Special Event Buses

[ibebobo]

My argument always has been that these public transit agencys are for the general public. For the most part, they run at a loss and need to be subsidized. I understand that there are (were) grants out there to provide for commuters and other situations, but again the FTA rules are designed to protect private companies that cannot compete with a government subsitized entity. I am only familiar with a few of these scenarios around the Chicagoland area. IMO, I have and always will feel that the shuttle bugs should be run by a private company and not PACE. I feel the same way about this Wrigley Field parking shuttle which just started to allow "the public" to ride, although it is just for night and weekend games. What is "the public" to do on the rest of the days? I'm surprised that the media (or maybe they have and I missed) has not investigated this stuff every time there is a budget crisis.

[jajuan]

My argument always has been that these public transit agencys are for the general public. For the most part, they run at a loss and need to be subsidized. I understand that there are (were) grants out there to provide for commuters and other situations, but again the FTA rules are designed to protect private companies that cannot compete with a government subsitized entity. I am only familiar with a few of these scenarios around the Chicagoland area. IMO, I have and always will feel that the shuttle bugs should be run by a private company and not PACE. I feel the same way about this Wrigley Field parking shuttle which just started to allow "the public" to ride, although it is just for night and weekend games. What is "the public" to do on the rest of the days? I'm surprised that the media (or maybe they have and I missed) has not investigated this stuff every time there is a budget crisis.

I do understand how you see it overall and can agree with you on parts of it while others I don't. The U of C routes, the current route 10 and the UPS routes I never really saw a problem with because the entities served were said to have paid for them. That's why I fall back on the question were there any private transportation companies out there who had any real interest in providing that service covered by the TAs. Now if there isn't a private entity stepping up with the desire to provide what the TAs are currently doing with respect to these routes, it gets sticky to say that TA shouldn't operate X, Y or Z because a private company can do it and the entity in question to be served desires some form of transportation access but no one showed a desire to provide it beyond that TA being willing. As for the media, they really show no interest in transit issues beyond different budget crises or some form of injury involving that transit agency.

[Busjack]

That's why I fall back on the question were there any private transportation companies out there who had any real interest in providing that service covered by the TAs. Now if there isn't a private entity stepping up with the desire to provide what the TAs are currently doing with respect to these routes, it gets sticky to say that TA shouldn't operate X, Y or Z because a private company can do it and the entity in question to be be served desires some form of transportation access but no one showed a desire to provide it beyond that TA being willing.

As long as this doesn't get into the legality (which it hasn't lately), I do see the point that the transit authorities shouldn't be using subsidies either to compete with private enterprise or to play games with the recovery ratio. I departed from ibebobo on whether reverse feeders are charters, although one became one (Olson Transportation took over a route in Lake Forest).

As far as private operators willing to do the work, there was one example that conforms to what he suggested, which was that whatever became Free Enterprise System got the contract to run the Northwestern Shuttle, and Northwestern U said that while it cost a bit more, it was worth it not to have to put up with the "scheduled stop" policy required by Pace for route 426.

Before the 170s, the U of C had (I believe since the 1970s) a private van service, operated by I believe Laidlaw, and while the private operator continues the night service, it also appears from their transportation page that other private service is being provided, including something from 57th Street to Roosevelt Road, as a substitute for the 173. I haven't been to Hyde Park lately to check it out.

In the example I mentioned in Rochester N.Y., where the school bus association had a much clearer case against the RGRTA, but the regulation got evaded by putting the trippers on public schedules, Laidlaw School Bus had complained.

In this area, given that Free Enterprise has picked up business, not only from Northwestern, but also the Indiana Regional Bus Authority, and both Keeshin-Coach America and, as reported by 5750 today, Colonial have lost much or all of their Pace contracts, and there are still the big gorillas like First, Veolia, and MV around, I doubt that one can say that there is no private carrier able to do the work. Of course, I have no info about ibebobo's statement that others bid on the Cubs contract.

[twyztdmynd]

Posted to Facebook - Attention all Wrigley Field Express Riders: Due to budget restrictions, we regret to inform you that Pace WILL NOT provide Wrigley Field Express service for 1 of the 2 games scheduled on June 28th.

For the first game (at 1:20pm), Pace WILL NOT provide the Wrigley Field Express.

Our initially scheduled service for the 7:05pm game will be operating that day. Buses depart at 4:30pm from Yorktown and Schaumburg.