EDITORIAL

JANUARY 15, 2018

THERE ARE MANY THINGS to like in the MBTA’s plan for a new fare collection system. By sheer bulk, there ought to be: At 1,112 pages, the request for proposals that resulted in the November contract with San Diego’s Cubic Corporation seems to include something for everybody.

The 13-year, $723 million deal overhauls the way fares are collected, in part by installing fare-validating devices on the Green Line and eliminating cash fares for buses or trains in order to speed up boarding. Instead, value can be added to new-tech Charlie cards or smart phones at kiosks installed at a number of stations and near bus stops.

So what’s not to like?

Nothing, if all works as planned. Unfortunately, the T isn’t always so blessed, especially when it comes to overseeing outside contractors, as noted in a Globe report on Jan. 3. Most glaring is the poor performance of Keolis running the habitually delayed commuter rail.

Another cause for skepticism is the T’s first go-round with automatic fare collection, dubbed AFC1.0, installed when Charlie cards first replaced tokens. A decade and a half later, the system is plagued by broken-down equipment, including wide-open gates at subway entrances and out-of-order fare machines. The T also said vending machines to load cards would be plentiful, but outside of T stations they remain few and far between.

And it hasn’t always been smooth sailing for Cubic. In 2005, the company and Houston’s transit agency went to court over disputes about contract terms and alleged deficiencies in an automatic fare-collection system. A Cubic spokeswoman said the issues were resolved and that Houston is still using the company’s equipment.

This time, however, MBTA officials say the risk is entirely on the contractor, with a clause stating no payments will be due to Cubic until the system is working. Obviously, it’s in the company’s own financial interest to create an exemplary system. That’s what happened in London, where Cubic received high marks for revamping the fare collection system. The software in that system that will be imported to the T allows innovations such as discounted routes in low-income areas that can address transportation inequities.

As for the T, attention and vigilance are demanded to assure all contract expectations are met, with no exceptions. And riders can do their part by embracing the innovations as they come online to bring the nation’s oldest subway system into the 21st century.

A little late, no question. But on the T, that’s what we’ve come to expect — and hope to fix.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/editorials/2018/01/15/give-fare-revamp-chance-but-enforce-contract/EpvfJDJktll0ByEa5jf2PM/story.html