I'm getting REALLY freaked about the CTA's threats to slash its service. I am not afraid because I will be affected by the changes. I mean, give me a break, I don't even live in Chicago!

But my whole love and respect for Chicago is based upon the fact that it is a traditional urban city established along a solid transit system, with a centralized downtown. It is something so magnificently powerful in a country where the majority of the landscape is bland, repetitive suburbia with Applebee's and Walmart on every other freeway exit.

If these changes occur, I think they will forever change the kind of city Chicago is. It may very well become a city that I don't like very much. And that's sad, because I LOVE loving Chicago. Perhaps I will have to find a different city to love?

Honestly, will Daley allow this? Will Illinois allow this? Will the CTA/RTA allow this? Will capital funds be used? I"m scared shitless, guys--what's going to happen?

i think they have already settled it. they have secured the funds from rta

well, not completely settled but at least they have an agreement with the RTA they just need the state legislators approval. i don't think drastic cuts are coming yet if at all.

Any threats to cut service were just part of the power-game. It's how Illinois' asinine political system "works."

Yup, I wouldn't be too concerned TUP. They got the funding that they asked for at the RTA meeting last week, and now it just needs to get pushed through the red-tape. The CTA is Chicago and there is no way that anyone would ever let it slip away.

Well, it was a few scary weeks for me... I guess I'll just have to get used to it. Rush hour only CTA? Good god, what a disaster that would be...

Don't worry sim... you could have moved to NY with me :)

Damn.


You guys been reading the news? This Frank Kreusi is really making a big play at this. This CTA funding issue is making headline news at least once a week. I don't know if there would be this much press unless there is a level of desperation.

Perhaps this is more than just a scare. Maybe some real cuts are imminent. I hope the Illinois Govt doesn't fuck up and screw its biggest asset--the city of Chicago--lest Chicago head down the path of Detroit, another city that got screwed by its state govt.

Today's trib had a metro section that was frightening. Although, again it could just be a powerplay, since there were two scenarios, one full-funded the other like 80% funding but with massive cuts in service. Maybe not to the degree of rush-hour only, but severe nonetheless.

I've long passed the point where I was convinced this was a scare-tactic (as I had previously stated). This is becoming an increasingly serious issue that needs swift correction (and we all know what the only true 'correction' can be). The gen. assembly needs to go ahead and give the CTA whatever it is that they want, because, without the CTA... Metra and Pace will be empty and useless. Alot of good their extra funding will do for them then.

CTA needs to increase service and build more lines.

If it didn't sound serious it would be very effective pandering. Why would they be spending billions on upgrading all these lines and buying all these new new trains just to cut service? Now that the suburbs are involved, on the same side as Chicago, and metro Chicago is about 80% of the population of Illinois it brings this pandering battle to a whole new level.

If it didn't sound serious it would be very effective pandering. Why would they be spending billions on upgrading all these lines and buying all these new new trains just to cut service? Now that the suburbs are involved, on the same side as Chicago, and metro Chicago is about 80% of the population of Illinois it brings this pandering battle to a whole new level.

READ: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS USE A DIFFERENT SOURCE OF FUNDING THAN SERVICE!!!!

Capital improvements are funded by federal grants. Service must be obtained by 50-some odd percent of farebox revenue, the rest is captured by RTA funding.

EDIT: http://chicago-l.org/FAQ.html#1.5 This link from Chicago-L.org will explain it for you.

^RELAX. Not all the funding comes from the Federal Government only a portion. A portion comes from the CTA and the logic of my argument still stands. Why would the anyone build all this if they are not going to use it? I highly doubt the Federal Government would allow billions of their money to be spent that way - save the sarcastic remarks. I also see that question you posted a link too has been asked before in another past time period. PANDERING it is.

^RELAX. Not all the funding comes from the Federal Government only a portion. A portion comes from the CTA and the logic of my argument still stands. Why would the anyone build all this if they are not going to use it? I highly doubt the Federal Government would allow billions of their money to be spent that way - save the sarcastic remarks. I also see that question you posted a link too has been asked before in another past time period. PANDERING it is.

Money has to be spent on new equipment just to keep the system in a state of good repair. The Blue Line cars are already past their design life and the Green Line cars are close to it. The cars are becoming more and more prone to breakdowns and parts are becoming harder and harder to find. Older buses are in the same boat. They NEED to be replaced. Same goes for track repairs such as the Cermark Branch of the Blue Line and the Dan Ryan portion of the Red Line. These facilities were way past their design life and not only becoming an inconvienence but also becoming a hazard. Same for the embankments on the Purple Line. Taking money out of the capital budgets just to keep operations afloat will only further delay these necessary improvments. This is what happened in the early 80s.

Extending existing lines, building the Circle Line, etc. are years away. CTA needs those billions to update their equipment just to keep what they already have running smoothly.

Stopgap aid from state could delay CTA cuts

October 28, 2004

BY MARK J. KONKOL Transportation Reporter




CTA officials are prepared to delay massive service cuts set for Jan. 2 if state lawmakers come up with a stopgap budget solution and pledge sweeping transit-funding reform next year.

State Rep. Julie Hamos (D-Evanston) and a spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan both said there probably isn't enough time during the six-day veto session next month to change a complicated transit funding formula.

Coming up with a "short-term solution [is] the wisest thing for the CTA to do right now," Madigan spokesman Steve Brown said.

CTA board president Carole Brown opened the door to that possibility Wednesday.

"Our goal is to fix what we think is a structural problem, but it's not to throw the baby out with the bath water," she said.

Hamos, who held legislative hearings on transit issues this month, said the best way to make progress on the CTA's bid for reform is to give lawmakers more time to act, possibly during the spring legislative session.

'Draconian choices'



"There's interest in considering something to make sure we don't see drastic cutbacks," Hamos said.

More than 350 people showed up for Wednesday's public hearing on the CTA's two budget plans -- one that fills a $77 million budget gap with new state funding and one that would balance the budget with a 20-percent service reduction and 1,250 layoffs.

Before the hearing, CTA president Frank Kruesi said without state intervention, service would be cut and that would be a "disaster" for employees, riders and the region. Without "additional funding then we will be back here next year with the same conversation about the same draconian choices," he said.

Mayor Daley warned the doomsday plan is a harsh reality, not a hollow threat. "If you don't have the money, you just can't pay people," he said.

Contributing: Fran Spielman

Why do I get the sinking feeling that even if the CTA gets the stop-gap measure they need to survive another year... nothing will be done to address the problem until it's too late again next year. Why are the putting this off? Just fix the damn forumlas and be done with it for 20 years.

This article says it all. I don't want to jinx it, but I get the feeling by reading this that the CTA is very reluctant to actually slash service, and they are beginning to entertain other options. Besides, how can they expect the General Assembly to actually change a major transportation funding formula in 6 days? Perhaps the state will give the CTA a hold-over cash infusion, ask it to increase fares, and readdress this issue in the spring. I get a feeling that there is a LOT of underlying pressure for the CTA not to make service cuts. Here's the article:



November 08, 2004
CTA punts on fare hike, service cuts


By Greg Hinz
The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) board blinked on Monday, putting off a final vote on huge service cuts or a possible fare hike until it finds out whether Springfield will ride to the fiscal rescue.
“Today, we passed the baton to the Illinois Senate, House and governor,” said CTA Chairwoman Carole Brown. “The final decision is theirs…Everything stays on the table until we see what and how much” financial aid they give the CTA.


continued below

Advertisement






Ms. Brown’s statement came as the board approved two versions of its proposed 2005 budget—neither one of which would, for now, implement a threatened 20% cut in CTA operations.
The first budget presumes that lawmakers gathered in Springfield for the fall veto session will give the CTA what it wants: more than $80 million in additional subsidies.

The second version assumes no new money and calls for $55 million in service cuts. On Ms. Brown’s motion, the board Monday postponed a vote on implementing $55 million in specific cuts.

With the board also now talking about the possibility of raising fares, that means the situation is “very fluid,” Ms. Brown said. “We’re waiting to see what they give us.”

Earlier, the agency had indicated it would complete action on the budget by today.

Springfield insiders say they do not expect major funding changes this fall, because that would mean either a tax hike or a cut in aid to Metra, the suburban rail commuter service. But those sources say lawmakers may give the CTA a temporary cash infusion to tide it over until lawmakers can examine the issue in more detail in their regular session this spring.

One possible source that’s being eyed is extra revenues from bonds issued by the Regional Transportation Authority that could be shifted to operational costs, at least temporarily. But aides to Gov. Rod Blagojevich also are eyeing the money, which could be used to help the state with its financial problems.

Meanwhile, CTA officials released projections showing that raising the agency’s base fare 25 cents, to $2 a ride, would raise the agency a net $25 million in new money but cost it 11 million riders a year.

Officials said a $2 fare would match fares in New York City and Philadelphia as the highest in the country. They also acknowledged that ridership has not declined in the wake of the 25-cent fare hike that was imposed Jan. 1.

11 million less rides would be plausible if that doens't take into consideration additional riders CTA would no doubt pick up just from the sheer population growth going on in Chicago at the moment with developments happening at a blistering pace in closer proximity to CTA stations. Raising fares to $2 while getting rid of those stupid transfer fees is actually probably the best solution. Many of the lower income users of the CTA don't ride rail directly. They take a bus to the nearest rail station and then ride it to downtown. The vast majority of them wouldn't be paying a penny more and the additional charge will not easily affect ridership among the more affluent users of just the rail system, particularly on the north and northwest sides.

^I like your fare idea, Claimore. It's never made sense to me that the people forced to transfer to get where they need to go are penalized by paying for the privilege, especially because it's usually the people who can least afford it who do most of the transferring.

Unpopular as it may be, there's no way around the $2 fare given current circumstances. So I wish they would just do it and get it over with. Nobody wants more service cuts and CTA's capital budget should be left alone. That leaves a fare increase as the only other reaistic option. The RTA funding formula should be changed, but that's not going to happen in the next 30 days.

Besides, a $2 fare in 2004 dollars is the same as the $1.50 fare in 1991 dollars. (1991 was when the fare was set at $1.50, where it remained until January 1 of this year) I plugged the numbers into an inflation calculator and the 2004 figure would actually be more like $2.05. CTA has as much right as anyone to raise prices to keep up with inflation, especially because they're required by law to get something like 52% of their operating budget from the farebox.

The next thing they need to do is get Illinois' congressional delegation in gear (are you listening, Mr. Speaker Hastert?) and get some major federal dollars in here to continue rebuilding the existing rail lines that are the heart of CTA's system. Next to high fares, poor service is what drives riders away, and the very slow service and decrepit stations on the oldest sections of the various rail lines are things that turn off riders in a big way. Building new lines and new express service is a nice idea, but in a time of scarce resources, you've got to take care of what you already have first.

That's all well and good... I fully support a fare-hike. But, $25m covers less than a third of the deficit. How do we make up the rest?

That's all well and good... I fully support a fare-hike. But, $25m covers less than a third of the deficit. How do we make up the rest?

Gas Tax! Make the stupid bastards driving in from the burbs pay $3.50 a gallon, and perhaps they will think about why they should be living in the city, and using public transit.
They can come in to the city to earn their living, but then they take all of the money and spend it outside of the city (having lunch out at the office doesn't count). I on the other hand earn my money in the city, and spend it in the city (probably because I almost never venture outside of the city limits.)

Gee, I don't have an opinion about this at all... :wink2:

I LOVE IT!!!!

Make the people who choose not to use transit pay for those of us who do!

People must remember that owning and driving a car is a privelage, not a right.