Support BMG PAC!
About BMG PAC
Make a secure credit card contribution using Google Checkout:
$
Or send a check to BMG PAC, PO Box 877, Medford, MA 02155.
View BMG PAC's latest disclosure report


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?



FREE COPY OF BOB'S BOOK Barack Obama for Beginners to every 50th Facebook Friend!
BMG on Facebook

About
About us
Rules of the road - please read!
Formatting and multimedia tips
Email us
RSS feed

BMG TRAFFIC REPORT
Blue Mass. Swag
Creative Commons License

Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Active Users
Currently 25 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Massachusetts Left
.08 Acres
Below Boston
Berkshires Blog
Blue News Tribune
Chimes at Midnight
Eisenthal Report
Granby 01033
Health Care for All
Left in Lowell
MA lefty blogs
Marry in Mass.
Mass Engagement
Massachusetts Liberal
Michael Forbes-Wilcox
My Dedham
Progressive Mass.
Quriltai on the Shore
Ryan's Take
Someday I Will
ShrewsBuried
Talking Stoneham
The Fray
Universal hub

Differently-Winged
John Daley
Mass. Pro-Life
No Looking Backwards
Peter Porcupine
Pundit Review
Red Mass Group
Scaling the Hill 2010

Mass. Media
David S. Bernstein
Cambridge politics
CommonWealth Unbound
Globe bloggers
Herald bloggers
Hub Blog
Jon Keller
MassBeacon
Media Nation (Dan Kennedy)
Open Media Boston
Adam Reilly
Toll Talk (Mary Connaughton)
Weekly Dig Blog

Legal
ACS Blog
Balkinization
Election law
How Appealing
SCOTUSblog
Volokh Conspiracy

General
Accountable Strategies
Billionaires for Bush
Blue Works Better
Crooks and Liars
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton (Atrios)
Glenn Greenwald
Grist (environment blog)
Hullabaloo (Digby)
LiberalOasis
MyDD
Oliver Willis
Pandagon
Political Animal
Political Critic
Political Wire
Poor Man
Progressive Blog Digest
Real Climate
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Tapped
Talking Points Memo
Think Progress
Truth and Progress
Turn Maine Blue
Wonkette

www.BlueMassGroup.com

A Major Transportation Announcement

by: Steve Baddour

Wed Jan 14, 2009 at 14:42:57 PM EST


(The Senate's plan is to go from this (click the images for larger views):

to this:

The Senate released two documents (PDF) describing the plan in more detail. - promoted by David)

(Cross-posted at Mass Trans for Tomorrow)

Hi folks. Today I was pleased to be joined by Senate President Murray as well as several of my colleagues in the Senate to announce a major plan for transportation reform. Below are the remarks I gave at today's press conference.
--

Steve Baddour :: A Major Transportation Announcement

The discussion surrounding the next wave of transportation reform has covered many ideas.  Today, we are here to talk about just that - reform.   We simply cannot continue to invest in the transportation infrastructure network without meaningful, serious reform - the kind of reform that is clear in its goals, comprehensive in its approach, and able to restore confidence that transportation funds are being spent efficiently and effectively for all parts of the Commonwealth.

The one thing we know is that reform is not easy. Changing institutions which seek to maintain the status quo is hard, but necessary, work. The Senate and the Legislature have worked diligently over the years to implement changes in the way we deliver transportation services in the Commonwealth.

In 2004, we redefined the role of the Secretary of Transportation. We believed then, as we do today, that moving toward a unified system was crucial to maximizing efficiency, improving communication, and spending transportation dollars wisely.

The next step was in 2007 when the Governor signed the Mass Mobility Compact, and we made the first move toward reducing waste at the Turnpike Authority by eliminating board compensation, and restructuring the terms of board service and top leadership.  

The non-partisan Transportation Finance Commission was also created legislatively. At the time, it was said by many that the commission would simply produce another report that would sit around and collect dust.

Today we know this couldn't be further from the truth.

I believe that without their groundbreaking reports - there would be no consensus around the gravity and seriousness of the problem facing our transportation delivery system. We are all very grateful for the deliberate and innovative work they produced.

And just last year, we undertook a second wave of sweeping transportation reform.  Again, we took on issues that were politically unpopular. These reforms were not easy, but we were willing to stand up to the critics and make the necessary changes:

For example -

We required the use of civilian flaggers on construction projects, and today more than 120 people are trained to assist at public construction sites;

We enacted changes to MBTA health benefits, requiring members to contribute 10% toward their co-pays - saving the system millions of dollars both now and in the future.

We initiated "Grey Notebook" reporting requirements, making MassHighway report on activities such as project delivery schedules, cash-flow and studies on the adoption of "best practices" from other states. These efforts have cut project delivery timelines by 40% and have improved Notice-to-Proceed timeframes from four-to-six-months to 60 days.

We pushed MassHighway to undertake     demonstration projects  for design-build and project acceleration.  Efforts, that if successful, can be replicated across projects to cut costs and make deadlines;

And we required EOT to address the mess that is the state's prequalification process for horizontal construction. The Commission is currently developing uniform standards for construction bidders, regardless of which agency is sponsoring the project, which will increase project bids and eliminate discretionary decision making.

All of these efforts moved us in the right direction, but our system is still clearly broken.  We need to - in a sense - force greater collaboration, cooperation and coordination.  

Looking forward, there is still great work to be done. We are facing a 15- to 19-billion-dollar shortfall in transportation funding over 20 years and a system that is virtually crumbling beneath us.  However, when we talk about investing in our transportation infrastructure, we must only do so if we are investing in the most efficient system possible - one that will allow for comprehensive planning, the cross leveraging of resources and that ultimately benefits the entire delivery network in all parts of the state.

I share President Murray's commitment to introducing major transportation reform legislation in the Senate by February that will achieve the following:

Create a unified, independent surface transportation authority, "MassTrans", to streamline operations, share services and reduce costs;

Adopt and enact all 22 of the remaining recommendations of the Transportation Finance Commission

Require new employees of existing organizations and MassTrans, once fully implemented, to participate in the GIC and the Commonwealth's pension plan

Establish legislative benchmarks throughout the transportation system, such as 90 percent of the milestones for each project being achieved on time and on budget;

Apply existing accountability and performance measures from EOT to MassTrans;

Reconstitute the Highway Fund as the Surface Transportation Trust Fund managed by MassTrans;

Ensure that MassTrans maintains parkways and
other transportation facilities currently managed by DCR. This will be consistent with the template established by recent agreements between EOT and EEA on the subject of DCR parkways;

And, preserve the RTA's continued independent existence, while improving central oversight and funding through MassTrans.

During the transition, we will have forensic accountants examine the finances of all Agencies transitioning to the new Authority so that we assure the public that there are no financial secrets as we go forward

This team will work with EOT who will help manage this critical transition from multiple agencies to one streamlined authority

This restructuring and reform initiative has the potential to save the Commonwealth up to 6-billion-dollars.  

These important reforms will be a major step toward transforming our transportation system.  We cannot talk accurately about what revenues we need until we have made the necessary reforms to improve our transportation system for everyone.  To do so in today's climate is not only a mistake but also an insult to the taxpayers of the Commonwealth.  We have to make sure that we are investing toll and tax-payer money into a system that makes financial sense for today and the future.  

Our bill will be the first step in making this a reality.  

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Thanks - can you link to the bill? (0.00 / 0)
As soon as it is available online, that is.

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb


As soon as bill is posted online (0.00 / 0)
I will link to it here.  Or, since this post will likely be pushed down off the front page by then, feel free to contact my office at 617-722-1604.

Thanks.


[ Parent ]
Thanks - but you became headline news! And I will happily contact you. (0.00 / 0)
As you can see, your post was greeted with attention and analysis - and as it will take grass roots support, that means that this community is interested, and perhaps, a support.  

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb


[ Parent ]
Here it is... (0.00 / 0)
AmberPaw, please click here to see the bill in its entirety. Thank you.


[ Parent ]
a small quibble... (6.00 / 1)
the "from this" graphic shows a very clear link to the Governor...

whereas the "to this" graphic appears to, entirely, omit the Governor...

I'm not sure that's the message you want to be sending... I'm just saying.


---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert


Looks Good Until the House Gets Its Paws on It! (0.00 / 0)

Clean chart.  Transparent.  Is that standard operating procedure in MA?  It appears to easy.

But if we could save $6 billion, why not?



Actually wondering how... (0.00 / 0)
... the 'shared' procurement will work and if it will make everyone happy.

"It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is because we do not dare that things are difficult." - Seneca (5 BC - 65 AD)

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic (5.00 / 3)
I'd like to think that this will solve Massachusetts's transportation problems, but but all the underlying structural problems of debt and poor funding are still there.  A new org chart is not going make these magically go away.

appointments to Board (0.00 / 0)
Are the terms of office for the MassTrans Board going to be concurrent with the Gov's term of office?  Or are we going to keep allowing lame-duck governors to make dead-hand appointments, denying the newly elected officials the chance to change policies?

Otherwise, this looks like a good plan.  Best of luck with the unions (GIC, pensions) and their political sponsors.


Surely you jest (0.00 / 0)
Not that I'm not against firing all the overpaid, featherbedding, related-to-somebody-on-Beacon-Hill incompetents that inhabit these semi-autonomous transportation entities, but just how many public sector positions will be eliminated in this consolidation?  I hate to be cynical.

But the lost positions, now populated by state employees with REAL political power, will trump the taxpayers' welfare.

I'll bet dinner this plans dies in committee.


The plan (0.00 / 0)
does not call for anyone to lose their job.  There is the possibility that we can cut back on some of the consultants and lawyers we are currently paying enormous fees to, but we do not expect anyone to be laid off as a result of this plan.

[ Parent ]
Where then is the $6 billion savings? (5.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
I want to clarify the issue (0.00 / 0)
regarding layoffs and downsizing when the transition from multiple agencies to a single authority occurs.   I think there are two different issues: engineers and front line workers and those that perform front/back office work.  In the first case, I don't anticipate that there will be any layoffs.  In fact, we need to hire more engineers, inspectors, and line workers.  For over a decade, MassHighway has been understaffed and frankly, they are currently hiring in an effort to rebuild staff and prepare for the implementation of the Accelerated Bridge Program.  In the case of front/back office work, things will be somewhat different.  As we start to create the Authority, agencies will eventually be using one human resources department, one legal department, etc.  and eventually there will be consolidation and ultimately some layoffs.  It should be noted however, that this is not a plan that seeks to save money through massive and sweeping layoffs.  Shared services - which also includes bulk procurement, moving to one IT system, processing benefits using one system and other functions - will result in significant savings.  So in short, the potential to save is from many other things rather than just worker reduction.  

[ Parent ]
But (0.00 / 0)

I understand that State Government, as a financial model, is principally 1) transfer payments (welfare, health care...) 2) debt service and 3) wages.  And, to a lesser extend 4) overheads.

In the tranportation biz, there's few transfer payments and you can't reorg debt away, so that leaves wages and overheads as a savings source.

You've advanced the number $6 billion as a potential savings.  How was that savings figure derived and over what time period.  i.e. 6 billion in a few years is great, over 100 years, not so much.  Any specifics?


[ Parent ]
how does it save (0.00 / 0)
$6 billion

and over how many years?

This is not a critique, I'm actually just curious.

Also, how would this fit in if we passed a bill creating a gas tax increase that would simultaneously end the tolls?

---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.


Before we look for additional revenue (0.00 / 0)
we should make the necessary reforms so we can determine with full accuracy whether or not a gas tax or toll increase is really necessary.  That is why I think it is vital that we implement these reforms right away.  As I said yesterday, it would be an insult to the taxpayers to ask them for to put more money into a broken system.  Let's fix the system first, and then determine whether or not additional revenue is needed.

[ Parent ]
needs work (0.00 / 0)
Your plan needs work.  

As noted already, there is little information on how the new agency will interface with the Governor, and thus, by extension with the government.     The term 'quasi-public' is used, but not defined.  I am not a timid man, but few words fill me with more fear than those involving the prefix 'quasi-'.    It suggests something more corruptible than a hybrid system yet less wieldy than an entrenched bureaucracy.    I'm also quite unclear as to the role of EOT and where, amidst the authority and the Governor, practical operational oversight occurs.

There is also a lot of talk about reform and restructuring. All well and good.   Precious little, however, is mentioned about recovery: that is to say, what to do about the debt existing and the systemic problems that the inefficiencies have caused.  I do not think, based upon what has been presented thus far, that recovery is implicit.  

On the issue of the debt: I suppose it is possible that the shared pool of funds may be used for this purpose, but it is not detailed how, if at all, combining several inefficient and wasteful systems will magically create one efficient system with available funds to cover all a outstanding debts.  We've restructured the MBTA before, fairly recently, with the apparent need to continue restructuring as the outcome.  Also, conspicuously absent is the explicit mention of which oversight organization will have control of the purse-strings.

On the issue of systemic problems and inefficiencies: implicit in the restructuring is a fairly broad 'absorption' of various administrations under an umbrella authority and into pre-defined divisions and components.  This is just shuffling and, methinks, hamstrings MASSTRANS from the start.  If there are problems and inefficiencies (and even waste and corruption) then moving organizations around and under other organizations isn't going to be the ticket.   Functions and outcomes ought to be  defined and MASSTRANS ought to have the 'authority' to direct them and to modify the organizational chart and divisions as necessary. For instance, dividing things into 'roads and bridges' and 'public transportation' seems a bit of the cart in front of the horse: you're not enabling 'authority' if you tell them, from the start, what they can and cannot do and how they are supposed to do it.

Much more plausible to me is to create the authority first and then allow it to define the structure and the make-up of the organization and sub-systems based upon defined and desired functions and outcomes.  Also, It hardly makes sense to do any sort of forensic accounting if the underlying structures and systems aren't going to change substantially as a result.    

I am quite suspicious, also, of public-private partnerships.   I am unalterably opposed to the idea that government ought to be 'run like a business.'  That is, not to put too fine a point upon it, inane.  I therefore don't see the benefit, either operationally or fiscally, to public-private partnerships.    



---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert


Concerns... (0.00 / 0)
Senator,

Obviously a lot of hard work went into this and I applaud the effort. But I am concerned that a giant leap like this will fail and we need reform right now. I am also concerned that we are taking a couple of pretty large bureaucracies and replacing them with one massive one. Implementing a plan like this will take tremendous political will and cooperation - something I can see in the Senate but not the House.

The reform we need right now is of course financial reform. I think if you try to transfer agencies and break unions you are in for an uphill battle that has a strong potential for failure. Not to mention, mergers are not cheap when done right. You do them when you have money in hand in preparation for times when you do not - not the other way around.

That said, I see tremendous potential in MassTrans, not as a new agency but a financial mechanism. Expand EOT's transportation planning role to a point where it is really meaningful - not the fluff department it is now. Then use that work product and combine it with a strong EOT-level capital planning unit. The information produced by these two units can then be used to advise an independent funding trust (MassTrans Trust) which in turn transparently makes the decision to appropriate funds and bonding capacity to each transportation department. One need to look no further than the Water Pollution Abatement Trust (SRF) for a great model.

I see the creation of such a Trust as strong reform that has a much better chance of passage. I see this as the best of both worlds; it gets most of the financial reforms we need right now and it's not creating a huge bureaucracy. It will also require much less political willpower for passage and it wont require any union breaking.

It doesn't get us one DOT but with expanded EOT planning everyone will be working and coordinating towards the same goal. Besides, a little healthy competition amongst agencies is not necessarily a bad thing - it can often lead to innovation - something we can use right now.





I support WWF


Political insider ad network Law blog ad network
Advertise Liberally









Powered by: SoapBlox