sw4400 Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Looks like the CTA has been over reporting mileage on vehicles to get improper grants. Story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Looks like the CTA has been over reporting mileage on vehicles to get improper grants. Story Although the questions and concerns over how CTA has counted bus mileage are legit, I don't put too much stock in the lawsuit itself with this story coming from a right wing "news" organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 Looks like the CTA has been over reporting mileage on vehicles to get improper grants. Story 1. This isn't news, as it was reported a couple of years ago that the Feds were disallowing mileage on garage trips. 2. I suppose there might be a cause of action under the False Claims Act, but I'll agree with jajuan that some officious intermeddler is trying to get some publicity (especially the end part about Obama being connected with the CTA). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 1. This isn't news, as it was reported a couple of years ago that the Feds were disallowing mileage on garage trips. 2. I suppose there might be a cause of action under the False Claims Act, but I'll agree with jajuan that some officious intermeddler is trying to get some publicity (especially the end part about Obama being connected with the CTA). I see you caught that last part too. Outside of the obvious slant in the article, that end part was what really had me say wait something is fishy with this whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetroShadow Posted January 23, 2014 Report Share Posted January 23, 2014 I see you caught that last part too. Outside of the obvious slant in the article, that end part was what really had me say wait something is fishy with this whole thing. Then I looked at the "About Us" section and laughed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrethebusman Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Actually this does bring up an interesting point. When is a bus "in service"? Until about 20 years ago, the answer was simple and unequivocal - from the time it goes out the garage gate until it comes back in. This was very specifically stated in the rulebooks. Now it is not so clear. CTA has many "deadhead moves" that run with "Not In Service" signs that are not intended to carry passengers. Even pullouts and pullins aren't clear any more. For instance, many of the buses leaving 103rd St Garage going to 95th/Dan Ryan now carry "Not In Service" signs. In my book, that means exactly that - no passengers. Maybe it is time to do what many systems do, simply state that once a bus gets to the end of the route, the trip back to the yard, even if along the route it just came off of, is non-revenue, and there is no argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 Actually this does bring up an interesting point. When is a bus "in service"? Until about 20 years ago, the answer was simple and unequivocal - from the time it goes out the garage gate until it comes back in. This was very specifically stated in the rulebooks. Now it is not so clear. CTA has many "deadhead moves" that run with "Not In Service" signs that are not intended to carry passengers. Even pullouts and pullins aren't clear any more. For instance, many of the buses leaving 103rd St Garage going to 95th/Dan Ryan now carry "Not In Service" signs. In my book, that means exactly that - no passengers. Maybe it is time to do what many systems do, simply state that once a bus gets to the end of the route, the trip back to the yard, even if along the route it just came off of, is non-revenue, and there is no argument. Granted, but as Busjack pointed out we already hashed out this point quite some time ago. And that gets back to my point above that this is just somebody with a right wing political agenda out trying to stir up attention for his Tea Party views against most forms of federal spending, part of which is pretty TA's across the country shouldn't get any type of federal funding at all. His little article goes far beyond the CTA may have gotten a few extra pennies on the dollar over the decades if you actually look at total transportation spending as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Granted, but as Busjack pointed out we already hashed out this point quite some time ago. ... Ad IIRC, the CTA response was that while the bus was considered in service, they would now conform to the current interpretation. Also because the feds basically don't provide operating assistance, I don't see what the stink is. Overcharging on some JARC isn't going to come to much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artthouwill Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Actually this does bring up an interesting point. When is a bus "in service"? Until about 20 years ago, the answer was simple and unequivocal - from the time it goes out the garage gate until it comes back in. This was very specifically stated in the rulebooks. Now it is not so clear. CTA has many "deadhead moves" that run with "Not In Service" signs that are not intended to carry passengers. Even pullouts and pullins aren't clear any more. For instance, many of the buses leaving 103rd St Garage going to 95th/Dan Ryan now carry "Not In Service" signs. In my book, that means exactly that - no passengers. Maybe it is time to do what many systems do, simply state that once a bus gets to the end of the route, the trip back to the yard, even if along the route it just came off of, is non-revenue, and there is no argument. That is an easy fix. Buses beginning or ending their trips at 95th/Dan Ryan can simply run as a 106 between the two points. Now you have a live trip that covers the mileage. How that skews passenger trips and loads is another matter. But it certainly is easy to route some buses 'live" back to the garage from a street that is near or runs into a garage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 That is an easy fix. Buses beginning or ending their trips at 95th/Dan Ryan can simply run as a 106 between the two points. Now you have a live trip that covers the mileage. How that skews passenger trips and loads is another matter. But it certainly is easy to route some buses 'live" back to the garage from a street that is near or runs into a garage. I'm sure those types of runs are trivial. What would be a bigger issue is that with the garages nearer to downtown having closed (such as Archer and Limits), there are the "To Downtown" from Foster, for instance. IIRC, it was mentioned a couple of years ago that CTA was using parking lots near downtown to cut down on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.