The rally, my first and last (and I’m not pulling a Cher, here, either–this really is my farewell tour, folks), was an experience. It was actually much like I had feared it would be, but I have to say finally meeting Dani B. in the flesh was not at all dreadful. He’s a delightful lad, in his woolly way, so far as I can tell. There were other delightful folks I’m glad to have met (including Jen, who took the pictures below), and for me that was always the point. My Doctor says I should get out and mix more. “People,” he’s always saying, “not gin and Prozac.”

Now I plan to spend some time in seclusion, of course. Like Candide, at the end of Rally Road, I find I have come full circle. My inner Pangloss intones: “There is a concatenation of all events in the best of possible worlds; for, in short, had you not been kicked out of a fine castle for the love of Miss Cunegund; had you not been put into the Inquisition; had you not traveled over America on foot; had you not run the Baron through the body; and had you not lost all your sheep, which you brought from the good country of El Dorado, you would not have been here to eat preserved citrons and pistachio nuts.” “Excellently observed,” my Inner Candide answers; “but let us cultivate our garden.”

All I can say is I’m glad I didn’t spend more than about fifteen bucks on the thing. I had three poster-size copies made—reading, simply “Keep MBTA Fares fair” and bought some new underwear for the occasion (I needed some new boxers anyway), but that’s about it. Lee Matsueda of the T Riders Union provided amplification, and TRU brought signs of their own.

Shoogs met me around three on the Square, but we didn’t really have much to do until four. The first people to show up, around fifteen minutes before the rally was to begin, were these punk-socialists. Of course they weren’t serious socialists—they just chose the most hopeless political cause they could find and joined it. They’re more like impotent designer anarchists in the final analysis. Amateur provocateurs out to draw attention to no greater a cause than the rebels without one.

I can’t deny it pissed me off to see these protest parasites show up and actually outnumber the poor, beleaguered protesters themselves. Not that they weren’t protesting. Christ, their entire existence is a protest. But there are ways things are done—and I’m just talking about people things here. Common courtesy. You want to be pariahs, do it on your own time. Get your own damn permit, don’t glom onto mine.

I mean, seriously, people. Have some manners. Do you realize how many of our social ills could be solved–just like that–with simple manners? These guys were my age, and acting like the trenchcoat mafia. When I told them to stop scaring off potential protesters one of them (I’m not sure if it was Mo or Curly — Larry was hanging back at this point)–but one of them even sneered and said: “we can do whatever we want, it’s a public square!” I was like, right, whatever. How many times have I heard that one (in the form of “it’s a free country!” and “you’re not the boss of me!”) from my nine and ten year old nieces?

It was like a bad after-school special, where the square student council president confronts the rebel outcasts trying to crash the big homecoming dance. I felt humorless and absurd doing it, and realized immediately that they’d be perfectly happy to argue with me unto the apocalypse. I told them, look, just try to stay out from in front of the cameras, will you? And by the way, this is no way to get laid.

The protest rally parasite problem is one I have to admit I had not anticipated in the least. You want to come to a rally someone’s organized because you dig what they’re trying to do, why not contact them first? I mean, if you’re socialists that shouldn’t be that big a deal. Socialize a little. There were several groups represented, but everyone had the courtesy to call first and discuss their ideas and goals. These guys basically showed up in an ugly, pestilent lump, didn’t say anything to us, and just started accosting people right and left in front of us. They were chasing people down like kids chasing pigeons in the park. People were scrambling to get away from them.

But once the rally (such as it was) started, they drifted to the margins and disappeared, as is their wont.

I wish I could say the same of the Deval Patrick groupies. They were as disgusting in their way as the impotent designer socialists. A bunch of Barbie and Ken dolls with super-sized campaign signs who just showed up in a clump and didn’t mix with the rabble, either. In their favor, there was an adult representative from his campaign who found me and introduced herself, and asked if I minded their being there and if I wouldn’t mind also mentioning that Deval would have been there himself if he had not had a prior engagement.

She went on her merry way and left the kids to find the spot where they were most likely to get their super-size signs on TV. You can see them schlubbed-up behind Lee Matsueda in the last picture below. They were utterly disengaged, uncommunicative, and looked dreadfully bored throughout the proceedings.

You know, I would not have been so touchy about all these parasites if the beast itself they were feeding off of wasn’t so pitiful. I mean they easily outnumbered real, live protesters. It was like a twelve-mile long tapeworm feeding off a teacup chihuahua. And in the end none of the networks (NECN, CBS4, and WHDH-7 were all there), to my knowledge, used any footage from the rally.

In fact, there was hardly anything about the hearing, much less the rally, in the papers. Nothing in Metro (and this was a Metro-worthy rally if ever there was one), a tiny blurb about Deval Patrick’s cursory appearance at the hearing in the Glob, and a brief mention in the Herald, who put the number in attendance at the rally at one hundred.

That much-disputed number. In a few years’ time I guarantee you it will be in the thousands. It’s the Woodstock effect. People will be like, it was a conspiracy! A media black-out! And when you ask someone—just some random someone at some dinner party or at a pick-up bar–if they were there, they’ll be all like, hell, yeah. And you’ll be all like, well, I didn’t see you there. And they’ll be like, Well there were about fifty-thousand of us. They had all the streets all blocked off.

And then you’ll reminisce together about how those crazy socialists blew up an MBTA bus while Deval Patrick introduced Nelson Mandela to the ecstatic applaud of the revolutionary masses. And then how it was all wiped from the record because Dan Grabauskas ordered the Herald to report that only a hundred people were there. And no further mention was ever made, spirits were crushed, the MBTA Liberation Army was driven underground, and finally fled to the hills of New Hampshire to fight their guerrilla war, now in its twenty-fifth year.

And you’ll be like, it sucks we’re paying twelve-hundred- seventy-three bucks a month for a T pass, but I guess if that’s what the MBTA says it needs to get through fiscal 2031, what can you do?

Just between you and me, I’d put the real number at something more like 33, 34, maybe 40, if you count passersby who paused momentarily to take in the sad spectacle and rubberneckers in their passing cars on Dartmouth. And about 25 of the aforementioned were IDAs, Devalheads, or the media. Then there were three of my friends, and Dani B., like I said there would be, and I think three other kind souls I was very grateful took the time to come out and was very pleased to have met.

I’ll have more to say about the hearing when I get a chance to go over the audio recording I made of it. The quality of the recording is pretty bad, but I can just about make out most of it. I should have some juicy tidbits for you tomorrow.

Until then, here are some pics from the big-ass rally of ‘06. That’s me, at top, imploring an uncaring universe not to ignore the two-page list of demands I’ve just outlined, and introducing Senator Jarrett Barrios, who’s in the next shot. Then there’s one of the “crowd,” such as it was (two of my three friends, a cameraman, a couple of TRU guys, and some poor sucker from NECN who’s thinking, “what the fuck?”). And finally, that’s Lee Matsueda (rocking that mic) and a couple of those Devalhead slugsacks. (They couldn’t even stand up–the one on the left has his fat ass planted right on Kahlil Gibran’s mug. Talk about manners.)

In case you were wondering, everything’s still on target for this afternoon.

The rally will be held at 4PM today in Copley Square, Dartmouth-side (see MAP). We will have State Senator Jarrett Barrios and representatives from the T Riders Union speaking. Deval Patrick will be at the hearings to voice his opposition to fare hikes, as well.

So you are encouraged to come to the rally, make a little noise, and then go on to the MBTA hearing at the Boston Public Library immediately afterward, and present your own personal “impact statement” for the record to the T. You can make a real difference in the fare restructuring.

Tune in here, and to tjustice.info, too, for more you can do after the rally to keep the momentum up, and ensure that T fares remain fair for all riders.

Hope to see you this afternoon at 4PM in Copley Square, and at the hearing afterwards!

Where’s the story? That’s what you have to ask yourself, as a reporter.

I’ll admit I’m a little disappointed in Mac Daniels’ decision to highlight the “cancellation” of the T-boycott, an idea that never really got off the ground in the first place, instead of highlighting the rally itself which has definitely not been cancelled.

I think what I said to Mac about the boycott was, if people wanted to boycott, they certainly could. He told me he, himself, was definitely interested in the idea of boycotts–not because he wanted to participate in this one, or thought it would be effective–but because boycotts are so hard to organize.

Exactly. And who’s got time for the tears? Life should be a banquet, not a beggar’s ball.

But I don’t think that’s the story, here. And I tried to stress that moving beyond the boycott (I don’t think I ever used the word “cancelled,” myself) wasn’t some big bureaucratic decision in the Star Chamber—it was really just about the best way to get people mobilized to do something productive with this thing, hook people up, show the world we’re mad as hell and we’re not gonna take it anymore, and blah blah blah, yeah, whatever. That kind of thing.

At least the headline in the Glob was somewhat informative: “T farehike protesters hold rally.” And just one little sentence in that first paragraph, detailing exactly when and where the rally would be held, and maybe even why, would have been helpful. But we’d all rather kick each other in the balls whenever the opportunity arises, so, yeah, whatever.

The Metro also ran the story, with a headline screaming “Boycott against proposed T fare hike cancelled.” Yes, the first paragraph mentions “a short rally before the first in a series of public hearings” (it’s the same exact story the Glob’s running, but with a more sensationalistically distorted headline, of course), but then the rest of the story is, again, about how it won’t be a boycott. Presumably, if you are reading the Metro in the first place, you are on a train or a bus and aren’t boycotting the T anyway.

Still there’s no doubt that a headline like that will confuse some poor Metro readers into thinking that the rally itself has been cancelled. They don’t provide any details about the rally, either: exactly where or when it’s happening, just that it’s not going to be a boycott. Which is very informative.

Of course, I woke up this morning with a dread thought: what if it’s just me and three of my friends and Dani B. who show up? It could be uncomfortable. We obviously should have stuck with the boycott idea.

Mac Daniel called me today, and will have a little blurb in the Globe about the rally tomorrow. We will definitely have some media coverage, so be sure to feather your hair and wear your best tubetops, visors, and red-white-and-blue sweatbands!

As I may have mentioned, one of the first people I contacted about the rally was Mike Dukakis. He finally got back to me this morning, sending regrets that he would not be able to attend, and suggesting I contact Deval Patrick, who will be at the hearing.

But I was way ahead of him. About a week-and-a-half-or-so ago I sent all the gubernatorial candidates an email asking for comment on the proposed fare hikes. None felt the urge to respond except Deval Patrick, and he is by far the cutest of them all, so we know who’s getting whose vote come election day, don’t we? Anyway, a spokeswoman from his campaign informed me that he was already planning to be at the hearing to make comments. She sent his regrets that he would not be able to attend the rally beforehand because of a prior television engagement. Fair enough. The point is that his campaign obviously views the fare hikes as a serious enough issue, that they’ve got him putting in an appearance at the hearing. Bravo, I say.

I will be in Copley Square, Dartmouth side (MAP) from 3PM. The rally will start promptly at 4PM and will be over by 4:30. Please plan to attend the hearing, not to rabble rouse, but to give your testimony on the fare hikes. A big showing outside will be good, a big showing inside at the hearings will be even better.

Take a moment before the hearing to prepare a short statement. Try to keep it sharp and focused and don’t ramble or monopolize the mic. Trust me, there will be enough crazy people on hand who go to all these freaking meetings who will. Just don’t be one of them.

But don’t let that keep you from actually stepping up to the mic and taking your turn. It’s important that the T hear from as many people willing to go on the record against the current fare hikes as possible.

I want to take a minute to thank Sarah Shugars for dragging me into this with her idea of a public action of some sort. And Lee Matsueda of the T Riders Union (TRU), whose materials and encouragement have been invaluable. I hope that Lee will speak at the rally tomorrow as well. And to those of you who read this blog and intend to show up, and to those who don’t and do, too, my thanks in advance to you all as well. Please be nice to me. I am not as mean in person.

And big fat raspberries to everyone else.

What’s most important on Tuesday, JUNE 6TH, is that you come prepared to go to the hearing at the Boston Public Library, a formal proceeding, where individuals can give their “personal impact statement” for the record. If you do come to the rally and/or go to the hearing, you may wish to prepare a short statement.

You will be asked to state your name, where you’re from, and which bus or train you use most often. Tell them whether or not you support the fare increase, and why or why not. Try to keep it concise and focused on the fare issue. You may wish to write a short statement and read it, so as not to get off-topic or forget anything you would like to mention. Use facts and numbers whenever you can.

I will mention that I feel the fare increase is excessive, that with the move to the OnePass the monthly cost to me will jump from $44 to $62. And while I understand the T would like to promote a view of the system as a whole, the buses do not run regularly or dependably enough along the routes I travel. It is very literally quicker for me to walk once I’ve gotten by train to Back Bay, where I work, than to take a bus. It is also much quicker for me, especially on weekends to ride my bike from Dorchester than to take the bus or the train.

But I also object to the surcharges or penalties that will come into play for those who use cash or the CharlieTicket instead of the CharlieCard, as outrageously excessive as well. Many cannot afford to pay for a monthly pass all at once. And I am concerned the T is not doing all it can to acclimate them to the new system. My concern is that the MBTA will not take adequate measures to provide information and education about the new fares and the new AFC system to people in more vulnerable populations, and that they will not provide adequate FVMs in the places where these people can use them easily and conveniently.

That’s really all I plan to say on the matter.

And this is about all I have to say before the rally, too. Hope to see you Tuesday, at 4PM in Copley Square (Dartmouth side–see MAP) and/or at 4:30PM in the Boston Public Library (700 Boylston St. entrance).

If you can’t make it Tuesday, check the MBTA website for other hearing dates, times and locations that might suit your schedule better. Some dates have been added.

So the “Voices of Dissent” experience was interesting. I’ll try to get the audio posted somehow, for download.

I realized, in the course of preparing for the interview, that my views, as we approach the rally, the hearings, and the end of the comment period, are continuing to evolve, as I look at new information, and see what, for example, groups like The T Riders Union (TRU) have done on the issue in the past.

This morning, with John, I tried to focus more on the social justice aspect, but he was very much more interested in the privacy issue that I believe Senator Barrios is also focused on. Again, transparency is key here. There’s obvious potential for abuses in civil liberties with a “smart card” like the Charlie Card. If the information on it is compiled and catalogued–things like names, addresses, credit card numbers, dates and times of boardings, and so on. I imagine Senator Barrios will speak about it briefly on Tuesday, JUNE 4TH, at 4PM in Copley Square (see map HERE).

While the privacy issue is obviously an important one (and I am absolutely sure the issue will eventually wend its way to court, as the MBTA is being typically coy about its plan for data gathering with the Charlie Card), the more immediate issue with the Charlie Card is probably one of equity–although the surcharge for not using the card is a way of coercing acquiescence on the personal data issue.

The T admits that its penalties/surcharges for using cash or a disposable Charlie Ticket to board are means of forcing compliance with the new Charlie Card, but it says the reason is increased efficiency. And there is truth in this. The Charlie Card is a “contactless” card–it doesn’t have to be inserted into a farebox or gate–you should be able to tap it and go. We all know how using coins or cash–on the bus or the green line–can significantly slow down a stop.

But the penalties for using cash or a Charlie Ticket are excessive (click the link and scroll down to pp.12-13 of the .pdf document). For a bus trip, the proposed fare is $1.25, already a 35¢ increase. The penalty for not having a Charlie Card is an additional 40¢. For rapid transit, the proposed fare is a 45¢ increase, to $1.70, with a penalty for using cash or the Charlie Ticket instead of the Card of an additional 55¢. There will, of course, be no “step-up” or free transfers with cash or ticket, only with the card.

Most of us will not have any trouble with this. Most of my friends are on some sort of corporate program, where it’s pretty much taken care of for them. But there is an issue of educating that segment of the public usually left to its own devices, something the T is certainly not very good at. Nor have I yet seen machines to add value at bus stops, and just as there are plenty of people who use the subway and never take a bus, the opposite’s true as well. Many will not be able to afford the price of a monthly pass all at once, and if they are unable to add value easily and conveniently to cards that the T may or may not proactively distribute to these populations, they will experience a near doubling of their single-trip fares.

Intermodal transfers will not be processed the same as now, either. So many will actually end up paying for transfers they are not required to at present.

The T must show that they are making a real and concerted effort to reach the most vulnerable populations, educate them, and provide them with a ready onsite means to easily add value to their Charlie Cards. if this is not done, it’s hardly fair to penalize them for not using them.

I’ll be speaking with John Grebe, host of “Sounds of Dissent” on WZBC 90.3FM this morning from 11:10 to 11:35.

Wow, what a night! Here are some pics of what you missed if you were one of the few people who didn’t show up for our first annual T-Rage Beers-n-Tears Mixer:

It started out pretty tame, but once those Brazilian guys showed up in nothing but their tighty-whities things got pretty jiggy, as they say. There was something for everybody. Wasn’t that spontaneous breakdance contest fly? That and the hand-stand in your briefs competition and then the poll-dancing finals were my favorite events. And then, to cap it all off the Teletubbies showed up!

If last night was any indication of what Tuesday’s gonna be like, I’m telling you, it’s gonna be apocalyptic!

On a suggestion from a reader I’m trying to simplify my recommendations (I don’t see them as demands, and would rather avoid that kind of language). He suggested that three categories seemed relevant:

1 – Rider Input

● ROC daily blog

● Bulletin board

● Full-time Ombudsman

2 – Transparency

● Readily available, searchable statistics on budget and labor

● Open inquiry into abuses

● Full and direct public participation in fare negotiations

3 – Fair Funding from the Commonwealth

● Real funding options for the T

● Viable debt payment

● Increased commitment to public transit

Thanks for the suggestions. I think they’re great.

Anyone have any more?

My Metro op-ed from yesterday, HERE.

With State Senator Jarrett Barrios, a member of the Joint Committee on Transportation, on board and speaking at 4PM, I’m satisfied I’ve brought something to the table here. Senator Barrios and his staff have been courteous, helpful, and accommodating, and I thank them for taking this matter seriously and taking the time to meet with and rally the public to a worthy cause.

The main event will be from 4 to 4:30 PM on Tuesday, June 6th, as, hopefully, you all know by now.

I will have much, much more to say about the individuals, groups and organizations charged with representing riders, after the rally. I don’t want to alienate anyone beforehand.

I will say this: Over the last couple of weeks I have been talking and on occasion meeting with representatives of various groups with varying levels of commitment to this issue. One recent exchange with a well-meaning lobbyist illustrates a typical philosophical difference. After exchanging emails, this representative of a well-known public interest group advised me thusly: “In my experience, a press conference is a lot easier than a rally. Especially if only 15 people show up.”

But I’ve been calling a press conference every morning when I’m about to have my BM, for years, and usually none of the major media outlets cover it. Humph.

I had an encounter with MASSPIRG yesterday that also illustrated the point. I was walking down Boylston from Berkeley to Copley Square around noon, and there were three of those awful, perky Blueshirts blocking the walk. That’s how they do it. It was impossible to avoid them or their membership drive without having to dash across the street and into traffic, risking life and limb.

I told the young woman who snagged me as I was hiding behind one of those dwarf trees they’ve got growing along there waiting for my chance to escape that (a) I was in a hurry (which I was), and (b) I would have a look at their website later (which I wouldn’t–but that’s our little secret). She insisted I sign up now (which I did not, as when anyone insists I do anything I don’t want to do, especially when it involves monthly payments, I most certainly do not). I was able to escape by pretending I saw a friend I was supposed to be meeting down the sidewalk, and wound up buying someone I didn’t know lunch. But that’s how it goes. It’s still the cheaper of evils in the long-run.

For the record, groups like MASSPIRG can call press conferences, apparently, and bully for them. Their thing is petitions and membership drives, and then, I assume, they have professional lobbyists who wear suits and schmooze with lawmakers to get legislation through. Again, all good. If it makes the world a better place, I’m all for it. But that’s not the only way people can be heard and things can get done.

I look at my humble little rally as a minor experiment in old-fashioned democratic hell-raising, without the middleman. We have pros and specialists for everything now, and while that’s how things get done, as I’ve said, I’m not so sure it’s the only way, or even the best way.

They assure us it is–that the crises of environmental degradation and human rights violations are so apocalyptic and urgent it is all best left to professionals to hash out the solutions. Many of the folks attached to the big-name public-interest lobbying groups seem to view old-fashioned community-building and public protest as quaint at best, harmfully amateurish and damaging to “The Cause” at worst.

I’m just not sure that I agree that “The Cause” is in better hands now that it is “The Cause, Inc.” Maybe, but who’s to say? The PR guys, I guess.

I’ll admit I’m a little old-fashioned, but I think there are merits beyond “The Cause,” even, for people coming together and exchanging ideas about things they have, by choice or sheer coincidence, in common. I think the idea of a common appeals to us, but the reality has become very much less attractive. This gulf between the idea of things and the reality can’t be bridged by signing an online petition, or joining a group that deducts their monthly membership fees from your bank account automatically and promises to do the work of democracy for you conveniently, without disturbing you with too many pesky details.

Don’t get me wrong. There are certain issues in which that approach is necessary and effective–because of their range or complexity, say–but when one of the points you want to make is that the public itself needs to get in on the process, you defeat your own purpose by calling a press conference “because it’s easier.”

That’s why my answer to the pros is: so what if “only 15 people show up”? I’d consider that a rousing success, actually.

You’re defeated when you do nothing.

There are some unique challenges to coordinating a public response to the T’s fare restructuring, and they are not merely coincidental. For one thing, there are some good things about the plan. Not everyone’s fare will increase. For another, many people who might be more inclined to get involved apparently work for companies that subsidize their T monthly passes. Whether you are personally negatively impacted, and to what extent, will obviously influence your inclination to protest.

The T has also planned a fairly short period in which to solicit reactions from riders in mostly symbolic Q&A sessions and hearings. Because the T is not at all a transparent organization, they did not include the wider public in any significant way in fare restructuring negotiations.

What is being communicated as for the nature of the relationship between the T and the public is: “The T is The Decider.” GM Dan Grabauskas comes out with these outrageous hikes for single trip bus and subway fares, and then condescendingly says, “but maybe we’ll lower them if you react.” What he’s saying is, the public’s role is to react. Not to be in on the process, but to bellyache about it when it’s all but over.

And people do react, but there is an undeniable sense of futility. The T makes the rules, they set the dates and times, and control the proceedings, and in the end, they decide, on their whim, whether or not to grant leniency. They are judge, jury, and hangman. Do you feel empowered by any of this?

Particularly the hearing on JUNE 6TH at the BPL, which, for whatever reason, has been scheduled for rush-hour, and will be half-over by the time most people get off work. But even if it was scheduled for 6:30, as most of the other remaining MBTA-sponsored gripe sessions are, it would not generate much buzz, or draw a big crowd. Partly that’s because we all feel a T-sponsored bitch session is, as I wrote in my weekly column, purely palliative.

And the meetings I have attended have borne this out. A good majority of those in attendance have used the opportunity to vent frustrations that should have been taken to the T personally, not in a public forum. But this is the only place and time they felt they could actually get someone–a live person–to sit and listen to their stories. Where they could be sure they were, at a minimum, being heard. What does that say about the T? About its commitment to customer service?

So, yes, the meetings show the level of frustration out there, but it’s not being channeled in a positive or productive way. It simply leads to more frustration.

For the Public: Given that the system is dysfunctional, as I’ve said, the way in which decisions are made has to change a bit. The latest round of fare increases has resulted in what I see as a mostly symbolic concession by the T, the establishment of the Rider Oversight Committee (ROC), whose mission statement is:

The MBTA Rider Oversight Committee (ROC), a diverse group of riders, advocates and MBTA employees, provides recommendations to the MBTA that communicate the needs and concerns of all riders in order to assist the MBTA in providing affordable, safe and quality service.

The Rider Oversight Committee was born out of the fare policy commitments. The MBTA, for the first time in its history, established the Rider Oversight Committee to meet monthly and discuss customer service improvements and service quality issues. The MBTA and the ROC come together to address the concerns of public transit customers.

All well and good, if overly fuzzy-wuzzy and vague. I would like to see the flow chart on this one. What relationship do they have to the T management? Is there a two-way conversation here, or is it just a monthly circle-jerk?

So what can the public do to give the ROC some teeth and make it work for them?

● Demand that the MBTA website include, at a minimum, a daily ROC blog and bulletin board that is easily accessible from the main page menu. The blog would deal with day-to-day issues impacting riders, and the bulletin board would serve as an open forum for riders to publicly air grievances, offer compliments, comments and suggestions, and ask questions of the T for which they can be assured they will receive answers accessible to all online.

There are websites, like badtransit, of course, that offer all of this. The point here is to integrate the dialogue about transit into the transit system itself, to give riders and the taxpaying public a sense that they are playing a real role and being heard and responded to by the MBTA.

● As a part of, or in addition to the ROC blog, the T should appoint an active ombudsman to directly and publicly investigate and address grievances on a daily basis.

● The ROC must be required to do more outreach and actively solicit public input. Through the internet and in the stations.

● Advocacy groups and riders unions must network and coordinate their efforts for the future. They must learn to utilize the internet as a tool for both delivering information to and soliciting it from their constituents. They must communicate with one another better, and they must be ready to mobilize on riders’ behalves when there is an issue that impacts them.

You will note that many of my suggestions have to do with instituting public participation, and not merely by proxy, in the hopes of gaining more transparency in the way the T is maintained.

For the MBTA: Transparency is a major issue. Consider the process leading to the latest proposed fare increases. What does the public know about it? Was any attempt made to inform the public of it before the proposed increases were announced?

Occasionally the General Manager posts a Message from Mars on the MBTA website, but hardly anything he has to say resembles the reality of riders’ daily commutes. His most recent MfM touts the T’s commitment to excellent customer service. And in the 27th dimension pigs can fly, rats can talk, and Al Gore is President of the United States. What this nonsense with knobs on tells me is that he is really not committed to excellence in customer service if he thinks it’s already been achieved on the T.

We are so used to the T touting meager accomplishments as major public service improvements or boasting about minimal compliance with the law as if they had initiated improvements themselves, that we’ve become discouraged about getting any straight talk from them.

Their recent addition of a translation feature on their website was treated as major news. They touted their compliance at last with parts of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a federal law passed 16 years ago, as if they had done it out of the kindness of their hearts for the greater good of humanity. And half of their elevators still don’t work.

So what can the T do?

● Kill the rhetoric, come back down to earth, and start taking its riders’ reality seriously, by instituting the recommendations above: an MBTA ROC daily blog, a bulletin board that is monitored daily for grievances, and a full-time ombudsman with a daily public blog as well.

● When a complaint is lodged by a rider, the process is not clear. At a recent MBTA fare hike meeting, the MBTA representative, in response to several riders’ specific grievances, claimed that the MBTA “disciplines” its employees who misbehave towards its customers. I don’t believe it for an instant. If it did, atrocious behavior would be the exception, not the rule.

The culture of the MBTA is that of a typical bureaucracy, where secrecy and obstructionism are the norm, and self-preservation always trumps customer service. That has to change. In order for this to happen, every step in the process has to be outed.

We are all suspicious of what role we might be playing, unwittingly, in the T’s internal affairs. David Bernstein’s piece in the Phoenix highlighted this culture of intrigue, where the public is a pawn in the machinations of management in their dealings with their unions. I’m over all the cloak and dagger crap, though I can appreciate the many difficulties management has with particularly strong unions, not least political.

But we need to know about abuses. Therefore…

● The MBTA must be required to regularly post complete statistics regarding absenteeism and overtime, number and nature of complaints and action taken to redress them. We need to know what the management’s policy is regarding merit pay and promotion versus promotion based on seniority, and we need ready access on their website to statistics. We need to know precisely what powers the management has in personnel issues.

Information is power, and the T should be required by law to provide it, and to make it readily available to the public online. This level of transparency will expose the dysfunctional culture of the T, of course, but it will also lead to much needed improvements and cost-saving measures in the long-run.

● The process by which the T arises at its annual budget and sets its fares must be transparent, as well, and include public input from the beginning.

The internet is a perfect tool for transparency. The MBTA needs to use it.

For the State Legislature:

● make the recommendations above LAW. Sorry to sound so pushy, but institutional transparency cannot be a matter of choice. It must be a requirement for the T.

● Dedicate more funds to developing public transportation in the Commonwealth. This requires that legislators themselves believe in making the system work. It is not a social service to citizens with no other options, it is an economic necessity. Boston could not function without it. Take it more seriously. Incorporate it more vitally into your vision of the future of New England.

● Give the MBTA some latitude in choices for funding their operations. They currently claim to have discretion only in the realm of fares. If this is indeed the case, then they will be raising fares whenever they come up short, which will likely be always, and forever.

● Along with more budgetary options, Seek out ways to give management greater negotiating power in labor relations. These issues are intimately related.

● An inquiry to out abuses in the current culture of the T on all levels would go a long way toward changing the way the T is maintained and managed.

I will emphasize again that transparency on all levels will lead inexorably to solutions to what ails the T. It’s hard to move forward to a more efficient and effective transit system, much less to ensure fair fares, without full disclosure.

Transparency is the key to the first step in the right direction for the T.