commuting picture is brighter.
The
Legislature has until November 20 to pull together so
much stalled, massive legislation
— only
seven legislative work days remain
— until the Legislature recesses into January.
As always,
critically important votes on massive policy changes and
major tax hikes will come up in the last moments of the
eleventh hour in the middle of the night in the final
day or two before Beacon Hill denizens again disappear
on another extended vacation. This has become
increasingly more common, an apparent leadership
strategy. Treat the citizenry like nuisance mushrooms:
Keep them in the dark and well-fertilized. And keep
legislative sheep equally in the dark until they must
vote on whatever is dropped in front of them just
moments before. They can be relied on to do as
they are told — not by
their constituents, but by their leaders who sign their
pay checks.
While the
House hopes to cram its major transportation "reform"
and tax hikes bill through before thankfully going AWOL
for the rest of the year, the Senate is looking to next
year before introducing is own version. In the
best of worlds it would require at least that long, but
in this world anything is possible.
Don't blink,
folks, or you might miss the next taxpayer heist.
We're not blinking, or taking our eyes off Beacon Hill.
Out of self-preservation nobody can afford to,
even for a moment.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
State House News
Service
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Tax Revenues Stable in October, DOR Reports
By Matt Murphy
The state's economy may have contracted slightly
in the third quarter, but tax revenues in
October grew by $115 million over last year and
beat expectations for the month by $39 million,
according to the Department of Revenue.
Revenue Commissioner Christopher Harding
announced Tuesday that the state had collected
just over $2 billion in October, up 6 percent
from October 2018, including a 4.5 percent
growth in sales tax collections of $599 million.
"October's results were consistent with our
expectations for steady, moderate growth,"
Harding said. "Monthly revenues exceeded
benchmark primarily due to corporate tax
collections and estate taxes."
The $75 million in corporate and business taxes
collected by the state exceeded estimates by $26
million and were up $29 million, or 62.9
percent, from last October. Gas, cigarette and
estate taxes, which are lumped into a single
category, were also up significantly, beating
last year by 9.4 percent with $241 million
coming into state coffers.
Harding said those gains were "partially offset"
by the non-withheld income grouping, which was
below benchmark. Non-withheld income taxes grew
by $1 million over last year in October,
according to DOR, missing projections by $18
million.
Economists at MassBenchmarks reported last month
that the state's gross domestic product declined
0.2 percent in the third quarter, a sign,
experts said, of "capacity limits" in the
economy and not necessarily a warning sign of a
coming recession.
The
Salem News
Saturday, November 9, 2019
Gas tax battle returns to Beacon Hill
Plan would raise tax for transportation funding
By Christian M. Wade, Statehouse Reporter
A new battle is brewing on Beacon Hill over the
state’s gas tax, with advocates pushing to raise
the levy to pay for upgrades to public transit
and fix crumbling roads and bridges.
This week, a coalition of business groups called
for hiking the 24-cents-per-gallon tax as part
of a raft of revenue-generating proposals it
argues are needed to plug an estimated $50
billion gap in transportation funding over the
next two decades.
The group, called “A Better City,” says raising
the tax by 11.5 cents, to 35.5 cents per gallon,
would drum up $7 billion by 2040.
“Enacting a suite of fair, equitable
transportation source fees will raise new
revenue to transform our transportation
infrastructure,” the coalition’s report stated.
“This approach will ultimately deliver three
primary benefits — better transit, less traffic,
and cleaner air.”
The report adds fuel to a debate on Beacon Hill
where legislative leaders are mulling plans for
tax hikes and new fees to generate much-needed
transportation funding.
To be sure, the latest efforts to hike the gas
tax face pushback from fiscal watchdogs,
pro-business groups and lawmakers who say it
would hurt low-income families and small
businesses.
Rep. Linda Campbell, D-Methuen, said she opposes
increasing the tax because of the burden it
would put on her working-class district along
the New Hampshire border.
“It affects the people most, who can least
afford it — the folks that are earning minimum
wage who have to commute long distances to get
to their job,” she said.
Rep. Lenny Mirra, R-West Newbury, also opposes
an increase. He said the Legislature needs to
cut state spending, not raise taxes, to meet its
transportation needs.
“We do very little to rein in spending,
especially on transportation,” he said. “We
already collect a lot of taxes that are
earmarked for transportation, but we’re not
spending it wisely.”
Baker’s plans
Gov. Charlie Baker argues that the state has
sufficient tax and borrowing capacity to make
the needed investments in transportation, and
doesn’t see a need to raise the gas tax.
The Baker administration has filed a bond bill
calling for more than $18 billion in investment
in transportation over the next five years, with
$8 billion devoted to the MBTA.
Despite Baker’s opposition to hiking the gas
tax, he is one of a dozen Northeast and
Mid-Atlantic governors working on an initiative
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the
transportation sector, an effort that could lead
to more revenue but also higher gas prices.
The Transportation Climate Initiative would set
“cap and trade” like policies to lower vehicle
emissions. Fiscal watchdogs such as the
conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance have
called it a “hidden gas tax” that bypasses the
normal process of approving new state taxes and
fees.
“Whether you support this gas tax hike or not,
it’s wrong of the governor to pursue a tax
increase without a legislative vote,” said Paul
Craney, the group’s spokesman.
In 2013, the Legislature raised the gas tax by 3
cents for the first time since 1991 and indexed
it to inflation, so that when the value of the
dollar rises the tax increases along with it.
Groups opposed to the automatic increases put a
“tank the tax” question on the 2014 ballot to
decouple it from inflation adjustments. The
measure passed with support from 53% of voters.
Proposals to increase the tax since then have
languished amid a lack of support. But recent
derailments on the MBTA subway system and a
report from the Baker administration suggesting
that the state has reached a “tipping point” on
traffic congestion have rekindled efforts by
advocates to hike the gas tax to boost funding.
Business burden
The state’s gas tax generated nearly $800
million in 2019, according to the Department of
Revenue. The money goes toward fixing roads and
bridges, and other projects.
Massachusetts also charges a 2.54 cent per
gallon fee for removing underground gasoline
tanks, which brings the state’s overall rate to
26.54 cents per gallon.
Overall, Bay State drivers pay a total of 44.9
cents per gallon in gasoline taxes, including
state and federal taxes and other fees,
according to the American Petroleum Institute.
That puts it below the U.S. average of just
under 49.3 cents per gallon in total taxes, the
group says.
In New Hampshire, which has a 22.2 cent state
tax, drivers pay 42.23 cents per gallon in total
taxes and fees, according to API. In Maine, the
total is 48.41 cents.
Christopher Carlozzi, Massachusetts state
director of the National Federation of
Independent Businesses, said low-income families
aren’t the only ones who would take it on the
chin from a gas tax increase. Small-business
owners would suffer too.
“Higher fuel taxes, new tolls and congestion
fees are all direct taxes on small businesses
simply trying to provide affordable products and
services to residents,” he said.
The group wants state officials to consider
transportation-related reforms, such as reducing
Massachusetts’ third-highest-in-the-nation road
repair costs.
“Policymakers are talking out of both sides of
their mouths,” Carlozzi said. “First, they say
how unaffordable Massachusetts is becoming, then
in the next breath they want to impose new taxes
that will increase costs for every business,
consumer, commuter and working family in the
state.”
State House News
Service
Monday, November 4, 2019
Baker Opposes "Big Increase" in Gas Tax
By Matt Murphy
With House Speaker Robert DeLeo eyeing a vote in
the coming weeks on new transportation revenue,
Gov. Charlie Baker on Monday said a "big
increase" in the gas tax would be a non-starter
for his administration.
Baker said he has already proposed policies that
would bring more money into the state's
transportation system without raising taxes,
including a regional effort to drive down carbon
emissions from vehicles with a multi-state
cap-and-invest program that could lead to higher
gas prices.
The governor said taking action as a region
would be "more competitive" than seeing
Massachusetts raise its gas tax alone.
"I don't see us supporting a big increase in the
gas tax, no. But these guys have a debate to
have and a lot of work to do and we'll see where
it goes," Baker said Monday when asked if he
could see himself supporting a new revenue
package for transportation.
DeLeo identified transportation revenues as one
of two major topics he'd like to see the House
tackle before the Legislature recesses for the
year on Nov. 20. The other issue, he said, is a
"comprehensive" vaping bill.
A coalition of business groups last week
detailed where the broader employer community
stands on new revenue for transportation,
including public transit systems that many of
their workers around Greater Boston rely on to
get to their jobs.
The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce said it
supports a 15-cent increase to the state's
24-cent gas tax as a interim measure to generate
funds until the regional Transportation Climate
Initiative can start generating revenues.
However, some other large business groups,
including Associated Industries of
Massachusetts, say they cannot support a gas tax
increase on top of TCI.
"I think from our point of view doing something
on a regional basis, rather than having
Massachusetts do something on its own, is a more
competitive way to deal with this," Baker said
Monday.
While it would not be until at least after the
new year, Senate President Karen Spilka was
non-committal about the Senate taking up a
transportation revenue bill should one pass the
House this session.
Spilka initially referenced the ongoing work of
Sen. Joseph Boncore and Sen. Adam Hinds, who are
leading working groups studying ways to improve
the transportation system and modernize the
state's tax code.
At a meeting of his revenue group last week,
Hinds said he felt the group was on track to
produce a set of recommendations by next summer
before the end of the legislative session, and
Sen. William Brownsberger urged the group to
focus on revenue-neutral ways to make the tax
code fairer.
"The senators, both Hinds and Boncore, are
looking at potential short-term recommendations
as well as long term recommendations," Spilka
said Monday.
In addition to the bill the Senate will vote on
Thursday to require additional campaign finance
reporting for legislative candidates, Spilka
said the Senate also hopes to act on a "pharmacy
related cost bill" before the break.
"That supp budget, too, right?" Baker chimed in,
prodding the two Democrats over a more than $700
million surplus spending bill that remains the
subject of negotiations and a procedural dispute
between the branches.
"Yes, there's progress there," Spilka said. "A
lot of progress with the substance and it's
moving forward."
The bill allocates surplus revenues from fiscal
2019, which ended June 30.
The Boston
Globe
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Poll shows strong opposition to 15-cent gas tax
increase
By Jon Chesto
As Massachusetts House leaders prepare to debate
solutions to the state’s transportation woes,
they face an inconvenient truth: Increasing the
gas tax remains an unpopular option among
voters.
A poll conducted for a labor-backed organization
found that only 11 percent of voters supported
adding 15 cents to the state’s gas tax, while 74
percent were opposed. The online poll of 600
likely voters was taken on behalf of advocacy
group Raise Up Massachusetts, which backs a
separate effort to increase taxes on the
wealthy.
The group’s poll, conducted in August, didn’t
show much support for congestion pricing,
either. When asked if they support raising tolls
by 20 percent at rush hour, only 20 percent of
respondents supported such a move, while 61
percent opposed it. (No mention was made about
the possibility of reducing tolls at off-peak
times.)
A separate survey of voters conducted for the
MassINC public-policy think tank in August
showed slightly more support for an unspecified
gas tax increase, but still only 26 percent were
in favor, with 68 percent opposed.
So what will voters support? Little surprise
here: the so-called millionaires tax. More than
two-thirds — 69 percent — told Raise Up
pollsters they back a 4 percent additional tax
on annual income over $1 million.
Representatives for Raise Up shared the results
with a group of liberal House members on
Wednesday, in advance of an upcoming floor
debate on transportation funding. The debate is
supposed to happen before Thanksgiving. But this
is such a politically thorny topic, there’s some
talk that it could get pushed off until 2020.
You can’t blame House members if they happen to
be dreading this vote. There’s a reason state
lawmakers have only raised the gas tax by 3
cents in the past two decades, to 24 cents a
gallon, while the cost of a monthly subway pass
has more than tripled. (Bus fares have gone up
by even more.) A measure that would have
automatically increased the gas tax by the rate
of inflation was repealed by voters in 2014,
despite a concerted push by the business
community to keep the indexing intact.
With workers and employers stressed out about
traffic jams and unreliable transit service,
this political hot potato is back on Beacon
Hill.
There’s notably less consensus among business
groups this time around. The Greater Boston
Chamber of Commerce recently refereed months of
discussions on transportation revenue. Finding
common ground on the gas tax was tough. The
Boston chamber is pushing a 15-cent increase,
but others were in favor of different increases.
Some still haven’t decided. And some don’t want
to see any at all.
A gas tax would be just one part of any
legislative package; other possible proposals
involve adding tolls in places that don’t have
them now and increasing the modest fee on Uber
and Lyft rides. (Meanwhile, in Connecticut this
week, Governor Ned Lamont is again trying to
bring back tolls to that state, although he has
scaled back his ambitions from an earlier failed
attempt.)
Gas-tax supporters already face criticism on the
right. Governor Charlie Baker on Monday said he
wouldn’t support a “big increase” in the tax.
The Baker administration instead is pushing its
$18 billion bond bill and a multistate effort to
curb greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles by
adding a fee to motor fuels, which would likely
drive up costs at the pump.
Now, the gas tax is under fire from some on the
left, too.
Harris Gruman, executive director of the SEIU
Massachusetts State Council, says Raise Up would
only support a modest gas tax increase or other
charge on commuters if it accompanies changes in
how businesses are taxed. Closing corporate tax
loopholes, Gruman said, would ensure a more
equitable approach. One possible example: a
tiered minimum corporate tax, ensuring a minimum
for larger companies that’s beyond the current
floor of $456 a year. Another: a state tax that
could capture a portion of profits shifted
offshore by big multinationals.
Raise Up wants something else, as well. The
coalition of unions and activist groups
continues to push that 4-percent surcharge on
incomes over $1 million. They call it the “Fair
Share Amendment.” The idea would be to spend the
windfall on transportation and education.
Several business associations thwarted an effort
to put the Fair Share tax on the statewide
ballot once before, in the courts. But the
proposal is back, and its proponents say they
have filed it in a way that would withstand
another legal challenge. Still, it requires a
constitutional amendment, a drawn-out process
that means voters wouldn’t get to decide on it
until fall 2022, at the earliest. The
Legislature has cast one supportive vote and
will need to do so again, but no sooner than
2021.
It can be easy to tax the very rich, at least
when compared to taxing everyday drivers. But no
one said fixing this transportation crisis would
be easy.
The Boston
Herald
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Boston business group calls for $50B in
transportation spending
By Sean Philip Cotter
An influential Boston business group is calling
for $50 billion in transportation projects aimed
at getting people onto public transit and
cutting down on traffic congestion — paid for by
hiking tolls and the gas tax.
“The Commonwealth needs to substantively engage
in shaping a 21st Century transportation system
to ensure the state’s global competitiveness and
sustainability,” the report by business group A
Better City states. “We are all in this
together.”
The organization highlights projects that would
cost a combined $50 billion over the next 20
years. This all would be paid for by pumping the
gas tax up by 11.5 cents a gallon — a 46%
increase — fees on ride-share services and
hammering drivers with way more tolls, including
on people entering the state, and everyone
driving on the Southeast Expressway and through
the I-93/I-95 interchanges, plus just raising
existing tolls.
The organization also advocated for raising
Registry of Motor Vehicle fees and making people
pay more taxes when trading in cars.
The largest chunk of money, $30 billion, would
go to “modernization and decarbonization”
projects, including $6 billion for various MBTA
resiliency projects and $5 billion to build a
high-speed rail line across the state.
The list of projects includes several that state
officials are currently weighing, including
extending the Blue Line to meet the Red Line at
Charles/MGH — on the cheaper end of the project
list at $300 million — and electrifying the
Commuter Rail, which this report pegs at $6
billion. The T’s oversight board this week
instructed the MBTA staff to move toward
electrifying many of the Commuter Rail’s main
lines.
The report calls the board’s push for major
Commuter Rail work, “critically important,
however, the up to $30 billion price tag is
currently unfunded.”
Another $10 billion in the report’s proposed
spending would go to bringing highways and other
state roads and bridges up to a state of good
repair, according to the report.
“This approach will ultimately deliver three
primary benefits — better transit, less traffic,
and cleaner air,” the report states. The
organization wrote that it supports Gov. Charlie
Baker’s current proposed transportation bond
bill, and many of the ideas in the report are
based in the governor’s Commission on the Future
of Transportation report from last year.
State House News
Service
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Biz Group Calls for $50 Billion in New Transpo
Revenues
By Chris Lisinski
Lawmakers are preparing to debate new forms of
transportation revenue and Gov. Charlie Baker
often touts his administration's record
investment in the MBTA, but the status quo is
nowhere near enough to meet the state's growing
transit needs, according to one business
coalition.
Instead, the group A Better City suggests in a
new 16-page report, Massachusetts leaders should
commit to raising and spending $50 billion on
transportation over the next two decades, all
with new revenue from a range of
transportation-specific sources like fees, tolls
and taxes.
The eyebrow-raising figure includes $10 billion
to help roads, bridges and public transit
achieve a state of good repair, $10 billion to
increase capacity as the population grows, and
$30 billion to modernize, decarbonize and
prepare infrastructure to cope with the effects
of climate change.
Rick Dimino, the group's CEO, said the state
needs to "go big" and "think about how we move
the needle" on a topic that directly affects
housing, economic development, the environment
and the ways people get around.
"We have to stop just thinking about fixing what
we have," Dimino told the News Service. "We have
to pivot to thinking about making sure we fix
what we have but also thinking about the next
wave of investments we need to make in our
transportation system."
Researchers proposed seven new or boosted
revenue streams to generate the $50 billion they
say is needed.
The majority of that money, about 54 percent,
could come from a broad expansion to roadway
pricing, adding $2-per-trip tolls to Interstate
93, $1 tolls on Interstate 93 and 95
interchanges, $1 fees to cross state lines by
car at several border locations, and more.
Researchers also suggested an 11.5 cent increase
in the gas tax could raise about $7 billion by
2040, and they named higher fees on ride-hailing
apps and Registry of Motor Vehicles
transactions, closing an auto trade-in sales tax
loophole, adding a commercial parking surcharge
and using revenue from the multi-state
initiative to reduce carbon emissions from the
transportation sector as other strategies.
The group's $50 billion would come entirely on
top of existing spending plans. Dimino said
other metropolitan areas have taken similar
steps in recent years. Seattle is planning to
raise and spend $54 billion over 25 years,
according to the report, and Los Angeles will
pursue a $120 billion target over the next four
decades.
A Better City is a downtown Boston-based group
of business leaders that advocates for economic
growth and sustainability. Doug McGarrah, the
group's board chair and partner at Foley Hoag,
said the plan "will mean less traffic, better
transit, and cleaner air – with an overall
faster and easier daily commute for everyone."
Jeanne Pinado, CEO of Madison Park Development
Corp., said in a statement released by ABC that
the group's plan would address inequities,
better connect workers to jobs, and keep the
economy moving forward.
The group's report was also influenced by James
Aloisi, who served as transportation secretary
under Gov. Deval Patrick and was thanked in the
report for his "invaluable counsel and
contributions."
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation's
current capital investment plan calls for more
than $18 billion in investments over the next
five years, about $8 billion of which will go to
the MBTA.
In February, A Better City projected that
Massachusetts faces an $8.4 billion revenue
shortfall over the next 10 years to maintain a
state of good repair for transportation
infrastructure, then upgraded that figure to $10
billion.
There is some momentum on Beacon Hill to take
action about growing transportation needs, with
service disruptions on the T and the Baker
administration's recent congestion study adding
a sense of urgency.
The House plans to debate options this month,
but leaders there still haven't outlined a
proposal. A coalition of business groups — which
includes A Better City — this month said a
majority of its members support new options to
raise transportation revenue such as a hike in
the state's gas tax.
"We were asked to do our homework and we wanted
to do the homework, and this is what our
homework points to," Dimino said.
State House News
Service
Thursday, November 7, 2019
Baker: Gas Tax Hike Not "The Right Way to Go"
By Michael P. Norton
Gov. Charlie Baker this week said he wouldn't
support a "big increase" in the gas tax but that
doesn't mean the governor supports any increase
in that levy.
"We've said all along that we don't think the
gas tax is the right way to go, primarily
because it is just Massachusetts, it can only be
used for roads and bridges, and people would be
able to just go to other states to purchase
gasoline, which puts a burden on retailers here
in Massachusetts and really won't raise the
money that people talk about," Baker said during
an event on Oct. 30, according to a transcript
provided by his office.
Many lawmakers and interest groups are pushing
for the inclusion of a sizeable increase in the
24 cent-per-gallon gas tax as part of a package
of revenue generation options that House leaders
are assembling and plan to present to the full
House for debate this month. Baker says the
state has sufficient tax and borrowing capacity
to make needed investments in transportation,
but many others believe the investments
necessary aren't possible without more money.
"We prefer the $19 billion bond bill that we've
got pending before the legislature – which has
resources in it," Baker said at the Oct. 30
event at the Volpe Center. "$11 billion to spend
on roads and bridges, choke points and other
issues like that; another $7 or $8 billion to
put on top of the money we've already put on the
table to support our public transportation
infrastructure."
Baker is among the governors in the Northeast
and mid-Atlantic states that are working on a
novel initiative to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from the transportation sector, an
effort that is expected to lead to higher gas
prices and generate revenue for participating
states.
If Baker is not on board with revenue-generating
proposals in the Legislature, the hurdle to pass
those measures would be higher as Democrats
would need to ensure they have a two thirds
majority in both branches to override any vetoes
that might be returned from the Corner Office.
State House News
Service
Friday, November 8, 2019
Weekly Roundup - One Way To Run A Railroad
Recap and analysis of the week in state
government
By Matt Murphy
There's a scenario in which gas-guzzling cars,
taxed aggressively, could be a necessary evil to
achieve a fully electrified train system that
services passengers every 15 minutes.
But Gov. Charlie Baker doesn't seem too eager to
live in that world.
On the same day that the MBTA's governing board
voted to endorse a plan that would cost billions
to totally reimagine the commuter rail, the
governor dismissed the notion of jacking up the
state's 24-cent gas tax to help pay for modern
transportation infrastructure.
"I don't see us supporting a big increase in the
gas tax, no," Baker said, standing next to House
Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Karen
Spilka. "But these guys have a debate to have
and a lot of work to do and we'll see where it
goes."
Where Baker would like to see it go is toward a
vote on his $18 billion borrowing bill for
transportation that would invest record levels
of capital into roads, bridges and transit. He
sees more frequent and electrified trains as a
worthy goal, but one with a 20-year runway and
more pressing needs in front of it.
But DeLeo still seems keen on asking the House
to vote in the next two weeks on a
transportation revenue package that is likely to
include at least a modest increase in the gas
tax.
That bill, however, wasn't the only thing Beacon
Hill was waiting this week to get eyes on.
With just seven work days left until the
Legislature recesses until 2020, the House and
Senate remain stalemated over a more than $700
million surplus spending bill that was, at least
on paper, due by Halloween....
As they prepare for the recess, state lawmakers
-- at least most of them -- had the luxury this
week of watching Election Day 2019 -- otherwise
known as the only day adults are allowed to be
excited about stickers -- from the sidelines.
The Boston City Council, for the first time in
its history, will have a women and minority
majority, but that majority will not include
former MassGOP Chairwoman Jennifer Nassour, who
lost her bid for district councilor.
Nassour's loss was one of four on an otherwise
good night for the Baker-aligned super PAC known
as Massachusetts Majority. In its first cycle,
it went 11 for 15.
The winners included Sen. Donald Humason of
Westfield, who will become that city's next
mayor in January and open up another vacant
Senate seat. With Humason and Sen. Viriato
deMacedo on their way out, the already small
Republican caucus will be further diminished,
falling to just four of 40 with real questions
about its ability to defend either of those
seats.
Reps. Paul Brodeur and Shaunna O'Connell are
also heading for the Legislature's exit after
winning mayoral contests in their home cities of
Melrose and Taunton, respectively....
STORY OF THE WEEK: Baker's MBTA Board reimagines
the T, but is it just a dream?
State House News
Service
Friday, November 8, 2019
Advances - Week of Nov. 10, 2019
House and Senate Democrats are less than two
weeks away from taking a multi-week break and
are searching for common ground on a series of
questions that divide them.
How much power should the state education
commissioner have over local district
improvement plans? Should a business tax break
be included in a more than $700 million spending
bill? Does the system used to pick the state's
top campaign finance regulator need to be
overhauled, or left alone? When will something
be done about the state's ineffective ban on
texting while driving? What should be done about
vaping, which has grown, mostly unchecked by
government, and is now blamed for lung injuries,
deaths and epidemic levels of usage among teens?
And who should pay more to make larger public
transportation investments and give
Massachusetts commuters relief from traffic
gridlock and substandard public transit
operations?
The House will take a stab at answering the
vaping question Wednesday when it plans to vote
on a still-unreleased bill focused on regulating
flavored tobacco products. As leaders of that
branch also work to get a transportation revenue
bill to the House floor for a vote by Nov. 20,
House and Senate leaders aim to possibly wrap up
work as soon as possible on other important
bills that have cleared both branches but
contain differences.
The other pressing questions are wrapped up in
backchannel debates over a $1.5 billion,
seven-year education funding bill, legislation
allocating the more than $1 billion budget
surplus left over from fiscal 2019, a bill to
require more frequent campaign finance reporting
by legislative candidates, and a driving safety
bill that has languished in conference committee
since June. Deliberations over vaping and
flavored tobacco and transportation funding are
still in the early stages, but House Democrats
have expressed an intent to act on both topics
before the coming six-week recess.
State House News
Service
Monday, November 4, 2019
MBTA Board Commits To Reimagined Commuter Rail
System
By Chris Lisinski
The MBTA board voted Monday to back substantial
investment in the commuter rail, calling for
electrification of the system and more frequent
service through the most dense corridors in a
step that transportation advocates praised as
historic.
The Fiscal and Management Control Board adopted
unanimously resolutions calling for the T to
develop a "commuter rail transformation office"
within three months that will then oversee
long-term work to electrify most of the network
and run trains with 15-minute headways between
key stations in a regional or urban rail model.
The decision still leaves questions unanswered
about how the MBTA will pay for the changes,
which will carry a price tag in the billions.
Onlookers and activists who have long called for
railway improvements complimented the board for
supporting a plan to improve transit equity,
take cars off congested roadways and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
"It's definitely a win," said Jarred Johnson,
chief operating officer of the TransitMatters
advocacy group. "It's a win for better service,
it's a win for equity concerns, and I think they
also heard the call loud and clear that commuter
rail fares have to be much, much more
affordable."
The improvements will start on three lines. One
resolution the board adopted instructs T
officials to prepare immediately to launch
electrified pilot programs on the
Providence/Stoughton Line, the Fairmount Line,
and a section of the Newburyport/Rockport Line
connecting Boston to Lynn, Revere, Chelsea and
Everett, sometimes referred to as the
"environmental justice line."
The resolution also calls for service on the
Fairmount Line and the "environmental justice"
section of the Newburyport Line to be as
frequent — and at the same fare level — as rapid
transit.
Although those pilots would be the first phase
of a broader transformation, it is not clear
when they might begin. MBTA General Manager
Steve Poftak said Monday that it could take two
to four years to acquire electric trains for the
programs.
Transportation Secretary Stephanie Pollack
raised concerns during the meeting about the
board backing specific pilots as a starting
point for the transformation without a clear
sense of operating costs, fare revenue changes
and other key factors.
But members stressed they believe there are
"actionable" steps worth targeting as soon as
possible, citing a sense of urgency around
rider-centric improvements.
"Let's see what happens. Let's go at it," said
Joseph Aiello, the board's chair. "If we keep
studying and studying and studying and don't
commit ourselves to going to implementation,
we'll be here in 20 years again at the same
point."
With Monday's vote, the board also urged the
Legislature to act quickly on procurement
reforms that Gov. Charlie Baker included in his
multi-year transportation bond bill, which
members said are crucial to ensuring success for
the major infrastructure work.
Baker told reporters Monday that he believes
"significant portions" of the commuter rail
should be electrified "over the course of the
next 15 or 20 years," but only if the grid can
handle the capacity and if electricity would be
cleaner than diesel.
"The grid, as it stands today, would be a close
call," Baker said. "If we manage to get our
hydro and our offshore wind and some of the
other initiatives we're pursuing to improve the
quality of our electricity and we have the
electricity available to electrify the system,
there are certainly parts of it that should be
electrified, yeah."
Aiello had prepared four resolutions, but the
board added a fifth at the suggestion of Vice
Chair Monica Tibbits-Nutt creating a
complementary bus transformation office that
will oversee major changes to the bus network.
Tibbits-Nutt said the new approach is necessary
because existing T efforts to upgrade buses have
"failed."
Members made some alterations to the resolutions
during the meeting. Brian Shortsleeve, a former
MBTA General Manager and current board
appointee, asked for language that explains how
renovation work would dovetail with Keolis'
contract to operate the commuter rail, which
expires in 2022 but has two separate two-year
extensions.
A T spokesman said the final text would not be
available until Monday evening or Tuesday
morning.
The board's vote came one week after a 22-member
commission presented its findings on six
different commuter rail investment plans,
ranging from simply running trains more
frequently to a "full transformation" that
combined electrification, regional rail service
and a North-South Rail Link.
Members opted not to embrace one of those
alternatives, but several described themselves
as supporting a "5.5" model somewhere between
the fifth and sixth — the most substantial and
expensive — options.
"The board embraced the notion that the commuter
rail system needs to transform itself into a
so-called regional rail, urban rail system
providing more aggressive service for the
region, trying to attract more riders and to
significantly make a dent in available capacity
in order to decongest the roadway systems,"
Aiello told reporters after the meeting, adding
that members are "certainly in favor" of
electrification.
Because the FMCB is seeking a combination of
investments, the potential cost was not clear
Monday. Alternatives 5 and 6, which members
wanted to draw from, were projected to cost
$10.6 billion and $28.9 billion, respectively,
in the Rail Vision study.
Aiello's resolution said the three pilot
programs would require about $1.5 billion, but
the chairman declined to answer questions from
reporters after Monday's meeting about the
overall price tag.
The MBTA will spend about $8 billion on capital
projects over the next five years, a record
amount over that timespan, but likely less than
the investment needed to implement the proposed
changes. The T also still faces an operating
deficit every year, even though the Baker
administration has defended the funding levels
and said the Fiscal and Management Control Board
cut down the size of the annual shortfall.
House lawmakers are preparing to debate new
revenue options "sourced from transportation for
transportation" this fall, such as increasing
the state's gas tax or the fees imposed on
ride-hailing trips.
Some business groups are supporting the House's
revenue efforts, and even the T's board has in
the past called for new revenues to fund the
system: Some members said in April, as they
approved a budget that included unpopular fare
increases, that the Legislature needs to
identify additional funding sources for public
transit.
Rail Passenger Association Northeast Field
Coordinator Joe Aiello — who has no relation to
the MBTA board chair — urged the board not to
shy away from the price tag, describing it as
the "baseline for what we need after decades of
not expanding."
"If we wait five or 10 years from now to come up
with a plan, it's going to be triple that," the
advocate said. "This is the price we pay to have
a world-class system if we want to call
ourselves a world-class city."
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Critics: MBTA’s $10B-$28B Commuter Rail overhaul
could be a ‘New Big Dig’
By Sean Philip Cotter
The MBTA is moving forward on a plan to spend
$10 billion to $28 billion on Commuter Rail
updates — a “New Big Dig” in the making, critics
caution, and top officials aren’t saying how
they will pay for it.
The T Fiscal & Management Control Board on
Monday approved a raft of resolutions directing
the T to get rolling on a massive overhaul of
the Commuter Rail, calling for electrification
of main Commuter Rail lines and trains running
every 15 to 20 minutes all day, rather than the
current status quo of a handful of trains headed
into Boston in the morning and then back out in
the evening. The most expensive option, at
nearly $30 billion, includes a tunnel linking
North and South stations. The plan is intended
to get cars off the road by giving commuters an
alternative — by 2040.
“The time is now to say let’s do it,” said MBTA
T Fiscal & Management Control Board Chairman Joe
Aiello. Aiello, who drew up the Commuter Rail
resolutions that passed during the meeting, took
a couple of questions from the media after the
votes — but smiled and slipped away into a back
room when asked about how the T could pay for
it.
Gov. Charlie Baker, when asked whether the money
will come from taxes, tolls, fares or all three,
would only say, “There’s a lot of work that has
to be done to figure out exactly which pieces
and when would be pursued under this.”
Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
said he suspects the answer could lie in high
gas taxes — and added that the state doesn’t
have the appropriate controls in place to make
sure this scale of spending is done properly.
“This is the new Big Dig for the next generation
to pay,” said Craney, referring to the
notoriously out-of-control, over-budget and
problem-plagued highway megaproject that burned
through money in the 1990s and 2000s.
Transportation watcher Charlie Chieppo of the
Pioneer Institute said that while
electrification on the main lines and higher
frequency at rush hour would be welcome
investments, planning for all-day frequent
service doesn’t make sense.
“That is just madness to me,” Chieppo said. “I
find it really hard to look taxpayers in the eye
and tell them they need to pay for that.”
The FMCB, which oversees the T, set out the
ambitious goals and ordered MBTA general manager
Steve Poftak to return in February with a
staffing plan for an office to oversee the
massive conglomeration of projects and a
timetable for two years of work. The board told
the T to prioritize $1.5 billion in work on the
Fairmount and Lynn lines that would essentially
turn them into subway-style services.
A Commuter Rail task force has spent nearly two
years mulling six options for the system’s
future, ranging from a $1.7 billion facelift to
a $29 billion gigantic overhaul that includes
the North-South Rail Link between North and
South stations. The board members said they’re
eyeing what amounts to a “5.5” — a major
overhaul of the system, but with no mention of
the rail link or some other changes included in
option six. Option Five, which includes this
type of overhaul, is estimated at $10.6 billion.
Matt Moran of the Boston Transportation
Department told the board that City Hall isn’t
backing any specific option, but he called for a
“large scale project” like Option Six.
The resolutions approved don’t set any immediate
projects in motion or allocate any money.
Mass transit advocates who spoke before the
board pushed for the big project and even to go
further, touting the “option six” with the rail
link.
TransitMatters said in a statement, “We look
forward to a close collaboration with the T and
other stakeholders to keep this critical
initiative on track.”
The Boston
Herald
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
A Boston Herald editorial
The T rolls out ‘Big Dig’ style commuter rail
overhaul
There’s one thing to be said for the MBTA’s
Fiscal and Management Control Board, it has a
puckish sense of humor.
As the Herald’s Sean Philip Cotter and Mary
Markos reported, the board met Monday and
approved a spate of spendy resolutions. First
up: a massive overhaul of the Commuter Rail,
with electrification of main Commuter Rail lines
and trains running every 15 to 20 minutes all
day, rather than the current handful of trains
headed into Boston in the morning and then back
out in the evening. But the piece de resistance
is a tunnel that would link North and South
stations.
Marvelous stuff, though we’re not quite sure why
all-day, every-20-minute trains are needed for
the Newburyport/Rockport Line. Perhaps Rockport
is the next hot nabe? And a tunnel linking North
Station with South would be a boon for getting
around the city efficiently. The last time it
was easy to traverse the Seaport and North End
areas using public transportation was in the
heyday of the Atlantic Avenue El, which ran from
1901 to 1938.
But here’s the tricky bit — the Commuter Rail
improvements come with a $10 billion to $28
billion price tag, and that North/South Station
tunnel rings up at nearly $30 billion on its
own.
“The time is now to say let’s do it,” said MBTA
Fiscal and Management Control Board Chairman Joe
Aiello.
And how will the T pay for all this?
Ah. Aiello smiled and slipped into a back room
when the sordid topic of coin was raised by
reporters. You have to give him points for comic
timing.
Gov. Charlie Baker, when asked whether the money
will come from taxes, tolls, fares or all three,
answered, “There’s a lot of work that has to be
done to figure out exactly which pieces and when
would be pursued under this.”
Translation: Prepare to be soaked.
Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The problem
with socialism is that you eventually run out of
other people’s money.” Fortunately for the T, we
live in a democracy in which we keep electing
people who raise our taxes, so the funding well
is virtually bottomless.
Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
suspects high gas taxes could foot part of the
bill — and added that the state doesn’t have the
appropriate controls in place to make sure this
scale of spending is done properly.
“This is the new Big Dig for the next generation
to pay,” said Craney, referring to the
notoriously out-of-control, over-budget and
problem-plagued highway megaproject that burned
through money in the 1990s and 2000s.
Even though Halloween is past, conjure up this
horrifying image: tunnel construction around
South Station during rush hour.
Part of the impetus for the plan is getting cars
off the road by 2040, by giving commuters an
alternative. High gas taxes and congestion
pricing will help with that, long before 2040.
The drivers won’t necessarily opt for public
transport — we’re talking about the “0 days
without a problem” T — but they could set their
GPS for New Hampshire or other states where the
tax and commuting picture is brighter.
|
| |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
