Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
Hear us now, believe us later, but if you don't want to end up with a crappy solution to a shitty problem, it might be a great time to contact your State Representatives and Senators and to tell them that you really, really do want to ride the CTA in the "ehh" manner you're used to, rather than the CTA-lite version that the CTA board just passed if they don't get more funds. Tony Coppoletta of savechicagolandtransit.com gave us the heads up, and we turned to the Sun-Times for more information.
For cryin' out loud. We haven't been CTA watching too much this summer, but here it goes again. Except this time, it's with a little more specificity. Kind of like when your mom threatens to "pull this car over," and you know she's totally bluffing, but you hit your sister one more time and all of a sudden the car starts veering toward the shoulder, and you start acting right real quick. The fact of the matter is, someone needs to start acting right real quick, or we're all going to get spanked.
Here are the proposed fare changes, confusing as they may be:
- Bus fares will rise to $2.00 (using Chicago Card/Chicago Card Plus or Transit Card) or $2.50 (using cash).
- Rail fares will rise to $2.00 (using Chicago Card/Chicago Card Plus) or $2.50 off-peak and $3.00 peak (using Transit Cards or cash). Peak periods will be 6:30-9:30 a.m. and 4:00-7:00 p.m.
- Transfers will remain the same, at 25 cents. Transfers are available only to customers paying fares with Transit Cards or Chicago Card/Chicago Card Plus.
- Prices for unlimited ride passes will increase 11-20%, with the 1-Day Pass increasing from $5 to $6, the 7-Day Pass going from $20 to $23, and the 30-Day Pass increasing from $75 to $84.
- Fares for reduced-fare customers, who include seniors and persons with disabilities, will not change.
In an amazing show of hospitality, the $5 fee for Chicago Cards and Chicago Card Plus will be waived for September and October. And in a wonderful "how do we ever make this work" situation, the CTA anticipates losing about 100,000 riders per day as a result of the fare increases and service cuts.
The doomsday proposal initially offered up big rate increases and lots and lots of bus cuts, with even a threat to cut the Purple Line. We sort of imagined that there was no way that the North Shore and Evanston were going to get the shaft, and we were right. The new proposal leaves the Yellow and Purple Lines (aren't those complementary colors?) alone. Why? The Sun-Times says that officials said, "The plan was changed in response to complaints from riders during a series of public meetings earlier this year." Reaaaaalllly. And what about all the other things that were said?
The Times article goes on to say, "The CTA says it will save $20 million through administrative cuts." Meanwhile, straight from the CTA press release, we see the CTA's take on the layoffs: "Due to the service reductions, the CTA intends to layoff a commensurate number of employees. Plans call for layoffs of nearly 700 employees, including bus operators, bus servicers, mechanics and Transportation Managers. In earlier cost cutting efforts, 75 administrative jobs were eliminated." Those are administrative jobs? We think an administrative job consists of sitting on your ass and trying to make yourself work rather than playing on the internet all day (and we should know, we've had plenty).
Right. Because your system runs so well right now, that you should cut out mechanics (!?!), bus operators, bus servicers (are these cleaners? — not sure what the difference would be between a servicer and a mechanic) and Transportation Managers. For fuck's sake, how about a bullshit executive? Who most likely makes three times as much as any bus operator? (We couldn't find the salaries listed anywhere, most likely because they aren't a public entity. Not like the Cook County salaries you can find online. But here is a list of recent job openings with the CTA.)
The new fares go into effect Sept. 16, CTA officials said. Hmmm. This is supposed to be a contingency plan, but it sounds like they aren't really being very contingent with it. Oh, and here is the list of bus cuts currently proposed (in PDF format) with the old list provided as well (the ones they're leaving). Oh, hang on. Let us get salt shakers for everyone on the board, so they can put it in our wounds.
Well, people, that's it. Discuss.
"and god damn the cta sometimes, too!" by smussyolay.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Sales of the 30-day pass should skyrocket. Now it takes about 21 days to break even if you only take the train back-and-forth to work. Under the new proposal, at peak rates it'll only take 14 days. Sure, it costs more than before, but it only increased 12 percent versus the 71% single-ride increase.
Finally, something for me to PERSONALLY complain about!
In all the years of riding the CTA on a 30-Day Pass (refilled each month, pre-tax, through my pay check), this will be the first time that I'm actually affected by a rate increase! $75 to $84!!!
This is preposterous! Alas, now I can finally relate to this public madness!
Thanks for the mention, Jocelyn.
Let's hope we can drive some new public interest. I think this week may be it--and some legislators were suggesting sitting on it until September, but that might not be necessary.
Also, I'd encourage people to call the Governor's office and demand that he not veto SB-572 if it reaches his desk, and Tom Cross, the House Republican Leader, who it sounds like is encouraging Republicans to hold off on approving this pending other legislation the party wants.
Our city's ability to function is on the line here. Let's get this fixed once and for all.
Wow. Getting to Lollapalooza next year will be a lot more expensive. What's Chicagoist's take on that?
Oh, I'll also point out that it's really easy to contact your legislators:
SaveChicagolandTransit.com allows you to contact your legislators in just a couple of clicks. We determine who your reps are and we deliver the e-mails and faxes.
Expensive, but worth it.
If you want to fill out an easy web form to contact your legislators, go here:
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/midwesthsr/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=11686&t=160.dwt
or
http://movingbeyondcongestion.org/signup.html
Or, better yet, a call has more impact. Go to the website below and find your legislator and their digits:
http://www.elections.il.gov/DistrictLocator/AddressSearch.aspx
God, this city and state sucks. How can anyone with any fucking sense want less mass transit in this region? What, losing second place to LA a few decades ago wasn't enough? Now we want to sink even further?
I've given up. Fuck it. New York ain't perfect, and the MTA faces problems too, but at least people there seem to realize the NYC fails without mass transit. Hope other people have the choice to move, too. Recognize Chicago, and Illinois, for the shitholes they are becoming. Every damn year we limp along with the same funding formula while roads get built, built, built and people bitch about longer commutes and high gas prices.
Fuck Daley (he could increase the city contribution, or fired Frankie a long time ago)
Fuck Blago (stubborn about sales taxes in the Chicago area counties)
Fuck Madigan (never cared about the CTA, and sure as hell doesn't now)
And these people are supposed to be Dems?
God, Chicago sucks.
...the CTA anticipates losing about 100,000 riders per day as a result of the fare increases and service cuts.
Sooo...100,000 riders lost at $1.75 - $2.00 a fare = a daily loss of $175,000 - $200,000, or over one million dollars a week...
and how is this supposed to ease the budget crisis again?? Seems rather self-defeating to me...
Chicago, you have no one to blame but yourselves. you keep electing these people and then you sit around an complain about them and don't do anything. well now's your chance. no seriously -- call the governor, call you state senator and rep., heck even call mayor daley and tell him to get his ass down to springfield and speak up for us!
we should really be ashamed of our state. we can do better. if these people come home without passing 572, don't you dare re-elect them and then keep complaining about the sorry state of our region.
9 is spot on.
We're fucked.
Write your legislators!
Word, Jocelyn. Rumor from Springfield has it that the GOP (evil mofos) will hold up transit funding until... September, waiting until they get billions of dollars to build soul-sucking highways out there. No, never mind global warming or literally-crumbling "L" lines, we need us some new highways.
So, cc: Tom Cross and Frank Watson, and get anyone you know in the 'burbs in on the action. Hey, Metra stands to earn money off SB 572, too.
Guest 12: If the Democrats in this state were able to set aside their gigantic egos they could have passed a budget by May 31 without a single Republican vote. I know the letter (R) after an politician's name is scary and evil but this budget boondoggle is 99% the Democrats' doing.
Do NOT blame the GOP for this one. The Dems own this state, and it is Blago and Madigan and Jones who are dragging ass, and Daley who has let the CTA crumble for years now, despite some of the good things he has done. 13 makes a great observation.
Yeah, I know it is easier to blame the evil Rs, but it just isn't the case on this issue. No, the Rs are not not mass transit's best friend, but neither are the Dems.
Tell me why other cities and regions, including in the South and even LA, are investing in transit, while we are letting our system go to waste. Seriously, I cannot figure that out.
Guests 13 and 14 are exactly right. Blaming the Rs for this is like blaming Iraq for 9/11.
All of you mindlessly support Democrats.
Democrats believe government can solve all of your problems.
Since government can't actually do this, things inevitably don't work correctly.
So, you have no one to blame but yourselves.
Vote Republican, Libertarian, or another third party so Democrats have some interest in actually serving their constituents. As long as they know they will be re-elected, they will not care about you or your problems.
Make the North Side Red Line and NW side Blue Line independent companies. If the revenue they generate didn't have to subsidize all the other lines (green, yellow, pink, etc...), they would work great.
Wait a minute!
You complain about the government screwing it up so badly, yet you want the same people to fix it? WTF?
Privatize this thing now. Government has tried, and failed, to make it work too many times.
i honestly don't understand what the logic behind the increase during peak hours is for. will someone kindly tell me what the thought process behind that is? i'm not being a smart-ass; i really don't know.
Privatize?
OK.
But first:
--Tell me how you would avoid repeating the mistakes that led to the formation of a single CTA in the first place.
--Give me at least a rough business model and predications for revenue streams and eventual profit margins, assuming this would be a for-profit venture.
--Identify companies that might be willing to step in, or investors who might be willing to drop bucks into this.
--Tell me if we can use other systems anywhere in the globe as models of privitization.
--Finally, give at least a rough idea of how govt should go about selling or leasing the current assets and infrastructure: How would you go about attaching value to it, for instance [what models would you use?], and how would you handle the existing union contracts?
In short, just don't pull something out of your ass because it sounds cool. Provide at least a few fucking details or go back to your Libertarian Club meeting in your mom's basement. In other words, don't waste anybody's time until you shown that you've actually, you know, thought this out.
Waiting ....
Did anyone actually READ the fare increases before freaking out?
1. If you have a Chicago Card, your fares are only going to go up a QUARTER per ride. Whoopdee! I know that I can't seem to find an extra 50 cents a day between buying my Starbucks latte and grabbing my Potbelly's sandwich at lunch. And the payback rate on the unlimited ride pass stays the same (19 days going to and from work with one transfer each).
2. If you don't have a Chicago Card, why the hell not? CTA waived the fee for an entire YEAR to avoid that excuse. There's absolutely no reason anyone who rides the transit system on a regular basis shouldn't have one of these cards. Do you LIKE paying higher cash fees on the bus?
3. Two months ago they were talking about $4 a ride fares. Now that was something to freak out about. It seems like they've figured out a decent compromise that doesn't kill service altogether and still manages to make it semi-affordable, at least until Springfield gets off their collective ass and figures out a budget.
Compared with other cities, CTA sucks. Definitely. But hey, you can always do what I did and start riding your bike.
Robin
"Word, Jocelyn. Rumor from Springfield has it that the GOP (evil mofos) will hold up transit funding until... September, waiting until they get billions of dollars to build soul-sucking highways out there. No, never mind global warming or literally-crumbling "L" lines, we need us some new highways." (guest 12)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Last time I checked, Daley wasn't registered Republican and he's one of the ones pushing hardest for one of those soul-sucking highways to go into Chicago. Oh, and he's not exactly the biggest supporter of the L out there, if actions really speak louder than words.
Wow. It's no wonder politics is so balkanized when people immediately turn their brains off depending on what the little letter behind a person's name is.
Robin
Right, the purple lines are "saved." If by "saved" you mean "The Purple Line/Evanston Express, although offering Purple express service line would be a daily decision based on how well the Red Line operates on adjacent tracks along the North Side, officials said." Thanks CTA! Now my commute time will vary between 30 and 60 minutes everyday, and I won't know how long until I get TO THE TRAIN STATION!
21: I don't think the fare increases are the big deal here.
It's:
1) The reduction in service, which likely will lead to reduction in ridership, which likely will lead to reduction in service ...
2) The use of capital funds, yet again, to support operating needs.
3) The failure to fix the funding formula, which means a same-time, next-year situation [with the added bonus that politicians will be closer to election time, making tax increases, even relaitvely small ones for worthwhile projects, much more unlikely]
4) And all the problems that result from the above issue, including delayed repairs and possible larger scale economic impact, to say nothing of the traffic problems.
That is why I am freaking out, not because I might have to pay a few extra dollars for my 30-day pass. Seriously, if we don't get a fix pretty damn soon, we are screwed, at least for the next few years. Combine that with declining property sales and upcoming big property tax increases, and the city become that much less livable for many of us.
Compared with other cities, CTA sucks.
Uh, what cities? New York is the only one I've been to that has anything close the comprehensive transportation options the CTA offers. Not that it couldn't be better. I hope this funding mess gets sorted out, so it doesn't get any worse.
But if you're talking about Europe, uh, yeah. Just about every city has us beat.
Someone wanted a business model up there. Well I have one, and it works for public or private.
SPEND LESS MONEY THAN YOU TAKE IN!
Of course, given the 99% Democratic government we have here, you can forget about simple items like that being followed.
26: Fine. Tell me how that works in the context of service levels and profit margins and fares. Provide some numbers, some details. Do you know anyting at all about how the world actually works, or has your graduate seminar in libertarian bullshit not progressed that far yet?
And let's not forget the GOP: They have proven they have a great talent at spending more than income would allow, both nationally and in the state. Are you really that sheltered from reality?
Examples of privatization are everywhere. Studies by the dozens verify its effectiveness. Articles and monographs are proliferating, advising officials of the pitfalls to avoid and the strategies that work. There is simply no denying that privatization is indeed a major trend now and that each new experience teaches us even more about how to maximize its benefits.
Objections to it, however, are still heard and sometimes loudly. I share with you here the most common ones, along with a brief response:
It is anti-public employee. As the experience of innovative cities like Indianapolis proves, strategies can be devised that actually involve public employees in a positive way. But ultimately, we must remember that government does not exist for the benefit of those who work for it; it exists for the benefit of those who pay its bills or need its services. Governments that employ more people than necessary, or that pay their employees more than their market will bear, are not doing any favors for the citizens—including the poor — who are picking up the tab.
It is a back-door way to hobble or destroy government. Mayor Goldsmith says that before he privatized city services, it was extremely difficult to resolve citizen complaints or get the bureaucracy to move on anything. Once a service is privatized, accountability is almost instantaneous. If performance suffers, the city can quickly cancel the contract. Because of that, says the mayor, government officials like him are actually empowered, not hobbled. As Hillsdale College economist Dr. Charles Van Eaton likes to point out, they can "shop around," just like ordinary consumers, and thereby find the best buys.
There are instances where it didn’t work, so we shouldn’t do it anywhere. I have yet to see a case where a failure was really an indictment of privatization itself. Failures are almost always arguments for avoiding poor practices, such as noncompetitive bidding in smoke-filled backrooms, sloppy contract writing, or nonexistent monitoring of performance.
It can breed special interests who will lobby for more contracts and services from government, even when that's not warranted. Public bureaucracies lobby for more government too. This is an argument for taxpayers and the press to be vigilant, not an argument against privatization.
Government officials may not do the right thing with the savings. It’s true that when privatization generates lower costs, officials may have multiple options for realizing the gain. They may choose to avoid raising taxes or actually cut them, passing the savings on to taxpayers. Or, they may simply take the savings and squander them on some other dubious enterprise of government. This is, again, an argument for vigilance, not against privatization.
All citizens who value freedom and the free markets that give life to that freedom should be encouraged by the privatization revolution. A better and leaner public sector is much more than a bipartisan, good government issue. It is an imperative that when accomplished will leave us a freer, more responsible, and better-served people.
#20 doesn't like privatization, but offers nothing in the way of solutions or how government control is a better option.
he does do a good job insulting people though, being anonymous makes anyone a tough guy i guess.
Vote Republican, Libertarian, or another third party so Democrats have some interest in actually serving their constituents. As long as they know they will be re-elected, they will not care about you or your problems.
The past several years of Republican domination has been just super for our country. As far as on the local level I'll vote green* (and do) before I vote for some Libertarian who lives in economic (boderline psychopathic) fantasy land.
*voted green against all dems I could, voted against both Daley and Stroger.
Anyhow to address a couple of you:
Democrats definitely hold the blame for many transit issues on the local level but years and years pf deliberate underfunding and in many cases dismantling of transit on a national level fully belongs to conservative Republicans and of course the neutered wimpy Democratics are partly to blame for not raising any hell about it.
Basically Republicans happily subsidize interstate highways and aviation all the while cutting or keeping stagnant rail and transit funding yet we never hear any of the usual subjects squawking about it.
Let me say it again, for all fans of privatization: Spare me your bullshit and rhetoric and show me some actual NUMBERS, and tell me how this effort will avoid mistakes made when the mass transit system was under private control in Chicago (you are aware of this fact, right?)
Have you people never taken a business or management class, or just read the books sent from teh Libertarian book club? You would think people so pro-free market would understand that for something to have a flying chance in the market, numbers and a solid proposal are needed. Show me how a privatie CTA would have positive revenue and build reserves and/or profits, and how capital expansions would be funded should the need arise. That's all I ask. You can leave the labor and other issues for a later day, including questions about what companies would actually be interested in the scheme were it to offer the chance of big profit [I can actually think of two, neither in the USA, but you will have to come up with your own].
As well, if you privitize mass transit, do you also support privitizing roads? Why or why not? Again, numbers and facts would be more helpful rather than more hot air stolen from Ayn Rand's decomposed corpse.
I have never, ever seen any actual figures from people who scream about privatizing the CTA--why is that? Are they too secret to reveal? On the other hand, plans that keep the mass transit system in the hands of the govt--right or wrong--are backed up with numerous figures--you know this if you read the papers and keep up with current events.
Shit or get off the pot, people. Though I tilt towad govt ownership of mass transit--I think major infrastructure and utilities that benefit the public good is better off being funded by relatively stable tax and, to an extent, fee revenue, and backed by the bonding authority of government, which can be a wonderful power--I would change my mind if someone offered an actual and solid proposal for privatization [as I did with the Skyway deal]. Does anyone actually have that? Or can you offer only hot air? I think most of you people have no idea what you are talking about beyond what you watched on Fox News last night.
29: I would have no problem being a tough guy and making these same arguments in your face. Leave me your email address and we will set something up, cowboy. I'm a cheapskate, though, so you will have to buy the beer. Your play.
Great comments from everyone.
I've travelled a bit around the world to cities where the subway seemed absolutely flawless, namely Tokyo and Paris, and these were both cities I've visited after moving to Chicago in 2001, for comparison's sake.
When in Tokyo last summer, I was well impressed at how effecient, clean, and on-time the subways and trains were. The friend I was visiting said that the only thing that ever seems to slow a train down is suicide - jumping in front of oncoming trains is a popular method, sadly.
I looked around, and learned that Tokyo trains and subways are a mix of government run and privately run lines.
Granted, you can't make a total comparison between Tokyo and Chicago for the simple reason that the work ethic there is off-the-charts compared to here. People care about the job they do. The CTA is filthy and failing because the right people in the matter don't care about finding a solution that benefits everyone.
I don't know if priviatization is the answer, but learning from those who do it well might be a start. We could have hired someone to run the CTA that was experienced and could have cleaned it up financially and esthetically, but Daley just brought in someone with ZERO experience in running a mass transit system. Pathetic.
As for the state government, is the CTA any direct benefit to them? It's funny, when I was a little kid growing up in Ft. Worth, TX, I used to always think that the bus was for poor people, because that's all you ever noticed riding it. I'm beginning to think that state officials who could actually make a difference in this situation think the same thing: people ride the CTA because they don't have cars, they can keep raising rates and screwing us over because, if you don't have a car, you have no other options.
We're the third largest city in the US and certainly the second most densely populated urban city after New York, and can be such a fantastic city. Call me naive, but it just seems so obvious that the right people make this problem work as quickly as possible.
But, oh, wait... we're more worried about something far more illogical like having the Olympics in Chicago.
i'd like to remind everyone that while i have a monthly pass on my chicago plus card, not everyone can afford to drop that kind of cash all in one fell swoop, and the low-income folks are the ones going to be hardest hit with the highest fare increase.
it's similiar to why a lot of low-income people eat shit fast food instead of cooking at home. besides the convenience when you're busting ass to make ends meet, it paradoxically costs less in the short term to throw down $2-$5 than it does to buy $100 worth of groceries.
being someone who often finds herself cash poor, i get the practice even though rationally it costs me much more to eat out. and that's the kind of problem that will screw lower-income folks.
I think it's interesting to debate who's responsible for mismanagement of funds, and whether private or public is better...but from my limited experience, the health of public transit in a city is inversely proportional to how much people love their cars.
In places where everyone who can afford a car, owns one and drives to work, the busses ARE only for poor people, and it's a sad state to be in. Chicago is unique in the cities I've lived in where there are people who take transit because it's more convenient, but they realistically could buy a car and drive if they wanted.
To me, it seems much more like a cultural debate than a political one. Do we want to be more like LA, where eveyone drives, or NYC? If gas prices continue to rise, it's going to be interesting to watch in the next few years to see which direction our city, and the rest of the country goes.
It just amazes me how susceptible your average Chicagoist reader is to standard run of the mill FUD.
1. We're not sure that rate increases are taking place.
2. Even if we were, these are not that significant increases.
3. Even if it were a significant hike, I would think that all of you ethical environmentalists wouldn't mind a few extra bucks just to save the environment.
When in Tokyo last summer, I was well impressed at how effecient, clean, and on-time the subways and trains were. The friend I was visiting said that the only thing that ever seems to slow a train down is suicide - jumping in front of oncoming trains is a popular method, sadly.
Many times I've said that if Daley really wanted this to be a world class city he'd have went straight to Tokyo (or one of the other well run transit cities) and found a transit guru to come here, instead we get an inner circle buddy with no experience.
"Hey Richie I hear da CTA needs a new head. Ya know I know a guy who knows a guy who has a brudder..."
Navin,
I've often thought the same thing, but Daley seems to be more concerned with modelling the city's flower arrangements on cities like Venice then he does venturing to Tokyo to find someone who can actually do something that benefits the city.
We can dream though! :D
What's with all the hand-wriging. Because it's going to cost you, at most, 50 cents more to ride the CTA? I'm not happy about it but what's with all the histronics? Even if you take it to work every single working day that's less than $30 per month--far cheaper than owning a car, obviously. Grow up!
Guest 38:
It's not the increase, it's the logic behind it, "it" being a crumbling failure of a public transportation system that will take a decade, at least, to fix.
34: Nice observation.
I don't understand what state and city leaders think will happen to Chicago if mass transit actually gets worse and stays that way. Do they know something we don't, or do they simply not care?
I realize there are multiple problems that need money right now, but I still see little evidence that our main leaders care about mass transit, and this includes Daley.
36: I tend to agree, but I also take hope in that Huberman is a rising star, and Daley has an interest in making sure he suceeds. This probably is a naive view, I admit. But I do wonder about the quality of the deputies directly under Huberman. Has he brought in any new blood?
I take the train all the time and don't mind it. As long as it's safe it's fine by me.
#28.
You're quoting a Hillsdale College prof.
For those that haven't heard of this place, it's a right wing loony bin, I believe in Michigan, that totally refuses federal money because then they would have to follow some actual academic standards, among other things!
Asking them for advice is like asking al Qaeda on how we should protect the US from terrorists.
Jocelyn--Just because you can't afford the monthly pass doesn't mean that you can't get a Chicago Card and avoid the worst of the increases. If the people who are still using cash on the bus (and believe me, I see plenty) would simply put that cash on a Chicago Card, they wouldn't see any increase at all, since they're already paying $2. The only people who should be paying $2.50 and $3.00 a ride are the tourists, and riders who only use the CTA to go to baseball games.
I think, based on the morons we have in Springfield, there is little chance of this plan NOT going into effect on Sept. 16. Hopefully I'm wrong.
As far as the capital money being used for operating expenses, I'm fine with that if the capital money was only going to be used to make the downtown stations "pretty." How much money was spent to put all of that new tilework in the Jackson station? Did any of that improve transit service, or was it just so the tourists didn't freak out when they walked down into the big bad connection tunnels?
Robin
Who cares who can't afford to rid it. The less people the more space for me and the train will move faster. Hopefully they will be better looking people and less bums too. Raise it to $120 a month and give better service.
By the way, Tony Coppolletta, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that, while the capital and operating budgets are different they CAN be diverted, as they are doing with with $57 million of it now.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/southsouthwest/chi-cta_09aug09,1,7202391.story
See: "The CTA will also transfer $57 million from its capital improvement budget to prop up the operations shortfall..."
You're obviously still the man as far as CTA, but I got a lot of shit for this in pretty much every post I've done about the transit authority, as well as on your blog. I just want it to be out there that it is possible for BOTH of these cash flows to be used to bail out the CTA.
My pointing this out isn't meant to be petty. I do think it should be a part of the conversation, and that this fact can be used on both sides of a healthy debate, so don't scream over the internet at me.
however, if i understand correctly -- when we use capital improvement money for basic operations, we end up with situations like crumbling tracks and endless 'slow zones.' there just needs to be enough money, not robbing peter to pay paul.
also with the chicago card scene ... i *have* one. but again, it's just not feasible for some people. be lucky you can't comprehend that kind of poverty/money issue. (i must admit that i do think it's weird when i still see what seem like chicagoans paying with cash.)
"also with the chicago card scene ... i *have* one. but again, it's just not feasible for some people. be lucky you can't comprehend that kind of poverty/money issue. (i must admit that i do think it's weird when i still see what seem like chicagoans paying with cash.)"
I have no idea what you are saying. There is no minimum amount required to put on a Chicago Card. Maybe when you are first getting one (if there is it is something like $20) but certainly not after you already have it. I have no idea what "poverty" would have to do with anything.
How can all you lefties have your panties in such a knot about a $1 rate increase on the El? This is nothing compared to the taxes the candidates you so passionately endorse always want to raise. At least you can choose not to take the El. I thought you were all borderline socialists? Just tell yourself it's for the greater good, man!
The same cash that goes into a bus can go into a Chicago Card machine. It doesn't cost any more (and, in fact, will actually cost you less after just one use!).
Also, if you take the bus or train almost every day, you can afford $75 to buy a monthly pass. You only have to save up once, and then every month you just take that money you were spending on the bus every day, hide it somewhere, and use it to buy another monthly pass 30 days later! Then take the extra money left over and burn it or something, since that's what you were doing anyway. And, yes, I truly believe that every single working person can manage to come up with $75 at the same time.
48: Uh, perhaps you don't read so good, but much of the outrage has to with deeper funding problems, of which the fare increases are only a minor part. I doubt anyone would mind higher fares if the city and state actaully provided a fair funding formula to the RTA.
And before YOU get your panties in a bunch, I am about the farthest thing from a socialist.
Get a life! Who cares? What are you, a city planner?
51: Who cares? We all should. This is our city. Why don't you give a fuck?
Because I show up, wait a few minutes for the train, and it takes me to where I want to go, and that's all I care about.
thanks for reminding me of the chicago card .. i always forget that you can just add money as you go on those. when i think 'chicago card,' i think checking account/monthly pass.
to that end, though ... again, not everyone has the money upfront to do the monthly. i'm glad all of you are such financial whizzes, but from someone who has struggled paycheck to paycheck, it's just not always feasible, and i can't imagine for people who have less money than i do.
53: it only takes a few minutes for the train? if you live in that reality, no wonder you aren't that concerned. for the rest of us who deal with delays, breakdowns, lack of communication, construction and slow zones, it sucks to think about paying more for what we currently have.
If you can afford to take the bus or train, you can afford the 30 day pass.
And, yes, the train does come every few minutes. You guys just like to bitch.
A few minutes for the train?
Sometimes, but not all the time.
If you don't think so, I doubt you are riding the trains everyday to and from work, or for assorted other tasks outside work hours. Granted, I can only speak for the Brown, Red, Purple, Orange, Blue and Pink lines--perhaps the Green and Yellow lines are the ones you are talking about?
Boo Hoo - downstate doesn't want to pay our bills for us.
I've got news for all of you Chicago people...we downstaters don't give a shit if you EVER get your funding. You want public transit? You should pay for it....ALL. No subsidies from the state government. I guarantee your monthly costs out of pocket are still far less than a car, insurance, gas and upkeep so you still come out money ahead. Consider yourselves lucky that you HAVE a public transit option....a lot of people work jobs that require them to travel long-distances using private transportation.
You keep putting the same jerk-off liberal Democrats in power and expect different results year after year....this is the textbook definition of insanity. Yet you march on to pull the Democrat straight ticket handle. Sheeple.
57: Sounds good.
Now, can we stop paying for all the road projects downstate? In fact, I don't want my tax dollars to go to the bridge that will be built to St. Louis over the river.
Guess what? I'm from downstate, a hick just like you. I just realize that without Chicago, this state would be worse than Nebraska in terms of economics.
And, dolt, the main proposal is a sales tax increase for the Chicago area, not Downstate.
Poor you.
Who cares about the rate increase? I'd happily pay an extra quarter if it meant that the blue line would actually RUN on time/at all.
I just had to turn around and come home because it's shut down for construction all weekend AGAIN, so my plans are forfeit. The shuttle buses are useless since I just don't have an extra couple of hours to get downtown.
And please gawd don't let this whole mess prompt everyone to buy multiple cars and force us all to spend two hours a day on freeways like they do in Los Angeles. I paid my dues there for eight years and after a while you just need to switch to living in a functioning city.
Nope, I ride 'em every day to get to and from work, and for assorted other tasks, and they come every few minutes and get you there just like they're supposed to. You guys are the ones that can't seem to appreciate this..
60: So, tell me why at least twice a week I have to wait perhaps 20 minutes for a pink line or 15 minutes for a blue line.
Seriously, tell me again how the trains run on time.
I didn't say they run "on time", I said they run every few minutes. Apparently a couple extra minutes are a horrible inconvenience for you. Be happy that it runs and you can use its services..
62: You have a very loose definition of "every few minutes."
Yes, when train delays make people late for work, or late getting home, that is rather annoying, don't you think? Perhaps you don't mind spending 90 minutes sometimes to travel 7-9 miles--remember, it was not always this way, and the three tracking is not the only reason for this.
And in case you didn't know, the CTA still publishes the fiction known as the El schedule, so apparently "on time" still retains some official meaning.
Well, #63, it's too bad all you want to do is complain that the system isn't as good as you would like, but that seems to be pretty prevalent around here. Fortunately for me, I get to use a fantastic, extensive public transportation system any time I want...and I'm still able to appreciate it.
64: It's too bad the people complain about the severe decline in EL and bus service in recent years?
That's an odd stance to take.
Perhaps one reason we complain is because some of us remember when the EL and buses were at least a bit better, and because we don't to see this important service fall even more.
But hey, if you're happy, that's all that matters.