MBTA fare hikes are unconscionable

Last month, MBTA board members voted 4-0 to discontinue late night T service in the Boston area. College students and Bostonians alike who rely on the service for jobs and safe transportation have since protested the decision, demanding the burdensome service cut be overturned. Instead, they faced another disappointment when MBTA announced on March 7 a new fare hike by an average of 9.3 percent. The sheer size of the increase has proved controversial among some law-savvy public figures who claim the increase is standing on shaky legal ground. According to 2013 legislation, the MBTA is capped at a 5-percent fare increase for every two years, but the last fare hike was in 2014.

Though the protesters may not agree, the MBTA has come forward with sound justifications for the cut in service and surge in fare. These rationales stem largely from a need for fiscal responsibility. The MBTA is committed to cutting costs and boosting efficiency in an attempt to lower the $242 million dollar deficit it was expected to run in 2017. Recently revised budget projects show that the hike reduces its anticipated deficit by 43 percent to around $134 million — a big cut but from whom?

The late night service is a logical target for pruning because it had a smaller benefit and larger cost than expected. Although nocturnal college students were quick to become accustomed to the freedom it afforded, it has only been running since 2014 as an experimental pilot program. In addition, it did not receive the support it needed to be sustainable. At the program’s launch, the MBTA anticipated larger usage and financial support from private companies, which it never saw. Cutting it could save $10 - $15 million, 10 percent of the necessary reduction.

The MBTA also cited the need for infrastructure investment in its fare hikes. In fact, along with the planned increases, the Governor's fiscal control board voted to create a “Lock box” to ensure that every additional dollar of revenue gained from the higher fares is directly reinvested in short term improvements in system functionality. This spending is certainly warranted: the aging system is in desperate need of a facelift.

However, we can’t forget that penny pinching has some real life consequences for everyday people, including college students who use the T as a safe late night transportation option. Many students from Tufts and other schools use weekend evenings to explore Boston nightlife and other campuses across the city, or to go to internships. Moreover, the MBTA launched the late night service with the intent of competing with other world-class cities. To cancel it would be a step backwards as the quality of life in Boston is struggling to catch up with that in cities like New York, whose mass transit systems run 24 hours a day.

As irksome as these service changes are for college students, they represent a real obstacle for low-income workers, disproportionately people of color, who work late nights to support their families. This makes the the changes in the system a challenge to equity. Though the 9.3-percent increase in fare may seem manageable to most, there are plenty of commuters who are just scraping by. When they can no longer afford to ride the T, they can’t commute back from late night jobs. Thus, many low-income workers are forced to find jobs elsewhere, effectively limiting job prospects and confining them in poorer neighborhoods. In a public comment to the MBTA, one commuter wrote, “my budget is as tight as I can possibly make it, and although an increase of $26.50 might not seem like much, that’s a tank of gas or a few bags of groceries that I now can’t afford…” Even worse is the fact that the MBTA shirked its responsibility in analyzing the equity costs of the change in service. The organization bypassed the federally required analysis report by claiming the change didn’t represent a momentous enough shift. Though it has recently been made to do the investigation by federal authorities, the analysis seems like an empty gesture because its mind is already made up.

It seems undeniable that changes must be made to account for the budgetary deficit of the MBTA and that the system needs a meaningful renovation; however, we cannot ignore the costs to safe nightlife, job opportunity and budget concern for those who rely on the T for their daily lives. As a response, the MBTA is supposedly exploring partnerships with private transportation companies, like Uber, Lyft and Bridj, to bolster late night transportation in place of the T. Possibilities like these must be fully investigated, certainly, but high fare costs and a weak transportation system are fundamentally unjust to too many.