(The
opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville News
belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect
the views or opinions of The Somerville News, its staff or publishers.)

The
story so far – when Governor Patrick was sworn into office, he
inherited a poorly-maintained, chronically underfunded transportation
system. In March, 2007, an expert commission studying transportation
finance issued a damning report. In December, 2007, the federal
government disapproved the state's official transportation plans,
jeopardizing funding.

2008: Actions Short of Solutions, New Problems

The
one-year anniversary of the Transportation Finance Commission Report
arrived in March, 2008, with no signs of action on its recommendations.
Instead, the administration was urging the legislature to act quickly
on its Transportation Bond Bill, which included authorizations for $600
million for the full estimated cost of the Green Line extension. The
bond bill was enacted before the July 2008 end of the legislative
session, as gasoline prices climbed to $4.00 a gallon.

Despite
the high price of gasoline, many in the legislature recognized the need
to solve the problem of insufficient revenue to run – and expand – the
state's transportation system, which had not yet been addressed.
Issuing more debt to build the Green Line extension and other projects
represented progress towards making those projects happen. Paying back
that debt – with interest – was going to require a revenue stream.

Several
legislators – including myself – went to work on transportation bills
to file when the new legislative session opened. Representatives from
Metro West communities organized to forestall expected toll increases
for the problem-plagued Massachusetts Turnpike. Meanwhile, the nation's
entire financial system – and that of the world – was showing signs of
serious meltdown.

Still, no proposal for reforming
transportation finance came from the administration. Instead there was
a surprising announcement: Bernard Cohen would be leaving his post as
Secretary of Transportation as of January 2, 2009. He would be replaced
by James Aloisi.

2009: Crisis, Opportunity, Retreat

The
new year was full of transportation initiatives, with several of us in
the House filing transportation reform bills in early January. On
January 13, the Governor announced that he would view a gas tax
increase favorably. On January 14, the Massachusetts Senate announced
its plan for comprehensive transportation reform, filing a bill that
proposed no new revenue.

On February 20, 2009, the Governor held
a press conference to announce that he would be filing a transportation
reform bill that included a 19 cent per gallon gasoline tax increase,
and did so the following week. On January 25, the Speaker of the house,
a supporter of a gas tax increase, announced his resignation as of
January 27, 2009. With leadership in the House temporarily uncertain,
the Senate raised the volume on its insistent message: "reform before
revenue."

At hearings that the legislative Transportation
Committee held around the state on transportation bills, the public
testimony was overwhelmingly against a gas tax increase. The public,
however, did not know that the federal government had disapproved the
state's long term transportation plan (STIP) for insufficient funding,
nor, it would seem, did the administration inform legislative leaders
about the STIP disapproval, and the consequent jeopardy to expected
federal transportation aid. The whole legislative debate on
transportation reform occurred without reference to the potential loss
of the state's single biggest transportation revenue source:
Washington, D.C.

Being out of compliance with federal
transportation regulations could prove problematic especially in 2009.
Federal stimulus money became available for transportation projects
this year, yet Massachusetts has only been funding for funding projects
that are relatively minor in size and scale, such as road resurfacing.
Meanwhile, the state's application for federal grant funding of the
important Silver Line 3 project was rejected because of the state's
financial problems ("Green Line extension funding in question," Boston
Globe, July 21, 2009).

The legislature during its budget process
did add some funding to transportation projects. Part of the revenue
raised by the new sales tax increase will be dedicated to paying
transportation system costs. The amount of money involved, however,
adds up to a band-aid for our transportation funding shortfall.

EOT
knew that it had to do something to get state transportation plans
federally approved, and federal dollars flowing again. It took the only
course left: re-writing the state's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
and shorter term transportation plans to fit the amount of funding
available.

On July 3, 2009, EOT presented its scaled back plans.
These included a proposal for the Green Line extension which delays the
College Ave to Route 16 portion until a later date. The project's
estimated cost ballooned; pegged at $438 million in 2005, and budgeted
for $600 million in last year's transportation bond bill, is now casted
in EOT's finance plan at $934 million – and EOT wants to make the
project conditional on federal grant funding.

What next?

On August 20, 2009, EOT's final revised plans will be presented for
public comment. The comment period will end September 22, 2009. Anyone
concerned with the future of the Green Line extension, or any other
affected part of our transportation system, should think about
submitting comments.