Will There Be Service Cuts This Year?

[Guest metralink]

What is the opionion if 1) the general assembly will come through with the funding to keep the 3 service boards solvant and 2) provide the real funding levels Pace needs to do its job in the suburbs.

They are only in session till the end of the month.

The doom and gloomers claim it will be 1982 all over again, remember commuter train cut backs, CTA cut backs, Suburban transit cut backs on routes, fare increases.

I would hate to be a legislator who needs to answer to their voters as to why transit is cut at at time with record high gas prices.

It will be interesting.

[Busjack]

The only significance to May 30 is that after that it takes a supermajority to pass something effective July 1. In 2004 they sat until they passed a budget in June. In 2005 and 2006, they met the deadline and cut the Republicans out of the budget process. Since the Democrats in the State Senate have a supermajority this time around, they can wait and still cut out the Republicans. The State House may not have that option. In any event, there are very few independent actors in the legislature, and if Madigan and Jones come to an agreement, that will be it. The other problem is that your Guv has priorities other than transit and is pouting that the legislature hasn't enacted the gross receipts tax first.

By the way, are you going to be paying any of the taxes that will have to be raised to cover this? There is no "funding" unless "taxes" are raised. The federal government can create money, but the state government doesn't have that power.

Update: A subsequent Tribune article put the tax question in perspective. Obviously, business interests want to put the tax on someone else.

[Guest metralink]

[

By the way, are you going to be paying any of the taxes that will have to be raised to cover this? There is no "funding" unless "taxes" are raised. The federal government can create money, but the state government doesn't have that power.

the funding formula needs to be changed. Collars should pay more into the Pace system ,the 1/4 tax is a joke for what they really need. Why give 70% back to Metra for a one market system to DT Chicago?

Suburban Cook formula also needs changing as CTA gets more funding than Pace. And when was the last time anyone seen a CTA bus in service in Tinley Park or Schaumburg? Probably never.

Pace is getting the shaft and gets all the blame for not providing service. It's time this region either put up or shut up about the transportation issues. Either fund a proper system or stop complaining.

[trainman8119]

...the funding formula needs to be changed. Collars should pay more into the Pace system ,the 1/4 tax is a joke for what they really need. Why give 70% back to Metra for a one market system to DT Chicago?

I question if the funding formula really should be changed. Percentages of nothing are still nothing. For one, the CTA wants to change it to take money from Pace and Metra and Pace wants it changed to take money from the CTA. I don't understand your 70% Metra comment. That all said, you may be onto something here as maybe the CTA should get a higher percentage of the tax money from the area it primarily serves, namely the City of Chicago and Pace and Metra get a higher percentage of tax money from the suburban areas. At least that way, the money comes from those who would be considered to be using the system.

Pace is getting the shaft and gets all the blame for not providing service. It's time this region either put up or shut up about the transportation issues. Either fund a proper system or stop complaining.

Pace does deserve a lot of the critcism they get. The service they provide is marginal at best, and they are becoming way to specialized (ie. vanpool, subscription service, special events, etc). Perhaps, part of the problem with Pace is that much of their management wears blinders, likes to pass the buck, is very easily influenced and prefers to specialize the operation. Often heard is that the area they cover is to big. If it is too big and they can't handle it (as they always seem to claim), perhaps it would be advisable to split up and create a new organization (yeah, I know...more political red tape) and reduce the area they serve. Yes, the specialized stuff moves people, but it seems to be elitist and ignores the basic concept of providing quality transportation to those who tend to need the most. As for funding...if the government keeps bailing these guys out, will there ever be any accountability to management. These guys are still getting their bonuses and buy outs....yet the system gets worse and worse. These operations get money from government and users (in the form of fares)...there is a money merry go round here....Sooner or later these guys will have to learn to operate within their means. If that means cuts...so be it.

[Buslover88]

If the service cuts happen, I think all of us that need transportation should boycott in Springfield or protest outside RTA Headquarters. PACE does not provide service like it should, so it should get some of the blame, not all of it. Actually, most of the blame is directed towards CTA, and quite frankly in these times, they need it. If the cuts should happen, most bus and train routes will get cut, they're be more cars meaning more pollution and traffic, and people will end up walking or just staying home! People, write a letter to your State Rep. and do something about this because it's becoming a crisis!

[Busjack]

This got confused real quick.

Metralink: What increased taxes are you willing to pay?

Trainman: CTA already gets 100% of the nondiscretionary funding in Chicago, so you can't increase that without increasing taxes in Chicago. Carole Brown originally thought that CTA, not Pace, was entitled to the $100 million a year that suburban Cook was supposedly cross subsidizing the collar counties, which was primarily Metra. That got Frank Kruesi and Jeff Ladd feuding, but apparently the new leadership decided to bury that hatchet, go along with Moving Beyond Congestion, and unite for higher taxes without mentioning the differential anymore.

I also question your complaints about "specialized transit." At least Pace has a strategic plan that is feasible in some respects, as it combines different types of services, such as arterial, circulator, community, demand response, and vanpool. Even employers (Aon, Hewitt) realize that it is more cost effective to support vanpool than their bus services (subscription bus is about dead; only 1012 will remain after the current hearing on 1023). I also wonder why you classify vanpool as elitist, as any group of 5-13 can get a van. I really don't see how traditional bus service (like buslover88 wanted) is supportable outside the "CTA Connection" zones, i.e. the South and West divisions and parts of the Northwest division that connect to CTA (i.e. 223, 270, 290).

There may be side issues, such as maybe the small city systems should not have been forced into Pace, or that if DuPage wants more bus service, it has to pay for it. However, it still appears that Pace at least understands that it operates under limited resources (something CTA does not).

Finally, the Auditor General's recommendations must be implemented as part of any transit solution. Pace at least acknowledged those recommendations and was rated by the Auditor as being above average in its peer group. CTA was the opposite in both categories.

[Busjack]

Metralink's 70% Metra comment relates to how RTA tax funds are distributed. The RTA takes 15% off the top, most of which then goes to the CTA. The ratios then are:

• Chicago 100% to CTA
  
• Suburban Cook: 30% to CTA, 15% to Pace, and 55% to Metra.
  
• Collar Counties: 30% to Pace and 70% to Metra.
  

This would mean that Pace actually receives 12.75% of the taxes raised in suburban Cook County, and CTA about 40% (since it gets most of the 15% off the top).

Metralink's argument then is that most of Metra's business serves workers in the loop. (This tends to ignore reverse commuter service, at least on the MilwN.) However, if Metralink lives in a collar county (as is implied by his or her name and the 70% reference), most of Pace's business in those counties (especially DuPage) is feeding Metra and is subsidized by Metra. The exception would be if he or she lives in one of the smaller cities (Joliet, Aurora, Elgin, or Waukegan) or uses a few of the cross-county routes (such as 572, 714 or 747). As I previously mentioned, if DuPage wants more routes like 714, it will have to pay for them.

[Buslover88]

I don't understand why people just don't use cabs? They're much easier to put up with...

[Guest metralink]

The point I was making is Pace has the largest and most difficult markets to serve yet receives the smallest amount of funding as Busjack indicated. The point made that pace has too large of an area to serve should not reflect what it can't do but what it's potential is. It's a fact it does serve a large area and it should receive funding to meet the demand.

Let's face it Metra rail and CTA will not serve the expected 70% of all NE Illinois residents living and working in the suburbs. This is from CMAP projections. Metra does serve the Downtown Chicago market well but its reverse service is not what it could be. CTA should focus on improving service in the city especially on the arterials and stop focusing on taking over suburban expansion.

Pace does have a very detailed stratetgic plan. Look at Moving beyond Congestion which is basically the first 1/2 of Vision 2020. Pace has arterial Rapid Transit Corridors, Arterial express service, Regional highway express bus network, community service which is defined as locally based service either paratransit, small buses, shared ride taxi, vans etc to meet the defined market. In MBC, they have specific routes, corridors, capital improvements new services etc, how can anyone say they don't have a vision and plan?

It also has the regional rideshare and vanpool markets and no they are no for the rich and elite, they actually operate several to disabled workshops and passengers I would not all rich.

Pace is so more techically advanced than its peers in other regions of the country they have so many great innovative plans they just need the support to make it all happen. Stop the Pace bashing, look at their website and see what they are doing. Their public outreach is second to none. They go out of their way to listen, try that with Metra or the CTA.

When I mentioned if the region needs to put up or shut up I was refering to the politicians, they talk about improved transit all the time yet fail to make it happen. I was't revering to us passengers yet it will be us that through grass roots make it happen.

Go to the pace website and it links to your state reps and gov to send a message on transit.

[Buslover88]

I think all three systems are bad, that's my opinion. CTA has to be the worst of the three in everything basically and PACE is number one in listening to improvements. I will write a letter to my State Rep. today.

[Busjack]

I agree with most of metralink's previous remarks. However, it also seems like Pace's plans ask for the moon, so that Pace can take what it gets, such as proposing BRT for Harlem Ave. when it is complaining that CTA is taking its passengers (at least in Oak Park), or express buses for I-57 and the Bishop Ford that would compete with Metra Electric (both of these are in the Moving Beyond Congestion Plan, at least as possibilities). Trainman has questioned the earmark for the Rand Road signal priority project, when there is no bus route there yet (but this may be due to Melissa Bean wanting something in the transportation bill). I remember a similar presentation (I can't put my finger on it however), where Pace said it was interested in bus service every 1/2 mile on the North Shore; there never will be demand for that.

However, it does seem like Pace does a good job of planning when it realizes that there are constraints. Community services and demand response make sense in some areas, while buses (even 30 foot ones) do not. Similarly, they realize that vanpool feeders between Metra and jobs make sense in some areas, while others (such as Lake Cook) can support buses, if the employers share the cost.

By the way, I did write my state legislators a week or so before the Auditor General's preliminary report was released. Not surprisingly, the letter included many of the points later contained in the Auditor General's report.

[trainman8119]

Pace is so more techically advanced than its peers in other regions of the country they have so many great innovative plans they just need the support to make it all happen. Stop the Pace bashing, look at their website and see what they are doing. Their public outreach is second to none. They go out of their way to listen, try that with Metra or the CTA.

Allow me to clarify a statement I previously made about Pace being an "elitist" form of service. In the "traditional" form of transit (ie. go to a corner and wait for a bus) Pace does not have a clue. Although the van pool program is a good one (I am good friends with the concept creator and promoter), it is a taxi...that is it. You pay x amount per month, get picked up at your door and dropped off at your destination (business). You can't argue that is what it is. Are there low income people who use it...yes...but I think the majority are not. Does it get cars off the street....yes. Not 35, but 12. I guess a little is better than none at all. The same goes for subscription buses, which Busjack has noted is falling by the wayside. Good for a select few who use it, but still not the traditional form of point to point transit. And...if a company doesn't pay for it, well, that is another topic for another day. The key point I am driving at here is the "traditional" drop a buck in the farebox and go is not on Pace's radar.

You can keep all of the bells and whistles. For all the money spent on GPS systems, tracking, signal interference (as I call it), cute sineage, bike racks, new logos and paint, etc. money could be better spent on basic day to day operations. I will not recognize the constant banter for money until some of that stops...and that applies to all service boards, not just Pace. As one who has sat in at Headquarters at one time day in and day out and watched how things are done there, I can feel I can bash it all I want. Vision 2020 doesn't mean anything if day May 11, 2007 is not realized. All of the service boards need to concentrate on figuring out how to operate today before even thinking about all of the "pie in the sky" plans 10 years away.

[Busjack]

Although the van pool program is a good one ... it is a taxi... Does it get cars off the street....yes. Not 35, but 12. I guess a little is better than none at all.

The only argument I would have with the preceding post is that it is more effective than such things as the former 636 bus (Rosemont-Lake Cook), run on a CMAQ grant for a couple of years, that maybe had 3 riders per trip. The 894 (Gurnee-Lake Cook) had a similar fate. It is federal money, rather than part of the RTA tax allocation, but I don't see how congestion is mitigated and air quality improved when you have a bus emitting soot (and these buses did) stuck on the Tollway with all the other traffic. Apparently, those two routes didn't induce enough drivers off the Tollway and onto the bus.

Thus, I have emphasized that transit funding should be directed to where the potential ridership is. I have no problem with vanpool and demand response services where there isn't the demand on the street corner to fill a bus (and the vanpool apparently makes a profit). One can argue whether the other capital expenditures (such as gps) were prudent. For instance, I have previously argued that the purchase of the 6600 series buses was proven in hindsight to be a mistake, when a 2600 apparently can do the job, for $45,000 per bus less.

[Busjack]

The only argument I would have with the preceding post is that it is more effective than such things as the former 636 bus (Rosemont-Lake Cook), run on a CMAQ grant for a couple of years, that maybe had 3 riders per trip. The 894 (Gurnee-Lake Cook) had a similar fate.

Having just received today's Moving into the Future, which is apparently a weekly plug on what "Moving Beyond Congestion" (i.e. Pace getting all the money it wants) means in each region, I didn't expect much for North Cook County, the eastern part of which had already been restructured, and was right. One thing I noted:

New express service from Rosemont CTA station to Lake-Cook Road ...

Didn't I just say that had failed?

[qwantae]

[

By the way, are you going to be paying any of the taxes that will have to be raised to cover this? There is no "funding" unless "taxes" are raised. The federal government can create money, but the state government doesn't have that power.

the funding formula needs to be changed. Collars should pay more into the Pace system ,the 1/4 tax is a joke for what they really need. Why give 70% back to Metra for a one market system to DT Chicago?

Suburban Cook formula also needs changing as CTA gets more funding than Pace. And when was the last time anyone seen a CTA bus in service in Tinley Park or Schaumburg? Probably never.

Pace is getting the shaft and gets all the blame for not providing service. It's time this region either put up or shut up about the transportation issues. Either fund a proper system or stop complaining.

Chicago is the worst big city with these Budget service cuts on Public Transportation, If raising the fares, to me its cheaper to drive and pay for high gas than paying 3.25 a fare. If they werent purchasing more New Flyers, none if this issue wouldnt happen. CTA is the worst transit agency than NYCMTA and LACMTA in Los Angeles. At lease Im getting a new car.

[Kevin]

If they werent purchasing more New Flyers, none if this issue wouldnt happen.

Your personal vendetta against the New Flyers is getting rather annoying.

[rmadisonwi]

If they werent purchasing more New Flyers, none if this issue wouldnt happen.

Actually, you're quite wrong. Funding for new buses comes out of capital funds from various sources (including the federal government). This money could not be used to find continuing operations. Plus, those new buses are needed to replace the old Flxibles and TMCs which are falling apart. If those buses weren't ordered, service would deteriorate anyway as the existing fleet fell apart.