• Sara Rimer

    Senior Contributing Editor

    Sara Rimer

    Sara Rimer spent 26 years as a reporter at the New York Times, where she wrote about education, the death penalty, immigration, and aging in America, and was the New England bureau chief. The Times nominated her for the Pulitzer Prize. Her coverage of the death penalty was cited by the Supreme Court in its 2002 ruling outlawing the execution of developmentally disabled individuals. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English.

There are 33 comments on What If the Green Line Actually Worked?

  1. Nice article. this guy understands the problem. Too bad people making the decisions don’t listen to people like him. The most important point this article pointed out is that city/state officials prefer to promote sexy projects instead of fixing problems. They do this because it promotes themselves. And most people seem to be blind to the fact that there are problems, so this works. But it’s terrible.

  2. I subjected myself to the MBTA for about forty years before I finally gave up on it as a waste of life time. Commitment to service has never been foremost in this transit system, and that has always shown – never more so than in this winter. The Carmen’s Union is the tail wagging the dog, perpetually antagonistic toward the MBTA and wholly self-interested to the exclusion of service concerns and public safety. In terms of monetary waste, consider the many millions of dollars in equipment which has been destroyed by Carmen’s Union members whose addictions and physical conditions and distracted operation are virtually untouchable because of union solidarity. Then there is perpetual MBTA mismanagement, with gross waste and exorbitant & unearned salary payments often exposed by local news reporters. Contrast the MBTA with the properly run Toronto Transit Commission: Toronto has serious winters, too, but their system runs, because there is intelligence and competence exercised in planning and maintenance. The MBTA’s biggest, historic problem has been attitude, and conditions won’t improve until that is finally rectified.

  3. Professor just need to try the subway in Beijjng/Shanghai/Tokyo/Taipei etc. In those cities, you can really have a TRUE subway. And, I do not think snowstorms will affect the subway operation in those cities. More maintenance on Green line will only be a waste of more money. Green line need a replacement! If the doctor don’t operate, the disease will only be postponed not cured.

  4. To Former Rider:

    AMEN!!!!! Born and raised in Boston I know the T TOO WELL and this “fun and games” crap has been going on for YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEARS!!!!! The T reminds me Ira and George Gershwin song, “They All Laughed” (Ho ho ho who’s got the last laugh now)

  5. He has some great points, but I’m suprised that he uses the green line extension as an example of misplaced priorities. The state is legally required to complete the extension and has delayed it for a very long time. Somerville filed a lawsuit in 2006 which pushed the project along, but it was supposed to be completed several months ago. The current schedule has it being completed in 2020 instead.

    1. Prof. Regan is precisely on the mark regrading misplaced priorities. Green Line expansion should never have been favored over longterm maintenance. That decision, & the processes leading to others like it in future, need close critical scrutiny. It is not acceptable as a fait accompli, including legal commitments.

      1. Claiming that the Green Line extension was favored over longterm maintenance is simply a lie. A malicious lie.

        What happened was that the Big Dig highway tunnel was favored over both the Green Line extension and longterm maintenance.

        The Green Line extension is an obligation of the state government — an obligation because the Big Dig was illegal! The Big Dig was illegal unless compensating public transit improvements were made to counteract the massive pollution increases caused by the Big Dig.

        Trying to force the MBTA to pay for the Green Line extension was an offensive and illegal move by the state government. The state government eventually backed off and took responsibility for the Green Line.

        The Green Line extension does NOT compete for funding with longterm maintenance. The Big Dig bonds are what competed with longterm maintenance.

  6. “Former Rider” put it perfectly. The problem of the T is the attitude.
    Yes, the MBTA needs more money. Yes, we should/could raise taxes ($1/Gal of State taxes on gas, instead of the actual $0.24/Gal, would be bearable; highway tolls are the lowest across any developed country, etc…). But why can’t the MBTA allocate money elsewhere too? The answer is called “Pacheco Law”, which Prof. Regan failed to mention. The Pacheco Law, for which the unions lobbied as hard as it is humanly possible, prohibits any interaction between the MBTA (or other similar public agencies) and private investors. E.g.: The orange line needs an update. The communities of Charlestown, Chelsea and Everett need more than buses. A casino is being built. The State gave “Mr. Winn” permission to build in exchange for A LOT of money to improve traffic conditions and clean the area from the chemical contamination. The MBTA could take a share of Winn’s money and build a second orange line branch, replace the old trains and invest in fixing the signals. Or not? No, the MBTA cannot; it would be ILLEGAL for the MBTA to do so. That would be a deal which would benefit three major communities, the MBTA and the commuters, and bring more customers to Winn Resort as well. A win-win deal. But the unions forbid it.
    The joke about the aging fleet instead is only a lame excuse. The fleet is aging but it is hardly the oldest around. In the old world (aka Europe), there are fleets with historic trains, which still circulate daily. Milan’s subway has trains from the ’50s; the tram system has three models in operation: The modern Sirietto trains, the Jumbo trains (from the late ’70s) and the Ventotto (Italian for “twenty-eight”), so called because they were put in operation in 1928! They still work perfectly because the proper maintenance is performed daily overnight. I have spoken with some of those operators; they talk about those old cars as if they were talking about their own children, they proudly show you their favorite car and how it works. There are stories of operators crying when leaving their cars for retirement! The T operators instead threaten to call the cops on you if you dare to complain that they have no excuses to be 15-minutes late at 6am.
    I am a European social-democrat of Brandtian style, but here the guilt of the unions is evident! These are sloppy, careless people who are overpaid (why are they paid as much as the NYC’s MTA’s employees if they perform considerably worse?) and focused only on maintaining the status quo of their benefits and privileges. The fix the T needs is a new agency which can work within the market rules. Guide it through a well planned bankruptcy, have the State absorb the current debt, repeal (or amend) the Pacheco Law, and finally create a brand new agency with a union that cares about safety and workers rights (instead of management and politics) and a management led by internationally recognized people who can run it as a State-owned but market-based company.
    This will never happen, because people with an attitude are also too proud to admit they failed. Instead, the MBTA will keep begging for more tax-dollars to waste. This analysis by Prof. Regan is deeply disappointing as it lacks of the basic historic truths about the agency. And anyways, the best subway line is not the most fun one!
    I suggest instead this article from the Boston Globe, which is more balanced and historically accurate: http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/02/14/transportation/U7vNqP861gKQFRly2jmjdL/story.html?hootPostID=13d6f2643e96b7d21ae3232fac8f31e8

    1. It’s disappointing that someone from Europe falls back on the (bad) old American catchall explanation: blame the unions.

      It is the job of unions to advocate for their members. Not just the whole organization, but individuals too. To do otherwise would be negligent. Old Continent cites no examples, though anti-union horror stories circulate regularly. But the hoary anecdotes about bad union workers are stray bits of data that prove nothing, except possibly the bias of those who cite them. I’ve belonged to several unions over the years, & the vast majority of members are very conscientious about doing their jobs, & also think & act like the public-spirited citizens they are.

      As US unions have declined over the last four decades so has the middle class. No unions, no middle class. And still, some people say that unions & collective bargaining must go, & (for teachers) tenure is bad too. That’s like assuming that the best way to avoid rotten apples is to cut down the entire orchard. No thank you!

  7. Massachusetts is larger than the area covered by transportation system. Do tax payers in those non-covered areas want to pay additional taxes to cover the needs of their neighbors? What if their neighbors are poorer and don’t pay as much so the tax burden falls on people not using the service? Would those people elect officials who want to put additional taxes on citizens not using the services they are paying for? Is it government, or the collective, voting, public that decides (whether they realize it or not) through voting what they want /are willing to pay for?

  8. “But I haven’t heard a single person in power say we should have to raise taxes or fees to provide the system with more money.”

    Actually, the fees for the MBTA were raised 2 years ago and apparently it did not do any good. The problem is twofold:
    1) the MBTA would do fine economically if there were not a gigantic debt (due to the Big Dig) and the interest to pay on that debt. The city should pay off the Big Dig debt.
    2) Mass transportation is a service to the city (like police or firefighters) and, in my opinion, the should be paid from the taxes and not from the passangers. I would even advocate for a completely free public transportation. The cost of the service is small compared to the benefit that the city would experience (for example reduction of cars on the road, traffic congestions etc).

  9. I know it’s complicated issue to fix the Green lines, but here’s my 2cents on a cheaper alternative:

    Replace the above-ground sections of the B and C lines with Buses routes. Use the extra space where the rails were to create more driving and bike lanes. This would reduce traffic congestion on Comm ave and Beacon st and wouldn’t require $400 mil to replace an entire fleet of ancient Green line trains.

    1. Oh, no, no, no, no. Buses instead of rail is never the solution. Both Comm Ave and Beacon are so congested as it is and streets cannot be widened because of the existing structures on either side of the streets. Adding bus lines instead of rail, much less REPLACING rail lines with buses, are absolutely never the answer. That would be an abject disaster.

  10. We’ve been trying to get commuter rail service extended into New Hampshire via the Lowell Line for at least 30 years. New Hampshire funded a study and has defined that its feasible to extend the line as far north as Manchester. I would be disappointed to see that effort stopped in its tracks (pardon the pun) yet again if commuter rail expansions are halted. I used to take the train from Lowell into North Station every day to work in Cambridge in the mid 1990’s. I grew up in Norwood and took the train from Norwood and Canton into South Station for school and work in the 1980’s. Rather than building more highways, we should be investing in public transportation. Highways get clogged with cars and trucks and reach maximum capacity a few years after expansion. Why can’t we have a world class public transportation system in the Northeast Corridor (PORTLAND, ME to Richmond, VA) that rivals those in Japan and Europe??

    1. Everyone would like for service to be extended, but how can we focus on extending lines further when the existing ones cannot fun functionally, even in normal weather? The Green Line can barely handle a Red Sox game on a work day, so we should focus on extending a Commuter Rail line up to New Hampshire?

      1. The tracks are owned by Pan Am Railways and New Hampshire would build stations plus equipment (locomotives and passenger cars) to run trains into North Station. Federal Government funding is available for a majority of the work to upgrade tracks to passenger rail service north of Lowell, build stations and help with buying the equipment. MBTA doesn’t even operate the commuter rail lines. They are contracted out to Keolis, a French firm that operates tail transit systems in Europe.

        The connection between MBTA Commuter Rail and rapid transit is North Station/South Station/Back Bay Stations. They are separate networks and operate separate sets of equipment.

  11. I don’t believe expansion initiatives are motivated by policy makers desire for self-promotion, but by a desire to expand the political base of support for public transportation. Understandable, given the climate of indifference to public transit needs as illustrated by the recent voter rejection of an indexed gas tax. Unfortunately, the system is in critical need of basic maintenance and updating, as this author points out; it’s rotting from the core. Objections to making the necessary investments often include complaints about management inefficiencies, but the truth is that both (investment and reform) are needed and the legislature should advance a single proposal that includes ample quantities of both.

  12. I try to avoid taking the when at all possible.
    My one thought anout the BU shuttle would be to break it into two different routes: have one continuous loop along Comm ave, and then a different route from Kenmore to the medical campus.

  13. Raise taxes! Are you kidding me? How about we demand that they use our tax dollars for some good instead of using them so inefficiently. And it’s not like we are paying taxes and the ride on the T is free. What happened to demanding something that works in exchange for the money you are paying? Have we become so complacent in this city? The reason the metro works well in other places is because the people demand it and there are better government and transportation officials. And in the huge cities, they would collapse without it. Do we need to come to that for people to start demanding more for their money?

    1. “they would collapse without it. Do we need to come to that…?”

      We have come to collapse this month. What’s needed is the political will to force the pace of change. Let’s stop poking our electronic devices long enough to positively shape public policy.

  14. I think that it is interesting that the top Green Line improvements Prof Regan suggested (time the signals and consolidate stations) do not seem to take large investments. Is it possible that the transit system could be highly improved just by better execution and attention to detail?

    Sure large investments would be nice, but lack of large chunks of new capital should not be an excuse for lack-luster management. I’d say let’s find a new team that can work enthusiastically within the current constraints.

    Kiril

  15. The infrastructure is old the city has changed of course, but for years our elected officials have benefited politically from expansion promises while kicking the issue of maintenance and funding down the road.

    As for the worker contracts, it’s time for a wake up call. While many T employees certainly work hard and under unenviable conditions, the exorbitant salaries and retirement benefits are unsustainable. For a system that is desperately lacking in funds, it is utterly absurd for so many people to be making six figure salaries while retiring with lifetime benefits in their early 50s. People deserve a living wage, but the T is handing out money at twice the market rate. You can find the salaries of T employees here:

    http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/Smart_Forms/News,_Events_and_Press_Releases/Wages2014.pdf

    1. These wages are obscene. Bus drivers with a high school degree (sometimes with very limited English) are making $60-$80K a year, while adjunct professors are struggling, and failing, to get by on $18K with no benefits. This sort of corruption and misplaced values makes me deeply ashamed of this city and this country.

  16. He understands the hardware, what he doesn’t understand is the management and labor costs. The MBTA is a cesspool of cronyism, nepotism and waste. We pay bus drivers $125,000/year. Street car cleaners $69,000/year. Who gets those jobs? Guess. MBTA management has thrown money at the unions, at the request of the legislature, and neglected the infrastructure. Before one dime of additional taxpayer money is thrown at this program the system needs to go into state receivership, the present contracts must be broken and fiscal sanity restored to the operation. Once the operation has been fixed and a plan for infrastructure investment developed, then we can talk about the possible need to develop additional revenue. Let’s not forget that over the past ten years, MBTA management has purchased hundreds of millions of dollars of new equipment that was broken when received, impossible to maintain because of ridiculous design demands and were failed upon receipt. Clean house, then we can talk.

  17. I think there is another Somerville expansion project that merits criticism here – the 30 million dollar Assembly Row debacle. It’s the new stop on the Orange Line named Assembly that took years to build (orange line passengers had to be shuttled on weekends for over a year which cost millions in itself). I live on the Orange Line and take it every day. Nobody ever gets of at the new 30 million dollar T stop. I mean, once in a while a couple people get off but this T stop is one of the most underutilized on the Orange line. Why? Everyone drives to the outlet malls/cinema at Assembly Row – it’s always packed there but people are not taking the T. What makes this waste even more egregious is that there are already 2 Orange line T stops, Sullivan and Wellington to which Assembly Row is walkable! I always walk to Assembly Row from Wellington anyway.
    I ride the Orange line every day and there isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t hear someone muttering about Assembly Row, sometimes it’s “I’m glad we spent millions on a stop nobody ever uses” and lately, the mantra is “Why couldn’t the MBTA invest 25 million in a new propulsion system for some of the trains!” The riders on the T get it – I just wish someone was listening!

  18. As a T commuter, I take the both the Mattapan trolley and the Ashmont branch of the Red line daily. I couldn’t agree more that the trolley is the best part of the MBTA. It is, however, a problem that the cars can be described as “rickety.” Even worse, they seem to be the most reliable trains in the system.

  19. Thanks so much for the insights, Mr. Regan! I really enjoyed your perspective. I too make a point to tour the transit systems of the cities I visit! I love learning how different cities move. Having lived in a number of cities along the Northeast corridor, I have to ask: why do you believe that Philadelphia and Boston’s transit systems are superior to DC’s? The transfer opportunities and reach of the DC Metro system are far more extensive than the T. And, though Philadelphia has decent bus and regional transit coverage, its urban train and light rail infrastructure leaves much to be desired. Plus, the diversity of DC’s transit options (bus, trolley, subway, circulator, etc.) provides many different options for different needs and budgets, which Philly’s and Boston’s systems don’t really do. Can you please explain your thinking?

  20. Just a nit, the current Orange Line cars started to arrive in 1979. Their average age was 35 when this blog was written. But they are definitely rotting out.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *