Opinion :: Letters
Rushing, Turner sound off
Thursday Oct 30, 2008
Rushing: Silver Line Phase III proposal ’dead in the water’
Rachel Kossman [10/16/08, "MBTA talks up Silver Line construction"]
quotes Andrew Brennan of the MBTA estimating that the Silver Line "Phase III" will cost more than $1.5 billion with no more than 60 percent of the funding coming from the federal government. That means a cost of more than $600 million for the Massachusetts taxpayers and the T riders. This important project can be done more cheaply if the T would consider eliminating the bells and whistles of a brand new tunnel and two brand new lower level stations.
The service that was promised to the communities along the Washington Street corridor -- after the successful movement to stop I-95 and the construction of the new Orange Line - was one equal or superior to the elevated service which then ran along the Street and which would provide efficient public transit directly connecting to the MBTA underground system.
The MBTA administration is in this predicament because it refuses to listen to and talk with the present and potential users of public transit in this corridor. The MBTA wants to place before us one more alternative that is not significantly different than its previous proposals. This proposal is dead in the water and the T knows it. If the T insists on considering only this one plan they are admitting that they have no intention of supporting any replacement service along the Washington Street Corridor.
The MBTA needs to put before the communities at least one additional alternative: Light Rail Vehicles along the corridor with a direct connection to the Green Line via the reuse of the Tremont Street tunnel, and the necessary concomitant upgrading of the Green Line signaling and electrical system. So much time has gone by since the LRV alternative was first considered that its cost is now favorably comparable to the bus tunnel alternatives -- and may be lower.
The users of public transportation in this corridor from the Greater Roxbury and the Greater South End neighborhoods have said again and again what they want. They want a one-fare, one-seat connection from the corridor into and connecting to the MBTA underground system. They want that connection to be as direct as is feasible.
They have never asked that the solution be the most expensive alternative. What they don’t want is another callously proposed alternative.
State Rep. Byron Rushing (D-South End)
An apology from City Councilor Chuck Turner
In an e-mail exchange regarding the candidacy of Ms. Sonia Chang-Diaz in the 2nd Suffolk Senatorial District race I made the following comment that became public and has created confusion and controversy: "My other concern about her perspectives is that her candidacy is being spearheaded by Barbara Lee and others from the white female progressive movement. Given the fact that this movement nationally has been saying that Barack was out of place in taking a position that should have gone to Hillary, I wonder what their positions will be on issues that will be facing our community." Given discussions with Senator Wilkerson, Ms. Chang-Diaz, and others, I realize that it was an inappropriate statement since there was and is no basis for that concern. Also, I have learned that Ms. Lee has financially supported the candidacy of every woman of color who has run for the State Legislature and has been actively raising funds for Barack Obama’s campaign since he won the nomination. I apologize for any and all confusion that my inappropriate statement has created.
Chuck Turner
District 7 City Councilor
More from Councilor Turner on 2nd Suffolk race
I resent the accusation that my support and the support of other African-Americans for Dianne Wilkerson’s sticker campaign in the November Second Suffolk Senatorial District (District) race is based on the thought that an "African-American" is entitled to the seat.
The District was created to enable the Black and Latino community in the geographical heart of Boston to elect a State Senator to represent the "community of interests" that held us together. While race was a significant part of our shared interests, the shared interests also included our economic and social situation and the fact that we were actively engaged in a fight against racial discrimination.
Remember, the seat was created in 1974 on the eve of the busing era. We were struggling in the courts to desegregate the MBTA, the Boston Police Department, the Fire Department. Discrimination was rampant not just against Blacks but all people of color. The District was consciously created as a safe seat to give the Black and Latino community and its organizations a base in the Senate to support our fight against the ongoing racial oppression in Boston. Senators Bolling, Owens and Wilkerson were elected to the seat not because of their race but because they were viewed as leaders in Boston’s Black and Latino struggle for justice.
Mel King and Kay Gibbs in a recent commentary on the creation of the Second Suffolk Senatorial District and the race for the seat said, "The objective was to create a new district that was a ’community of interest’ among voters of similar backgrounds, interests, and needs, just as other neighborhoods in the proposed new district map were ethnically, economically, ideologically, and politically cohesive."
That statement speaks to the heart of the dilemma. The reality is that the Second Suffolk Senatorial District is not the same District that was created in 1974. In order to create a second Senate seat where a person of color could be elected (a seat now occupied by Senator Hart), Senator Wilkerson designed a new alignment for the District by dropping precincts that were predominantly Black while adding precincts from Jamaica Plain, Back Bay, and Chinatown that were collectively predominantly white. Also, the addition of Jamaica Plain and Back Bay changed the economic demographics of the district. The reality is that the community of interests that brought the District together in 1974 is no longer there in the "ethnically, economically, ideologically, and politically cohesive" manner referenced by Mr. King and Ms. Gibbs.
My support for Senator Wilkerson’s sticker campaign is not based on race but on my view that those of us who live in the "old" part of the District in the tough times ahead need someone in the State Senate who has a history of leadership and working familiarity with our community, organizational concerns, and needs. While times have changed, the community of interests for the majority of people in the Roxbury-Dorchester part of the District remains much the same as in the 70s-racial justice, economic parity, and the development of a network of institutions that will help us with the development of our children.
Since Ms. Chang-Diaz, whose base is in the "new" part of the district, has had little contact and familiarity with the people and organizations of the "old" part of the District, I do not think she will be able to provide the leadership or protection of our interests in the Senate that we need. That’s why I continue to support Dianne Wilkerson for State Senate.
I find it ironic that after a decade in which leaders in Boston’s African-American political community a) played a leadership role in the development of the New Majority to empower people of color politically across racial lines; b) provided active support for the candidacy of Felix Arroyo who topped the City Council At-Large ticket in predominantly Black precincts; c) provided active support for the candidacy of Sam Yoon who came in second to Felix in the Council At-Large race in predominantly black precincts, we are now being accused of supporting Dianne because she is African-American. Good Grief! Give us a break!
Chuck Turner
District 7 City Councilor
Lawmakers should stop wasting our money or be replaced
As another thinking independent, I have to agree with Shirley Kressel that it’s time to vote out all the "fat cats" who are not paying attention to us, their constituents [See, "Why this liberal supports repealing the income tax," Oct. 23]. These ultra long terms in office are preventing our reps from living in the same reality as most taxpayers and affords too many cozy connections to develop and continue.
For example, the $1.8 billion still being planned for Silver Line III because it’s "on the books" (imagine just adding a bus stop that could do the same thing and cost almost nothing). We have to question the judgment and common sense that is not being used.
P. Murphy
Boston
|
|
|
