CTA Tattler

So, according to stories in today's paper, heads have already rolled at the CTA. Why weren't we told all about this long ago? More acknowledgement that there were screw-ups would have been in order; Daley and Huberman only hurt their credibility by not bothering to acknowledge it before. And how do we know the job of overhauling the place is really finished? The riding public and the legislators deserve proof that it's finally safe to fund the CTA properly. Proving that management has made changes is how a publcly-held company would see its stock go up and attract capital to put into better service. Same principle should apply here.

A comment to someone's comment about charging extra for express routes not being worth the trouble: The purpose is not only income at the fare box; it's allocation of usage. Kinda like the tollway. Anyhow, I was under the impression that an electronic fare system has all kinds of possibilities for customizing. Is that not the case?

Contact the IOC and tell them not to let Chicago host the Olympics:

http://www.olympic.org/uk/utilities/request_new_uk.asp?prm_bgd_col=contact&prm_lang=en&prm_sel_cat=

CC: I wrote about the firings in January when they happened:

http://www.ctatattler.com/2007/01/cta_accepts_blu.html

However, the CTA press release I link to in the above post doesn't mention all the top managers being fired whom Huberman appears to be referring to.

I believe mass transit is underfunded BUT before the CTA-RTA get one more dime let's see a detailed plan on how the additional money will IMPROVE services. Prohibited from the proposal: salary increases, sweetheart union contracts and more consulting fees.

Has anyone else noticed that the poster the CTA put up with the bar graph showing the cities with better public funding are missing New York and Washington?

The person writing the announcement about track work apparently forgot that Diversey is closed.

It will be awesome if the CTA can survive until the end of 2008, though -- a totally redone Brown Line, slow zones eliminated on the O'Hare Blue Line and part of the Red Line. In fact, one might even call those *service improvements,* the latter of which the new management specifically implemented (after the old management forecast a decade to remove slow zones from the Blue Line). But apparently since that doesn't fit with the narrative where the CTA only ever fucks up, people don't take that into consideration.

I have a job offer in the city where I can continue to take the train and listen to the yearly "doomsday" threats or another job offer in the burbs where it'll be a 25 minute car ride.... The nice warm sweet ride of my gas guzzling SUV is sounding pretty good right now.

BillyJ,
So CTA non-union employees are supposed to keep going along without cost-of-living pay increases (of which there have only been 2 in the past 6 years anyway)? e.g. an effective pay cut every year? That's nice of you.

also, WMATA's public funding ratio for operations is similar to CTA, but misleading because a) WMATA is much more heavily geared towards rail, which is more capital-intensive than operating-intensive, and b) the rail that WMATA does operate is only between 2 and 30 years old, as opposed to CTA's which is in many cases over 100, thereby having a much higher operating cost for basic maintenance.

NYCTA isn't even comparable because NYC's transit usage and car ownership rates are so far removed from other American cities that comparisons are basically meaningless.

C C Writer,
What you talk about re: flexibility in fare collection is certainly true of the modern AFC (magnetic transit card) and CC (Chicago Card RFID smart cards). However, the buses still use an approximately 20 y/o antique farebox system which is, long-story-short, much less flexible and advanced. Periodically CTA murmurs about finally upgrading the bus fareboxed to modern standards to fully integrate with all the other systems (AFC, GPS, etc) and allow credit card payments etc, but of course that's hundreds of millions in capital dollars that aren't really available.

It's my understanding that the funding isn't "additional" funding, it is just base level funding to keep the system running as is.

CC Writer sez: "The riding public and the legislators deserve proof that it's finally safe to fund the CTA properly"

I agree with your assessment of CTA's communication failure, but do you really think the funding drama has ANYTHING to do with CTA safety or anything else to do with the CTA or RTA? Please. It's all about Democrat "leaders" egos and political ambitions and GOP attempts to be relevant again.

The real problem goes far beyond mass transit or any other real issue. To start fixing it, a good start would be to have one legislative chamber with no more than 100 members, plus recall of all elected state officials. Getting rid of most legislator-parasites would probably save enough money right there to fund the CTA for all eternity.

Of course the ultimate step would be for Cook County/Northern IL to separate its income and finances from the rest of the state entirely.

Davey, I could go you one better if you want to get radical: privatize public transportation. Then it couldn't be held hostage to politics. Right now I'd settle for trying to build in facsimiles of market features that help private businesses get things right.

Adam, if the CTA would admit when it ****s up instead of pretending it never does, it would be easier to remember that there have been some good decisions. Right now, the usual implied message to the passenger is "everything's normal, what you're getting is exactly what you deserve." They should be saying "here's what just happened and why--it's not what we want for you and we will do better next time." But I did acknowledge that adding express routes was a smart thing to do. And I appreciate the electronic fare cards, though some aspects of the introduction could have been done better.

CC, the reason we have the CTA is that the private operators ran it into the ground (maybe literally). I think privatization is a really bad answer to just about every problem. Just ask any victim of Blue Cross or AT&T whether they feel empowered.

There is an idea I stumbled across that seems well worth pursuing tho. They call it competitive contracting, which would split bus and L routes into small groups and bid out short-term operation contracts to private businesses. The CTA/RTA would still own all the physical assets and set the standards for performance. Apparently this was proposed by RTA consultants a decade ago after which it vanished without a trace. You can read about it here:
http://www.publicpurpose.com/mta-cta.htm

It could be an idea worth fighting for. I'd only add much stronger power for riders to decide on whether contracts are renewed.

I question the faith many people have that private contractors will do a better job than civil servants, especially here in Chicago. Yoohoo, anyone remember Hired Truck? And how many complaints do I hear on these same boards about the "do-nothing" Securitas people at "L" stations? Or how swimmingly is "the first privatized war" going over in Iraq?

Meanwhile, just across the pond, strikes against the private (and now bankrupt!) firm managing construction on 75% of the lines have absolutely crippled the Underground -- capping off a decade of literally-disastrous privatization schemes for British railways. Oh, and I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that the Underground contracts went in only after a colossal battle within the Labour party.

I don't deny that contracting could lead to additional efficiencies, and potentially leverage the private sector's expertise in risk management. The privatized bus shelters work pretty well, Victor Reyes' shadow notwithstanding. (And no, I have no involvement with any public sector union.) However, it is not a panacea by any means.

@Viva: thanks for saving me the effort.
@Adam: thanks for the props. I don't know how this many people function with this level of cynicism.

C.C., Do you not realize that the current system is a result of the government buying out private operators because it wasn't profitable?

This privatization stuff is idiocy. Let's privatize the police next! Or the fire department!

Privatization as such has never solved any public problem, as far as I can remember. Aside from that, it is brought up as a way of saying the current funding problem is all about CTA/RTA's inefficiency, a claim independent audits do not support. The real problem lies (in every sense of the word) in Springfield.

This drama will go on until Chicago area legislators quit buying into the idea that "bailing out" public transit is somehow basically wrong, that it should be paying its own way. This is a claim very effectively pushed by downstate, suburban Republicans, and their highway-lobby allies. Somehow it's just bad that a person in Yorktown has to pay taxes for the CTA, but it's just natural that I, who have never seen Yorktown have to pay for their roads.

If the Dem takeover had turned out to be anything but a disaster, the RTA region's "representatives" would be shutting down all infrastructure funding statewide until public transportation for Northeast Illinois gets the same treatment as infrastructure in the rest of the state. But it's business as usual in Springfield and corruption and cowardice rule. Our medium-term goal has to be to teach them an object lesson by working to dump Blag, Madigan, and Jones for starters at the first opportunity. They are all miserable, toxic failures.

Beyond being disgraceful in general, the failure of SB572 in the House is really kind of appalling when you consider:

-11 Democrats (including 6 from the region served by the RTA) voted "no" or failed to vote

-29 legislators from the region served by the RTA voted "no", "present" or failed to vote

-7 leglslators from *Cook County* voted "no" or failed to vote

It was nice of Speaker Madigan to vote for the bill, but where was the party discipline? On what other important vote were 11 Democrats allowed to bolt and sink the ship? Are these people keeping their committee assignments?

And for all the legislators whose constituents are served by the RTA - huh? And for those in Cook County - HUH???

The legislators who didn't vote "YES" need to hear from people that they need to reconsider their vote. You can see the roll-call vote here: www.juliehamos.org/news/newsitem.aspx?newsitemid=128

Here is a list of those who voted "NO", didn't vote, or "present", along with their city and county.

"No" votes town/county
================ ========
Mark Beaubien Wauconda/Lake
Patricia Bellcock Westmont/Dupage
Bob Biggins Elmhurst/Dupage
Linda Chapa LaVia Aurora/Kane
Franco Coladipietro Bloomingdale/Dupage
Sandy Cole Grayslake/Lake
Fred Crespo Streamwood/Cook
Jack D. Franks Woodstock/McHenry
Brent Hassert Romeoville/Will
Renée Kosel Mokena/Will
Patricia Reid Lindner Sugar Grove/Kane
Kevin A. McCarthy Orland Park/Cook
James H. Meyer Naperville/Dupage
Ruth Munson Elgin/Kane
JoAnn D. Osmond Antioch/Lake
Harry R. Ramey, Jr. West Chicago/DuPage
Dennis M. Reboletti Addison/DuPage
Angelo Saviano River Grove/Cook
Timothy L. Schmitz Geneva/Kane
Ed Sullivan, Jr. Mundelein/Lake
Michael Tryon Crystal Lake/McHenry

Not voting
================
Richard Bradley Chicago/Cook
Joe Dunn Naperville/DuPage
Carolyn Krause Mount Prospect/Cook
Karen May Highwood/Lake
Michael Mcauliffe Chicago/Cook
Sandra M. Pihos Glen Ellyn/DuPage

Present
================
Jim Durkin Countryside/Cook
Mike Fortner West Chicago/Dupage-
Kane

C C Writer wrote: "I could go you one better if you want to get radical: privatize public transportation. Then it couldn't be held hostage to politics."

How so?

Public transportation can't generate enough revenue to turn a profit. Raise the fare, ridership goes down. Lower the fare, ridership goes up, but before volume increases to a profitable level, system capacity is reached.

So essentially, even if you contract with a private operator to run the system, it still needs a public subsidy.

Look at Milwaukee. The operating company is actually a private company. A small amount of funding comes from the fare box; an insignificant amount comes from advertising and other alternative revenue streams; and the bulk of funding comes from public subsidies, the largest being property taxes.

And it doesn't work.

Privitazation is not the answer to everything.

Another reason why privitization isn't the answer is that people make the assumption that the bureaucracy of government is greater than the bureaucracy of a private company. But that's a false assumption.

When you're talking about something as big as public transportation, you're not going to get competitive bidding. When the contract comes up, what's the possibility that there's going to be another company around that can ramp-up, and take over if they should win the bid?

So you'd be talking about a private company who's only "customer" is the government agency providing the huge subsidy that keeps them in business. There's no incentive to become more effcient. All they have to do is milk the subsidy.

And how does the company milk the subsidy? Lobbying and politics.

Net result: Privitizing the CTA takes away some public control, and doesn't save the taxpayer a dime. In fact, it'll probably cost more just to provide the service, and then require even more money to oversee the contract that's spiralling out of control.

Of all the suggestions for solving the CTA's problems, privitization is one of the worst. The only people that win are stockholders in the company that gets the contract. Everyone else loses, and loses big. (Including the mindless anti-government dittoheads out there.)