Ventra - Bugs, Feedback, and Questions

[mkohut]

I think another of Emanuel problems was left out .The Chicago Cubs

[MetroShadow]

I think another of Emanuel problems was left out .The Chicago Cubs

In terms of problems he has to deal with:

Teachers > Schlubs.

[artthouwill]

Probably because he's trying to do damage control. But in all honesty, if CTA is not going to benefit from the Mastercard customers I don't see why they would promote it either. That's for ventra to do. They are the ones that's trying to gouge the consumer.

I think the key word that is missing is PREPAID. CTA's charges for the Ventra debit/credit option are no different than the charges if any other PREPAID debit/credit card. Its no different than when banks used to charge for writing checks and monthly fees. That is how banks make miney. Someone has to process that stuff.

[BusHunter]

I think the key word that is missing is PREPAID. CTA's charges for the Ventra debit/credit option are no different than the charges if any other PREPAID debit/credit card. Its no different than when banks used to charge for writing checks and monthly fees. That is how banks make miney. Someone has to process that stuff.

Yeah but the scandal is that CTA's making money off the fees. The media is all over this today. I bet they'd really like to talk to Emanuel and Claypool now. Claypool might need to call up Emanuel to see where he's hiding. Someone's going to have to comment on this. I think Claypool needs to take some action now with his underclassmen/women or his job is history.

[Busjack]

Yeah but the scandal is that CTA's making money off the fees. The media is all over this today. I bet they'd really like to talk to Emanuel and Claypool now. Claypool might need to call up Emanuel to see where he's hiding. Someone's going to have to comment on this. I think Claypool needs to take some action now with his underclassmen/women or his job is history.

Claypool undoubtedly doesn't think so. Either some functionary (like Brian Steele) trots out some misinformation (like they didn't know about MetaBank withdrawing some charges) or Claypool tells the public to suck it up, except using about 350 words to convey that thought.

I bet by posting the Ventra Potential Fees page last night, CTA believes that there has been sufficient glastnost.

And, on the transit side, they didn't mention is mandatory transfer fee to get the Ventra ticket up to $3. They did mention that they aren't charging the 50 cent fee for disposable tickets used at O'Hare* and for one day passes, figuring that the [according to Emanuel non-] fare increase is sufficient gouging.

____________

*If I am reading the CTA Fare page correctly, you don't get a transfer if it takes $5.00 off a transit card.

[jajuan]

My point is that it is just shuffling taxpayers' money. Given that the CTA budget indicates $630 million in public funding, it probably doesn't make much difference whether the additional $5 million statutory contribution comes out of city and county property taxes or RTA sales taxes. It isn't like the CTA providing a direct service to the city, such as when the trolley companies had to plow the streets.

I guess I might not have picked up the nuance in your statement "I'm glad not to see a Chicago mayor jumping in front of a camera putting on display how he's micro-mismanaging CTA operations when they're supposed to be separate from the City."

Were you referring to that he was not micromanaging (my first inference), or just that he wasn't making a display of micromanaging [at least in that instance]?

Sorry. This time I actually meant he wasn't making a big display of it. I'll agree with you that he definitely is still micromanaging like recent Chicago mayors do.

[BusHunter]

Claypool undoubtedly doesn't think so. Either some functionary (like Brian Steele) trots out some misinformation (like they didn't know about MetaBank withdrawing some charges) or Claypool tells the public to suck it up, except using about 350 words to convey that thought.

I bet by posting the Ventra Potential Fees page last night, CTA believes that there has been sufficient glastnost.

And, on the transit side, they didn't mention is mandatory transfer fee to get the Ventra ticket up to $3. They did mention that they aren't charging the 50 cent fee for disposable tickets used at O'Hare* and for one day passes, figuring that the [according to Emanuel non-] fare increase is sufficient gouging.

____________

*If I am reading the CTA Fare page correctly, you don't get a transfer if it takes $5.00 off a transit card.

According to this article here Link:http://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/03/28/ventra-will-be-anything-but-a-smooth-retail-experience/ they estimate CTA will gain around 1/2 a million annually off the Ventra card. Not bad for a hidden revenue source. They make alot of good points in this article about CTA riders just not being savvy enough to bypass all the fees. No doubt this will be a good revenue producer.

[sw4400]

Looks like enough of a stir about Ventra has occured that the State of Illinois is getting involved, courtesy of Blago's Sister-In-Law...

Story

[Busjack]

Looks like enough of a stir about Ventra has occured that the State of Illinois is getting involved, courtesy of Blago's Sister-In-Law...

Story

Last four words sort of sum it up.

Unless she has a bill ready to get out of committee that can overturn a contract somewhat mandated by state law (although the debit card portion wasn't), usual posturing by a legislator [installed there by her daddy] to get some press.

Maybe CTA will send Claypool down there, and get a result like today's Dilbert.*

_________________

*I figured I'd get some use out of it.

[artthouwill]

If Pace has paid into this system, what percentage of the debit card revenue do they get, if any?

[Busjack]

If Pace has paid into this system, what percentage of the debit card revenue do they get, if any?

I don't think it was ever said straight out.

The only thing close is this statement from the Tribune article: "CTA critics say the complicated deal appears structured to maximize revenue for the private companies, while forcing CTA and Pace riders to pay more by substituting a litany of service charges for a fare increase." That really doesn't say anything about Pace getting a cut, and most of the references to revenue in the article are to CTA.

If I recall Pace minutes correctly, they only indicate that Pace signed on to an option in the CTA contract, had to front money to Cubic to start installing the equipment, and then hemmed and hawed about whether Metra was getting on board.

[sw4400]

If Pace has paid into this system, what percentage of the debit card revenue do they get, if any?

As I understand from what I read, the optional Ventra Debit Card revenue goes to Money Network® and CTA. What percentage, I'm not sure... it could be 50/50 or some other determined split. But this revenue is between Money Network® and CTA. PACE isn't getting any of the revenue from it. But I've dwelled into this hellish nightmare enough... hopefully before these Ventra packages hit the stores and riders hands, the Debit option is removed by CTA waking up and doing so or the State of Illinois reading it over carefully and ordering Forrest Claypool to remove it from all Ventra packages. Only time will tell since apparantly Blago's Sister-In-Law is going to bring this up in a state hearing tomorrow at the Bilandic Building.

[jajuan]

As I understand from what I read, the optional Ventra Debit Card revenue goes to Money Network® and CTA. What percentage, I'm not sure... it could be 50/50 or some other determined split. But this revenue is between Money Network® and CTA. PACE isn't getting any of the revenue from it. But I've dwelled into this hellish nightmare enough... hopefully before these Ventra packages hit the stores and riders hands, the Debit option is removed by CTA waking up and doing so or the State of Illinois reading it over carefully and ordering Forrest Claypool to remove it from all Ventra packages. Only time will tell since apparantly Blago's Sister-In-Law is going to bring this up in a state hearing tomorrow at the Bilandic Building.

I think Busjack is right on this one in suggesting that you don't hold your breath on that happening unless you're ready to suffer self suffocation and unless she actually has a bill that gets out of committee that would serve to reverse what the state itself mandated CTA and PACE do at the least on the transit side of this. Especially with implementation in the test phase of this (and yes this year's initial implementation is the test phase) legislatively right around the corner. They're just not going to get any legislation passed in time that would cancel anything on this as much as you may wish it to happen. Just prepare yourself to do what many of us have been suggesting several times over which get the card for TRANSIT ONLY and actually buy a Ventra card that provides you multiple fares and not a Ventra ticket if you also want to avoid paying 3 bucks on the train. At least the 5 bucks extra there at the time of initial purchase gets converted to a transit credit in some form when you register the card, much like current Chicago Cards. Speaking of Chicago Cards one thing that did cross my mind is how are they going to facilitate the transition there for those folks especially whose Chicago Card has a few years left before expiration instead of expiring at points before total conversion to Ventra happens early next year?

[Busjack]

I think Busjack is right on this one in suggesting that you don't hold your breath on that happening unless you're ready to suffer self suffocation and unless she actually has a bill that gets out of committee that would serve to reverse what the state itself mandated CTA and PACE do at the least on the transit side of this.... They're just not going to get any legislation passed in time that would cancel anything on this as much as you may wish it to happen. ...

Besides that, there is the issue of a legal contract between CTA and Cubic. Any legislation that passed would have to compensate the private parties for having their contract rights taken away.*

And, of course, CTA would be out an undetermined amount of money if the deal were cancelled, and undoubtedly would go back to the broke state for that.

_____________

*The term is rescission. Similar to Emanuel saying to cancel the parking meter deal, until it was pointed out that the Daley administration already had spent the money, and hence he could not refund it.

[Busjack]

Looks like enough of a stir about Ventra has occured that the State of Illinois is getting involved, courtesy of Blago's Sister-In-Law...

Story

And as far as the Tribune account of the hearing goes, we got exactly what I predicted.

Among other things, Claypool doubletalk (nothing new), posturing legislators, and "But the legislature has "limited, if any" oversight authority to force the CTA to abandon the prepaid debit-card accounts, Mell said."

At least Reese admitted that he was around when the request for proposals went out.

Then there was the haranguing of Metra.

And doesn't the chairperson's hairdo look a lot like her brother in laws'?

[sw4400]

Claypool is such a flip-flopper here. He says no other transit agencies have ever offered a prepaid Debit account to it's customers and didn't even say why, because of the ridiculous fees. Then he says it's an option, but he promoted it's features as a public service to low-income commuters who don't have bank accounts. Then he says CTA will not be marketing the Debit Card... Story

Then he says it's an option, but he promoted it's features as a public service to low-income commuters who don't have bank accounts.

Hello!!! Earth to Forrest!!! You just said here you promoted the features, yet the CTA won't market the optional Debit Card??? Key word: Promoted...

Promote

• to urge the adoption of; advocate
• to attempt to sell or popularize by advertising or publicity

Claypool expressed confidence that "people will make good choices" to determine whether the Ventra prepaid debit MasterCard is right for their specific financial situation. He said the prepaid debit account is "a 100 percent voluntary choice."

Yet minutes later, Claypool sent a mixed signal when he told the committee: "It's a massive undertaking to educate and bring people along."

This guy doesn't know what he wants... but this paragraph tells me all I need to know...

The Ventra contract for the prepaid debit account guarantees the CTA a minimum of $500,000 a year regardless of whether the debit accounts sell, and potentially much more revenue if large numbers of Ventra customers activate the prepaid debit-account option and start racking up service charges and convenience fees that accompany ATM withdrawals and other activities, as well as "dormancy fee" penalties for not using the Ventra MasterCard often enough.

CTA is guaranteed to make more revenue if they can get some poor souls to sign up for that optional Debit Card and get hit with fees. You can hide behind the whole "CTA won't promote the optional Debit Card." B.S, Forrest, but the media and word of mouth have already promoted it. Several customers I spoke to already knew about the Ventra Debit Card and I didn't have to say one thing. Best thing you can do(and should do) now is cut it off all Ventra packages. You did so with the Senior and Disabled Ventra packages.

I can pretty much guarantee the Ventra packages with the Debit Card options will have wording in the info that sounds so tantalizing, people will apply for the option and be hit with all these ridiculous fees.

State Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, asked Claypool why the CTA sought bids for a combined transit-debit card instead of only a new transit card to replace the current CTA Chicago Cards and magnetic stripe tickets.

Claypool said it wasn't his decision.

"When I walked into the door, the (request for proposals) was (already) on the street," Claypool said.

If the RFP was out there at the time, but nobody bid on it yet, according to Claypool's testimony(if anyone can believe it), he can pull it or modify it, I'm sure. Even when a contract is done, it can be modified. Look at the 5000-Series Contract with Bombardier as an example. It's been modified several times to include color LED's and eight more cars tacked on. A contract with Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. and the subcontractor(and reason this is all being brought up), First Data Corp. and MetaBank could've been modified to cut the optional Debit Card totally. It still can, IMO.

[Busjack]

Claypool is such a flip-flopper here. ..

I didn't know we needed that much bandwidth to state the obvious.

...

If the RFP was out there at the time, but nobody bid on it yet, according to Claypool's testimony(if anyone can believe it), he can pull it or modify it, I'm sure. Even when a contract is done, it can be modified. Look at the 5000-Series Contract with Bombardier as an example. It's been modified several times to include color LED's and eight more cars tacked on. A contract with Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. and the subcontractor(and reason this is all being brought up), First Data Corp. and MetaBank could've been modified to cut the optional Debit Card totally. It still can, IMO.

Your first conclusion is correct, in that CTA puts out addenda all the time until a contract is awarded and, in some cases, a Notice to Proceed is issued.

However, once there is a contract (in this case after it was approved by the CT Board in Nov. 2011), one side can't unilaterally pull out without being in breach to the other. In the case of the two rail car change orders, Bombardier agreed to the changes, and certain amounts were reshuffled.

In this case, it would be the same as the parking meter deal I described above--MetaBank could demand damages for breach of contract, and, of course, CTA would be out some portion of the $500K a year.

I don't know what Jewel's policy is with regard to returning partially eaten food, but I doubt that SuperValu could ask Cerberus to give Jewel back or vice versa (absent breach of warranty).

[sw4400]

BTW: For the record, anyone know if the RFP for the Ventra Card came out before Claypool became CTA President? I'm sure Busjack, Kevin, or someone who follows the RFP info might know.

[Busjack]

Googling indicates that CTA passed an ordinance on December 15, 2010, reciting that:

"WHEREAS, The Chicago Transit Authority (Authority) is seeking to divest
itself of its current fare collection system, and has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP)
with the goal of obtaining an Open Standards Fare System; and
WHEREAS, The Chicago Transit Board (Board) wishes to perform due
diligence independent of that conducted by staff; and
WHEREAS, Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) has extensive experience in
providing strategy, operations, and information technology consulting, particularly within the
public sector;" BAH was hired to provide services in evaluating the proposals.

So, it appears that Claypool was correct that the RFP preceded him.

[jajuan]

Kevin from the Tattler reports that some CTA officials told him that the bulk of the $500K CTA could receivewouldn't come from customers, but from various advertising fees from advertising placed at Ventra purchase and reload stations and ads placed on Ventra receipts that customers receive when purchasing any Ventra fare media. But given how CTA botched this just from giving customers so little information about how Ventra is going to work and placing emphasis on the transit beefits nd Claypool doing so much double speak, after letting the Tribune control so much of the story for so long, it's highly doubtful anyone would believe that now. And I did take notice that Transit Committee member from Olympia Fields went in on Metra's executive director for not joining with Pace and CTA on developmenrt of a card that works for all three or negotiating toward that end in good faith. Several folks have said why not stay with the Chicago Card? But that question doesn't take into account that it doesn't work on Metra and that the mandate is for an open fare system that works on all three transit systems. The state should have just combined all three long ago when they had the chance instead of playing this level of politics that encouraged and facilitated mistrust between city and burbs for at least three decades.

[jajuan]

Googling indicates that CTA passed an ordinance on December 15, 2010, reciting that:

"WHEREAS, The Chicago Transit Authority (Authority) is seeking to divest

itself of its current fare collection system, and has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP)

with the goal of obtaining an Open Standards Fare System; and

WHEREAS, The Chicago Transit Board (Board) wishes to perform due

diligence independent of that conducted by staff; and

WHEREAS, Booz Allen Hamilton (BAH) has extensive experience in

providing strategy, operations, and information technology consulting, particularly within the

public sector;" BAH was hired to provide services in evaluating the proposals.

So, it appears that Claypool was correct that the RFP preceded him.

No wonder this has been blowing up in such a negative way. Is Booz Allen Hamilton the same Booz-Allen that led CTA toward the big cuts of 1997-98?

[Busjack]

No wonder this has been blowing up in such a negative way. Is Booz Allen Hamilton the same Booz-Allen that led CTA toward the big cuts of 1997-98?

It is (history page).

However, there appears to be a finite number of consultants at the public trough.

And if the system is broke, it doesn't matter if one attributes change to Booz-Allen, Rodriguez personally, or the Northwestern Traffic Institute. In fact, I pointed out that nobody ever took Booz-Allen's recommendation for community transit west of Midway or Jefferson Park.

As far as stuff blowing up, I'm sure it blew up now because of the Tribune's FOIA request. I'll also bet that that request was made as a result of the "under the radar" hearing notice for the CTA fare hikes ($3.00 Ventra ticket and transit dormancy fee), and thus the Tribune saying "guess what else we found out."

[jajuan]

True of course. But in light of your rightly reminding us that they never did act on the recommendation of using vans for the Midway and Jefferson Park short/lower ridership routes, it does make you wonder what else they didn't follow through on in doing all these runs with consultants or just plain did something totally different than what these sometimes high priced consultants recommended a la purchasing those stupid Optimas in lieu of setting up van pools.

[Busjack]

True of course. But in light of your rightly reminding us that they never did act on the recommendation of using vans for the Midway and Jefferson Park short/lower ridership routes, it does make you wonder what else they didn't follow through on in doing all these runs with consultants or just plain did something totally different than what these sometimes high priced consultants recommended a la purchasing those stupid Optimas in lieu of setting up van pools.

At the time, I believe that Mosena was pretty up front about the various stages of the Booz-Allen recommendations, and implemented all but the last one.

Other than that, CTA isn't Pace, and not all those concepts (including call and ride) were developed until fairly recently. Based on the revenue recovery numbers given for call and ride in the last Pace budget, I'm not so sure it would survive absent the grants. On the other hand, Pace vanpools turn a profit (recovery ratio in excess of 100%).

[jajuan]

At the time, I believe that Mosena was pretty up front about the various stages of the Booz-Allen recommendations, and implemented all but the last one.

Other than that, CTA isn't Pace, and not all those concepts (including call and ride) were developed until fairly recently. Based on the revenue recovery numbers given for call and ride in the last Pace budget, I'm not so sure it would survive absent the grants. On the other hand, Pace vanpools turn a profit (recovery ratio in excess of 100%).

No they're not Pace but was there a way to at least try it rather than write it off and 15-16 years later have the west of Midway routes have buses running practically empty everyday while other routes of higher ridership see complete or partial cuts? I admit I'm no expert I'll also conceded for not the first time that that side of CTA operations is more complicated than it may appear on the surface.