CTA Tattler

Ah, the CTA "funding crisis".

Has Ron gotten rid of any of those thousands of political hacks sitting in the office yet?

The CTA is one of the porkiest public agencies in the state. Even worse than Cook County hospital.

Thanks for asking him that, Kevin. I have to admit, I think he answered the first (easy) part of the question and fell back on boilerplate for the rest of the answer; he didn't really address "what do they do well."

But I'll be honest -- I didn't (and still don't) think he could answer that, and that's why I asked the question. I have no doubt he has a better relationship with and reputation in Springfield than Kreusi did, because he's an administrator and because Kreusi burned plenty of bridges, but he really doesn't show me any signs of being a good public transit planner.

Helena,
Name 10. Heck, name 5. Or are you just full of it?

Does he need to personally be a good transit planner to be a good administrator of the CTA? Assuming that that Huberman's job has been in the past and will continue to be 'political', then I think Huberman's upside is that he seems to bring a technocratic, results-oriented model of administration. People say he's destined for big things in Chicago politics. Should he screw up at the CTA, it certainly wouldn't help his career, so I imagine he has a personal stake in getting results.

Arguably, what they "do well" is keeping antiquated system running (if barely so) despite very low levels of state and local taxpayer funding AND while keeping fares at a modest level. I have to say, I admire his current approach which seems to be on focusing the CTA's limited resources on making the most of its current equipment and manpower. I think that this emphasis could help down the line with obtaining more capital funds from the state; if Huberman can fix the slow zone problems that have been crippling parts of the system for years, then that demonstrates at least some competence and improves the rider experience at the same time. A modestly more efficient CTA in the near future will make it a more appealing investment when it comes time to dole out big bucks for big projects.

Larry, I agree with your big-picture overview. But 2 million people ride the system every weekday, and I'd like to think he has them in mind. My question hoped to elicit a little perspective from him on that and it didn't, and I think that's because he doesn't have it. The cynical take (one I can see, don't share entirely, but could certainly adopt) on your answer is that those 2 million of us are just a stepping stone on his career path.

Just one aspect of his answer that dismays me: He focuses only on rail. My understanding's that more people ride the buses than the trains, but he doesn't seem to be thinking about what the bus operation could do to make transit in this city better.

In rush traffic, you can't make buses go any faster. However, you can make trains go faster, and they are putting in a system using GPS to combat bus bunching and to tell when the next bus will come on a line. I think that's pretty much all they can do because buses get stuck in traffic.

Actually JDog you can make buses go faster!
You can add bus pre-emption traffic signals, so that the bus driver turns the light green for the bus.
You can put a special turn signal on the left rear of the bus & require traffic to allow the bus to merge into the traffic lane. $500 fine for violations.
You can get rid of those idiot, worse than useless traffic aides & replace them with cops that know how to direct traffic. We used to have those!
You charge even higher fares than now to anyone that doesn't use a smart card!
Buy buses
You get the morons to use the rear door on the bus.
You fire any driver that answers a question with a grunt, instead of answering the question. The questioner then has to repeat the question until the grunter actually deigns to speak, thus wasting time.
You arrest all the yuppie scum moms that are picking up their precious darlings at Parker School by double parking on Clark St. every afternoon, thus blocking both the Clark & Broadway buses! And crush their SUV's.

See, there are lots of things that can speed up rush hour buses!
I'm sure other readers have even more!

Oops, I meant buy buses with double width front doors, so two people can enter at once.

It's too cynical by a bit to think that a political appointee heading up an administrative agency doesn't have *some* interest in doing a good job for the citizens/taxpayers/users of the agency. However, if Huberman is in fact a career politician or government administrator, his future is undoubtedly a priority. I would contend that in this instance, though, his personal motivations might dovetail toward the same ends that benefit all of us CTA riders. If he can "fix" the "broken" CTA -- or at least make more out of less -- that would give him both political capital in Springfield and City Hall AND impress me as Joe Voter.

His focus on rail might be reflective of how he understood the questions. Or it might reflect his priorities. Or it might reflect his learning curve. I would sincerely hope there are people with the appropriate academic background and work experience in urban transit planning working at an agency so large as the CTA. If not, I would be sort of appalled. To be clear, I think you not only need to promote from within the CTA and take on talented administrators from comparable city departments but also add people with specific education in the field. Those sort of people can help educate Ron (and maybe others in the city?) about the virtues of bus rapid transit or streetcars or light rail or the many options on the mass transit buffet.

"Does he need to personally be a good transit planner to be a good administrator of the CTA?"
Absolutely! Do you think the other major cities he knows of, i.e. Hong Kong, Curitiba and Tokyo, would let a political hack run their systems? No. Nor would cities with older systems, i.e. Amsterdam, paris, madrid. When the world is ready to collapse around Chicago riders, you don't put a political hack in charge, you go get the best management/technical person available to do the job. But again, Daley picks the low hanging fruit without experience to fix the problem and also avoids spending taxpayer dollars where they need to be spent.

Ron Huberman has been on the job 10 weeks and he has already done more that Kruesi did during his final year. Cut him some slack. Most every transit agency in the U.S. is in crisis due to a deadly combination of inadequate funding and transit planning "experts" who don't understand the value of the money they do have.

For example, would Chicago want to recruit the head of the D.C. system to come here? They can't keep their trains on the tracks and have huge problems with their railcars. On a 30-year old system. Can you imagine what that "expert" would do with a century old system? Someone from outside transit is EXACTLY what we needed, even if he's a political appointee.

As for the ignorant "yuppie scum" comment, give it a rest. It's offensive and irrelevant. And yeah I ride the Brown Line so you can start your anti-yuppie rant now.

I have to disagree with people bashing Huberman here.

Huberman's political aspirations are great news for CTA riders. People working today for their next job tend to be motivated. People who believe they have topped out tend to coast. Huberman can't coast because it will end his career.

As for the "political hack" silliness, Huberman needs to (a) get money, (b) show leadership (including setting broad priorities), and (c) be willing to be the accountable face of the CTA. He needs transit professionals to advise him properly on spending the money, understanding how to set the priorities, and avoiding gaffes that make him accountable for things outside of his control. That is management. So far he seems to be getting it. Expecting him to personally be the transit guru who will have all of the solutions is probably expecting too much. Expecting him to build bridges with Springfield etc. and allow the professionals to do their jobs is a winning combination.

Hey J-2: I specifically mentioned the yuppie scum moms that block Clark St. by double parking there every weekday afternoon during the school year to pick up their brats at Parker, which for those who don't know is on Clark between Webster & Belden.
Why don't they pick them up on Commonwealth in the back of the school?
Why don't the cops ticket them or even better, arrest them?
I'm not going to lay off on them, they screw up traffic.
You however are taking the L.
That makes you an honorable person, not yuppie scum!

Interesting comments. I agree that there is a problem at Parker and plenty of other privileged schools with pickup lines. Seems they have never heard of public transportation. I take the #6 to get my son at Lab, and we are the only family in the entire school to do that. The rest are stuck in a long line. Next step is to get an apartment in Hyde Park.

I'm skeptical of Huberman. His work at the police department, with the blue-light cop-in-a-box concept, may look sexy but it is simply an expensive juggernaut, the same kind the agencies roll out every few years and pat themselves on the back for. CAD/AVL on the buses and cameras trained on bus operators is NOT the answer, but it is likely the class of solutions that gives Huberman erections. I'm very nervous about gratuitous application of technology.

None of the proposed tech solution can compete with a line of paint on the street that tells cars, "You on this side - bus on that side." When buses have a priority lane down the middle of a congested street, the system will improve overnight.

Peter,
I don't know where the priority lane is going to come from on most streets. Even where parking is generally banned (many major streets during rush hour) traffic is often terrible. How will removing two lanes from general traffic help most people?

The bus ideas remind me of something that's always puzzled me. Is there any reason, besides CTA perversity, that almost all bus stops are on the near side of the intersection? In my observation, that means that a CTA bus that stops to pick up or let off even one passenger 1) blocks everyone behind who wants to make a right turn and 2) invariably ends up sitting through an extra cycle of the traffic light if there is one. More traffic disruption, more wasted time. I may be missing something, but it seems to me that just changing the stops to the far side where practical would be a relatively cheap way to get a little improvement.

I remember there was some mention a few months back that the CTA was looking into moving a number of bus stops, where possible, to the far side of an intersection. Personally, I think this would be *great* -- as Quondam El Rat mentioned, it's almost guaranteed to sit through an extra cycle of the stop light every time someone requests a stop. It slows the bus down tremendously, and is insanely frustrating.

Unfortunately, I haven't heard anything or seen this put into effect anywhere since then..

I recently moved from Chicago to San Francisco, in part because I'd had it with the CTA. Some observations:

1. The bus system here is a much bigger deal than buses are in Chicago. I don't know what the ridership levels are, but anecdotally, I think SF Muni takes buses more seriously.

2. Most of the bus routes (and all of the light rail) are equipped with GPS. You can get real-time arrival information. This is HUGE. I save so much time because I never have to wait for the bus, wondering when it will arrive.

3. The buses' front doors are wider, which allows more than one person to board the bus at a time. It really does help boarding time. I think the CTA should be working on this.

4. Perhaps related to the GPS issue, there is no such thing as bus bunching here. It amazes me. It's like I have Stockholm Syndrome with the 66 and 49, because I am amazed by the lack of bunching.

All in all, Muni is a better system, but to be fair, it's also smaller and it gets more funding than the CTA does. I do think there's a lot that the CTA could learn from it. I can't tell you what a great change it has been to have transit that I can rely on. There's no reason aside from money (I know, that's a big reason) that the CTA shouldn't implement some of these changes. GPS tracking would be a huge one.

Quondom and Joe,
They have moved some bus stops. For instance, Irving Park Rd (the 80) moved the westbound stop at Laramie west of Laramie. They did the same thing a few other places on Irving Park. It seems like where they had the space and a light they did it. Some places it is not possible, but they have implemented that idea at least in part.