Fury over possible toll hike overshadows concerns about T

The threat of a Big Gulp size toll increase on the Massachusetts Turnpike took Governor Deval Patrick and legislative leaders to the brink last week, forcing another last-minute delay in the rate hike, followed by a few minutes of smiles and hugs in front of the cameras.

The high-profile demonstration of political capital on tolls has public transportation advocates worried. Where, they wonder, is the similar outrage over the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's repeated warnings about deep service cuts and a 30 percent fare hike?

"Everything is about how to prevent a toll increase," said Eric Bourassa, transit analyst for the Massachusetts Public Research Interest Group. "We feel like the MBTA is often getting left out of this discussion."

The transit advocates have reason to be scared. It's still early in the debate, but the T's $160 million deficit is definitely taking a back seat to the Turnpike Authority's crisis, and there appears to be less legislative support for a gas tax-funded bailout of the T.

As noted here many times, the MBTA's problems are mounting quickly. Last week, Boston's regional planning organization took another ugly step, officially authorizing an $86,000 analysis of various rate hike and service cut scenarios that could begin in September or October. The T has yet to approve the contract, but has begun planning.

For now, the plan is being prepared only as a contingency. If all or some of Patrick's proposed 19-cent increase goes to the T, officials can spare transit commuters.

But some key legislators have been saying there is little political appetite for Patrick's full 19 cents, or anything close. Three Beacon Hill insiders, two of whom demanded anonymity, told me last week that the turnpike's problems were getting far more support than the MBTA's. The insider who did speak on the record, Representative Joseph F. Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat who co-chairs the joint committee on transportation, said he is among those more inclined to help the Turnpike Authority than the T.

Why? Neither agency is an easy sell in his Western Massachusetts district, where many residents protest a higher gas tax to pay for what they perceive as Boston's problems.

But Wagner believes the Turnpike Authority's crisis stems from Big Dig debt, something that should be a statewide responsibility - if not a popular one - because all road expenses are shared statewide. The T, he reasons, already gets a penny of the state sales tax on every dollar. But Wagner, like other knowledgeable legislators, acknowledges that the T's share of the sales tax does not cover the agency's bills, and he does not have a ready solution to that problem.

Transit advocates say the T serves some of the state's poorest residents, while many of the loudest opponents of toll increases come from wealthier suburban communities. In fact, 74 percent of the state's population is served in some way by the T.

"We're just concerned that there's no large group carrying the water for the MBTA within the Legislature," Bourassa said.

That has not been a problem for the turnpike. Constituents in toll-dependent communities were stunned by the Turnpike Authority's November vote to raise the cash toll to $2 at booths inside Greater Boston and to $7 at the harbor tunnels.

They let their representatives know, showing up at public hearings, protesting in chicken suits, and jamming phone lines. Boston's western suburbs have a well-organized and active legislative caucus, which banded with North Shore legislators to turn up the pressure on the Patrick administration. It helped that Robert A. DeLeo, the new speaker of the house, comes from Winthrop, where residents depend heavily on tolled tunnels to get to Boston.

Salvatore F. DiMasi, the former House speaker from the North End, might have been a more useful public transit ally, but he's gone. Other top leaders, who live on the outskirts of the public transit system, are under little pressure from constituents to fix the T.

Patrick's political strategy in selling the gas tax, it seems, also backfired on the MBTA.

He let the turnpike board, which he controls, vote in the toll hikes with fixed deadlines that put pressure on legislators and drew widespread media attention. That angered legislators and forced the board into two delays and some embarrassment. But it focused attention on the turnpike.

The MBTA board, also controlled by Patrick, did not use the same tactic. Its members approved a preliminary budget this month with a $160 million hole in it, with the hope that the Legislature would come through with some relief.

That softer sell may have been intentional, given the political repercussions Patrick faced by setting turnpike deadlines. But the result has left the T with far less public attention.

Advocates such as the T Riders Union have been gearing up, holding funny publicity stunts like an MBTA bake sale to raise money for subway riders. And Transportation Secretary James A. Aloisi Jr., who chairs the T's board, made a speech at a recent board meeting, trying to dramatize potential impacts of service cuts and fare hikes. But without specifics on the table, it's harder to generate the kind of alarm that the toll hikes caused.

"We know what fare increases have done to us in the past," said Lee Matsueda, of the T Riders Union.

He points to one client, a single mother who rides the T to work. She also drops off a toddler at day care and pays for a 13-year-old to attend school. Money is so tight that she cannot afford a monthly pass and has to load her CharlieCard with a few dollars at a time.

The last-minute decision to delay next week's toll increase will cost the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority $13 million from its rainy-day fund. But that's not the only expense for the indebted agency.

Politicians can change their minds at a moment's notice, but turnpike workers need time to change signs, print rate cards, and alter electronic toll systems to reflect new tolls. Alan LeBovidge, the Turnpike Authority's executive director, said some of that work had already begun and estimates the agency has spent between $10,000 and $20,000.

"It's not the most efficient use of money, but it's not a lot of money," LeBovidge said. The authority board, which is controlled by Patrick, is likely to approve his proposal for a delay at tomorrow's meeting in Ludlow.

But LeBovidge said the whole saga was not in vain because lawmakers may now finally find a way to solve the authority's debt problems.

Please send complaints or comments to starts@globe.com.