Thank you unions; unfortunate Web page juxtaposition for Trib
So the unions came to their senses and called off the "job action." For that I thank them. Though many of you disagreed with me and think they should have gone through with it. I still say it would have accomplished nothing, and probably should have been done earlier to make a bigger impact.
The unions certainly would make an impact if they follow through with a new threat not to go to work on Monday, Jan. 21, if the crisis is not solved by then. That's the first work day after the newest Doomsday for the threatened service cuts and fare increases.
Meanwhile, now Madigan says the House will NOT meet this week, so Jan. 7 is probably the next scheduled session. That would give them less than two weeks to do what they haven't been able to do all year.
And I leave you with this great screen shot from the Tribune's Web site last week. It was captured by a Chicago El Live Journal community member. As Jonathan reports here, they are two different trains. Priceless.
But "what they haven't been able to do" all year, or at least since June 1st, is get a 3/5 majority in both houses.
The task in January is different - and simpler - because the bizarre quirk in the Illinois constitution that has prolonged this crisis for the last 6-7 months by requiring a supermajority vote will go away (for a little while). RTA funding can go through on a simple majority vote and we won't have to buy off downstate legislators with that ghastly capital bill.
The capital bill is awful - and it's too high a price to pay for getting the middling increase in operating funds that's on the table now. The RTA needs BILLIONS in capital funds. The capital bill, as currently drafted, provides almost none of that. If it goes through, what do you think the chances are of getting the legislature to approve a free-standing transit capital bill? It may not be zero, but it's pretty close.
And the result of that will be that capital funds will come from bonds that will be funded with... fare increases! So trading the capital bill for operating funds doesn't accomplish much for us in the long run - it just means we'll get significant fare increases for a different reason in the not-too-distant future.
I have no doubt that with a majority of the legislature empowered to act, the RTA will do far better in both operating funding and capital funding. It's too bad the deal with the unions had such an ill-advised expiration date on it (didn't anyone check the legislative calendar?), but that's peanuts compared to capital funding.
Posted by: MajorityRulez | December 17, 2007 at 04:50 PM
Awhile back, there was a report of the cost of running the CTA Santa Train and many thought the cost was quite high. Well, I road the Santa Train over the weekend (just happened to be the next train in the station when I was on my way home from errands). First thing I noted was that all of the seats have fabric inserts with Santa motifs. That cost something to acquire and something to install. There are "fake" ads in the cars that are holiday spoofs on businesses. Cute but obviously there were costs involved as these are custom items. The big cost appeared to be 3 CTA workers in each car. That's an additional 18 workers, plus Santa and whomever else was on his open car with him. The decorations and candycanes were garden variety but the custom stuff and the labor is what makes this a costly (but delightful) holiday tradition.
Posted by: Maureen | December 18, 2007 at 05:09 PM
The extra staff consists of volunteers.
Posted by: Arfo | December 18, 2007 at 06:29 PM
The seat inserts and fake ads are reused from at least the last 3 years, for a few days a year on a limited run, and perhaps will last another decade. CTA posts that the decoration and installation are done with maintenance volunteers.
Perhaps it costs for the mini candy canes that are passed out, I really don't know how they get funded.
Posted by: John T | December 18, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Are those unpaid volunteers?? It is one thing to raise your hand and volunyteer to do these special shifts but is it done without compensation? Volunteer doesn't necessarily mean "unpaid".
Don't get me wrong, I thoughtthe train was delightful but I'm trying to figure out why running a special train for about 14 days was being estimated to cost the CTA $200,000. (Isn't that the figure I saw on this site?)
Posted by: Maureen | December 19, 2007 at 08:20 AM
"Awhile back, there was a report of the cost of running the CTA Santa Train and many thought the cost was quite high" - Maureen
"I'm trying to figure out why running a special train for about 14 days was being estimated to cost the CTA $200,000. (Isn't that the figure I saw on this site?)" - Maureen
Maureen,
First you have one post saying that "many" "thought" the cost was high, then you have another post explicitly saying $200,000 and that it came from this site.
In answer to your question: One person, Bill, posted that number, and many others questioned the authenticity of that number. Simply repeating it, does not make it authentic.
Bill's quote:
"I heard that it costs about $200,000 a year to operate"
Bill's quote and the many responses asking for authenticity of that made up number are here:
http://www.ctatattler.com/2007/11/special-legisla.html
Anyone is welcome to look at the above to see for themselves, including Bill's other post about an "orchestra playing"
Posted by: John T | December 19, 2007 at 09:34 AM