MBTA rescue plan in jeopardy

Could lose $13m to other agencies Lawmaker objects, but seeks solution

A key lawmaker said Monday that he wants to take some of the rescue money the MBTA is counting on and direct it to bus systems elsewhere in the state, a move that could leave the T scrambling to make up the difference before July 1.

Representative William M. Straus, House chairman of the Joint Transportation Committee, said he will try to amend legislation proposed by Governor Deval Patrick’s administration to take some of the sting out of rail and bus fare increases. Under that proposal, the T would get $51 million from a surplus in a little-known motor vehicle inspection account.

That transfer requires legislative approval that Straus and some others are reluctant to grant, saying the money should be distributed to all of the state’s transit authorities - including networks serving Greater Springfield, Worcester, Lowell, and other regions - in proportion to its collection.

“Because the money was generated from everywhere around the state, I think there’s a strong case that this fund should go to all transit authorities,’’ said Straus, Democrat of Mattapoisett.

That would leave the T roughly $13 million short, with no immediate alternative besides imposing deeper service cuts and steeper fare increases, Secretary of Transportation Richard A. Davey said. The board that oversees the T approved fare increases last week that would boost most subway rides by 30 cents and increase bus fares by 25 cents; fares might be even higher without the infusion from the car inspection fund.

“This is the last rabbit out of the hat,’’ Davey told reporters, after testifying before the committee Monday. “We don’t have a contingency in place.’’

But Straus said Monday night he would work with his cochairman, Senator Thomas M. McGee, to craft a solution that would not require the T to impose steeper fare increases and service cuts. “My own view is that if we don’t recommend as a committee to our colleagues the administration’s proposals, we have an obligation to present an alternative,’’ he said in an e-mail. The committee will review the bill over the next few weeks.

The T’s budget for fiscal 2013 is balanced in part with about $90 million worth of cuts (a smattering of bus lines, three weekend commuter-rail routes) and fare increases. Riders with the reloadable CharlieCard will pay $2 per subway ride, and $1.50 for the bus. Monthly passes for the commuter rail are going up $38 to $64, depending on distance.

The budget also relies on legislative help to cover its deficit: about $4 million in annual savings from a proposed cap on damages in lawsuits against the T; $5 million from permission to coordinate with the Executive Office of Health and Human Services to seek Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement for some trips by the Ride, the door-to-door service for the disabled; and especially the $51 million.

About three-quarters of vehicle inspections occur inside the MBTA’s service area.

“We recognize that this solution requires the use of revenues generated statewide,’’ Davey told lawmakers. “[But] the air quality impacts caused by massive bus and rail service cuts with corresponding increase in vehicle driving do not recognize town or regional boundaries.’’

Like Straus, Representative Michael J. Finn, Democrat of West Springfield, questioned the proposal. He noted that Springfield’s Pioneer Valley Transit Authority, which serves a largely low-income ridership, faces an equal fare increase to the T and has not received the promise of additional state aid.

Davey said a few hundred thousand dollars might be available for Springfield but could not promise that other regional authorities would get additional aid without new taxes.

During his 90 minutes before the committee, Davey and legislators agreed on broad issues, chiefly that the T’s budget plan represents a one-year fix that does not address structural problems.

Some of the T’s costs have risen much faster than its main sources of income, fares and aid from the state’s sales tax. Both the T and the highway system are highly indebted.

“This is probably, in my opinion, the number one issue we face,’’ McGee said. “We can’t grow the economy in this state - we can’t get the dollars we need for education and health care - if we don’t make our investment in transportation.’’

Some lawmakers signaled their displeasure at MBTA changes affecting their constituents. Senator Robert L. Hedlund, a Weymouth Republican who fought to preserve ferries, asked for the rationale behind the decision to save most ferry service but raise prices to market rate, all but ending their subsidy.

Senator Jennifer L. Flanagan, a Leominster Democrat, said her constituents at the end of the Fitchburg Line have the longest and most expensive commute on the T. While their increase may be proportionate, the hike from $3,180 to $3,948 for a year’s worth of passes is considerable. “My constituency has one form of transportation other than driving [to Boston], and that’s commuter rail,’’ she said.

Davey said the T faced hard decisions. “The great tragedy in all of this is that what we heard unanimously from all of our customers is that they want more T service,’’ he said. “Whether you live in Fitchburg or Roxbury, they want more. Unfortunately, we can’t [afford] it.’’

Activists, including members of the Massachusetts Senior Action Council and Occupy Boston, some of whom have been camped out in front of the State House since the T vote, called on the Legislature to provide more money to erase disproportionate fare increases for seniors and the disabled, to expand service and hold prices steady, and to better fund regional buses.