CTA Tattler

I'm just curious about a couple of points, maybe someone could shed some light on it. (a) For all of Daley's usual histrionics, how much does the City of Chicago actually contribute to the CTA? I should think that with the leasing of the Skyway and the Grant Park garages, it should be more than a little and (b) if not, why aren't the aldermen of the city speaking up about it? (Not to be naive, I'm sure they wouldn't be speaking up about more funding for the CTA if that cut into their pet projects.)

Great job Kevin, good on you AND Hamos for taking Filan to task! My favorite was when he trotted out the good-old "Casino Revenues Will Save Us All" chestnut, and Hamos gave him the verbal smackdown ("you mean a casino that hasn't been built, or passed?") As for Hassert, all I can say is "meh"--he basically gave your standard polictical non-responses, trying to make a case of how un-important regional transit is in the Grand Scheme of the State of Illinois(I disagree).

Ajax: See my earlier post on this subject:

http://www.ctatattler.com/2007/08/chicagos-contri.html

Ajax- the city's contributions to the CTA are immaterial. What the CTA, Metra and Pace (Kevin, some of us ride Pace, too) need is a solid funding source that will keep all of them solvent for many years to come. A sales tax is much better than relying on the City of Chicago to cough up money each year because we know that the city's finances can be spotty at best- if you don't believe me, see the budget shortfall that we're suddenly discovering now that DaMare's been reelected. What if one year the city suddenly decided it couldn't contribute x million to the CTA? The RTA sales tax is stable and guaranteed to be there by state law.
Besides, since the money generated for the CTA comes from your tax dollars, what difference does it make if it comes through the city or through the RTA sales tax?

The city of Chicago contributes $3 million to the CTA's capital budget every year. Also, the CTA police, which must cost millions to operate, is entirely funded by the city.

I can't believe that any of you are actually in favor of a tax increase when the CTA and its spending is totally unaccountable to the general public. The CTA is a patronage dumping ground with gigantic pension liabilites because large numbers of political hacks were hired there and given government retirement packages with few years of service. Saying its the public's responsibility to keep bailing out this ridiculous mess with regular tax and fare increases is insane. The true cost of a CTA ride is double the standard $2 fare already--public transoportation is already highly subsidized.

I'm also sorry to inform you that highways are a form of public transit--they are completely open to the public as long as the citizen provides their own car (or bike). What you are advocating is high-density public transit, with a bunch of crooked unaccountable politicians and political hacks constantly crying wolf and jacking the public to finance their cronyism. Its disgusting.

I can't leave this city or state fast enough.

and how crowded would those highways be if the few hundred people on each train were on that road in their own cars? Where would they park when they got to their jobs in crowded office buildings? If you live within 50 miles of chicago the cta makes your life easier use it or not.

The cta needs an overhaul but the whole reigon needs tranist more.

I am a former resident of suburban Chichago (relied mostly on Metra and Pace) who plans to return to the Chicago area when he retires and will need access to public transportation at that time. I have been watching this struggle from afar with facination. What I cannot understand is just what is wrong with Governor Blango that he is willing to let metropolitan Chicago's public transportation system go down the tubes to fight an ideological issue about sales taxes taxes versus closing corporate tax loopholes that he apparently cannot win? The people who will be hurt if the cutbacks and fare increases take place are the people at the lower end of the economic ladder. Corporate excecutives will, on the whole, not be hurt, except to the degree that is will increase the time their limousines sit on the expressways.

"Corporate excecutives will, on the whole, not be hurt, except to the degree that is will increase the time their limousines sit on the expressways."

That is about as far from the truth as it gets. The service cuts would hurt everyone of all income levels. First of all, contrary to what a huge number of people believe, public transportation is used by white collar businesspeople as much or more so than by lower income groups. I'm surprised you say you used to take metra. Didn't you notice "corporate executives" on the trains? Nearly everyone who works in or near downtown takes public transportation. If you look at the Lake Shore Drive busses you will notice that all of them during rush hour (where they operate every few seconds) are filled to capacity with mostly higher income people. And a growing number of people take it to the suburbs as well (even though metra and pace have abysimally failed to meet the demand in reverse commutting).

Second, and more important, the cutbacks would cause a huge effect to the local economy. Many people choose to live and/or work in the area bacause of the efficiancy of public transportation. If that is taken away, they will not do so and they will not spend property, sales and income taxes. Businesses would be forced to close which will cause a loss of jobs, more people to leave the area, more tax revenue to decrease, and then more businesses to close. That is not beneficial to the "corporate executives" (as you call them) and they are aware of that. From what I have heard, businesses have been lobbying hard for this bill to pass. Also, when the population decreases it means those that stay will have to shoulder a bigger burdon of the taxes. You would bet that property taxes will have to be raised.

You are certainly correct in your premise that lower income people will be hurt by the cutbacks far more than this tiny sales tax increase. And Blagoivich is increadibly stupid and wrong to not support it. I also certainly do not support his absurd plan to close so-called corporate loopholes. The things that he is proposing are not logically connected with where the revenue would go and do not provide the long-term stability of a sales tax increase. And, of course, a tax increase to businesses would be passed down to consumers anyway. I think most people realize that and Blagoivich is stupid to think he can trick people into thinking otherwise.

buh-bye, Engineer. Not sure we'll miss you...