From: M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org
Subject: Re: Charlie on the T ( Ma. Pike vs. MTA)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford MA 01730
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:38:20 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.093034.2167@merrimack.edu>
gemmellj@merrimack.edu writes:
 
>
>Hi.  With all this hub-dub I created about Charlie on the T, I wondered
>when the MTA changed its name to the MBTA.
>Now, the MTA is the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.
>A long time ago it stood for the Mass. transit authority.
>Don't you love it when the folks on Beacon Hill change meanings
>for government agencies..
The Metropolitan Transit Authority was created in 1948 I believe for the
purpose of taking over the property and operations of the Boston Elevated
Railway, which had been the operators of rapid transit, streetcar, trackless
trolley (Boston for trolley bus) and bus service since circa 1895.  The "El"
was a private company, but had been under strict governmental (State  I think)
regulatory control since about 1915.  The MTA operated ONLY the routes of the
former "El", and only those 14 Cities and Towns formerly served by the "El"
shared in its cost.  There were even a few isolated instances (which I could
describe in detail if anyone is interested) of other private bus companies
operating minor routes entirely within a City or Town which was in the MTA
district.
 
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority was created I believe in 1964,
and actually began operating in 1965.  The "need" for this new agency arose out
of two situations that were coming to a head at that time.  First, the Boston
and Maine Railroad, in bankruptcy at the time, was threatening to discontinue
all commuter service (in fact, all passenger service), and it seemed likely
that the court overseeing the bankruptcy would permit this regardless of what
any public or regulatory agency might say.  The New Haven and the Boston and
Albany also wanted out of the commuter business, but there did not appear to be
at that time any real likelihood that they would be allowed to do so.  At about
the same time, the rapid transit extension to Quincy was soon to be constructed
and opened.  It was intended that this should be operated by the MTA.  The
opening of this line would put the MTA in direct competition with the Eastern
Massachusetts Street Railway, which was operating bus service between Quincy
(and other South Shore communities) and the existing MTA subway at Fields
Corner and Ashmont stations.  There were laws about Federal money being used to
construct facilities that would adversely affect private companies, and the
Eastern Mass., with considerable justification, complained bitterly that the
"wicked" MTA was going to force it out of business by taking most of the rider-
ship from its most profitable line.
 
The answer that the Legislature came up with to "solve" these problems was to
create the MBTA, and charge it with the responsibility for ALL public trans-
portation within the Federal Census Bureau's "Standard Metropolitan Statistical
Area" for Boston.  Note that the MBTA was NOT created necessarily to OPERATE
all public transit within its area, but was merely to be responsible for such
operation.  That is to say, they were (and are) free to subsidize private
carriers for specific services if they so wish.  The Town of Maynard, by its
own request, was added to the legal area of responsibility (and financial
support) for the MBTA so as to preserve (temporarily as it turned out) bus
service to it, which was being operated by the Middlesex and Boston Street
Railway Company.  This company had been heavily subsidized by the State - I am
not sure just how the money was funnelled to them pre-MBTA - but was still
unable to survive and would soon be taken over lock, stock and ancient ACF's
by the MBTA.  The MBTA reached agreement with the Boston and Maine and hired
the B&M to operate commuter trains within its service area.  Thus, for a short
time beginning in January, 1965, trains terminated at Manchester, So. Hamilton,
Reading, Wilmington and West Concord.  Communities beyond the MBTA service area
were invited to contract with the MBTA for service initially using a payment
formula of (incremental operating cost - fares collected).  Lowell, Acton,
Ipswich, Gloucester and Rockport soon signed up on this basis.  From this
beginning, through a convoluted set of events and changes in laws, subsidy
formulas, service operators, etc., has evolved today's Commuter Rail system.
 
At the same time, the MBTA purchased the assets of the Eastern Massachusetts
Street Railway, and began operating ALL its routes, including those serving
such communities as Brockton, Lowell and Lawrence that were far beyond the
legal area of responsibility of the MBTA.  This was done (under what financial
arrangement I know not) as a stop-gap measure to retain service in these Cities
until local agencies could get organized to take over.  Eventually, all this
service was assumed by the various "Regional Transit Authorities", of which
there are 14 around the State.  These Authorities were created by either the
same legislation that created the MBTA or other legislation passed at about the
same time.  Unlike the MBTA which MAY (but does not have to) operate its own
lines, the Regional Authorities are REQUIRED to contract for operation to
private companies.  This provision of the law is in response to widespread
criticism of the allegedly wasteful and too costly operating practices of the
MTA.  Criticism of the MBTA (Weld's "Budget Buster" comments, etc.) along the
same lines has continued to the present time.  IMHO, a good deal of it is
justified, but a good deal is not.  The "T" suffers from an inordinate amount
of political interference, and is (although methinks this is decreasing a bit
of late) under enormous pressure to give in to any demands its unions may make.
As an example of the latter, I believe it is still written in the law that
there must be a "Guard" for every two cars on a rapid transit train.  This
person's only function is to open and close the doors.  Imagine such a rule in
New York!  How many additional employees would be required?!?  On the other
hand, probably also forced by politics, the MBTA has the LOWEST fare of any
major City's transit system.  So it's no wonder that it has one of the worst,
if not the absolute worst, fare recovery ratio!  The politicians keep the
expenses high and the income low so what the Hell do they think will happen?!?
Despite all the criticism it gets, it is my sincere opinion that the MBTA
operates a damn fine system that is generally speaking getting better all the
time.  How it's financed is largely up to the politicians, and they are the
ones that have to live with it and justify it to the electorate, because the
management is not free to influence the "bottom line" in any really
meaningful way.
 
 
Len Bachelder        Archives Committee, Boston and Maine RR Historical Society
MITRE Corp.           Secretary, Massachusetts Bay Railroad Enthusiasts
Bedford MA 01730      Member, 470 Railroad Club
<M00209@mbvm.mitre.org>
 
"Amazing love, how can it be that Thou, my God, should'st die for me!"
                                                 - Charles Wesley