Consolidation of Transit Boards

[Busjack]

If any of you have been following my thinking on this, it went from (in about 2006) restructuring the CTA to restrict it to serving residents in the city, instead of running routes like the 200s and 317, and putting suburban appointees on its board, to (more recently) blowing up the whole structure and having something like the NY MTA, with one board of 17 members covering the entire 6 county region, maybe with operating subsidiaries.

Well, the CTA Tattler had a post referring to a Metropolis 2020 report, which essentially said the same thing in much more detail (see about page 58).

I know that politicians don't want to give up their fiefdoms, but with Mayor Daley leaving and some civic support for the concept, do you think it could be pushed through or work?

[rotjohns]

If any of you have been following my thinking on this, it went from (in about 2006) restructuring the CTA to restrict it to serving residents in the city, instead of running routes like the 200s and 317, and putting suburban appointees on its board, to (more recently) blowing up the whole structure and having something like the NY MTA, with one board of 17 members covering the entire 6 county region, maybe with operating subsidiaries.

Well, the CTA Tattler had a post referring to a Metropolis 2020 report, which essentially said the same thing in much more detail (see about page 58).

I know that politicians don't want to give up their fiefdoms, but with Mayor Daley leaving and some civic support for the concept, do you think it could be pushed through or work?

I think that it can, but the Chicago area has always been stuck in the 20th (and sometimes 19th) century when it comes to transportation. People that work in the transportation industry and know transit from the back of their heads are needed, whether they can get them from Chicago or other cities. I never understood the RTA in the first place. Why not put 17 members, say minimum 2 from the other 5 counties and the rest for the city of Chicago and utilize it that way? I don't pretend to even know about all this, but from reading some of the article, it sure makes sense to me.

[artthouwill]

I think that it can, but the Chicago area has always been stuck in the 20th (and sometimes 19th) century when it comes to transportation. People that work in the transportation industry and know transit from the back of their heads are needed, whether they can get them from Chicago or other cities. I never understood the RTA in the first place. Why not put 17 members, say minimum 2 from the other 5 counties and the rest for the city of Chicago and utilize it that way? I don't pretend to even know about all this, but from reading some of the article, it sure makes sense to me.

In theory this sounds all nice, but page 22 explains why this won't happen, even if it does make sense. If it is not city vs suburb, its county vs county, upstate vs downstate, state vs state. Heck, states are competing for education dollars based on Arne Duncan's program.

One would think expanding Gary airport would be beneficial for the entire region, but it is on the Indiana side of the border, thus Illinois won't support it (even though it is an existing airport, would be the least expensive option as opposed to Peotone, is closer to downtown than Peotone, has existing interstate options accessible to the city, south suburbs, and NW Indiana). Not only is there an Illinois/Indiana squabble, but you can rest assured that NW Indians leaders don't want that airport within the controls of the city of Gary, and none of these parties maybe too keen on sharing that airport with Illinois unless they can have some say with O'Hare and Midway (much like the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey), something Illinoisians in general and Chicago in particular would most certainly object to.

We have a great sense of self. How many times have I read about someone moving to a far flung suburb because they enjoyed the peace, serenity of two land roads, but then several people move there for the same reason, then when those roads become clogged and someone dares suggest widening roads, etc, people complain that this would open the door for more people to move out there and ruin their quality of life. (lLike they are the only ones entitled to it).

In order for a unified board to work, there has to be a unified mindset, and nothing will get done with antisuburban city dwellers on the same board as anticity suburban dwellers. I hate to be a pessimist, but this is how America works.

Based on your math of the 5 collar counties of 2 members each, and the rest from the city, that gives the suburbs a majority vote on your proposed board. The only pro city votes you will get from them will be Metra based, and that is not even giving suburban Ccok 2 votes.

[Busjack]

Based on your math of the 5 collar counties of 2 members each, and the rest from the city, that gives the suburbs a majority vote on your proposed board. The only pro city votes you will get from them will be Metra based, and that is not even giving suburban Cook 2 votes.

I'm not assuming Rotjohns's math. If I were to make any assumption, it is that the current representation on the RTA board conforms to the census, and yes, population has moved into the suburban area. That, I assume, is one reason that the city would fight such a proposal. The RTA Act passed in 1974 only because of city votes; I doubt that it could pass today.

The NY MTA has representatives for the collar counties, but also has that 4 of them combine for one vote.

While representation could be allocated in the same manner as the RTA board is today, I would fire the existing board, as happened in 1983, and put in a legal requirement that the board members have business or transportation experience. At least it should be debated whether the current trend of putting transit activists on the boards is a good idea.

As far as coordination with Indiana, I can see that point, but not before both Illinois and Indiana get their acts together. At least the Indiana authorities are trying to get everything under the Regional Bus Authority, even though they have not figured out how to fund it nor how to deal with GPTC, which has its own taxing authority.

[New Flyer]

Nice idea but it will never happen to much politics and bullshit. Look how many years they've been supposedly

trying to design a single fare card system .

[rotjohns]

Nice idea but it will never happen to much politics and bullshit. Look how many years they've been supposedly

trying to design a single fare card system .

And this is why Chicago (in fact the entire state) will always finish amongst the bottom tier of major cities when it comes to transit infrastructure. L.A. has a single fare card system. And I wouldn't doubt it smaller cities will too. As New Flyer said, too much politics, too many people wanna run the system the way they want it, which means running it to the ground. This is why CTA is begging for money every year. Mayor can say what he wants, it aint like this everywhere. Rev. Jackson even said himself, Chicago needs to concentrate on local infrastructure instead of trying to get high-speed service to St. Louis.

Here's an example of : when I visited NIU last Oct for a tour, I asked some students from the Chicago area how they usually got there & all of them said drive. When I asked about other options, I was told "carpool". Greyhound stopped servicing Dekalb a while ago when they re-did all their routes. If the RTA was smart, then why is there not a train or something going out there? I finally looked up the fact a NIU bus service goes to Elburn Metra on Fridays and Sundays. Are you serious? It can't be because of money because I'd bet you if you send Metra or Amtrak out there, the support would be there.

I guess the bottom line to me is unless the idea is thrown out to LaHood, too many politicians will prevent potential money making transit options from ever coming forward. And my thought on having at least 2 people for the 5 surrounding counties was that I didn't think that one person alone should be in charge of overseeing transit options (1 in Dupage, 1 for Kane, etc.) I would think it would be too big of a burden.

[jacksone44]

If any of you have been following my thinking on this, it went from (in about 2006) restructuring the CTA to restrict it to serving residents in the city, instead of running routes like the 200s and 317, and putting suburban appointees on its board, to (more recently) blowing up the whole structure and having something like the NY MTA, with one board of 17 members covering the entire 6 county region, maybe with operating subsidiaries.

Well, the CTA Tattler had a post referring to a Metropolis 2020 report, which essentially said the same thing in much more detail (see about page 58).

I know that politicians don't want to give up their fiefdoms, but with Mayor Daley leaving and some civic support for the concept, do you think it could be pushed through or work?

Thanks for bringing this topic up BusJack. I recently just relocated to Newark, New Jersey and now am riding NJ Transit, where there's a consolidated structure. While consolidating the boards is a great idea as there will be many synergies through a combined system along with many others, the "Big Rock" on why it will never happen in Chicagoland is politics. Thinking on a larger scale, the only thing that could supercede Chicago politics on this issue is if there was a mandate either by the Governor (Bill Brady has been a proponent of this) would enact legislation essentially forcing this, or somehow if Lahood stepped in jepordizing federal funds (far fetched).

[Busjack]

Here's an example of : when I visited NIU last Oct for a tour, I asked some students from the Chicago area how they usually got there & all of them said drive. When I asked about other options, I was told "carpool". Greyhound stopped servicing Dekalb a while ago when they re-did all their routes. If the RTA was smart, then why is there not a train or something going out there? I finally looked up the fact a NIU bus service goes to Elburn Metra on Fridays and Sundays. Are you serious? It can't be because of money because I'd bet you if you send Metra or Amtrak out there, the support would be there.

A couple of problems with this, basically because NIU is a residential university, and thus is not generating commuter traffic. In that the "dog" couldn't make it doesn't indicate much demand. Going to and back during breaks isn't going to justify service.

Also, there is the problem that DeKalb County is outside the RTA area, as discussed in the Pace minutes over Oswego. It might be within the Chicago area defined on page 20 (22 of the pdf), but then that county would have to pay RTA taxes or otherwise support it.

I guess the bottom line to me is unless the idea is thrown out to LaHood, too many politicians will prevent potential money making transit options from ever coming forward. And my thought on having at least 2 people for the 5 surrounding counties was that I didn't think that one person alone should be in charge of overseeing transit options (1 in Dupage, 1 for Kane, etc.) I would think it would be too big of a burden.

Basically, the purpose of the board is to set policy, approve contracts, and (something at least 3 of the current boards do not do) exercise oversight. Like in NY and I believe NJ (jacksone44 could clarify), there could be operating subsidiaries for rail, rapid transit, and bus (I would also throw in paratransit here) but the heads of those subsidiaries would be responsible to the board, not Mayor Daley or themselves. On the other hand, the board would make policy decisions regarding such matters as what routes serve overlap areas like Evanston or Oak Park.

Of course, given the current situation in DuPage, Pace is just basically overseeing contractors (with the exception of a few interurban routes). No need for an extra layer of bureaucracy there; just determine whether there is enough ridership to justify the contracts.

[jacksone44]

A couple of problems with this, basically because NIU is a residential university, and thus is not generating commuter traffic. In that the "dog" couldn't make it doesn't indicate much demand. Going to and back during breaks isn't going to justify service.

Also, there is the problem that DeKalb County is outside the RTA area, as discussed in the Pace minutes over Oswego. It might be within the Chicago area defined on page 20 (22 of the pdf), but then that county would have to pay RTA taxes or otherwise support it.

Basically, the purpose of the board is to set policy, approve contracts, and (something at least 3 of the current boards do not do) exercise oversight. Like in NY and I believe NJ (jacksone44 could clarify), there could be operating subsidiaries for rail, rapid transit, and bus (I would also throw in paratransit here) but the heads of those subsidiaries would be responsible to the board, not Mayor Daley or themselves. On the other hand, the board would make policy decisions regarding such matters as what routes serve overlap areas like Evanston or Oak Park.

Of course, given the current situation in DuPage, Pace is just basically overseeing contractors (with the exception of a few interurban routes). No need for an extra layer of bureaucracy there; just determine whether there is enough ridership to justify the contracts.

Yes. NJ Transit structure is one that I think serves as a great model. There are 3 subsidiaries ( Rail, Light Rail, and Bus) and the heads of those units report to the Executive Director of NJ Transit (who is appointed by the Governor). The Chairman (who is the NJ DOT Commissioner by default) oversees the board and ED and there are Committees the the board memebers are divided (Customer Service Improvement, Operations, Financial Oversight, and Capital Programs) that work at a board level on each of those respective areas of the organization.

[Busjack]

... There are 3 subsidiaries ( Rail, Light Rail, and Bus) and the heads of those units report to the Executive Director of NJ Transit (who is appointed by the Governor). ...

.. there are Committees the the board memebers are divided (Customer Service Improvement, Operations, Financial Oversight, and Capital Programs) that work at a board level on each of those respective areas of the organization.

I wonder if the committee structure is more effective there than it is here.

There are indications of committee structures in the Chicago area boards (see, for instance, the RTA director page and the CTA Agenda page) the stress there, and apparently at Pace and Metra, is on financial and auditing. I sure don't see anything like Customer Service Improvement.

BTW, my impression (from photos in books and the like) was that light rail was part of New Jersey Transit Bus Operations, Inc. The About Us page (when expanded) lists 3 subsidiaries, but the third one is Mercer.

[jacksone44]

I wonder if the committee structure is more effective there than it is here.

There are indications of committee structures in the Chicago area boards (see, for instance, the RTA director page and the CTA Agenda page) the stress there, and apparently at Pace and Metra, is on financial and auditing. I sure don't see anything like Customer Service Improvement.

BTW, my impression (from photos in books and the like) was that light rail was part of New Jersey Transit Bus Operations, Inc. The About Us page (when expanded) lists 3 subsidiaries, but the third one is Mercer.

I havent been here long enough to make an opininon on whether they are effective or not, but can tell you I dont hear much complaining about the service. But can tell you that bus and trains are some of the cleanest ive ever riden on!

The Newark Light Rail is part of NJ Transit Bus Operations as its owned and operated by NJ Transit. The Hudson Bergen Light Rail, and the River Line are part of Light Rail, of which most operations are outsourced.