By Joseph A. Curtatone

(The opinions and views expressed in the commentaries of The Somerville Times belong solely to the authors of those commentaries and do not reflect the views or opinions of The Somerville Times, its staff or publishers)

The news that the projected cost of the Green Line Extension could be an additional $700 million to $1 billion more than previously estimated is in no way welcome, but it does not spell the end. To keep this project moving forward, our community has fought for it for decades, overcoming numerous stumbling blocks (Remember when Big Dig cost overruns threatened to cancel the Green Line Extension entirely?). As we confront this new hurdle, I am confident that the Governor’s team can and will find a way forward—and swiftly. They will succeed because they are committed to the project and are focusing on all the areas that matter: cutting costs, reviewing the bid process, scaling down the scope of the project (without giving up any stations), and looking for additional funding sources and mechanisms.

Cost of course is the greatest factor. Government leaders and planners must respect the taxpayers’ dollars in every project, large and small. I believe we can do that here if we trim the costs down. I have spoken with Gov. Charlie Baker, Secretary of Transportation Stephanie Pollock and interim MBTA General Manager Frank DePaola, and I am confident not only that they believe in the Green Line Extension, but that by working hand-in-hand, we can reduce these projected costs and make sure the Green Line Extension, which already has more than $300 million in projects under construction—continues to move forward on schedule and brings the economic opportunity and environmental benefits that our community has fought for over decades.

But to drive down those costs, we need to understand why the bid came in so high. For one, we are in an up economy, which drives up the costs of material and labor. But the MBTA also used a new bidding process that may have inadvertently inflated the bid price. It’s important to note that the projected Green Line Extension cost is not an overrun. The roughly $300 million in contracted work that has already been completed or is underway has generally aligned with projected costs to this point. The potentially higher estimated costs are now based on construction manager White Skanska Kiewit’s (WSK) bid on this latest phase, but that contract has not been awarded yet. The State is carefully reviewing what can be done to drive that bid down whether through renegotiation or potentially breaking out some pieces of the project and using a different procurement method.

The next way to lower costs that the State is reviewing is to re-examine the scope of the project. Basically, that means change what they plan to build. We can’t lop off GLX stations, because that would put at risk the $1 billion from the federal government. (Though funds for the Rt. 16 station, which is not part of the federally funded portion of the GLX, could be repurposed.) But for instance, some of the more elaborate station designs could be pared back. As long as they remain functional and accessible, that’s all we need. A developer building next to or near the station could always contribute to an enhanced station later. We’ve already seen an example of this at Tufts, where the University, the City of Medford, and the Cummings Foundation have partnered with MBTA to design a new academic building above the College Avenue station and footbridge that connects it to the university’s campus.

The State is and should also looking to take advantage of a range of financing tools that are known as “value capture,” which would use the new tax revenues generated by the properties that get built near new T stations to pay for the borrowing used to build a portion of the Green Line Extension itself.  This is a tool other States are using to surpass us, and Massachusetts should consider its use more. To see an example of this in action, we need look no further than Assembly Square, where the Great Recession put that new Orange Line station at risk until a value capture approach saved it. The City used a $25 million District Improvement Financing (DIF) plan and the state used its I-Cubed bond program. New tax revenues generated by the development at Assembly Row are paying off those investments over time, and while they do, we have new transit, new jobs and new investment in the area in the meantime.

Another factor that got the Assembly Row Station built was that the funding was a public-private partnership. Assembly Row developer Federal Realty Investment Trust kicked in $15 million to  help build the station. Various developers along the GLX could be tapped to do the same. Look to Assembly Square today: we have the first new T station in almost three decades, a vibrant new neighborhood, and $133 million in public investment (city, state and federal) has unlocked $1.5 billion in initial private investment.

An even greater benefit to the entire Commonwealth is estimated if the full Green Line Extension is built out, which is why this project isn’t just for Somerville as some would say. This is the most important transportation project in generations for Massachusetts. It is expected to create 18 million square feet of potential new development, 30,000 new jobs, $4.5 billion in private investment and within 25 years generates $2.5 billion in new tax revenue for Massachusetts. At the same time it will alleviate traffic congestion in one of the most congested areas in the country. Throughout history, major transportation investments have undergirded the world’s thriving economies. If Massachusetts wants a successful 21st century economy, we can’t get there with Nixon era infrastructure. Baker knows this. Somerville knows this. That’s why we will get this done as our City team supports his every step of the way.