“I have seen a lot of references to ‘Big Dig debt,’ ’’ wrote reader Ken Olum, who lives in Sharon and works at Tufts, riding the commuter rail and Red Line. “Does this mean that money was borrowed for building roads that the T was then obligated to pay back? I think readers’ opinions about public policy issues such as whether the gas tax should be raised to pay for transit would be better informed if we understood the history.’’
The answer is, sort of. Here’s a primer:
Forget the T’s 1964 origins. The modern MBTA was born in 2000, when the Legislature enacted what’s known as “forward funding.’’ Until then, Beacon Hill used to cover the difference between MBTA income (fares, parking, advertising, contributions from member cities and towns) and expenses every year.
For those who think that’s outrageous, consider that public transportation is subsidized around the world as a public good, valued for connecting employees with employers, easing road congestion, and reducing emissions and fossil-fuel dependence.
But like parents sending a child off into the world, lawmakers decided the T should balance its own books. As a parting gift, they gave the T one cent out of every five cents collected from the state sales tax — but bundled that with $3.8 billion in debt.
In fairness, that money had been borrowed to pay for expanding the MBTA (with a little thrown in for maintaining an aging fleet, track, stations, and power systems). But transit systems have enough trouble meeting operating costs, much less shouldering expansion costs.
Less than half of that was considered Big Dig debt, but that did not mean that the T was now paying off the $15 billion Central Artery/Tunnel highway construction. Instead, it was paying for the companion transit work the state was legally obligated to complete, to avoid violating the federal Clean Air Act for all the traffic and emissions the Big Dig would generate.
