RTA Governance

[Busjack]

///

Without knowing how many Paratransit trips there are.

Claypool and Emanuel were too stupid to realize money would be taken off the top.They added more riders with the cut on Lincoln.

...

That was way before their time.

The first shot in the 2005 "We gotta have more funding war" was Carole Brown saying "CTA has a $54 million deficit, and paratransit is costing us $55 million." Then staff said "we'll have to go to a Sunday schedule 7 days a week."

Someone in the legislature said "Pace seems to run it more efficiently so give it to them," which the legislature immediately did. At which point I posted on her blog, "why don't you call off the the threat of service cuts" to which her reply was "the money is going with it."

Now, I don't know if paratransit was then a red herring or she just realized that she goofed, but in any event that was in 2005, when Daley was still mayor.

Then the 2008 legislation said that the RTA was responsible for funding paratransit, and then legislation in 2011 provided that allocations to the service boards shall be made after the RTA deposited "an amount equal to the final budgeted funding for ADA paratransit services for the current year" into the ADA paratransit fund.

At the time, I wrote my legislator that this assured that paratransit would never be efficient, and would continue to eat into fixed route services.

The only thing that can be attributed to Emanuel is that both CTA and Metra said during the 2013 budget cycle that paratransit was eating into their allocations. So, again, I was ahead of the curve.

But, clearly, all including probably the 2011 legislation was while Daley was asleep at the controls.

And as far as the number of paratransit trips, I don't know that, but the budgeted cost has gone up from about $67 million ($55 million CTA and $12 million Pace) in 2005 to $140 million in the 2013 budget.

Also, your NW Indiana points make about as much sense as Windsor Ontario taking over Detroit--none. They have their own indigenous form of corruption.

[mkohut]

With the stalemate going on at the RTA.

No one is in a hurry to appoint anyone to Metra

So I don't know if can do there budget or even approve one.

I have to wonder how much fat was in there budget for this year .If they had money to pay Clifford and everybody else with that mess.

Any predicts how the stalemate is going to end?

Detroit went downhill after Wrestlemania at the Silverdome with Hulk Hogan vs Andre The Giant.

[Busjack]

...

Any predicts how the stalemate is going to end?

...

Last year's ended with the RTA saying it supposedly had money from another source for Metra and cut Pace's share of discretionary funds a bit.

The other roadblock this year is whether RTA or CTA issues bonds; last year RTA accused CTA of being too far in debt in called Claypool in, but eventually approved the CTA budget. That's probably too technical to call, but this is starting to look like the Insull empire with multiple levels of debt, but only one source (sales tax) to pay for it.

Pace is probably protected, because the legislation I mentioned before has paratransit, the Suburban Mobility Fund, and the South Suburban Job Access fund off the top. As the 2013 budget indicates, Pace isn't doing anything special with the South Suburban Job Access Fund, but says "Pace currently expends in excess of $32.0 million for services in South Cook County for two of its operating divisions - Pace South and Pace Southwest." The SMF and SSJAF provide about $28 million that the others don't get, which reinforces my prior point that CTA doesn't want to go back to the legislature, because the suburban legislators are in charge and protect these setasides.

You are probably correct that there won't be anyone to protect Metra's interests this time.

Some budget will be passed because there has to be some budget. There isn't going to be a 1981 style shutdown. It does take 12 votes for the RTA to pass a budget, but, except for the discretionary funds, the statutory formulas indicate how much each service board gets in any event. Probably only $4 million is at stake out of about $1.3 billion of sales tax collected by the RTA (again according to the accounting of all RTA funds in the Pace budget).

[mkohut]

Has there any update on the RTA Lawsuit against Kanakee over sale tax Money?

I think they had some other ones too.

[Busjack]

Has there any update on the RTA Lawsuit against Kanakee over sale tax Money?

I think they had some other ones too.

Only thing on the RTA site is that they are pending.

There was also some TV investigative report that the business owner on the first floor never saw anyone go into the second floor offices where supposedly the tax evaders were accepting orders.

[mkohut]

Only thing on the RTA site is that they are pending.

There was also some TV investigative report that the business owner on the first floor never saw anyone go into the second floor offices where supposedly the tax evaders were accepting orders.

Its interesting that the RTA wants more power.But,hasn't ask the College Clowns to close the loophole.

[Busjack]

Its interesting that the RTA wants more power.But,hasn't ask the College Clowns to close the loophole.

The real issue was that some clown from the Chicago Heights area wanted to codify the loophole.

Admittedly the loophole could be closed by legislation, but maybe the big companies (such as the airlines, who say that they accept fuel orders out by Sycamore, Ill.*) are paying off enough legislators. There are also various small towns (such as Channahon and Kankakee) that are cleaning up by keeping a bit of the sales tax and rebating the remainder to the companies.

The easy way to clean up the loophole is that if the seller has a point of presence where the product is delivered, it is taxable there. For instance, the jet fuel is obviously delivered either at O'Hare (Cook County) or a tank farm in Bensenville (DuPage County). It isn't being dumped from the pipeline into trucks owned by United in Sycamore.

_______

*Corrected based on RTA press release.

[ctrabs74]

I don't know if winning 2 Stanley Cups is enough. Maybe Stan Bowman, as he has experience as a general manager.

The last mayoral election was about as open as possible (especially given that some element of the Machine tried to get Rahm kicked off the ballot). The problem in this case is besides the advantage of incrumbency [spelling intentional], Emanuel can get money from his brother Ari's associates in Hollywood, as well as his business associates, such as Rauner who is running for governor as a Republican but getting only minor flack as being associated with Rahm and putting Rahm in business between being a Clinton aide and a Congressman.

I'm still surprised that based on your prior posts, you didn't nominate C.M. Punk. After all, Jesse the Body Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota.

Hell, CM Punk can't do any worse in trying to clean up the mess that is Chicago politics...

But, in all seriousness, I'm wondering how much of Mayor Emanuel's "cushion" in Chicago is because of him being President Obama's chief of staff during O's first term.

[Busjack]

Hell, CM Punk can't do any worse in trying to clean up the mess that is Chicago politics...

But, in all seriousness, I'm wondering how much of Mayor Emanuel's "cushion" in Chicago is because of him being President Obama's chief of staff during O's first term.

CM isn't having much luck with Paul Heyman and Curt Henning Jr.

On Emanuel, I doubt any of it. He had independent status as the Congressman from the 5th District and supposedly was in line to succeed Nancy Pelosi if he had stayed in the House.* He also held a similar position in the Clinton White House and was supposedly a prodigious fundraiser then.

The cushion basically depends on (1) whether the residency challenge made him a "sympathetic victim," (2) his ability to get the Black vote, despite there being a Black candidate, (3) whatever was the dynamic that restricted Chico's vote to the southwest side, (4) Daley apparently having left a mess, (5) his brother's fundraising contacts in Hollywood, and (6) how long the dictatorial style described by Brizard can last.

*Blago was reported to have also been interested in selling Emanuel's seat, but was told that an election had to be scheduled.

[mkohut]

At lease one thing is Emanuel can't have his way in Springfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if somebody try to make the CTA,RTA,METRA,and PACE one board with Emanuel not being to appoint anybody.

[Busjack]

At lease one thing is Emanuel can't have his way in Springfield.

It wouldn't surprise me if somebody try to make the CTA,RTA,METRA,and PACE one board with Emanuel not being to appoint anybody.

Somebody may try, but the way the Quinn panel seems to be going, doesn't look like it is going to succeed, as indicated when Dan Lipinski got the brush off after suggesting one agency.

If whatever transit authority emerges from this, if it includes the city, there is no way to exclude the mayor. Besides that being politically impossible, the last time board memberships came up, it was indicated that areas were entitled to representation according to their census numbers, sort of like congressional and aldermanic districts.

Now to get to some real clowning, there was a short-lived story last night in the Tribune that Cook Commissioner Jeffrey Tobolski, D-McCook was proposing that Metra directors have rail experience. Fine and good, except during his campaign against Tony Peraica, wasn't it alleged that Tobolski put all his family and political friends on the McCook payroll?

It might work if the qualification were as stringent as Tobolski indicated, but let's remember that the Metropolitan Transit Act provisions that the board members are to have business experience and the executive director be appointed by the board and have transportation experience have been ignored for the past about 6 years.

[jajuan]

Somebody may try, but the way the Quinn panel seems to be going, doesn't look like it is going to succeed, as indicated when Dan Lipinski got the brush off after suggesting one agency.

If whatever transit authority emerges from this, if it includes the city, there is no way to exclude the mayor. Besides that being politically impossible, the last time board memberships came up, it was indicated that areas were entitled to representation according to their census numbers, sort of like congressional and aldermanic districts.

Now to get to some real clowning, there was a short-lived story last night in the Tribune that Cook Commissioner Jeffrey Tobolski, D-McCook was proposing that Metra directors have rail experience. Fine and good, except during his campaign against Tony Peraica, wasn't it alleged that Tobolski put all his family and political friends on the McCook payroll?

It might work if the qualification were as stringent as Tobolski indicated, but let's remember that the Metropolitan Transit Act provisions that the board members are to have business experience and the executive director be appointed by the board and have transportation experience have been ignored for the past about 6 years.

And that's where we keep running into problems in trying to truly reform transit in NE Illinois. Basically how do you streamline the current four boards into one and still protect both the city's and suburbs' transit needs and keep both sides of that coin on EQUAL ground? Finding a way to keep city and burbs on equal footing in terms of having their interests represented and once and for all dumping the status quo that keeps this ridiculous city vs suburb dynamic going seems to be a real key that keeps popping up at each attempt to reform Chicago area transit. Basically the city needs to realize that it can't dictate terms to the suburbs and the burbs need to realize they can't get anywhere without the city side of the transit equation. Sounds simple to a lot of us I know but somehow it gets mucked up along the way because the politicians' egos become too large a part of the mix each and every time a mention of fixing the mess is made.

[Busjack]

...and the burbs need to realize they can't get anywhere without the city side of the transit equation....

As I have noted before, the opposite is the case. The city can't get a tax bill for the RTA or any other legislation through without the suburban representatives sponsoring it. Also, the tax increases in 1973, 1983 and 2008 were only because suburban transit was being squeezed too. Look at the names sponsoring those bills; they are generally Hamos (formerly of Evanston) and Nekritz (of Northbrook).

Of course, the gerrymanders in the Illinois legislature made sure that another sponsor of transit (Mathias R-Buffalo Grove) was forced out.

As I mentioned before, the best CTA could do is hire the web site operator who earlier said he couldn't understand why there were differential tax rates throughout the region. CTA got stuck with such stuff as that the real estate transfer tax to cover the CTA pension bonds had to be authorized by the city council and imposed only in the city, according to the 2008 legislation.

Like the guy from Crystal Lake who asked Carole why he should pay for the CTA, I think most of the suburbs could get around without it. Main difference would be that Pace would have to connect with Metra, which it often does.

[jajuan]

As I have noted before, the opposite is the case. The city can't get a tax bill for the RTA or any other legislation through without the suburban representatives sponsoring it. Also, the tax increases in 1973, 1983 and 2008 were only because suburban transit was being squeezed too. Look at the names sponsoring those bills; they are generally Hamos (formerly of Evanston) and Nekritz (of Northbrook).

Of course, the gerrymanders in the Illinois legislature made sure that another sponsor of transit (Mathias R-Buffalo Grove) was forced out.

As I mentioned before, the best CTA could do is hire the web site operator who earlier said he couldn't understand why there were differential tax rates throughout the region. CTA got stuck with such stuff as that the real estate transfer tax to cover the CTA pension bonds had to be authorized by the city council and imposed only in the city, according to the 2008 legislation.

Like the guy from Crystal Lake who asked Carole why he should pay for the CTA, I think most of the suburbs could get around without it. Main difference would be that Pace would have to connect with Metra, which it often does.

While that may be true that Pace can connect to Metra, neither of them exactly exist in a bubble as much as either of them or some of their passengers may like to believe. Not every suburban rider coming to the city is going to a downtown location. So who gets them the rest of the way of their journey? CTA. And even if they were going downtown, more likely than not it's still the CTA that's completing their trips since Metra doesn't exactly go or stop everywhere and taxis aren't always reliable or cost effective among available options. And a similar thing can be said for city residents going into the burbs. Pace where possible is completing the trip when that city resident comes off a Metra train in a reverse trip. CTA may have less of the political clout in the present makeup of the Legislature due to some degree to inept CTA presidents or ego driven Chicago mayors, but if we are all being completely honest and focusing on how transit should be run compared to the reality of how it is run here, ALL three still need each other even if various leaders of either three along the years have been loathe to admit that or even better in an ideal world where the boards were streamlined the city and burbs both need each other when it comes to transit in this area. Time out for all this crap and bull that either side can exist in a bubble or one side needs the other than the other side needs it. This is the crap line that the politicians on both side of the political divide in this part of the state has been using for decades in various forms and residents fall for it and get caught in the trap every time.

[Busjack]

I was referring back to your "the burbs need to realize they can't get anywhere without the city side of the transit equation...." which is false.

I'm not advocating abolishing the operations of the CTA, and certainly not going back on my position that there should be only one board, properly apportioned.

Suburbanites may need the CTA if they are navigating in the city somewhat off the Metra beaten track, but if they are staying in their general suburban area (except for Evanston and Skokie, where I contend CTA should turn over its bus service to Pace), they really don't need the CTA, as exemplified by all the "CTA should serve this suburban shopping center" comments going nowhere.

Notwithstanding the tools of Chicago mayors, CT Board members, and CTA Presidents, if things count based on population and political influence, CTA is dependent on the suburbs. Even beyond my comment about which legislators' support it needs, if one assumes that the RTA was properly apportioned in 2008, the city only has the 5 or 6 votes to block the suburbs, but not the votes to get anything done itself. I'm sure Emanuel realizes that, and thus while there are still stories, like today's in the Sun-Times, that the panel is looking into "how the best-performing systems are governed," nowhere else has this political construct, and so long as Emanuel speaks for both CDOT and CTA, best practices will be blocked.

Note also that the Sun-Times article refers to while the Republican county commissioners want the rest of the Metra board out, Larry Suffredin (D-Evanston) says no reason for that. Everyone is trying to save his or her political hide.

[mkohut]

I was referring back to your "the burbs need to realize they can't get anywhere without the city side of the transit equation...." which is false.

I'm not advocating abolishing the operations of the CTA, and certainly not going back on my position that there should be only one board, properly apportioned.

Suburbanites may need the CTA if they are navigating in the city somewhat off the Metra beaten track, but if they are staying in their general suburban area (except for Evanston and Skokie, where I contend CTA should turn over its bus service to Pace), they really don't need the CTA, as exemplified by all the "CTA should serve this suburban shopping center" comments going nowhere.

Notwithstanding the tools of Chicago mayors, CT Board members, and CTA Presidents, if things count based on population and political influence, CTA is dependent on the suburbs. Even beyond my comment about which legislators' support it needs, if one assumes that the RTA was properly apportioned in 2008, the city only has the 5 or 6 votes to block the suburbs, but not the votes to get anything done itself. I'm sure Emanuel realizes that, and thus while there are still stories, like today's in the Sun-Times, that the panel is looking into "how the best-performing systems are governed," nowhere else has this political construct, and so long as Emanuel speaks for both CDOT and CTA, best practices will be blocked.

Note also that the Sun-Times article refers to while the Republican county commissioners want the rest of the Metra board out, Larry Suffredin (D-Evanston) says no reason for that. Everyone is trying to save his or her political hide.

I want to point something out 1 of the Republican county commissioners.Peter Silversti.Up until the last election .He was Double Dipping.Besides the job as a Commissioner he was also Village President of Elmwood Park.I wouldn't call him a saint.

[jajuan]

I was referring back to your "the burbs need to realize they can't get anywhere without the city side of the transit equation...." which is false.

I'm not advocating abolishing the operations of the CTA, and certainly not going back on my position that there should be only one board, properly apportioned.

Suburbanites may need the CTA if they are navigating in the city somewhat off the Metra beaten track, but if they are staying in their general suburban area (except for Evanston and Skokie, where I contend CTA should turn over its bus service to Pace), they really don't need the CTA, as exemplified by all the "CTA should serve this suburban shopping center" comments going nowhere.

Notwithstanding the tools of Chicago mayors, CT Board members, and CTA Presidents, if things count based on population and political influence, CTA is dependent on the suburbs. Even beyond my comment about which legislators' support it needs, if one assumes that the RTA was properly apportioned in 2008, the city only has the 5 or 6 votes to block the suburbs, but not the votes to get anything done itself. I'm sure Emanuel realizes that, and thus while there are still stories, like today's in the Sun-Times, that the panel is looking into "how the best-performing systems are governed," nowhere else has this political construct, and so long as Emanuel speaks for both CDOT and CTA, best practices will be blocked.

Note also that the Sun-Times article refers to while the Republican county commissioners want the rest of the Metra board out, Larry Suffredin (D-Evanston) says no reason for that. Everyone is trying to save his or her political hide.

No I got where you were coming from in response to that one comment I made. I was clarifying a bit more clearly what I meant by the comment as far as going outside of the political foolishness played by the politicians on both sides of the city limits and looking at the operations of the transit agencies and taking as nonpolitical or nonbiased a view as I can and not look at it solely through the eyes of a Chicago resident. Realistically speaking folks living on either side of city limits are not sticking solely to the Metra beaten track.

[Busjack]

A few inklings in the Sun-Times article on RTA proposes merging transit agencies' planning departments, including the "overpriced joint fares" with Metra and Pace on the Dan Ryan Red Line project. However, I still can't take Gates seriously.

[mkohut]

A few inklings in the Sun-Times article on RTA proposes merging transit agencies' planning departments, including the "overpriced joint fares" with Metra and Pace on the Dan Ryan Red Line project. However, I still can't take Gates seriously.

I can't even think the last think the RTA did any planning.Usually what happens on any planning a consultant gets richer and the project doesn't get funding.

[Busjack]

I can't even think the last think the RTA did any planning.Usually what happens on any planning a consultant gets richer and the project doesn't get funding.

Basically, the RTA hasn't done any planning. The consultant grants are to the 3 transit agencies (primarily CTA and Metra), or as in the case of the Eisenhower expressway project mentioned under the Blue Line, IDOT with CTA cooperation.

The essential problem in this region is that planning is an oxymoron.

Another problem, typified by the "overpriced joint fares" comment is that each service board has the statutory right to set its own fares and service levels, which wouldn't be cured simply by merging planning departments. The only thing it might cure is competition for projects (if say, the Red Line extension to 130th really competed with the Metra Electric).

[jajuan]

It looks like the final commenter to the article so far, brendan duckus, agrees with you that this is more clipping around the edges of the central problem that we all agreed long ago Illinois legislators just don't seem to have to political stomach to do anytime soon, namely replace the status quo with only one board that's not set up to be political bastions Governor of Illinois, Mayor of Chicago, suburban mayors and most recently under the moist recent legislation regarding the RTA the Cook County Board President.

[mkohut]

It nice to read that Claypool wouldn't have job security.

http://www.suntimes.com/22344033-418/transit-task-force-urged-to-streamline-rta-cta-pace-and-metra.html

[Busjack]

It nice to read that Claypool wouldn't have job security.

http://www.suntimes.com/22344033-418/transit-task-force-urged-to-streamline-rta-cta-pace-and-metra.html

• I'm surprised that the background materials even mentioned it, but I don't think that Quinn has to political guts to do anything about the 47 board members, especially since he appointed 3 with no qualifications, and one of his nominees was forced to withdraw.
• Fitzgerald's comment about preventing the next scandal shows a much smaller scope, and basically the only way you prevent that is to make sure that the next U.S. Attorney (Fardon) starts prosecuting. The inspector general law the last time around only proved to provide another means for a coverup.

[mkohut]

• I'm surprised that the background materials even mentioned it, but I don't think that Quinn has to political guts to do anything about the 47 board members, especially since he appointed 3 with no qualifications, and one of his nominees was forced to withdraw.
• Fitzgerald's comment about preventing the next scandal shows a much smaller scope, and basically the only way you prevent that is to make sure that the next U.S. Attorney (Fardon) starts prosecuting. The inspector general law the last time around only proved to provide another means for a coverup.

If Quinn doesn't listen to his own panel.I'm sure all the other people running for Governor will make it a issue.I think part of Fitzgerald comment might have been directed toward Daddy's little girl.Lisa.

The one thing that is showing is how much money is being wasted between Planners and Board Members.

[Busjack]

If Quinn doesn't listen to his own panel.I'm sure all the other people running for Governor will make it a issue.I think part of Fitzgerald comment might have been directed toward Daddy's little girl.Lisa.

The one thing that is showing is how much money is being wasted between Planners and Board Members.

It isn't so much whether Quinn listens to his own panel. Besides my prior observation that the panel was constructed so as not to propose significant change, there was also the observation that when Quinn had the ethics panel after Blago was impeached and removed, the legislature would not enact its recommendations.

I also mentioned that the legislature made corned beef hash out of the Auditor General's recommendations in 2007, by putting conditions on such things as service coordination, by prefacing it with "on the vote of 9 directors, the Executive Director may investigate."

In that the current structure (including that each service board may set its own fares and level of service, thereby precluding one planning department) was imposed by legislation, the legislature would have to pass any reform. Do you think that is likely, when:

• Daley is running against Quinn on a platform that the RTA should be abolished?
• Emanuel would have to give up power, and his tool said "there is no problem because I report to the mayor?"
• One precipitating cause of this scandal was the Speaker of the House?

Quinn would rather run against Daley based on either the illusion of reform or "I tried but was stymied," which is his usual modus operandi. Remember that Quinn's one claimed accomplishment was doing away with cumulative voting in the House,* resulting in the current stalemate, even though he says "I got rid of 1/3 of the legislators."

________

*That was a system where you could vote for 1 to 3 House members in a Senate district, but each party could nominate only 2, resulting in guaranteed minority representation.