A state senator says he’s retaining an “open mind” about what path MBTA oversight ought to take following a listening to that laid out a number of potentialities, however is adamant {that a} new strategy is required.
“I think the current structure hasn’t met the moment,” state Sen. Mike Barrett instructed the Herald a day after he chaired a legislative listening to weighing continued DPU security oversight. “It has been a protracted and really eventful 5 years stuffed with mass transit accidents and incidents.
“Inevitably, you’re forced to the conclusion that the current institutional arrangement can’t find the staff,” he mentioned. “I think a new launch incorporating an organization with a fresh mission, and a little cache, and a sense of renewed urgency, and a revamped salary structure is our best bet.”
Lizzi Weyant, deputy govt director of public affairs for the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, shared three doable oversight eventualities with the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities & Energy on Thursday.
Weyant mentioned the three-member Department of Public Utilities fee could possibly be expanded so as to add a seat for transportation to “ensure that safety measures are monitored and maintained.”
But she mentioned the governor shouldn’t be the appointing authority for the state security oversight company. The Federal Transit Administration was vital of the DPU’s lack of independence in its security administration inspection report.
A second choice can be for a quasi-independent construction, which the state’s transportation oversight division, presently housed within the DPU, would report back to. It can be a board made up of transportation specialists, and much like different boards and commissions within the state, she mentioned.
“The third option is removing the DPU oversight to create a totally separate entity,” Weyant mentioned. “This totally separate entity would just be required to oversee MBTA safety, perhaps our RTAs as well.”
Weyant mentioned it might take years to totally implement a brand new system, and federal funding alone shouldn’t be going to permit for the brand new construction.
But Barrett disagreed considerably, citing the inflow of funding that can be accessible for mass transit by the U.S. bipartisan infrastructure invoice.
“The problem instead is finding warm bodies interested in doing the work,” Barrett mentioned. “I don’t think the salaries are high enough. If we can work up the salaries, we can hire people and train them for these jobs.”
Bringing out these rail transit security jobs from the present inflexible wage construction is a powerful argument for an impartial transportation security division within the state of Massachusetts, he mentioned.
The subsequent step can be for a lawmaker to file laws for the upcoming two-year session. Different oversight proposals could possibly be hashed out in legislative periods in 2023, Barrett mentioned.
“The conversation can’t really continue until legislators put forward competing ideas,” he mentioned. “I expect that’s going to happen here.”
Source: www.bostonherald.com”