ADA Issues

[trainman8119]

Instead of addressing each person individually, I will do this in a public forum.

Let me be clear on my issues with ADA. There is not an issue against those with disabilities, and the fact that things are made workable for those with those who are disabled is commendable. I will continue to work hard to provide an additional service (when needed and requested) to those need assistance daily without issue. However, please realize that there are those who claim to look out for the disabled that are at issue here.

Many a time I have had confrontations with the leaders of the pack you constantly see in print (see Busjack's post regarding Pace). There are a few people in that group who do nothing but seek to create trouble and attention on themselves. There are many services that the disabled had at one time that were a much better alternative than what is out there today. When Metra was forced to purchase lift equipped cars under the ADA act, it was one of my responsiblilites at Pace to listen and document complaints regarding the door to door service that Mayflower used to provide and would no longer do, since Metra was no longer required to pay for it. This largest complaint was that people would now have to find their way to a station and wait for trains like everyone else, and why was the door to door service no longer provided. The answer in short was that the advocates, those who claim to be working in your best interests didn't want you to have that !!! It was far better for them to block driveways, disrupt meetings and generally be a pain in the butt to get something, at the time, a majority didn't really care if they had or not. But because a few felt the need, it became reality. Is it good or bad...I don't know, that would be up to you to decide.

Now that Pace is responsible for the entire ADA service they are under fire. Quite frankly, they could not handle what they had when they just did suburbia. Now they are required to operate city and suburbs and honestly, it looks like they are fumbling the ball. No real suprise. Should they have had to work this way...no, absolutely not. But the CTA wanted nothing to do with operating the service and they found a way to disassociate themselves from it and Pace was foolish enough to think they could handle it all. And again, we see the same people out there creating news, trying for sympathy, which they say they don't want. Remember, this group wants everyone to be the same, except when it doesn't benefit them...then they are "special". As far as I am concerned, ADA should not be operated by Pace or CTA, since they can't or don't want to handle it. It should perhaps be a separate arm under the umbrella of the RTA, funded separately, etc. I don't need to see the advocate rebels out there telling me that.

I know this is a hot topic, and please don't misunderstand what I am trying to say. When comments are made about crybabying, this is where I am aiming. Again, my comments are not directed at those who are disabled, more at those who continue to claim to be for a community, but who are more in it for themselves.

[Busjack]

I also want to say that I don't intend disrespect to any individual, and should have qualified my comment with "some members." I also agree with the concept of ADA that it should enable otherwise productive people to work. The taxpayers have spent money for such things as the CD announcements for the blind and displays for the deaf to help out, and paratransit is costing this area about $100 million a year, even though one goal was to enable people to use the mainline services.

The Pace reference was basically to Chicago paratransit riders complaining about the increase in the monthly pass to $150. As I noted in connection with Doomsday and the free rides for seniors, those who complained to the Tribune that "the legislature forgot us" were wrong...the legislature imposed the 10-12% recovery ratio, and federal law allows a paratransit fare of twice the normal one.

Another Pace reference was to not having city representatives on the Pace board. However, the legislation was set up that way.

With regard to Metra, my only point was that the ADA requirement of at least one accessible car per train would be more than met.

My point is that the Pace board can do nothing about the first two things, as the proper target is the unresponsive state legislature. Another with regard to the first was in the ADA not being sufficient for some, and if an issue were made about the third, the same would apply.

I sort of concur with trainman on maybe there should be a separate paratransit authority, as CTA didn't want the responsibility at all (and Carole Brown didn't even understand it, thinking that CTA was turning over paratransit to a Pace operated entity, being misinformed that Pace didn't use contractors), and Pace is having trouble implementing the city system, despite its supposed expertise. There is the issue that city residents are not represented. On the other hand, one of the pre-Doomsday debates was whether the 41 suburbs that supposedly owed CTA something should be better represented on its board. Nothing was done there, and all recent press events and releases have been in the name of Mayor Daley and Ron Huberman. Was Carole Brown or any other CTA Board member even around for the BRT rollout? There are already 44 individuals pulling down $15,000 or $25,000 per year to sit on the RTA and the 3 service boards; how many more payrollers are necessary?

In any event, the place to complain about anything other than strictly operational issues is Congress or the State Legislature, not the Pace board meeting. And if people want more accessible cars (or if another demographic group is complaining that the remaining 1970s Metra Electric District cars are not being replaced), tell Congress, or more directly, the state legislature to pass a capital plan.

[Buslover88]

Let me be clear on my issues with ADA. There is not an issue against those with disabilities, and the fact that things are made workable for those with those who are disabled is commendable.

Many a time I have had confrontations with the leaders of the pack you constantly see in print. There are a few people in that group who do nothing but seek to create trouble and attention on themselves. There are many services that the disabled had at one time that were a much better alternative than what is out there today. When Metra was forced to purchase lift equipped cars under the ADA act, it was one of my responsiblilites at Pace to listen and document complaints regarding the door to door service that Mayflower used to provide and would no longer do, since Metra was no longer required to pay for it. This largest complaint was that people would now have to find their way to a station and wait for trains like everyone else, and why was the door to door service no longer provided. The answer in short was that the advocates, those who claim to be working in your best interests didn't want you to have that !!! It was far better for them to block driveways, disrupt meetings and generally be a pain in the butt to get something, at the time, a majority didn't really care if they had or not. But because a few felt the need, it became reality. Is it good or bad...I don't know, that would be up to you to decide.

I know this is a hot topic, and please don't misunderstand what I am trying to say. When comments are made about crybabying, this is where I am aiming. Again, my comments are not directed at those who are disabled, more at those who continue to claim to be for a community, but who are more in it for themselves.

I wasn't really offended by your comment since nothing was really said, but maybe others were. But I will agree with you here when you say there's a few ADA people who are only out their for theirselves. And I will say thank you for apologizing to the ADA/disabled community (since some might have been really offended), it was a nice thing to do.

[ibebobo]

I wasn't really offended by your comment since nothing was really said, but maybe others were. But I will agree with you here when you say there's a few ADA people who are only out their for theirselves. And I will say thank you for apologizing to the ADA/disabled community (since some might have been really offended), it was a nice thing to do.

Maybe if Pace wasn't using so much money to fund their "shuttle bug" routes that serve the employees of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS that have a CONTRACT (making it a charter), there would be more money for paratransit that is so desperately needed. That makes ME sick. Wait until the new gas tax goes into effect to fund this stuff. People will really get more pissed off.

[jajuan]

Maybe if Pace wasn't using so much money to fund their "shuttle bug" routes that serve the employees of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS that have a CONTRACT (making it a charter), there would be more money for paratransit that is so desperately needed. That makes ME sick. Wait until the new gas tax goes into effect to fund this stuff. People will really get more pissed off.

I thought the whole shuttle bug issue and whether those routes qualify as charters was already debated weeks ago. Not to mention this is a totally separate issue that shouldn't even be debated in this thread. If you want to debate that issue further, you should be doing so in the the original thread that you were making your argument. This issue shouldn't be mixed with this issue and debated here. As Busjack mentioned to you already in that thread, if you're dissatisfied with Pace providing that service then you should be contacting your state legislator or appropriate member of Congress about it.

[ibebobo]

I thought the whole shuttle bug issue and whether those routes qualify as charters was already debated weeks ago. Not to mention this is a totally separate issue that shouldn't even be debated in this thread. If you want to debate that issue further, you should be doing so in the the original thread that you were making your argument. This issue shouldn't be mixed with this issue and debated here. As Busjack mentioned to you already in that thread, if you're dissatisfied with Pace providing that service then you should be contacting your state legislator or appropriate member of Congress about it.

Well, I added another post that was never answered about how an entity that receives federal money HAS to sign a certain agreement, but it was never responded to. In the mean time, we have a new member who is probably very interested in anything that has to do with an ADA issue and how monies are inappropriately being used. My message needs to be spread to everyone, because what they are doing is wrong. And if there is a loophole, why is that? Why would an entity WANT to lose money when it doesn't have to? And if it takes away money from where it should be used (in this case ADA issues) why shouldn't it be discussed here or anywhere else? Is there something that needs to be hidden??? I also copied and pasted the exact wording of what some of these rules (laws) are, but all I got back was dialogue. Show me the exact wording (and links) of the laws. I did.

[jajuan]

Well, I added another post that was never answered about how an entity that receives federal money HAS to sign a certain agreement, but it was never responded to. In the mean time, we have a new member who is probably very interested in anything that has to do with an ADA issue and how monies are inappropriately being used. My message needs to be spread to everyone, because what they are doing is wrong. And if there is a loophole, why is that? Why would an entity WANT to lose money when it doesn't have to? And if it takes away money from where it should be used (in this case ADA issues) why shouldn't it be discussed here or anywhere else? Is there something that needs to be hidden??? I also copied and pasted the exact wording of what some of these rules (laws) are, but all I got back was dialogue. Show me the exact wording (and links) of the laws. I did.

All I'll say is this, if you can show me how Pace is not living up to one of its purposes, which is to provide an alternative way for people to get to work, I'd be more receptive to your argument. So far you haven't convinced me. As for this thread, I'd gladly like to hear how you think ADA services can be improved beyond all mainline Pace and CTA bus service being 100% accessible to persons with disabilities. The shuttle bug issue can be discussed in the other thread. Mixing two separate issues and arguments won't really make anyone more inclined to listen. You'll likely get the opposite affect you're hoping for.

[Busjack]

Maybe if Pace wasn't using so much money to fund their "shuttle bug" routes that serve the employees of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS that have a CONTRACT (making it a charter), there would be more money for paratransit that is so desperately needed. That makes ME sick.

The 2008 RTA Act sets aside $100 milllion for paratransit before any service board gets dime one (70 ILCS 4.04.03(c )(1)). Also the state has traditionally appropriated $54 million of general revenue to paratransit. So your allegation that the Shuttle Bug is diverting money from paratransit is factually DEAD WRONG.

As far as not responding to your Federal Register post, as I'm on retired status with the ARDC, I am not giving you legal advice concerning what I consider to be your misguided crusade against the Shuttle Bugs. You don't have to have a lawyer to file a complaint with the FTA, if you have the facts showing that the agreement was violated. But, as you don't have the facts about paratransit funding, I doubt that you have the facts about the SBs, the NC restructuring, or the Wrigley Field or UPS operations, either. As jajuan said, only an FTA complaint will prove anything and get any result. Otherwise, take some Pepto Bismol and you won't feel sick.

[ibebobo]

All I'll say is this, if you can show me how Pace is not living up to one of its purposes, which is to provide an alternative way for people to get to work, I'd be more receptive to your argument. So far you haven't convinced me. As for this thread, I'd gladly like to hear how you think ADA services can be improved beyond all mainline Pace and CTA bus service being 100% accessible to persons with disabilities. The shuttle bug issue can be discussed in the other thread. Mixing two separate issues and arguments won't really make anyone more inclined to listen. You'll likely get the opposite affect you're hoping for.

OK. I will give you one example. The city of Antioch is trying to get/expand paratransit service but cannot get the funding. There is funding being wasted serving private corporations with the shuttle bug service.

There is one example. I know there are many more places that could use service. 100% accessability where the service is is not the issue. It's where it isn't, that is. Now I will go back to the original forum to continue this discussion, but no one replied. And again, I would like to see in writing if I am incorrect, but I doubt I will.

[Busjack]

OK. I will give you one example. The city of Antioch is trying to get/expand paratransit service but cannot get the funding. There is funding being wasted serving private corporations with the shuttle bug service.

There is one example. I know there are many more places that could use service. 100% accessability where the service is is not the issue. It's where it isn't, that is. Now I will go back to the original forum to continue this discussion, but no one replied. And again, I would like to see in writing if I am incorrect, but I doubt I will.

Read my prior post. No you won't.

Also, Pace supplies McHenry County with ADA paratransit service out of its McHenry garage and has a contractor in Lake County. If either of them isn't serving the people of Antioch, file a complaint.* If Antioch wants community service, Pace has 100 vehicles for that, and it should ask for one. Joliet, Wheeling, and Rich Twp. did.

___

*Although the 3/4 mile from a fixed route rule precludes complaining about any lack of paratransit coverage under the ADA.